HOME Featured Stories July 2007 Blog-Eds List Background Information News On the Web
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers

Posted by Think-Israel, July 31, 2007.

Courtesy of artist Fred Reifenberg. Fred was born in Germany, and grew up during the Hitler period. In 40's he moved to NY. He is a veteran of the Korean War. Currently he lives in Israel. He enjoys harmonizing with nature, and photographing nature in its many wonderful forms. He also create a variety of abstracts, combining photography and graphics.


Posted by Sarah Schmidt, July 31, 2007.

Alex Grobman
Nations United: How the United Nations Is Undermining Israel and the West
Balfour Books, Green Forest, AR, 2006
ISBN-13: 978-0-89221-674-1
ISBN-10: 0-89221-674-3
Library of Congress Catalog Number: 2006935625 638

This review was published in the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. (Jewish Political Studies Review 19:1-2, Spring 2007.)

Dr. Alex Grobman, president of the Institute for Contemporary Jewish Life and former director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, has written a highly readable, meticulously researched, fact-filled account of how and why Israel has become the focus of misdirected attention at the United Nations, especially since 1975 and the passage of the "Zionism is racism" resolution. Grobman is a trained historian, but here he writes with a clear agenda: an impassioned defense of Israel in the context of its relationship with the UN. Reflecting his background, however, Grobman provides access to a wide range of supporting sources through extensive use of endnotes plus an up-to-date, comprehensive bibliography.

Nations United traces the UN's transformation from an organization that in 1947 voted to partition Palestine into two states, thus providing international legitimacy for Israel's establishment, to one that by 1975 sought to delegitimize its existence. From 1947 until 1967, anti-Zionism was a regional affair, a clash between Arab and Jewish national movements. Since 1975, when the UN General Assembly declared that "Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination," its anti-Israeli stance has been incorporated into a range of UN and other programs, including those of NGOs.

For the majority of UN member states, Israel became the "locus of evil" deserving international condemnation. It likewise became the target of the majority of UN sanctions. Even in matters of self-defense the Hague International Court of Justice saw fit to condemn it, and the Geneva Convention singled it out as the foremost world violator of human rights.

Identifying Israel as a racist state both reinforces notions of a country that oppresses minorities and questions Israel's right to exist. Grobman is concerned that this "Big Lie" will become a stereotype throughout the media and daily speech, that it will not only taint the Jewish state but also become part of the legacy of Western civilization.

The Role of the Soviet Bloc

Soon after the UN passed "Zionism is racism," the Soviet Union launched a propaganda campaign based on the allegation that Zionism was evil. In effect, the "racism" resolution provided the justification for a final reversal of Soviet policy. In 1947, the Soviets had supported Israel's establishment. They believed that, as a result of Mandate policies, the Jews had become anti-British and so were on the frontlines of an anticolonial struggle. Moscow also wanted to find a point of entry into the Middle East, particularly out of renewed concern that the West might control vital sources of oil.

At the same time, though, the Soviet ambassador to the UN reassured his Arab colleagues that in the future they could expect the USSR to help them in struggling for their "lawful interests." By 1955 the Soviets had made good on their promise: a massive arms deal between Czechoslovakia and Egypt provided the Arabs with weapons greater in quantity and quality than those possessed by Israel.

After the Six Day War, Zionism became the Soviets' euphemism for Jews, their criticism of Israel equated Zionism with Nazism, and they focused on trying to force Israel to leave what they termed "occupied territories." By identifying Israel as expansionist, colonialist, and racist, the Soviets laid the groundwork for "Zionism is racism" while also buttressing their Arab clients, who now hoped to isolate Israel and press forward with plans to destroy it.

"Zionism Is Racism" and International Discourse

The international sanction provided by the UN resolution also has paved the way to reviving previously discredited forms of anti-Semitism. It has led to the renewal of extreme Jew-hatred in the Arab world, much of it based on Arab dissemination of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, but some of it with a religious dimension. Israel can now more easily be portrayed as the infidel that took over sacred Muslim land, including control over Islamic holy sites.

Arabs have also revived the medieval blood libel; Israelis have been accused of poisoning Arab schoolgirls, stealing vital organs from Palestinian schoolchildren, and even of using Arab blood to prepare holiday foods. Although contrary to traditional Islamic belief, Arab circles now also routinely blame Jews for killing Jesus.

Additionally, "Zionism is racism" has provided a platform for Holocaust denial. Grobman adduces numerous sources showing how Arab media question the existence of gas chambers and deny the systematic Nazi policy to annihilate the Jews. Arab propagandists claim that Zionists have exaggerated the number of Jews killed during World War II so as to gain more compensation from Germany.

Most recently, the Iranians are using Holocaust denial to advance their own agenda. In a postmodern world, where all is relative, who can be sure that the Holocaust was not overstated and embellished as a way to take over Palestinian land? Thus Ahmadinejad can "morally" use nuclear weapons to set things right in the Middle East.

A Destructive Force

The UN's attacks on Israel help legitimize the recent worldwide increase in anti-Semitism. France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Greece, and the United Kingdom have seen physical attacks, verbal abuse, and vandalism against Jews, synagogues, and cemeteries. Jews have been held responsible for America's pro-Israeli and other policies, encouraging conspiracy theories about Jews controlling the world. Developing countries like Malaysia, looking for scapegoats for their financial chaos, explain that Jews are responsible for "bring[ing] about the collapse of our economy."

In addition, the UN has reinforced a tendency to condone violence. In 2002, six European states approved a UN Human Rights Commission resolution approving "all available means, including armed struggle" to establish a Palestinian state. That same year, the UN played a key part in spreading false allegations of an Israeli massacre in the Jenin refugee camp, ignoring the fact that the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), among other things, permits its food warehouses to serve as Palestinian weapons depots.

Dore Gold has pointed out that, while the UN was created to maintain global peace, it has trouble distinguishing between aggressors and victims. The UN's ongoing betrayal of Israel, he suggests, is a measure of the organization's total failure.[1] But the UN seems to be more than a failed instrument. In the words of columnist Charles Krauthammer, "it is a bad instrument." Grobman seems to agree.


[1] Dore Gold, Tower of Babble: How the United Nations Has Fueled Global Chaos (New York: Crown Forum, 2004), 228-29, 205.

Dr Sarah Schmidt is senior lecturer in modern Jewish history and Zionist history at the Rothberg International School of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, where she also teaches an honors seminar, "The American Jew and the Israeli Jew: A Comparative Analysis."

To Go To Top

Posted by Eli E. Hertz, July 31, 2007.

Arab Member of Knesset Rewriting History: "Palestine belongs to its Arab residents, not to the Jewish occupiers." -- Al-Quds, July 29, 2007

(IsraelNN.com) Israeli Arab Knesset Member Ahmed Tibi (United Arab List/Ram Ta'al) attacked the State of Israel in a fiery editorial published in the Arabic-language newspaper Al-Quds on Sunday.
http://news.walla.co.il/?w=//1144762 (Hebrew)

Mr. Tibi,

Political rights to self-determination as a polity for Arabs were guaranteed by the League of Nations in four Mandates -- in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and later, Trans-Jordan. Palestine has been recognized as the Jewish national home by all 51 member countries -- the entire League of Nations -- which unanimously declared on July 24, 1922:

"Recognition Has Been Given to the Historical Connection of the Jewish People with Palestine and to the Grounds for Reconstituting their National Home in that Country."

Article 6 of the "Mandate for Palestine" clearly states:

"The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced [as in your case Mr. Tibi, since your civil and religious rights are protected as an Israeli Arab inhabitant in the land of Israel], shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes."

The "Mandate for Palestine,"[1] a historical League of Nations document laid down the Jewish legal right to settle anywhere in western Palestine, a 10,000-square-mile area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, an entitlement unaltered in international law and valid to this day.

And since you, Mr. Tibi, cite Martin Luther King, Jr., and explicitly attack Zionism, it would be worthwhile to cite Reverend King in a 1968 appearance at Harvard University, where he said: "When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews. You are talking antisemitism."

Mr. Tibi, you have 21 Arab countries to choose from. The Jews have one homeland -- Israel -- and they do not plan on giving it up.

[1] http://www.mythsandfacts.com/Conflict/mandate_for_palestine/Mandate_for_Palestine.pdf

Eli E. Hertz, who is President of the Myths and Facts Organization. Contact him at the website: www.mythsandfacts.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Helen Freedman, July 31, 2007.

Having just returned from a three week trip to Israel, I'm sorting out the information and impressions gathered from traveling throughout the country and meeting with many good friends, all dedicated to preserving Am Yisrael in Eretz Yisrael.

Viewed from the U.S., one sees the enormity of the problems, mostly caused by the fecklessness and ineptitude of Israel's leaders, who seemed determined to lead Israel off the cliff. There's no need to itemize the list of abominations promoted by the government, nor its abandonment of the security and welfare of its Jewish citizens. And the Olmert government seems to be aided in its suicidal efforts by incomprehensible decisions by the Bush administration. Suffice it to say, Israelis are very well aware of the threats to their existence, which come from their enemies in the Muslim Arab world, in the western world, and most tragically, from their Jewish leaders. The question then is, "How do ordinary people survive in such toxic surroundings?" The answer is, "They can't save the forest without first saving the trees." The "trees" all have different names and locations.

I found that the people in Tsfat are still suffering from the after-effects of last summer's Lebanon war. The shelters are still not prepared, nor are they adequate for the numbers of people who would need to use them should war break out once again in Lebanon, as was/is predicted for this summer. The government just hasn't come through on its promises to protect the citizens of Tsfat.

In Jerusalem I found ordinary citizens struggling to keep their businesses going. Government taxes and restrictions cause great hardships for the average shop-keeper. I was commiserating with my restaurant-owner friend, when I realized that hard as her situation was, of course, there were people who had no work at all.

I went to the demonstration tent that had been set up by the unemployed farmers of the former Gush Katif communities. It was located near the Jerusalem Supreme Court. The plan was to keep it there for two weeks, with men and women who had turned the sands of Gush Katif into flourishing farms and hothouses, now demanding that the government fulfill its promises to find a "solution for every person." Residents from the former Gush Katif arrived, along with many supporters and Members of Knesset, who came and went throughout the two weeks. The farmers wore green and white shirts, rather than the familiar orange, because they wished to de-politicize their plight. Their signs asked for people to simply empathize and understand what it was like to be approximately fifty years old, to lose your home and farm and livelihood, and wonder how your life can ever be restored. I met many friends at the tent, and we agreed that not much had changed over the two years since the expulsion. Instead of the refugees being in hotel rooms, they are now in cardboard caravans, still waiting for their permanent homes, schools, synagogues, youth centers, and jobs.

Among the Members of Knesset who spoke at the Wednesday, July 18 demonstration were Arieh Eldad, Effie Eitam, and Uri Ariel. The need to change the compensation laws so that realistic numbers could be offered to the Gush Katif refugees, was one of the ongoing themes. It is unlikely that these problems will ever be properly addressed by the present Olmert/Ramon/Peres government. It was interesting to note that the press was at the demonstration in large numbers as Bibi Netanyahu, Israel Katz, and Limor Livnat arrived to listen to the arguments of the farmers. As soon as they left, the press left also. The entire demonstration, with all the speakers strongly supporting the farmers, and with the large crowd that had gathered to lend its support, received little press attention.

Still in Jerusalem, I met with Joel Golovensky of the Institute for Zionist Strategies (www.izs.org.il). He presented me with a wonderful booklet his organization had produced: CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL. It was written in response to the constitution proposal of the Israel Democracy Institute, which the IZS believes "does not look after the essential interests of the Jewish people and is based on illusions." In addition to working on a constitution, the IZS is trying to halt illegal Arab construction "which continues unabated because the government lacks the Zionist vision and political courage to stop it." They are also attempting to develop a generation of public leaders who will be diametrically opposite from the present leadership, who will put the interests of the Jewish state ahead of their own personal greed and self-interests.

The IZS also prepared a lengthy presentation regarding the instruction of the Supreme Court that JNF/KKL land, purchased by Jews for the express purpose of buying and developing land in Israel for the benefit of Jews, should now be available to Arabs and all non-Jews. This is an issue being exposed and fought by Arieh King in Jerusalem, and Aaron Klein of World Net Daily and the John Batchelor and Mike Savage talk shows. Based on the research done by Arieh and Aaron, I, along with others, have been demanding answers of the JNF in New York as to why JNF donors are being deceived.

Dr. Daniel Doron, a famous Israeli economist, also met with me to discuss the disgraceful activities of the New Israel Fund. Disguised under seemingly altruistic goals such as Civil and Human Rights, Social and Economic Justice, and Religious Pluralism and Tolerance, the New Israel Fund, with millions of dollars received from donors who include the Ford Foundation, has a strong left-wing program designed to undermine the Jewish character of the Jewish State. It is necessary to expose the true pro-Arab nature of their activities so that unwitting donors can direct their philanthropy elsewhere.

I took the 160 Egged bus to Hebron to meet with David Wilder, a well-known spokesman for the community. I saw that the homes in the market place that had been forcibly emptied of Jews by the Israeli police and soldiers, were still primarily unoccupied. I understand that the few families who are living there were told to evacuate or they would have to pay the hefty costs of their forced evacuation. The scenario is definitely one reminiscent of George Orwell's 1984.

David Wilder took me to Beit HaShalom, the large building that the Jewish community bought for $700,000, and for which they are now fighting in the courts. It is on the path between Kiryat Arba and Hebron. When the building was purchased, it was in terrible disrepair. The Jewish workers put in plumbing, a community kitchen, and partitions so that individual families could have a bit of privacy. One of our good friends, Yifat Akobi, is living there with her husband, Shalom, and their six children, the youngest just a few weeks old. Yifat is always an inspiration, and because she is such a heroic figure, she is constantly being harassed by the Israeli police. She, and probably all of her young children, have police records based on absurd accusations by Arabs. Nevertheless, responding to the court on the various charges against her takes up valuable time and money which the family does not have. Yifat, however, continues to feel that she is blessed in being able to live in the holy city of Hebron.

David then drove me up to Tel Rumeida, the highest point overlooking Hebron. He showed me a home adjacent to the Jewish homes and caravans on the Tel, which belongs to a Hamas terrorist. Left-wingers from Israel and around the world have come to the Hamas home to "protect" it from the Jews, preserving it for the Hamas owner. While on the premises, they harass the Jews at every opportunity. A soldier stood near us while we were talking, to protect us from being stoned, or worse.

We drove to Kiryat Arba, where I visited Rav Waldman of the Nir Yeshiva, along with his long-time assistant, Celia Ofer. The Rabbi was very upset over President Bush's speech of July 16. In response to Bush's comments about removing the Jews of Judea and Samaria and promoting "settlement" in the Galilee and the Negev, Rav Waldman wanted it made clear that no one, not even the President of the U.S., has the right to dictate to Israel, a sovereign country, where it may settle its people. The Rabbi also made it very clear that we don't need terrorists like Mahmoud Abbas to "recognize Israel's right to exist." He said, "The State of Israel is a divine creation of the G-d of Israel, and only He determines its destiny."

The most optimistic person I met with was Dr.Yitzchak Klein of the Israel Policy Center (info@merkazmedini.org). He believes that most Israelis are tired of the old give-away, appeasement policies and see the need to change the government, the media, and the courts. Dr. Klein, along with Attorney Noga Cooper and Shilat Edri, have produced publications citing the Constraints on Political Expression in Israel, and an Interim Report on Political Interrogation and Non-Induction of Candidates for Military Service into the IDF. Detailed case histories are given wherein the evils of the government are described. In the case of the IDF interrogations, candidates for the IDF, who were labeled as demonstrating against the Gush Katif expulsion, are interrogated and in many cases marked as mentally unsuited for the army. This label of having a "psychiatric disorder" which makes them unfit for military service, brands the young people for life as unfit for other pursuits. The work that the Israel Policy Center does in exposing the anti-Jewish, anti-humanitarian, and anti-democratic actions of the Israeli government against its Jewish citizens is extremely important. They also work with Honenu, an organization that fights for the civil rights of Jews unfairly treated in the Israeli courts. Their website is: www.honenu.org.il.

My next destination was Mitzpe Ramon, in the Negev. The bus to Be'er Sheva from the Jerusalem central bus station took me through Kiryat Gat, an old town with a very new, modern section boasting attractive apartment building complexes. Be'er Sheva itself has grown dramatically, with the very beautiful Ben Gurion University, and large, modern buildings. Threading my way through all the soldiers who seem to be present in large numbers at every bus station, I got on the bus to Mitzpe Ramon. As soon as we were on the outskirts of Be'ersheva, I saw the Bedouin houses and tents sprawling in the now sandy landscape, featuring an occasional palm tree. As we traveled deeper into the Negev, the surroundings became more and more dramatic. The scenery of the desert landscape has a mysterious beauty all its own, and it was spread out before me in all its splendor. My friends greeted me in Mitzpe and took me to their home which boasts Green Build technology. Both Stephanie and Philippe Frydman are consultants in building homes so that they maximize environmentally friendly resources. They also bake wonderful organic sourdough bread and muffins. What a treat! There was a wonderful evening concert at Avdat, a Nabatean and Roman ruin, high on a mountain top. It was a welcome respite from all the political mayhem. Of course, the Negev is not free of problems. The Bedouins are being mobilized by leftist groups such as the New Israel Fund to demand land from the government, and as in all of Israel, Jews are being crowded out of their land.

I returned to Jerusalem and met Chaim Silberstein of Uvneh Yerushalyim, (Rebuild Jerusalem), for a late afternoon tour of Kever Rachel, the grave of Mother Rachel in Bethlehem. The bus had to pass through the 25ft. high walls which flank the approach to Rachel's tomb. The fortifications necessary around the tomb strongly display the intolerable need to have a strong military presence at Jewish holy sites. Despite this ugliness, Chaim is very excited about his plans for a Bat Mitzvah center at the Kever, as well as a woman's learning center. Evelyn Haies, strongly devoted to Kever Rachel, was with us also, and enthusiastically reinforced Chaim's words. The image of Mother Rachel crying for her children, and HaShem's promise to Rachel that "your children will return to their borders," seemed especially timely as we prepared for Tisha B'Av.

The night before the Ninth of Av, the day associated with the sin of the spies, and the destruction of both Temples, Women In Green was holding their traditional walk around the Old City walls, led by MK Arieh Eldad. We met the group at Safra Square, for the reading of Eicha. The mood was somber as was befitting on this sad occasion of remembrance. However, one could not help but enjoy meeting so many old friends. It was a pleasure seeing Nadia Matar, Tuvia Singer, Aaron Klein, Shifra Hoffman, Yehudit Tayar, and so many people from the former Gush Katif communities. The black helmeted Yassamnakim, on their black motorcycles, rode alongside the crowd. It was hard to tell whether they were meant to protect or intimidate the thousands of Jewish walkers. The mounted police were in attendance, riding the German horses which had played such a cruel part in the Amona expulsion. We finished our walk at the Kotel. The plaza was packed with people, talking, praying, and crying. It was an incredible sight.

On Tisha B'av, I walked with a friend to the Christian Quarter of the Old City to visit Matti Dan, head of Ateret Cohanim, and his wife Etti. Matti told us of the great struggle he and his organization are undergoing in their efforts to hold onto homes purchased at great expense in the Silwan area of Jerusalem. Again, the Israeli court system seems bent on making life as difficult as possible for Jews, while being negligently and dangerously lenient with Arabs.

That evening, I made my way back to the protest tent of the former farmers of Gush Katif. When evening services were concluded, the fast was over, and watermelon, cookies, and drinks were brought out and gratefully devoured. Then I joined the travelers to Nitzan, the caravan community near Ashkelon where hundreds of Gush Katif refugees are now living in temporary homes. I was a guest in the home of Keren and Dror Vanunu and their children, just as I had been their guest two years prior in August, 2005, in their beautiful home in Nevei Dekalim. My intention was to participate the next day, July 25, in the special commemorative activities marking two years since the expulsion.

I have written elsewhere in detail about this remarkable day. Suffice it to say, the day was organized by a small group of people volunteering their time, efforts, and creative skills to make it work. We started in Kissufim junction with the dedication of a special Gush Katif Sefer Torah, where people stood silently, weeping, as the speakers talked about remembering and returning. We then drove to Netivot, a very successful city of 30,000 people, for a full day of movies, speakers, and activities. That was followed by a march to the grave of Babba Sallie with the Sefer Torah, amidst much singing and dancing. The day concluded with a joyous celebration in Sderot when the Sefer Torah was brought in by thousands of marchers. The survivors of the destroyed communities of Gush Katif demonstrated their solidarity with the besieged city of Sderot by choosing to house their Sefer Torah in Sderot until the scroll could be brought to its permanent home back in Gush Katif. How "coincidental" that both the former Gush Katif and the present Sderot suffered and are suffering because of the perfidy of Olmert and his government.

Seeing our good friends, Anita Tucker, Rachel and Moshe Saperstein, Laurence Beziz, Debbie Rosen, Rivka and Michael Goldschmidt, and so many more, awakened many emotions. We had all cried together in disbelief that August, 2005, watching the residents of Gush Katif being forcibly evicted from their homes. Even as it was happening, we couldn't believe that an Israeli government would order such a cruel, meaningless and dangerous destruction of communities. It did happen, however, and today we are concerned that even more expulsions from the Golan, Judea, and Samaria are being planned. Is it possible that a government would proceed on such a self-destructive path, knowing what the outcome must be? Would the Knesset allow it to happen? Would Israel's citizens rise up in revolution against such suicidal plans? The "cuckoo's nest" is becoming clearer than ever.

The following morning I walked around Nitzan, viewing the caravan homes in the dry, hot, barren area. Many people still had their containers adjacent to their homes. The containers had to be filled with totally unusable furniture and clothing, having weathered the cold weather and the extreme heat. Only mildew and mold could survive in that setting.

That afternoon, Dror and I drove to Yad Binyamin where the Ganei Tal farmers had a beautiful exhibit of their former lives. It was heartbreaking to view the beautiful gardens and hothouses and homes that had once existed and then were turned to rubble by order of the cruel, lunatic leaders of Israel.

My trip ended in Tel Aviv, where the beaches were filled with people enjoying the wonderful waters of the Mediterranean, along with the hot sunshine and cool cafes.

What an amazing country is this land of Israel. It is the most modern, most highly developed, most democratic and opportunity laden country in the entire Middle East, and yet, it carries vestiges of the ancient, and recent, painful history of the Jewish people. The hatred that exists within the Israeli society, that causes Israel's leaders to permit the destruction of its own Jews, is incomprehensible, but real. We therefore have to do everything in our power to prevent the evil forces from being successful.

Readers of this report, who wish to be part of the program to prevent Israel's destruction, are requested to contact Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI -- 212-828-2424, www.afsi.org; afsi@rcn.com to learn what can be done to help. I can be reached at: ghfree@aol.com. We hope to hear from you.

To Go To Top

Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, July 31, 2007.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had barely finished calling for a Judea ("land of the Judeans"--Jews) made Judenrein--free of Jews, who have thousands of years of history and modern ownership connecting them to the land--when it was announced that America had agreed to sell state of the art aircraft and other weaponry to Arabs either still technically at war with or dedicated to the destruction of Israel.

Hitler would be proud--as certainly are his Nazi-affiliated Arabs' descendants. The latters' World War II era icon, Grand Mufti Hajj Amin al-Husseini, was a key Hitler ally in the Middle East and Arafat's hero.

To show gratitude for earlier German favors, in 1943 al-Husseini repeatedly traveled to Bosnia where, on orders of the Nazi SS, he recruited the notorious Hanjar Troopers, a special Bosnian Muslim Waffen SS company which slaughtered the vast majority of Bosnia's Jews and committed repeated atrocities against Serbs as well.

Keep in mind that the West's current darling, Arafatian-in-a-suit, Mahmoud Abbas, is a Holocaust denier and is on record calling for Israel's destruction as a Jewish State. And he's the "moderate." Abbas simply plays the game better than the more genocidally honest folks in Hamas. Just ask Arafat's ghost...billions of dollars stashed away in Swiss bank accounts, and so forth.

Back to the current proposed massive American arms sale to Gulf Arab states...

Before proceeding any further, a lesson in demographics and geography is called for...especially for new readers.

Take out a map of the Middle East...a map of the world might do, but you'll probably need a magnifying glass to assist in this exercise.

Find Israel on the map. Most of its population and industry lie within that miniscule central waistband, made about nine-sixteen miles wide by the '49 armistice lines, not borders. The lines simply marked the place where fighting was brought to a halt after the Arabs' combined attempt to nip Israel in the bud in 1948. They were never meant to be permanent borders.

Next, take a look at the vast expanse of the Arab and non-Arab Muslim states surrounding Israel.

The Arabs themselves now claim almost two dozen states (conquered from mostly non-Arab peoples) on over six million square miles of territory.

Israel consists of about one-sixth of one percent of the land just held by Arabs. About five million Israeli Jews are surrounded by hundreds of millions of Arabs; this doesn't include, of course, Muslim Iranians (and others) who are amongst Israel's worst enemies today.

Now that we have some territorial perspective, we can move on...

Several decades earlier, President Jimmy ("Apartheid Israel") Carter sold Saudi Arabia similar state of the art aircraft and such.

In May of 1978, the sale of over ninety F-15 C/D strike aircraft was narrowly approved by Congress, and only after Riyadh supposedly accepted restrictions that limited its ability to deploy against Israel. To allegedly "assure" this, the aircraft were not to be equipped with conformal fuel tanks (CFTs), preventing them from carrying extra fuel and a full weapons load simultaneously. The Saudis also agreed to refrain from basing the aircraft at the northwestern Tabuk airbase, a few minutes flight time from Israel.

In 1992, sales of seventy-two even more advanced F-15S aircraft were placed under the same and additional restrictions.

All of this was done to supposedly allow an Israel grotesquely out-manned and out-gunned to somehow maintain an edge on the battlefield. Quantitatively, there was nothing America could do...so the edge has always had to be qualitative.

Unfortunately, Israel's "best friend," America, has done much over the past years to erode the latter as well.

There are just so many rabbits that fit into a hat...and each time Israel fights an increasingly better enemy, its ability to continuously perform magic comes at an ever greater cost.

CFTs, AWACS command and control aircraft, etc. and so forth were later supplied to the Saudis, and Riyadh has repeatedly deployed F-15s at Tabuk, neutralizing Israel's relative strategic depth.

The record of implementation for alleged American "restrictions" has thus been poor. And America has done nothing to address this except make excuses and downplay Israel's concerns. The James Baker & Co. crew--petrodollar zillionaires, the Saudis' legal reps, and so forth--have done their jobs well.

One of the latest excuses used to wink at this non-response to Arab non-compliance involved alleged Saudi support for America's earlier Iraq offensive.

As is well known, however, if it was up to the Saudis, Kuwait, and the smaller Gulf Arab states themselves--despite the billions of dollars in arms they had already received--as the Saudis conquered much of the Arabian Peninsula from the Hashemites early in the 20th century creating Saudi Arabia, the land would most likely be known as Saddam Arabia today.

In 2007, substitute the threat from an Arab Saddam with that of a now even more powerful non-Arab Iran.

The mullahs not only have plans to create their twin Shi'a Islamic Republic to the west , but have recently openly staked claims to Bahrain and elsewhere as well...like Iraq, once part of ancient Iranian empires.

So, America--especially an Arabist-dominated State Department and its various petrodollar buddies--now has its latest excuse to play games at Israel's expense.

Realistically, the latest proposed arms sales to the Arabs have about as much chance as being used against Iran as me being named an ayatollah. Unlike Israel, Iran won't worry about precision bombing, targeted killings, and such if push really does come to shove in the Persian aka Arabian Gulf. And the Arabs know this...

So, as the Foggy Folks (who opposed Israel's rebirth in the first place) know quite well, the only targets Arab arms will likely wind up being used against--one way or another--will be kosher ones. And the odds of any new so-called restrictions on renewed massive arms sales to Arabs being honored have about as much chance of success as the earlier ones did.

Back in 2005, the United States imposed sanctions after a dispute over Israel's sale of drones --unmanned aerial vehicles--to China. The Israelis were forced to back down.

America dwarfs Israel in size and is the most powerful nation on Earth.

The weapons Washington sells Israel's enemies--many of whom are still sworn to its demise--are far more lethal than those drones. The problem doesn't go away simply by selling the Jews more armaments as well. Again, keep the demographics and geography in mind.

Israel's qualitative edge these days is mostly--if not entirely--of its own making...upgrades on systems made by the Jews themselves.

Such continuous, callous disregard by America for the minimal, basic security needs of its tiny, beleaguered true friend--whether territorial (recall Rice's demand for Israel to return to its 9-mile wide, '49 armistice line existence), military, or otherwise--is something which will backfire on America itself not too far down the road.

Gerald A. Honigman, a Florida educator, has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in both the print media and on websites. Contact him at honigman6@msn.com or go to his website: http://geraldahonigman.com/blog.php

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, July 31, 2007.

What do anti-Semitism, racism and Islamophobia have in common?

In fact, nothing.

But according to Islamist groups, Western media and the United Nations, they have everything in common. Anti-Semites hate all Jews, racists hate all members of another race, and Islamophobes hate all Muslims.

Whoever coined the term "Islamophobia" was quite shrewd.

Notice the intellectual sleight of hand here. The term is not "Muslim-phobia" or "anti-Muslimist," it is Islam-ophobia -- fear of Islam -- yet fear of Islam is in no way the same as hatred of all Muslims.

One can rightly or wrongly fear Islam, or more usually, aspects of Islam, and have absolutely no bias against all Muslims, let alone be a racist.

The equation of Islamophobia with racism is particularly dishonest.

Muslims come in every racial group, and Islam has nothing to do with race.

Nevertheless, mainstream Western media, Islamist groups calling themselves Muslim civil liberties groups and various Western organizations repeatedly declare that Islamophobia is racism.

To cite three of innumerable examples:

The Guardian published an opinion piece titled, "Islamophobia should be as unacceptable as racism"; the European Union has established the European Monitoring Center for Racism and Xenophobia; and the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation Commission of Australia notes that "Muslims have also been the target of racism in Australia, often referred to as Islamophobia."

Even granting that there are people who fear Islam, how does that in any way correlate with racism? If fear of an ideology rendered one racist, all those who fear conservatism or liberalism should be considered racist.

Of course, some may argue that whereas conservatism and liberalism are ideas, Islam is a religion, and while one can attack ideas, one must not attack religions.

It is, however, quite insulting to religions to deny that they are ideas.

Religions are certainly more than ideas -- they are theological belief systems -- but they are also ideas about how society should be run just as much as liberalism and conservatism are.

Therefore, Islam, or Christianity, or Judaism, or Buddhism should be just as subject to criticism as conservatism or liberalism.

However, the only religion the West permits criticism of is Christianity.

People write books, give lectures and conduct seminars on the falsity of Christian claims, or on the immoral record of Christianity, and no one attacks them for racism or bigotry, let alone attacks them physically. The head of the Anti-Defamation League announces that conservative Christians are the greatest threat to America today, and no one charges him with racism or Christianophobia.

The statement may be an expression of hysteria and of ignorance, but not of racism.

But if one says that Islam does not appear compatible with democracy or that the Islamic treatment of women is inferior to the West's, he or she is labeled a racist Islamophobe.

One might counter that maligning people for criticism is not only true of those who criticize Islam, it is also true of critics of Israel and of America -- the former, it is said, are immediately labeled "anti-Semitic" and the latter are immediately labeled "unpatriotic."

Neither is true at all. Both are, and I use this word rarely, lies.

No one is labeled anti-Semitic for merely criticizing Israel.

People are labeled anti-Semitic for denying Israel's right to exist, for siding with those who wish to exterminate it or for singling out the Jewish state alone among all the nations of the world for attacks that most other countries deserve far more.

And no one in any responsible capacity has called anyone "unpatriotic" just for criticizing America. Sen. Hillary Clinton claimed during the last Democratic presidential debate that the Defense Department called her "unpatriotic" for asking whether the Defense Department has a plan to withdraw American troops from Iraq.

Yet the term "unpatriotic" was not only not used in the response to the senator, it was not even hinted at.

The fact remains that the term "Islamophobia" has one purpose -- to suppress any criticism, legitimate or not, of Islam.

And given the cowardice of the Western media, and the collusion of the left in banning any such criticism (while piling it on Christianity and Christians), it is working.

Latest proof:

This past week a man in New York was charged with two felonies for what is being labeled the hate crime of putting a Koran in a toilet at Pace College.

Not misdemeanors, mind you, felonies.

Meanwhile, the man who put a crucifix in a jar of urine continues to have his artwork -- "Piss Christ" -- displayed at galleries and museums.

A Koran in a toilet is a hate crime; a crucifix in pee is a work of art. Thanks in part to that brilliant term, "Islamophobia."

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Manhigut Yehudit, July 31, 2007.

As the United States, the European Union and the Arab League continue their pincer attack on Israel by way of their constant pressure on the Jewish State to make suicidal concessions to its sworn enemies, only one man has the moral compass, the integrity and the fortitude to stand up to such international pressure -- Moshe Feiglin.

The United States has just funded, trained and armed Mahmoud Abbas' "moderate" Fatah terrorist group, proposed selling $200 billion of advanced weopons technology to Saudi Arabia, and demanded through Condoleeza Rice that Israel evacuate and destroy over 100 more Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria according to the Road Map (of appeasement), which when taken these steps will only encourage the terrorists to further attack both Israel and the United States.

Besides Mr. Feiglin (who believes in the policy of "Peace for Peace" and not "Land for Peace"), there is no one else on the Israeli political scene who will end the possibility of making these concessions on the Land of Israel.

Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Olmert, Ehud Barak and Shimon Peres have all recently pledged to continue the insane policies of giving away the Land of Israel and making "painful" and "serious" concessions to Israel's sworn enemies. These concession have statistically been proven to bring only death and destruction to Jews in Israel, to Europeans and to Americans by fueling the fires and the confidence of the terrorists worldwide.


The Moshe Feiglin campaign for the Head of Likud is gaining strength every day as Israelis from all sides of the political spectrum recognize that the only solution for Israel is to have Authentic Jewish Leadership.

For the latest on the August 14, 2007 Likud election, click on Manhigut Yehudit's website www.jewishisrael.org (English) and on Moshe Feiglin's campaign website www.mf1.co.il (Hebrew)

Click here to listen to or to download the new Feiglin campaign theme song (performed by the Internationally-reknown Israeli singer Ariel Zilber):

Click here to watch the new Feiglin campaign music video:

All are invited to play the theme song on their media outlets.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by B.E. Shep, July 31, 2007.

This comes from Al Bawaba

The Union of Islamic Communities in Italy has urged all Muslims across the country to express their views following a new book which hails Israel and slams Palestinian resistance groups. According to a Saudi newspaper, the leaders of the Islamic community in Italy are furious about the new book which amazingly was edited by an Egyptian-born Italian writer and journalist!

Magdi Allam, 55, deputy chief editor of Italy's most influential newspaper Il Corriere della Sera, is again at the center of the storm following his seventh book, dubbed "Viva Israele" (Long Live Israel). The subtitle of the book reads "From the ideology of death to the civilization of life: my story."

"Long Live Israel" is the tale of his life ever since his youth under the republican regime of late Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser.

According to Allam, Nasser is responsible for having turned Egypt -- and the rest of the Arab world -- into the cradle of the "ideology of death". Allam claims Nasser brought about an aggressive pan-Arabic dream based on the denial of Israel's right to exist. The need for the destruction of Israel is the dominant theme that, Allam states, made death and destruction the core values of a once liberal Islamic culture.

Thus, the new book defends the existence of Israel and terms armed Palestinian groups as "dangerous terrorist threats." In addition, Allam wrote that during their operations in the Palestinian territories, Israeli forces have been trying to avoid hitting Palestinian civilians and only aim to defend Israeli citizens....

Furthermore, Allam added that the main cause for the Israeli -- Palestinian dispute stems form the Palestinian terror.

Allam says that "Israel -- along with Pope Benedict XVI -- represents the residual hope for Western civilization, which, more than other civilizations, embodies the sacredness of life and personal freedom."

Allam also slams the Arab calls for the killing of Jews. In the past, Allam also criticized resistance groups in Lebanon and Iraq.

Muslims in Italy have been claiming that Allam is an unreliable person who spreads suspicion and hatred against Islam and Muslim people by reporting undocumented, unverified or even utterly false news, just to flatter to the West.

It should be noted that during his adolescent years, Allam maintained completely different views. Allam was raised as a Muslim and attended the Italian school of Cairo. In Italy since 1972, Allam started his stay there as an enthusiastic activist for the Palestinian cause. At that period, Allam thought of Israel as a racist and aggressive state "invented by the Western world as some kind of compensation for the horrors of the Jewish Holocaust".

Years later, his interest in the history of Zionism and a meeting with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat brought him to realize that "Arafat was responsible for Palestinian terrorism" and that "the predication of the ideology of death eventually hit and harmed the Palestinians themselves."

The latest book has changed Allam's life. The Saudi newspaper reported that following threats to his life, the Italian police decided to intensify his security escort. Under these circumstances, it is not surprising that many Muslims in Italy denounce Allam as a new "Salman Rushdie", the British writer who was forced into hiding in the 1990s after Iran's religious leaders issued a fatwa (religious edict), calling for his death.

Contact B.E. Shep at BEShep33@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, July 31, 2007.

This comes from Jihad Watch www.jihadwatch.org/archives/017579.php

This sounds great until one realizes that both Brown and Bush are in total denial about the deep roots of jihad and Islamic supremacism within Islamic theology and tradition.

Can we really fight the war of ideas effectively while ignoring and denying the true nature of the conflict itself ?

And then when you see what Brown is actually recommending, it just involves a further retreat from the ideological challenge the jihadists present.

Instead of confronting that challenge and joining the battle, he is recommending that we ignore that jihadism represents a "cause" altogether, and treat it the way it was treated before 9/11, as a series of unrelated, distinct "crimes" that had no underlying unifying purpose or goal.

Imagine if the Allies had tried to fight World War II that way: instead of treating Nazism as an ideology and combatting it, imagine if they treated each German offensive in Europe as a separate "crime," not as part of any larger purpose, and offered outreach programs to Germans in the face of each "crime." How far might Hitler have gotten?

From the Daily Mail

Gordon Brown will use his first formal talks with George Bush to urge a massive cultural offensive against Islamic extremism.

He is set to urge America to learn from the Cold War and mount a battle of ideas rather than rely on military might alone.

Ahead of his first formal talks with President Bush, he declared: "It is our shared task to expose terrorism for what it is -- not a cause but a crime. A crime against humanity."

His words contrasted strongly with the Bush rhetoric of a "war against terror".

He emphasised the importance of winning with ideas and values rather than just bullets.

"We should remember that during the Cold War, the united front against Soviet communism involved deterrence through large arsenals of weapons and a cultural effort also on an unprecedented scale, deploying what Roosevelt called the 'arsenal of democracy'," he wrote in the Washington Post. "Foundations, trusts, civil society and civic organisations -- links and exchanges between schools, universities, museums, institutes, churches, trade unions, sports clubs, societies -- were all engaged."

Yes, there was a lot of attempting to win hearts and minds. There was also a lot of clear-eyed confrontation of the Communist ideology. Where is today's Radio Free Europe, beaming anti-jihadist broadcasts into the Islamic world? Who would dare to establish it?

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 31, 2007.

According to Al-Hayat in London, which cited an Israeli "senior government source," Olmert and Abbas have set up a secret channel for discussing final status issues. These include establishment of an independent Palestinian state, the refugee issue, the question of settlements and the future of Jerusalem, although -- according to the report -- there have been no breakthroughs.

Olmert's office is denying this. But I have picked up similar inklings from another source and I consider this within the realm of possibility. Those of us who have been monitoring Olmert are aware that he is focused on this: a desire to give away part of the land. He came into office speaking of "realignment," which was to be the Judea-Samaria version of the Gaza disengagement. When that didn't play because of the political situation, he pulled back temporarily. Now, with "peace talk" in the air, he may believe he has the opportunity to give our land to the Palestinians more directly.


After considerable publicity about Olmert's possible readiness to allow Jordanian regular army forces from the Badr Brigade -- which consists of Bedouins with experience in fighting terrorists -- into Judea and Samaria to help the PA, Jordan has responded: Nothing doing.

Said a Jordanian spokesman: "To discuss such a notion is shooting down Palestinian aspirations of independent statehood and implies that the Palestinians aren't capable of taking responsibility for their own security. We aren't contemplating anything like that."

Translation: We have no intention of getting involved at this level now.


Round and round we go... But there's no clarity, no sense of anything really happening (because in truth nothing is happening):

The Arab states -- which had presumably been promoting "peace" via the Arab League initiative (from which the Saudis have since withdrawn) -- are now saying that they're not terribly enthusiastic about Bush's plans for a peace conference. Such an effort, they are saying, should be "all-inclusive," meaning that it should work on peace between Syria and Israel at the same time. A new wrinkle.

When the Arab governments met in Cairo on Monday to discuss their response to Bush's proposed conference, representatives of Syria stormed out, angry that fellow Arabs would even discuss it. It would, they said, "liquidate the Palestinian cause."

So much for that. Let's hope.


A number of terrorist Palestinian groups -- most notably the Palestinian Resistance Committees -- have expressed fury with PA Prime Minister Fayad for dropping the term "armed struggle" (mukawama) from his newly announced platform. One PRC representative, Abu Abir, said they would target Fayad and "his treacherous gang."

"We will target them in the field the same way we attack Israel. We promise to put an end to all the American-backed Palestinian personalities in the near future because of their decision to side with the Israeli enemy."

And so, guess what?

When Fayad was at the Arab League meeting in Cairo on Monday, he held a press conference and further explained his stand: Palestinians have a right to resist the "occupation" even if the word mukawama didn't appear in his platform (for semantic reasons and because of the possibility of misunderstandings): "What is the essence of resistance, especially in light of the current occupation? Does it not begin with all possible efforts to strengthen the permanence of the Palestinian citizens on their land? That is precisely the government's agenda."

Oh. Right. That was a close one for Fayad.


Word came out from the Lebanese paper An-Nahar the other day that one of the two Israeli soldiers being held by Hezbollah is dead. This information reportedly came from Germans who had been in touch with Christian Lebanese Michael Aoun, an ally of Hezbollah.

Israel is not giving this undocumented report credibility. In truth, we just don't know.


It would seem that Bush has made pretty much of a mess of things with his latest diplomatic gambit. Over the weekend the US announced that it is planning to sell Saudi Arabia $20 billion in advanced weapons systems, including JDAMs that turn regular bombs into "smart" bombs, which present a potential strategic threat to Israel.

He is doing this to secure Saudi cooperation in Iraq. But it seems fairly short-sighted (exceedingly myopic?) to establish such a policy made in the expectation of an alliance with the Saudis. Of late, they promoted the unity government in Mecca, favoring Hamas; then they withdrew support for the Arab League peace initiative, instead pushing renewed negotiations between Fatah and Hamas, something that the US solidly opposes.

Far more significantly, Saudi Arabia -- home of radical fundamentalist, virulently anti-Shiite Islamic Wahhabism -- is directly connected to terrorism in Iraq. Saudi Arabia has permitted Sunni radicals to cross into Iraq, and has provided funding for them; Wahhabi clerics have encouraged them. The New York Times reports that "Of an estimated 60 to 80 foreign fighters who enter Iraq each month, American military and intelligence officials say that nearly half are coming from Saudi Arabia."

And Bush has failed to notice this?

Addressing the issue of how the American government views the Saudis, Stephen Schwartz, a senior policy analyst with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, writes, "The (Saudi) kingdom is an unwavering nerve center of ideological indoctrination, incitement, and terrorist financing...Washington needs to end its delusion that the Saudi royal family is a moderating force...

"...Saudi Arabia has never been subjugated by the West, instead it has only been cuddled and bribed to ridiculous extremes. And in turn the West has received a torrent of violence and hateful venom."


Resistance to this sale has been stiffer than Bush had anticipated, for the prospect of increased risk to Israel does not sit well here in Jerusalem or among supporters of Israel in Congress; there is no adequate Israeli defense for these "smart" bombs.

In an attempt to sweeten the situation, the US has announced an increase in military aid to Israel, from $2.4 to $3 billion annually. Along with this came promises of continuing US commitment to Israel's qualitative military edge and guarantees that limits would be put on the Saudis regarding use of their equipment ("restrictions on the range, size and location of the satellite-guided bombs," including a commitment not to store the weapons at air bases close to Israeli territory).

Whether the US is truly committed to Israel's qualitative edge remains to be seen. Israel's request to buy the US's most sophisticated stealth bomber has been denied.

As to restrictions on the use of the equipment, a report today indicated that this may make it more difficult for Condoleezza Rice to get the Saudis to cooperate publicly with supporting the Israeli-Palestinian process. Is this not unreal?

Reps. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) and Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) have announced that they will introduce a joint resolution to block the deal when Congress is formally notified. Said Weiner, "The reputation of the Saudis has taken quite a beating since 9/11, and despite the fact that the administration has done everything to portray them as part of the moderate Arab world, members of Congress of both parties are increasingly skeptical."


A Palestinian Arab was caught at a checkpoint (yup! one of those checkpoints again) near Shechem with 22 pounds of explosives.


This is an interesting news item: The Prison Service has decided to cancel matriculation exams for Palestinian Arabs in Israeli prisons. Seems there have been several incidents in which Arabs brought in to administer the tests attempted to bring letters to, or accept letters from, the prisoners.

Matriculation exams for Palestinians in Israeli prisons?

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, July 31, 2007.

Dear friends,

Americans adore winners!!! In America, in every walk of life, winners are admired. AMERICA HELPS WINNERS.

After the Olmert debacle in Lebanon last year, I knew immediately that the Bush's administration will do its best to look for new winners.

Unfortunately, I was right again.

Here is another superb article from the pen of Caroline Glick. It appeared today in the Jerusalem Post

Your Truth Provider,

Two major arms sales were announced over the weekend. First, the US announced that it is planning to sell Saudi Arabia $20 billion in advanced weapons systems, including Joint Direct Attack Munition kits or JDAMs that are capable of transforming regular gravitational bombs into precision-guided "smart" weapons.

Largely in an attempt to neutralize Congressional opposition to the proposed sale, the Bush administration also announced that it plans to increase annual military assistance to Israel by some 25 percent next year and that it hopes that next year's increase in assistance will be maintained by the next administration.

The second arms sale was the reported Russian agreement to sell Iran 250 advanced long-ranged Sukhoi-30 fighter jets and aerial fuel tankers capable of extending the jets' range by thousands of kilometers. Russia's massive armament of Iran in this and in previous sales over the past two years make clear that from Russia's perspective, all threats to US interests, including Shi'ite expansionism, work to Moscow's advantage.

ON THE face of it, these contrasting US and Russian announcements seem to signal that geopolitics have reverted to the Cold War model of two superpowers competing for global power by, among other things, assisting their proxies in fighting one another. Yet, today the situation is not the same as it was before.

Today, the US finds itself competing not only against an emergent Russia, but against Iran, and the Shi'ite expansionism it advances. Moreover, it finds itself under attack from Sunni jihadism, which is incubated and financed by Saudi Arabia, America's primary ally in the Persian Gulf.

The US's proposed arms sale to Saudi Arabia has raised pointed criticism in Israel and among Israel's supporters in the US. As senior defense officials told The Jerusalem Post Monday, the JDAM sale to Saudi Arabia constitutes a strategic threat to Israel which has no way of defending itself against JDAM capabilities.

To assess the reasonableness of Israel's opposition to the proposed sale, and to understand the sale's significance against the background of emerging regional and global threats to US national security interests, it is worthwhile to revisit US actions toward Israel and Saudi Arabia during the Cold War when checking Soviet expansion worldwide was the main goal of US foreign policy.

THE US held Israel at arms length until after its stunning victory against Soviet clients Egypt and Syria in the 1967 Six Day War. In the aftermath of Israel's victory, the US realized that Israel was a natural ally in checking Soviet power in the Middle East. As a result, in 1968 it began providing Israel with political and military aid. This policy paid off in spades in the 1973 Yom Kippur War and in the 1982 Lebanon War when the IDF handily beat the Soviets' proxy armies. Indeed, from the US perspective, there was no downside to supporting Israel. Israel's patent lack of expansionist ambitions ensured that the US would suffer no ancillary blowback for its support.

The US-Israel alliance's central weakness was US's perception of Saudi Arabia as its strategic ally. This weakness came to the fore most prominently in 1981 with the Reagan administration's decision to sell AWACs spy planes to the Saudis. As is the case with the US's current proposed arms sale to the Saudis, back then Israel perceived the AWACs sale as a strategic threat to its national security. Yet, since checking Soviet expansionism and not securing Israel was the US's primary strategic aim, and since the US perceived Saudi Arabia as an ally against Soviet expansionism, the Reagan administration pushed the sale forward against Israel's strenuous objections.

In the end, the AWACs were not used against Israel. Yet by the same token, they also did nothing to curb Soviet expansionism or advance any other US interest. During the 1991 Gulf War, the Saudis played no effective combat role against Iraq.

The main Saudi contribution to the US's victory in the Cold War was its willingness to finance the mujahadeen in Afghanistan who fought the Soviet invasion. There can be no doubt that the rout of the Soviet military in Afghanistan played a central role in causing the dissolution of the Soviet empire. But there is also no question that the blowback from the war in Afghanistan has been enormously detrimental to US national security and to global security as a whole.

The mujadaheen's US-armed and Saudi financed victory against the Soviets in Afghanistan fed the aspirations of Saudi supported Sunni jihadists. It spawned al-Qaida and provided arms and combat experience to forces that would come back to haunt the US.

SO AS far as the Middle East and Central Asia are concerned, a primary lesson of the Cold War relates to the relative weight the US can securely place in its alliance with Israel on the one hand, and its alliance with the Saudis on the other. Israel used US support in a manner that advanced both Israel's national security and US geopolitical interests with no blowback. The Saudis were either inconsequential, or advanced US interests in a manner that caused enormous blowback.

Today as the US faces Russian hostility, Iranian expansionism and Saudi-financed Sunni jihadists, it remains afflicted by the Cold War dilemma of the relative importance of its alliances with Israel and Saudi Arabia. On the face of it, given that today the potential for blowback in supporting Saudi Arabia is far higher and eminently more foreseeable than it was 25 years ago, it should seem clear that in assessing its strategic assets and interests in the region, the US would place far greater weight on its alliance with Israel.

Unfortunately, today the Bush administration is behaving counterintuitively. It pursues its alliance with Saudi Arabia with vigor while eschewing and downgrading its alliance with Israel.

The administration's hostility toward Israel is not limited to its intention to arm the Saudis with weapons capable of destroying Israel's strategic assets in the Negev. It is also actively pressuring Israel not to defend itself against Iran and its proxies. Since the Second Lebanon War last summer, the US has pushed Israel to take no action against Iran's proxy Hamas on the one hand, while pushing Israel to empower Fatah, which has its own strong ties to Iran and to Hamas, on the other. By pressuring Israel to enact a policy of capitulation toward the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria, similar to its capitulation to the Palestinians two years ago in Gaza, the Bush administration is advancing a policy that if implemented all but ensures Iranian control over the outskirts of Jerusalem and Amman.

THERE ARE two principal causes of the US's coolness toward Israel and warm embrace of the Saudis. First, the administration's failure to achieve its goals in Iraq strengthened the influence of the Saudi's Cold War proponents. These proponents, led by former secretary of state James Baker's disciples Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, advance their Saudi-centric agenda while paving the way for a US withdrawal from Iraq without victory. In the Baker camp's view, the best way to facilitate a pullout is by strengthening the Saudis so that they can perhaps prevent a post-US withdrawal Iraq from devolving into an Iranian colony.

The second cause of the administration's hostility toward Israel is the Olmert government's irresolute handling of the Second Lebanon War last year. As was the case 25 years ago, so too last summer, the administration supported Israel against the wishes of the Baker camp. Yet when unlike 25 years ago, last summer the Olmert government led Israel to defeat in Lebanon, it weakened the standing of administration officials who view Israel as a strategic ally and oppose the Saudis, while strengthening Israel's Baker-inspired foes who view Israel as a strategic liability.

The Olmert government's enthusiastic embrace of capitulation as a national policy toward the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria merely serves to strengthen the US view that Israel is a strategic liability rather than an asset.

Yet the lessons of the Cold War, and those of the past 15 years remain clear. The Saudis remain at best fair-weather friends to the US, while Israel's strength or weakness directly impacts US national security and geopolitical interests. As was the case during the Cold War, so too today, the US's best option for checking Russian and Iranian expansionism and neutralizing Sunni jihadists is to back Israel.

If the US were willing to understand the clear lessons from its Cold War experience in the Middle East, it would not be pushing Israel to weaken itself still further through land giveaways to Iran's Palestinian proxies. It would not be actively undercutting Israel's national security by supplying sophisticated weapons to the Saudis. It would be admonishing the Olmert government for its irresponsible behavior and exhorting Israel not to go wobbly because it is needed for the larger fight.

Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Harry W. Gluckman, July 31, 2007.

In my humble and worthless opinion, i cannot feel too sorry for a people who have left all of the millions of dunam of land totally unplanted for several centuries, without so much as one flower, one dunam of vegetables, no trees, except for the olive trees they inherited from their grandparents, and not a G. damned thing accomplished, except bloodshed, pain, ignorance and misery, all living on the dole, except for the multi-billionaires who don't give a shit about their fellow men and women, nor whether they live or die. P....s on them all, at least until they lift one finger to help themselves or others!

Sorry to be so blunt, but............................................!!


You don't want to wake our inmates.

We've got the answers....supply them with funds, guns, water, electricity, and many, many, more good will gestures. They'll come to the realization that we mean business....monkey business.

DEBKAfile: Israel taken aback by Palestinian PM Salam Fayyad's insistence that "resistance" is "legitimate" Palestinian right
July 30, 2007, 8:33 PM (GMT+02:00) Palestinian PM Salam Fayyad in Cairo Palestinian PM Salam Fayyad in Cairo

The pro-US Fatah head of the Ramallah government, Salam Fayyad, stated at an Arab League Council meeting in Cairo Monday, July 30: "We are an occupied nation and resistance is the legitimate right of the Palestinian people."

DEBKAfile notes: "Resistance" is the Palestinian euphemism for armed terror including suicide bombing. The separate Fatah administration on the West Bank omitted the term "resistance" from its platform -- at first. As a result, Mahmoud Abbas and Fayyad were hailed as moderates and partners for peace dialogue, while Fayyad, a former Washington banker, was seen in Washington and Jerusalem as a new species of Palestinian leader, who differed from his predecessors who routinely employed diplomatic language which sat easily on Western ears and reserved their true sentiments for Arab audiences.

Monday, to an Arab League audience, Fayyad showed his true colors.

He was certainly catering to the violent Fatah-Al Aqsa Brigades, Hamas and Jihad Islami, who have vilified him for turning away from armed operations against Israel. The Popular Resistance Committees branded him and his ministers traitors and threatened his life.

But additionally, DEBKAfile's Palestinian sources report, Fayyad made a point of reverting to traditional Palestinian "resistance" ideology as a signal to Egypt and the Saudis that his Fatah has enough common ground with Hamas to resume dialogue for a shared government, which would rule from both Ramallah and Gaza.

Until then, Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert had proffered a series of supportive gestures, maintaining that the Fatah government had turned a new leaf. None of those gestures was acclaimed by West Bank Palestinians; nor did they change their lives for the better.

In contrast, Hamas' security forces have brought a degree of law and order to the streets of the Gaza Strip and cleared them of mob rule. West Bankers resent the fact that with all the financial aid and arms provided by Americans and Israeli sources, the suits in Ramallah have not delivered: The Abbas-Fayyad administration's control does not extend beyond Ramallah and Jericho and it has failed to bring order to West Bank towns.

Contact Harry Gluckman at harry@gluckman.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Simon McIlwaine, July 31, 2007.

These are articles on how Christians are treated in the Middle East.

"Treatment of Palestinian Christians 'Medieval'" by Paul Steven Ghiringhelli, the assistant news editor of Charisma (http://www.charismamag.com/middle-east/073007.html).

Violence and behind-the-scenes persecution are contributing to a mass exodus of Christians from the Palestinian territories

(July 30, 2007) -- Arab Christians are leaving the Palestinian territories in droves due to discrimination and persecution from a Muslim-dominant police force and government, Dr. Justus Weiner, a distinguished scholar in residence at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, told reporters and academics at the Hudson Institute in Washington D.C. on July 17.

"For a number of years now, this minority community [of Christians] has been in dire need of assistance," he said. "Palestinian Christians are unable to practice their religion in freedom and in peace.

"Most in danger are Arab Christians. And most in danger among Arab Christians are those who have converted from Islam. They are often left defenseless against cruelty from Muslim fundamentalists."

Weiner, an internationally recognized human rights lawyer, began advocating for Palestinian Christians nine years ago, after being surprised to discover that a problem even existed. He learned that "systematic persecution" was being met with total silence by most of the developed world, including human rights groups.

Due to the rise of Islamic extremism in the Middle East, Weiner pointed out that the city of Bethlehem, which in 1948 was nearly 80 percent Christian, is today barely 12 percent. He also noted that Christians make up less than 2 percent of the entire West Bank and Gaza Strip. "They're practically at the point of disappearing -- nobody denies this," he said.

Weiner cited several specific examples of persecution, including an Armenian Christian jeweler arrested without cause and beaten for eight hours in a Palestinian police station.

Another case involved a 16-year-old girl from Bethlehem who was kidnapped by a 23-year-old Muslim man who told police she had willingly eloped. High-level diplomacy secured the Christian girl's release, but only because she was an American citizen.

Human rights violations against Palestinian Christians, according to Weiner, also include: individual loss of job or property; firebombed churches; destruction of Christian-based centers; beatings; torture; forced marriages; sexual harassment; and extortion.

He noted that most of the persecution has taken place since the empowerment of the Palestinian Authority in 1995 under Yasser Arafat. He described the torture suffered by Christian converts from Islam since then as "the kind of thing you only read about in Medieval books -- it's very difficult to describe."

Anti-Christian violence made international news last month when a Catholic convent was ransacked and desecrated during Hamas' violent takeover of Gaza, according to the Associated Press (AP). The incident touched off fresh fear among Gaza's Christian community, which numbers 3,000 compared with 1.4 million Muslims.

Because of the work of lawyers like Weiner, other human rights activists are increasingly sounding an alarm in the international community to wake up the world to the plight of Arab Christians throughout the Middle East. Analysts estimate as much as half of Iraq's Christians have left the country.

At a "Save the Christians" rally in Rome earlier this month, the AP reported several hundred people gathered to demand an end to the persecution of Christians in the Middle East. In addition to top Vatican officials and Italy's former Premier Berlusconi, a prominent Jewish activist from the U.S. also attended.

"I stand here tonight as an American Jew and as a survivor of the Holocaust to say to you that 'never again' was a pledge that the Jewish people learned with great pain and sadness," said Abraham Foxman, U.S. director of the Anti-Defamation League. "But 'never again' is not limited to Jewish pain and suffering -- I pledge to you that our voices will be heard whenever Christians are discriminated against."

"Faith Under Fire,"
'We are Christian,' boys tell Muslims
Told to take conversion test for Islam or lose education

Two young boys ordered to take a school test that would result in their conversion to Islam wrote, "I am Christian," on the exam papers, knowing in advance that could very well spell the end of their educations. Now a U.S.-based organization is lobbying for international pressure on Egypt to quit forcing Christians into such no-win situations.

"What brought the case to the public attention is the categorical refusal of the two kids to pass the Islamic exams and convert to Islam, stating, 'they will not deny their Christianity and convert to Islam no matter what it would cost them,'" Sam Grace, a spokesman for Coptic News said.

The organization aims to "reveal the untold stories -- which are not told by the conventional Arabic press."

He told WND the boys, Mario Medhat Ramses, 11, and Andrew Medhat Ramses, 13, now are facing a future without educational opportunities even though they had been classified as "brilliant" students at the French Lycee school of Alexandria.

Grace said Egypt's ministry of education ordered the boys to take the test that would result in their conversion to Islam because their father, who left the family about five years ago, had decided to convert from Christianity to Islam.

The parents, Medhat Ramses and Camellia Medhat were a Christian couple when the boys were born, but the father then divorced the mother, leaving his sons behind, and converted to Islam to marry a Muslim.

But Islamic religious law, which has been adopted by the civil government in Egypt, requires that children follow the faith of any parent who converts to Islam, "since Islam is the superior religion that abrogated all other religions," Grace said.

And leaving the children "to follow the corrupted religions (Christianity and Judaism) of the other parent would be condemning the kids to the doom of hell fire where Christians, Jews and all other non-Muslims are destined," he said.

"We need all human rights organizations to try to force Egypt to respect the human rights conventions, and Egypt is a signatory for all these human rights conventions," Grace said. "Our aim is really that we want to call on all human rights groups in the civilized world, and all freedom-loving people. We want to incite them into action, to call Egyptian embassies, letting them know that [this] cannot happen in the 21st Century."

Grace told WND the boys already are serving as deacons in their Christian church, and have gone on Egyptian talk programs to express their dedication to Christianity. The Egyptian media, he said, has portrayed the situation as a mother applying pressure on her sons not to convert.

Their situation arose because of the Islamic law demand that children follow their father's faith if it is Islam. The nation's education ministry then requires children to take -- and pass -- a test on Islam in order for them to be advanced in school. No passing grade, no more schooling, Grace said.

"The whole Egyptian Coptic Christian people are praying and pleading with the conscience of all the human rights organizations, governments and public opinions of all the civilized world to contact * the Egyptian embassies * and demand that the Egyptian government stop torturing those two kids and their mother," Grace said.

The Middle East Review of International Affairs said the rise of Islam in Egypt arrived with Anwar Sadat's tenure.

"He then initiated what one could, in hindsight, term 'the Great Islamic Transformation' of Egypt. The first step was to stipulate in the Second Article of his new Constitution, promulgated in 1971 (long before Khomeini embarked on his Islamic revolutionary campaign), that the Principles of Islamic Shari'a were 'a main source' of legislation. In May 1981, the 'a' was replaced with 'the,' making Shari'a the term of reference for the entire constitution, meaning all other articles were to be interpreted in that light," the organization said.

"The curricula of public schools, established by the Ministry of Education, ignore the Coptic era in Egypt's history. Courses glorifying Islam (the 'Only True Religion') and its history, while vilifying the crusaders (i.e. Christians) and the Jews, are imposed on all students," the group said.

"In the case of a father of a Christian family converting to Islam, his minor children are forced to follow suit: The mother's custody rights -- a well established legal principle -- are ignored in this case, as children, according to typical court rulings, are supposed to follow the 'better (or 'more noble') of the two religions,'" the group said.

There also are other indications that Egypt is not particularly tolerant of non-Muslims. An Egyptian Christian who had fled his home nation, "most assuredly has a right not to be tortured," a federal court ruled in allowing him to remain in the United States.

The court pointedly concluded that "diplomatic assurances" of his religious rights "by a country known to have engaged in torture" weren't reassuring.

A report from the Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights concluded Coptic Christians in Egypt have been harassed, tortured and killed by Muslims for 1,400 years.

"They have been subjected to all kinds of hate crimes including, the abduction of young Coptic girls, the killing of Coptic women and children and the destruction of their places of worship," the report concluded.

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, an agency created by Congress, lists Egypt on its watch list of countries, noting it had "a poor overall human rights record."

ACLU battles Jesus in court
'They're blatantly disobeying the law with a religious symbol'
-- ABC News
-- "The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it -- in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah." -- OSAMA bin LADEN -- 1998

Contact Simon McIlwaine at Simon.McIlwaine@ormerods.co.uk. His website is at www.anglicansforisrael.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, July 31, 2007.

Israel and the Jews have been pursued and persecuted for decades and centuries. The Jewish people owe the world's nations absolutely nothing, except our ultimatum, as follows:

We will give you peace for peace, nothing more.

Should you gather to destroy us, be assured that your civilizations will regress to their earliest, most primitive times. You will be our guarantors for our safety. It does not matter that you directly or indirectly launched the attack against our cities, you will be held responsible. It seems quite clear that the nations, with their respective religions will never let us live in peace. Very well.

Now, in addition to age-old anti-Semitism, we have the human plague of "Jihadist" Muslims who are pledged to eliminate the Jewish State of Israel, in addition to savaging other non-Muslim countries.

We have reached a time when our technology allows us to create a wall of deterrence, namely, Nuclear Weapons of Mass Destruction. So, you are appointed our guardians. Should you choose to know of any other states' plans for our destruction, it will be the same as if you, yourself launched the ensuing war.

We will not go quietly into G-d's good night.

Instead, we insure that you all will join us in a flash of light as brilliant as the Sun.

Perhaps it is time to let the earth rest -- as G-d mandated for the "Shmitta" Year. That is G-d's Seventh Year when Jews must allow G-d's Land to rest, to let the fields lie fallow, in order to re-Jew-venate so as to be fertile in the next six years.

We humans have overused and contaminated the beautiful Earth that G-d gave us. Like a plague that cannot be stopped, we have ravaged the Earth, not giving it a moment to breathe and recover.

Perhaps it needs more that the Seventh Year which we Jews give to the fields.

Perhaps it needs a hundred or a thousand years to cleanse the oceans and the land of pesticides, oil spills and airborne pollution.

So you wish to kill off G-d's messengers so only you will have a clear path to what you believe is a Heaven waiting just for you, no matter how you get there. The Jews now have the capacity to send you to wherever you think you belong.

So know this, in our clash of civilizations, you will disappear before us, as have other aggressive plundering civilizations before you.

The choice is yours or Armageddon.

We could have had a remarkable world of scientific achievement for the betterment of man but, you have chosen instead to create a Genocide for others.

Very well, we will see you in the Valley of the Dry Bones where you are to be buried as instructed in Tanach (the Bible).

Did you know the Parasha (Portion of the Week) of Tanach where the nations come from the North to fall upon Israel and are ultimately destroyed -- to a man? The flesh melts off the enemies' faces. G-d says so in the Tanach but, you don't believe in the G-d of the Jews and thus need not concern yourselves with His Retribution!

After the predicted Armageddon, the Jews are instructed to send out teams, with staffs to mark wherever human bones of the decimated attackers are found so they may be gathered and buried in the Valley of Dry Bones so the Land is to be cleansed of the dead whom they will bury with respect.

The Jewish people will always survive -- even after you try to destroy us all, a remnant shall always remain -- equal to those 600,000 plus the women and children who received G-d's 10 Commandments and the 613 Mitzvot (Good Deeds). After every destruction the nations of the world implement, that same remnant remains.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 31, 2007.


Hamas refers to the "national struggle." Westerners might think that means that the Arab-Israel conflict is a national one, over territory. It isn't. It is a religious struggle. To the Muslims, national boundaries don't mean much, because they want a single caliphate for the world.


It has become an axiom here that the Palestinian Arab Muslims keep missing opportunities for making a peace settlement to achieve national goals. The axiom is misconceived. Those Muslims are not a nationality, and have no national goals. They don't miss opportunities to make peace, they just don't want peace and may feel ashamed of an arrangement, however beneficial to them, that recognized the legitimacy of an infidel state where Islam once had ruled.

They do make mistakes. So does Israel. Israel's mistakes grow in frequency and gravity, as its leadership becomes more appeasement-minded or, as the Left would say, peace-oriented. The Left thinks it can get into the water with a hungry crocodile and tame it by being nice to it.

The current release of terrorists is a mistake that now is being recognized as worse than the usual releases. The usual releases increase the ranks of terrorists by about half the number of releases. Israeli leaders claim that releases bring goodwill, but do not cite instances of goodwill, i.e., reciprocation. Neither, apparently, does the media, biased by sharing the Left's ideology and unscrupulousness, ask what past results justify new releases.

The current release is worse because the freed terrorist comprise much of the leadership of Fatah, the most active terrorist organization. The IDF had targeted those leaders, to weaken Fatah's ability to organize against Israel. The policy of targeted assassination, which includes attempts to capture the wanted men when feasible, was touted as a clever way of avoiding having to invade in force. It never was sufficient to stop terrorism from Gaza, the way the presence of Israeli patrols in Judea-Samaria stops almost all of it from there. But it helped.

The government's excuse for the exchange is not even that the US demands it. The US does demand it. Time for supporters both of the US and of Israel to question how US policy serves the national interest and shows Bush friendship for Israel, by promoting anti-American and anti-Zionist terrorism. Foreign Min. Livni's excuse is that she knows this bolsters Fatah, but somehow Fatah is now viewed as moderate and a stronger Fatah will destroy Hamas. This is said after Hamas has shown it knows how to destroy Fatah, and Fatah doesn't fight back. And suppose Fatah did destroy Hamas. Fatah would go on to attack Israel.


NY Times letters of 7/16 discussed preventive detention of alleged terrorists. Do we need a new court? We do need new definitions and rules.

Preventive detention was called "un-American." That is, we never did it before. Then domestic security policy is like the related immigration policy. To illustrate current immigration policy to those who favor large-scale, unrestricted immigration, take them into the kitchen. Pour water and some dirt into a glass until your guests warn that the water is spilling over and what was collected is contaminated. Then tell them that that is our traditional immigration policy, with Islamists attending colleges. We should review the suitability of policies responding to earlier conditions. Conditions have changed.

Preventive detention can be abused. Israel abuses it to repress Jewish opposition to its anti-Zionist policies. Opponents of the measure fail to acknowledge our state of war. Congress failed to declare war, and the President failed to ask it to. We are in a world war based on enemy attacks, not on our inadequate response. Many ordinary standards for criminal courts do not apply.

War justifies stiffer measures. In war, we capture enemy soldiers and detain them. They may not have committed crimes. In this war, most of the enemy we encounter are not lawfully constituted soldiers. They are like pirates, common enemies of mankind, operating outside of law and without the rights of prisoners of war. International law allows their execution. The Center for Constitutional Rights asserts that international law prohibits preventive detention. The Center argues that the measure is not justified, because the continued existence of the US is not threatened. Oh no?! Al Qaeda seeks global hegemony and dirty nuclear explosives. Internationalists pervert international law. If they succeed, we must reject international law as unethical.

Terrorism is an ideology. Members divide up their tasks, some financing others who explode bombs, etc.. All are culpable, regardless of whether they attacked anyone. We must eliminate them, not leave them in our midst to strike when ready. Based on that understanding, the means of dealing with them are clearer, and preventive detention is reasonable. America should do the prudent and the right thing, without regard to biased and blind world public opinion.

The question is how to identify terrorist adherents. For those caught in battle, this is not difficult, though some bystanders may claim innocence. We need a judicial procedure to which captives claiming innocence can appeal, and in which the government would have to show that they are terrorists. The government has released some people after years of captivity. Were they held by mistake? That would be a grave injustice. Beware giving the federal government the right to pluck non-terrorists off the street and keep them incommunicado under color of fighting terrorism. Fight the war, but also stay free!

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, July 31, 2007.

This was written by Yaakov Lappin and it was published in Ynet News

Former UN ambassador: Al-Qaeda has penetrated Saudi military; scenario of attack must be considered

An impending 20 billion dollar American arms deal with Saudi Arabia, in which the Saudis would receive state-of-the-art military equipment over the next decade, is fraught with potential dangers for Israel, former Israeli ambassador to the UN Dore Gold told Ynetnews on Tuesday.

Gold is President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA), and is author of 'Hatred's Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia supports the New Global Terrorism.'

Speaking by phone from his home in Jerusalem, Gold said the new arms deal failed to take into consideration a number of problematic scenarios. "There are a broad set of very possible scenarios that Israel certainly has to take into consideration.

Several years ago, Israel received reports of the interrogation of al-Qaeda captives who admitted that their organization had penetrated the Saudi Arabian air force, and that it was planning to take control of several Saudi F-15s based at Tabuk in north Western Saudi Arabia, near Eilat, and fly the fighter planes into sky scrapers in Tel Aviv," Gold said.

"From the pattern of past al-Qaeda attacks in Saudi Arabia, many western observers have concluded that elements of the Saudi national guard colluded with the attackers. Which only further substantiates Western concern that al-Qaeda has penetrated different branches of Saudi Armed forces.

So even without a militant Islamic takeover in Saudi Arabia, there are multiple sources of concern for Israel and United States," he added. Gold also cited figures according to which half of the insurgents in Iraq who emarbarked on a jihad against coalition forces were Saudi.

"There is abundant evidence, despite the efforts of Saudi security forces to quell al-Qaeda in the Kingdom, that large parts of Saudi Arabia have become a hot house for radical Sunni Islam," Gold warned.

On Friday, an American defense department official said that the threat posed by Shiite Iran to Sunni states such as Saudi Arabia made the arms transfers necessary. "We've been working very hard on the Saudi arms package, which we believe is critical... to deal with the changing strategic threat from Iran and other forces," the official said, according to AFP.

That view was accepted by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who told a weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday: "We understand the need of the United States to support the Arab moderate states, and there is a need for a united front between the US and us regarding Iran."

Iran, for its part, condemned the arms deal, and charged on Monday that the US was trying to create a "horror scenario" in the Middle East. But the American attempt to arm Sunni states to deal with the Shiite Iranian threat was misguided, Gold said.

"The current radical Islamic wave that Western alliance is facing has two sources. First, the Islamic revolution in Iran led by Ayatollah Khamenei. And the second is the rise of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, much of which is backed by Saudi Arabia. Therefore an effective counter-strategy has to take into account both sources of the problem," he said.

'Israeli gov't suffers from certain myopia'

As Israel and its neighbors prepared for a Middle Eastern peace conference this fall, Gold said that Saudi participation would not be a negative development, but added that "Israel doesn't have to roll back to 1967 lines in order to get a Saudi foreign minister to attend a middle east peace summit."

"If the Saudis wish to resume that level of participation, no one could object," Gold said.

He added, however, that "when it comes to Saudi Arabia, the Israeli government suffers from a certain myopia, forgetting that in the 9/11 attacks, 15 of the 19 terrorists were Saudis, and that up until recently, Saudi Arabia was the primary funder of Hamas during the high point of the suicide bombing attacks against Israel."

"There may be a limited basis of dialogue with Saudi Arabia which should be conducted in secret channels, with very limited aims. But US and Israeli officials should be reticent before recommending high profile Saudi-Israeli meetings on the White House lawn or in Jerusalem," Gold said.

Citing a written pledge made by Bush to former prime minister Ariel Sharon, according to which Israel would not be expected to withdraw to the 1967 lines, Gold said: "By embracing the Arab peace initiative (which calls for an Israeli retreat to the '67 lines), the Bush administration is creating some confusion over whether Bush's assurances to Sharon still stand. And therefore, it should issue a clarification in this regard."

Contact Avodah by email by avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Bryna Berch, July 30, 2007.

This was written by Ronen Bergman and it appeared in Ynet News
(www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3431862,00.html). Interesting that the Iranians have litte trouble recruiting Israeli Arabs to be traitors to Israel. They aren't worried the "Palestinians" will mistranslate Hebrew material or misinform them -- they are sure these guys aren't patriotic. And they are right.

Regime seeking Israeli Arabs and Palestinians abroad to teach Hebrew to agents and Hizbullah members, help translate propaganda materials

The "intelligence war" between Iran and Israel is gaining momentum, as both countries' intelligence services are increasing efforts to recruit Hebrew and Farsi speakers to their ranks.

The Iranian regime needs Hebrew speakers to work as translators, intelligence agents and as part of its propaganda machine against Israel. The main source of Hebrew speakers is Palestinian students studying abroad or Palestinian terrorists sent for military training in Iran and Lebanon.

One of the most prominent centers for Hebrew studies is located at Iran's embassy in Beirut, where Hizbullah members learn Hebrew at the Islamic Culture and Education Center.

The embassy owns a vast library of Hebrew newspapers and books, including even children's' books. It was there that Hizbullah had trained, with the aid of Palestinians, a large group of fighters who were placed in charge of tapping Israeli communication systems, in a bid to collect intelligence on the "Zionist enemy" before and during the Second Lebanon War.

According to the Shin Bet, Israeli Arab students studying out of the country are an attractive target for Hizbullah, because it is easier for the organization to recruit and train them abroad.

Only recently a young Israeli Arab woman who was studying dentistry in Jordan was arrested at the Allenby Bridge border crossing on suspicion of collaborating with Hizbullah. The woman admitted in her investigation she was contacted by the group's agents in Amman and was offered to serve as its agent in Israel.

Meanwhile, in Israel, the Mossad has recently published an ad in the newspaper inviting Farsi speakers to apply for "an interesting, challenging position," which apparently includes listening in on Iranian transmissions and translating materials published in Iran.

To Go To Top

Posted by Uniglicht, Lawrence, July 30, 2007.

qThe Middle East arms race commences hence weapons manufacturers as well as terrorist cadres dance with glee! The Bush Administration sticking to its guns proposes, albeit a Democratic led Congress not of one mind must approve, that multi-billion dollar high tech military packages be provided to Israel and Egypt as well as sold to Saudi Arabia and five other Persian Gulf States. On the other side of a 'might makes right' crazed world, erstwhile KGB commie agent morphed to oil-rich capitalist, Russian autocrat Vladimir Putin, extends a helping hand to madman AhMADinejad of 'wipe Israel off the map' infamy and his motley crew of Persian mullahs, selling them 250 long distance Sukhoi fighter-bombers, 20 fuel-tankers, enhancing the long-range air capabilities of nuclear-emerging Iran, perhaps with Dr Strangelove tendencies Islamic style. No doubt, with the per barrel price of oil topping 70 petrodollars, red chess pieces once again stand tall, reminiscent of a cold war mentality, however accompanied by perilous complexities, most notably the aforementioned jihadist anti-secular martyr -- driven imam obsessed delusional Islamic fundamentalist partner frothing to attain its unholy grail. This arms build-up, to say the least, bodes ominously for sane humans everywhere, most of whom thankfully are not earning livelihoods from the darker side of this planet's collective military industrial complex. Furthermore, now that kindred spirits in savagery, albeit ever feuding tribes of jihad junkies, not bound by governmental responsibilities, including Hizbullah and Hamas, jump into the mix, ingrained with radical Sunni and Shiite tendencies, far more dangerous than those comparative love-bunny legendary Hatfields and McCoys could ever have hoped to be, we have one heck of a potential Armageddon brewing, especially when some of those fine weapons, presumably meant for aforementioned heads of state, are gripped by spindly talons of those martyr-driven terror organizations.

Of course, the ever threatened State of Israel needs to stay ahead of the pack in truly defensive weaponry, surrounded by hostile neighbors who truly yearn for her demise, but does it make sense to raise the bar in terms of quality and quantity of weapons throughout the volatile Middle East, increasing the possibility of all out uncivil wars, born of diverse rationales, between Sunni and Shiite adherents, secular and religious Islamists, power-crazed and moderate autocrats, all as inferred less than fond of the one Western style tiny democratic nation just trying to survive? Furthermore, does it make sense to in effect further arm jihadists, some proxies some extortionists of various sovereign Islamic regimes, enraptured by an unquenchable desire to morph planet Earth into a misogynistic infidel-bereft Muslim 'paradise'? Might somnambulistic European nations abutting the dysfunctional mostly Muslim Middle East housing these jihadists, less than prepared to deal with their radical agenda, wipe a liberal dose of fairy dust from their collective secular Westernized eyes, note their own discontented jihad prone Islamic ghettos, thus perhaps voice an opinion as to whether a liberal arm-them-to-the-teeth policy promoted by chess masters Bush and Putin is such a good idea.

When advanced weaponry is disseminated throughout the Middle East by erstwhile cold war adversaries again choosing up sides, perhaps nostalgically reawakening the 'good old days' when curtains were made of iron, the biggest short-term loser could very well be Israel, although provided with advanced weaponry, made less secure by reciprocal arrangements to her Sunni as well as Shiite enemies, in effect reducing the weapons technology gap that insures her security. What if the House of Saud for one, supplied with newly enhanced military prowess, is someday overthrown by wild-eyed jihadists less reticent to launch a WMD directed at say Tel Aviv? Perhaps the egg on Washington's confident morphed to solemn face, the former owned by today's arms proliferating Bush Administration, would satisfy 'I told you so' peace activists and other critics of a hawkish White House, but how might that help Israel now in the crosshairs of a looming catastrophe? Indeed, since much weaponry dispersed to rulers of Middle East Muslim regimes ends up stockpiled in terrorist arsenals, making life more insecure for Israelis, moderate Muslim citizens, and in fact all citizens affixed to this imperiled third rock from its sun, how can this strategy of proliferation make the region less likely to explode? Alternately, an astute policy maker might observe, a precipitous drop in the per barrel price of oil would surely wreck havoc on the economies of Iran and its major weapon's supplier Russia, consequently halting an arms race that indeed does threaten world stability? Saudi Arabia has the clout to make that happen, with a little arm twisting of course from Uncle Sam. Furthermore, such a worthwhile strategy would also put the kabash on oil-rich Hugo Chavez's plans to perhaps load up on weapons and dominate South America, a possibility that today's major superpower to the proximate north should not ignore. I imagine arms dealers and the industry they represent might suffer, reducing future political contributions to empathetic politicos in the U.S.A. for one, no doubt a small price to pay for the preservation of the human species. I guess we would all have to live with that!

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, July 30, 2007.
This is from today's Agence France-Presse

The US ambassador to the United Nations accused Saudi Arabia and other US allies in the Middle East Sunday of undermining efforts to curb violence in Iraq.

UN envoy Zalmay Khalilzad acknowledged on CNN that he was also referring to Saudi Arabia when he wrote in an opinion piece in the New York Times last week that "Several of Iraq's neighbors -- not only Syria and Iran but also some friends of the United States -- are pursuing destabilizing policies."

"Yes, well, there is no question that ... Saudi Arabia and a number of other countries are not doing all they can to help us in Iraq," Khalilzad, the former US ambassador to Iraq, told the US news network.

"I mean, they are great allies of ours in that region. And the future of Iraq is the most important issue now affecting the region," he said.

"And therefore, we would expect and want them to help us on this strategic issue more than they are doing. And at times, some of them are not only not helping, (they) are doing things that is undermining the effort to make progress."

The envoy lamented that some of Iraq's neighbors were not engaging the government or the Shiite majority and had no diplomatic representation in Baghdad.

"The level of positive effort that they are making compared to the stakes involved for the region is minimal," he said.

His comments came one day before Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates are to depart to the Middle East to seek Arab support to bolster Iraq and to discuss weapons sales with allies.

Rice and Gates will make rare joint visits to Egypt and Saudi Arabia before separate trips to other parts of the region.

Ahead of the trip, the US government was expected to announce Monday arms deals worth at least 20 billion dollars with Saudi Arabia and the five other Gulf states, US media reported.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Hana Levi Julian, July 30, 2007.

(IsraelNN.com) The Civil Lands Administration destroyed a one-year-old synagogue built on Mount Gerizim near the Samarian city of Shechem on Monday afternoon. The structure was built not far from one of the holiest sites in the Jewish world.

Government officials maintained that the building was erected without a permit, and was not a synagogue.

Dozens of Breslov Chassidim and other rabbis and students worshipped there daily, learning Torah between the services. The rabbinical students vowed not to give up the site without opposition. "If the synagogue is destroyed, it will be re-built," vowed one student before the house of worship was razed to the ground.

The structure was built by the students in order to study as close as possible to the burial place in Shechem of the biblical Joseph, son of the Jewish matriarch Rachel and Jewish patriarch Jacob, following its capture and destruction by Palestinian Authority Arab hordes in October 2000. There have been many clandestine pilgrimages by Jews -- "and some not so clandestine --" to the tomb since then.

Echoes of the past reverberate in the hills around the grave of the biblical Joseph, whose bones were brought to rest in Samaria by the Children of Israel when they escaped from Egyptian slavery thousands of years ago.

"The bones of Joseph which the Children of Israel brought up from Egypt were buried in Shechem in the portion of the field that had been purchased by Jacob." (Joshua 24.32)

The Tomb of Joseph, whose sons headed two of the twelve tribes of Israel, was to remain accessible to Jews under the terms of the Oslo Accords signed by Israel with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which represented the PA.

The area around it, including the city of Shechem, was handed over to the PA, then an administrative body whose leaders had promised to protect the site.

But Jewish access to the tomb was blasted away by PLO terrorists in October 2000 a scant few days after the start of the second intifada, which many refer to as the Oslo War.

Israel Border Police officers spent days fending off terrorist attempts to capture and destroy the tomb. Within a week, the government of then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak, currently Israel's Defense Minister, caved in and ordered IDF troops to abandon the site.

Another Joseph was also abandoned that day in 2000 -- a Druze Border Policeman named Madhat Yusuf (Joseph, in Arabic) who was left to bleed to death as soldiers waited for the order to rescue him. It took five precious hours for then IDF Chief of Staff Shaul Mofaz to negotiate with the PLO for his evacuation to safety, but by then it was too late. The government later told journalists the talks were necessary in order to avoid the risk of killing PA civilians.

The PA promise to preserve Joseph's Tomb and allow Jewish access was violated within two hours after Yusuf's body was carried away. A flood of PA Arabs entered the compound and razed the synagogue to the ground, burning furniture and holy books as the PA policemen who had vowed to protect the site stood idly by.

Two days later, the dome of the tomb itself was painted -- evil eye green -- as some people refer to the color, which in Arabic tradition wards off the evil eye. Bulldozers cleared away the remnants of the orgy of violence that had taken place there, transforming the holy Jewish monument into a Muslim religious site.

This appeared today in Arutz-Sheva

To Go To Top

Posted by Shmuel Sackett, July 30, 2007.

All of us American Jews look across the ocean at our beloved State of Israel and we wonder "What went wrong?" and "How can it be fixed?" Or we even dare to whisper, "Can it be saved?"

Israel is faced with a seemingly endless string of enemies bent on its destruction -- from Hamas to the so-called "moderate" PLO, from Hizballah to Syria, and now to nuclear-bound Iran. This situation would be depressing enough for most of us, but what makes it worse is the fact that all of Israel's politicians and leaders are plagued by corruption, scandals and/or complete and utter ineptitude.

In a recent poll, Israel's current Prime Minister Ehud Olmert received an approval rating of below 1%. That's right -- below 1%. Yet somehow, he manages to stay in office because his Kadima party and the other parties in the government refuse to vote him out of office because they would most surely lose their comfortable Knesset seats and the perks that go along with them if they did.

Olmert even tries to hang onto office by proposing further Israeli withdrawals from Judea & Samaria ("the West Bank") and the Golan Heights to make him appear as a successful "peacemaker", even though it is obvious to all that the concept of evicting Jews from their homes such as was done in 2005 from Gaza was a complete failure and only put Israel in a much worse strategic position than it was in previously. Let's also not forget to mention that Ariel Sharon's Disengagement has produced 10,000 Jewish refugees in their own country who are being treated worse than the government treats endangered salamanders, and it brought death and its daily specter to thousands of Israelis who live in cities surrounding Gaza by way of Arab rockets falling daily on them which the government refuses to answer in a serious way.

How can it be fixed when according to recent polls, the majority of non-observant Israeli teens can't even recite the Shema, and three-quarters of them have never set foot anywhere in the city of Jerusalem by the time they enter the army at 18 years of age? Unbelievable as it may seem, these numbers are true! Is it any wonder that the majority of non-observant Israelis actually believe that their country won't exist in 30 years.

Should we all heed the unbelievable advice given last month by former Knesset Speaker Avraham Burg who told all Israeli Jews to get foreign passports, eliminate the Jewish "right of return" to Israel, and make Israel into a bi-national state -- i.e. an Arab state -- immediately, or do we have a Jewish answer to this cesspool of problems?

There is hope!

There is one man who is trying to lead the country who has real answers to these very real problems, and on August 14th, the Likud party will be able to choose him to run for Prime Minister. As all Israeli polls show the Likud party winning the next general election, in essence the Likud's August 14 primary is really to choose the next Prime Minister of the State of Israel.

Moshe Feiglin is the President of Manhigut Yehudit, which in English means "Jewish Leadership", the largest bloc inside the Likud Party of Israel. Mr. Feiglin and Manhigut Yehudit were invited into the Likud party in 2001, as veteran Likudniks felt that the Likud party had abandoned its ideology and they felt that Mr. Feiglin would be the one to bring it back. They surely felt this way because during the early "good years" of the "peace process", Mr. Feiglin and his predecessor organization, Zo Artzeinu ("This is Our Land"), were the first to introduce the concept of non-violent civil disobedience into Israel in such a way as Martin Luther King had done so in America during the 1960's.

Even though the Likud has only continued the shameful Oslo farce, the Likud's official charter still calls for Jewish annexation of and settlement of the entire Land of Israel along with the country being run by "Jewish Values". Manhigut Yehudit joined Likud because it agreed with these core Likud principles, and because most Prime Ministers come from the Likud party. As such, Mr. Feiglin decided that in order to lead the entire State of Israel from the Prime Minister's office, the best way to do this would be through the Likud party.

In the previous Likud primary for head of the party, and therefore for candidate for Prime Minister, Mr. Feiglin finished in 3rd place out of 7 with 13% of the vote. According to current polls for the upcoming August 14 Likud primary, Mr. Feiglin now is polling very strongly and trails only former PM and Oslo-continuer and Disengagement-supporter Benjamin Netanyahu.

Netanyahu only this summer stated that he advocates bringing Jordanian troops into Judea and Samaria ("the West Bank") in order to strengthen the "palestinian moderate" Mahmoud Abbas in order to help Abbas create another Arab state inside of the Land of Israel. Aside from ignoring Abbas' credentials as Yasser Arafat's right-hand man for 40 years, his being the author of the PLO's phased plan for the destruction of Israel in stages (the first stage being negotiations), and ignoring his direct ties to the Nazi genocide by way of his mentor the Mufti of Jerusalem Hajj Amin al Husseini (who created Bosnian SS Divisions for Hitler and drew plans for another Auschwitz in Israel), Netanyahu's vision is just a continuation of the suicidal policies of the Left. Hasn't he seen the direct correlation between the amount of land that Israel gives to its enemies and the amount of Jews who are murdered? Don't we deserve better than this?

Manhigut Yehudit's all-encompassing mission is to "perfect the world in the kingdom of the Almighty....by awakening and revitalizing Israeli society in its connection and bond to its Jewish roots, national history and the Land of Israel. Manhigut Yehudit's unmistakable message of Jewish Values, Jewish Pride, and Social and Judicial reforms strives to turn the State of Jews into the Jewish State."

Before we go any further, let's take a look at Manhigut Yehudit's policy lines to see how Moshe Feiglin as Prime Minister plans on accomplishing this goal:

*A Jewish State: The State of Israel is the instrument for establishing the sovereignty of the Jewish people in the Land of Israel. Massive government funding to bring ALL Jews home.

*Education towards Love of Israel, Torah and the Land: Education for ALL Israelis based on Jewish values, taught with love and not through coercion. One hour per day of Judaism will be taught in schools. Currently there is NO Jewish education in schools.

*Liberation of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount: We shall foster Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount and build a synagogue and study hall for the Sanhedrin on the Temple Mount where permitted by Jewish Law. Sovereignty of the Temple Mount will be taken from the Islamic Wakf and given back to the Jewish People.

*Cancellation of the Oslo Accords and Immediate Annexation of Judea & Samaria (the "West Bank") and Gaza: Honoring the Biblical covenant between the Nation of Israel and the Creator of the world, we shall immediately annex all territory in our hands, settle EVERY part of the Land of Israel and terminate the Oslo Accords. This plan also honors the philosophy of common sense -- namely since the Arabs have attacked us and lost these territories, they deserve to pay a penalty. As such, they will never recover these territories. We believe in the policy of "Peace for Peace", not "Land for Peace", which has been proven not to work.

*Renewal of Democracy and the Justice System on the Basis of National Values: A constitution based on Jewish values shall be enacted to preserve Israel as a Jewish country (yet not to legislate or mandate religious practice), to protect the human and civil rights of all its faithful residents, and to protect the political rights of its Jews.

*Jewish Labor for an Effective, Creative and Moral Economy: Jewish labor will be encouraged, with vocational training during the third year of army service and the removal of foreign workers. We will strive to build all our military necessities and not purchase them from the US and elsewhere.

*Energy & Financial Independence: We will initiate a massively government funded and directed plan to develop non-petroleum-based energy sources so as to provide ourselves and the world with clean, abundant energy which will provide us and not our enemies with funding. We will also end the acceptance of aid from America (it comprises only 2.5% of Israel's GNP), as it is a drag on Israel's economy, costs Israel 100,000 jobs and costs Israel its real or perceived sovereignty.

*Returning Moral Strength and Power of Deterrence to Israel's Army: The Israeli Army must not be concerned with "world opinion," must strike first when required, and will be enabled to defeat and destroy Israel's enemies.

The upcoming Likud primary will be held in a few weeks on August 14th. Moshe Feiglin and Manhigut Yehudit hope to make this election one that will reverberate around the globe with the hope that the Jewish People will not lie down in the face of their problems anymore, but that they will stand up and defeat them with their heads held high, and they will lead the world to victory.

Won't you help us make this very worthwhile dream into a reality?

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Sommer, July 30, 2007.

Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA (Indpendent Media Review and Analysis Website: www.imra.org.il) writes: Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs) are hardly a defensive weapon. They put the Saudis in the position that a mediocre pilot who might not have either skill or the will to approach a target and hit it can carry out a precision bombing against any fixed target.

Even if you think the current regime is fantastic, who will rule Saudi Arabia in 5 years?

Hamas today has all kinds of weapons that Washington supplied to "moderate" Abbas in the Gaza Strip.

It should also be kept in mind that previous promises not to deploy weapons near Israel were not honored by the Saudis -- for example F-15's in Tabuk.

This is entitled "U.S. Plans New Arms Sales to Gulf Allies $20 Billion Deal Includes Weapons For Saudi Arabia" and it was written by Robin Wright, Washington Post Staff Writer. It appeared July 28, 2007 (www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/27/ AR2007072702454_pf.html). Research editor Alice Crites contributed to this report.

The Bush administration will announce next week a series of arms deals worth at least $20 billion to Saudi Arabia and five other oil-rich Persian Gulf states as well as new 10-year military aid packages to Israel and Egypt, a move to shore up allies in the Middle East and counter Iran's rising influence, U.S. officials said yesterday.

The arms deals, which include the sales of a variety of sophisticated weaponry, would be the largest negotiated by this administration. The military assistance agreements would provide $30 billion in new U.S. aid to Israel and $13 billion to Egypt over 10 years, the officials said. Both figures represent significant increases in military support.

U.S. officials said the arms sales to Saudi Arabia are expected to include air-to-air missiles as well as Joint Direct Attack Munitions, which turn standard bombs into "smart" precision-guided bombs. Most, but not all, of the arms sales to the six Gulf Cooperation Council countries -- Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman -- will be defensive, the officials said.

U.S. officials said the common goal of the military aid packages and arms sales is to strengthen pro-Western countries against Iran at a time when the hard-line regime seeks to extend its power in the region.

"This is a big development, because it's part of a larger regional strategy and the maintenance of a strong U.S. presence in the region. We're paying attention to the needs of our allies and what everyone in the region believes is a flexing of muscles by a more aggressive Iran. One way to deal with that is to make our allies and friends strong," said a senior administration official involved in the negotiations.

The arms deals have quietly been under discussion for months despite U.S. disappointment over Saudi Arabia's failure to support the Iraqi government and to bring that country's Sunni Muslims into the reconciliation process.

The administration's plans will be announced Monday in advance of trips next week to the Middle East by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, and are expected to be on their agenda in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The administration has a notional list of arms to sell to the Gulf states, but there are no final agreements on quantities and specific models, U.S. officials said.

State Department and Pentagon officials started briefing key members of Congress about their intentions over the past week, U.S. officials said. The initial reception has been positive, said officials involved in those briefings. They acknowledged, however, that some parts of the deal are supported more than others. Arms sales to Gulf countries have often been controversial.

The administration hopes to provide a full rundown this fall for congressional approval.

"We want to convince Congress to continue our tradition of military sales to all six" states, the senior administration official said. "We've been helping Gulf Arabs for years, and that needs to continue."

Sunni regimes in the Gulf region have felt particularly vulnerable since the election of a pro-Iranian Shiite government in neighboring Iraq last year. "There's a sense here and in the region of the need to build up defenses against Iranian encroachment," said a U.S. official familiar with the deals.

The aid packages to Israel and Egypt are further along. A U.S.-Israel agreement, to replace a 10-year arrangement that expires this year, has been under discussion since February, U.S. officials said. The new U.S. package will include strictly military aid and would expand the U.S. contribution 25 percent over the current $2.4 billion per year; economic assistance has been discontinued now that Israel is considered a developed economy, U.S. officials said.

President Bush said last month, after meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, that he was strongly committed to a new 10-year agreement that would increase U.S. assistance "to meet the new threats and challenges [Israel] faces." Washington has long promised to help Israel sustain a so-called "qualitative military edge" over other major powers in the region.

Rice is expected to announce Monday that, after her Middle East trip, Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns will finalize the agreements with Israel and Egypt.

Contact Barbara Sommer at sommer_1_98@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Janet Lehr, July 30, 2007.

We need to follow this closely -- Every US President has been cozy with the Saudis. It is simplistic to blame it on our need for oil -- That is putting the cart before the horse, or it is only one element. Consider that 80% [my estimate] of retired US State Department employees spend their retirement years as consultants to the Saudi's or working for firms with strong Saudi ties and you see why such a strong allegiance to Saudi interests sculpts US Foreign policy. Counter balance that relatively short range thinking with the facts. If we put a man on the moon with 6 years of research, we could find efficient, and cost effective alternate fuels -- non nuclear, if we applied ourselves. The present Saudi regime's life span is severely limited. Within perhaps 5-7 years, Wahhabu interests, if they choose, will overthrow the 3000 members of the ruling class. The ruling class stays in power by extreme totalitarian means. In the center of Rhydah today, there is a Square dubbed 'hanging square' where weekly, hangings and hacking off of limbs of those who 'offend' the ruling class are 'punished'. 5 of 19 WTC highjackers were Saudis.

Any arms supplied the present 'moderate Saudi government' will be controlled by radical Islamists within a decade and turned against the UNITED STATES, ISRAEL AND EUROPE. VOTE NO TO THE SALE OF ARMS AND CERTAINLY ADVANCED ARMS, TO THE SAUDI REGIME. WRITE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE. To find and write your representative, go to www.StandWithUs.com PLEASE FORWARD THIS URGENT ARTICLE AS BROADLY AS POSSIBLE.


Press Release from Anthony D. Weiner
May 24, 2007



Washington, DC -- In an effort to stop the sale of high tech missile technology to the Saudi Arabian government, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY), and Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL), announced they will introduce legislation to block the deal "the minute the deal is announced."

Reps. Shelley Berkley (D-NV), Joseph Crowley (D-NY), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Jerry Nadler (D-NY), Linda Sanchez (D-CA) and Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) have joined Weiner and Wexler in support of a Joint Resolution of Disapproval, writing "we have grave reservations that this arms sale to Saudi Arabia could allow weapons to slip into terrorist hands."

According to published reports, President Bush is planning to sell the Saudi Arabian government Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM's), satellite guided bombs accurate enough to shoot through the window of a building from jets in any weather. The United States has never sold such advances munitions to Saudi Arabia before, and the sale would upgrade the capability of the Saudi Air Force.

Congress may reject any large arms sale according to the Arms Control Export Act of 1976. The President is required to officially notify Congress of an impending arms deal, who then has 30 days to trigger a review and pass a Joint Resolution of Disapproval.

The Joint Resolution of Disapproval has been used in the past by Congress to affect weapons sales, including in 1986 when Congress successfully convinced then President Reagan to cut back an arms sale to Saudi Arabia. Past administrations have renegotiated sales based on just the prospect if a Congressional Review.

Despite assurances to the contrary, Saudi Arabia continues to bankroll terrorist organizations that have attacked both the United States and Israel. In sworn testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in November 2005, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Daniel L. Glaser indicated that the Saudi Arabian government refuses to crack down on the World Association of Muslim Youth (WAMY), which spreads radical Wahhabism and finances Hamas and Al Qaeda.

* Saudi Arabia has worked against U.S. interests:

In February the Saudi Arabian government torpedoed U.S. plans to conduct a high-profile peace summit meeting between Israel and the Palestinian Authority by brokering their own power-sharing agreement, catching the U.S. off guard and ensuring the agreement would not require Hamas to recognize Israel or forswear violence.

On March 29th, many agree Saudi Arabia King Abdullah referred to the U.S. troops in Iraq as an "illegitimate foreign occupation" at a two-day Arab summit in Riyadh.

* Saudi Arabia exports terrorism:

In the past two years, an estimated 2,500 Saudi Arabian youths eager to wage jihad have slipped into Iraq and 70% of the most-wanted international terrorists are Saudi Arabians.

"We need to send a crystal clear message to the Saudi Arabian government that their tacit approval of terrorism can't go unpunished," said Rep. Weiner. "Saudi Arabia should not get an ounce of military support from the U.S until they unequivocally denounce terrorism and take tangible steps to prevent it."

"It is critical that Congress block the sale of these high tech weapons to Saudi Arabia given its abysmal record in combating terrorism and unwillingness to crack down on extremists," said Rep. Wexler. "America's national security interest must come first, and I urge President Bush to immediately cancel this controversial sale of weapons to Saudi Arabia."

For each of the last three years, Rep. Weiner has passed amendments in the House of Representatives banning U.S aid to Saudi Arabia.

Janet Lehr is editor/publisher of a daily e-mail called "Israel Lives." She can be contacted at israellives@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, July 30, 2007.

To understand the history of the Am Yisrael (the nation of Israel), one must understand what to bully means. To bully is to intimidate, terrorize, persecute, torment, frighten, oppress, harass.

The history of the Jewish people is scarred by such torments, as witnessed in formative events from the exile of Am Yisrael from its land of Israel, to the Inquisition, to the pogroms and the libels, and to the Holocaust.

No matter how many contributions the Jewish nation has made to the world, it has been repaid in its own blood, sweat, tears, and millions of lives needlessly lost.

If the Jews had not been systematically killed since the day they adopted monotheism, accepted the Ten Commandments, and became God's chosen people, they might well have outnumbered the 1.3 billion Muslim now occupying on our planet.

During the years before the Romans exiled them from their land, the Jews fought various wars. King Saul and King David had little choice but to go to war. The survival of the Jewish nation meant constantly fighting against foreign forces vying to conquer the land. Revolts against conquerors resulted in two exiles that disrupted the continuity of the Jewish nation's prosperity on the land God had bequeathed unto them.

During the 2,000 years of exile, the Jews were bullied in every aspect. Words such as blood libel, antisemitism, the Inquisition, pogrom, and the Holocaust are forever linked with Jews. Jews became an all too regular target of the inexcusable and inexhaustible hatred of the non-Jewish world. In many countries, Jews were forced to adhere to special dress codes in order to be marginalized and separated from the greater, non-Jewish populace. When countries grew weary of their Jewish populations, they would simply drive them out with a single decree. Jews were forced to abandon all they had built and accomplished to search for another country that would permit them to stay, if only for a generation or two. The tales of the bullied, vagabond Jew fills millions of pages of the world's history books.

Even when the nation of Israel brought monotheism to the world, before the pagans saw the light, they bullied the Jewish nation. Then, the monotheistic Christians and Muslims also saw fit to bully the Jews and have not stopped doing so to this day.

No matter what Jews do, they are bullied. It is an international pastime.

Where in the past bullying took place in the Diaspora, today it is aimed at the modern State of Israel. For the past sixty years, the United Nations has made a habit of condemning Israel for killing one Arab, while they rarely condemn an Arab nation for murdering thousand of Jews. The world will sanction one boycott after another against Israel. The United States and other nations bully Israel in a way they would never do to any other sovereign nation.

Simply put, no one will leave the small Jewish populace in tiny Israel alone! Through human history, bullying Jews has not stopped for a single moment. It seems that the world wakes up each morning thinking of ways to bully Jews and Israel.

Over the past sixty years, the modern State of Israel has also had to fight many wars to safeguard its existence, and there appears to be no end in sight to this struggle. The endless attempts to rid the world of Jews appear stronger now than ever. Sadly, Jews in Israel as well as beyond have become tired, weary, and confused by the nonstop bullying of Am Yisrael.

This is a call to the world that thrives on bullying the Jews: Leave Israel and us alone. Stop bullying us, or we will bring this vile behavior to an end. We have had enough of it, and we will make sure you have finally had enough of it too.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Shamrak, July 30, 2007.

Rice, about to depart for the Middle East to prepare an upcoming international meeting of regional leaders, said that President Bush recently stated "very clearly that Israel's future will rest in Israel, in places like Galilee and in the Negev -- and that the occupation of the West Bank will have to end, and a Palestinian state will need to be established." In fact, however, in his recent speech, President Bush did not phrase this as a demand upon Israel. (Arabs are actually the occupiers of Judea, Samaria and Trans-Jordan, not the Jews! One thing Rice is right about -- "Israel's future will rest in Israel". Only one strong and self-respectful Jewish State on all Jewish land can stop Arab terror and Arab occupation of our land!)

The Yesha Council issued a statement rejecting a speech by United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice: "Yehuda and Shomron [Samaria] are not 'occupied territories, but rather the historic homeland of the Jewish people."

UnJewish President: Peres met Blair on Tisha B'Av! Peres has no respect at all for the people and country he represents!

Life with No self-Respect. Israel's Education Ministry announced that it had approved a textbook for use in the state's Arab schools that for the first time described Israel's 1948 war of independence as a "catastrophe" for the Arab population. (If Arabs had won, what would it be called just another slaughter of the Jews!)

Food for Thought.

Ad hoc Zionism does not work! Several political factions, even a new party were very active in promoting their pro-Zionist platform before last election in Israel. After the election -- Nothing! Our enemies have been conducting persistent and systematic anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish propaganda for many decades. It is time to take Jewish rights and the "Media War" seriously!

World Yawns. A permanent 'Palestinian refugee camp' in north Lebanon, home to the Al Qaeda-linked Fatah al-Islam and was a home to 40,000 refugees before the hostilities, has been completely wiped out by the Lebanese army. To rebuild it is expected to cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Its residents have sought shelter in other camps. (The world is silent. It would not be the case if Israel destroyed the Hamas terror nest in Gaza and moved all residents to Sinai!)

The Government of Nutters. Deputy Prime Minister Chaim Ramon says Israel should "move quickly" to secure a final agreement with the PA. (... and commit the national suicide!)

So Much Noise for Nothing. An Arab League delegation, led by the foreign ministers of Egypt and Jordan, came to Jerusalem, bringing a proposal for full recognition of Israel by the Arab and Islamic world in return for Israel's withdrawal from all lands captured in the 1967 Middle East war. (Next there will be a demand for withdrawal to 1947 UN drawn map -- the second Holocaust plan. And after that there will be nothing much to recognize!)

Political Mumbo-Jumbo. During his recent visit Blair said: "I think there is a sense of possibility. Whether that sense of possibility can be translated into something, that is something that needs to be worked at and thought about over time." ("If you keep doing the same thing you'll keep getting the same results" -- Undeniably, there is a sense of persistent political stupidity, where the well being of Jews is concerned!)

Democracy PA Style. Fatah Chief and PA President Mahmoud Abbas said that he would adjust PA laws in order to prevent Hamas from winning the next election. (How about changing Arab's homicidal mentality?)

Dreams are Better than Betrayal. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert reiterated his belief that Israel "needs to withdraw" from the biblical Jewish provinces of Judea and Samaria. Olmert maintained that Israel would have to make "tough decisions" with regard to territorial compromise and said that anyone who thinks Israel can continue to hold onto the Jewish land is "living in a dream." (Life is made of dreams. Delusional betrayal is suicidal!)

Barbarism Thrives in Gaza. The bodies of three sisters, aged 16, 19, and 22, who died of multiple stab wounds with other signs of torture, were found in Gaza. The murders were apparently "honour killings," in which women are killed for supposedly dishonouring their family name.

IDF's 'Victory'. The army says it prevented the planned ascent of 2,000 to 3,000 people, to the ruins of the Jewish community of Homesh in Samaria, but hundreds of pioneers were still in the area and more were coming. 70 activists while fleeing from police, were attacked with stones by local Arabs. (It is easy to fight the Jewish patriots. They do not kill Jewish solders, like Arabs do!)

Quote of the Week:

"It has been thanks to my personal acquaintance with Arafat that I managed to get rid of my anti-Israeli prejudice and to understand the irresistible force of sacredness of life as a value." -- Deputy chief editor of an influential Italian daily, Magdi Allam, who was born in Egypt and raised as a Muslim.

While Terrorist are being Released. Five rockets were fired from northern Gaza into Israel while Israel was releasing Arab terrorists. The mortar shells exploded within the territory of the Hof Ashkelon Regional Council.

Time to Boycott Britain. A British Science Journal on its map of the world, does not designate Israel as a country. The word "Israel" is replaced by the term "occupied Palestine." (So much for the scientific objectivity and expertise! The Great Britain still has not apologised for expulsion of Jews from isles.) All of Israel -- #34: http://www.nature.com/news/specials/islamandscience/map/islam-map.html )

Most 'Investigated' PM. The State Prosecutor has recommended to the Attorney General that a criminal investigation be launched against Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. The allegation is that he bought the house on Cremieux Street in Jerusalem from a company called Alumot at a discount of $480,000. In return, Olmert and his people allegedly helped the company receive permits for the project. (...and he is still in office!)

UN is Helping Build Iran Nuke! After four years of doubletalk, evasions and prevarication by Iranian leaders, UN watchdog helps Iran win another 6 months' grace period for its nuclear weapons program. IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei is still giving Tehran the benefit of the doubt, although he still cannot say for sure Tehran's nuclear program is peaceful or transparent. (Effectively, the UN is protecting Iran from a preventive strike!)

'Inhumane' Israel and Empty Promises. One of the 156 terrorists slated for release from prison has refused the offer because he wants to continue receiving free medicine for arthritis, according to Pardons Department director Emmy Palmor. But she cannot promise that the terrorists will not return to their terrorist past. (17 percent of terrorists who have been freed in the past continued to engage in attacks against Israel)

An open letter to 'Dead Wood' President. by Nathan Lopes Cardozo, (extract)

...Mr. President (Shimon Peres), we, in Israel, have lost our identity. Many of us no longer know who we are. We all recognize that we are in dire need of a new vision for Israel's and our own future. There is a need for a powerful voice for change and our eyes now turn to you. Newspapers have already been imploring you to uproot corruption, to promote civility, battle domestic violence, mend Arab-Jewish relations, to foster economic relations with Israel's neighbors and, obviously, to advance peace in the Middle East.

But however important these goals are, they are missing the point. All of these serious problems are the symptoms of the real inescapable crisis, which has befallen us and that need to deal with our own identity. Let us not fool ourselves: A large percentage of our young people have no idea who they are. They are asked to serve in Tzahal, the Israeli army, risking their lives for this State without really knowing anymore why they should. Many of our top leaders in the Knesset have virtually no knowledge of their Jewishness or look down on it due to an erroneous upbringing in their younger years.

More and more of our fellow Jews throughout the country lack Jewish self understanding and wonder why they should live in this beautiful country called Israel. It is only a matter of time before we will find ourselves confronted with a majority of fine young people who will be struggling with an identity crisis of such proportions that many will leave this country out of sheer bewilderment. And let us be honest: It is extremely dangerous. It threatens the very existence of our people and our State. Men can starve from a lack of identity as much as they can from a lack of bread...

Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement. He publishes internet editorial letters on the Arab-Israeli conflict independently, not as a member of any organization or political movement. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@mail2world.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Koira, July 30, 2007.

This article was written by Melanie Pillips and it appeared June 21, 2007 in the Spectator.

The DryBones cartoon called and distributed by UCI (United Coalition for Israel). It isn't part of the original article.

Britain gazes upon the butchery in Gaza and is shocked. Shocked! How could the Palestinians be behaving in this way, it wails?

The Palestinian butchery of blowing Israelis to bits by human bomb or rocket attacks leaves Britain unmoved. The videos of lisping Palestinian toddlers being taught to sing about murdering the Jews elicits barely a shrug. After all, these are brutal Israeli occupiers who deserve all they get, right? Whereas the Palestinians are the good guys, the helpless victims, the people who only want a state of their own.

Well, now the lie is sickeningly exposed for all to see. Palestinians throwing each other off the tops of tall buildings. Churches ransacked and Bibles burned. Hospital patients being treated for their injuries gunned down in those same hospitals.

Astoundingly, there are those who blame Israel, America and Europe for causing this carnage by refusing to recognise Hamas and imposing 'punishing sanctions' against it.

Decent, rational people, however, can see that that this is a struggle for mastery between people who have brutalised themselves. Those who turn their own children into human bombs will behave in the same depraved way towards each other.

As for the 'punishing sanctions', the aid going into Gaza since these were imposed has actually doubled. If the Gazans are now going hungry, it's because the money has been siphoned off to line their leaders' pockets or to buy weapons.

Undoubtedly, a humanitarian disaster now looms. But the claim that Israel controls access to Gaza is untrue. Hamas now controls its border with Egypt. Aid should therefore be funnelled through Egypt, which should be held responsible with Hamas for its safe passage.

Why should Israel be expected to supply aid to those who will merely redouble their rocket and human bomb attacks on it (but whom it continues to treat, nevertheless, in its own hospitals)? Of what other country has such a truly suicidal response to those waging war upon it ever been expected?

Unreality, however, begets ever deeper unreality. It's not just that the Palestinians have divided themselves into two 'states'. It is quickly becoming accepted that there are two different sets of people: Hamas who are beyond the pale, and Fatah with whom we can do business.

Thus America and Israel are now busily shoring up the Fatah end of the Palestinian pantomime horse, President Mahmoud Abbas. But how deluded is this?

After all, Abbas hardly moved a muscle against Hamas in Gaza; indeed, he has always said plainly that he would never fight them. With his 40,000 armed men, he could have crushed them. He chose not to do so.

And the idea that Fatah is 'moderate' is ludicrous. Its militias have been heavily involved in recent attacks against Israel, to whose destruction -- whatever weasel words Abbas may use for credulous western consumption-- it remains committed.

But when in a hole, the Americans continue to dig. Their renewed aid to Fatah will undoubtedly fuel yet more of the corruption that helped bring Hamas to power. Worse still, although the weapons they showered upon Abbas to help him defeat Hamas have now fallen into its hands, they will continue to arm him -- even though if Hamas captures the West Bank, it will capture those weapons too.

The reason for this deluded approach is the fundamentally flawed western belief that the 'two state solution' will end the Middle East impasse. The fact is that the 'two state solution' has been on offer since 1922. That was when Britain gave away to the Arabs three quarters of Mandatory Palestine -- within all of which it was bound by international agreement to re-establish the Jews in their ancestral national home -- creating the Hashemite kingdom of Trans-Jordan. Jordan therefore is the Arab state of Palestine.

Ever since, different configurations of the 'two-state solution' have been repeatedly offered, only to be met by Arab attempts to drive the Jews out. The belief that creating a Palestine state will end this 90-year trauma is therefore as much of a fantasy as finding a crock of gold at the end of the rainbow.

This continued delusion is further preventing the west from grasping that the war against Israel is merely one front in a far bigger war against the free world, in which Iran is the major player. Iran now controls Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, and is wreaking havoc in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The true significance of Hamastan, therefore, is that it strengthens Iran still further in its 28-year jihad against the west. And since Hamas is now an Iranian proxy, its agenda is transparently no longer a Palestinian state but the Islamist onslaught upon the whole free world.

Yet in Britain, elements within the Foreign Office and intelligence establishment are pushing 'engagement' with Hamas, even though its agenda is totally non-negotiable. Its Charter doesn't merely commit it to eradicating Israel, but is a declaration of war against the entire Jewish people, with demented Nazi-style ravings about the world Jewish conspiracy. It would be as suicidal and immoral to 'engage' with such a body as it was to advocate the appeasement of Hitler.

Israel is now in an appalling position. It must do everything possible to avoid re-occupying Gaza, although it may have no alternative if the rocket fire from there escalates. It is trapped by an Iranian pincer movement in Gaza and Lebanon, from where two rockets were fired on Monday at northern Israel. So much for UNIFIL. Iran's satrapy Syria, meanwhile, is making ominous preparations for war. So Israel could soon face war on three fronts from the Iran/Syria axis.

That axis, though, does not just threaten Israel and the west but much of the Arab world too. Egypt now has the nightmare of both the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran on its doorstep in Gaza, and Jordan is eyeing the same prospect on the West Bank.

Abbas is patently incapable of stopping Hamas. So a new dynamic is being created. Long-term, the solution lies in Jordan and Egypt exercising their own self-interest. A Jordan-West Bank confederation is now being floated; the same logic would mean Egypt re-occupying Gaza.

Despite the fact that this idea would take us back 40 years, it has certain attractions. Order would be restored by Jordan and Egypt which, unlike Israel, would tackle Hamas with a vigour from which our own principled multiculturalists would not dream of demurring.

The Palestinians would be in the state they were given in 1922. The Arab world would finally take responsibility for a tragedy they themselves created. The Iranian pincer would be broken.

One thing threatens to scupper this. It is the US/UK axis of appeasement, the fateful union of British cynicism with America's catastrophic loss of nerve. No wonder Iran is on a roll. With such serial strategic stupidity and cravenness by the west, how can it lose?

Contact Koira at koira@dbmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Karl Ericson, July 30, 2007.

These are several excerpts from the original article, which is available, complete with live links, at

Was Muhammad a great prophet of God spreading goodness throughout the world or a power hungry manipulator of people who used their desires for sex, eternal life and help from God, for personal gain? One way to answer this question is to ask what he would have done if he were one or the other and than compare what the Koran and the Hadiths say he did, to these expectations. In this essay we will try and determine which is correct by considering what Muhammad would have done if he was a ruthless power hungry man who used religion to manipulate people and comparing that to what he actually did. To help do this let us imagine ourselves in his situation.

If you decided to start a cult you would have to figure out how to do it. You could declare that you are God. After some thought, you might realize that, that is not the best way to go about it. If you claim to be God to people, they will think you are crazy and they will challenge you to perform miracles and you can't perform miracles. Another option is to try and convince them that you can communicate with God (you are his prophet) and that God talks through you. Now you don't have to perform miracles.

One problem you would face is that if you persuade these people to believe in you, they might tell their friends about their new religion and their friends may convince them that you are a con-artist after their money. How can you prevent that from happening? Somehow you need to stop them from communicating with their friends. (This is a technique commonly used by modern day cults) You could take the approach Muhammad took which was to command them:

O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. [Koran, al-Ma'idah 5:51.11]

What if they start having doubts on their own and start spreading those doubts? You could terrify them into being silent about those doubts by instructing your followers:

Whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him. Sahih Al-Bukhari (9:57)

You could also threaten them with burning in the eternal fires of hell if they don't believe.

Garments of fire have been prepared for the unbelievers. Scalding water shall be poured upon their heads, melting their skins and that which is in their bellies. (Koran 22:19-22:23)

One way to increase your wealth and power and wipe out those that spread doubt about you at the same time, would be to conquer the infidels who dare not honor you as their prophet and seize their money. You might instruct your followers:

Slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush. (Koran 9:5)

If you wanted revenge against those who refuse to accept your religion and you were a totally ruthless and vicious sicko you might tell your followers to torture the non-believer. You might say:

Take him and fetter him and expose him to hell fire. And then insert him in a chain whereof the length is seventy cubits. (Koran 69:30-37)


Inevitably you will find some people who don't believe in you because they already believe in other religions. It would be much easier to manipulate people into believing that you are a prophet if you argue that your God Allah is the same as their God. According to the following text in the Koran Muhammad did this. In this text Allah is God, Isa is Jesus, Marium is Mary the Taurat is the Torah and the Injeel is the New Testament.

5.44] Surely We revealed the Taurat in which was guidance and light; ...[5.46] And We sent after them in their footsteps Isa, son of Marium, verifying what was before him of the Taurat and We gave him the Injeel in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Taurat and a guidance and an admonition for those who guard (against evil).

There is evidence that Muhammad did this with the Pagans in Arabia as well. The crescent moon which is a symbol of Islam is also a symbol of the moon God which was worshipped by the Arabs of Muhammad's time. One of the names of the moon God was Al-Ilah which is most likely where the word Allah came from. The Kaaba was the house of the moon God and is the holiest place in Islam. For more about this see "Who is Allah?" on You Tube [Editor's Note: It's no longer there. There's a note that reads "This video has been removed by the user." But you can google many articles on the subject, such as "http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/skm30804.htm".]

Saying that Allah is the same God as the God of other religions may create unexpected problems. What if other religions teach, that killing the non-believer is wrong? The Jewish Mishna teaches that:

whoever destroys one life is regarded by the Torah as if he has destroyed a whole world; and whoever saves one life, is regarded as if he has saved a whole world.

According to the Koran, Muhammad did not deny that Allah had said this but explained that it did not apply to killing non-Jewish infidels. Muhammad said that Allah said: (Koran 5.32-5.33)

Dealing with the problem of compassionate verses in religions that you incorporate into your own is only one of your problems if you are trying to be a wealthy prophet. One problem with encouraging your followers to attack and loot the infidel is that the non-believing infidel might defend himself. That might deter your followers from attacking. You could give them the incentive of being able to keep the booty. You could tell them:

The person who participates in (Holy battles) in Allah's cause ... will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) (Hadith Sahih Bukhari, Vol 1 Book 2 Number 35)


You could give them the incentive of sex also by saying that it's fine with Allah if your followers have sex with the captured women and keep them as slaves.

33:50 -- "Prophet, We have made lawful to you ... the slave girls whom God has given you as booty." 4:24 -- And all married women (are forbidden) unto your save those (captives) whom your right hand possesses.

Still the risk of death might deter some of your followers. If you were a brilliant and evil man you might think of and carry out the following ingenious solution to the problem. You could tell your followers that they will go to paradise if they die fighting for the faith. You might complete the previous sentence as follows:

The person who participates in (Holy battles) in Allah's cause ... will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise (if he is killed in the battle as a martyr). (Hadith Sahih Bukhari, Vol 1 Book 2 Number 35)

So tell us what it is like to be in paradise your followers might ask. You might say that those who enter paradise will enjoy:

"abundant fruits, unforbidden, never-ending." There will be "gushing fountains" and everyone "shall recline on jeweled couches face to face, and there shall wait on them immortal youths with bowls and ewers and a cup of purest wine." Suras (or chapters) 55 and 56 of the Quran.

That might not be enough to convince your lusty male followers to risk death in battle so you might tell them some even more thrilling aspects of Paradise. You might tell them:

"Therein are bashful virgins whom neither man nor jinnee will have touched before ... virgins as fair as corals and rubies," sura 55. A few lines later, you might remind them of "virgins chaste and fair ... they shall recline on green cushions and fine carpets."

By now you have a rapt audience of eager male listeners.

Even with all this incentive there may be some of your followers who are afraid of getting hurt. They may be afraid of dying, the cowards. Not only that but they may fear that since they haven't led the most moral life they may not qualify for paradise and spend eternity in hell. Reassure the miserable cowards. Tell them that the rewards of Al Shaheed (Martyr) include:

(Hadith Tirmidhî and Ahmad):
  • He will not feel the agony of death.
  • He does not feel the pain of the killing except like that of a pinch.
  • All the Shaheed's sins and faults are forgiven with the first drop of blood that comes out of his body.
  • The soul of the martyrs dwell in Paradise whenever they like.
  • Allah will marry him to Hur-al-een.
Congratulations. You've almost completely brainwashed your followers into becoming murdering madmen but something is still missing. Some of your followers had Jewish or Christian friends. They don't want to kill them. You need paranoia. You need to convince your followers that the non-believers are evil. You need to tell them that:
Those who deny Muhammad's revelation are evil.

There is still something missing. You need more paranoia. If you want your followers to wipe out the Jews you need to make the Jews out to be a threat. You might do what Muhammad did to get his followers to massacre them.

He accused the Jewish tribe of the Bani Quraytha of wanting to betray him and the angel Gabriel ordered him to attack them. He went to them, put them under siege for 14 days. Finally they surrendered. So Mohammed killed all their men, enslaved their women and children [Saheeh Muslim -- 1769].

Congratulations, your brainwashed followers are enthusiastically killing the infidel right and left and you are getting wealthy off the booty.


Contact Karl Ericson at his website: http://www.mypracticalphilosophy.com/ or send an email to philosopherplus@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Barry Rubin, July 30, 2007.

News item: After Islamist suicide bomb attacks on London and Glasgow by Islamists were foiled, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown ordered ministers never to use the word "Muslim" when discussing terrorism.

It was a dark and stormy night in London, which is just as well since my arrival was supposed to be a top secret. I was picked up at Heathrow Airport by a limousine and driven immediately to Number 10 Downing Street. I had been called in by a government frustrated about what might well be the biggest mystery in British history. Gordon Brown was certainly glad to see me. "Tony Rodef, Middle East Detective! Just the man we need," he said with a sigh of relief. "Quick, this is a major crisis. Let's not waste any time but go straight to the briefing." We entered the prime minister's briefing room and he introduced me to Moss, "Our top man on terrorism," explained Brown.

"Moss?" I pondered. "Haven't we met before."

"Perhaps, sir, until last week I was in charge of stopping the import of stale vegetables from Central America."

"Ah, yes. Do you like your new job?"

"Certainly," he beamed. "Stale vegetables, detecting terrorists; it's all the same thing, you see."


"Now, here's the first slide, September 11, 2001.A group of terrorists, mostly from Saudi Arabia, hijack planes and attack New York and Washington. Why might they have done such a thing? Hard to tell. But it gets even more mysterious." And so it went. Slide after slide. Bombs in Spain; bombs in Bali; bombs in Israel; bombs in the London subway. Six years of terrorism, often using the same methods.

"And finally," Moss said showing the last slide, "the latest attacks in Britain. People from Iraq, Jordan, you know countries in your part of the world."

I nodded. "So what's the problem?"

"Ah," said the prime minister, "that's the point. We are trying to figure out who these people are and why they are doing this. We sort of suspect we might have done something to hurt their feelings."

"I see."

"Yes," Brown continued. "We just cannot figure it out. Some of these people are Arabs but others are not. They come from lots of different countries. They often refer to someone named Al or Allah. Some are rich and some are poor. Some are common laborers; others are doctors. But what do they have in common? What's linking them together?"

"Have you tried using James Bond?"

"He's in semi-retirement now as a multicultural tolerance counselor in Manchester. So instead we have Philby who is heading our research section."

"Philby?" pondered I. Haven't we met before?"

"Yes, sir. Up until last week I was in charge of passing secret information to the Russians. Er, I mean collecting secret information on the Russians."

Philby gave his briefing. They had run every known fact about the terrorists through the most advanced computers. The most promising correlations were height and the number of letters in their first names. They were all right-handed, a potentially promising lead. They didn't eat pork or practice bungee-jumping.

"Is that all?" I asked Philby.

"Well there's one more thing. All of them are Mu...Mu...Mu...."

"You'll have to forgive Philby. He has a slight stutter."

"Thank you, sir," Philby gasped. "I meant to say that all of them are moustached men."

"Moustaches, huh," I retorted. "Perhaps that means something. A disguise perhaps?" I pondered some more. "So let me get this straight," I summarized. "You have a bunch of men from a lot of countries running around setting off bombs for no apparent reason who are roughly the same height, have roughly the same number of letters in one of their names, don't eat pork, and don't jump off platforms with a cord attached to one of their legs."

"That's about it, sir," said Philby. "Oh, and they go to mosques a lot and read religious literature in Arabic."

"Philby!" the prime minister recoiled in horror.

"Sorry, sir. I meant to say they are sort of religious. But we've ruled that out as a motive."

"A real puzzler," I sighed.

"Look," said the prime minister. "You must understand that solving this problem is of the greatest importance. We must find out who these people are, what they believe, why they are doing this, and how to counter them. The fate of our country depends on it. Nothing can stand in the way of our finding out what is going on!"

"I understand completely, prime minister," I said in a properly deferential and sympathetic voice. "I, Tony Rodef, Middle East Detective am on the job. And if there is any common factor that links these people together I'm sure we will find it."

"Money is no object," he said emphatically. "Now you must excuse me as I need to meet with the Muslim community leadership which is declaring its revulsion at these events." We all stood up. "And remember if you find anything behind this wave of attacks you must let me know immediately."

"Yes, prime minister," we all said in chorus.

Barry Rubin is Director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Interdisciplinary Center university. His latest book, The Truth about Syria was published by Palgrave-Macmillan in May 2007. Prof. Rubins columns can be read online at: http://gloria.idc.ac.il/articles/archives/oldindex.html.

To Go To Top

Posted by Jenny Grigg, July 30, 2007.

Below is an essay by Vineyard Saker who contends that it's Palestine that has been wiped off the map by the terrorist state of Israel. The misconceptions in the essay are ably challenged by Eli E. Hertz, who is President of the Myths and Facts Organization. Contact him at the website: www.mythsandfacts.com. Both essays are to be found at

[Editor's Note: We might add that if Vineyard Saker can not accept the Jewish resettling Mandated Palestine as sanctioned by international law, then he should also reject the other partitions the Mandate made in the Ottoman Empire to create the modern Arab states of Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Kuwait, Yemen, etc. Britain also installed Ibn Saud as ruler of Saudi Arabia and gave over the administration of 80% of Mandated Palestine to what became Transjordan and is now called the Hashamite Kingdom of Jordan. Saker might start his reading with a simple but accurate essay from the Aish Organization. Or look at some of the internet articles discussed on Think-Israel's background page.]

"Wiping Whom Off The Map?"
by Vineyard Saker

In occupied Palestine Israel differentiates between Christian and Muslim Palestinians, between Fatah and Hamas, between West Bank and Gaza Strip, and between citizens of one town and the other.

Since the establishment of their terrorist state on usurped Palestinian land Israelis keep regurgitating their phobic mantra "Arabs want to wipe Israel off the map" in order to draw international sympathy, and to cover up their war crimes throughout the Arab World. To build their divinely racist "God's promised Jewish only" state from Nile to Euphrates Israeli government is conducting the policy of graduated wiping Palestinians off their own existence. Israel had, so far, successfully wiped Palestine off the map. Palestine had become to be known as occupied territories, disputed territories, and finally West Bank and Gaza Strip. Palestine, a name used for the last three thousand years, to describe the land between Mediterranean shores west to Jordan River east, and from Lebanon north to Egypt south, can no longer be found on any modern map. PALESTINE HAS BEEN WIPED OFF THE MAP!!!

Israel was established and built on Zionism, a colonialist expansionist political movement based on religiously elitist ideology (God's chosen people), and a complete denial of the other. Its ultimate goal is to build a super power state, which they hope would eventually exceed the US in controlling the globe, within the heart of the Arab World to control their resource-rich region. Its first step was to establish Israel in place of Palestine and to win (force) its international legitimacy through imperial power (unfortunately might is still right in our age). Thus Palestinians became the primary target of Zionist terror and occupation to evacuate the land, since an independent viable Palestinian state would negate the essence of Israel's right to exist on occupied land, and would put an end to the Zionist's expansionist dreams. The birth of the Zionist entity is based not only on wiping Palestine off the map, but also wiping all Palestinians, their history and their culture off existence. Zionist Israel, thus, had adopted a graduated genocidal policy against Palestinians in specific and against Arabs in general.

Zionists perceived seeds of conflict among Arabs due to the variety of their culture, ethnicity, and religious backgrounds. To build their divinely racist Jewish-only Greater Israel from Nile to Euphrates through the division of Arabs, Zionist Israel developed its own expansionist geopolitical policy inspired from and akin to the German Nazi geopolitical policy of 1890 to 1933 of dividing Europe into smaller states to be swallowed up by strong Germany. Where Nazi Germans prescribed to a biological elitist ideology of the superior pure Arian blood (the Superman), Zionist Israelis prescribed to a divine elitist ideology of the superior pure Jewish blood (God's chosen people).

In occupied Palestine Israel differentiates between Christian and Muslim Palestinians, between Fatah and Hamas, between West Bank and Gaza Strip, and between citizens of one town and the other. Within the neighboring Arab states (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq) Israel is inciting conflict and hatred between the citizens of those countries and Palestinian refugees, between Christians and Muslims, between Shiites and Sunni Muslims, between Kurds and Arabs, and between different political parties.

On the Palestinian front Israeli government had adopted a three-dimensional graduated genocidal policy. First comes uprooting Palestinians from their land and towns and transferring them to neighboring countries. Second is perpetrating massacres and ethnic cleansing through military incursions, shelling, and air raids against Palestinian communities to coerce the rest of them to immigrate. Third is the distortion and destruction of all physical, cultural, and historical evidence tying Palestinians to the land. Palestinian villages have been completely demolished (wiped off existence), Palestinian culture was hijacked and many had been claimed to be Jewish, and history was distorted to reflect Palestinians as invader terrorist Muslim tribes from the Saudi Desert that never had any right in God's Promised Land. Israel has sought to negate, falsify, demonize and wipe off every aspect of Palestinian life to a point where ex Israeli PM Golda Meier stated in 1969: "There is no such thing as Palestinians, they never existed."

The policy of wiping Palestine off the map and wiping Palestinians off existence had been adopted early since the founding of Zionism. Here follows quotes of only few of noted Zionist leaders. Theodor Herzl, father of political Zionism, had written in his diaries in 1898, "The Palestinians would be spirited across the border." Israel Zangwill, a British Zionist Jew, is known for his slogan "A land without a people for a people without a land" describing Zionist dream of Israeli state in Palestine. This slogan, though, was invented by a Zionist British Member of Parliament Lord Shaftsbury, who in 1853 wrote to Foreign Minister Aberdeen that Greater Syria was "a country without a nation in need of a nation without a country... the ancient and rightful lords of the soil, the Jews".

Chaim Weitzman, the first president of Israel, saw no room for Palestinians in Palestine. In his autobiography, "Trial and Error", he wrote "Palestine will become as Jewish as England is English."

In chapter four of his book, "Birth of Palestinian Refugee Problem", Israeli historian Benny Morris wrote about Yousef Weitz, the director of the Jewish National Fund's Land Department, a man noted for his strong Zionist convictions. Weitz wrote in his diary on December 20th 1940: "It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both people (Palestinians and Jews) ... the only solution is a Land of Israel, at least a western Land of Israel without Arabs. There is no room here for compromise ... There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighboring countries ... Not one village must be left, nor one Bedouin tribe." In 1948 Weitz was given the task of creating the "Transfer Committee", which supervised the destruction of evacuated Arab villages, and repopulating others with recent Jewish immigrants in order to make any return of Palestinian refugees to their villages impossible.

Many Palestinian villages, which survived destruction during 1948 war, were later erased (wiped off) after the war. Records of the Association of Archeological Survey, housed in the Rockefeller Museum in Jerusalem, show that a plan to wipe off Palestinian villages was implemented jointly by the Israeli Lands Administration and the Jewish National Fund in 1965, and was carried on for several years. The plan intended to wipe off all traces of Palestinian villages in order to destroy any hope for the Palestinian refugees to return to their homes.

The Israeli Association of Archaeological Survey was established in 1964 to issue permits for the destruction of Palestinian villages. By 1967 this association had approved the wiping off of about 100 villages inside 1948-occupied Palestine (Israel). After 1967 the Association turned its attention to destroy Palestinian villages in West Bank and Golan heights. On December 2006 Roni Bar-On, Israeli Interior Minister declared his ministry's approval on a plan to demolish more than 42,000 homes of Palestinian Bedouins in Negev Desert. This plan will wipe off 45 Palestinian villages housing more than 86,000 Palestinian Bedouins, who in 1958 were evacuated out of their land and confined to a piece of land in the desert known as the Triangle. Although paying taxes to Israeli government like any other town, these 45 villages were not recognized by the Israeli government, and received no civil services at all.

The destruction of Palestinian history and culture, and the wiping off Palestinian names of towns and replacing them with Jewish names was accelerated to a point where Moshe Dyan, a previous Israeli Defense Minister, bragged about it in a lecture he gave at the Technion University in Haifa in March 19th 1969. He stated: "we came here to a country that was populated by Arabs, and we are building here a Hebrew, a Jewish state; instead of the Arab villages, Jewish villages were established. You even do not know the names of those villages, and I do not blame you because these villages no longer exist. There is no single Jewish settlement that was not established in the place of a former Arab Village. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not here either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul, Kibbutz Gv'at in the place of Jibta, Kibbutz Sared in the place of Huneifis, and Yehushua in the place of Tel al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population." (Haaretz, April 4th, 1969).

The policy of wiping off Palestinian names and replacing them with Jewish names was adopted by first Israeli PM David Ben Gurion since the establishment of Israel in 1948 when he established a special committee from historians, geographers, geologists and Torah experts, whose task was to wipe off the Canaanite and Palestinian Arabic names and substitute them with Jewish names. So Tel Rabi' became Tel Aviv, Al-Quds became Urushalaim, Um Rashrash became Eilat, Shu'fat became Nevi Yachob, Beit Jala became Gilo, Za'tara became Tabbuch, Beisan became Beit Shean, Qualandia became Atarot, Beit Mahseer became Beit Me'er, Artof became Hartuv, and so on.

Israeli government came up with a set of despotic laws to justify its robbery of Palestinian property. For example the "Expulsion of Invaders" amendment to land laws was designed to allow Israel to expel Palestinians from their land under the excuse that Palestinians are invaders. Palestinian refugees, who tried to return to their land, are considered invaders by Israel. The law of "Abandoned Properties" is designed to make it "legal" for Israeli government to seize any land belongs to absent (evacuated, transferred) owners. This law "legalized" the general confiscation of almost 450 Palestinian villages and associated farm land that were later either wiped off or Judaised. According to a report drawn up in 1952 Israel had succeeded in expropriating all Palestinian quarters in mixed towns, 73,000 rooms in abandoned houses, 7800 Palestinian shops, workshops and warehouses, 5 million Palestinian pounds in bank accounts, and most importantly 300 thousand hectares of land (see Simha Flapan's "The Birth of Israel; Myths and Realities" p. 107)

Israel is intent on destroying all Palestinian and Islamic cultural city landmarks. Religious places and buildings, especially Muslim mosques, were claimed as Jewish, destroyed, neglected to collapse, and turned into museums, art galleries, whore houses, clubs, senior citizens shelters, and stables for farm animals. Muslim Palestinians were not allowed to renovate or build new mosques. Renovation and strengthening the bases of Al-Aqsa mosque was hindered by Jerusalem municipality. Building permits were withheld, and building materials were not allowed to pass through old gates to the mosque. The ancient Islamic Council building and its adjacent Islamic "Ma'man Allah" cemetery in West Jerusalem are important historic and cultural Palestinian landmarks. The Israeli government is destroying the internals of the Islamic Council building to build western-style apartments, and digging up the cemetery to build a Jewish Museum of Tolerance on its place. What hypocrisy!!!

Israel had always rejected, obstructed, or violated all peace treaties with Arabs since 1948 for fear of establishing permanent borders and repatriating Palestinian refugees, as explained explicitly by their first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion in his "The War Diary 1948/9". For Zionists peace means the return of Palestinian refugees to their homes (a demographic threat to the pure exclusive Jewish state), and specifying permanent borders putting an end to Zionist expansionist dreams. In December 1948 the UN established a Palestine Conciliation Commission (PCC) with representatives from US, France and Turkey to mediate between Arabs and Israel. Peace negotiation held in Lausanne, Switzerland on April 26th 1948. Israel was forced to attend negotiation after US threatened to prevent Israel's admission to the UN. In the negotiation Arabs offered Israel peace and recognition providing Israel implements UN resolution 194 of returning Palestinian refugees to their homes. Israel rejected the offer.

Oslo Agreement was forced on Israel by Bush, the father, to appease Arab Gulf states, which joined his first Gulf War against Iraq, knowing very well that Israelis will eventually circumvent the Agreement somehow, and they did.

Benjamin Netanyahu, in June 1996, gave his famous three "NO"s to peace process: no withdrawal, no Palestinian State, and no refugee's return. Dov Weisglass, Sharon's senior adviser and one of the initiator of Sharon's disengagement plan, stated "The significance of the disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process. And when you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Effectively, this whole package called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda." (Ha'aretz, October 6th 2004)

Israel has also rejected the generous peace offer of March 2003 by the Arab League, which promised recognition, putting an end to all resistance, and full diplomatic relations with ALL Arab states. This offer would have fulfilled Israelis' dreams and aspirations for the peace they claim to always have called for. Yet Israeli PM Ariel Sharon, at the time, responded by driving his tanks into all major Palestinian cities. Israel also rejected all Syrian peace offers, and violated all agreements with the Palestinian Authority.

Zionist Israeli settlers are worse than their government in their terrorist genocidal attacks against Palestinians. Zionist settlers have their own underground terrorist militias allegedly formed to protect their settlements. Given implicit permission by their government, and under the protection of the Israeli army, terrorist militias routinely attack Palestinian farmers, burn their crops, cut and uproot their trees, burn their shacks, poison their water wells, shoot and poison their farm animals, terrorize and assault members of International Solidarity Movement, who travel to Palestine to protect farmers in their fields and students on their way to schools. Some of these extremist militias (Shlomo Dvir, Yarden Morag and Ofer Gamliel) planted car bombs near Palestinian high schools in Jerusalem's suburbs in April 2002. Others (Chahr Zliger, Naom Federman, and undisclosed other terrorists) arrested in September 2003, planned to bomb many Islamic mosques, including al-Aqsa mosque, across West Bank at the same day.

The extremist settlers encourage such terrorist acts against Palestinians and consider them religious duty. This could be seen in the way the settlers of Keryat Arba' had sanctified the terrorist Baruch Goldstein by building a shrine for him and calling him a saint. Goldstein had shot 29 Muslim prayers in the back and injured 129 others while praying in the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron in February 1994.

Settlers' terror increased up to a point where, in April 27, 2005, Amnesty International (AI) urged the Israeli occupation authorities to launch immediate probes into the Jewish settlers' poisoning of Palestinian agrarian fields. The Israeli government ignored such a request.

Despite all the media cover up, and the Zionist propaganda, the international community, on the civic level, understands and sympathizes with the Palestinian just cause. Many civil walks and protests demanding justice for Palestinians take place in major cities all over the world. People from all over the world join International Solidarity Movement to travel to Palestine to protect Palestinians from Israeli terror, and to protest Israeli imprisoning wall designed to choke Palestinian towns. Polls, especially in Europe, had shown that Israel is considered the most dangerous threat to world peace even before Iran.

Unfortunately the blackmail of World Zionist Organization and the pressure of the pro-Zionist neoconservative American administration and that of AIPAC made criticizing Israel a "political suicide" as described by previous American President Jimmy Carter. World leaders and politicians had ignored the plight of Palestinian people. They had ignored the illegal establishment of the terrorist state of Israel on usurped Palestine, ignored Israeli massacres against Palestinian civilians, the destruction of their villages, and the expulsion of almost 750 thousand Palestinian out of their homes, ignored the right of return for the hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees and the implementation of UN resolution 194 of 1948 demanding their return to their land, ignored the suffering of Palestinians under Israeli terrorist occupation for the last 60 years, denied the Palestinians' right of self-defense and resisting occupation, as guaranteed by UN charters, and called this right terrorism, ignored Israeli terrorism, on the other hand, and called it self-defense, ignored and turned against the UN democratic principles when they rejected the Palestinian government that was elected by the most democratic election as witnessed and testified by UN and international well known monitors, and imposed financial and economic siege to starve Palestinians for their democratic process.

As the international political community, alas including some Arab leaders, had shown sympathy for the capture, as a war prisoner, of the Israeli soldier (Shalit), who was sent to Gaza Strip to shell and destroy the homes of Palestinian civilians and to kill their women and children, and expressed their understanding of the Israeli terrorist war against Lebanon (July 2006) in response to the capture of two Israeli soldiers sent across Lebanese borders to incite anticipated trouble, this international "civilized" community expressed no sympathy towards the 12 thousand Palestinian civilians, including women and children, rotting in miserable Israeli jails after being snatched out of their families in the middle of the night from their homes, nor did they express any understanding for the Palestinian attacks against Israeli settlers, who usurped Palestinian land.

The international community knows that Israel is perpetrating ethnic cleansing against Palestinians, yet none of its governments is doing anything about it or objecting it, giving Israel the wrong message that it is OK to kill Palestinians. That is why wiping Palestinians off existence is still going on until today. Palestinians have long joined native Australians and Native American Indians in the category of "endangered species". Today it is Palestinians; tomorrow it is the rest of Arab nations.

"Wiping Whom Off the Map?"
by Eli E. Hertz
July 26, 2007

The "Mandate for Palestine," a historical League of Nations document, laid down the Jewish legal right to settle anywhere in western Palestine, a 10,000-square-mile area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, an entitlement unaltered in international law and valid to this day.


Let discuss the legal occupation of Jews in the area known forever as Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. under international law:

In 1897 it was Benjamin Ze'ev (Theodor) Herzl, founder of modern Zionism, who said: "Palestine is our ever-memorable historic home. The very name of Palestine would attract our people with a force of marvelous potency."

In 1917 it was Arthur James Balfour of Great Britain who declared:

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object ..."

In 1922 it was Winston Churchill the British Secretary of State for the Colonies, who declared:

Jews are in Palestine "as of right and not on sufferance ... When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride."

On July 24, 1922 it was fifty-one member countries -- the entire League of Nations -- that published the legally binding document "Mandate for Palestine" and unanimously declared:

"Recognition Has Been Given to the Historical Connection of the Jewish People with Palestine and to the Grounds for Reconstituting their National Home in that Country."

The "Mandate for Palestine," a historical League of Nations document, laid down the Jewish legal right to settle anywhere in western Palestine, a 10,000-square-mile area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, an entitlement unaltered in international law and valid to this day.

On June 30, 1922 it was the joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States that unanimously endorsed the "Mandate for Palestine," confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine -- anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

"Favoring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.

"resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United State of America in congress assembled, That the United States of America favors the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of Christian and all other non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and that the holy places and religious buildings and sites in Palestine shall be adequately protected." [The resolution was incorporated in the 1937 Palestine Royal commission Report, Chapter II, page 31]

On September 21, 1922 it was Warren G. Harding, President of the United Sates of America, who signed the joint resolution of approval to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

Palestine is a geographical area, not a nationality!

As a matter of fact there has never been a sovereign Arab state in Palestine. The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations that never established a Palestinian state themselves. Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinian Arabs clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.

Jewish "continuing occupation" that you speak about is legal and endorsed by international law.

The "Mandate for Palestine" document defined where Jews are and are not permitted to settle. Article 6 of the "Mandate" clearly states:

"The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes."

The "Mandate for Palestine" document is the last legally binding document regarding the status of what is commonly called "the West Bank and Gaza." The September 16, 1922 memorandum (of the "Mandate") is also the last modification of the official terms of the "Mandate" on record by the League of Nations or by its legal successor -- the United Nations -- in accordance with Article 27 of the "Mandate" that states unequivocally: "The consent of the Council of the League of Nations is required for any modification of the terms of this mandate."

Political rights to self-determination as a polity for Arabs were guaranteed in three other mandates -- in Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq. A fourth Arab state east of the Jordan River -- Trans-Jordan, came to fruition via the "Mandate for Palestine."

Fellow Arab,

300,000,000 Arabs in 21 "exclusive" Arab countries now occupy an area of 5,207,000 square-mile, including all the principal Arab and Moslem centers.

6,000,000 Jews in 1 country now occupy an area of nearly 10,000 square-mile in Palestine,[would fit into Lake Michigan with plenty of room left over] and you are still complaining...

Contact Jenny Grigg at jennygrigg@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, July 30, 2007.

The two articles below offer the same clarity of purpose that 'Mein Kampf' offered back in 1928. It took Hitler 15 years before he was in a position to fulfill the promises that he made in his magnum opus. Technology has contributed to speeking things up in our generation.

Now, as then, the world prefers to ignore the obvious and pretend that there can be a basis for negotiation with an enemy whose goal is your destruction (destroy half of us? -- is that a starting point for negotiations?).

The first is a review by Janet Levy of The Al Qaeda Reader, edited by Raymond Ibrahim. The Al Qaeda Reader gathers together the essential texts and documents that trace the origin, history, and evolution of the ideas of al-Qaeda founders Ayman al-Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden.

The second is by Steve Feldman and points out that the extremist assertions by the "good" terrorists aren't an aberration -- they come straight from the Fatah Constitution.

The Al-Qaeda Reader
by Janet Levy
July 17, 2007

Recently, a shoeless President George Bush accompanied by female aides in makeshift hijabs (Islamic prayer scarves) spoke at the rededication of the Islamic Center of Washington. The president sang the praises of a "religion of peace," despite the fact that the Center is a Saudi-funded promulgator of Wahhabism, a strict form of Islam that critics say has spawned Muslim fundamentalism and extremism. He extolled a "faith that has enriched civilization for centuries" as he stood surrounded by representatives from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Muslim Public Affairs Council and the Islamic Society of North America, organizations that fund the Muslim Brotherhood and affiliated Islamic terrorist groups. Bush emphasized America's solidarity with Muslims in the fight to preserve religious freedom and liberty and to combat terrorism. In his speech commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Islamic Center, Bush thanked Muslim leaders who oppose extremism and railed against "radical extremists who use the veneer of Islamic belief to support and fund acts of violence."

Yet, this public reassurance by Bush amidst the apologists and supporters of jihad belies new evidence of just how closely Islamic extremism derives its strength and core beliefs from the basic tenets of the Islamic faith itself. A recently translated collection of Al Qaeda treatises, The Al-Qaeda Reader, calls into question many of the operating conceptions the Western world holds about the religion of Mohammed and its attitudes toward the West. Written by Osama Bin Laden and Ayman Al Zawahiri, the #1 and #2 Al Qaeda leaders, and translated by Raymond Ibrahim, a Middle East and Islam historian who works for the Library of Congress, The Al-Qaeda Reader contains exhortations and religious exegeses directed to Muslims, as well as propaganda tracts and warnings to non-Muslims of their imminent defeat and the consequences they will suffer for their perfidious actions, plus, invitations to embrace Islam. A timely and critically important collection, it provides a clearer picture of our enemies and casts serious doubt on the President's assumptions of shared Muslim/Western aims.

In their entreaties to fellow Muslims, Bin Laden and Al Zawahiri pronounce the requirements of their faith. They base their beliefs on the Koran's delineation of a world with two camps: the Dar-al-Harb, the world of the infidel or the world of war, and the Dar-al-Islam, the domain of peace inhabited by faithful Muslims. Bin Laden and Zawahiri declare the obligation of Muslims is to follow the only authentic sources of Islamic jurisprudence: the Koran, the Sunna (the codified legal and social practices of Islam) and the rulings of religious leaders, the ulema. Their treatises include strict definitions of true Islam which prohibits relationships and peaceful coexistence with non-Muslims or kuffirs. They denounce separation of church and state, condemn democracy and affirm the sanctity of jihad.

Moderate Islam Rejected

In his description of authentic Islam, Osama Bin Laden informs Muslims that their return to past glory and the end of their enslavement by infidels is incumbent upon their adherence to the true word of Allah. So-called "moderate" constructs of Islam, employed merely to appease non-believers, must be rejected. Zawahiri cautions that moderate Islam is not true Islam and that the primary goal of Islam is to wage jihad against non-Muslims and establish a worldwide caliphate under the sharia, or Islamic principles of law. Anything less is considered antithetical to Islam and thereby constitutes apostasy. Any modifications to Islamic doctrine as defined in the Koran and the Sunna is strictly prohibited, rendering impossible any moderate interpretations of Islam. In summary, the very foundations of the religion must be carefully followed without deviation and the word of Allah deemed timeless and immutable.

Coexistence with Non-Muslims Prohibited

Zawahiri and Bin Laden enjoin their Muslim brethren from befriending or engaging in peaceful coexistence with non-Muslims. Followers are reminded to abide by the precepts of the "Doctrine of Loyalty and Enmity" found in Koranic teachings and interpretations and to emulate the example of Mohammed who attacked and subjugated infidels. Any expression of friendship with non-believers indicates a lack of faith and insufficient love for Allah. It is impossible to befriend someone who opposes Allah. Fraternizing with infidels is evil, defiles the soul and jeopardizes the relationship with Allah. It is also forbidden to assist non-believers, fight for them or join them in any military endeavors. Muslims must establish their superiority to non-Muslims to engender the necessary hostility to effectively wage jihad, according to the interpretations of Islamic belief given by Zawahiri and Bin Laden.

Separation of Church & State Outlawed

These Al-Qaeda leaders state emphatically to fellow Muslims in their fatwas, or rulings on Islamic law, that no separation of church and state is possible under Islam. For example, they quote: "Whatever the subject of your disputes, the final decision rests in Allah alone" [42:10] and "It is not fitting for true believers -- men or women -- to take their choice in affairs if Allah and His Messenger have decreed otherwise" [33:36].

The concept here is that Islam is more than a religion; it is an all-encompassing way of life that governs all social, economic, political and personal matters. The concept of "leaving to Caesar what is Caesar's" is blasphemous in Islam. The concept of a nation state that presides over secular affairs contradicts the teachings of Islam and threatens the overriding exclusive loyalty of Muslims to the Umma, or community of Muslims. Zawahiri and Bin Laden caution against this form of apostasy and emphasize the Muslim obligation to impose their religion on all spheres of life.

Democracy Opposed

The translation of Zawahiri's extracts on the subject of sharia and democracy expose the fact that democracy is antithetical to Islam. These writings clearly state that Allah is the only legislator and that those who don't adhere to the sharia are infidels.

Democracy is not permitted in Islam as its very existence would make the state, its rulers and laws equivalent to Mohammed and his sharia, which is completely unacceptable to faithful Muslims. Ruling is the exclusive province of Allah and "infidels are those who set up equals with their Lord" [6:1]. Furthermore, the principles of democracy such as freedom of religion, civil rights, equality under the law, voting and justice run counter to Muslim doctrine. As Islam is viewed as the only true religion, religious freedom is apostasy punishable by death. Subjugation, conversion or death are the only choices for infidels and the injunction that "all men are created equal under the law" runs counter to the Koran-required jizya (tax on non-Muslims), the dhimmitude (the discriminatory Islamic system of governing non-Muslim and conquered populations), and accompanying social restrictions for non-believers.

In addition, the democratic concept of equality abrogates man's domination of women, abolishes sanctions for homosexuality and puts Muslims on an equal plane with non-believers, all of which violate Islamic beliefs. Similarly, the act of voting is strictly forbidden as it denotes acceptance of democracy. Further, justice for devout Muslims is defined as bringing someone to the righteousness of Islam. Oppression is the act of leaving non-Muslims in a state of unbelief and not employing jihad to bring them into Islam.

Jihad Embraced

The crowning glory of Zawahiri's translated treatises in The Al-Qaeda Reader, are his pronouncements on "jihad, martyrdom, and the killing of innocents." As proclaimed in Muslim theology, Islam is for the common good and it must be spread by the sword. Jihad is an obligation of Muslims and opposing acts of terrorism is equivalent to apostasy. Zawahiri explains that as the basic tenet of Islam is love for Allah, the highest form of demonstrating this love and the sure route to salvation is in the glory of jihad.

"You are obligated to fight, though you may hate it. For it may well be that you hate that which is good for you and love that which is evil for you. Allah knows [best]; you do not know" [2:216].

Martyrdom operations are obligatory against those who fight the Muslims, those who befriend the infidels and those who govern without sharia, even fellow Muslims. The death of a martyr is viewed as a victory for Islam and Muslim casualties are permissible if they ultimately benefit the religion and are necessary for defense.

The West Deliberately Misled

In the propaganda tracts and warnings to non-Muslims by the Al Qaeda leadership found in The Al-Qaeda Reader, non-believers are admonished for their foreign policy and for their perceived hostility toward Islam. The West is viewed as being at war with Islam rather than fighting to protect its cherished freedoms and way of life from attack. In their communications with the West, Zawahiri and Bin Laden offer open invitations to embrace Islam. They portray the religion as peaceful. Hostility to the West is blamed on U.S. support for Israel, the war in Iraq and U.S. support for oppressive regimes. Any mention of the obligation of Muslims to fight the infidels into submission and establish the caliphate under the sharia is avoided. Missives to the West exclude any references to offensive jihad, dhimmitude and the doctrine of Loyalty and Enmity which denounces peaceful co-existence with non-believers.

Thus, in this important collection of key Al Qaeda texts, Mr. Ibrahim has provided us with a glimpse of incendiary doctrine and convictions that clearly expose the reality of the enemy we are facing. It's high time to heed the messages in these disturbing documents and counter this politico-religious movement that is anything but peaceful. We must acknowledge that for increasing numbers of Islamists the word of Allah to subjugate women, stone homosexuals, dhimmitize non-Muslims and institute totalitarian rule under a barbaric code, holds more appeal than liberty and justice for all. We must understand that we are engaged in a serious global struggle for our very existence, fueled, not by a response to Western policies, but driven by Islamic religious fanaticism to establish a worldwide caliphate under sharia. The sooner the Western world realizes this reality, the safer we will all be.

"Supporting the Right Terrorists"
by Steve Feldman
July 17, 2007

Has President Bush lost his moral compass, or has he merely failed to read the fine print?

Monday the president pledged an additional $190 million in direct American aid as well as $80 million in military assistance and $228 million more in business assistance to bolster the leader of an organization that declares itself dedicated to "armed revolution," "eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence," and "opposing any political solution" to end the Middle East conflict.

While these violent and extremist assertions may sound like the rantings of a Hamas leader, they are in fact quoted directly from the constitution of the Fatah organization, the organization led by Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas.

Abbas' Fatah group is the largest faction of the Palestinian Authority and the PLO (which did not die with the passing of Yasser Arafat). This is whom President Bush wants to give hundreds of millions more of U.S. taxpayers' dollars to, to bolster?

This is whom President Bush wants to force our Israel allies and friends to sit at a table with and iron out a "peace agreement"? I would hate to see how Bush treats his enemies?

Palestinian-Arab leaders have admitted that most of the hundreds of millions of previously-donated American aid have been stolen by Abbas' cronies, such as his enforcer, Mahmoud Dahlan.

And now Bush wants to give them more. Talk about pouring more money down the sewer.

Fatah's goals -- which Abbas as its leader must no doubt embrace -- are every bit as violent, extreme and anti-Israel as Hamas' -- a group Bush readily chided in his speech. Yet Bush is clear to warn Hamas in his speech: "you must reject violence, and recognize Israel's right to exist" but offers no such admonition for the like-minded Fatah.

Hamas is the group the Palestinian-Arab people put into power in a free and fair election, and Hamas is the group the Palestinian-Arab people say they continue to support over Fatah in poll after poll.

But according to Bush, the refrain is:

· Hamas, bad.
· Fatah, good.
· Marginalize Hamas.
· Strengthen Fatah and Abbas, its leader.

Has Bus failed to read the Fatah constitution? Does he not see that instead of "the good guys" vs. "the bad guys" in the areas controlled by the Palestinian-Arabs it's more like "the bad guys" vs. "the bad guys?"

After all, neither Fatah nor Hamas respect human rights, and each have at their root the goal of destroying Israel either in stages or in one fell swoop. The only difference between them is a simple one: Hamas is a fundamentalist terrorist group motivated by the Koran's intolerance of infidels, while Fatah has no such religious dogma and instead bases its agenda on a non-theological desire to eradicate Zionism and replace Israel with a Palestinian state.

The violence which characterizes both groups' aims (as laid out in the Hamas charter and Fatah constitution) are two sides of the same coin. In fact, Fatah's Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade has claimed responsibility for more terrorist attacks against Israelis since 2000 than have Hamas.

So why the affection by Bush, the West and the Israeli leaders for Fatah and its chief, Abbas, and the portrayal of them as "moderates?"

It is a mystery, but it could be a case of the secular humanists of the world having an affinity for Fatah's secular de-humanists.

A FEW EXCERPTS OF THE FATAH CONSTITUTION (http://www.fateh.net/e_public/constitution.htm) should clearly dispel any notion that Abbas and his thugs are moderates:

  • "This constitution revolves around the following principles: The armed revolution we are waging ... ."

  • "Article (3) The Palestinian Revolution plays a leading role in liberating Palestine."

  • "Article (4) The Palestinian struggle is part and parcel of the world-wide struggle against Zionism, colonialism and international imperialism."

  • "Article (9) Liberating Palestine and protecting its holy places is an Arab, religious and human obligation."

Under its "goals" are listed the following:

  • "Article (12) Complete liberation of Palestine, and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence."

Under "method":

  • "Article (17) Armed public revolution is the inevitable method to liberating Palestine."

  • "Article (19) Armed struggle is a strategy and not a tactic, and the Palestinian Arab People's armed revolution is a decisive factor in the liberation fight and in uprooting the Zionist existence, and this struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished and Palestine is completely liberated."

  • "Article (20) Achieving mutual understanding with all the national forces participating in the armed struggle to attain the national unity."

  • "Article (22) Opposing any political solution offered as an alternative to demolishing the Zionist occupation in Palestine, as well as any project intended to liquidate the Palestinian case or impose any international mandate on its people."

In the Fatah constitution's "Chapter Two" under "Organization Rules and Principles" are the following:

  • "In its organisational work, the Movement depends on the following rules and principles:

  • First: Commitment. This means:

  • "Article (28) a. Firm belief in the case and the Movement's objectives and utter readiness to sacrifice for its sake till victory."


"He must take the following oath: [to become a member]: "(By Allah, the almighty and by my honour and beliefs I swear to remain faithful to Palestine, and to spare no effort to liberate it; I swear not to disclose any of the Movement's (FATEH) secrets and affairs; this is a free oath, to which God bears witness.)"

This is not the credo of a "moderate" group. The world and especially the Israelis have seen just how far the Fatah members are willing to take their "commitment" to their cause and their "utter readiness" to "sacrifice for its sake till victory." Hundreds were murdered and thousands more maimed and scarred in the last six years alone as proof.

This is the organization Mahmoud Abbas leads. Prior to that, he was Yasser Arafat's right-hand man and Fatah financier for 40 years.

As you can now see, the goals of Fatah and its leader Abbas are no different -- and no more moderate -- than Hamas.

President Bush is wrong to offer more American financial aid to Fatah, as well as military training and any weapons transfers, and the Israelis would be wise to do the same. Any support -- material, moral or otherwise -- will merely enable a ruthless gang of murderers -- whether they be called Hamas or Fatah -- to continue to strive to attain its goal: killing Israelis.

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, July 30, 2007.

Palestinian boys gather in front of the gate at the Rafah Crossing during a protest against the closure of the border in the southern Gaza strip July 11, 2007. Since Hamas's takeover, Gaza's main border crossings have largely been closed, including the Rafah crossing with Egypt, drawing criticism from some aid groups. (Reuters/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa, Gaza)

This photo is a good example of how a decontextualized image can wreak havoc on reality.

The photo shows Gaza Arabs demonstrating at the gate of the Karni crossing. The gates are closed. The demonstrators are locked in. The casual observer may easily think that Israel closed the gates -- logical, since Israel is in control of the crossing and has often closed the gates for security reasons.

But the reality is that Hamas has closed the gates, on its side. Israel has kept the crossing open despite rocket attacks. Hamas has prevented food from entering from Israel, despite Israel's supply of fruits and vegetables which hamas has rejected and prevented from entering. Hamas is keeping the Gaza Arabs locked in for political and PR purposes.

The photo makes Israel look bad, even as Israel has offered shelter to fleeing Gaza Arabs. The fact that the demonstrators are demonstrating at the gates, demonstrating against the gates' being locked, and demanding that they be allowed to enter Israel....all condemn Hamas....but you would never know that from the photo and its caption. A more accurate title would be:  Gaza: Hamas imprisons their own

Next is another way in which reality is distorted. Read the emails from my various contacts in Israel and the EU about the recent accusation that Israel is cutting off Bethlehem's water.

Suddenly, one day, the refugee camp near Bethlehem has no water, so a resident there tells everyone he can, including contacts abroad via email, that Israel has cut off the water. The email recipients quickly spread the word, world-wide, that Israel is torturing the poor Palestinans by cutting off their water in 100-degree heat.

A quick review of the situation demostrates that Israel did not do this, and in fact could not do this because the water supply is controled by the palestinian Authority; and it is more likely that Arab terror groups cut off the water, or that Arabs stole the water and damaged the pipes which led to the water being cut off for repairs....repairs that UNRWA would need to make if UNRWA were aware that water had been cut off...which it is not.

But none of that matters to the people who made the accusation, nor to those who received it and then published it world-wide. They acknowledge the error but keep on insisting to the recipients of their emails that Israel is to blame ('it must have been the Israeli tanks').

Below is the exchange on the "Water wars" -- on the water shortage in Bethlehem.

David ML

Joanne Moston, a member of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) wrote:

I had a text message from my friend in Deheisheh camp, Bethlehem, today, and heard that the water in the camp has been turned off now....by Israel....for 10 days. There is NO WATER IN THE CAMP! I don't know about elsewhere in the West Bank, but for sure other places will be affected . Is there anything that we can do from here? I have told him to buy a tanker load, which costs 300 NIS which he hasn't got, (£37.50) so I have arranged a loan from a money changer for him to order 2 tankers, so that his family have water, and there will be enough to share with is neighbours. The temperature has been over 40 C for the past week or so. Surely this is a breach of human rights, apart from the fact that the Palestinians have to pay 4 times as much as the Israelis for water, and it is their own water, from under the West Bank that they are paying for. Am I angry?? YES I AM!! Perhaps I should send this to our new envoy for the Middle East!?


Following discussion with many authorities, we were able to reply to her

Following the claim that water has been 'cut off', a spokesman for the Co-coordinator of Civilian Activities in the Territories had the following to say :

a) Israel -- i.e. the Coordinator in the Territories, is not aware and does not know of any suspension in the water supply to Dehaisha.

b) The claim that water supply has been cut has been checked with both the Palestinian Authority and with UNWRA. Neither are cognisant of any problem.

c) Dehaisha and the rest of Bethlehem is located in Area 'A' in which the Palestinian Authority is totally responsible for all civilian matters. including the regularity of water supply.

d) Israel's responsibility to supply water stops at the municipal boundary.

e) Water supply and distribution of water within Bethlehem including Dahaisha [as well as in the other Palestinian towns located in Area A] is not in Israel hands.

f) Under the Interim Agreement on Self Government, Israel is responsible for supplying a 4% increase in the amount supplied last year. In reality, Israel has supplied 20% in excess of last years supply

g) There is a very high probability that the infrastructure in Bethlehem and Dehaisha is defective or has been tampered with. Experience in Hebron has shown that water losses amount to 40% of the amount supplied -- due to leakage resulting from a lack of infrastructural maintenance and more significantly by water theft. Holes are made in the supply pipes and water is drained off by the inhabitants in order to avoid paying for the water consumed.

h) Water wells around Bethlehem have been approved and supply pipes have been laid.

i) There was indeed a cut in the water supply for a couple of days to a small Palestinian settlement near Nablus (Shehem). This was caused by deep-ploughing which punctured the underground supply line and the (Arab) farmer responsible covered up the damage -- leaving the Israel Water Authority to discover where the leak was -- which took time.

j) Israel also supplies water to Gaza well in excess of anything they are entitled. Gaza is served by wells in the Gaza aquifer and this has been over exploited by the Gazans

k) There has been wildcat drilling of the order of 100's of illegal wells.

l) In contrast to Israel -- the Palestinians DO NOT RECYCLE THEIR WASTE WATER. The Israel settlements in the Gaza strip which Israel vacated 2 years ago already, each had a water recycling plant which was left in good order. Not a single plant is in operation since Israel's withdrawal

m) Waste water and sewerage is left untreated within the West Bank and Gaza and is allowed to percolate into the ground causing pollution to the ground water.

We could also reply to a Dr John Jenning (johnfj60@hotmail.com), also from PSC, as follows:

A spokesman for the area concerned stated that "there was stoppage of water supplies for about 2 days but he pointed out that beyond the municipal boundaries, Israel is not responsible for water supply." He mentioned "that the infrastructure was being damaged from within the municipal boundaries."

As a consequence of this letter, the lady in question acknowledged to her colleagues (not directly to us):

To all concerned re WATER in Deheisheh Camp.

I have had a long conversation with a friend in Deheisheh Camp, to find out the exact situation so that I can pass it to anyone who has shown concern about this problem.

1. I know I said the water was turned off by 'Israel' and that is how the people there see it, because the water is controlled by Israel, and it is never enough, and is often cut duing the summer because it's hot, and this year during the past few weeks there has been a heatwave. However, the water has been cut off for 16 days in total, and IT CAME ON AT 1AM THIS MORNING! Because it had been on for 3 days some of the inhabitants of the first 2 rows in the camp, had some water, so it did go quickly to the 3rd and other rows. The water was turned off by the Bethlehem Municipality, as I said previously, in order to ration it. Yes, there are problems with the infrastructure, because funds have been cut to Palestine, because they voted for the 'wrong people.'!!! If the water supplied by Israel is not enough, so it has to be rationed / or cut off, it would obviously be seen to be done by Israel as they are in control of it....although the municipality had their hand on the tap!

2. UNWRA did know about the lack of water in the camp, though they seem to be denying it.

3. It is very likely that the pipes are damaged as the road has often been severely damaged by tanks. Apparently there has been a recent problem with supply in parts of Bethlehem due to structural damage. This happend here in Britain...millions of gallons lost due to leaks, but one section of our population does not have their water turned off for 16 days.

I am making no apology for publicising my concern about the water cuts. It happens every year in summer, and is considered a war crime for an occupying force to deprive anyone of water, though is is 'indirectly' in this case.

My concerns are purely humanitarian. I don't want people to suffer by deprivation of everyones right to water, food and shelter. If I can do anything to help those people, I will.

Now they have water....until the next time, in 2 or 3 wks, when it goes off again. I have been buying water in tankers for some years now, but this year it was a much worse situation.

Thank you to all those who have sent donations so that I could authorise a supply in tankers. Every penny sent, will be used for water bills, this time, and any over will be kept for next time this emergency occurs.

Praying for Peace with Justice,

SO the bottom line is:

1) Israel has not cut water off

2) Under Oslo, Israel has supplied over and above the amounts required

3) It is official that the Palestinians are asked to pay the same as Israelis for their water.

4) Israel is responsible to deliver water to the entrance to towns / cities. From that point on, the mayor must take control. (In past, there have been incidents of Palestinian groups stealing / diverting supplies). FACT -- in Hebron alone 40% of the water gets "lost"

5) KEY POINT!!! UNRWA is responsible for distributing water in camps like Dehaishe. And UNRWA would not let a situation go on for 10 days, and definitely not during a heat wave. There have been no complaints from UNRWA!!!!

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Simon McIlwaine, July 30, 2007.

Anglican Friends of Israel is becoming established as a voice for Israel amongst those who want more balanced debate about the Middle East in the UK. AFI representatives have been interviewed on UK and Israeli radio, had letters published in the national and Church press, and have successfully complained to the BBC about unbalanced and unfair reporting of the Middle East. We are about to publish a booklet on the 6 Day War.

As a next step, we hope to facilitate those of you who want to become more active in promoting understand of Israel and opposing efforts to isolate and discredit her. In order to do this, we'd like to send area updates of meetings and events in which you could participate by speaking, voting, or simply turning up! For instance, public meetings about the academic boycott of Israel are to be held throughout the country in the autumn, at which you could express your views on the boycott.

At present, we have to send everyone on the mailing list information about every event, which wastes both your time and inbox space, so we'd like to draw up regional mailing lists. Then we can alert you to local events as we learn of them.

If you don't want to get regional updates, you don't have to -- don't reply to this email.

But if you would like them, please tell our Membership Director, Frances Waddams, which county you live in, and your two nearest large towns or cities. In this way, we can notify you of events in your area only. Of course, if you want to receive more than one area update, then you can. Just tell us.

Please reply to Frances Waddams, Membership Director AFI at rsposse@ntlworld.com

Please visit our website at: www.anglicansforisrael.com

Contact Simon McIlwaine at Simon.McIlwaine@ormerods.co.uk

To Go To Top

Posted by Daily Alert, July 30, 2007.

This article was written by CAM SIMPSON in Jerusalem and NEIL KING JR. in Washington and it appeared today in the Wall Street Journal. Write to Cam Simpson at cam.simpson@wsj.com and Neil King Jr. at neil.king@wsj.com


The Find: Palestinian group Hamas seized rival Fatah's intelligence-and-military infrastructure, which was built with U.S. help.
What's at Stake: Secrets, expertise and technology are now in the hands of a group the U.S. calls a terrorist organization.
The Damage: Though the ultimate impact is difficult to determine, Hamas leaders say they will make some details public and share others with Arab governments.

When the Islamist group Hamas conquered the Gaza Strip in June it seized an intelligence-and-military infrastructure created with U.S. help by the security chiefs of the Palestinian territory's former ruler.

According to current and former Israeli intelligence officials, former U.S. intelligence personnel and Palestinian officials, Hamas has increased its inventory of arms since the takeover of Gaza and picked up technical expertise -- such as espionage techniques -- that could assist the group in its fight against Israel or Washington's Palestinian allies, the Fatah movement founded by Yasser Arafat.

Hamas leaders say they acquired thousands of paper files, computer records, videos, photographs and audio recordings containing valuable and potentially embarrassing intelligence information gathered by Fatah. For more than a decade, Fatah operated a vast intelligence network in Gaza established under the tutelage of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Hamas leaders are expected as early as tomorrow to go public with some of the documents and the secrets they hold.

The exact nature of the threat posed by the intelligence grab in Gaza -- including any damage to U.S. intelligence operations in the Palestinian territories and the broader Middle East -- is difficult to ascertain. U.S. and Israeli officials generally tried to play down any losses, saying any intelligence damage is likely minimal.

But a number of former U.S. intelligence officials, including some who have worked closely with the Palestinians, said there was ample reason to worry that Hamas has acquired access to important spying technology as well as intelligence information that could be helpful to Hamas in countering Israeli and U.S. efforts against the group.

"People are worried, and reasonably so, about what kind of intelligence losses we may have suffered," said one former U.S. intelligence official with extensive experience in Gaza.

A U.S. government official said he doubted serious secrets were compromised in the Gaza takeover. Other officials said they had no reason to believe that U.S. spying operations elsewhere in the Arab world had been compromised.

Close ties between Hamas and the governments of Iran and Syria also mean that intelligence-and-spying techniques could be shared with the main Middle East rivals of the Bush administration. As the White House prepares to lead an international effort to bolster Fatah's security apparatus in the West Bank, the losses in Gaza stand as an example of how efforts to help Fatah can backfire.

The compromised intelligence Hamas says it now has ranges widely. The group alleges it has videos used in a sexual-blackmail operation run by Washington's allies inside Fatah's security apparatus. But the group also says it has uncovered detailed evidence of Fatah-controlled spying operations carried out in Arab and Muslim countries for the benefit of the U.S. and other foreign governments. Hamas also alleges that Fatah intelligence operatives cooperated with Israeli intelligence officials to target Islamist leaders for assassination.

"What we have is good enough for us to completely reveal the practices [of Fatah-controlled security services], both locally and throughout the region," said Khalil al Hayya, a senior Hamas official in Gaza, who has assumed a leading role on the intelligence issue for the Islamist group.

Michael Scheuer, a former top CIA counterterrorism analyst who left the agency in 2004, said the U.S. had provided the Fatah-controlled Palestinian Authority with "substantial help" in training as well as computers, other equipment and analytical tools. Other former intelligence officials confirmed that the U.S. gave Fatah-controlled services sophisticated intelligence-gathering equipment, including eavesdropping technology, though these officials wouldn't provide more precise details about the technology.

This kind of technology, along with the knowledge it yields, is broadly known in intelligence circles as "Sigint," which is shorthand for "signals intelligence." It can include eavesdropping equipment, devices used for intercepting radio, microwave and telephone communications and telemetry technology that allows the user to pinpoint the location of someone holding a communication device, such as a cellphone.

"The United States invested a lot of effort in setting up this system in Gaza -- construction, equipment, training... filings, the logistics, the transportation. It was a big operation, and it's now in the hands of the other side," said Efraim Halevy, who formerly headed both the Mossad, which is Israel's foreign-intelligence agency, and Israel's National Security Council. Mr. Halevy said, however, that he didn't want to overemphasize the value of Hamas's potential intelligence gains.

Avi Dichter, Israel's public-security minister and the former head of Shin Bet, the domestic intelligence-and-counterterrorism agency, also said he didn't want to overemphasize the potential benefits to Hamas. But he confirmed that the Islamist group seized Sigint technology and expertise during its Gaza sweep. He declined to provide specifics, but said it had been provided by the Americans, the British and the French.

Mr. Dichter, who left the Shin Bet when his five-year term as its chief ended in 2005, also said the potential damage goes beyond Hamas's ability to turn the technology against its enemies. Now, he said, the militants could gain an understanding of how such technology is used against them, allowing them to adopt more sophisticated counter measures.

"It's not only the tools. It's also the philosophy that's behind them," he said.

Hamas leaders are being vague about the equipment and technological know-how they captured. Mr. Hayya said some important former Fatah operatives in Gaza, all of whom were granted amnesty after Hamas took over, were now cooperating with the group on intelligence matters.

Easier to assess is the threat posed by the military hardware Hamas picked up after the takeover. The militant group seized an arsenal of arms and munitions captured from U.S.-backed security forces loyal to Fatah and its leader, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

Mr. Dichter said Hamas gained roughly the same number of weapons during a few days that it would have taken the group nearly a year to amass from smuggling operations.

Hamas says it is using the armaments to build a popular army in Gaza. Israeli intelligence and security officials estimate the Islamist group has some 13,000 armed men in Gaza.

As for Fatah's secrets, Hamas leaders say they grabbed intelligence stashes from three locations: the headquarters in Gaza City of the Preventive Security Force; the Palestinian Authority intelligence headquarters, which were housed in a Gaza City office known as "Il Safina," or "the ship"; and a nearby satellite-intelligence office dubbed, "Il Mashtal," or "the nursery."

As Hamas fighters moved in during their June sweep across Gaza, Fatah officials burned some papers and stripped data from computers. But the Hamas conquest was so quick that significant caches remained for the taking, according to the militant group.

All three sites were long under the sway of Fatah strongman Mohammed Dahlan, who first became an important CIA ally in Gaza in 1996. At the time, then-CIA director George Tenet began working openly with Mr. Dahlan and other Palestinian officials to build up security services aimed at combating the rise of Hamas and like-minded extremist groups that rejected the Oslo peace accords.

Through a spokesman, Mr. Tenet declined to comment on the CIA-Fatah cooperation, his relationship with Mr. Dahlan or Hamas's gains. Mr. Dahlan on Thursday formally resigned his Palestinian Authority post. Mr. Dahlan hasn't commented publicly since resigning and he couldn't be located for comment. Associates in the West Bank said he was abroad.

Mr. Hayya, the senior Hamas leader, said hundreds of the group's Hamas's operatives have been culling through and analyzing the intelligence troves since their seizure, with specialists in security, forensic accounting and administration conducting detailed assessments. Significant portions of these assessments are close to completion, Mr. Hayya said.

Some of the most potentially explosive claims from Hamas center on the alleged activities beyond the Gaza Strip of Palestinian agents loyal to Fatah. Mr. Hayya alleged the CIA utilized Palestinian agents for covert intelligence operations in other Middle Eastern countries. Hamas, he said, now possesses a roadmap detailing the names and actions of "those men whom thought were going to continue to be their hand across the region."

Some former U.S. intelligence officials who worked closely with the Palestinian Authority confirmed that such overseas spying arrangements beyond Gaza existed with the Palestinians in the past and said they likely continued, bolstering the credibility of Hamas's claims.

Whitley Bruner, a longtime CIA officer in the Middle East, recalled that "some of our first really good information on [Osama] bin Laden in Sudan" in the early 1990s "came from Palestinian sources." Before leaving the agency in 1997, Mr. Bruner participated in many of the first cooperative sessions organized by Mr. Tenet between the CIA and the Palestinians.

"It's not unlikely that continued to do things for the U.S. well beyond the territories," Mr. Bruner said. "Palestinians are embedded all over the place, so they have access to things that the U.S. doesn't."

Others are more circumspect. Bruce Reidel, who worked for nearly 30 years as a U.S. Middle East specialist, both as a CIA intelligence officer and as an adviser to Presidents Clinton and Bush, said there is sure to be "quite a treasure trove of materials that would document relationship with the CIA." Mr. Reidel said during his time in government, which ended in 2005, "the Palestinians were always trying to prove that they had unique access and information," but he said he was skeptical of Hamas's claims that such operations ventured far beyond Gaza and the West Bank.

Mr. Hayya alleges that while many officials from Arab and Muslim nations knew Mr. Dahlan was cooperating with U.S. intelligence agencies inside the Palestinian territories, many of those same leaders "are going to be amazed and surprised when they discover had actually worked against them for the Americans." He wouldn't directly answer a question about which nations were allegedly being spied on, but he said Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates had the most to be concerned about from potential disclosures.

Jabril Rajoub, a Fatah rival to Mr. Dahlan who was long his West Bank counterpart and most recently served as Mr. Abbas's national security adviser, said he was aware of the alleged outlines of these operations, though he said he was unaware of their details. He called the Gaza-based network a "for-hire" intelligence operation, adding that it was active around the Middle East and provided information to the Americans, the British and others.

Mr. Hayya also said there is a substantial amount of evidence detailing cooperation between Fatah and Israel. There is evidence several militant leaders were targeted as a result of such cooperation, he alleged. This includes circumstantial evidence that he was personally targeted in an Israeli assassination attempt after he was fingered by Fatah intelligence officers as a top security threat.

After taking over Gaza, Mr. Hayya said Hamas recovered notes from a meeting of senior Palestinian Authority intelligence officials in which they discussed Mr. Hayya's value to the Islamist group. On May 20, less than a week after the meeting, an Israeli missile was fired into his home, killing eight people. Mr. Hayya was en route at the time, but says the strike came about five minutes after his 35-year-old cousin, Ibrahim, entered the home. The Hamas leader said he and his cousin look very similar.

"They thought it was me," he said.

A spokeswoman for the Shin Bet declined to comment.

The Daily Alert is sponsored by Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and prepared by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). To subscribe to their free daily alerts, send an email to daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, July 29, 2007.

This was written by Hana Levi Julian and it appeared in Arutz-Sheva

And our inmates continue on the path to self destruction, just listen to one of them, who should have been out on his ears, but is now deputy prime minister.

Sad, Bad, Mad mad world....!

(IsraelNN.com) Deputy Prime Minister Chaim Ramon urged the government Friday to join Fatah PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas in his drive to move immediately to final status talks.

"I believe right now we have a partner. I don't know for how long, so we must move quickly," said Ramon in an interview on Voice of Israel government radio. The former Justice Minister is one of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's closest allies in the cabinet.

Abbas has raised the issue of final status talks in every one of his meetings with Olmert over the past year, but the Prime Minister has side-stepped the issue.

"We have been very clear that we are not willing to discuss at this stage the three core issues of borders, refugees and Jerusalem," said Miri Eisen, spokesperson for the Prime Minister last week.

Now his Number Two is bluntly saying there is no choice but to do precisely that -- and fast. He also recommended the deployment of NATO forces as IDF troops are withdrawn from each area.

Ramon's vision of the final agreement, he said, includes withdrawal from most of Judea and Samaria. "In my eyes, the occupation of the territories threatens our very existence, our legitimacy and our international standing," he said.

The deputy prime minister maintained that Abbas and his Prime Minister/Finance Minister Salam Fayyad, are the first PA leaders with whom Israel can talk and come to a bilateral agreement.

He stopped short of giving specific details of how much land he would hand over to the PA, however.

Abbas reiterated this week that he is ready and willing to finalize a final status agreement by next fall.

Contact Fred Reifenberg at freify@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Barry Rubin, July 29, 2007.

News item: The Iranian establishment daily Kayhan, July 26, 2007, criticized officials there for allowing the sale of the new Harry Potter book, claiming the series is a Zionist project in order to disrupt the minds of young people.

From the text:
"The main thing is to try and convince as many people as possible that You-Know-Who came back, Harry....[Minister of Magic Cornelius Fudge] is absolutely refusing to believe it's happened."
"But why?" said Harry desperately. "Why's he being so stupid?"...
"Because accepting that Voldemort's back would mean trouble...."
"It's hard to convince people he's back, especially as they really don't want to believe it in the first place."
--Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, pp. 93-94.

By Barry Rubin

Harry Potter was angry. He had been used to all the abuse and criticism, the danger and adventure, the fear that Lord Voldemort would return and turn the world into a living hell for wizard and Muggle alike. But why were people who should have defended their civilization pretending that nothing was happening or even becoming apologists for the other side?

There it was, the lead story in the Daily Prophet newspaper:
"Minister Fudge Urges Engagement; Accuses Harry Potter of Voldemortphobia"

"What's going on here," Harry said angrily. "I personally saw Voldemort gathering his followers but when I read the Daily Prophet it would seem there is no real threat. And now they want to negotiate with Voldemort?"

"That's not all," Hermione explained. "The newspaper is trying to make you sound deluded for exposing the truth."

"Yes," Ron added, "and there are a lot of people now who favor giving aid to Voldemort in order -- they claim--to moderate him."

Certainly, the MSMM (Mainstream Magical Media), had long been blind to the return of Voldemort and his Death Eater movement. The Order of the Phoenix, the group formed to fight Voldemort, had a lot of blogs but the followers of You-Know-Who seemed to control all too many of the biggest institutions. Even on the Internet, Draco Malfoy had even developed one of the most popular blogs of all, "The Daily Draco" and some of the blander naïf's from one of Hogwarts' houses had created the "Hufflepuff Post."

Harry just didn't understand. How could anyone not see the terrible things going on around the world: the suicide bombing attacks; the organized incitement of hatred, the attempt by an extremist movement to take over and enslave millions of people? Why were they constantly attacking the victims and ridiculing those trying to expose these dangers, distorting their words and slandering their characters?

Even Hogwarts could no longer be counted on to fight the threat. The school had been taken over by teachers who brainwashed students into thinking that the Voldemort movement was all the fault of Dumbledore and others trying to fight it. The Death Eaters' deeds were simply being exaggerated, said the professors. They had grievances, after all, and if only these were addressed and understood, there wouldn't be any conflict. And hadn't all wizards committed crimes in the past? Let him who was without sin cast the first spell. This was certainly the line taken by the Magical Events Studies Association, the organization of those who held such views, producing studies like, "Dementors: Legitimate Resistance As A Response to Oppression."

Nothing could be taken for granted. No matter what the other side did there was always some excuse made to rationalize it. With Voldemort working to develop extreme new magical weapons and threatening to wipe the Muggles off the face of the earth, there were those who explained that his statements were being taken out of context. He was merely expressing the hope that they would come to see the error of their ways and peacefully commit suicide.

Moreover, despite Dumbledore's efforts to block aid or negotiations with Voldemort, delegations were constantly traveling to his headquarters, posing with him in photo opportunities. He was really quite nice in person, visitors explained. And he really does want peace. After all, he said so and why would Lord Voldemort tell a lie?

But of course, as popular as the Harry Potter series has been it is still just a set of novels about a fantasy situation. Thank goodness nothing like this could happen in the real world.

Barry Rubin is Director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Interdisciplinary Center university. His latest book, The Truth about Syria was published by Palgrave-Macmillan in May 2007. Prof. Rubins columns can be read online at: http://gloria.idc.ac.il/articles/archives/oldindex.html.

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, July 29, 2007.

If there was ever any reason to bring Israel's current Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to trial, it is for what he and former Prime Minister Arik Sharon did by abandoning 10,000 Jewish men, women and children living in Gush Katif/Gaza (plus 4 North Samarian communities)...and the unconscionable number of Israelis who will be killed or maimed by their action in the expected coming war. Clearly, employing Pre-Emptive Judgement is the wise course, given that Olmert and his confederates wish to repeat Gaza as soon as possible -- by abandoning Judea and Samaria.

A constant flow of munitions have been smuggled into the hands of first Fatah and now Hamas. We all knew that Egypt, with malice aforethought, refused to close its Sinai smuggling borders with Gaza and, in fact, aided the smuggling with no objection from Olmert. They turned a blind eye to the tunnels, some of which were found to start in Egyptian army camps.

Now Olmert, his Kadima crowd and Israel's new President Shimon Peres declare they plan to repeat the Gaza trap by surrendering Judea and Samaria, putting all of Israel's population centers within easy range of Muslim Rockets and Katyusha Missiles from Gaza, South Lebanon and (after we surrender) from the Muslims within Israel's heartland of Judea and Samaria.

As the tonnage of explosives, missiles and the trained men from all the terrorist training camps in the Middle East, Africa and Al Qaeda flowed in, Olmert refused to allow the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) to stop this smuggling, even to the point of holding the IDF back from a forceful re-entry to stop the daily barrages of Kassam Rockets which are hitting the town of Sderot and the city of Ashkelon. For this alone Olmert should be tried and imprisoned.

But, keep in mind that Olmert is a weak and twisty man, easily manipulated by the Bush regime for the purpose of the transfer of Land G-d gave to the Israelites in perpetuity. Remember that Bush intends to leave as a legacy the fiction that he brought peace to the Middle East.

On June 25, 2007 Barbara Opall-Rome wrote a hair-raising article in the prestigious U.S. Defense News. Her main, introductory theme was a pledge by President Bush to increase military aid to Israel due to the increased capability of Hamas. But, the U.S. actually plans to balance the deal to sell Saudi Arabia $20 billion worth of America's best armaments and weapons' systems. What Ms. Rome reported about the arms that Hamas has and will get is perhaps the most disturbing. Therefore, I will start with the end of her report. (1)

Ms. Rome tells us that the Hamas take-over of the Gaza Strip creates a veritable arms bazaar as smugglers from the Sinai easily flow through the Egyptian lines. Olmert knows all this and couldn't care less if his restraint of the IDF is any indication.

Ms. Rome quotes Israel's Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center March report on security data which estimates that Hamas has 16,000 rifles, 40 tons of explosives, 1,800 anti-tank missiles, second-generation night vision gear, 50 rockets, hundreds of RPGs (Rocket Propelled Grenades) and 20 anti-aircraft missiles.

(Note! Keep in mind that this would be considered a conservative estimate -- as of June 25th. Given Israel's low estimate of what they thought Hezb'Allah had accumulated in Lebanon of Katyusha Missiles, in addition to Sharon and Olmert ignoring six years of the Hezb'Allah tunneling and bunker building in Lebanon and now in Gaza, I would guess that Hezb'Allah has at least double what Hamas has accumulated.)

I would also add that we lost those American-supplied munitions to Abu Mazen's Fatah before Hamas easily (too easily) conquered them and confiscated the tonnage of rifles, ammunition, mortars, shoulder-fired missiles and all the rolling stock, namely trucks and other vehicles -- some possibly armored.

There is every indication that, with Abu Mazen's approval, the attacks against Fatah by Hamas were allowed to proceed with no real defense by the superior forces of Fatah. Apparently the intention was to further arm Hamas (who created Hamastan in Gaza). Later Abu Mazen and Hamas would reconcile with a combined army of considerable force. In the interim, America and other donor countries would re-arm Fatah with new weapons under the guise that Fatah (supposedly no longer connected to Hamas) was "moderate" and worthy of being a "peaceful state" in Judea and Samaria alongside Israel.

I suppose this would be James Baker's idea of driving the 250,000 Jewish men, women and children out of Judea and Samaria with Hamas and Fatah re-unified, making up a Southern Front with Hamas in Gaza. Hezb'Allah has rearmed and is now a powerful Northern Front. Fatah alone (with several other PLO Terror organizations) in Judea and Samaria would be the "Internal" Front (or Fifth Column) -- coming from the 7 cities deeded to them by Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres in the Oslo subversion.

Ms. Opall-Rome goes on to report that Hamas, in addition to illicit imports, has started its own indigenous manufacture of rockets, mortars and, no doubt, IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices) now being exported into Iraq by Iran to kill American and Allied soldiers.

"More alarming" Rome says, "is Hamas' ability to produce anti-tank missiles, capable of penetrating 200 millimeters of steel from ranges of 250 meters. (That means it can go through the 'glacis' -- front of a tank's heavy armor.) This is based on the Russian PG-2" -- with Putin's assistance.

All of the above is the doing of Sharon, Olmert, Peres and Livni in their casual intent to turn Gaza over to the Muslims for what all experts knew and said would become a super Global Terror base. Have you heard any apology from these incompetents for putting Sderot, Ashkelon and other towns under rocket fire? Did anyone "fall on their sword" for these extreme actions of poor judgement causing casualties? No, except for Chief of Staff Gen. Halutz. He retired. The rest are still in power, Olmert in the Prime Ministry, with Ehud Barak in the Defense Ministry, Tzipi Livni Foreign Ministry and now Shimon Peres in the President's house.

As for the Bush gesture to increase military aid to Israel, that is all well and good, except the U.S. Intelligence knows a war is coming before Israel can really get the level of munitions to effectively stop Hamas who say they plan to kill a lot of Israelis. Besides it is a false gesture to silence opposition from Israel and the American Congress over the $20 Billion sale of advanced weaponry to Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf oil states.

In an article I wrote on July 25th, entitled "Planning to Lose A War?", I opined that Olmert and his Leftist conspirators believe that allowing Hamas/Fatah to defeat Israeli forces will effectively transfer Judea and Samaria into the hands of Palestinians. The same plan would be used to allow Syria to overrun the Golan, thereby, transferring the Golan Heights without negotiations and interference by the citizens of Israel. Some would call that treason and a hanging offense, especially for the casualties it will cause.

Perhaps you will recall the same sort of double cross when then President Bill Clinton promised then Prime Minister Ehud Barak $800 million if he abandoned the Israeli security zone in South Lebanon. Barak ordered his infamous midnight run, thereby leaving the vacuum for Hezb'Allah and the July 2006 Second Lebanon War where 4,000 Katyusha missiles were launched against the Israeli civilians in the North of Israel.

Clinton never fulfilled his part of this Faustian bargain. No $800 million was forthcoming, although that is the same amount Bush is offering Olmert to cut-and-run. Barak betrayed Israel's Lebanese allies and the Israeli people for the promise of cash which Israel never received. Now, as re-appointed Defense Minister by Olmert, all Barak has to do is cripple Israel's defenses and insure the transfer of Judea, Samaria and the Golan Heights into the hands of the Arabs with, of course, under the table guarantees by Bush and Baker.

Keep an eye on that $800 million because so far it's been sold twice and no telling how many more times it will be re-sold.

As a significant aside, Bush wishes to push through a $20 Billion Dollar arms package to Saudi Arabia. Israel is being bribed with approximately an $800 million increase per year in military aid to keep its mouth shut and no derailing of the Saudi deal. What is NOT being said is that Saudi Arabia, with its already vast American-supplied weapons' stock, will one day be overthrown by the Muslim Jihadists such as the Muslim Brotherhood who will then control the most fearsome weapons at their disposal, plus control over the Saudi oil fields.

Similarly, that happened when Jimmy Carter assisted the Ayatollah Khomeini to leave exile in France and return to take over Iran. Some of America's most advanced weapons' systems fell into Khomeini's hands and from there they went to the then Soviet Union.

The U.S. lost the advanced F-14 Tomcat which reappeared in Soviet inventory as the MIG30. America also lost the Phoenix missile system and that too went to the Soviets. It's just a matter of time before both the Saudis and Egypt fall to the Muslim Brotherhood and both have gigantic inventories of America's most advanced weapons' technology and missile systems.

If you look at a map of the Middle East, the linkage of a nuclear Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan (with the Arab Palestinians in the middle) moving south to Egypt, Libya, Sudan, Algeria... you would have a deadly necklace of killer Muslim states.

Now, do you really think that, today's President Bush will forward the promised money to build up Israel so she can have weapons' superiority or even parity with her hostile neighboring countries? The bribe wasn't really necessary because Olmert and Kadima were ready to throw up their hands in surrender -- for nothing in return.

Therefore, it is time for PRE-EMPTIVE JUDGEMENT before Judea and Samaria are surrendered by a coalition of Israel's corrupt leaders working with foreign governments to re-partition Israel and try to appease the Arabs. This then will be the legacy of the Bush family, the current Israeli government and the Israeli Left.


1. "Bush Pledges Hike in Military Aid to Israel: Arms Industry in Gaza Sparks Alarm" by Barbara Opall-Rome June 25, 2007

2. "U.S. Set to Offer Huge Arms Deal to Saudi Arabia: $20 Billion Gulf Package -- Doubt about Kingdom's Role in Iraq May be a Hurdle in Congress" by David S. Cloud New York Times July 28, 2007

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, July 29, 2007.

Haim Ramon -- not known for his ability to think -- has spoken out from the vacuum of his mind about pacifying Fatah of the PLO by withdrawing from Judea and Samaria as a gesture of friendliness. Naturally, his ramblings were immediately featured in the New York Times. (1)

The first time I saw Haim Ramon it was at a session of the Knesset (Israel's Parliament). He stood out to me as a "man-child" as he giggled and wiggled like a puppy happy to be noticed by other more competent Knesset members. It was bizarre. His behavior was bizarre.

Haim Ramon's record as a Leftist politician was virtually empty of accomplishment. But, leave it to Steve Erlanger of the New York Times to take the babbling of a "man-child" and position it as if an important man had made a wise and visionary statement.

Haim Ramon is said to be close to Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, which is not surprising considering that institutional dimwits find each other excellent company. Besides many of the other Kadima Cabinet members are under investigation for criminal activity.

Erlanger, a typical NYT journalistic stooge assigned to spin the news tells us that Olmert was elected on a platform of unilateral withdrawal. What Erlanger conveniently ignores is that Olmert was only elected on the spill-over of Arik Sharon's popularity and his sudden stroke, leaving Olmert to ride in on the back of a Sharon in a vegetative state.

Sharon used to use Olmert as the Gas Bag to float unpopular plans. Now Olmert has his own Gas Bag, Haim Ramon to float trial balloons. Naturally, most of the script was written by the President George W. Bush, Sec. Of State Condoleezza Rice and former Sec. Of State James Baker III collaborators, particularly with respect to gifting Judea and Samaria to Abu Mazen.

The Big Push is to make Yassir Arafat's companion, Mohammed Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) into a mix between a saint and a great moderate leader. To do that, the collaborators had to recruit Leftist leaders of Israel to dance to this tune. Olmert and his gang of Kadima were the perfect dupes or dopes, as you prefer.

Olmert just lost a war to Hezb'Allah and has been slammed by two investigations for his incompetence. He is being positioned as if his judgement is flawless -- along with that "vision thing" so familiar to us as expressed by former U.S. President George Herbert Walker Bush.

Ramon, a deputy prime minister close to Olmert, acting like a perfect lap dummy, tells us "Israel must move quickly because we have a "partner" in the non-Hamas leadership." He goes on to say "I don't know for how long, so we must act quickly." Think about what the "man-child" blurted out and doesn't even know what he implied.

Ramon has revealed what many already know that Abu Mazen won't be with us for very long. He is known to be a weak leader and will either be voted out of power or simply assassinated by his own terrorists who are deeply connected to Hamas.

"Ramon told Israel Radio that Israel should move quickly to negotiate the principles of a peace deal and to withdraw from "most" of the 'occupied West Bank'. He told foreign diplomats this week that he favored a withdrawal from 70% of the West Bank." Olmert's election platform was a promise for an Israeli "unilateral withdrawal from 90% of the West Bank, roughly to the security barrier Israel has built, but not including the 3 large settlement blocs inside that barrier." (1)

Erlanger reminds us that more than two thirds of Israel (according to Erlanger) supported Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza which has now become Hamastan, perhaps the newest center for Global Terror as predicted by us and most of those like us who track Middle East history of Terrorism. Nearly 60% of Israelis responding now say the 2005 withdrawal from Gush Katif/Gaza was a mistake as Kassam Rockets from Gaza pour into Southern Israel hitting the cities, towns and villages such as Ashkelon and Sderot.

In the meantime, Erlanger admits that Saudi Arabia is pushing for a reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas -- which brings us back to the original Fatah under Yassir Arafat and now under Abu Mazen composed of the PLO, Hamas, PFLP, Al Aksa Martyrs' Brigades, Tanzim, Force 17, the Executive Force plus at least 9 separate Secret Services and any number of free lance terrorists. Of course, all of the above have different support nations funding and arming them such as Syria, Iran, Russia, China, North Korea and, regrettably, the U.S. re-arming Fatah.

It bears noting that the 5 biggest arms dealers in the world are America, Russia, France, England and China -- these five are the five members of the U.N. Security Council.

So Haim Ramon and his dopey boss Olmert are following the Yellow Brick Road as laid out by Bush, Rice and Baker and always the oil magnates (or is it maggots?)

Please note that Erlanger does not tell us that, Olmert released millions of dollars to Abu Mazen and Israel is arming Abu Mazen's Fatah, in addition to hundreds of millions of American tax-payers' dollars to pay his Fatah army, numbering about 60,000 terrorists under arms. Olmert tricked the Israeli people with a deal wherein he released 255 convicted and jailed terrorist prisoners and took 178 of the worst terrorists off the hunt-and-kill list IF they turned in their weapons and promised to be good. More than 60% of released prisoners for crimes of terrorism have returned to being terrorists upon release. I suspect that even the most brain-damaged person in an institution for the criminally insane might see through Olmert's scam. Taking a terrorist at his word and having him turn in one gun out of hundreds makes him reliable? But, Olmert and the man-child called Ramon ignore the build-up of weapons within both the Fatah and Hamas armies.

Let us not forget that Shimon Peres continues to play his role of abandoning the territories (as he said upon his oath-taking as Israel's new President), getting rid of the territories as he did in his secret negotiations that led to the Oslo Accords debacle.

Sharon and Olmert, with counsel from Peres, surrendered Gush Katif/Gaza, even though all their military advisors told them it would be a great disaster. Their forecast (which we published as did others) proved itself and Gaza is not only a fully fledged terrorist encampment but, a forward base for Iranian, Syrian and Iraqi terrorists, including Al Qaeda.

Regrettably, for selfish reasons of keeping own their seats of political power, the Knesset did not close down Olmert's failed government for both lost wars, namely, for Gaza continuing and 34 days against Hezb'Allah during the summer of 2006.

I urge you to read an article I wrote dated July 27th entitled "Planning to Lose a War". It outlines what Olmert, his Kadima Party and the so-called quartet of the U.S., U.N., E.U., and Russia are planning to insure Israel's divestment of Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights and those parts of Jerusalem occupied and desecrated by Jordan for 19 years from 1948 to 1967. These plans will inevitably lead to the sacrifice of too many dead Jewish men, women and children.

I cannot help but wonder if either the Mossad or the Shabak realizes that they have a government spinning out of control unless they, too, are in agreement to the re-partition scheme. Let's hope that the honor of these honored institutions has not been compromised through politically correct appointees to lead.

You can always tell when the rats have pried off the lid to the garbage can when the New York Times gets behind a push to forcibly evacuate Jews from the Land that G-d gave them in perpetuity.

Sometimes, however, the rats scatter when you shine a light on them, so what are you/we waiting for.


1. "In Gesture to Fatah, Israeli Official Pushes West Bank Pullback" by Steven Erlanger The New York Times July 28, 2007

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, July 29, 2007.

"'Flying Imams' and Reichstags" was written by Jonathan Tobin.

It used to be that the only people I knew who were concerned about the behavior of fellow mass-transit passengers were Israelis. But that was before Sept. 11, the airline "shoe bomber," the Madrid railway attacks and the 2005 suicide bombings in the London subway.

Like it or not, the mantra "if you see something, say something" is simply part of the reality of life in the age of the war on Islamist terror. Indeed, it was exactly this sort of routine vigilance on the part of a young clerk at a Circuit City electronics outlet store this spring that led to the uncovering of a local Islamist plot to murder U.S. soldiers at Fort Dix, N.J.

But while that young man was justly celebrated for his good deed, others with equally reasonable suspicions of foul play can expect something quite different: a lawsuit.

Justified Suspicions

Passengers on a U.S. Airways flight in Minneapolis last November noticed six Islamic clerics behaving in a suspicious manner. They were not merely by praying loudly before boarding, but didn't sit in their assigned seats and spread out around the airplane and asked for unneeded seatbelt extenders.

Frightened by the possibility of a hijacking, the passengers reported this behavior to authorities. The six Muslims, now known as the "flying imams," were questioned and then exonerated. But it didn't end there.

Rather than express understanding of the situation, with the help of the Council of American Islamic Relations the imams accused everyone involved in the incident of anti-Muslim prejudice, and are suing the passengers they frightened.

The goal of the lawsuit is not just revenge for their experience, but to send a message to anyone who associates Muslims with terror -- no matter how reasonable their suspicions might be -- that they should think twice before saying anything.

The possibility of such lawsuits, not to mention the certainty that CAIR will label them as "racists," will deter those who report questionable activity to the authorities, and thus potentially make it easier for terrorists to operate in the open.

Some members of Congress have responded to this problem, and are seeking to add to a Homeland Security bill an amendment that would give immunity to anyone who reported in good faith suspicious activity on mass transit. Though the provision sponsored by Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) was passed in both Houses of Congress, it may yet be discarded when competing House and Senate bills are reconciled in conference.

If that happens, it will be because some of our politicians are more interested in their war on the administration than in giving honest citizens protection against frivolous lawsuits by the Islamist race-baiters at CAIR, whose roots as a support group for Hamas betray their own extremist agenda.

But at the heart of this controversy isn't just partisanship, or a desire to protect innocent Muslims from humiliation. What this is about is the legitimacy of the war on Islamist terror itself.

Insight into this dilemma was provided, ironically enough by the first professed Muslim to serve in Congress: freshman Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.).

Ellison caused a regrettable kerfuffle when some pundits wrongly expressed opposition to his decision to take his oath of office last January by swearing on the Koran. His defenders sought to downplay any notion that this former supporter of Louis Farrakhan was anything but an ardent defender of civil liberties.

But in a July 8 speech, Ellison revealed himself to be someone who looks at the post-9/11 world from a CAIR-like frame of reference. In it, he compared America's response to that attack to the way the Nazis exploited the 1933 burning of the Reichstag in Berlin.

The statement was not just a classic example of Michael Moore-style, over-the-top hatred for Bush, but revealed a sensibility that saw the entire effort to fight Al Qaeda and render future terror attacks less likely as inherently illegitimate. In Ellison's vision, the belated efforts by Americans to wake up to the reality of the Islamist threat was a nightmare based on fraud and fear-mongering Nazi-look-alikes, not a nation asserting its right to defend itself against terror.

That such sentiments exist in the fever swamps of both the far right and left in this country is no secret. That they are being put about by members of Congress -- especially the man embraced by American Muslims as their role model and spokesman -- is telling.

The speech also generated one of those controversies that illustrate how distorted both political discourse and interfaith communal relations have become.

In response to his use of an inappropriate Nazi analogy, the Anti-Defamation League first reached out to Ellison. Seeking to make friends rather than merely to shoot from the hip, the ADL met with the congressman to try and coax back in off the ledge. But though the Minnesotan now says he agrees with ADL's position, he was slow to backtrack, and after the affair dragged on for weeks, the group's leader, Abe Foxman, finally issued a statement taking him to task.

Ellison's reaction was to play the victim and claim he was "blindsided" by Foxman's reproof since he eventually intended to say something though he won't make one now. Thus, rather than the focus being on Ellison's wild charges, Foxman wound up in the dock.

Due to Ellison's clever spin, the reaction to his speech was treated as the offense, not his appropriation of Holocaust imagery to smear the anti-terror campaign. The issue became Foxman's supposed eagerness to garner publicity and to shrei gevalt, not Ellison's embrace of extremist rhetoric.

But Foxman had been dead right about Ellison.

While America Slept

Prior to 9/11, America was asleep to the threat from Islamist terrorists, and their apologists and rationalizers. After that national trauma, more of us began to think about the danger and take action.

It is true that the Homeland Security Department created to coordinate our defense has been a disappointing boondoggle. And a fear of accusations of racism from CAIR has led to a refusal to use profiling techniques that has rendered airline-security measures a joke, as old ladies can be strip-searched while those who are more likely to be dangerous are left alone. But though the possibility of another atrocity exists, there has been no repeat of 9/11.

While the administration has plenty of mistakes to answer for, the real danger is the return to the pre-9/11 apathetic mindset that Ellison and his allies at CAIR are encouraging.

If it has gotten to the point where people like the U.S. Air passengers and Abe Foxman are seen as the problem -- and not the jihad-rationalizers at CAIR or a congressman who thinks Republicans are Nazis -- then we are back to square one in the war on terror.

"Sheikh delays plane over seating, pilot unintimidated" comes from the Dhimmi Watch website
(www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/017553.php). It was posted by Robert Spencer.

Three of his female relatives were seated next to men they did not know. The British Airways pilot, however, was evidently a firm anti-dhimmi, and would have none of it: when the Sheikh complained, he ordered him and his entourage off the plane.

"Sheikh delays plane over seating," from Reuters (thanks to Hany):

MILAN (Reuters) -- A Qatar sheikh held up a British Airways flight at Milan's Linate airport for nearly three hours after discovering three of his female relatives had been seated next to men they did not know.

When none of the other business class passengers agreed to swap seats, the sheikh, a member of Qatar's ruling family, went to the pilot, who had already started the engine, to complain, an airport official said.

But the pilot ordered him and his traveling companions, the three women, two men, a cook and a servant, off the plane.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 29, 2007.

Narrative is the politically correct buzz word these days: There's your narrative (version of events) and there's mine. No absolute truth. No documented history. One narrative is to be respected as much as another, is as valid as another.

This take has generated much difficulty for Israel. For our truth has gotten lost in a revisionist, relativist take on matters. As Assaf Wohl wrote recently in YNet, "For some reason, whenever I hear the word 'narrative' I immediately sense the stench of lies tickling my Jewish nostrils. I found this word too often in articles written by those 'new historians,' who in order to advance their anti-Israeli and post-Zionist ideas invented the term 'narrative.'"

And unfortunately we have not been forceful enough in responding and defending our position. In fact, the opposite seems to be occurring. There is a current dispute in Israel about the fact that the concept of Nakba (catastrophe) is to be introduced into textbooks in Israel for the Arab populace: While Jews were celebrating their Independence, the Arabs marked this day as the Nakba, it explains. The argument being advanced is that this dovetails with the version of events the students are being taught in their homes and mosques, confirming their reality as one narrative -- although not the Jewish narrative. But their "reality" is distorted and it perhaps falls to the schools in particular to present the facts.


The concept of "narrative" is also at the forefront of an article that ran today in The New York Times. It describes a letter sent by "several dozen evangelical clergy and activists" to President Bush, urging him to promote a two-state solution. Only then could "justice" be done, you see, for, according to this letter, both Israelis and Palestinians have rights to the Land going back "millennium."

But this simply is not true. And, as always, it is important for us to speak out forcefully in defense of the truth. Arabs are latecomers to the Land, and never had a nation in the area known as Palestine. Only the Jews did: the Land is a Jewish heritage. In fact, the very areas that are being claimed by the Arabs now -- eastern Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria -- represent the true heart of our Jewish presence here. Anyone who takes the time to tour this area (and I urge everyone to do so!) comes away impressed with the evidence of that presence. If justice is truly to be done on this issue, it means acknowledgement of our rights to this Land. The notion that "justice" requires a balance between competing positions is a fallacious one.

I will add here that there is considerable evidence for the fact that many so-called Palestinians moved into Palestine within the early part of the 20th century, from places such as Syria, having come as migrants seeking work when the Jews began to develop the land.

For further information I invite you to visit the "Background Information" page of my website, where you can access information both on ancient and modern history in this land.


It should be noted that these evangelicals do not represent the mainstream position of evangelical Christians with regard to Israel, even if the Times saw fit to give their letter major play. Protests have come from several quarters. John Hagee's group, Christians United for Israel, is planning on sending its own letter to Bush to refute the earlier letter; Hagee's letter will say that the claim that Palestinians have an historical connection to Israel is "absolutely incorrect." Hagee is on the mark.


In a briefing done for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, Dan Diker visits this same issue of narrative and how we've fallen on our faces with regard to defending our positions. In writing about "Why Israel Must Now Move from a Concessions-Based Diplomacy to Rights-Based Diplomacy," Diker explains:

In spite of generous territorial concessions, Israel is not receiving international support, but, instead, faces an increased challenge internationally to her existence.

This is happening because with Oslo Israeli diplomacy was focused on helping the Palestinians achieve what they -- the Palestinians -- claimed were their "legitimate rights." This was a tacit recognition of the Palestinian narrative -- accepted in the hope that this position of granting concessions would lead to peace. But in the process, the Israeli narrative was lost.

We spent painful years pretending that the Palestinians had "rights" that they don't have. And as we failed to defend the rights we do have, the world forgot about them. The world? Our own head of state. Diker presents the following example among many.

In June, the Guardian ran opposing op-eds by Israeli Prime Minister Olmert and Palestinian Prime Minster Haniyeh.

Haniyeh spoke of rights: "My people will...remain rooted in their land, whatever the price, and pursue their legitimate right to resist the occupation." Their land. Their legitimate right.

All Olmert did was lament the poor response Israel was receiving from the Palestinians with regard to concessions made: "In the face of concessions that have threatened our own domestic consensus, the constant refrain has been the Palestinian refusal to end its violent attacks on our citizens." In spite of this, Olmert concluded with a restatement of his position that "Israel is prepared to make painful concessions to pay the price for a lasting and just peace that will allow the people of the Middle East to live in dignity and security."

It's all about what we will give. No refutation of Palestinian claims and no statement of our own rights. This is a serious, serious business.

See the entire briefing at:
www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=2&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID= 111&FID=375&PID=0&IID=1607&TTL=Why_Israel_Must_Now_Move_from_ Concessions-Based_Diplomacy_to_Rights-Based_Diplomacy

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Kaustav Chakrabarti, July 29, 2007.

The West has no permanent interest to bring about Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation that might spell a better future for the entire region.

The West has a good market for its arms in the Arab and Islamic states. War brings good profit but peace does not. The West which thrives on war will not profit from peace. It would therefore try to cajole its clients with offers of better armaments even to Israel's detriment.

If the West had been at all serious about permanent peace in the Middle East, it should have desisted from selling sophisticated weaponry to its Arab and Islamic clients instead of lecturing Israel to return to its pre-1967 borders.

If peace is all that important, would the West make sacrifices like foregoing its profits from arms sales? Would it guarantee the existence of Israel? The answer would ne an absolute "No!" Today's Europe or the West for that matter is one which is being run by politicians instead of statesmen. They have their constituencies to look after, including Arab and Islamic ones.

None would dare to anger his or her electorate by justifying Israel. So how are they expected to take a non-partisan attitude in the interest of peace? It all boils down to a matter of pragmatic politics.

If Europe during the Second World War could not guarantee the survival of the Jewish people, how could it do so for the Jewish State of Israel which had long been fighting for its survival? So all this talk of peace is that of "sublime non-sense" having no bearing on the geo-political reality of the Middle East whatsoever.

Kaustav Chakrabarti

Contact Kaustav Chakrabarti at kaustav12000@yahoo.co.in

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, July 29, 2007.

[Background: A recent poll has caused elation -- it seems to show that Muslims were less keen on suicide bombings than previously. This has been interpreted to mean that Muslims are becoming more "moderate."]

I learned via experience for over more than 40 years, to distrust any poll I hear. The opportunities for manipulation are just too many: the way questions are formulated, the way sampling is done, the locale of the polling event, subjective factors, etc.

Unfortunately, most people take polls for granted, especially the ones that fit their agenda

Simple example:

Ask a devout (and they all are devout to their Quran) Muslim if he approves of suicides bombings, and he'll envision his own precious behind being blown to bits, and his answer will be "no."

Ask him if suicide bombers are Martyrs -- "shaheed" (literally, "witness")... The concept of the shaheed is discussed in the Hadith... and go to Paradise to be rewarded for their Martyrdom, and that'll be somewhat problematic.

Most likely, he'll leave that survey question blank for public-relations purposes.... or if it is a verbal polling and his/her faces are not exposed ... her wearing her burka ... he/she'll say; YES.. for Martyrs going to paradise, and their little children will go to such paradise with a smile of happiness, because they have been indoctrinated from the day of inception, via their mother's bosom ....... and sweets and celebrations will be the order of the day

This below is by Jugh Fitzgerald and is called "The new survey of Muslim attitudes means nothing,"

Survey: More Muslims reject extremism, survey finds: Support for bombings fell in seven of eight Muslim countries surveyed -- the headline to this story

This survey means nothing, except insofar as it has the ability to mislead and console the unwary.


Suicide bombings are now taking place not against the Americans -- who mostly suffer casualties from I.E.D.'s, but against other Muslims, in both Iraq and Pakistan, where they are directed against the government.

And there have been other cases in Lebanon and in Saudi Arabia. And it may have spread to the Maghreb. Muslims are well aware of this.

They are well aware that suicide bombings may be a threat to them, to their own wellbeing, as they walk down the streets of Cairo or Damascus or Beirut or Algiers or Riyadh.

And they are also well aware of what damage, not all terrorism, but a particular kind of terrorism -- suicide bombing -- does to the all-important "image" of Islam.

It is too easy to put into a political cartoon a suicide-belted fanatic. That can be easily grasped by the viewer. A growing number of Muslims obviously feel keenly the public-relations problem, which for them is quite different from moral abhorrence.

Imagine, if you will, that there were no suicide bombs going off in Iraq, or now in Pakistan, or in Algiers, or, here and there, even in Lebanon, or Morocco. Imagine that you are a Muslim living in Doha or Dearborn.

If in Doha, you probably don't like the idea that suicide-bombers could suddenly decide that the Al-Thani family has been too friendly to Infidels (it's nonsense), or that the wife of the reigning ruler is a bit too fashionably got up and too "feminist" in her leanings. And these suicide-bombings, you might feel at this point, are something to be discouraged, for they might come to you.

And if you are a Muslim in Dearborn, and are keenly aware of the need to lie low for now, and to proceed softly-softly so as to ensure that you have the time to solidly insinuate yourself into the American landscape.

You do this not least through constant repetition of phrases about "three abrahamic faiths" and a deliberate emphasis, with which the media plays eager ball, on how family-oriented (you bet!) Muslims are, and what good incomes Muslims make in this country (a sign which we are apparently to interpret as making them more American, Just Like Us, Nearer My God to Thee) and all kinds of other things.

None of them, of course, have anything to do with the texts or tenets or inculcated beliefs of Islam, such as sole loyalty being owed only to Islam and fellow members of the Umma. None mention the disbelief in pluralism (save where, in countries still controlled by Infidels, such "pluralism" can be exploited to Muslim advantage), or in individual rights and autonomy (Islam is a collectivist faith; the individual does not matter, and he certainly is not to be permitted the Western ideas of freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, freedom of speech).

That's it. Some of those answering the survey of Muslim "opinion" surely have learned by now that they can answer any damn way that suits the interests of Islam, and would naturally wish to put the best face on Islam for the Infidels that they can.

So the lying, which we shall primly describe as the "margin for error," only goes one way -- and the size of that "margin" in a culture of lying for Islam must be very large. Certainly it cannot possibly be estimated in any plausible way.

All such polls of Muslims, when they have at hand a worked-out doctrine of religiously-sanctioned dissiumulation (taqiyya and kitman, both of which are ultimately derived from Muhammad's declaration that "war is deception" -- a statement taken to heart over the past 1350 years of Islamic history) are silly.

Or rather, they are useful only in establishing the absolutely minimum number of Muslims who might support something hideous.

If 29% of Muslims living in Great Britain, for example, reply to a poll that they support acts of terrorism within Britain itself, then one has a base line -- 29% -- and can conclude, with confidence, that at least 29% of Muslims in Great Britain would support domestic terrorism.

But that is all one can say.

One cannot say, with equal confidence, that 71% of Muslims living in Great Britain are unalterably opposed, or even opposed, to acts of terrorism within Great Britain.

One cannot say that those who are opposed to such acts of terrorism within Great Britain are also opposed to such acts in, say, New York or Washington, D.C., or for that matter Jerusalem or Delhi or Bombay.

And the main point is this: is any declared opposition to a particular kind of terrorism -- as suicide bombing -- based on fear that this weapon could easily be used, as in Iraq and Pakistan, against Muslim regimes, and so be a threat, given the nature of the weapon, to the security of Muslim streets in Muslim cities, combined with a worry over Islam's "image"?

Or is it a principled opposition to the random killing of non-combatants? And does it extend to Infidels, and if so, to all Infidels, or only those who live in cities where there are also Muslims who might suffer?

Without knowing the answers to these questions, these polls are, and will remain, guides to nothing and nowhere.

Polling is an exceedingly clumsy way to find out the truth about what Muslims think.

What they think surely must come from what they are taught to think, in environments in which Islam informs every area of life, in a way that no other faith does or ever has, but that can only be compared, in its overwhelmingness, to living in a totalitarian state, with the ruling ideology that is in the very air one breathes.

Nevertheless, this poll will be taken seriously, and misused, in order to prolong naivete, unwariness, willful ignorance, and a willful refusal to study and to think about the unprecedented problem of millions of Muslims allowed to live, without anyone having thought much about it, in the countries of Western Europe and North America, and the consequences of that heedlessness, that nearly criminal negligence, that civilizational frivolity.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by B'nai Elim, July 29, 2007.

This was written by Arieh Eldad.

In Northern Samaria, 650 meters above sea level, 40 kilometers as the crow flies from Tel Aviv, lay Homesh. It was destroyed exactly two years ago and its residents expelled. From Homesh you can see Tel Aviv, but from Tel Aviv you cannot see Homesh. This week thousands of people including a group of "disengagement" refugee families returned to the ruins of the community. This became the fifth or sixth time the army and police have been sent to eject the settlers. Most Israelis did not even hear about this. The journalists, who were brought by police escort, found hundreds of police had conquered the mountain in advance; because they did not see any settlers, they believed the police spokesman who claimed the police had prevented the settlers' return, at which point the journalists left and missed the story.

Only the settler families had been discovered by the police, in late afternoon. Hundreds of border police were sent to eject them. The families, with their children and babies -- from whom the police withheld water -- were removed from the area. But hundreds of youth had hid in forests and chasms during the day. They had spread out to the hilltops. The military and police patrols missed most of them. They walked by night. All night jeeps patrolled the sandy paths, searching with flashlights for those walking in the dark.

By morning the border police in Homesh awoke to find themselves surrounded by a thousand youth who had reached the mountaintop. Each of the youth carried in his knapsack one brick. On a nearby hilltop a wood tower was built reminiscent of the pre-State days when Jews erected "watchtower settlements" overnight. Near the Homesh reservoir, they began erecting the first new house. It took a few hours for the police to realize what was happening, expel the thirsty and tired youth, and destroy what they had begun to build. Another victory for the police.

From the Homesh mountaintop, one can see Tel Aviv. But none of what I've just described was seen in Tel Aviv. Not only because of the lack of media, not only because the police officers illegally confiscated the cameras and cell phone photo-chips of those on the mountain, but mainly because Homesh is of no interest to Tel Aviv.

Sderot is also of no interest to Tel Aviv. And only when the Hamas in Gaza have armed themselves with medium-range Katyusha rockets, which they will soon do, will Tel Aviv once again take an interest in the rocket launching bases now showering death on Sderot. When those in Tel Aviv will see the flairs of rockets being shot at them from the summit of Homesh, many will ask themselves why the Israeli government firmly and foolishly ejected those whose presence in Homesh might have prevented Tel Aviv and Netanya from being fired upon, just as the residents of Nisanit and Eli Sinai once prevented by their physical presence the shooting of Kassam rockets into Ashkelon.

There are not many Israelis today, except the radical Left and the Arabs, who do not think that the "disengagement" was a bad mistake, not only from the immediate security point of view of having the Gaza Strip turn into a base from which to launch rockets into the western Negev, and also because of the deeper and more dangerous security point of view: The war in Lebanon occurred because the "disengagement" was interpreted as weakness, which was proved by the failure of the war in Lebanon. But beyond all these security issues, the more serious point of view is the Zionist. Israel's post-Zionist education minister's new approval of teaching the Naqba (the Arab portrayal of the creation of the State of Israel as a "disaster") in Israeli elementary schools; the anti-Zionist confessions of former Jewish Agency Chairman Avrum Burg; and the increasing avoidance of IDF service, which may be the chicken or the egg, are a post-Zionist wave threatening to sink the State. We must break the wave.

The return to Homesh is such a wave-breaker. In order to see Homesh from Tel Aviv, you must look into the distance, you must look high. This kind of sight is sometimes called vision; once, it was called Zionism.

I am sure that the residents of Homesh will return. If they do not succeed this time, they will succeed eventually, even if it be after a hundred times. The government and its representatives try to frighten the youth with investigations, surveillance, criminal records, not drafting them into the army, and drivers who drive the Homesh residents to the area have been warned they will not be eligible to work with any government institution, and the memories of the photo-chips and cameras which record the police violence are erased. Later this week we climbed to the Eitam Hill near Efrat, and the day after that the residents of Nissanit and Elei Sinai in North Gaza Strip marched to the ruins of their settlements, demanding their "right of Return". This is the wave that will break the Post Zionist wave.

Do they believe they can succeed this way? That they will succeed in erasing our memories and our desire?

Only he who is already without any vision can imagine that one thousand policemen are stronger than they who believe the Land of Israel belongs to the people of Israel. Only a government which no longer believes this land is ours can in the same week fight against a new beginning in Homesh and fund with our taxpayer money school studies of the Naqba.

If Jews are not allowed to return to Homesh, the Arabs of the Naqba will be there, and there they will plan their return to "Sheikh Munis," now known as northern Tel Aviv. That's the way it is: them or us.

Contact B'nai Elim at news@bnaielim.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Sergio Tessa (HaDaR), July 28, 2007.

Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs) are hardly a defensive weapon. They put the Saudis in the position that a mediocre pilot who might not have either skill or the will to approach a target and hit it can carry out a precision bombing against any fixed target.

Even if you think the current regime is fantastic, who will rule Saudi Arabia in 5 years?

Hamas today has all kinds of weapons that Washington supplied to "moderate" Abbas in the Gaza Strip.

It should also be kept in mind that previous promises not to deploy weapons near Israel were not honored by the Saudis -- for example F-15's in Tabuk.

This comes from Dr. Aaron Lerner -- IMRA.

U.S. Plans New Arms Sales to Gulf Allies $20 Billion Deal Includes Weapons For Saudi Arabia

By Robin Wright Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, July 28, 2007; A01

The Bush administration will announce next week a series of arms deals worth at least $20 billion to Saudi Arabia and five other oil-rich Persian Gulf states as well as new 10-year military aid packages to Israel and Egypt, a move to shore up allies in the Middle East and counter Iran's rising influence, U.S. officials said yesterday.

The arms deals, which include the sales of a variety of sophisticated weaponry, would be the largest negotiated by this administration. The military assistance agreements would provide $30 billion in new U.S. aid to Israel and $13 billion to Egypt over 10 years, the officials said. Both figures represent significant increases in military support.

U.S. officials said the arms sales to Saudi Arabia are expected to include air-to-air missiles as well as Joint Direct Attack Munitions, which turn standard bombs into "smart" precision-guided bombs. Most, but not all, of the arms sales to the six Gulf Cooperation Council countries -- Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman -- will be defensive, the officials said.

U.S. officials said the common goal of the military aid packages and arms sales is to strengthen pro-Western countries against Iran at a time when the hard-line regime seeks to extend its power in the region.

"This is a big development, because it's part of a larger regional strategy and the maintenance of a strong U.S. presence in the region. We're paying attention to the needs of our allies and what everyone in the region believes is a flexing of muscles by a more aggressive Iran. One way to deal with that is to make our allies and friends strong," said a senior administration official involved in the negotiations.

The arms deals have quietly been under discussion for months despite U.S. disappointment over Saudi Arabia's failure to support the Iraqi government and to bring that country's Sunni Muslims into the reconciliation process.

The administration's plans will be announced Monday in advance of trips next week to the Middle East by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, and are expected to be on their agenda in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The administration has a notional list of arms to sell to the Gulf states, but there are no final agreements on quantities and specific models, U.S. officials said.

State Department and Pentagon officials started briefing key members of Congress about their intentions over the past week, U.S. officials said. The initial reception has been positive, said officials involved in those briefings. They acknowledged, however, that some parts of the deal are supported more than others. Arms sales to Gulf countries have often been controversial.

The administration hopes to provide a full rundown this fall for congressional approval.

"We want to convince Congress to continue our tradition of military sales to all six" states, the senior administration official said. "We've been helping Gulf Arabs for years, and that needs to continue."

Sunni regimes in the Gulf region have felt particularly vulnerable since the election of a pro-Iranian Shiite government in neighboring Iraq last year. "There's a sense here and in the region of the need to build up defenses against Iranian encroachment," said a U.S. official familiar with the deals.

The aid packages to Israel and Egypt are further along. A U.S.-Israel agreement, to replace a 10-year arrangement that expires this year, has been under discussion since February, U.S. officials said. The new U.S. package will include strictly military aid and would expand the U.S. contribution 25 percent over the current $2.4 billion per year; economic assistance has been discontinued now that Israel is considered a developed economy, U.S. officials said.

President Bush said last month, after meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, that he was strongly committed to a new 10-year agreement that would increase U.S. assistance "to meet the new threats and challenges [Israel] faces." Washington has long promised to help Israel sustain a so-called "qualitative military edge" over other major powers in the region.

Rice is expected to announce Monday that, after her Middle East trip, Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns will finalize the agreements with Israel and Egypt.

Research editor Alice Crites contributed to this report.

Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net.

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, July 28, 2007.

Israel must avoid tendency to rely on Fatah leaders in hopes of curbing Hamas

This was written by Dore Gold and published as an opinion piece in Ynet News
(www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3430800,00.html). Dore Gold is a former Israeli ambassador to the United Nation and President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs

Mohammed Dahlan has resigned from the post of Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas' national security advisor. More than any other Palestinian figure, Dahlan symbolized the cooperation between Israel and Fatah at the height of the Oslo period during the '90s.

Many Israeli citizens view Dahlan as a man who bravely fought against Hamas in the past and believe that his defeat by Hamas is part of the price he had to pay. Several reasons can be identified for Dahlan's resignation, but it is clear that they do not include unbridgeable dogmatic differences between him and Hamas, as history showed us otherwise.

The latest clashes between Fatah and Hamas made many forget how closely the two organizations cooperated on the operational level over the years.

On January 22, 2006, Dahlan appeared on Lebanese television network LBC and revealed that he warned "the brothers in Hamas" that they must hide Yahya Ayyash, the military wing's leading engineer responsible for all suicide attacks against Israel at the time.

Dahlan bemoaned the fact Hamas failed to heed his warning and added: "All your military commanders were protected by the (Palestinian) defense establishment during the (second) Intifada. They enjoyed full protection."

Dahlan noted that one of the most notable figures he protected was none other than Mohammed Deif, Yahya Ayyash's successor. We also know that at the time Dahlan's deputy was responsible for a terror attack on a bus carrying children from the Gaza community of Kfar Darom to their school.

Another symbol of the emerging cooperation between Israel and Fatah today is Marwan Barghouti, who is perceived as a powerful figure able to lead a renewed Fatah struggle against Hamas should he be released from Israeli prison.

Many forget that at the height of the second Intifada, Barghouti headed an umbrella organization called The National and Islamic Forces that coordinated Hamas and Fatah attacks against Israel.

Think twice about helping Fatah

Documents seized by the IDF revealed that Barghouti signed orders to pay al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades members involved in serious attacks against Israeli citizens.

We can assume that after he is released he will again be promoting reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas, as he did in the "Prisoners' Document" that dealt with cooperation between Fatah and Hamas in the struggle against Israel.

Following Hamas' Gaza Strip takeover, we see Israeli enthusiasm over renewed cooperation with Fatah, without taking a moment to think back to past experience.

The Israeli leadership can go ahead and meet with Abbas in order to maintain open channels of communication with the Palestinians, but it should think twice before it invests funds and hands over weapons to Fatah and grants it international legitimacy -- particularly in Washington.

After all, we are talking about an organization that is willing to cooperate with Israel at a time of weakness but can quickly renew its partnership with Hamas and other violent organizations, as was the case in the past decade.

It would be preferable for Israel to deepen its diplomatic cooperation on the Palestinian question with Jordan and Egypt, in light of the fact that those two countries present themselves as interested parties in this matter. An alternative diplomatic approach must be outlined to replace the one that has unequivocally failed upon the implementation of the Oslo agreements and the disengagement.

The return on such track cannot be immediate and would require years of hard diplomatic work, but Israel can count on the fact that both Egypt and Jordan fear Palestinian radicalization and a Hamas boost, which may ultimately constitute a catalyst for an Islamic revolution in their territory, with the Iranian threat looming in the background.

What is clear is that Israel cannot readopt the same overused formulae, which have proven to be unfeasible.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Ted Belman, July 28, 2007.

A year ago, I wrote "The Conspiracy to Shrink Israel" in which I made the case that the US was party to this and its leader, by quoting from a number of sources. Now my leftist Zionist friend Ami Isseroff has added to my evidence and drove the point home in his article, Understanding the obvious: U.S. policy toward Israel The Israeli government always knew the score, even if it tried to forget it. Initially, Israel was in earnest about returning all or most of the land conquered in return for peace. Following the Khartoum resolutions however, and later, after the infamous UN Zionism is Racism resolution, it appeared safe to assume that Arab peace partners, other than Egypt, would never present themselves, and that Israel could take it for granted that the US would look the other way while Israel built settlements and created "facts on the ground," ignoring the hypothetical day of reckoning that might come if and when the Arabs side ever opted for peace. From the point of view of the supporters of settlement, American support for Israel was a Faustian deal, and they would rather not think that one day the devil might come to get his due.

The "territorial integrity" and "land for peace" policy of the US has been largely ignored by many pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian analysts and statesmen, despite the fact it is a matter of public record. For Greater Israel enthusiasts, there was no point in emphasizing the huge gamble involved in pouring billions of dollars into the settlements. Likewise, when it is out of power, it is very convenient for the Israeli right to label any Israeli politician who is in power, and must offer concessions in line with U.S. policy, as a traitor or at least a wimp.

The penny-ante pundits on the sidelines do not understand this game. When a Sharon or Netanyahu actually gets into power, the amateur kibbitzers expect that they are going to do something different. They will annex the West Bank perhaps, or rebuild the Temple. When this doesn't happen, because it can't happen, the pundits of the right cry "traitor" and "incompetent" and "corrupt" at their own previously adored leaders, and turn to more extreme politicians.

Yes, where the left lays back and accepts the inevitable, many of us strive to create a different outcome. We don't like what the US has planned for us. That makes us the dreamer and the left the realists.

The process began with Menachem Begin, who was unalterably opposed to surrendering a single clod of earth, as he repeated many times, and was promptly roped in to giving up all of the Sinai peninsula. "From here," as Sharon was later to remark upon assuming office, "it does not look the same as it did from there."

The stalwart of the right, Benjamin Netanyahu, was singing a somewhat different tune by the time he got to the Wye River Memorandum. The Sharon bogeyman in office became the architect of disengagement. It will be observed that even Avigdor Lieberman in the cabinet, looks quite a bit different than he did when he was in the opposition. He does not object to negotiations with Mahmoud Abbas too strenuously. Nobody has remarked on the absurdity of the fact that Benjamin Netanyahu out of office, is now to the right of Avigdor Lieberman. It is all determined by the obvious need of the Israeli government to fall in line, more or less, with US policy.

For standard anti-Zionists of all kinds, it is very convenient to point to the large amounts of foreign aid given to Israel. Of course, that aid is given to ensure that Israel will remain compliant with US wishes, and prevent a repetition of the Six Day War scenario, which was a nightmare for the US State Department after all. Out of no place seemingly, an independent regional player had appeared, and was in a position to dictate the course of affairs. An imperialist power cannot allow that.

For Arab, anti-U.S. rhetoricians, it is hardly convenient to point out that the US has a vested interested in peace in the Middle East, and much more profitable to claim that the US is pro-Israel, a claim that US statesmen and politicians must back up for reasons of domestic politics, as well as to keep the confidence of the Israeli government.

Everyone in the US government probably remembers the unfortunate announcement of Robert McCloskey, prior to the Six Day War, that the US would remain neutral in thought word and deed, and nobody wants to repeat that fiasco. But the truth is, that stripped of niceties, the policy that President Bush enunciated in his recent Middle East speech is not much different from the policy that Kissinger explained to the Iraqi foreign minister: Land for peace. The land is real enough. The nature of the peace is open to negotiation. As Kissinger also remarked at the time:I have told friends that peace isn't a final end. Wars begin elsewhere between countries that are at peace.

That was a pretty broad hint. If the US can get peace, it will force Israeli withdrawal, and it will not examine this peace too closely to see if it is permanent.

This last sentence fully supports my article Its all about ending the "occupation" and not about achieving a peace agreement in which I concluded "Thus this plan is intended to end the occupation of J & S without a peace agreement.".

The realities of the Middle East have changed in the past forty years, though U.S. policies and perceptions have not. This creates problems for the U.S. In this period, a stubborn lobby in support of settlements grew up in Israel. Their opposition to peace and concessions was seemingly validated to many Israelis by the breakdown of the Oslo process, and by the disastrous aftermath of disengagement.

At the same time, the cause of disaffection with the United States among Muslim countries, and Arab countries among them, is no longer only support for Israeli retention of territories. Rather, because of the rise of radical Islam, it is becoming more and more the case that the Israeli presence in the Middle East is branded as a Western colonial implant. Any peace that is sponsored by the United States, no matter what the settlement, is by definition a disaster for the local enemies of the United States. Therefore, trying to make peace between Israel and the Muslim/Arab world is no longer the panacea for America that it was in past decades. In addition, European countries, Russia and China stand ready to take up the slack where American influence wanes. Russia no longer has the odium of atheistic communism associated with it, which deterred conservative regimes in the past.

An additional complication is that Americans have become increasingly entangled in Iraq. In their desperation, some delude themselves into believing that making peace between Israel and the Palestinians will somehow help their cause in Iraq. This idea was apparently injected into the Iraq Study Group report by expert adviser Ray Close. For Middle Easterners, Americans are inscrutable occidentals. It is impossible to understand why Americans would think Al Qaeda, Shi'a or Sunni extremists would really be touched to the core of their humanitarian souls and stop blowing up mosques because the Palestinian problem was "settled." Rather, these extremists are bending every effort to ensure that the only acceptable "settlement" of the problem would be eradication of Israel. Any genuine moves toward peace would cause them to redouble their explosive efforts, and any settlement that left a Jewish state intact would be portrayed as "betrayal" of the Palestinian people.

Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Ben-Ariel, July 28, 2007.

A growing debate among gun owners is whether or not the gun allegedly used to assassinate Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin could have shot blanks.

All have viewed the Kempler video of Yitzhak Rabin murder in Tel Aviv and have come to different conclusions.

If you know anything about guns, feel free to weigh in on this gun debate.

Below are two views:


Cut it OUT, Already! We have PROVEN that your claims are impossible.

1. It was impossible that Amir fired blanks, since blanks will not operate his pistol.

2. Ballistic tests proved that the bullets extracted from Prime Minister Rabin came from Amir's gun and no other.

3. Ballistic tests also proved that the cartridge cases found on the scene were fired from Amir's gun and no other.

These are more than sufficient to disprove your preposterous claims that someone OTHER than Amir shot Rabin.

David F Mayer


Depending on what type of blank is used, an automatic pistol may or may not work after the FIRST shot.

Basically, the pistol's carriage goes back to allow another cartridge to enter the firing chamber using a small amount of the power generated by the firing of the powder of the previous bullet.

The carriage and that includes the firing chamber as well as the rifled tube, barrel, which the bullet travels through on its way out, are easily moved by hand on pistols that require that for the first shot. "Cocking". Other pistols are motivated by the trigger mechanism.

I have owned or fired several guns and tried at one time or another blanks and in some cases the pistol locked and in other cases the pistol worked normally. DEPENDING FOR THE MOST ON THE AMOUNT of powder used to load the cartridge and type of powder. The amount of energy delivered to both the bullet and the carriage depends on those things.

Compare it to a piston on a car's engine. If you put LOW OCTANE gasoline the power generated by the igniting gasoline will be low, if in turn you put HIGH OCTANE gasoline that will increase and if you add nitro or sugar then that mixture will deliver a huge increase on power and of course cause to blow a piston as well... LOL

I observed the "flare" coming out of Amir's pistol at the time he fired upon Rabin. The welding torch like flare I saw was huge indicating either a very light bullet or no bullet in the shot. The flare escaped forward as if there was no bullet using the energy... Also shows that the type of powder use was not the most modern either.

BOTTOM LINE Unless that pistol is tried by experts, not with the government or involved on the case, using blank cartridges, there is almost certainty that the pistol could have fired blanks. Before the test firings the pistol MUST be disassembled and checked thoroughly to ascertain that no component has been tampered with. ALL components and dimensions must be checked against the gun manufacturer's drawing and specifications beforehand.

Since the Amir cartridges have been fired, there is no way to assure that the test will repeat the actual shots. Being hand loaded, anyone could have used different loads on those shots and the ones remaining. In fact the remaining cartridges are worthless for any action leading to ferreting the truth.

With all due respect to the fellow in the denial trail, there are many experts on firearms other than those suspects working with the SB's, that of course meaning the Shin Bet, not the other thing, :-).

BULLETS EXTRACTED FROM RABIN Ballistic tests are easily tampered with. A thousand and one ways. Again lets do some basic review on how its is done. A bullet traveling through a gun's barrel accepts a "signature" from the mechanical condition of the barrel, rifling marks, barrel distortions, etc. It then enters the target and is in most cases grossly deformed by the impact/s. It is not difficult at all to fire again that pistol against a dummy and generate samples comparably similar to those extracted from Rabin, or claimed to have been extracted from him. Going into basics. Another team of investigators must do the testing.

My LITMUS test is predicated upon the fact that the criminals in government here have been repeatedly involved on tampering with evidence, fabricating files, performing frame ups, ordering and effecting murders, participating on torture, conspiracies, etc.

Something or a lot is fishy on that murder. Besides the timing and use of it that followed.

SHmuel HaLevi

David Ben-Ariel is a Christian Zionist and author of "Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall." Contact him by email at davidbenariel@earthlink.net or at http://www.beyondbabylon.blogspot.com/

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, July 28, 2007.

The future is now! Political leaders worldwide, strings in many cases pulled by the rich and infamous, fail miserably in creating a planetary utopia. Eliminating say war, poverty, disease, and hunger are not priorities when the planet's movers and shakers are more concerned, in fact wholly concerned with preserving and expanding personal largesse, indeed at the expense of everything and everyone else. Why stop genocide in Darfur when Sudan's oil rich government might be offended by foreign intervention; just pay lip service to the idea, thus preserve current and future oil contracts. Why treat Israel, a nation besieged daily by militant Islamic radicals, fairly when Islamic moguls, prone to suck up to these fanatics for self preservation, control the Middle East's ever needed fossil fuel reserves while the Jewish State has virtually not a drop beneath her cherished sandy soil? All major policy decisions effectuated by 'enlightened' Eastern and Western industrial nations are filtered by a wealthy few, again at the expense of many, remaining intertwined with the vicious viscous prehistoric energy source making state economies, thus a few especially privileged bank accounts, go and grow obscenely, putting all humane principles and fair decisions on an unlit back burner. Again, the future is now, change is urgently needed, so the vast majority of world citizens can be granted an opportunity to seize the day, so they can unleash the inherent awesome potential languishing in the human genome like a good genie bottled up in vestiges of a savage past, exploited by today's small number of muscle-bound predators, adorned mostly in Armani suits and silk white robes, bereft of moral fiber.

A futuristic apolitical morally principled socioeconomic structure, engineered to maximize human potential, bereft of human ingenuity morphed to unquenchable greed, a counter-productively expanded evolutionary vestige, indeed ought to be designed and utilized if our species intends to succeed as the dominant life form on this amoral planet in an amoral galaxy. Humans are capable of such a feat. Humans can fix what is so broken within their less than prescient present socioeconomic structures, engineer a system worthy of a progressive century twenty-one, counteract wealth curves worldwide that skew ever upward, rich getting richer, poor getting poorer, less and less in-between, in much the same way they have enhanced technology at an exponentially increasing rate. In such a progressive framework, misogynistic Islamic fundamentalism, for one, would not metastasize like a radically replicating cancerous tumor, as secular life would be good, indeed less stressful as well as more fulfilling, for so many more people, in this case within a vast swath of the Muslim world. Furthermore, a model now exists, endorsed by many wealthy yet enlightened entrepreneurs such as Donald Trump, insuring the harder and smarter one strives for success, the more that individual is likely to earn, within a team oriented framework. That model, mostly applicable to the sale of services and products, can be described by the term network marketing, a team oriented concept that has the potential of intermingling Jews and Muslims, helping each other earn commissions, break down cultural walls, allow independent representatives to be individual business owners and leaders.

The private sector can succeed where political leaders, obsessed with self-enriching agendas, fail to provide constituents with beneficial policies. Machiavellian movers and shakers care little for the nations or tribes they steward. A business model designed to pull each human component along, where team earnings and individual earning are directly proportional, encourages diverse ethnicities to support each other for altruistic as well as selfish motives. All rational folks desire to provide for themselves and their families, when given a choice will work productively to achieve such ends, will not as likely be seduced by promises of paradise in any after life when secular life is rewarding, and will appreciate individuals born of all cultures the more they get to know them on a personal level, especially in a well constructed upbeat symbiotic human friendly working environment. In network marketing, independent representatives of a particular company's product or service recruit, train, and motivate other people to be independent representatives just like them, assuring that profits or commissions are shared between those recruited and the recruiters. Maintaining an upbeat and supportive environment is essential for success. Furthermore, each recruited representative becomes a leader and recruiter of other representatives that build his personal team, thus enhancing the flow of profits or commissions within his business. It is critical that all representatives support each other, without regard to respective ethnicities. Money talks! If say Jews recruit Muslims and vice versa, cultural barriers and antagonisms break down. Corrupt egocentric political and religious leadership becomes irrelevant in such a milieu.

When established leaders worldwide, in politics and industry, in democracies and dictatorships, in secular and religious nations, do little to substantially improve and in many cases detract from the lives of the majority of ordinary citizens, it is time for those citizens to find a way to engineer a better system. This does not infer revolution, it does infer evolution. Progressive ideas crafted to enhance the way individuals earn their livelihoods, circumventing negative structures developed to funnel wealth to those relative few in charge, could make all the difference.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, July 27, 2007.

This is by John Podhoretz and it appeared in the New York Post (www.nypost.com) and is archived at
www.nypost.com/seven/06152007/news/columnists/ self_rule__try_mob_rule_columnists_john_podhoretz.htm.

ISRAEL'S disengagement from Gaza, completed 22 months ago, has succeeded.

It was a demonstration project of a sort -- an experiment in Palestinian self-rule. If the management of Gaza had gone well, there would have been a Palestinian state within three years, tops.

OK, now speak these three words to yourself: a Palestinian state.

Finished? Good. So are the words. They won't be coming out of anybody's mouth again for a very, very long time -- at least not in any meaningful way.

Someone asked Benjamin Franklin what America got out of the Constitutional Convention of 1787. His reply: "A republic -- if you can keep it."

So it was with Gaza in August 2005. The Palestinians got a "homeland, if you can keep it."

What they got instead was hell on earth. What they got was two brutally murderous gangs, Fatah and Hamas, competing for power by throwing people off the roofs of buildings and slaughtering rivals in front of their wives and children.

What they got was Tony Soprano (Fatah) vs. Phil Leotardo (Hamas). Only this time, Tony got his head smashed in by the SUV.

This isn't a civil war -- it's a gang war. And thousands of Palestinian bystanders are going to get shot while these two gangs go to the mattresses.

Ah, the joys of self-rule.

Ariel Sharon, the Israeli prime minister who conceived the disengagement plan, had a brilliant insight: Why not let them have it? They want it? It's theirs.

After all, over the course of Israel's 38 years of occupation, fewer than 10,000 Jews actually sought to live in Gaza -- and their settlements required tens of thousands of other Israelis to risk their lives protecting them.

The Palestinians spent decades professing their detestation of Israeli occupation and demanding self-rule ... so Israel gave them their heart's desire.

Gaza is Judenrein -- emptied of all Jews, just as Hitler dreamed Germany would be. No Jews live in Gaza. No Jews patrol Gaza. It's Jew-Free-by-the-Sea, with a charming Mediterranean coast worth billions of dollars in tourism and trade.

So what's the problem?

The problem is that the Jews weren't the problem. The problem is that the Palestinians are the problem: They are drenched in an ideology of blood and murder and suicide.

A new nation must be brought into being, nurtured and built. But Palestinian political culture is a culture of destruction.

And a culture of destruction is, inevitably, a culture of self-destruction.

So: Bye-bye, Palestinian state. See you in a few decades, when Palestinians learn how to do something other than destroy others and themselves.

Contact Fred Reifenberg at freify@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Barry Rubin, July 28, 2007.
This is an excerpt of an article that appeared July 26, 2007 in The Los Angeles Times called "Two versions of history." For full text see:
www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-textbook27jul27,0,3555205.story?coll= la-opinion-leftrail. Emphasis added.
History is continually being revised. Although written first by the victors, over time the voices of the defeated and disregarded demand inclusion. China and Korea insist that Japan acknowledge wartime atrocities; Native Americans, that their 4,000-year history become a part of this country's founding narrative; and women, that their deeds get equal scrutiny with those of men.

Whether most Palestinians fled their homes voluntarily or through coercion and force, and whether they have a right to return, will likely be argued until the end of time. But that thousands did flee and have spent subsequent decades living in refugee camps -- the United Nations says that descendants have swelled the number of refugees to 4 million today -- is not at issue. Why not teach that truth?

By amending history textbooks for Arab children, Israel has acknowledged the validity of the Nakba. And if it's valid for Arabs, it should be valid for Jews as well.

What is really amazing about something like this Los Angeles Times editorial (see below) is that those writing it don't have the least consciousness of the fact that in Arab and Palestinian media, books, politics, etc., there is not the slightest acknowledgement to anything Israelis and Jews say, feel, or have experienced is acknowledged in any way. In other words, they and others demand that Israel be completely balanced--and criticize anything that appears not to be--while not demanding anything of the other side. I might add that I am not opposed to a passage being put in Israeli textbooks saying that the Arabs consider the creation of Israel a disaster for themselves.

But for the Los Angeles Times, one might expect some minimal attempt at balance, even if only to protect those writing it from well-grounded accusations of bias or stupidity. Something along the lines of: And Palestinian textbooks and media should also be revised. Yet in this seven-paragraph-long editorial there is no mention of how the Arab world deals with Israel or Jews. And if one points out how ridiculously imbalanced what they are doing is, those parts of the media and Western intellectuals who say such things would either be startled or dismissive. Let's assume that Israel's coverage of the Arab/Palestinian world view is just barely passing. That would make the score 80 for Israel and 0 for its enemies.

But there is still more ignorance here. First, every Israeli knows about how the Palestinians view the situation. Palestinians, both leaders, and average people, are constantly quoted. The observance of Nakba Day, a recently created Palestinian commemoration mourning Israel's creation, is widely covered in the Israeli media. When a long series on Israeli history was televised about two years ago this point was included.

But the opposite does not apply. Any survey of the Palestinian media--and that includes the television and newspapers controlled by the Palestinian Authority--will rarely if ever find any examples of empathy or even honesty about Israel, its people, or its history. MEMRI, Palestinian Media Watch, and the U.S. government's Foreign Broadcast Information Service, can and have supplied huge numbers of examples of this situation.

While there is some debate over exactly what current Palestinian textbooks contain--whether they reject Israel's existence altogether--there is certainly nothing that says, for example, "The Zionists felt a strong connection with their ancient land and argued that reestablishing a state there was necessary for their people's survival and well-being." The book could then go on to explain why Palestinians rejected this idea. Palestinians and Arabs in general are taught by every source--sermons, government statements, textbooks, etc.--that Israel is evil and illegitimate. The great majority of the time, the few statements that contradict these claims are discouraged, censored, or punished.

In general in the Arab world, Israel and Israelis are presented as monstrous murderers. In the Israeli media--tv, radio, and the four main daily newspapers--the presentation of the Palestinians is not that much different from what appears in the American media. There is considerable sympathy for their plight coupled with exposure and scathing criticism of any action that Israel's government or army commits that is deemed illegal or immoral. Soldiers who kill or injure civilians are punished or put on trial. On the Palestinian side, no one has ever been punished for terrorist acts against Israeli civilians. (At most, they are convicted of staging attacks at the wrong time, and even these people are quickly and quietly released.)

How then can such nonsense appear in elite American newspapers, so totally one-sided, demanding perfection from Israel and nothing from the other side? Clearly this must be an example of a philosophical standpoint which is distorting the truth and greatly damaging--I am tempted to write here the words, possibly helping to destroy--the side of truth-seeking, democracy, and freedom in the world. The roots and effects of that world view, which applies nowadays to far more than Israel, need to be explored and combatted. Barry Rubin is Director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Interdisciplinary Center university. His latest book, The Truth about Syria was published by Palgrave-Macmillan in May 2007. Prof. Rubins columns can be read online at: http://gloria.idc.ac.il/articles/archives/oldindex.html.

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, July 28, 2007.

This was written by Debbie Schlussel. Visit her website -- www.debbieschlussel.com -- or contact her by email at writedebbie@gmail.com

Become an Iraqi.[*]

(photo: Zaid Sabah, USA Today) Applicants apply for grants at the Iraqi-American Chamber of Commerce in Baghdad which has a program that offers funds to start small businesses.

Today's USA Today notes that the U.S. government is now giving Iraqis grants that pay up to half of what Iraqis need to start a business.

"This is my golden opportunity," [Hamid] Hussein said. "Nobody before offered such a great favor to jobless people."

And nobody offered it to jobless Americans, either. So, why are Americans paying for 1/2 of new businesses for Iraqis? And by the way, the government isn't even doing the vetting. It's giving the money and the job of vetting to the politically-charged Iraqi-American Chamber of Commerce. Bad move.

I'm all for helping Iraq become a civilization (if that's possible). But to treat Iraqis better than we treat Americans is a little ridiculous. The article, entitled "U.S. Grants Help Iraqis Launch Business Dreams," begs the question:

What about Americans' business dreams?--Don't they deserve launching?

This is going way overboard and way beyond our duty as Americans. If we aren't going to fund 1/2 of all new businesses for Americans on American soil, don't do it for them.

Oh, and what was that about us going into Iraq "for cheap oil" and funding 1/2 of all new Iraqi business start-ups?

[*] Zaid Sabah, "U.S. grants help Iraqis launch business dreams," USA Today

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, July 27, 2007.

This was sent by Barry.

Even if you are not Jewish, this is really amazing. The Jewish Star (of David) is also referred to as a MAGEN DAVID.



Contact Fred Reifenberg at freify@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, July 27, 2007.

This essay was written by Stuart Wax.

As long as Israel spends their time and PR whining to the world, that we "offered them 98% of their land," if it's their land, and not yours, then give them 100%. Once you make the statement that it is their land, then you lose all claim to the land.

If Chevron or Shechem is their land, than so is Jerusalem and north Tel Aviv; and one can argue, but so is Ramle, Jaffa and Haifa.

If somebody accused you of stealing $200 from them, and you tell them "no, I didn't," they might respond, "yes you did." But if you respond "I'll give you $150,"then you look like the thief. That is how the Israeli negotiating position looks to the world, and no amount of PR, or Foreign Ministry spokesmen's pleading will be able to explain that away.

To paraphrase the Biblical story of King Solomon: The Israelis say "cut the baby in two," and the Palestinians say "keep the baby whole," of course the world will support the perceived true mother of the baby.

The truth is, that the only argument the world could support, is that "The Land of Israel Belongs To The Jewish People, Because G-d Gave It To Us." The Evangelicals are not afraid to use this to defend Israel, and the world doesn't attack them for "racist views." It is the only answer; the whole world is waiting to hear it from Jews and Israelis!

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Kae, July 27, 2007.

This is JINSA Report #690, 26 July 2007 and is called "Giving Up Gaza, Again?."

We didn't say anything about Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's overtures to Abu Mazen in the wake of Hamas's swift and brutal putsch in Gaza.

We did worry about President Bush offering further incentives to Abu Mazen who, we believe, has never been willing and/or able to use them to create a political future with Israel. He can only be less able after losing a war, half of his population base and much of his weaponry. Therefore, we were totally dismayed to read Stratfor quoting Ha'aretz saying,

"Israeli officials said Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is ready to discuss 'an agreement of principles' that would create a Palestinian state made up of 90 percent of the land in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank in addition to linking the two with a tunnel."

First, how can Mr. Olmert propose the creation of a Palestinian state or anything else in Gaza? He isn't in it, doesn't control it and can't talk to the people who do.

Which leads to the second point. With whom is he planning to discuss his principles? Abu Mazen? Abu Mazen doesn't control the Gaza Strip any more than Mr. Olmert does. To make a deal covering both territories, Abu Mazen would have to reach accommodation with Hamas, and it appears he is already working on it.

Does Mr. Olmert accept that? And at what cost to Israel? Or perhaps the Israeli Prime Minister will discuss his principles directly with Hamas. Will he do it while Hamas is firing rockets at Sderot, importing ever more lethal weapons and insisting it will not only NOT recognize Israel, but will use military force to eliminate it?

Third point: a tunnel?! Controlled by whom? Running under what? Secured how? Tunneling is a favorite Palestinian pastime. The Palestinians were using a stolen Austrian tunnel digger in Lebanon in the early 1980s to hide weapons and fighters before Operation Peace for Galilee in 1982. (Hezbollah is a Johnny-come-lately here.)

In Gaza, the Palestinians have been tunneling from Egyptian-controlled Rafah to Israeli-controlled Rafah for years. Tunnels up to 35 meters deep, lined with electric lights, rails and handcars have been used to bring everything from rocket-propelled grenade launchers to cigarettes and whiskey into Gaza (we suspect the whiskey is a thing of the past).

The idea of a secure tunnel from Gaza to the West Bank is absurd. And, since Gaza and the West Bank are at war with each other as well as with Israel, a tunnel would simply allow Gaza fighters and weapons to come to the West Bank and vice versa. This is no to way "strengthens Abu Mazen" if that is Israel's goal.

Bottom line: Israel appears ready to give up on any conditions that would once have been required of the Palestinians for a secure Israel next to a Palestinian state. The Israeli Prime Minister appears ready to let go of the whole thing now -- forget President Bush's conditions for "leaders untainted by terror, clean institutions, etc." And Hamas -- the long arm of Iran -- is calling the shots. Meanwhile, no one in Israel and few in the United States appear to object. Is this demoralization the long-term effect of last summer's war or political opportunism run amok?

Contact Kae at kew1@dbmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Kae, July 27, 2007.

This is called "The Galloway Papers: Parliament's damning report about Saddam apologist George Galloway." by Christopher Hitchens. It appeared 23 July 2007. in Slate,

The mills of justice grind with maddening slowness, but they do at least grind. In October 2005, my friend Denis MacShane, the radical Labor member of Parliament for Rotherham, rose on the floor of the House of Commons to demand a joint inquiry by the British parliament and the U.S. Congress into the financial relationship between George Galloway and the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

This followed the report that month, by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, that presented persuasive evidence showing that Galloway's front organization, a "charity" known as the Mariam Appeal that campaigned against the sanctions on Iraq, had in fact received direct Iraqi subventions from the proceeds of the U.N.-sponsored "Oil for Food" program. Bank records established that Galloway's former wife had been paid at least $150,000 in this way.

A completely separate U.N. inquiry chaired by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker identified another "Oil for Food" payment to the same lady, this time in the sum of $120,000.

MacShane's intervention was important, not least because the House of Commons requires its members to declare all sources of outside income. An inquiry was set up, by the Committee on Standards and Privileges, to investigate. It has now produced its report, along with a recommendation that Mr. Galloway apologize to the House and be suspended from Parliament for 18 days. And the findings of the report are even more damning, if that is possible, than the conclusions reached by the Senate and Volcker investigations. In particular, they make reference to the transcript of a meeting between Galloway and Saddam Hussein on Aug. 8, 2002.

On that date, Galloway complained to his political master -- the man he had saluted in public for his "courage" and "indefatigability" -- that certain problems with oil prices were affecting "our income" and "our dues."

This raises two quite serious questions.

The first is the extent to which the Iraqi Baath Party was able to purchase direct influence among Western politicians: George Galloway has been a hysterically extremist political thug for a long time, but others more supposedly "respectable," including some important Russian and French politicians and diplomats, may have been sweetened and suborned in the same way.

The second has to do with a purely moral issue. The "Oil for Food" program was the means by which the most vulnerable people in Iraq -- the children, the sick, and the aged -- were supposed to be protected from the effect of sanctions aimed at the regime. To have profited from its abuse or its diversion is therefore somewhat worse than to have accepted a straight-out bribe or inducement from Saddam Hussein. It is to have stolen directly from the neediest and the weakest, in order to finance a propaganda campaign that in turn blamed the West for the avoidable sufferings of Iraqis between 1991 and 2003.

The "anti-war" movement is not blameless in all this. When Galloway came to testify before the Senate and delivered a spittle-fueled harangue instead of answering the direct questions posed to him, he became a populist hero on the Left, was rewarded with a moist profile in the New York Times that praised his general feistiness, and was invited back to the United States to mount a speaking tour in which he repeated his general praise for the heroic "resistance" in Iraq, adding a few well-chosen words in support of the Assad regime in Syria. Praise was showered upon him in the Daily Kos, by columnists in The Nation, and elsewhere.

Now we have the sober words of Sir Philip Mawer, the parliamentary commissioner for standards among elected members, who adds to the existing reports and evidence by saying that however much Galloway may have "prevaricated and fudged," the evidence against him is "now undeniable."

I do not think that an 18-day suspension from the House of Commons is anything like enough punishment for what Galloway has done, first on behalf of a sadistic and genocidal megalomaniac and second to steal food and medicine from the mouths of desperate Iraqis.

We ran into each other a few times on his debate-tour, and on the last occasion on which we exchanged views, when he told me that he would never debate with me again (which he has since consistently refused to do), I told him that we were not done with each other.

I would, I told him, be waiting to write a review of his prison diaries. The Senate subcommittee referred his "false and misleading" statements under oath (a crime under 18 USC Section 1001) to the Department of Justice in November 2005.

Prosecutors in Manhattan (location of the banks through which some of the shady transfers were made) have also been handed the relevant papers. And the evidence adduced by the House of Commons must necessarily be considered by Scotland Yard, because it goes far beyond the damage done to the honor of Parliament.

In the meantime, it will be interesting to discover whether Galloway's former wife, or the associates of his campaign who also received "Oil for Food" money, ever declared the income or paid any tax on it.

And if I was the editor of the Daily Telegraph in London, whose printed documents about Galloway appear to have been vindicated by the parliamentary inquiry, I would want to revisit the judgment for libel that Galloway astonishingly managed to win, even under a notoriously oppressive law, in an English court. His troubles are only now beginning.

Just look at the gang that strove to prevent the United Nations from enforcing its library of resolutions on Saddam Hussein. Where are they now?

Gerhard Schroeder, ex-chancellor of Germany, has gone straight to work for a Russian oil-and-gas consortium.

Vladimir Putin, master of such consortia and their manipulation, is undisguised in his thirst to re-establish a one-party state.

Jacques Chirac, who only avoided prosecution for corruption by getting himself immunized by re-election (and who had Saddam's sons as his personal guests while in office, and built Saddam Hussein a nuclear reactor while knowing what he wanted it for), is now undergoing some unpleasant interviews with the Paris police.

So is his cynical understudy Dominique de Villepin, once the glamour-boy of the "European" school of diplomacy without force. What a crew!

Galloway is the most sordid of this group because he managed to be a pimp for, as well as a prostitute of, one of the foulest dictatorships of modern times. But the taint of collusion and corruption extends much further than his pathetic figure, and one day, slowly but surely, we shall find out the whole disgusting thing.

Contact Kae at kew1@dbmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, July 27, 2007.

This is a DryBones cartoon called Double Trouble and distributed by UCI (United Coalition for Israel).

It takes careful planning to lose a war in order to achieve your goals. That "planning" seems to be currently in formation for Israel by many interests, both in and out of Israel. Those in power have longed for the opportunity to fulfill years of thwarted yearning to transfer the Land G-d gave to the Jews over to the Muslim Arabs.

For the conspirators, they assume certain benefits -- despite losses.

The losses would be soldiers and civilians killed or maimed in the arranged transfer of the Land. They would be acceptable as expendable losses, particularly if they were religious settlers. The conspirators have demonstrated a consistent open doctrine of making Israel wholly secular on the theory that an un-Jewish State would be less offensive to the Arab Islamists.

The benefits for the conspirators? They think they will be liked by the world if they de-Judaize their Jewish State.

Each time they make the attempt such as the Oslo Accords and all those other misbegotten agreements that followed, the plan inevitably fails and hundreds to thousands of Jews are murdered and maimed for life. The fomenters of such catastrophes are never investigated, indicted, tried or sentenced to jail for treason or to capital punishment for ending so many innocents' lives.

Presently, the game plan pressed forward by President George W. Bush, Sec. Of State Condoleezza Rice, and former Sec. Of State for Papa Bush, James Baker the III is to assist Mahmoud Abbas ("nom du guerre" Abu Mazen) in occupying Judea and Samaria (called the "West Bank") for what is blithely called a two-state solution. Collaborating in this obscene scheme would be the Bush Administration, the U.S. State Department on one side -- with Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, her new President Shimon Peres, and new Defense Minister Ehud Barak on the other side, denials notwithstanding. You can see the involvement of George W. Bush's Father, then President George Herbert Walker Bush in The Secret War Against the Jewish People by John Loftus. (1)

The "problem" for these conspirators is that there are currently 250,000 residents in Judea and Samaria alone -- plus 250,000 million Jews in that part of Jerusalem occupied and desecrated by Jordan from 1948 to 1967. Don't forget the several million supporters who live in the whole of Israel and may not wish to trust the plotters, the Muslim Arabs nor the so-called Quartet.

So what are the plotters to do?

How about starting a war designed to be lost -- such as last summer 2006 when Hezb'Allah launching 4000 of its 15,000 Katyusha Missiles into the civilian communities of Northern Israel including as far as Haifa and Safed -- from the Hezb'Allah bunkers carved under Southern Lebanon?

So, what methods would the plotters select to advance their scheme to transfer the Land?

How about cutting Israel's military budget severely, as has already been done?

How about cutting the IDF's combat training and only train Israeli soldiers to war against the Jewish population in those areas to be made "Judenrein" (Jew-free) and transferred to the Muslim Arabs, as has already been done?

How about appointing some officers to the IDF who are PC (Politically Correct) and make them Generals like Avram Mitzna or Ehud Barak or Yitzhak Rabin in their time ...Leftist officers committed to the Leftist doctrine of re-partitioning the Jewish Land to benefit the Muslim Arab Palestinian Jihadists?

How about following then Prime Minister Ehud Barak's call to abandon the Golan Heights because, as he said, Syria could mount an attack and kill Israeli soldiers and civilians living on the Golan?

Why did Barak so desperately want to give the Golan to Syria and was thwarted in doing so then and as Defense Minister would do so now? Of course, there was the time when PM Ehud Barak was at Camp David in 2000 with President Clinton and Yassir Arafat, grandfather of modern terrorism and Jihadism (war for Islamic control of the world).

Why did Barak offer Arafat 97% those territories Israel had liberated in 1967. Arafat refused! Three months later Arafat initiated his "Second Intifada", blaming it all on Arik Sharon for walking on the Temple Mount.

Then let us recall the year 2000 when Prime Minister Barak ordered the IDF to run away from the South Lebanon Security Belt, in the middle of the night, leaving behind valiant Allies and valuable equipment to fall into the hands of the Hezb'Allah. This small man has always been frustrated in his desire to abandon as much of the Land of Israel as possible. He is now the leading member of the Labor Party again and Olmert has made him Minister of Defense to replace the inept Amir Peretz. He has perfect positioning to deliberately use mismanagement to throw the next War (expected this summer by most military experts).

The Arabist U.S. State Department now has four perfect collaborators in Olmert, Peres and Barak -- and, of course, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni who is scheduled to replace Olmert. All four are dedicated to re-partitioning the Jewish State of Israel and de-Judaizing her.

So, if you cannot get what you want by lying, cheating and stealing, you must move on to other methods such as betrayal, subversion and even descending to treason. This is where arranging for your own nation to "partially" lose a war comes in. I use the word "partially" in the sense that losing the war entirely would result in the saboteurs of the war effort themselves being hanged or having their heads chopped off by their incoming Jihadist friends.

Numerous phases are necessary to deliberately lose a war for your nation while pretending to defend that nation. First, you must either have PC (Politically Correct) Leftist Generals who are willing to sacrifice their own troops through seemingly blundering orders, something like the empty defense against Hezb'Allah in Lebanon. Or you must be able to restrain your troops from fully fighting the Hamas in Gaza to stop their Rockets against your civilians. You will probably have to plan to lose on at least 3 battle fronts: Hamas in Gaza; Hezb'Allah in Lebanon and the other Muslim Arabs among the Palestinians within your country. It's also probable that Muslim Arab armies from surrounding Arab Muslim countries will come to join in the fun!

To achieve a partial loss of War and Land, you will need the solemn word of the U.S., E.U., U.N. and Russia of the so-called Quartet to stop the war at an agreed time. Also, the enemy will know that foreign troops (all of the above quartet) may be deployed to stop the war at a certain point IF it appears that Israel might be winning OR losing. That would occur IF the Syrians were allowed, by previous plan among the collaborators, to overrun the Golan Heights -- as proposed earlier by Ehud Barak. Israel would, of course, not be allowed to counter-attack to recover the Golan by a Leftist Defense Minister who does not want the Golan Heights.

Once the Syrians have gone beyond Quneitra and down to the edge of the Kinneret, then a halt would be called, much as was done by the U.N./U.S. and Olmert during the Lebanon/Hezb'Allah war. The arrangement that followed was a phony cessation of battle and the insertion of the useless UNIFIL (UN Interim Forces in Lebanon) troops whose credo was to never interfere with Terrorists or their re-arming.

The concept of losing Judea and Samaria would call for a pronouncement by Olmert, Peres and Barak to state, under whatever authority they may have, that they are transferring Judea and Samaria to Abu Mazen or whomsoever will have replaced him. The U.N., E.U., U.S. State Department and Russia, i.e., the so-called quartet will immediately accept the "transfer" as binding and a matter of something equal to a declaration of surrender by the Jewish State of Israel.

At this point, Olmert will introduce his Yassam force to drive the 250,000 residents from the Land, much as they did those 10,000 Jewish men, women and children from 21 communities they created in Gush Katif/Gaza and the 4 communities in Northern Samaria.

A mix of foreign troops will also be introduced as so-called Peace-Keeping forces. They will join the Yassam Israeli forces to make "Judenrein" the Land G-d gave to the Jews in perpetuity. All the homes, gardens, farms, factories, businesses, schools, synagogues, yeshivas, infrastructure and cemeteries will be yielded to the incoming Muslims Arab Palestinians to make a functioning State.

This "Plan" goes back to the early 1980s when Rabin-Peres colluded with Arafat when it was illegal to meet the PLO members. They "planned" to drive the settlers from the territories. Now they will implement that plan -- if given a chance. Be assured that those Israelis resisting will be shot or imprisoned after being brutally removed from their homes they built -- unless, of course, the Army revolts and declares martial law. That would entail sweeping out the existing government who would be tried and judged guilty of betrayal of office and collusion with hostiles, along with those who participated in the planning -- such as the Leftist Courts.

While the betrayers would have counted on the nations and agencies to step in and stop the Muslim Arab onslaught, they will, of course, be deliberately late to bring in troops, equipment, and re-supplies of arms and ammunition (like in the 1973 Yom Kippur War). There may be a mass slaughter of Jews, considered expendable for the "greater good". Sadly, tragically, this is not inconceivable -- as we witnessed the Holocaust in the last century. As for the Muslims calling a halt to their next successful invasion, no one would or could believe that they would stop, given a taste of victory and the opportunity for Genocide against the Jewish people or, as they frequently proclaim: "We will dance in the blood of the Jews."

The current government would attempt to flee but, remaining Jews and soldiers would likely hunt them down and summarily execute them through a Peoples' Court IF they are judged guilty of treason. Many would try to leave the country, expecting the nations who assisted in their betrayal to open their gates. Some would but, most would not. Either way, they would be hunted as happened after WWII and the Holocaust.

(See John Loftus' book The Secret War Against the Jewish People: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People -- 1920-92. Don't be surprised that the Bush family, fathers and grandfathers are mentioned prominently with George H.W. on pages: 56,78,356, 358, 360-61, 510. See Prescott Bush on 358-62 and 369, etc. Also read

Christopher Simpson's 2 major books: Blowback: The First Full Account of America's Recruitment of Nazis & Its Disastrous Effect on Our Domestic & Foreign Policy & The Splendid Blond Beast: Money, Law, & Genocide in the 20th Century.... and the MAX groups who hunted down the "Judanratt" along with the Nazis.) (1)

Watch the bits and pieces being assembled, including the Bush-Rice-Baker plan to hold a regional or International Conference aimed to create a two-state solution.

Watch the meeting Olmert is having with Syria, Egypt, Jordan -- even though Saudi Arabia and Egypt have told Bush that they would NOT attend the above mentioned Conference. Keep in mind that some of the lead players in this perfidious plan could be Bush, Rice and Baker (the State Department in general), Olmert Peres, Barak and Livni. There are, of course, more and they will emerge as needed to finalize the transfer of Jewish Land to Muslim Arabs.

One of the Players will be Tony Blair to add cover to the Muslims' plan of elimination. He has already ensconced himself in Jerusalem, apparently fearing to live and work out of Ram'Allah. Gosh, Tony. Do you think the Fatah of Abbas would shoot you dead for not being sufficiently pro-Arab?

In any case, with Olmert and gang working from within and Bush with the quartet working from without, Israel may have to fight very hard and accept tragic losses to survive at all. Hopefully, G-d will lend a hand to burn, flood and freeze the participating nations. I make that request nightly and watch as England floods, parts of Europe have triple digit heat and forest blazes. I guess if Iran experiences a massive earthquake, some may conclude that G-d is in His own mode of payback.


1. The Secret War Against the Jewish People: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People by John Loftus & Mark Aarons St. Martin's Press ;NYC 1994 &

Blowback: The First Full Account of America's Recruitment of Nazis & Its Disastrous Effect on Our Domestic & Foreign Policy by Christopher Simpson Weidenfeld & Nicholson NY 1988 & The Splendid Blond Beast: Money, Law, & Genocide in the 20th Century Grove Press NYC 1993

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

To Go To Top

Posted by David Wilder, July 27, 2007.

To the Editors, The Washington Post
Caroline Little, Chief Executive Officer and Publisher
Jim Brady, Executive Editor

Re: In Divided Hebron, a Shared Despair
by Scott Wilson

Dear Sirs,

Considering the Post's reputation, I was quite surprised by the number of factual errors in the above article, not to mention the immense bias portrayed in the feature.

1. "Within Hebron, the separation is enforced not only by Israeli barriers but also by military checkpoints and curfews..."

There has not been a curfew in Hebron in years.

2. "Securing the small Jewish minority has a potent impact on the lives of the city's 150,000 Arabs,"

Exactly 10 years ago Hebron was divided into two zones. In an official agreement with Arafat, Israel transferred over 80% of Hebron to The Palestinian Authority. There is no proof of the number of Arabs who live in Hebron, but for the sake of argument, should there really be 150,000, ten years ago at least 130,000 came under the sole control of the P.A. Presently, the number of Arabs in P.A. controlled Hebron would be in the vicinity of 90%. Where then does Israel's presence in less than 10% of the city have a 'potent impact on the lives of the city's 150,000 Arabs?'

3. "In recent months, the Israeli army has helped the Hebron settlers expand eastward to a hilltop home near the settlement of Kiryat Arba..."

The Hebron Jewish community purchased a 35,000 square foot building for over $700,000. The Israeli military had nothing to do with the purchase and did not 'help the Hebron settlers expand.' They fulfill their function by offering the necessary protection at the site, as the military does throughout Israel. There are no restrictions on Arabs living in the vicinity of the building.

4. "'There is no future for Arabs and Jews together in Hebron,' said Noam Federman, 37, a settler from Beit Hadassah"

Noam Federman never lived in Beit Hadassah. He and his family have lived in Kiryat Arba for the past year and a half. His statements do not represent anyone or anything except his own personal views.

5. "... Behind him trailed a small group of men and boys, who at Shuyukhi's instruction were attempting to defy the enforced division of their city that has virtually emptied its most important historic, religious and commercial areas of Palestinians."

a) According to the Hebron accords, the entire city is supposed to be open to both Jews/Israelis and Arabs. However, Jews are forbidden from entering the "Arab/Palestinian" side of the city, whereas Arabs are permitted to enter the Israeli-controlled side of the city.

b) As above, virtually all of the commercial areas of Arab Hebron are located within the area controlled by the P.A. This is not cut off from the Arabs. In addition, no Arabs have been forced to leave their homes, or move out of the Israeli-controlled side of the city.

6. "The post bars Palestinians from entering Shuhada Street, a once-thriving commercial strip closed by the Israeli military more than a decade ago to protect the two Jewish settlements and a yeshiva along its route. The U.S. Agency for International Development spent $2 million in 1997 to renovate the street as part of an Israeli-Palestinian agreement to reopen it for Palestinians. But Israel has since refused to do so."

a) The area closed off to Arab traffic is approximately two blocks long. Alternate routes have been provided. This, in comparison to 80% of the city, closed off to Jews.

b) It is not true that Israel refused to open the street. It was open to vehicular and foot traffic following completion of the construction by US AID. However, the Israel Defense Forces demanded it be closed following the outbreak of the second intifada in October, 2000, when Hebron Arabs began shooting at Jews from the surrounding hills, hills which had been transferred to the Palestinian Authority as part of the Hebron Accords.

7. "...there are 100 Israeli-constructed fences, gates, concrete barriers and military checkpoints within the roughly one-square-mile historic center."

These fences and barriers have been constructed to prevent infiltration of terrorists and to prevent easy escape routes for terrorists following perpetration of terror attacks.

8. "... The area included the Jewish Quarter until 1929, when Arabs killed more than 60 Jews living there. The survivors fled."

In 1929, 67 Jews were raped, tortured and killed by their next door neighbors. Seventy were wounded. The survivors did not flee. They were expelled by the British. A group returned in 1931 and remained until 1936 when again they were expelled due to Arab inciting.

9. " Hemmed in and harassed, the Palestinians are fleeing today. Nearly half the homes in and around the Israeli-controlled Old City of Hebron have been vacated, the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem recently reported."

a) Who is hemmed in and harassed? Arab terrorists shot at Jews for two years, killing and wounding. Dozens of Israelis have been killed in and around Hebron since the signing of the Oslo Accords.

b) B'Tselem is a radical left wing organization, whose facts and statistics are very much in question.

10. "The Ibrahimi Mosque is ours, not theirs."

The 'Ibrahimi Mosque' -- otherwise known as "Ma'arat HaMachpela," the Tomb of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs, is the second holiest site to Jews in the world. The site was off-limits to Jews and Christians for 700 years -- from 1267-1967. This despite its sanctity to Jews, and despite the fact that the building above the caves was built by Herod some 2,000 years ago, six hundred years prior to Muhammad's birth. Since Israel's return to Hebron in 1967 the site has been accessible to all people of all faiths. However, Moslems refuse to accept freedom of worship, claim that it's a mosque and declare that should they ever again control the site, it will be off-limits to anyone not Moslem. (The site, nor the city of Hebron is mentioned anywhere in the Koran.)

11. "The 50-yard walkway took months to complete because each night the bricks were uprooted. It opened this year."

The walkway has been used by Arabs for years. A sidewalk was paved last year.

12. "During the three-month period ending Jan. 31, the observer group received 35 complaints of settler violence and harassment, ranging from beatings to throwing debris. Over the next three months, 71 cases were reported.

"'The pattern you see is that you have settlement and then violence around it,' Lignell said. 'And you see this project inching forward.'"

a) TIPH -- Temporary International Presence in Hebron -- is supposed to be an observer force. What is the legitimacy of "received complaints?" Such 'complaints' may, or may not be true. An 'observer force' is supposed to do just that -- observe -- and not base conclusions around 'complaints received' which have no proof backing them up. TIPH is an extremely anti-Semitic organization, made up primarily of Scandinavian human rights workers, who know virtually nothing about the Jewish history and tradition of Hebron, and who are notorious for one-sided 'observations.'

b) According to recent reports issued by the IDF and the police there has been a tremendous decrease of violence by Israelis in Hebron over the past year, with very few cases being brought to the attention of the police.

13. "Palestinian patrons, who have watched anxiously as the settlement project recently swelled beyond the city center under the protection of Israel's military, whose strategic goals frequently coincide with the settlers'."

a) Foreign governments, primarily Germany, France and Spain, have invested huge amounts of money in various parts of Hebron, including the Casba. Why is it legitimate for Arabs to renovate property, yet when Jews do such it is deemed illegitimate? Why can Arabs build, buy and sell, while the same activity by Jews is considered negative?

b) The IDF does not and never has been involved with 'strategic planning' with civilians in Hebron. The military is under the direct rule of the Defense Department, i.e. the Defense Minister, the Prime Minister and the Israeli government. There are times when our aims coincide but also many times when they clash.

14. "'The town is divided, it is deserted, and in many ways like a prison for us,' said Khaled Osaily,"

As written earlier, 80% of Hebron is under total PA control. The entire city was open until beginning of the second intifada, during which time a homicide bomber exploded and killed a couple from nearby Kiryat Arba.

15. "David Wilder, originally from New Jersey, is the spokesman for the Hebron settlers. He largely dismissed public relations until Goldstein opened fire."

This is totally inaccurate. I began working for the Hebron Jewish Community in an administrative capacity in May of 1994 and did not begin work as a spokesman for about 2 years following that, with the advent of the Hebron Accords. My employment had nothing to do with Baruch Goldstein.

16. " Wilder, who like many settlers here wears a pistol on his hip,..."

This is true. We are licensed to carry a weapon for reasons of self-defense. I have never needed to use it, thank G-d. I know people who are alive today because they had a weapon.

17. (He) does not agree with what he calls the Israeli military's "concept of using walls as a means of security, of building barriers and saying, 'Now you are safe.'

"'The problem here is not so much that people can't make a living; it's a political one,' Wilder said. 'The Arabs want a presence here. If they have it, they own it, de facto. And if not, they don't.'"

These two paragraphs are total non-sequiturs, making no sense in the context of the article. It is clear that they were inserted: 1) to include a Hebron representative in the article, and 2) to make me look foolish and unintelligent.

18. "On a hilltop less than a mile's trip along streets secured by Israeli soldiers sits a four-story house, which a group of settlers occupied the evening of March 19."

This building was not 'occupied,' rather it was purchased for over $700,000. Why, when an Israeli purchases property he is an 'occupier' but when an Arab buys property and moves in, his is a legal resident?

19. "the military government in the occupied territories, contends that the settlers did not arrange for the permits Israelis need to buy and move into property in the West Bank."

1) Why does the Washington Post use language 'the occupied territories' as opposed to Judea and Samaria, or the West Bank?

2) The permits were requested and denied for political reasons, not for any legal reason. The entire transaction will be proven to be legal and legitimate.

20. "...and the Tomb of the Patriarchs, the caves beneath the Ibrahimi Mosque."

Why is the site called the "Ibrahami Mosque?" Why isn't it written that there are also a number of synagogues in the building, which again, was not built by Herod as a mosque?

21. "'We don't know the people who come and go from there,' said Jabari, 22, a bespectacled middle school chemistry teacher. 'We try to stay inside now as much as possible.'"

Arabs in the neighborhood continue to walk the streets freely. They are not restricted in any way, and no incidents initiated by Jews have been reported in the area since Hebron residents moved in.

22. "One tried to snatch a soldier's gun, Israeli military officials said, and the officer opened fire."

The article concludes with such a sorrowful scene. However, would it have ended the same way had the Arab been able to take the soldier's gun and open fire on the Israelis at the scene? When you play with fire, you get burned.

This article does not attempt, in any way, to portray an accurate portrait of life in Hebron. It clearly portrays the Arabs as the oppressed and the Jews as the oppressors; the Arabs as the victims and the Jews as the culprits.

Within the article on the Washington Post web site are three featured videos: One with the Arab mayor of Hebron, one calling for expulsion of Jews from Hebron, and one featuring an extreme left-wing Israeli. Why aren't their three videos featuring Hebron Jewish residents?

A graphic map of Hebron -- "Detailed map of Hebron and area surrounding shows locations of checkpoints, roadblocks and settlements.," is totally inaccurate, making it look as if almost all of Hebron is under Israeli rule. This is misleading and false, being that an overwhelming majority of Hebron is under the rule of the P.A.

It is unfortunate that the Washington Post should see fit to print Wilson's shabby, one-sided, biased piece of yellow journalism.

David Wilder

David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 27, 2007.


At the same time that even Members of Congress are accepting the old Nazi and new Muslim myths of "the Jews" controlling American foreign policy via AIPAC, the government is persecuting AIPAC, either to undermine Israel or as part of the new policy of prosecuting governmental or political targets. Other recent examples of prosecution in the absence of a crime are of Conrad Black and of Mr. Libby. A fuller account is in the source of my source, Dorothy Rabinowitz, Wall St. J., 4/2.

AIPAC had not done anything wrong when its employee, Keith Weissman, was asked by Pentagon analyst Lawrence Franklin to meet him for urgent news. The news was of an Iranian plot against the US and Israel in Iraq.

The FBI put Franklin up to it to entrap AIPAC. It told him what words to utter so as to incriminate Weissman (to say that the information was classified). It outfitted him with a wire. First it appealed to his patriotism. When it found he had taken classified documents home, a crime not pursued when done by former CIA director John Deutch and flagrantly by former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, he became liable for major punishment. That made him more dependent upon results. (The prosecution extorted testimony against Conrad Black, too.) While he was cooperating, they secretly intended to charge him with more serious offenses. The FBI leaked news of the case melodramatically, to make culpability seem greater.

The FBI bullied AIPAC, to make sure the defendants didn't get help, by the manner and type of questions it asked, such as did the agency pay the defendants' lawyers. Usually a private citizen cooperates against a government employee, because the government is held to higher standards. This case is the reverse. This is the first time prosecutors indicted private citizens under the 1919 Espionage Act. This prosecution chills a major aspect of our open society, discussions about weighty matters. The case imperils freedom of speech, not to mention national security, because it inhibits discussion. The media constantly receives and even publishes damaging leaks, but mostly ignores this unfair case.

Civil liberties organizations are too busy defending enemies of our country to uphold the rights of the patriots indicted in the AIPAC case. Ironically, the government would have to persuade the jury that those charged with revealing classified information "knew that its disclosure could injure the national defense."

One of the most significant counts involved an informal paper Franklin typed and faxed to a defendant, that the government called classified but Franklin denied was classified. The defendants did not ask for classified information. Defendant Rosen could get a 20-year sentence for giving his fax number to Franklin, at Franklins request, so Franklin could transmit what the government calls classified material -- the one sheet he typed with eight bullet points stating Iran's offenses (Jewish Political Chronicle, Spring 2007, p.56)


In violation of its agreements, the P.A. smuggled some heavy weaponry into Gaza. These include Strella anti aircraft missiles, Sagger anti-tank missiles, and Grad B 122mm Katyushas. Hamas now possesses them.

The small arms and ammunition that Hamas captured is enough to expand its forces in Gaza from 6,000 to perhaps 15,000. Much of it was supplied to Fatah by US Gen. Dayton (IMRA, 7/6).

PM Olmert approved the arms for Fatah. He refuses to admit his error. What does the US propose, now? It proposes to send new supplies to Fatah, this time in Judea-Samaria. Whom does it propose putting in charge of this? Gen. Dayton! Like Israel, the State Dept. likes to throw good money after bad.


A former British terrorist became disillusioned with Islamism when he found his fellow believers becoming mindless killers at war with the whole world and warring without rules, only with cowardice and treachery. He thinks that Islamist war is an anachronism in the modern world.

He informs us that his comrades used to laugh at Britons blaming Britain's solidarity with the US in Iraq for the upsurge in terrorism. They laughed because that made propaganda for them and weakened their enemy's resolve. The real reason is for the upsurge is Islamist recruitment.

Recruiters find themselves not challenged on religious grounds by religious authorities, who could point out their errors. Some Muslims who, in the mosques, objected to Islamist tenets, were expelled from the mosques. Islamist recruiters had it all their own way.


Sen. Harry Reid said, "Given Pres. Bush's stubborn dedication to keeping our overextended military mired in an Iraqi civil war, it is not surprising that al Qaeda has been able to reorganize and rebuild." (NY Sun, 7/16, Ed.).

Why is a supposed superpower's military overextended by two minor wars? Because we don't force Syria, Iran, and Pakistan to stop pouring jihadists into Iraq and Afghanistan? Too many garrisons, as in Korea? Too few troops in all? Why don't our leaders have the imagination to increase our troops? Is it that Americans won't permit a new draft? What happens if the enemy opens another front?


Most people think that poverty engenders terrorism. Several studies find that most terrorists are educated, middle class or upper class people. They were not economically desperate but indoctrinated into terrorism, (Morton Klein, Pres. of ZOA, NY Sun, 7/16, letter) or psychologically vulnerable to recruiters.

How can we utilize the studies' finding? Stop supporting education in Muslim countries? Those who attend madrassas are indoctrinated and not prepared for honest employment. I think recruiters get around to the lower class, too.


Israel wants to give Iranians an understanding of Israel different from their Muslim propaganda (IMRA, 7/8).

The message that the Olmert regime is likely to disseminate may be worse than nothing. It may reflect appeasement and his notorious stupidity. That would induce Muslims to suppose that Israel is vulnerable to war, now.


The plan they drew up announced the demilitarization of Gaza, leaving no illegitimate weapons. To back up that intent, the IDF would patrol the Gaza-Sinai border until no longer needed there.

Then PM Sharon withdrew the border patrols, and the arms rush was on! The result was the militarization of Gaza, leaving enough illegitimate weapons to provision much larger forces.

The same group that prepared that plan refuses to admit its mistake and proposes compounding it by further withdrawals (IMRA, 7/8).

Barry Chamish's explanation goes beyond leftist appeasement. He accuses some Israeli leaders, such as Peres, of hating Judaism and wanting to get Israel destroyed. They certainly act as if that were their goal, giving in to most US and Arab requests that hurt Israel in the long run.


Midstream magazine features a learned treatise on post-Zionism by Yoav Gelber. I boil it down to the "ism" being lying propagandists' neurotic attempt to undermine Jewish nationalism so Israel would become a bi-national state (Prof. Steven Plaut, 7/8). Then the Muslims would kill most of them off.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Woman in Green, July 27, 2007.

Dear Friends,

There are no other words to describe Wednesday's first aliya to the Eitam Hill than "A HUGE SUCCESS!"

1) The authorities really thought they could prevent us from reaching to the Eitam, but hundreds of fearless Jews went to the Eitam Hill and declared: the order to prevent us from going up to the Eitam is an illegal order. That is already a success.

2) The entire world heard on the news how Jews do not accept the decree that areas which belong to Jews be judenrein -- and that they are willing to fight to keep their Homeland. That is also a success!

3) Hundreds of Jews walked for hours beyond the "separation fence" in areas where Jews for years unfortunately have hardly set foot. That is also a success! Walking on the holy earth of Eretz Israel in places where for so long only few Jews have been, we really felt how the land of Eretz Israel was saying: "Finally masses of Jews are walking here again, veshavu banim ligvulam!!!"

True, we did not yet succeed to build homes there and to settle the families who want to live there. However, we know from past experience (Dagan, Tamar, Zayit) that this takes time. We have patience and steadfastness on our side. We will go back again and again and again, until the Eitam Hill will, please G-d, be settled. We will update you as to when the next aliya is taking place.

Now is the time to say yashar koach -- yashar koach to Rabbi Riskin, Rabbi Shimon Golan, Rabbi Moshe Levinger, Rabbi Gideon Perl, who inspired us with their uplifting words before the march. Yashar koach to all the youth and adults who came and walked for hours, despite the very hot weather. Yashar koach to all the organizers those who went up on the hill and those who stayed back in the tent to coordinate the different events, and to pass on all the information to the media.

Yashar koach also to all those who worked hard preparing the prefabs and all the logistics. Yashar koach to the volunteer medics who were there to help. Yashar koach to all the Efrat & Gush Etzion residents who helped in so many ways (manning the tent, baking cakes, shuttling back and forth activists stranded on the road because of police roadblocks, etc...etc..etc...).

Yashar koach to all the wonderful lovers of Israel who came from around the country (Beersheva, the Golan, Herzliya, Tel Aviv, Chashmonaim and many more places)

We can be very proud of what occurred. We thank Hashem for his help and pray that, please G-d we will soon be able to settle the Eitam Hill and the other places in Judea and Samaria that we are planning to settle in weeks to come.

Updates, articles, video footage and photos can be found on the website: http://www.yishuvnow.com

Below please find an article written by new olah and Gush Etzion resident Laura Ben-David. It's called "Ascent to Eitam: A Journey of Hope," and it is archived at

Nadia Matar

P.S.  You are invited to join Women in Green's first ever, all inclusive, guided tour to the center of the struggle for Israel's heartland. Don't just read about what's going on in Judea and Samaria, see everything with your own eyes and meet the real people who are standing firm against those who want to surrender parts of our Holy Land. This fall, we will take you "beyond the wall" for an unforgettable experience. For more information please contact therealisrael@womeningreen.org.

Today I embarked on a journey that united me not only with hundreds of neighbors and friends, but with the Jewish people of countless generations filled with hope and a deep yearning for Zion. A journey that recognizes that our quest to reestablish our homeland did not end with the Balfour Declaration in 1917; did not end with the declaration of the State of Israel in 1948 with its subsequent war and continued bloodshed; did not end with the Six-Day War in 1967; and it certainly is not over now that our government has done deeds such as ripping away the homes of thousands in Gush Katif, to make way for Hamastan, and now seems poised to facilitate the creation of another terror state in Judea and Samaria. A journey that seeks to rectify the past, and fortify the future.

Today we were determined to act; to do our part to reverse the self-destructive path that Israel seems determined to take, contrary to all reason. A path chosen despite the fact that further territorial concessions have been proven highly detrimental and despite the fact that the so-called security wall has been proven to cause more harm than good. Today we collectively said, "Enough!" as we prepared to march unto Eitam Hill, the eighth hill of Efrat, to land that was zoned for housing more than twenty years ago. Highly strategic land that is slated to be on the "other" side of the fence ­ effectively giving the land away, endangering all of Gush Etzion and Jerusalem.

I joined in rather late; only a few lone trekkers were starting out then. A refreshment table, placed at the start, provided me with extra water, and I set out with another Efrat resident. We left the northern gates of Efrat under the early evening sun and entered beautiful, largely untouched land leading toward Eitam Hill. I felt a sense of adventure and purpose as we set forth, though thoroughly unequipped for the occasion, in a straight skirt and open-toe slides. Over piles of boulders, down rocky mountain ledges, through wild fields, and ancient olive groves we climbed and crawled, we hiked and scrambled, none of my companions any the wiser of where we were, or just how far our destination lay. It would be an hour of this rough terrain before we stopped, just short of the spot where the most determined among us were to begin to build, and fight for, Eitam Hill. However, we saw and heard plenty throughout the journey.

All along the way there were army soldiers, police officers, border police, and Yassam (SWAT) units. There were even some on horseback. It seemed that each unit had its own tasks. Some were there to block us from going at all, while others, ironically, were there to protect us as we went. Still others were there to maintain order, make arrests, and then there were those who seemed to be there for no reason other than to harass us.

People were coming and going. Early on we met a distraught woman on her way back. She said that they had made it to the end, and her husband was holding an Israeli flag. One soldier allegedly pushed her husband, and then it seemed to be open-season on this man as a number of other soldiers jumped in to attack him, after which the man was arrested ­ all for holding an Israeli flag.

A bit further on I watched four border policemen drag someone away. I had no idea what he had or had not done to warrant such excessive force. Maybe he was passively resisting? Or maybe he was a dangerous criminal? That seemed rather unlikely though.

Moshe, a 15 year old from Chashmonaim, had a very difficult time. When he and his friends reached the final hill of Eitam, he spoke to some of the soldiers there, explaining the importance for every Jew to settle the Land of Israel. A border policeman, whose name, ironically, was Arafat, started cursing them and pushing. The boys weren't looking for a fight. They were speaking nicely with one of the Yassam officers, when this man allegedly said, "I'm sick of being nice" and started to choke Moshe, while covering his mouth. Four Yassam officers reportedly joined in, and threw him onto a bus. When Moshe protested further brutal action toward someone else, the officer punched him in the face, used pressure points in his ear to cause pain, cursed at him. Finally, other cops pulled his attacker off the bus. However, soon afterwards several Yassam officers got back on the bus, pushed the border policemen who was protecting him out of the way, and proceeded to pull his tzizit, choking him, and kicking him. All the while Moshe was yelling, "I surrender, I surrender! I didn't do anything!"

Despite how terrible these reports seemed, I was determined to try to see this event through the eyes of the soldiers and officers. I desperately wanted to understand. I therefore tried talking to many of the various security personnel on the scene. I wanted to know -- did it torment them to have to prevent their fellow Jews from their struggle to preserve the Jewish quality of the Land of Israel? Most were pretty tight-lipped. One of the border policemen put it this way: "This is a restricted area, no civilians are allowed. There are hostile villages here."

"Yes," I told him, "I understand. But how do you feel about doing this?"

"I don't feel. I do my orders."

I tried several other officers. One told me that he can't speak to me while in uniform, that he has a job. I suggested that I speak to him later, when he is off-duty, and he said, "Later, I just want to go home."

I couldn't help but wonder: Does the army consist solely of battalions, or of individuals too? Where should the individual end and the establishment begin? Can they coexist? Must we lose our humanity to be part of the establishment?

The current "establishment" seems to have completely sold-out on the pioneers of Israel. What was Zionism, patriotism and nationalistic spirit, is now patently illegal. Criminal activity. Our soldiers -- OUR SOLDIERS! -- have been charged with stopping us in our tracks. Maybe even to threaten us and hurt us. Sometimes they do. But not always. Sometimes they're our brothers, our fathers, our sons. But not always.

The soldiers and police had said they could not speak to me, but after a while they did. They are not my enemies, and I am not theirs! When they passed out fruit to their comrades, they shared a plum with me as well. I was confused; were they the good guys or the bad guys? Whose side was I on anyway? This, an unfortunate byproduct of pitting brother against brother, I suddenly remembered my great-grandfather tell of the First World War, and how he had brothers on both sides of the conflict and therefore would never shoot a gun...

Eighteen year old Nahara, of Efrat, bemoaned the fact that the soldiers have forgotten the fact that we are all Jews. I wondered about it, and then I approached a female soldier posted nearby and asked her how she felt about this whole situation. She looked at me as if I fell from the moon. I explained my question again, and then on a hunch I asked her if she was Jewish. "No, I'm Russian," began her cold reply. "They told me to come, to do this, I come and I do this."

Surprised, I approached another female soldier. Turns out she was a non-Jew from Ethiopia. Upon further examination we discovered Druze and even Arab soldiers. Prior to the expulsion of Gush Katif we questioned how we can fight "brother against brother." It seems that they are already trying to deliberately circumvent this reality; after all, in a land with such a Jewish majority, what chance is there of such a large proportion of soldiers not being Jewish? Yet how can someone who is not Jewish, who has no feelings for the Land of Israel, truly fight for it? And were those soldiers, desperate to prevent this rag-tag group of people from settling an empty hilltop that has been zoned for this very purpose for more than twenty years, fighting for the Land of Israel or against it? Not an easy question, and there are no easy answers.

As it was already dark, I finally returned to Efrat, with a number of youth, in an armored army vehicle. I was surely the oldest one in the truck, though by far not the oldest one who had participated. It felt like a school trip out on a four-wheel-drive excursion. But truth be told, there are no youth like true, Zionist Israelis. Their drive and determination, their feelings, and their passion it was palpable in that tense and bumpy ride after a tense and bumpy night. In fact, it was in such direct contrast to the impassive soldiers sitting watching us, with blank looks on their faces. The soldiers couldn't care less. The fact that at every rally, demonstration, and social action event these young people show up in such huge numbers to demonstrate, to show their allegiance and to protect their country; it was true Zionist youth like them who created our past and it is true Zionist youth like them who hold our hope for the future. Who would you want fighting for your country?

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, July 27, 2007.

From Hereon, The Government of Israel Must Be Named The Government of Fleeing, Defeats and Betrayal and The Kadima Party Is a Pro-Arab Party

Here she goes again the foolish, misinformed US Secretary Of State. During her tenure, along her unjust political pressure, Condoleezza Rice has caused Israel to lose a great deal of national security, resulting in many Israelis deaths.

Madam Rice has not yet learned the basics of modern Israel history: it is the Arabs who are the occupying land that is the Land of Israel not the other way around. Also, there is no such a place as the "west bank." This abhorrent woman has not learned yet that it is the Land of Israel that belongs to Am Yisrael, the Nation of Israel.

Lacking the ability to think matters through, Madam Secretary did not deal with the question of what to do with the 240,000 Jews l already living in Judea and Samaria. But perhaps considering Israeli/Jewish issues is not important to the anti Israel SOS.

Madam Rice, it is your fuzzy mind that believes that the entire population of the State of Israel is devoted to the two-state solution you have in mind and cannot let go. Madam Rice talks about statehood for the Arabs is egregious especially when her designated people to receive a state is Fatah and their Fatah Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades who in fact have taken responsibility for every suicide bombing in Israel the past three years.

The paradigm of two-state solution is DEAD and has been removed from the negotiations table in Israel as well as the international policies! Israel is not for sale in the Arab Bazaar.

Larry, Curley and Moe -- The Three Stooges

This was written by Hillel Fendel and is called "Scy. Rice: Israel Must End Occupation of 'West Bank'." It appeared in Arutz-Sheva

(IsraelNN.com) Speaking with Arabic-language Radio Sawa, based in Washington and Dubai, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice went further in her demands on Israel than President Bush did in his recent speech on Israel.

Rice, about to depart for the Middle East to prepare an upcoming international meeting of regional leaders, said that President Bush recently stated "very clearly that Israel's future will rest in Israel, in places like Galilee and in the Negev -- and that the occupation of the West Bank will have to end, and a Palestinian state will need to be established."

In fact, however, in his recent speech, President Bush did not phrase this as a demand upon Israel, but rather cited Prime Minister Olmert as having "made clear that Israel's future lies in developing areas like the Negev and Galilee -- not in continuing occupation of the West Bank. This is a reality that Prime Minister Sharon recognized, as well. So unauthorized outposts should be removed and settlement expansion ended."

Rice Sets New Standard

Pres. Bush also stopped short of saying Israel must withdraw from all of Judea and Samaria. Bush said rather that future Israel-PA negotiations must "lead to a territorial settlement, with mutually agreed borders reflecting previous lines and current realities, and mutually agreed adjustments."

By stating so clearly that the "the occupation of the West Bank will have to end," Rice has set a new standard for United States officials of her stature in opposition to Israel's presence in Judea and Samaria.

Secretary Rice did not deal with the question of what to do with the 240,000 Jews living in the non-annexed areas of Judea and Samaria (nor the roughly equal amount living in the outlying neighborhoods of Jerusalem beyond Israel's pre-1967 borders). Israel has not yet been able to solve the problems of the fewer than 10,000 Jews it evicted from Gaza two years ago; those Jews are still living in transient camps of temporary pre-fab houses, with no long-term housing or employment solutions in sight.

No Invitations Yet

Secretary Rice also told Radio Sawa that "no invitations have gone out yet" for the planned meeting. "I want to talk to our allies in the region and our friends in the region about how they see and what they would see to be a useful international meeting," she said. "[It] will be, as the President said, an opportunity to review our progress. It will be an opportunity to make commitments to support the Israelis and Palestinians in their discussions, in their future negotiations...The United States doesn't want Made-in-America solutions. We need the entire population of states that are devoted to the two-state solution to work with us. And so these will be very important consultations."

Bush: Hamas -- Bad, Fatah -- Great

President Bush, in his speech ten days ago, compared Hamas and Fatah in stark terms, painting a picture of contrasts in which the Arabs under PA jurisdiction can, seemingly, choose either evil (Hamas) or good (Fatah).

"This is a moment of clarity for all Palestinians," Bush said," and now comes a moment of choice... There is the vision of Hamas, which the world saw in Gaza -- with murderers in black masks, and summary executions, and men thrown to their death from rooftops. By following this path, the Palestinian people would guarantee chaos, and suffering, and the endless perpetuation of grievance. They would surrender their future to Hamas's foreign sponsors in Syria and Iran. And they would crush the possibility of a Palestinian state."

"There's another option," Bush continued, "and that's a hopeful option. It is the vision of [Fatah] President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad; it's the vision of their government; it's the vision of a peaceful state called Palestine as a homeland for the Palestinian people. To realize this vision, these leaders are striving to build the institutions of a modern democracy. They're working to strengthen the Palestinian security services, so they can confront the terrorists and protect the innocent...And they're ensuring that Palestinian society operates under the rule of law. By following this path, Palestinians can reclaim their dignity and their future -- and establish a state of their own."

Rampant Fatah Terrorism and Hatred

In fact, however, Fatah's Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades have actually taken responsibility for every suicide bombing in Israel the past three years. Just this week, World Net Daily's Aaron Klein reports, Fatah terrorists organized yet another terrorist cell in Samaria for attacks against Israel. In addition, the 178 wanted Fatah terrorists whom Israel agreed to pardon last week if they would renounce terrorism described their hand-in of weapons as a "big joke."

Interestingly, Bush noted that Hamas men threw Fatah members out of apartment buildings during their recent battles, but neglected to mention that Fatah did the same to Hamas members.

As Caroline Glick wrote in the Jerusalem Post on Dec. 26, 2006, "If Abbas were interested in peace, he would not be demanding that Israel [do the following]: release terrorists from prison; stop arresting wanted terrorists; make it easier for terrorists to operate in Judea and Samaria by suspending IDF counterterror operations and taking down roadblocks; bring more terrorists into the areas from Jordan; arm terrorists through Egypt; and give him money to pay the salaries of terrorists."

Former Israeli Cabinet Minister Natan Sharansky succinctly described the cultural milieu in the Fatah-controlled Palestinian Authority as one that "promotes genocide" against Jews: "As in Nazi Germany, there is an entire culture of hatred in Palestinian Arab society today, from textbooks to crossword puzzles, from day camps to TV music videos. Calling for the murder of Jews, as Jews, is the end result."

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, July 27, 2007.

Mike Eber, LSA senior and a member of the MI Daily's editorial board wrote this article: Good Job, Brownie [PM Gordon Brown]. It appeared in The Michigan Daily July 16, 2007.

I think British Prime Minister Gordon Brown reads The Michigan Daily. Or, maybe he just has the potential to be one of the most inspiring leaders since Winston Churchill. Earlier this summer, I argued for the removal of the term "Islamic fundamentalist" on the grounds that it too improperly associates political terrorism with a religion (War of words, 05/29/2007). Similarly, Brown took the bold step of eliminating his administration's official use of the adjective "Muslim" while publicly discussing terrorism.

Before the fellas at Webster get into a brawl with the blokes at Oxford, consider the motivations for a person to perpetrate such an un-American act as Brown has done. According to Brown's spokesman, "There is clearly a need to strike a consensual tone in relation to all communities across the UK."

By casting aside religious signifiers like "Muslim," Brown is trying to regulate divisive speech and foster a greater spirit of British national pride in all people. Reversing the old "sticks and stones" adage, Brown appeals to various sympathies of oppressed people without pumping in billions in tax revenue to do so. A little sensitivity goes a long way.

An idea like Brown's, a change in semantics based on not assigning a religion to terrorism, created uproar amongst online readers of the Daily back in May. Few readers actually responded in ways ultimately approving of violence against Muslims. Here in America it seems that the general public would rather wade in this red-versus-blue manner, decide who is "American" and whose code of religious-based morality we want. And, according to some, singling out divisive speech is deemed political whitewash.

Ironically, this rift in the American viewpoint mirrors our own misunderstanding of Middle Eastern politics. As we consider terror in that part of the world as part of the same movement, we fail to recognize the difference between Al Qaeda and Hamas. Whereas one is bent on global jihad, the latter is concerned with local conflicts and vehemently opposes Al Qaeda involvement in the West Bank and Gaza. If we cannot understand this complexity, how can we call terrorism a Muslim problem? Not understanding the particularities of so-called "Muslim" terrorism handicaps us in ways Brown is starting to realize.

Jerome S. Kaufman replies in this essay: I Don't Think So.

It is truly unfortunate that British Prime Minister Gordon Brown finds it too uncomfortable to face the facts of Muslim or Islamic Fundamentalism and its incontrovertible links to world-wide terrorism. He, instead, has chosen to adopt a language of obfuscation lulling to sleep his own nation. He refuses to acknowledge as our mutual enemy, Islamo-fascism -- a world-wide ideology that daily declares its ultimate centuries-old goal to destroy Western thought and to forcibly replace our way of life with Shar'ia law. How many times must it be said that it is true that all Muslims are not terrorists but virtually all terrorists happen to be Muslims?

It is only necessary to read, even the liberal press and watch overwhelmingly liberal television to understand that the far greatest number of bloody conflicts going on all over the world, are wars based upon the notion of Islamic triumphalism and irredentism. This "religion of peace" is waging bloody conflicts of the sword in the Philippines, Indonesia, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Chechnya, Iraq, Gaza, Judea and Samaria, Macedonia, Algeria, the Sudan, Sub-Saharan Africa, etc. -- all in the name of a religious concept far more coherent than the somnolent Western nations, as painfully exemplified by Gordon Brown, are willing to comprehend or acknowledge. Right before Brown's own eyes, London has become what Melanie Phillip's has named Londistan in her brilliant book of the same name.

Daniel Johnson in Commentary, November 2006 reports that, Abu Izzadeen, a Jamaican convert to Islam living in London, advised a British audience in public forum that, "Britain does not belong to the English or the Queen or to the British government, but to Allah. He has put us on earth to implement shari'a law." Indeed, Abu Izzadeen's attempt to claim the East End of London as an exclusively "Muslim area" may not be mere fantasy. In 2012, the East End will host the Olympics. Waiting to be built, in a spot adjacent to the Olympic village, is the largest place of worship in Europe; the London Markaz, part of a vast complex projected to cost £100 million, most of it coming from Saudi Arabia. The organizational backer for this project is Tablighi Jamaat, a Muslim missionary group that the FBI has labeled a recruiting ground for al Qaeda.

London, with over 1,000 mosques, is already Europe's unofficial Muslim capital. Its status will be enhanced immeasurably by the Markaz, whose size -- it is projected to hold 70,000 worshippers, dwarfing St. Paul's Cathedral and Westminster Abbey! To contemplate the building of so potent a symbol of Islamic triumphalism over Europe's Christian heritage is all but incredible.

At an exponentially less important level, it is unfortunate for the readers of the Michigan Daily that one of the Daily editors has embraced PM Brown's lethal exercise in political correctness as a panacea for the world's mortal conflict with militant Islam. Hopefully future articles in the Daily will not reflect this naïve point of view.

Jerome S. Kaufman is National Secretary of the Zionist Organization of America and hosts the Israel Commentary website (http://www.israel-commentary.org).

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, July 27, 2007.

I knew and read his book Never Again, when in the '60 I was a youth group advisor. Then I met him at Haifa U. around the period this was written. Everything he said sounded wild and radical, but proved to be what happened. Today we are surrounded and have put out lives in the hands of inmates who run our asylum, and incompetents, who should be put into padded cells. It does not bode well for the future.

I've been predicting {prophesizing} economic and financial collapse with an inflationary depression being the result. It sounds like an oxymoron, but folks from Germany in the period from 1918 at the end of the war, until 1923 can testify to that it happened and will happen again.

This was written by Rav Meir Kahane in September 1976.

Many times I have spoken of the Talmudic parable of the king, his servant, and the fish. Never was it more apt.

Once there was a king who sent his servant to buy a fish. The servant returned with a fish that stank. In fury the king gave the servant a choice of three punishments: "Eat the fish, get whipped for the fish, or pay for the fish." In common with most people, the servant chose not to reach into his pocket and he decided to eat the stinking fish but after two bites the stench made him give up and he decided to get whipped for it. The pain of the lashes, however, made him stop that, too, and he cried out, "I will pay for the fish!"

And so the fool ate the fish, got whipped for the fish and, in the end, had to pay for it, anyhow. Those in Israel and without, who refuse to understand that nothing will deter America from demanding that Israel make the maximum concessions, play the same fool. Those who do not understand that there is nothing that Israel can possible do, that there are no compromises it can make, that there is nothing short of full retreat to the 1967 borders that will satisfy the United States -- are the same fools as the servant who ate, got whipped and in the end had to pay anyhow,

Their refusal to make the difficult choice of telling the Americans NO, now, at this moment, will see them making the retreats they hope will avert American anger; it will see this effort fail even as the frontier moves from its present lines within the Arab heartland to new ones close to the Jewish cities; and most important, the Americans will make the same demands they always have envisioned since the days of the Roger Plan -- total Israeli withdrawal. And since this is a thing that not even the most dovish of Israelis will agree to, the result will be an ultimate Israeli firm NO, an ultimate American anger of the kind all men of "new initiative" propose to avert today by compromise, and exactly the same conditions of confrontation that would come anyhow if the Israelis said their NO today. There would be one great difference, however, a NO today will bring the crisis while Israel stands poised near the Arab capitols. A NO tomorrow, after all the hapless and confused compromises and "initiatives," will bring the same crisis near Tel Aviv, Beersheva and Netanya.

This is what happens when foolish and confused Israelis, by refusing to pay the price of saying "no" to the stinking fish of pressure, attempt to eat it, submit to getting beaten over it and then learn to their dismay that there is no escape from the difficult decision that they should have made in the first place.

Let the Israeli government, its men of "new initiative" and the Jewish leaders in America understand several basic axioms:

  1. America is committed to the Roger Plan and the world's interpretation of security council Resolution 242, i.e. Israeli withdrawal from all (but insignificant) parts of the lands of 1967. This includes the Golan Heights, Gaza, the entire West bank and the entire Sinai as well as changing Jerusalem's present Jewish sovereignty status.

  2. American interests lie, in the minds of most officials in Washington, with Arab oil, the huge potential Arab market and with supplanting Soviet influence with American. This means, at best, an "even-handed" policy rather than a pro-Israeli one.

  3. America is moving steadily to recognition of the "Palestinians" as a people and of whoever they decide to have as their leaders. Those leaders are clearly the PLO and already the move to "moderate" the PLO, "public-relations-wise" is underway so that Washington can more easily pressure Israel into recognizing them.

  4. The Ford-Kissinger administration is determined to prevent stagnation and will pressure Israel into concession after concession.

  5. No administration will got o war for Israel and no administration will continue the present aid level no matter what Israel does or concedes. The frantic search for human allies will end as unsuccessfully as those Jews in the past who forgot what faith in the Jewish G-d was and who turned to Egypt or Assyria or other "allies" for help, only to learn to their dismay that the allies betrayed them.

Stinking fish are not made to be eaten or to get whipped or. One must have the courage to look at the truth and pay the bitter price of honesty. America is tired of the Israeli nuisance and wishes it would eat the fish already. The time to loudly proclaim NO is now.

Contact Fred Reifenberg at freify@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Daniel Mandel, July 26, 2007.

Turkey's Justice and Development Party (AKP) won re-election last Sunday -- a result that could decisively alter the character and direction of this 74-million strong, hitherto secular Muslim republic.

There are those who doubt the gravity of this result. Skeptics point to the fact that the AKP has been in office since 2002 without overturning Turkey's secular norms or making major alterations to its broadly pro-Western foreign policy. But all this could now change because the AKP, Islamist in character but incremental in operation, has conducted a low-intensity assault on the secular foundations of the state and now stands a good chance of finally breaching them.

How has the AKP gone about it? Although the AKP won in 2002 only 34.3 percent of the vote, the parliamentary threshold of 10 percent kept out the five incumbent coalition parties, which the electorate punished for the country's economic malaise. The AKP thus ended up with two-thirds of the seats, enough to override presidential vetoes.

At first, a criminal conviction for inciting religious hatred kept the AKP's leader, Recep Tayyip Erdoðan, out of the new parliament (He had been convicted after reciting at a public meeting an Islamized version of a national poem by Ziya Gokalp, declaiming "Mosques are our barracks, domes our helmets, minarets our bayonets, believers our soldiers. This holy army guards my religion."). However, amendments to the election law by the AKP and the overturning of President Ahmet Necdet Sezer's veto enabled Erdogan to run in a 2003 by-election, to win a seat, and to take over the premiership from his colleague, Abdullah Gul.

Without dramatic shifts or confrontations, Erdoðan created new universities to which he could appoint his chosen rectors and lowered the mandatory retirement age in the bureaucracy to enable the appointment of many thousands of new, Islamist judges. Some AKP-dominated municipalities introduced bans on the sale of alcohol. He also adroitly pushed Turkey's quest for EU membership by instituting liberalizing reforms that have the effect of weakening the military establishment, a staunchly secular institution and guarantor of the secular state.

In April, Gul became the AKP's candidate for the presidency that Sezer is vacating. However, the secular opposition parties boycotted the proceedings. This was accompanied by anti-AKP demonstrations, including one 700,000-strong in Istanbul, and dark hints from the military of consequences to follow. At this point, the country's highest court invalidated the first round of voting on technical grounds.

However, this proved only a temporary setback for Gul and the AKP. The AKP now passed a constitutional amendment allowing for direct popular election of the president. Sezer and the opposition Republican People's Party failed in an appeal to the Supreme Court to repeal the amendment, so a referendum on the popular election amendment is scheduled for October 21.

Gul, who first withdrew, then renewed, his candidacy for the presidency, thus retains a distinct chance of winning that post, whichever way November's referendum on popular election of the presidency goes. If the referendum is passed, a politically dominant AKP is likely to have its candidate endorsed by the electorate; if not, an AKP enjoying close to a two-thirds majority (340 of 550 seats) might well prevail in having the legislature endorse its candidate.

The legislature, after all, now includes the Nationalist Action Party, which won 14 percent of the vote (70 seats), and which might well accommodate the AKP in its choice of candidate. Its general secretary, Cihan Pacaci, has hinted as much, saying that the presidential election shouldn't be approached "just in terms of whether the candidate's wife wears a headscarf."

Why would an AKP presidency matter? Because the Turkish president disposes of vital powers. He determines not only which party leaders form government, but who heads government departments as well as the Court of Accounts, which audits the government. He appoints quarter of the justices on the Constitutional Court, the chief public prosecutor and -- hugely important in a country where the military establishment is the bastion of the secular republic -- the head of the armed forces. In addition, the president can veto legislation once and, if presented a second time with the rejected legislation, can refer it for adjudication to the same Constitutional Court.

Just how central the presidency is to impeding the AKP's Islamist agenda is apparent from the record of the outgoing secularist president. Sezer vetoed over 3,000 appointments by the Erdogan government and referred more than one hundred pieces of legislation he had previously vetoed to the Constitutional Court. This system of checks and balances to a considerable extent held the AKP's Islamist political insurgency at bay. The elevation of the AKP's candidate to the presidency would end that holding action, with unknown consequences for the secular republic.

This appeared in Front Page Magazine
(http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=29299). The original has live links to additional material.

To Go To Top

Posted by Koira, July 26, 2007.

This was written by Donald Meissner and it appeared yesterday in Front Page Magazine

The establishment media's favorite terrorism expert in recent years has been Michael Scheuer -- and Scheuer's favorite scapegoats of late have been shadowy, Jewish "Israel-firsters who dominate the American governing elite."

In part, Scheuer's status in the media is owed to his status as former director of the CIA unit responsible to apprehend Osama bin Laden. In part, this is due to the fact that Scheuer appears to enjoy disparaging his former employer.

He recently echoed the Left's criticism, telling ABC News,

"We've tried to do Afghanistan on the cheap, and it's going to cost us domestically in terms of the next attack on the United States."

However, Scheuer's 2004 critique of U.S. foreign policy Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror, indicts more than President Bush. He blames Jewish "neo-conservatives" and implicates Israel in America's victimization.

"Surely there can be no other historical example of a faraway, theocracy-in-all-but-name of only six million people that ultimately controls the extent and even the occurrence of an important portion of political discourse and national security debate in a country of 270-plus million people that prides itself on religious toleration, separation of church and state, and freedom of speech."

Scheuer's characterization of Israel as a theocracy is ludicrous -- Israel is the only secular democracy in the Middle East, with citizens free to practice any religion, or none at all. At least Scheuer's predilection is clear: he does not hide his antipathy for the secular Jewish state.

On April 9th of this year, in a speech to the Center for Naval Analysis, Scheuer said:

"By defining bin Laden and his ilk as would-be Islamist Hitlers, the U.S. citizen Israel-firsters who dominate the American governing elite ensure that those who question the nature and benefit of current U.S.-Israel ties are slandered as pro-Nazi, anti-Semites."

In this case Scheuer, citing no specific evidence, invents a Jewish conspiracy theory. In his world the U.S. political, economic, and military alliance with Israel is a reverse proof that U.S. policy is "dominated" by that interest group. Who are these shadowy dominators, and what is the source of their awesome power? Scheuer has no answers, only insinuation and circular logic.

Scheuer publicly defended the innuendo-ridden Walt-Mearsheimer report, which he said

"critiqued at length the prolonged, deranging, and clearly negative impact the Israeli lobby has had on the formulation and conduct of U.S. foreign policy."

Not everyone would stand by the ludicrous report. The imprimatur of Harvard University was rescinded from Walt-Mearsheimer. Numerous scholars, including Alan Dershowitz, have documented the report's errors of fact, omission, inaccurate citations, and lack of adherence to basic scholarly standards regarding sources and interpretation.

Also troubling, in 2005, Scheuer remarked to the Council on Foreign Relations that Israel operates in America

"probably the most successful covert-action program in the history of man."

His lone example was the Holocaust Museum in Washington -- as though Israel arranged the Holocaust for the purposes of manipulating U.S. foreign policy. [logically all he has to believe is they invented it]

Now that you know the conspiratorial musings of Scheuer's imaginative mind, several questions arise: How does a top CIA official develop and espouse views diametrically opposed to U.S. foreign policy since 1948? Is he correct in his assertions?

Like other analysts who consider the U.S.-Israel relationship a root cause of Muslim fury -- august minds like Jimmy Carter, Pat Buchanan, Mel Gibson, Norman Finkelstein, and David Duke -- Scheuer is primed and ready to be called an anti-Semite, so don't go there. A greater rhetorical faux pas would be to mention the Holocaust, or to reference Munich.

There is one sure way former staffers like Scheuer, a self-described "life-long Republican," enter the limelight and lecture circuit: vehemently criticize the Bush administration, and blame the entire morass on Israel and anonymous, perfidious Jews. That is truly what Scheuer and his ilk intend when they conjure and decry an imaginary pro-Israel hegemony within the United States.

Is it possible that a mere six-million beleaguered Jews in Israel, many recent immigrants from the former Soviet Union, Africa and elsewhere, could manipulate the world's only superpower? How many "Elders of Zion" live among us here in the United States? To paraphrase Natan Sharansky, from his book The Case for Democracy: to demonize, delegitimize, and hold Israel to a double standard is modern anti-Semitism. To anyone who studies world history and the Hebrew Bible, this prepossession and prejudice remains as old as the Judean hills.

The Jews, slaughtered and repeatedly exiled from nations of the Diaspora, are now forced to entertain the mortifying question of their "right to exist" in their sliver of a homeland. The conspiratorial anti-Israelis profoundly misunderstand the meaning of their one correct conclusion: Israel represents the essence of the struggle. The Jews were participants in the Genesis of Western civilization, contribute fully to the blossoming of our advanced culture, and will still exist when the walls come tumbling down. For Scheuer and his cohorts, Jews are hastening its demise.

If that's his best analysis of world history, his analysis of bin Laden may also be suspect.

Contact Koira at koira@dbmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Aleksandra Fliegler, July 27, 2007.

Dan Calic wrote this urgent email.

Please forward it to any other lists which supporters of Israel might subscribe to.

Many of you know about Walid Shoebat http://www.shoebat.com/ the former PLO member who in 1993 renounced Islam and has since dedicated his life to supporting Israel and the Jewish people.

Some of you have seen him recently at UC Davis and more recently at Stanford and in Southern California.

Just last week he flew to New York to speak at a gathering for the victims of Sderot bombings.

Walid would like to visit Israel, but has been denied a tourist visa due to his prior involvement with the PLO.

Since 1993 has chosen to dedicate his life to supporting Israel, and has traveled all over speaking in synagogues, churches and college campuses. He's also been a frequent guest on Fox News, and other network programs.

Because of his convictions he has become an enemy of Islam, thus his life is at risk.

I believe he should be granted a tourist visa.

Walid and I have developed a personal relationship and with his blessing I have composed a letter to be presented to the Israeli Consul General.

Walid has personally approved the letter.

The Consul General and I have spoken and he has agreed to present the letter to the Israeli government for review.

It would be helpful to have other supportive statements from prominent members of the Jewish community included with the letter.

If you feel as I do that Walid should be granted a tourist visa, I invite you to provide a supportive statement, which I will include in the package to be presented to the Consul General. Best would be a letter with letterhead and the original signature. Please contact me at calic@comcast.net if you're interested in helping this wonderful supporter of Israel.

Send me an email at calic@comcast.net and I'll give you my mailing address.

Contact Aleksandra Fliegler at thelady@bayarea.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Chuck Morse, July 27, 2007.

Organizations that apologize for Islamic terrorists on a regular basis, such as the Council on American- Islamic Relations (CAIR), are engaging in character assassination when they equate honest criticism of Islamic extremism with the charge that the person doing the criticizing is anti-Muslim or anti-Arab. The charge is as ridiculous and as dangerous as a claim that criticizing Nazism during World War II would've been anti-German or criticizing Communism during the Cold War would've been anti-Russian.

In case the apologists haven't noticed, the United States, the western democracies, and, for that matter, more moderate Muslim states and peoples around the world are defending themselves against an aggressive enemy. That enemy is the forces of Islamic terrorism. It should be obvious that criticizing those who are trying to kill us, and in fact have already killed many of us, because we refuse to submit ourselves to their control has nothing to do with the ethnic background of the killers but, rather, has everything to do with their actions. What these apologists are doing is no different than claiming that it would be anti-Italian to criticize the Mafia.

A case in point is an attempt by CAIR to seek damages from US Airways for ejecting a group of 6 bearded Imams who publically chanted "Allah Akbar" before boarding a passenger jet in Minneapolis last November. While this would be part of a prayer for moderate Muslims, for the Islamic terrorist, such an utterance would be the the equivalent of shouting "Heil Hitler" before gassing a group of Jews. After boarding the plane, the Imams, rather than sitting at their assigned seats, situated themselves at locations in the plane that were reminicent of positions taken by the 9/11 hijackers. According to the police report, an arabic speaking passenger spoke to one of the Imams who expressed radical views. Hijackers shouted "Allah Akbar" as they seized the passenger jets on September 11, 2001 turning them into missiles. Under the circumstances, people boarding American airplanes are right to be concerned.

Yet I saw the executive director of the Foundation for Arab-American Leadership, Dr. Hussein Ibish, chortling and sneering the other night on Hannity and Colmes in response to concerns expressed by Stop the Madrassa Coalition representative Sara Springer over a planned opening of a public school in Brooklyn that would be dedicated to the teaching of Arab language and culture. I'm sure that such a school would be fine in more peaceful times but is it not reasonable and proper, in these less than peaceful times, to be concerned and vigilant?

We are struggling to survive as a nation and as a people and many have already lost the fight. How many children lost one or both of their parents on 9/11? The Department of Homeland Security is telling us to expect more mass murder in the coming months. Yet groups such as CAIR are shutting down our ability to identify the nature of the enemy by harassing and suing those to dare to speak of it. An example is talk show host Michael Graham, who resigned from his DC radio gig rather than apologize for remarks he made about Islamic terrorism. His station was threatened with a lawsuit by CAIR. Today, Michael Graham is back on the air in Boston but for how long? Indeed, the fear is in the room.

For more information, please check out the excellent website www.anti-cair-net.org.

Chuck Morse is a Boston radio talk show host, author, columnist and former Republican congressional candidate.

To Go To Top

Posted by David Haimson, July 27, 2007.

This is a New York Sun editorial. It appeared July 18, 2007 in the New York Sun and is archived at

Those who want to comprehend the import of the new National Intelligence Estimate on the terrorist threat have two choices. They can look at the dispatch by our Eli Lake on page one of yesterday's Sun, which reported its conclusion that one of two known Al Qaeda leadership councils meets regularly in eastern Iran. Or they can go with the version being retailed by the official briefer of the press, Ted Gistaro, who, when asked about Mr. Lake's report yesterday, went out of his way to mumble something about how he didn't know anything about it.

Our advice is go with Mr. Lake. One of the hottest potatoes in the intelligence community right now is the gathering evidence that not only is Iran operating against us in Iraq but that leaders of Al Qaeda are operating against us from inside Iran. This is not information anyone is eager to put his or her name to, lest they get accused of ginning up support for a war. We'll leave it to those in a higher pay grade to decide whether there ought to be a war. But Mr. Lake's assignment is to cut to the facts, and the fact is that our intelligence community has concluded that Al Qaeda leaders are operating inside Iran. The intelligence community diverges, as Mr. Lake reported yesterday, on the extent to which the hosting of senior leaders in Iran represents a policy of the regime in Tehran or the rogue actions of Iran's Quds Force, the terrorist units that report directly to Iran's supreme leader. But the picture is increasingly clear that one of the two councils that run Al Qaeda -- they're known as Shura Majlis -- meets in eastern Iran in a network established after Al Qaeda was driven from Afghanistan in 2001. One of participants in the Shura Majlis in Iran is Saad bin Laden.

Recognize the last name? It's one of Osama's sons and is, some analysts believe, his heir apparent. In other words, the maneuverings being carried out in Iran by Al Qaeda are not merely the comings and goings of the odd messenger. It is a far more serious thing, according to the picture being sketched for Mr. Lake. And at some point it is going to have to be confronted, either militarily, by covert means, or -- though it's not much of a prospect at the moment -- political or diplomatic means. If we've learned one thing from all the intelligence controversies over the years, the worst thing we can do is take the blandishments of intelligence analysts as gospel.


Contact David Haimson at DvHaimson@aol.com to receive emails with direct links to articles on Israel that are well-worth reading.

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Sommer, July 26, 2007.

Jewish Poll: "Disengagement was wrong move 59%:29%; Oppose additional unilateral withdrawal 74%:18%"

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
Website: http://www.imra.org.il

Telephone poll of a representative sample of 493 adult Israeli Jews carried out by Teleseker for Maariv the week of 26 July, 2007.

Was the disengagement in the way that it was carried out a correct move or a mistake?
Mistake 59% Correct move 29% No opinion 29%

How did the disengagement impact the security situation of Israel?
Worse 51% No impact 30% Better 12%

Do you agree with the assertion that the State of Israel abandoned the evacuees of Gush Katif?
Yes 71% No 19% Don't know 10%

Are you for or against the unilateral evacuation of communities in Judea and Samaria?
For 18% Against 74%

Palestinian Arab Poll: Eighty-five per cent of those polled see negotiations between Fatah and Hamas as more important than peace talks with Israel.

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director of IMRA:
Fafo provided the detailed tables to IMRA:
The results are available at Fafo's web-page:
Fafo Press Release 18 July 2007

Question 3.45: All Palestinians factions must stop firing rockets against Israel
Total: Strongly agree 17% Agree 27% Disagree 25% Strongly disagree 31%
West Bank: Strongly agree 16% Agree 31% Disagree 28% Strongly disagree 25%
GAza Strip:Strongly agree 20% Agree 19% Disagree 20% Strongly disagree 42%]

Political chaos takes its toll:

A new poll says Palestinians are losing faith in their political leaders and want reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah

According to a new poll by Fafo, Palestinians see national reconciliation as more important than peace talks with Israel. Eighty-five per cent of those polled would like to see negotiations between Fatah and Hamas. Although a higher proportion of Hamas voters (91%) are in favor of such talks, reconciliation between the two parties also attracts strong support among Fatah followers (73%). Fifty-eight per cent say they want peace negotiations with Israel, which is a decline by 20 percentage points from December 2006. People in Gaza and those who vote for Hamas are less likely to support talks with Israel than others.

Palestinians are in disagreement on the formation of the recent government. Thirty-one per cent of the Palestinians have little or no trust in the Emergency Government. A similar share of the population is distrustful of the Hamas Government in Gaza. Thirty-seven per cent think Mr. Fayyad's government is Palestine's legitimate government, while 28% believe Mr. Haniyeh's Hamas government is legitimate. The remainder of those polled --

35% -- believes neither government is legitimate. Both governments receive the highest legitimacy scores in Gaza while a larger share of people in the West Bank (41%) think neither government is legitimate.

People are divided on the best way to improve the political situation. One-half of those polled are of the opinion that President Abbas did the right thing when he declared emergency laws and appointed a new government. A majority of the Fatah followers polled stand behind the President's decision while few of the Hamas supporters polled do. Thirty-three percent believe the solution is to be found in elections for a new parliament, while thirty-one percent think that the preferred way forward is the establishment of a coalition government. Fourteen percent are of the opinion that the best strategy is to let Hamas stay in power, whereas 6% think Fayyad's government should continue. Sixteen per cent believe a referendum would be appropriate.

It is unclear whether parliamentary elections will help the situation. If parliamentary elections were to be held, 48% think that would have a positive effect on the current political situation, while 26% believe such elections would make things worse. If elections were to take place, as many as 40% of the electorate would chose not to cast their votes, which is an increase of 12 percentage points from Fafo's poll in December 2006.

If elections took place today, however, Fatah would win a majority of the popular vote by a clear margin. Fatah would receive 45% of the votes of those polled, which is level with the support recorded by Fafo's poll in December 2006. Hamas, on the other hand, drops 6 percentage points over the previous poll, receiving 22% of the votes today. Fourteen per cent of the respondents said they did not know which party to support. Fatah received approximately the same percentage of votes in both areas, gaining as much in the West Bank as it has lost in Gaza, when compared with the December poll. Hamas has lost 9% in the West Bank and gained 3% popularity in the Gaza Strip. Today, 15% of West Bankers and 34% of Gaza dwellers would have voted for Hamas, as compared with respectively 24% and 31% in December 2006.

There is general fear (73%) that Gaza and the West Bank will drift further apart. Very few people support the idea of a Palestine divided into two separate regions.

Forty-four per cent of the population want to establish Islamic rule of law in Gaza. 89% of these want the same for the West Bank.

The proposal to send UN forces to the Gaza Strip receives support from only one in four in the Gaza and the West Bank. A higher proportion of Fatah followers (42%) than Hamas supporters (8%) are positive to the proposal.

Only 7% think Tony Blair is the right man on the job as the Quartet's Middle East envoy.

Fafo carried out an opinion poll of 1,953 adult individuals in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the period 2-12 July. The study entailed face-to-face interviews with persons aged 18 years and older. It gathered information on all household members' living conditions and the selected individuals' attitudes regarding current political affairs, elections, the security situation, and relations with Israel. The poll was funded by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Attitudes regarding the current political situation

While 69% of Fatah's supporters think President Abbas does a good job, only 11% of Hamas' supporters do the same. Altogether 43% of the respondents think the President does a good job (45% in the West Bank; 39% in Gaza), whereas 31% think he does a very bad job. This is deterioration from December 2006, when 56% said the President did a good job (52% in the West Bank; 60% in Gaza) and 21% thought he did a very bad job.

53% (55% in the West Bank; 50% in Gaza) think President Abbas did the right thing when he appointed the Emergency Government. This is true for 18% of Hamas' followers and 86% of those who support Fatah.

However, only 37% think that the Emergency Government of Fayyad is Palestine's legitimate Government (36% in the West Bank; 39% in Gaza). 28% hold the opinion that Haniyeh's Hamas Government is Palestine's legitimate government (24% in the West Bank; 35% in Gaza). One in three (35%) believe neither government is legitimate (41% in the West Bank; 26% in Gaza). Among people who vote Hamas, a majority (80%) say Haniyeh's government is legitimate while 14% claim none is legitimate. A majority of Fatah voters (76%) believe Fayyad's government is the rightful one, while 18% assert neither of the two governments is legitimate.

50% of the respondents believe Hamas will improve the security situation on the Gaza Strip. As many people think Hamas will manage to resolve the conflicts between the various tribes (hamulahs) in Gaza, whereas one in three (33%) trust Hamas will better the economic situation there. Gazans have higher confidence in Hamas than West Bankers.

On a question regarding the responsibility of the violent fights that triggered the formation of the Emergency Government, 84% of the polled blame Israel and 54% hold the international community responsible. Half the respondents say President Abbas and Fatah are responsible for the crisis while 65 put blame on Hamas. Fewer people ascribe responsibility to regional actors such as Iran/Syria (32%) and Egypt (20%).

27% think Hamas will resort to violent means to take over the control of the West Bank (28% in the West Bank; 30% in Gaza). 47% of Hamas voters hold this opinion as compared with 24% of Fatah voters.

44% of the polled would like to see Islamic rule of law established in Gaza (42% in the West Bank; 48% in Gaza). 83% of Hamas supporters compared to 20% of Fatah voters wish such a development. 89% of those in favor of introducing Islamic rule in Gaza want the same for the West Bank (69% of Fatah voters; 97% of Hamas voters).

A vast majority of respondents (85%) would like to see negotiations between Fatah and Hamas (73% of Fatah voters; 91% of Hamas voters).

Only a minority (23%) think that the appropriate solution to the current political crisis is to dismantle the Palestinian Authority (PA) and all its institutions. This is, however, a minor increase from 19% in December 2006. There are more people who support a closure of the PA in the West Bank (26%) than in the Gaza Strip (16%), suggesting a stronger breakdown of confidence in the overall political system in the West Bank than in Gaza.

There is general fear (73%) that the crack between Gaza and the West Bank will widen (77% of Fatah voters; 63% of Hamas voters). Very few people (14%) support the idea of a Palestine divided into two separate regions even if Fatah and Hamas were not to reconcile.

More than half the respondents (54%) fear the collapse of the PLO. There is no regional variation here, but the fear is larger among Fatah voters (56%) than Hamas voters (47%).

Both Haniyeh's Hamas Government and Fayyad's Emergency Government attract little trust in the Palestinian population. Only 31% of the polled state they have very much and some trust in them. The support to both governments is approximately 10 percentage points stronger in Gaza than in the West Bank. Hamas followers voice the most support for the Hamas Government in Gaza (86%) while Fatah followers give their strongest support to the Emergency Government (59%).

People's trust in Parliament is also low (32%: 35% in the West Bank and 29% in Gaza), which is 7 percentage points lower than in December of last year. Those who support Hamas reveal more trust in Parliament than people who support Fatah, at 68% versus 15%.

People's confidence in the security services (including the police) is lower than last year. Merely 6% voice 'a great deal' of confidence while 21% report 'quite a lot' of confidence. 38% have no confidence in the security services at all.

The Executive Forces loyal to Hamas also suffer reduced support compared to last year. Only 16% voice 'a great deal' of confidence and 14% report 'quite a lot' of confidence, while 53% have absolutely no confidence in them.

People have the lowest confidence in political parties. 42% of the polled say they have no confidence, 3% have 'a great deal' and 14% report 'quite a lot' of confidence in them. Only 31% say they have confidence in NGOs.

15% have 'a great deal' of confidence and 30% report 'quite a lot' of confidence in the PLO, while 26% have no confidence in the national Palestinian institution. The faith in PLO is stronger in Gaza than the West Bank and Fatah followers much more frequently report confidence in the PLO than Hamas followers do, at 75% versus 27%.

Only 1% voice 'a great deal' of confidence and 9% report 'quite a lot' of confidence in the Quartet, while 73% have absolutely no confidence in the Quartet, which recently appointed Tony Blair its special envoy to the Middle East.

UNRWA is the institution that enjoys the greatest degree of confidence in the Palestinian population as altogether 59% said they have either 'a great deal' of confidence or 'quite a lot' of confidence in it. Yet it is a 10 percentage point decline in support since December 2006.

14% of the respondents have some confidence in the CNN and the BBC, while a majority of 62% does not trust these media outlets whatsoever.

The poll asked people to indicate what, in their minds, the most pressing political issue is right now. Results suggest that several issues are almost equally important: reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas (25%); improved economic conditions (23%); release of Palestinian prisoners from Israeli captivity (23%); and resumption of peace talks with Israel (14%).

One in four support deploying UN troops in Gaza (insignificant regional variation). Among those in favor of sending UN troops, 88% think they should buffer Israeli and Palestinian armed forces, 74% say they should impose law and order in the streets, 72% think they could separate armed groups from Hamas and Fatah, while 60% believe the UN forces should stop arms smuggling between Egypt and Gaza.

Election trends:

If elections to a new Palestinian parliament were to be held, 32% say they would vote for Fatah and 16% would vote for Hamas. 40% declare they would choose not to participate in the elections. Excluding those who would abstain, Fatah receives 45% and Hamas 22% of the votes.

If parliamentary elections took place, 48% think that would have a positive effect on the current political situation, while 26% believe such elections would make things worse (22% in the West Bank; 34% in Gaza). Fatah followers in particular deem new elections useful (81%), while fewer Hamas supporters (28%) do the same. 49% of the Hamas supporters believe new parliamentary elections would be counterproductive.

If people were to elect a new Palestinian president now, 30% would opt not to cast their votes. The current President, Abbas, would receive 25% of the votes, Hamas' leader Haniyeh, who has declined to leave the Prime Minister's Office in Gaza, would receive 23% of the votes, and Marwan Barghouti, who is still behind Israeli bars, is supported by 18% of the electorate.

Living conditions:

16% of the Palestinians claim to be among the poor while 13% say they are rich. The majority (74%) say they are neither rich nor poor.

28% of the population aged 15 and above were working during the week preceding the interview (47% of men; 9% of women). 51% of West Bank men worked while 41% of men in the Gaza Strip did the same. 10% and 7% of women worked in the two areas respectively. These are very low figures both in an international and a regional perspective.

10% of the surveyed population was unemployed in the week preceding the interview, whereas 26% were students and 31% were classified as housewives. The retired and those who for health reasons were unable to work made up 5%.

Assuming that the Palestinian workforce consist of those who worked and those who were out of work (but wished to work) the week preceding the poll, we have a labor force of 38% and an unemployment rate of 25%. The unemployment is highest among the youngest (38% for people aged 15-29); it is virtually identical for women and men; and it is higher in Gaza (31%) than in the West Bank (22%).

The personal economy has deteriorated for 62% of the population (WB 60%; Gaza 66%) compared to the same time last year. 6% reported improved economy (WB 7%; Gaza 4%).

The life situation has deteriorated severely for 30% of the polled compared to last year while an additional 26% of them reported that things in life had become somewhat worse. Only 2% claimed to have improved their situation and 10% said their lives had improved somewhat. The percentage of respondents who reported deteriorating conditions was 9 percentage points higher in Gaza compared to the West Bank.

49% of the polled are dissatisfied with their lives and only 3% reported to be very satisfied and 21% rather satisfied.

55% expect that things in their lives will improve next year (WB 53%; Gaza 57%).

38% say that the household will be unable to secure their basic needs for the three months to come should the economic situation remain as it is now.

One out of four says that the water supply must be improved. While 6% of the population is not connected to the water network, another 26% had interrupted delivery of piped water the day before the interview (WB 30% and Gaza 17%). Only 38% had piped water 24 hours while 49% had water for 12 hours or less the day preceding the interview. One in four thinks water is the local service that is in most need of improvement, while 15% hold the opinion that it is the sanitation system that requires development the most.

79% had electricity for 24 hours the day preceding the interview (WB 88%; Gaza 60%)

70% of all households failed to pay the latest electricity bill (WB 62%; Gaza 86%) and 74% had not paid the latest water bill (WB 67%; Gaza 87%).

70% of all households have debts. 52% owe more than USD 1,650 and 10% owe nearly USD 8,000.

War and peace:

58% (WB 78%; Gaza 50%) want peace talks with Israel to resume, a decline from 78% in December 2006. People who vote for Fatah are much more supportive of peace negotiations than those who vote for Hamas, at 74% and 29% respectively.

44% of the respondents are of the opinion that the missile attacks on Israel should cease (WB 47%; Gaza 39%). 53% of Fatah's supporters compared with 22% of Hamas' supporters hold this position, while respectively 24% and 57% in the two groups say they strongly oppose halting such attacks.

Only 4% believe that the kidnapping of foreigners serve the Palestinian cause (WB 5%; Gaza 2%). There are insignificant differences in the opinions of Fatah and Hamas supporters.

The security situation:

Overall, people in the Gaza Strip feel safer in their neighborhoods than people in the West Bank. While a vast majority feel that children, women and men alike are safe during daytime this is not the case in the evenings. 26% in the West Bank and 48% in Gaza (total of 34%) state that it is safe for children to be outdoors after dark. 30% of the respondents in the West Bank find that it is safe for women to be outdoors after dark, while 51% of the respondents in Gaza say so (total of 37%). The figures for men are 48% in the West Bank and 60% in Gaza (total of 52%).

Notwithstanding the stronger feeling of security in the Gaza Strip, a larger share of households in Gaza than in the West Bank report being subject to a criminal act during the 6 months preceding the interview (16% versus 6%). Altogether 10% of the households say they have experienced crimes such as theft, violence or serious threats during the past 6 months. 55% of these households report at least one such incident the past month.

Of all episodes reported in the poll, 37% were threats provoking fear, 24% were thefts, 13% gunfire, 11% physical violence resulting in injury or death and 8% violence that not implied injury.

The respondents generally claimed to know the identity of the perpetrators, or at least which 'group' they belonged to. 24% of the reported criminal acts were attributed to Hamas' Executive Forces and 19% to security forces loyal to Fatah. The IDF and various political factions were reported to be behind respectively 16% and 11% of all incidents.

30% of the polled had heard daily shooting in their neighborhood during the past month (WB 18%; Gaza 51%). An additional 15% reported weekly episodes of shooting. 27% of the respondents had heard one or a few shootings during the month prior to the survey while 28% (WB 40%; Gaza 5%) said they had not heard shooting in the neighborhood the past month.

62% are in favor of disarming armed groups (no significant regional variation; 72% among supporters of Fatah; 47% among Hamas' followers).

59% of the polled expressed general fear for the security of their households (WB 34%; Gaza 54%).

Contact Barbara Sommer at sommer_1_98@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Barry Shaw, July 26, 2007.

It seems that Britain has continued to maintain, and even widen, its contacts with the Hamas Islamic terror organization.

This despite the fact that the British Government, as part of the European Union, still officially recognizes Hamas as a terrorist organization.

Not withstanding the lengthy contacts with Hamas during negotiations for the release of BBC journalist, Alan Johnson, in Gaza, the British Foreign Office admits that these contacts have continued, and even enlarged, since Johnson's release.

The British Government has so far failed to admit that a ransom of $4,000,000 was paid to Hamas for Johnson's release.

Despite these contacts the British Foreign Office have been silent over the fact that Johnson's captors remain free, despite the claim of Hamas leader, and Palestinian Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh, that Hamas is pursuing a policy of law and order in the Gaza Strip.

No protest has been made by the British Government to Hamas to bring Alan Johnson's kidnappers to justice.

Nor have they made effort to persuade Hamas to release the Israeli hostage, Gilat Shalit.

So much for the Foreign Office assertion that their Hamas contacts have been maintained strictly for humanitarian reasons. Now read The Guardian article on this subject... and, as a reminder of exactly what Hamas stands for please read through the official Hamas Charter here.

This was written by Conal Urquhart (in Gaza City) and it appeared July 26, 2007 in The Guardian (UK)

Hamas leader claims UK has widened links · Help in freeing BBC man 'opened new channels' · Foreign Office denies any political contacts

The British government has expanded its links with Hamas in recent weeks, according to the militant organisation's leader, Ismail Haniyeh.

Mr Haniyeh, who was the Palestinian prime minister until last month, claims that contacts between Hamas and Britain have increased since they worked together to free Alan Johnston, the BBC Gaza correspondent, who was held captive in Gaza for almost four months.

"I cannot deny that there are now other contacts, other channels of communication with the UK and these involve people of high rank, although I am not personally involved," he claimed in an interview with the Guardian.

"The main aim of the contacts is to improve our democracy and governance. This is just part of the many contacts that are going on with other governments around the world."

He added that Britain wanted to keep the contacts secret.

Both the US and the EU have designated Hamas a terrorist organisation and pledged to isolate it until it adopts the principles of the Quartet of Middle East negotiators -- a renunciation of violence, recognition of Israel and honouring all previous agreements made by the Palestinian Authority.

Officials at the Foreign Office and the British consulate in Jerusalem denied that there had been political links with Hamas and insisted that any contacts had been purely "humanitarian and consular". They said it was possible that Mr Haniyeh had misunderstood the work of British non-governmental organisations such as Forward Thinking and Conflicts Forum, which have established contacts with Hamas. Both groups work with former government advisers and civil servants and members of the House of Lords.

Forward Thinking "aims to promote a more inclusive peace process by engaging the religiously motivated Palestinian and Israeli political parties who have been previously excluded from ... dialogue."

The British government has sanctioned unofficial visits to the UK for senior Hamas officials in Gaza over the past 18 months. In one of the first Ghazi Hamed, the former editor of Al Risala, the Hamas newspaper, visited the BBC and the Guardian. Ahmed Yusef, an adviser to Mr Haniyeh, has also visited the UK.

The Johnston kidnapping forced Britain to change its policy of not publicly meeting Hamas officials. Richard Makepeace, Britain's consul general in Jerusalem, twice travelled to Gaza City to request Mr Haniyeh's help in freeing Johnston. Mr Haniyeh assured Mr Makepeace that he would do everything in his power to free Johnston and Mr Hamed was asked to head the negotiations with the kidnappers.

In May Mr Hamed was again invited to the UK and attended a Hay festival event that was also attended by Gordon Brown, then chancellor. The two did not speak.

Johnston was freed on July 4 after Hamas surrounded the compound of the Dogmush family, the kidnappers.

David Miliband, the foreign secretary, thanked Hamas for its help in freeing the BBC correspondent. Mr Haniyeh said he was pleased with the respect and gratitude shown by the British government and organisations for Hamas's assistance.

"The deputy consul came to thank me personally and the consul general and the foreign minister thanked us in press conferences that were broadcast all over the world. In addition we have received thanks from the Johnston family, British NGOs and the British media. They have shown us a lot of respect," he said. "In addition, 20 members of the British parliament signed a motion to renew contacts with Hamas."

Mr Haniyeh said that Hamas intended to enforce law and order in Gaza but admitted that the kidnappers of Johnston, who also kidnapped two journalists from Fox TV in Gaza last year, remained free. "But they are being watched closely and are subject to other controls which I can't tell you," he said.

He said that Hamas would not change its policy of refusing to recognise Israel and said that the Palestine Liberation Organisation's recognition of Israel 15 years ago had not led to any improvement in the rights of Palestinians.

"In return for recognition, the PLO got the opposite of what they wanted. They got the expansion of the settlements, the confiscation of the Jordan valley and the wall. The problem is therefore not one of recognition but something else," he said.

Barry Shaw made aliyah from Manchester, England, 25 years ago with his family. He writes the "View from Here" columns from Israel. To sign up to receive his emails, contact him at netre@matav.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Adina Kutnicki, July 26, 2007.

There is a method to the madness.

The most effective way for a leadership to demoralize its citizens is to demonstrate to them, through both calculated words and unfathomable deeds, that their foundational moorings are unjust. Israel's leaders have precisely pinpointed their attacks to be able to steer its Jews away from Zionism to post-Zionism, regardless of all their protestations to the contrary that they too are really Zionists.

Zionists are made to feel, through a myriad of actions intentionally undertaken by the Israeli regime, that not only is a post-Zionist outlook just, but that persisting in a Zionist outlook will cause many more Jewish deaths. The leadership understands that creating visual aids is a powerful tool. There are few more devastating sights than helplessly witnessing the release of captured terrorists, and the pardoning of many more terror leaders.

While, on a daily basis, Jewish soldiers and security officers risk life and limb to capture these killers, the Israeli leadership treats their heroic actions as nothing more than a game of cat-and-mouse. Not only is this message seared into the souls of the soldiers, thus demoralizing them, but also into the consciousness of the terrorists. How many times have we witnessed the humiliating spectacle of newly captured terrorists smile for the cameras, wave victory fingers, and brazenly state that they expect to be released, while being hauled off to jail?

The terrorists have surely imbibed the message that a catch-and-release program is part of the Israeli leadership's plans -- no matter how heinous the terrorists' crimes. If you were a terrorist, wouldn't you, too, internalize the same hopeful message? No such positive message is aimed at the Jews.

Of course, there are varied excuses and babblings about why these releases are necessary -- that "diplomatic" concerns dictate such "bold risks for peace;" that "windows of political opportunities" can't be missed; and the tried and true refrain of "two states living side by side in peace." To all the "sacrifices for peace," these platitudes are nothing but a dagger in their already bleeding hearts.

In actuality, there is a goal-oriented method to the leadership's perceived madness. That is, the remaking of our Jewish homeland into an Israeli (rather than Jewish) State. This persistent and dangerous vision imbibed by the ruling elite (particularly since the Oslo Accords) dare not be misinterpreted and left for another day. While this nightmarish scenario might seem like madness, or a pie-in-the-sky plan, to the average Zionist, secular or religious, this is the plan. Shimon Peres's New Middle East' is the reason why scores of PLO terrorists were resurrected from the dead in Tunis, only to be implanted right into our heartland; shades of "capturing and pardoning" should come to mind.

To further their post-Zionist goals, the secular elite pounced on several wellsprings. To get to the heart and soul of the matter, they co-opted the Education Ministry. Through small, but steady incremental measures, they revamped a previously robust Zionist education. Ever since the tutelage of Shulamit Aloni, core Zionist ethos has been almost eviscerated. How better to brainwash the youth than to strip them of their Zionist roots?

To actually visualize and internalize their post-Zionist aspirations, many probing questions must be asked and answered. Why would a normal, supposedly Zionist Israeli leadership agree to turn tens of thousands of nationalist Jews into refugees, when no other country would dare commit such a violation of Jewish rights? Not only that, but the leadership ensured (through benign neglect) that the refugees would become helpless and hopeless pawns in their New Middle East plan -- all in order to shatter their dreams of a Greater Israel, encompassing our historical and Biblical heartland. They broke every promise of their oft-repeated refrain before the expulsion, "There is a solution for every community." Two years later, the Knesset is still promising and making clucking sounds, but, as expected, all comes to naught.

In addition, every time the IDF gets close to vanquishing our enemies, they are rolled back. Instead of operating as an offensive force, they have been mandated to wage a defensive war, whose core goal is "containment," certainly not victory. Why?

Even if one tries to convince oneself that Washington and others prevent the IDF from achieving victory (through various measures), it still doesn't take the absolute onus off the leadership. First and foremost, it is their sworn duty to protect their citizens.

In essence, Israel's leadership has become legal outlaws. World-recognized, international criminal law expert Professor Louis Beres states, "Terrorism is a crime under international law, and incontestably one of the most serious. The precise offenses that comprise this crime can be found at the European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism.... [Every] state has an obligation under international law to prosecute and punish terrorists.... [Any] person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible and liable to punishment...."

In addition, Israel's Basic Law is very clear. Israeli leadership is obligated to protect the enshrined civil and human rights of its citizens -- Zionists included. Doesn't all the above violate this sacred law?

Look, my blood is boiling to the nth degree (all the way from the US) watching the spectacle of bloodthirsty Jew-killers (successful ones or not) once again mugging for the cameras and waving their "Palestine" flags. Their relatives are smug in the reality that their loved ones are now home, while Israelis at home mourn their own losses and are humiliated to boot. What precisely will it take for millions -- yes, millions -- of Jews in Israel to take to the streets, to finally rid themselves of the dangerous albatross around their necks?

Nullum Crimen Sine Poena.

Adina Kutnicki and her husband operate a CPA tax practice; she is involved in Israel activism and investigates ISM terror front groups.

Entitled "No Crime without punishment," this essay appeared today as an opinion piece in Arutz-Sheva

To Go To Top

Posted by Lee Caplan, July 26, 2007.

PRC: New Weapons Will End up in 'Hands of Resistance'

(IsraelNN.com) A spokesman for the Popular Resistance Committees said Thursday that the thousands of M-16 semi-automatic rifles transferred from Jordan to the Palestinian Authority this week will end up in different hands.

"The PA hasn't learned from Gaza, as we warned in the past -- that the weapons transferred to Gaza would eventually end up in the hands of the Palestinian resistance," said PRC spokesman Abu Abir. "So we promise that these weapons will end up in the hands of the Palestinian resistance."

Thousands of weapons given to PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah forces did indeed end up in Hamas hands during the Hamas takeover of Gaza. Israel has now approved another transfer of semi-automatic M-16 rifles from Jordan to Abbas's elite Force 17 guards, the largest transfer in several years.

The PRC is one of the three Hamas-allied terror groups that kidnapped IDF Cpl. Gilad Shalit in June 2006. Shalit's whereabouts and conditions are unknown.

Israel Okays Transfer of 1,000 Rifles from Jordan to PA

(IsraelNN.com) Israel has approved another transfer of semi-automatic M-16 rifles from Jordan to Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmoud Abbas's Presidential Force elite guards, the largest transfer in several years. Israel is counting on Abbas's militia to use the weapons to prevent a Hamas military takeover although previous shipments of guns often were used in attacks against Israelis.

Israel approved a similar shipment several months ago to PA forces in Gaza, where Hamas took possession of the weapons.

Police Deny Water to 11-Year-Old Eitam Hill Backers

(IsraelNN.com) Police refused to allow 30 children. ages 11-12, to drink or relieve themselves after they were arrested during the attempt to establish a new community at Eitam Hill in Efrat. Police herded the children into buses and dropped them off in Beit Shemesh, several miles away, although many of them had no food or money. Organizers of the Eitam Hill project severely criticized the government's opposition to allowing Jews to develop the area and using excessive violence against activists. "This kind of force should be used against terrorists and criminals and not against Jews," they told Arutz 7.

(IsraelNN.com) Israeli media have maintained an almost total blackout on police violence at Homesh. Reports that police are hitting youth and confiscating cameras that document the violence have been relegated to one-line statements on the radio and on web sites. Media were not present at the site.

Several hundred people circumvented police Sunday night and Monday morning and reached the site of the demolished Jewish community and a neighboring hilltop. They vastly outnumbered police and began building a synagogue, but police sent reinforcements and forcibly dragging people on to buses.

Homesh supporters at the site reported that police also took bottles of water away from activists.

Lee Caplan can be contacted by email at leescaplan@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Professors for a Strong Israel, July 26, 2007.

The so-called Minister of Education, having solved all the other problems that beset education in Israel, has decided to join forces with the Palestinian education/propaganda system and adopt the enemy's terminology. Henceforth the establishment of the State of Israel is to be termed nakba, the catastrophe.

Professors for a Strong Israel reminds this minister, representing "Ethnic Cleansing Now" in this government, that she bears joint responsibility for the Jewish nakba, the signing of the articles of surrender in the Oslo "peace" process. Can we expect our children to receive at least a balanced perspective, that they will see what the majority of Israel's Jews know: that we have not a peace process but a continuing catastrophe?

To contact Professors for a Strong Israel, send an email to Benjamin Svetitsky at bqs@julian.tau.ac.il or telephone at 050 551 8940

To Go To Top

Posted by Ralph's Rant, July 26, 2007.

US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice said yesterday "the future of Israel is in building a strong Israeli state in places like the Negev and Galilee" and not "under the continued occupation of the West Bank." According to a article in ynetnews.com.

If any proof is needed to prove that Israel is being sold out politically by the United States is this statement. Not one word about secure borders the moving of the US embassy to Jerusalem, and Israeli rights were said in the speech.

Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice seems to be out on a vendetta against Israel with her policies and statements. Possibly because of the Arabist leanings of the State Department. Statements over the past year or so have basically ignored many of the grievances and claims of Israel including secure borders, recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and the religious rights of Jews to religious sites in Jerusalem and the West Bank aka Judea and Samaria.

They have also ignored past promises which were broken by the US. The State Department policy leaders and personnel have very little knowledge of Israel, and fail to understand that if the Israeli people are not sold on Peace there will be no peace. It takes two to have peace and if the Israeli government has no internal support there will not be peace. Israelis are getting more and more frustrated and angry with their weak leaders and government, and it is only a matter of time before a more right wing government is voted in.

PM Olmert Livni, Peres, and Barak are only interested in what is good for them not for what is good for Israel. The Israeli and the Jewish people will not allow Israel to be sold out or allow a peace at any price.

The State Department analysts need to start studying Israel and respect the feelings of the Israeli and the Jewish people not just the Arab states.

[Editor's Note: Hillel Fendel of Arutz-Sheva commented: "Speaking with Arabic-language Radio Sawa, based in Washington and Dubai, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice went further in her demands on Israel than President Bush did in his recent speech on Israel." We seem to have gone from "should" to "must" in just a couple of days. At least, Israel "must".]

Ralph's Rant is a new blog to be found at http://ralphsrant1.blogspot.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 26, 2007.


Not enough, says Dep. Defense Min. Sneh. For years, the government watered down the budgets for intelligence and for other projects for dealing with Iran and doesn't plan operational cooperation with the US. Nobody is stopping Iran from directing terrorism against other countries (IMRA, 7/3).

Therefore the US is failing its own duty, too. The governments of the US and Israel are more afraid of critics of aggressive self-defense against imperialist Islam than they are of imperialist Islam. They hope that somebody else will pull their chestnuts out of the fire. There is nobody else, at least not in the short run. With Iran, we are down to the short run.


Hamas has been given millions of dollars to propagandize Arabs on the Temple Mount and in Israel. Its members use their Jerusalem identity cards to be able to travel throughout Israel. A group of them were arrested for plotting to take over the Mount (Arutz-7, 7/3).

It is a serious mistake for Westerners to treat Muslims as normal people allowed to live amongst them. They provide cover for fifth columnists to operate. The government claims to want to separate the two peoples, but although it removed the Jews from Gaza, it does not remove the Arabs from Jerusalem or elsewhere.


Some Gazan parents are withdrawing their children from Hamas summer camps, after having found out what goes on there. Campers are taught, as they were when Fatah controlled Gaza, military training and hatred of the US and Israel. In Hamas camps, they also are taught to hate Fatah and that it is their duty to kill them (IMRA, 7/3).

So now it is their religious duty to murder adherents of a different faction, though Muslim.


Abbas admits that the P.A. signed agreements renouncing armed attacks on Israelis, but demands that those who committed such attacks be released. He is trying to have it both ways. Having renounced violence, his side "forfeited the so called 'right to violent resistance' in 1993. "...those who engaged in violence after that date aren't heroes -- they are criminals" who should not be released (IMRA, 7/3). The Arabs have it both ways, and Israel, no way.


The Saudis told Israel, whose Prime Minister had called the Saudi initiative the basis for negotiations, that their plan should not be considered while the P.A. is chaotic (IMRA, 7/4).

The initiative was totally one-sided, a scheme for rendering Israel vulnerable to conquest. Having nothing to commend it to Israel, the plan never should have been considered a basis for negotiations. A patriotic negotiator for Israel would start by rejecting it in its entirety.


PM Olmert denies that his withdrawing Israeli civilians and soldiers from Gaza was a mistake. (It led to continual bombardment of Israel and freedom for Hamas to build up its forces. It ruined thousands of Israelis and turned the police more into fascists.) Dr. Aaron Lerner remarks, "If PM Olmert cannot concede that the retreat from Gaza was a screw up, and then later asserts that he did a simply fantastic job with the Second Lebanon War then why should anyone expect him to perform better now? (IMRA, 7/4.) Is Olmert crazy?

How bullheaded the Left is about persisting in failed policies!


Abbas was the one who invited Hamas into the political process. (Israel failed to object.) He signed the Mecca Agreement, that adopted extremist Hamas positions. He invited Hamas and other terrorists into the police forces (that then he did not order to fight against Hamas or that refused to). His Fatah troops simply gave up. The source, an Israeli, claims that not only did Fatah outnumber Hamas, but it was better armed and trained. It lacked will (and initiative).

Abbas is allied with Fatah terrorists. Abbas claims he asked Fatah to disarm. Fatah leaders deny it. They explain that he alleged the order only to impress foreign disbursers.

Having acquired Fatah's intelligence files, Hamas can further weaken Fatah. Fatah already lost US-supplied weapons to Hamas. It is a poor bet to do any better with new ones (David Bedein of Israel Resource News Agency, 7/4).


Terrorists in Israeli prisons, being convicts, should not be described as "prisoners," implying they are prisoners of war with hope of release (IMRA, 7/4).


Hamas warned us that Fatah weapons would end up in its hands. It anticipated buying and capturing the Fatah weapons and intelligence. Its capture of the whole Fatah intelligence file is the greatest intelligence coup in history. (As was the cracking of the WWII Axis codes.) Indications are that Hamas is sharing this intelligence with Iran. Iran claims that Egypt stimulated Hamas to move against Fatah. By revealing that, Iran damages Egypt's reputation.

Fearing Iranian blackmail, neighboring countries urge Fatah to accommodate Hamas. Abbas announced that funds released by Israel will be shared with P.A. employees in Gaza. That subsidizes the Hamas regime that the US wanted to isolate. Who now can expect Fatah to destroy Hamas?

Since Hamas ends up with money Israel sends to Abbas, indirectly Israel is financing Hamas. That puts the lie to PM Olmert's assurances that releasing those funds would not assist Hamas. Hamas has increased its ties with al-Qaeda. Syria is preparing terrorist infiltration of the Golan and a pretext for war. It would involve a missile barrage of population centers, which still lack civil defense, despite the constant bombardment from Gaza pointing the way. Arms are pouring into Lebanon, unhindered.

Contradicting intelligence reports Israel provides UNIFIL of Lebanon arms smuggling, Foreign Min. Livni claimed that the UNO sanctions on arms smuggling work. Correcting her, Deputy Defense Min. Sneh explained that the current and prior regimes have reduced defense spending for all those threats, and denied any coordination with the US.

The Olmert regime has devised no coherent policies for any of the mounting threats against Israel.

Instead, the government acts to exacerbate the problems by having (hostile or indifferent) foreign troops replace the successful Israeli troops in Judea-Samaria and to gain membership in the anti-Zionist E.U. (Caroline Glick, IMRA, 7/6). Israel abases itself for gentile acceptance.

Israeli assurances either are naïve or deceitful.

Which of Iran's revelations are genuine and which does it make up?


The Honenu civil rights organizations opposes releasing Arab terrorists, especially by the hundreds. It finds a double standard in not releasing Jews who defended themselves from Arab marauders (Arutz-7, 7/6). I agree with Honenu, but doesn't it know that Israel is anti-Jewish? Jewish self-defense is illegal there.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gil Ronen, July 26, 2007.

As night fell on Givat HaEitam, hundreds of Land of Israel activists had reached the top of the hill despite use of force by IDF soldiers and police to prevent their ascent.

Activists set out from Efrat's Zayit (Olive) neighborhood toward Givat HaEitam, part of the town that is being left outside the Partition Wall

Givat HaEitam is the northern most hill of the Efrat Municipality, a south Jerusalem suburb, and was approved as part of the city's limits. Israel's Housing Ministry originally planned to build 2,500 Jewish housing units on the hill. All of that changed when the architects of Israel's Partition Wall planned the route to truncate Givat HaEitam from the rest of Efrat, leaving it on PA-controlled Bethlehem's side of the wall.

Jews from all over the country answered the call to protest the shrinking of Efrat and came out Wednesday to establish a Jewish presence on Givat HaEitam. The Partition Wall is not yet built there, and protestors hope that as a result of their actions, the route will be changed to incorporate Givat HaEitam back into Efrat as per original plans.

MK Aryeh Eldad was at the protests and attempted to lower tensions and relay a report to Public Security Minister Avi Dichter about what was happening.

The activists came to create a new community at the site. 13 people have been arrested, including Baruch Marzel, the head of the Jewish Front movement, who is being held on suspicion that he incited youths to enter a closed military zone, and Rabbi Moshe Levinger, the father of the renewed Jewish community in Hevron. At least two women were among those arrested.

The event's organizers said that hundreds of people continue to stream up the hill and that those who reached the top had begun building a stone structure. Security forces chased down the protestors detaining busloads of them. Police struck some activists and twisted arms, despite the event being one of civil disobedience.

Parents and activists implore soldiers and police to refrain from violence and allow the activists to stay

"The ascenders, including old people and women, are being beaten with no justification by the IDF and the police," the organizers claimed. They said that Rabbi Levinger was also beaten by police.

Faced with an onslaught of Border Guard policemen and Yasam Special Force Units, the activists scattered in the fields and reorganized in groups of about 30 each before attempting the ascent again.

Rabbi Shlomo Riskin of Efrat, Rabbi Moshe Levinger of Hevron, Rabbi Gidon Perl and Rabbi Shimon Golan encouraged the civilians to continue in their peaceful action of establishing a Jewish presence on the barren hill.

Activists in Efrat said earlier Wednesday that the IDF should not have deployed large forces to fight them. "It is a national disgrace that in order to prevent the ascent to Eitam, the Yehuda Regiment assembled a large force that includes two infantry battalions, a reconnaissance unit and hundreds of police officers, including YASAM (SWAT) teams," they said. "This force should be used against terrorists and crime families and not against Jews," the HaEitam Headquarters said.

Security forces claim the community on HaEitam Hill is an "illegal outpost."

IsraelNationalRadio Showhost Jeremy Gimpel was amongst those detained temporarily. He said:

"Three guards were watching over our group of detained activists. One guard was from Russia, one from Ethiopia, and one from Kazakhstan. I pointed out to them that I am from the US, and they are each from their respective countries. What brings us together is that we are brothers who have returned to Zion to establish a Jewish presence in our Holy Land after 2,000 years. I continued talking to them about the importance of strengthening Israel through settlement, through Jewish brotherly love, and through a return to Torah values. Suddenly, a 4th guard, apparently a Druze Arab, came over and shouted at me to shut up. The three guards shouted back, however, and insisted that I continue to talk to them."

The HaEitam project is only the opening shot in a large scale campaign of renewal that the activists are planning to put into motion. The organization "Yishuv Achshav" (Settlement Now) is a coalition of organizations that include the Land of Israel Faithful, Youth for the Land of Israel, Women in Green and the Action Committees for Hevron and Kiryat Arba.

The organizers say that groups of families will settle on different hills in Judea and Samaria, with the purpose of building new communities in the Land of Israel. "This is our answer to the ongoing policy of surrendering to the enemy," they said. "We will ascend HaEitam Hill, establish roots in it and declare: 'we shall continue to build you, Land of Israel!'"

Scores of activists at Givat HaEitam being forcibly removed by Yassam riot police

"Two years after the terrible eviction of our brothers from Gush Katif and northern Samaria," they lamented, "Gaza has become Hamastan. Sderot and nearby communities are bombarded." Despite the fact that "anyone with half a brain" now realizes that handing over parts of the homeland to the enemy endangers the country," they said, "our political leaders intend to surrender, retreat, give up, hand over more and drive [us] away. Instead of trying to strengthen the People of Israel and defeating the Arab enemy endangering our existence on its own territory, the government busies itself day and night with attempts to set up a terror state in Judea and Samaria."

A female activist being dragged by her hair despite the presence of female officers

Gil Ronen is a writer for Arutz-Sheva. This appeared today in Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com).

To Go To Top

Posted by Moshe Belogorodsky, July 26, 2007.

".. he hoped for justice but behold oppression; for righteousness but behold a cry". Yeshayahu (5:7)

My name is Moshe Belogorodsky. I decided to write this letter after I read of your decision to allow the promotion of Niso Shaham to the position of deputy police chief of the Jerusalem district. The same Niso Shaham who, during the expulsion from Gush Katif, gave the following orders to fellow police officers:" I am a pro in dealing with these Orthodox Jews. S**t on them. Let them burn. Hit them from the waist down. I will f**k the hell out of them". Those orders were directed against demonstrators in Kfar Maimon.

After a video of the episode was broadcast on channel 10 national news, Shaham was brought before the police disciplinary court where he was reprimanded and deprived of pay for six days. The police court apparently decided that this was punishment enough for his words which insulted a whole segment of Israeli society. And now you, a judge of the Supreme Court of Israel, have demonstrated your apparent concurrence with the police court's decision. Indeed, you went much further, by deciding to allow Shaham's promotion(!) based on the fact that Shaham expressed regret over his words. In your decision you speak of the need to forgive in the following terms: "a candidate's failure in the line of duty does not necessarily disqualify him from promotion on the count of breaching the public's trust. Public trust is a term that also recognizes penitence, asking forgiveness and seeking answers." You even go so far as to scold the petitioners against his promotion for their "inability to forgive".

All the flowery words notwithstanding, allow me to question the justice of your decision. And if you ask who am I, a simple citizen of this country, to dare question the decision of the Supreme Court, allow me to remind you.

I am the father of Chaya, the 14 year old girl who was arrested during the expulsion. It was you who decided to keep her under arrest until the end of proceedings against her, all because one police woman claimed that Chaya insulted her by saying "shut up and arrest me". And because of your concern for the honor of that one police woman my child spent 40 days in Maasiyahu jail. You kept her in jail even though she too expressed her regret and promised not to make the same mistake again. We asked you to release her to full house arrest so that she would not have to sit in jail (p.4 par.8 of the protocol). Unfortunately, you could not find any room in your heart to "recognize penitence", nor to accept my child's "asking for forgiveness". To the contrary, you sent my child to jail because she " insulted a police officer in a crude way" (p.5 par.10). It appears you thought that her words were infinitely cruder than those of Shaham. You spoke of the " outright lack of respect for the police officer" as another justification for keeping Chaya in jail. It seems that Shaham's lack of the most basic respect for the citizens of this country is much less "outright" in your eyes.

There is one more sentence in your decision to keep Chaya in jail -- a sentence which you must have forgotten when dealing with the Shaham case. " ...her behavior does not leave me a choice except to isolate her from the center of her ideologically motivated activities (meaning Chaya's home -- M.B.) which swept her into committing the crime"(p.6 par.11) I ask: Is it not fitting to "isolate" Niso Shaham from his "center of activities which swept him into committing the crime"? Is it possible that in any normal country a high ranking police officer be allowed to get away with these types of statements? Is my child's "crime" more heinous in your eyes than Shaham's truly criminal orders to perpetrate a pogrom against the demonstrators in Kfar Maimon? Lastly, how can you justify on any grounds, moral or judicial, your outright discriminatory treatment of my child versus the treatment Shaham benefited from in your court?

It seems to me that it is no coincidence at all that you handed down your decision regarding Niso Shaham on the eve of Tisha B'Av -- the day we mourn the Destruction caused by baseless hatred.

Allow me to end my letter with this: We were "privileged" with Niso Shaham's apologies. We are still waiting for yours.

[Editor's note: The Israeli Government's treatment of Chaya Belogorodsky is shameful. You can read more about it here and here.]

Contact Chaya's parents, Moshe and Abigail Belogorodsky at ydf@013.net.

To Go To Top

Posted by Jack Engelhard, July 26, 2007.

Eugene Narrett is a professor (Ph.D from Columbia no less) so you'd expect a book of his to be so very academic, which this is, but at the same time it is written so skillfully that it reads like a thriller. This new one of his is a page-turner all right and from page to page, chapter to chapter, it shines and merits urgent attention.

Published by Lightcatcher Books, the title goes like this: World War III: The War on the Jews and the Rise of the World Security State.

I'd add this to the subtitle: "How The West Was Lost."

It's rare that a work of non-fiction should be so quotable. I could pick virtually any passage and give it here as a sample of the gems that exist in Narrett's deeply researched documentation of the past and present (he sure is up to the minute) along with his prophetic insights and warnings.

In this age of scholarly leftism, ambiguity and moral relativism, here we come upon an author who is stouthearted and direct in his love of Zion. He refuses to compromise. Let others dither in their tents; Narrett picks up where Nachmanides and Judah HaLevi left off, and let's remember that in "The Kuzari", written a thousand years ago, HaLevi says, "Whenever they fight their fight [Rome with Mecca], it is we who fall, and thus it has been in former times in Israel."

Thus it is to this very day....

As the title of Narrett's book suggests, the world is at war against Israel (meaning all Jews). That sounds clear enough and others have written on this topic as well, but Narrett's approach is absolutely unique in that he spares no one (certainly not Britain and America) and really -- rather incredibly -- gives scant notice to Islam. He writes about it, yes, of course. He gives the facts about Islam but to go on endlessly about Islam's baseless grudge against Israel would only be stating the obvious.

Narrett's focus is on the Big Powers (today's "Quartet") that have collaborated, through the ages, toward a single goal -- re-creating a world deleted of God's Image, in other words, a world without Jews. As "civilized" nations doom the Jews, warns Narrett, they doom themselves.

There is no equivocating in Narrett's prose. He is firmly in step with HaLevi who insisted that the Revelation at Sinai is central to Judaism and the World. Plainly, without Torah there is no Israel and without Israel there is no World. To depart from Torah is to invite chaos, as we can see all around us today. "If Americans cannot get their politicians to detach from the treacherous plans of the elites in Britain, the UN and its assorted NGO's, we will experience the complete destruction of the America the founders bequeathed."

Narrett continues: "America will follow Israel, whose Scripture was the model for its polity, laws and ethics, into ruins and we will be living like the Jews in Nahariya and Sderot; we will inherit the chronic apocalypse described by Orwell and visible now in the Gaza strip."

Are we there yet? Pretty close.

Narrett brilliantly encompasses the past to the present to prove that nothing has changed. The imperative to "get the Jews out" is as new as today's headline in the New York Times and as old as the pages of Jacob and Esau. The worldwide rush to "push relentlessly for the creation of a Jihadist state from the center of the Land of Israel" only proves that it's a different day but the same agenda.

The effort to "detach" the Jews can be traced back to Pharaoh when, in order to turn the Egyptians against the Hebrews, he declared, "Come, let is deal craftily with this people." So it was and so it is. The nations continue to deal with Israel by means of outright warfare but also through stealth.

To achieve a Judenrein Israel, the nations will stop at nothing. Jews will be "beaten and dragged" from their homes all for the sake of a world without ethics. (See Gush Katif.)

Narrett's masterpiece may well have been inspired by King David's sublime complaint: "Why are the nations in an uproar? And why do the peoples mutter in vain? The kings of the earth stand up, and the rulers take counsel together against the Lord, and against His anointed."

Narrett takes on, or rather takes apart, a Western culture that "enhances" (male performance) as it simultaneously castrates righteous and valiant leadership. Corruption rules. This leads to Solomon's vexation of the spirit and leaves us vulnerable for the jackals. In defying God, in denying Torah, in the dash to destroy His Children, the nations will have only themselves to blame for what comes next -- and it's already around the corner, at a mosque near you.

Israel, Narrett reminds us, is indeed a light unto the nations, if only the nations would open their eyes; if only the nations would remove the blinders of hatred and bigotry.

This book is huge in scope -- historical, Biblical, topical, and always with a view upon a world gone mad through a perversion of politics, religion, geography and culture. This book is beautifully written. This book is important. Yes, attention must be paid! Yet this is not a work of pessimism. We can all chip in and DO SOMETHING. Narrett has answers. For that, READ THE BOOK.

Meanwhile, there is this prescription and prophecy from Eugene Narrett:

"Help Israel settle in its historical place in the entire Promised Land. Do this or a great darkness will come."

Jack Engelhard's latest novel, "The Bathsheba Deadline," is running as an online serial on Amazon.com. Engelhard wrote the international bestselling novel "Indecent Proposal" that was translated into more than 22 languages and turned into a motion picture starring Robert Redford and Demi Moore. His other published works include "Escape From Mount Moriah" and "The Days of the Bitter End."

To Go To Top

Posted by David Wilder, July 25, 2007.

Yesterday the Jewish people marked the fast day, Tisha b'Av -- the ninth day of Av. Exactly 1938 years ago the heart of Israel went up in flames. On the 9th day of Av the Second Temple was destroyed by the Roman army. Some 650 years previously, on the exact same day, the First Temple was razed by the Babylonians. That day, Tisha b'Av, the 9th day of the month of Av, is commemorated each year as a fast day, from sunset to sunset.

Other inauspicious also occurred on the same date. Most well known was the expulsion from Spain in 1492. The decree ordering Jews to leave Spain was issued on March 31, 1492. The expulsion was to be completed by July 31 of that year. July 31 was the 9th of Av. [http://www.jewfaq.org/holidayd.htm]

However, most significant was the first Tisha b'Av, marked by the rejection of Eretz Yisrael, the land of Israel, by the Israelites, who had been liberated from Egypt only months earlier. Moses sent 12 men to spy the Land. Those men were the leaders of the people, the 'president' of each of the 12 tribes. The best of the best. According to Jewish sources, they realized that upon entrance into the Land of Israel they would be replaced, they would no longer be 'leaders.' As a result, upon their return to Moses and the rest of the Israelites, ten of them slandered the Land, calling it a land of giants that devours it inhabitants. Only two of the spies rejected this slander, Joshua and Kalev, exclaiming that Israel is a 'very very good land.' But they were not able to convince the majority who tore their clothes, wailed and demanded to return to Egypt. As a result, G-d decreed this day to be a day of hardship and mourning, and so it has remained over the centuries.

In other words, the root of Tisha b'Av, the ninth day of Av, is the rejection of our G-d-given Land, of Eretz Yisrael.

The mourning period, prior to Tisha b'Av is quite intense and, in many respects, difficult. With the advent of the month of Av, many religious Jews refrained from eating meat or drinking wine until after the fast. In addition, they did not wear freshly laundered clothing or bathe for 10 days. It would be expected that following the path of thousands of years of history, thousands of years of calamity, destruction and mourning, our people would have learned the lesson of Tisha b'Av. Unfortunately it seems that this has yet to be learned and internalized.

Just 10 days ago, as the grief of the month of Av began, the state of Israel 'celebrated' the inauguration of the state's ninth president. The commencement of Shimon Peres' reign as president is another reason to mourn. Shimon Peres is the embodiment of the vile spies, who, thousands of years ago, maligned and rejected Eretz Yisrael.

Peres was the driving force behind Oslo over 13 years ago. As was then, still today. On the day of his inauguration the eleventh spy proclaimed, "We have to rid ourselves of the 'territories'".

The Prime Minister has mouthed the same thoughts: we shouldn't fool ourselves -- we won't be able to hold on to the 'territories.' He has ordered the notorious minister Haim Ramon, recently convicted of a 'sex crime' to head up expulsion from and destruction of 'hilltop communities.' Ramon recently suggested a 'toned-down' disengagement: rather than abandon some 90% of Yesha, as Olmert proposed following the last elections, Ramon called for an abandonment of 'only' 70% of Yesha.

The Churban -- the destruction of 1938 years ago continues.

One of the most difficult and emotional episodes faced during these days of mourning began today, exactly two years ago, when Gush Katif was deleted from the face of the earth. Not only is the memory heartbreaking. It is also nauseating. Last week a number of programs on radio, and articles in the press 'questioned' the wisdom of Sharon's 'vision,' bringing about the churan of Gush Katif and the northern Shomron. Hundreds and thousands have been left without employment or permanent housing. Homes have been broken; students who once excelled in their studies lost all motivation to continue. People who were 'temporarily housed' at certain Kibbutzim find themselves again about to be expelled from their homes due to disagreements between the government and the kibbutz administration concerning the cost of rent. The state of Israel has, for all intensive purposes, abandoned these people, who gave their entire lives to the 'greening of the desert,' who suffered mortar attacks and terror killings for years and years, yet refused to give up.

And of course, the result of Israel's abandonment of Gush Katif was readily known long before the expulsion. That land would be utilized as a base from which to attack Israel. Now, two years later, the Israeli media, one of the main stalwarts of Sharon's madness, is 'starting to ask questions.' Maybe, just maybe Israel made a mistake?! It really is nauseating.

Over the past week hundreds and thousands of youth have attempted to return to Homesh, one of the two communities destroyed in the northern Shomron. From the highest point in Homesh you can view the Israeli coast, from Netanya to Ashdod and Ashkelon. This land, now cleared of all Jews, is still under Israeli control. But Israelis are forbidden from being there, in accordance with the expulsion law passed some two and a half years ago, legalizing the uprooting of 10,000 Jews from their homes.

Of course those brave souls, walking for hours to reach their destination because roads were closed off by security forces, we 'greeted' by baton-wielding police who beat them and dragged them away. However, these people never give up and have sworn to return again and again, until the Homesh community is rebuilt on the ruins of the destroyed town.

And what about Hebron? The craziness continues here too. The story of the Shalhevet neighborhood -- the 'shuk' is well known. The 'shuk' -- the area of the old Arab market, was built on Jewish property purchased in 1807. The market was closed years ago and the buildings left vacant. Following the murder of the 10-month old infant, Shalhevet Pass, in March 2001, we moved into those buildings and renovated them, transforming them into apartments for 9 families and a study hall in Shalhevet's memory.

Following the expulsion from Gush Katif, the government decided to expel us from those apartments too. The day before their ultimatum expired, ordering us out, they offered us a deal: we leave voluntarily, and the government would work out an arrangement allowing us to move back in 'legally' in a short period of time.

We had a 'town meeting' about this in the middle of the night and took a vote, and it was decided to opt for the deal. The next day the families moved out. That was over a year and a half ago, and we still aren't back in. The attorney general first denied a deal had been made and then later, admitted it had been agreed upon, but voided it.

Some months ago two of the families who had moved out of the "Shalhevet neighborhood" moved back in for lack of any other place to live. When the authorities discovered them this too started bouncing around in the courts. Last week they were presented with eviction notices, demanding they move out by this Friday at 12 noon or be forcibly expelled.

We have decided not to move out willingly this time around. The families won't leave voluntarily. The Israeli government has a moral obligation to allow Jews to live on Jewish land in Hebron, especially at this site, having been evicted with the promise of return. Enough expulsions, enough abandonment of Jewish land, enough broken promises. This time we will not give up easily!

In a few days we will mark the 78th anniversary of the 1929 Hebron massacre which left 67 dead, 70 wounded and hundreds expelled from their homes in Hebron. Is the Israeli government going to follow in the footsteps of our Forefather Abraham, who settled the land, who settled Hebron, or in the footsteps of Haj Amin el Husseini, whose murderous incitement led to the riots, slaughter and expulsion? Do we live in Eretz Yisrael or Soviet Israel?

The following letter was sent today to Defense Minister Ehud Barak by Chairman of seven Knesset factions:

To Defense Minister Ehud Barak:

At the present time, when we are marking 78 years since the 1929 riots, you are faced with a fateful decision concerning one of the sites which represents, more than anything else, the murder and the thievery of the Hebron Jewish community of those days: the site of the 'shuk' in Hebron, where presently several families are living.

We the undersigned, chairmen of various parties in the Knesset, turn to you with this request to refrain from expelling these Jewish families living in the 'shuk' and to study alternative ways to resolve Jewish quarters at this site, legally.

Before our eyes are the following factors:

  1. We are dealing with Jewish-owned land, which was stolen as a result of the terrible slaughter. It is incumbent on the government to act to return the stolen property as would be expected in relationship to stolen Jewish property anywhere in the world.

  2. The preset time is a time of reconciliation, during which we are attempting to refrain from conflicts which are avoidable. A solution to this issue, was suggested by a highly respected attorney, former Justice minister Dr. Ya'akov Ne'eman. This should be seriously studied prior to physical conflicts which would almost inevitably occur.

  3. The residents of Hebron prevented violence and conflict similar to the occurrences in "Amona" when they voluntarily moved out of these homes, based upon promises that they would be allowed to return, honoring and respecting promises of representatives of the state, IDF officers. This type of approach is to be encouraged and rewarded, not discouraged.

  4. The continued residency of Jews in the shuk does not harm Hebron's Arabs, who have enjoyed an alternative modern market place in the Palestinian side of the city. The site also does not expand the Jewish community of Hebron at all. We are speaking of maintaining the status quo and preventing actions which could cause instability in this sensitive area.

For all the above reasons, we request, that you order that the issue of Jewish residency in the shuk be studied seriously, and that in any case, you prevent, for the time being, any eviction of Jewish residents from the site.

Knesset party chairmen:
Yoel Hasson, Kadima
Meir Porush, Yahadut HaTorah
Uri Ariel, National Union-NRP
Gideon Saar -- Likud
Robert Ilatov -- Yisrael Beitanu
Ya'akov Margi -- Shas
Moshe Sharoni -- Retirees

David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, July 25, 2007.

To those who do not really know what Chomesh is and what the concept of "Chomesh First" is, please read on. Chomesh symbolizes the return to and the rebuilding of all the communities from which Jews were expelled, plus the building of another 100 new communities. If the struggle to return to Chomesh succeeds, the paving of the road will have begun.

Today on Ten Be'Av (a day after Tisha Be'Av), a nucleus of approximately 100 "chevreh" (comrades) and families are now staying on the ground. On the ruins of the synagogue that the IDF destroyed, they began building a new, permanent synagogue made of brick. Right now, they are using improvised tools. Food is being served from a giant pot, and Rabbi Lior is leading in song and dance.

Suddenly, observers came to warn them that six police jeeps that were on the way. The police forcefully chased everyone away. They could not accept that a permanent synagogue would be built in Chomesh.

However, seventy-five chevreh who were chased out of Chomesh returned. There were no roadblocks this time. No police, army, or security forces stood in the way of them returning home. They Israeli government had surrendered to the fact that there will be a new Chomesh where the old community stood!

This is a VICTORY of Am Yisrael for Eretz Yisrael after nine days of continuous, non-stop Jewish presence in Chomesh!

Tomorrow, please God, they will RETURN for GOOD!

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, July 25, 2007.
fter the vicious and deadly attacks of 9-11-2001........

After seven years of open borders and "Do not pursue" orders regarding illegals from terror supporting nations...

After billions of State Department dollars spent bringing radical Moslem clerics into our prison system to convert violent criminals into violent Jihadists...

After the establishment of hundreds of colonies and compounds on American territory, home to hundreds of thousands of combat trained, radical Islamists.....clearly outnumbering our National Guard and active military...

After seven years of using the White House and State Dept. websites to proselytise for our Islamic enemy, .... Air Force Gen. Victor "Gene" Renuart (PBUH) has become suspicious of Al Qaeda. "Our buddies, in the 'Religion of Peace' may be planning an attack on American soil."

Wow! What a revelation! Renuart deserves the Medal of Honor for his clear headedness and quick thinking.

With idiots such as Gen. Renuart in charge, defeat is just around the corner.

This is called "al-Qaida Works to Reform US Terror Cells" and appeared yesterday. It was written by Lolita C. Baldor, Associated Press writer.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. military commander in charge of defending the U.S. homeland said Tuesday that he believes there are al-Qaida cells in the United States or people working to create them.

Air Force Gen. Victor "Gene" Renuart said that while the terrorism threat within the nation's boundaries has increased in the past year, officials have strengthened intelligence sharing, particularly in an effort to shore up weaknesses in security at U.S. ports.

"I believe there are cells in the United States, or at least people who aspire to create cells in the United States," Renuart said in an interview with The Associated Press. "To assume that there are not those cells is naive and so we have to take that threat seriously."

He added, "Am I concerned that this will happen this summer, I have to be concerned that it could happen any day."

Other U.S. officials last week said they did not know of al-Qaida cells in the United States.

Renuart, who took over the job as the head of U.S. Northern Command just four months ago, said that to counter the growing threat, the military also needs to create two more brigade-size units to be available to respond to nuclear, chemical and biological incidents at home -- because currently there is only one. A brigade is about 3,500 troops.

Renuart's comments came in the wake of a national intelligence report released last week, which concluded that al-Qaida is using its growing strength in the Middle East to plot attacks on U.S. soil.

Port security has long been identified as a key weak point, including the need to scan cargo containers coming into the country by ship. [Which is why our draft-dodging talk-show hosts and politicos wanted to turn over our port security to the perpetrators of 9-11 -- ng.]

Renuart said officials are expanding their use of sensors and other technologies that allow them to track ships, including their location, their speed and other commercial information. And, while he would not provide details, he said there has already been "real payback" in terms of identifying vessels of concern and either checking or boarding them well before they got into U.S. waters.

"Because the national intelligence estimate talks about the vulnerability of ports, and because of the importance that we place on the movement of a variety of goods through those ports, finding ways to improve that is a really important element of our day to day work," Renuart said.

At the same time, he said it will be a year or two before he is able to pull together the military units he needs to better be able to respond to a chemical, biological or nuclear disaster in the U.S.

The units, he said, will be made up of active duty, reserves and National Guard troops. And while portions of the brigades will be located in different states, they will be expected to train together and be able to respond quickly to a disaster.

Overall, Renuart said that as the terror threat increases, the nation's ability to detect problems has also improved.

The intelligence report, he said, is a "summary of drumbeats, and the drumbeats are getting more prevalent out there. You cannot afford to ignore that." But he said, a few years ago, the nation was not as able to hear and interpret those drumbeats.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 25, 2007.

Ehud Olmert continues to be inordinately eager to promote a Palestinian state. Yesterday I wrote about the refusal of the leaders of the international community to recognize who the Palestinians really are and how unlikely is the possibility that they can put together a viable state. But I was remiss: I should have included the leaders of Israel.

Olmert is offering to hold negotiations on an "Agreement of Principles" for the establishment of a Palestinian state. What this means, and it makes me sick in the pit of my stomach, is that Olmert wants to push aside the difficult issues and yet negotiate on some of the factors that would be involved in establishment of a state -- such as the characteristics of the state, official institutions and customs arrangements.

What this does is provide tacit acknowledgement on our side of acceptance in principle of a state (that's what hits me in the stomach) even before there has been resolution of such issues as borders, refugees and the capital in Jerusalem.

Olmert is assuming this will strengthen Abbas, who can show what he has achieved, and strengthen himself with the Israeli populace at the same time, as he will say that he is the one who can bring "peace."

What he is trying to do is "restart the peace process" even though he knows that the PA is weak and will not fulfill its obligations regarding security. Rather blows the mind, does it not?


Aaron Lerner of IMRA points out today that what Olmert seeks to do is dangerous because within the context of the Road Map a sovereign Palestinian state can be created before the difficult final status issues are resolved, so that it would be possible for us to find ourselves with a Palestinian state adjacent to our nation without the Palestinians even signing off on end of conflict. And indeed, Lerner is correct. The Road Map (see http://www.palestine-info.co.uk/am/old/printer_982.shtml ) states:

"In the second phase, efforts are focused on the option of creating an independent Palestinian state with provisional borders and attributes of sovereignty...as a way station to a permanent status settlement."

It is not until phase three, that there is a permanent status agreement and an end to the conflict.

However... The very first phase of the plan calls for the Palestinians to "immediately undertake an unconditional cessation of violence." This includes "sustained, targeted, and effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantlement of terrorist capabilities and infrastructure." Also "all official Palestinian institutions end incitement against Israel."

If the Palestinians were held to this, there would be no progress. But once again the bar is being lowered and obligations are being waived: They can't do this? Let's move on.

The stuff of nightmares.


I note that in the report on this, released by Haaretz, one of the subjects on the table would be a tunnel between Judea and Samaria and Gaza, to provide contiguity. I am fascinated, as Hamas controls Gaza and is supposed to be excluded at present. Olmert is supposed to be supporting Abbas in his stand against Hamas.

And so I remain alert as to what will happen with regard to this. My take is that no one knows how this is going to play out. This provides some measure of comfort: the Palestinians have in the past messed up opportunities to have a state and their situation today is considerably less stable than it was previously.

While we must be on guard, stay informed, and fight what he plans with all our energy, the fact is that from Olmert's malign intentions to fulfillment of the reality is still a large step. There are many experts who see the PA as so unstable that it is incapable of actually achieving the status of a state.

(See the following report.)


Ephraim Inbar has written an analytic piece for the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, "Bush Cannot Succeed in the Holy Land." He advances several reasons why Bush's attempt to form a Palestinian state is bound to fail:

-- Palestinian society cannot be reformed by outsiders. "Middle Eastern societies have already proven their resistance to attempts by Western powers to change their old habits of doing business. It is naïve to believe that political and social dynamics rooted in centuries-old traditions can be easily manipulated by well-intentioned, but presumptuous Westerners." If ever reform is to occur it will be from within.

-- It is a fallacy to assume that "economic assistance to the Palestinians can alleviate political problems." "Since the Oslo Accords (September 1993), the Palestinian Authority (PA) has received the highest amount of economic aid per capita in the world. Yet, billions of euros transferred to the PA have been squandered and misused. The PA, like other Third World countries, was quite ingenious in siphoning parts of the aid to those members least in need of outside support."

Inbar speaks of the philosophy of Maimonides, who said that in the hierarchy of philanthropy helping someone become self-sufficient ranks first. "...the history of humanitarian aid in the last century...shows that outside economic aid is only as good as the ability of a recipient's economy and government to use it prudently and productively. Therefore, it is doubtful whether sending more money to the dysfunctional Palestinian economy, as President Bush proposes, will do any good. "

-- It is a mistake to think that Abbas can be an agent of change and thus deserves support. [His] record as leader is dismal. He failed to unite the security services under one organ as pledged and has not followed through with his anti-corruption election campaign promises. The chaos within the PA increased under his presidency...The Palestinians have suffered from bad leadership for almost a century, and are in need of a strong leader...to rescue them from the crisis they have brought upon themselves. Unfortunately, such a courageous and visionary leader does not appear to be in sight."

-- It is a fallacy to assume that "Palestinian society can be quickly transformed into a good neighbor of Israel and that a stable settlement is within reach." "Since the Oslo Accords, the PA's education system, media, and dramatic militarization process has done great damage to the collective Palestinian psyche. A society mesmerized by the use of force and accustomed to the shaheed (martyr) ready to blow himself up among the hated Israelis will not change overnight. Numerous facets of Palestinian society have been radicalized and the widespread influence and popularity of Hamas is a clear indication of such a process."

(I apologize that I cannot locate a URL for this piece.)


This last point is perhaps the most ignored, and it is critical. People are aware of corruption and a host of other problems in the PA. They tend to forget about the radicalization of the population that has taken place because of the incitement that has been engendered since Oslo started. This is the greatest irony: When Arafat gained control of the educational system and the media, instead of educating for peace, he educated for war and hatred. This has continued with Abbas, in particular with regard to textbooks. The lessons have been well learned.

The fact is that there was more hatred of Israel in the PA in the years when we were withdrawing from Arab population centers and trying to give them autonomy (1994-2000) than there had been when we administered all systems. When we were in control, we simply didn't permit that sort of incitement. Here is an example of trying to be nice and having it backfire totally. The hatred, the attitude that Israel is illegitimate and that Allah praises jihad, has all become entrenched.


If this isn't game-playing, I do not know what it is: Envoys from Egypt and Jordan, originally charged by the Arab League with coming to Israel to do persuasion regarding the Arab League "peace" initiative, are finally here after a postponement in their visit. They were charged by the League, truly -- selected because they already have diplomatic ties with Israel. But these envoys are now insisting they don't represent the League but only their own nations. In fact, Egypt has gone to the trouble of specifically putting out a communiqué saying that their envoy, Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit, would be representing only his country.

What is this about? Israel had made note of the fact that this visit would be "historic" -- the first time that representatives of the Arab League would be visiting Israel. And, as I noted before, the Arabs weren't having it. Horrors! This might suggest that the various nations of the League recognize Israel, and they cannot allow that. And so, an about-face. Silly beyond words. They are ostensibly promoting a plan that would provide Israel with 'normal relations' with all these nations (if Israel pulled back to '67 lines, allowed refugees to return,etc.) You can tell how eager they are about this.

To make it sillier still: Saudi Arabia, as I have written, has backed off from the plan, even though this "Arab League plan" is really a Saudi plan. So it seems the "normal relations" with Israel wouldn't include the Saudis anyway.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Louis Rene Beres, July 25, 2007.

Jorge Luis Borges sometimes happily identified himself as a sort of Jew. Although without any apparent basis in Halachah, he obviously felt himself a deeply kindred spirit: "Many a time I think of myself as a Jew," he is quoted in Willis Barnstone's Borges At Eighty: Conversations (1982), "but I wonder whether I have the right to think so. It may be wishful thinking."

Such an explicit Philo-Semitic sentiment is assuredly welcome and rare, especially when it is uttered in sincerity, by one of the modern world's greatest thinkers and writers. It follows that we Jews ought to pay especially close attention to Borges' ecumenical wisdom. I refer particularly to one of his best stories, wherein a condemned man, having noticed that expectations rarely coincide with reality, consciously imagines the circumstances of his own death. Because they have become expectations, he reasons, they can never actually come to pass.

So it should now be as well with the State of Israel. Recognizing that fear and reality go together naturally, the People of Israel should begin to imagine itself, even as the ingathered Jewish community, within the ambit of both individual and collective mortality. Only then could Israel effectively undertake the more specific political and military policies now needed to secure the Jewish State from forcible extinction.

Such paradoxical advice, of course, will appear foolish to many people. After all, they will argue, death fear is debilitating. Anxiety, we must surely understand, is an expression of weakness. What possible advantages, therefore, can there be to deliberately nurturing thoughts of national fear and trembling, of dread and disappearance?

Truth sometimes emerges only through paradox, and imaginations of a collective immortality -- imaginations generally encouraged by a panoply of false hopes and false dawns -- will inevitably discourage needed Israeli steps toward collective self-preservation. Even in those expanding circles of enlightenment where there is no longer any faith in the always-delusional "peace process," many Israelis will instinctually resist any intimations of national annihilation.

Unable to understand that what is true for individuals is also true for States -- that prudent lifestyles must flow from a prior awareness of fragility -- these Jewish citizens will stubbornly choose to imagine an Israel that is necessarily forever. The only predictable result of such wrongheaded imagination would only be an even greater level of Jewish national transience.

There are multiple ironies here. In the fashion of many of its Arab/Islamic enemies, Israel insistently imagines for itself only life everlasting. But unlike these enemies, Israel does not see itself achieving immortality, individually or collectively, by the ritual murder of its enemies through war and terrorism.

Rather, it sees its collective survival as the permanent product of divine protection, reasoned diplomatic settlements and prudent military planning. Singly or collectively, there is nothing inherently wrong with these expectations, but they should never be allowed to displace an antecedent awareness of possible impermanence.

The asymmetry of purpose and expectation between Israel and its implacable foes places the Jewish State at a notable and foreseeable strategic disadvantage. While Israel's enemies, most notably Iran, now manifest their "positive" hopes for immortality by the intended slaughter of Jews (religiously, their nexus between these hopes and such slaughter is fixed and strong), Israel's leaders display their country's own expectations for collective immortality by agreeing to steadily incremental surrenders of vital territories.

In the end, the protracted clash in the Middle East between Arab/Islamic believers in violence and Israeli believers in reason will likely favor the former. In the end, unless the prevailing asymmetry is replaced by new and far-reaching Israeli imaginations of existential disaster, the Jewish believers in reason will have to depart once again from the Promised Land. Exeunt omnes.

To be sure, it is difficult to ask of Israelis that they resist American-style "positive thinking" and choose, instead, to think the worst. Yet, all serious thought is steeped in pessimism, and it would now be far better for Israel to err on the side of candor. Spurred on by the most conspicuously dreadful imaginations of existential disaster, the People of Israel could finally begin to contemplate the stark connections between Palestinian statehood, Iranian nuclearization and apocalyptic war.

The alternative, to blindly celebrate the twisted cartography of a genocidal "Road Map" or to blithely accept the inevitability of atomic weapons in Iran, would encourage Israel's military defeat.

Louis Rene Beres (Ph.D., Princeton, 1971) lectures and publishes widely on Israeli security matters. Strategic and Military Affairs columnist for The Jewish Press, he is also Chair of "Project Daniel," a private nuclear advisory group that reported authoritatively to former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

This appeared today in Jewish Press
(www.thejewishpress.com/print.do/22400/Intimations_Of_Mortality%2C_ A_Paradoxical_Basis_For_Israel%27s_Survival.html).

To Go To Top

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, July 25, 2007.

This was written by Aaron Klein and it appeared in World Net Daily
(www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56825). Aaron Klein, WorldNetDaily's Jerusalem bureau chief, is known for his regular interviews with Mideast terror leaders and his popular segments on America's top radio programs.

Illegal Arab construction in Qalandiya (WND photo)

JERUSALEM -- Prime Minister Ehud Olmert yesterday was presented with a proposal demanding the return to the state of more than 400,000 acres of land purchased with hundreds of millions in Jewish donor funds solicited mostly in the U.S. for the stated purpose of facilitating Jewish settlement in Israel.

If returned to the government, the lands purchased for Jews will be utilized for both Jewish and Arab construction and settlement, according to the proposal presented to Olmert by former education minister and Israeli legal expert Amnon Rubinstein.

The proposal was in response to the Knesset's passing earlier this month of a preliminary bill which calls for all lands owned the Jewish National Fund or JNF to be allocated only to Jews since it was purchased on behalf of the Jewish people. The JNF has been allowing the Israeli government to manage its lands.

The bill passed by a massive majority of 64 Knesset members to 16, garnering support from a number of prominent lawmakers, including opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu.

Sources in Olmert's office told WND the Israeli Prime Minister supports giving the JNF land to Arabs and Jews.

The Knesset proposal to allocated JNF lands only to Jews followed a widely-circulated WND exclusive report revealing hundreds of acres of key properties in Jerusalem purchased by the JNF for Jewish settlement were instead utilized for the illegal construction of dozens of Arab apartment buildings housing thousands and for United Nations facilities.

The JNF seemingly has done little to boot the Arab squatters from its land, while the Israeli government, which manages the areas, has not halted the illegal Arab construction on the Jewish-owned properties.

The Jewish-owned lands recently were blocked off from Jewish sections of Jerusalem and isolated to Arab neighborhoods by Israel's security fence.

The properties in question include over 200 acres in the northern Jerusalem neighborhoods of Qalandiya and Kfar Akev, located near an old Israeli airport, and about 50 acres in a north Jerusalem suburb known as Shoafat, adjacent to the Jewish neighborhood of Pisgat Zeev. The lands were purchased legally on behalf of JNF using Jewish donations in the early 1900s, immediately after the organization was founded in 1901 with the specific charge of repurchasing and developing the land of Israel for Jewish settlement.

A tour of Qalandiya and Kfar Akev found dozens of Arab apartment complexes, a Palestinian refugee camp and a U.N. school for Palestinians constructed on the land.

Illegal Arab construction in Qalandiya (WND photo) U.N. school for Palestinians illegally built on Jewish property (WND photo)

According to officials in Israel's Housing Ministry, Arabs first constructed facilities illegally in Qalandiya and Kfar Akev between 1948 and 1967, prior to the 1967 Six-Day War in which Israel retook control of the entire city of Jerusalem.

Qalandiya, still owned by JNF, came under the management of the Israeli government's Land Authority in the late 1960s.

Ministry officials say the bulk of illegal Arab construction in Qalandiya took place in the past 20 years, with construction of several new Arab apartment complexes in just the past two years.

Neither the Israeli government nor JNF took any concrete measures to stop the illegal building, which continues today with at least one apartment complex in Qalandiya under construction.

Jerusalem's Shoafat neighborhood, which has an estimated value of $3 million, was also purchased by JNF in the early 1900s and fell under the management of the Israel Land Authority about 40 years ago. Much of the illegal Arab construction in Shoafat took place in the past 15 years, with some apartment complexes built as late as 2004.

In Qalandiya, Kfar Akev and Shoafat, Israel's security fence cordons off the Arab sections of the JNF lands from the rest of Jewish Jerusalem.

Internal JNF documents obtained by WND outline illegal Arab construction on the Jewish-owned land. A survey of Qalandiya summarized on JNF stationery conducted in December 2000 and signed by a JNF worker states, "In a lot of the plots I find Arabs are living and building illegally and also working the JNF land without permission."

The JNF survey goes on to document illegal construction of Arab apartment complexes and the U.N. school under the property management of Israel's Land Authority.

JNF misleading donors?

In response to the WND report, JND CEO Russell Robinson has been sending statements to concerned donors that the illegal construction occurred during periods the Jerusalem land was occupied by Jordan.

"During that time, the Jordanian government oversaw all activities, including the U.N. building. Under international law, this makes matters pertaining to the land more complicated than what [WND describes]," states Robinson's letter to donors.

Jordan, together with other Arab countries, attacked Israel after its founding in 1948 and administered eastern sections of Jerusalem following an armistice agreement until Jordan attacked again and Israel liberated the entire city of Jerusalem in the 1967 Six-Day War. During the period of Jordan control, some new construction took place, including in areas previously purchased by Jews.

But WND obtained aerial photos of the two JNF sites in question, which Robinson claimed were illegally built upon prior to 1967.

left: 1991 photo of Shoafat shows region entirely forest land (WND photo)

A photo taken in 1991 of one of the sites, Shoafat, shows the entire area was a forest -- meaning all illegal Arab construction took place after 1967 while the land was under Jewish control.

left: 1967 aerial photo of Qalandiya region (WND photo)

An aerial photo taken in 1967 of the second site, Qalandiya, which is now a large Arab town, finds construction of a U.N. building but few other sites, indicating the vast majority of Arab construction -- dozens of large apartment complexes -- occurred under JNF control. WND originally reported some of the construction took place prior to 1967, but the bulk of the building occurred the past few years, under Jewish management.

Robinson did not return phone calls seeking comment.

'Leftist millionaires' influencing JNF?

Illegal Arab construction on Jewish-owned lands is not limited to Jerusalem. Arabs reportedly are building without permits on JNF-owned property in the Galilee and in areas outside Bethlehem. Due to Israeli military laws, Jews are barred from building on the JNF lands near Bethlehem. Also, Arabs are living illegally in JNF-owned apartments in strategic areas in Jerusalem's Old City.

Palestinians illegally build apartments in Jewish-owned Shoafat (WND photo)

Asked to explain why the esteemed Jewish organization would allow Arabs to illegally occupy strategic land purchased for Jews, one JNF source involved in land acquisition pointed to what he claimed was the "disproportionate influence" over the organization by a small group of Jewish multimillionaires in New Jersey who lead major public fundraising efforts for the JNF.

The source said the group of wealthy New Jersey Jews, all of whom are real estate moguls and many of whom invest in projects as a team, are largely also donors to leftist causes associated with former Prime Minister Shimon Peres, who advocates the division of Jerusalem and an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank.

The Jews include the Wilf, Halpern, Zuckerman and Tisch families, according to the JNF source.

The key lands in Jerusalem upon which the JNF has allowed Arabs to illegally construct are part of the areas Peres has advocated handing to the Palestinians.

Peres currently serves as Israel's minister for the development of the Negev Desert, which the JNF has been leading a massive campaign to populate, with the goal of bringing 250,000 Jewish residents there.

Peres' face is prominently featured on JNF advertisements and material.

"The wealthy New Jersey Jews are highly politically motivated, support leftist causes and are involved in JNF affairs," charged the JNF source. "It is unfair to Jews worldwide who donate to the JNF with certain expectations, such as that their donations will be used for Jewish settlement in Jerusalem."

Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel.

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, July 25, 2007.

Perhaps you thought that Iran's Muslim Hitler, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the only one planning the Genocide of all Israelis. Think again! As in WWII, the many nations of the world are gathering -- again, each in their own way and purpose, to participate in liquidating the Jews and their State. For some time Intelligence reports and analysts in various military journals have brought great clarity to the fact that Israel is to be the target to solve the uprising of Islamic Jihadists world wide.

The leaders of these nations already know that Islam is on a march toward world domination by violent conquest and nothing will appease them nor modify what they believe is their destiny as commanded by Allah through Mohammed.

Regrettably, a coalition of Jews in control of Israel believe that they can buy off the "Jihadists" (holy warriors for Islam) by surrendering to them defensible territory and then the Muslims will cease their attacks. Regrettably, these un-Jews put no value on the Land given to the Jewish people in perpetuity by a G-d none of them believe exists.

Specifically, I speak of Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, her new President Shimon Peres, her new Defense Minister Ehud Barak and her Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. The words of "betrayal" and "treason" fall far short of what they and the rest of the Left have done and continue to plan for the demise of their own nation. All have pledged to re-partition Israel, regardless of the consequences as now displayed in Gaza and Lebanon.

If you read Intelligence reports and opinions of military analysts, you could see the growing confluence of pro-Arab nations, acting in unison with Israel's weak, corrupt leadership to set the stage for a massive attack on Israel's population centers, her infrastructure such as Ben Gurion International Airport, Dimona and her coastal plain where 70% of the nation's population live.

Olmert, Peres, Barak and Livni give every indication that they are willing to engage in treason, in coordination with Muslim Arab terrorist organizations and foreign governments in order to achieve their goals of re-partitioning the country. They will claim what they are doing is best for the country but, there is enough 'prima facie' evidence to prove that they are knowingly engaged in betrayal, treason and crimes against their own Jewish people. Clearly, so-called Jewish Leftist leadership is planning to lose the next war so they can transfer much of Israel's heartland to the Arab Muslim under the terms of compromise.

A Peoples' Court would have every reason to find them guilty and sentence them with capital punishment for their culpability in the murders and maiming of thousands of their people that have already been murdered -- with more to come IF their failed policies continue.

The evidence of malfeasance and misfeasance in office was confirmed first by the investigation of the Knesset State Controller Micha Lindenstrauss into the incompetence of Olmert, then Defense Minister Amir Peretz and Dan Halutz, Chief of Staff during the Lebanon debacle of summer 2006.

On April 30, 2007 the Winograd Commission (reluctantly appointed by Olmert to investigate the Lebanon debacle) released its preliminary report, confirming Lindenstrauss' conclusions and harshly criticizing key decision-makers but, the Chair, Eliahu Winograd, delayed his final report until August 2007, despite having concluded his Inquiry months ago.

That Eliahu Winograd is a friend of Olmert and that he was appointed by Olmert, casts doubt on his objectivity, especially when he refused to issue a final (and damning) report which would force Olmert from his Prime Ministry before he could do greater harm to the nation's security and sovereignty.

There is little doubt that the Leftist political leadership worked with PC (Politically Correct) Generals to cut budgets for the replacement of aging war materials, using the money instead for enhancing political projects instead.

Training the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) for War was put aside and instead what training the soldiers received was for brutally violent police actions against settlers in Gaza and protestors against government policy anywhere they lived in Israel, including Mea Shearim where the people "en masse" protested the gay march that desecrated Jerusalem. Instead of training for war, defense funds were spent on Yassam, i.e., special troops, first profiling them for violent characteristics and then training them for future evacuations planned for Judea and Samaria. Olmert has publically proclaimed that these are his intentions.

The Leftist government has indicated that this will later be extended to include the Golan Heights, the Jordan Valley and all those parts of Jerusalem which were occupied and desecrated by Jordan from 1948 to 1967.

The lack of command and equipment preparedness was strikingly clear during the Lebanon/Hezb'Allah fiasco a year ago. Out-of-date stores in water, food, protective vests, ammunition and other equipment quickly became apparent. Lack of adequate bomb shelters for residents in the North and poor attention to their health and safety needs was criminally irresponsible. The Israeli leadership knew of these shortages and deliberately chose to ignore them.

If this shoddy behavior happened in Russia, I would dare to say that some Generals and politicians would have faced a prompt firing squad.

One is reminded of Israel's Yom Kippur 1973 debacle where Israeli and American Intel showed the mobilization of the Egyptian and Syrian forces on Israel's borders but because of the arrogance of the elect, some Generals and politicians believed that Egypt wouldn't dare attack the so-called powerful Israel forces. The following commentary from U.S. Defense News speaks about the deliberate failure, at worst, or negligence of the politicians to prepare to combat the observed six-year build-up of Hezb'Allah on Israel's Lebanon border. Last summer Hezb'Allah launched 4,000 Katyusha Missiles out of the 15,000 which they had stockpiled undeterred for 6 years. Today they have reportedly more than 20,000 -- despite the International troops and Lebanon troops supposedly preventing their shipping in of weapons from Iran through Syria.

Abandoning the settlers and "ethnically cleansing" them from the G-d given Land had a higher priority for this government than deterring enemies and defending the country in case of war. That "conceptzia" (concept of invincibility) and mind-set continues today, further endangering the Jewish State because the weapons of today are more lethal even than in 1973 or 2006.

Add to that the Sharon/Olmert blunder to virtually turning Gaza over to Hamas who is now equipped with Long Range Katyusha MLRs (Multiple Launch Rockets), ready to hit the heartland of Israel in the next confrontation. Olmert continues to restrain the IDF from cleaning out Gaza.

In what appears to be a plan to launch a multi-front war against Israel, it would be beneficial for Israel's survival to put her so-called leaders in detention when the missiles are launched. They cannot be allowed to lose the next war as they did the Summer of 2006 with Hezb'Allah.

U.S. DEFENSE NEWS is one of the leading journals on military matters and is respected world-wide for its reportage and commentary. The following Letter to the Editor by Kenneth S. Brower (July 16, 2007) is especially poignant at a time when Iran continues it nuclear program and Syria moves up troops toward Quneitra on the Golan Heights.

To state that recent Israeli budget cuts did not affect the combat readiness of Israeli forces or the quality of their equipment and quantities of supplies ("Israeli Experts Debunk Lebanon War Claims," June 18) is preposterous.

Training in conventional force-on-force vs. low-intensity combat had been progressively reduced over the decade prior to 2006. Investment in new Israel-produced armored fighting vehicles, artillery and other combat arms and supplies had also been dramatically reduced. The Israeli public paid an unnecessary blood tax for severely under funding the military. They sent their sons into combat ill-prepared and under equipped.

Over 30 days, Hizbollah fired fewer rockets than the number of shells that a single artillery brigade could fire in 45 minutes. Most Hizbollah rockets were of the small, man-portable 107mm variety and three-quarters of the rockets that landed in Israel hit no civilian or military target.

The Israeli campaign was marked by inept political-military leadership and utterly amateurish government, making decisions based on plans generated by a careerist General Staff.

It should have been obvious to Israel's leadership that Hizbollah's stupid crossborder act of war presented them with a golden strategic opportunity to wedge Syria from Iran by driving a corps up the Bekaa Valley towards Balbek.

This would have been a decisive strategic turning movement, except that no one in the Israeli General Staff could seemingly remember the art of warfare above platoon-level low-intensity combat.

Uzi Rubin's hypothesis that airpower alone could, somehow, totally neutralize the short-term rocket threat is ridiculous, given that Hizbollah was willing to employ one-time-use mobile launchers or numerous, pre-registered fixed, hardened, near-zero-signature launchers.

Israel has yet to decide if the conflicts in Gaza or South Lebanon are asymmetrical, low-intensity combat or real war. Asymmetrical war is only feasible if the stronger side voluntarily decides to follow politically correct rules that constrain its military response to acts of aggression, thereby ensuring that victory is unachievable. The theory of asymmetrical warfare will collapse the first time the politically correct illusion of self-restraint is shattered.

Virtually every Israeli serves or has served in the military, yet virtually no one understands defense. Fifty years of propaganda and disinformation have had more impact on the Israelis than their enemies. Israel cannot survive a nuclear-armed Iran.

Yet within Israel, there is no urgency to address this existential threat or the near certainty of war with Hamas, Hizbollah and Syria if Iran is pre-empted. Training and re-armament proceed minimally based on long-term plans when the threat has to be faced in the near term.

Kenneth S. Brower, Middle East defense analyst,
Delray Beach, Fla.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Peck, July 25, 2007.

Bordering on impeachment? What to do?

Ratings down? Bordering on impeachment? What to do? Well, how about beating the dead cow of Oslo and the Palestinian state again?

Do you think that either Ehud Olmert, who, last I looked, was down to 3% approval rating, and George Bush, who is down to around 20-something (BC: Before Carter), just might be thinking of a "distraction"? And the perfect distraction might be to arrange another one of those famous -- or was that "infamous"? -- "peace meetings," with all those "good friends" of the Jewish state; friends like Russia, Saudi Arabia and, of course, the European Union. Hell, anybody that wants to come to the meeting is welcome and, while we're at it, let's decide to carve up Israel to form a Palestinian state.

In any other situation, I'd find it incredible that a man with virtually no popularity or standing in the polls like Ehud Olmert is still able to hang on. Worse, he and Shimon Peres, who unbelievably was elected by his peers to a term as President, are continuing the process of wreaking havoc on Israel. Olmert is now giving press conferences reiterating his belief that Israel "needs to withdraw" from the Biblical Jewish provinces of Judea and Samaria. Wow! Talk about chutzpah! This is another of his "tough decisions" regarding territorial compromise. Compromise? Naw, these are the final blows to what was once Israel.

Does anyone see anything wrong when incompetent leaders of both the United States and Israel meet and decide to giveaway all of Judea and Samaria, land that was given to the Israelites by G-d? What right do they have to decide this "compromise"? What compromise are we talking about here? Here it is: Judea and Samaria would not be given up unilaterally, as was Gaza following the withdrawal of the IDF in 2005. No. This time, they mean to bring it about through a negotiated solution with the Palestinian Authority and Prime Minister Olmert. What? When are they going to realize that to negotiate requires having an honorable partner. But why should we question anything as fundamental as that?

This is a government that can release 255 convicted terrorists serving terms in Israeli prisons without a qualm. Nope. Just open the gates and let the tigers, a.k.a. terrorists, roam free in Judea and Samaria to savage civilians again. But, hey, a "goodwill" gesture to that very "moderate" Mahmoud Abbas just might help their poll numbers. By the way, does anybody remember Mr. Olmert even mentioning that maybe his good friend, Abbas, could conjure up some information on the whereabouts of the Israeli soldier they kidnapped over a year ago? Where is the goodwill on their part? But why should we question anything as fundamental as that?

If I had my druthers, I'd turn off the lights, water and electricity in the PA and let these barbarians continue to destroy each other in their civil war.

The last time that I remember any sort of Jewish protest coming out of the State of Israel was when there were front-page headlines about the anger over a gay rights parade. The country is falling down around them and, like sheep, they seem to be walking quietly to the slaughter. Yet, huge masses find the time to hit the streets to make their feelings known about issues of homosexuality. Gawd!

I don't know. I can't figure it out. Maybe everyone is just too busy with other things. The same seems to be happening here on our side of the globe. Our borders are open and criminals and terrorists are pouring in like water through a sieve. Then they wonder why the traffic is so bad. It hasn't seemed to hit them that 20 to 30 million "guest workers" that Bush has allowed in have filled up our prisons, schools, hospitals and, yes, freeways, making the drive home impossible. I'm rapidly watching California become a third-world country.

Meantime, I wonder how long it is going to take Olmert to make a deal with Bush to grant the "right of return"? Another stupid "good-will gesture"?

Hey, I live in La-La Land. We're used to outrageous incidents to bring up the ratings. But when are we, the public both here and in Israel, going to get the message across that the future we're facing is more than a "ratings season" for incompetent politicians? Whatever happened to, "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore"? Time was, when the US government feared the people. When did that change? Now, we're in fear of the government.

Arlene Peck is an internationally syndicated columnist and television talk show hostess. She can be reached at: bestredhead@earthlink.net and www.arlenepeck.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 25, 2007.


Everybody wants to be thought realistic, even if also idealistic. To have realistic policies, one cannot be insane or corrupt. Israeli leaders are both. They persist in policies that fail and they neither study enemy culture nor plan strategy other than for immediate public relations.

When reviewing their policies, I suggest the proper course for them. I do not expect them to set that new course. That would take normalcy and intelligence.

Is there any hope? Yes, the current direction may be down, but public opinion, even when partially controlled, like Israel's, can veer onto a true course.

Our future looks bleak, as the US and Britain pull back from confronting their enemies and they treat the Jewish state as an enemy.

I think that the US election is perverting the discussion about the war. Some people have not realized that debates about whether to have entered the war and whether to maintain the war are different. Once in, the question no longer is whether it was the wisest choice to wage war, we are in. Considerations of whether and how to get out are being made through politics. The candidates pander to their most adamant supporters, instead of bringing some thoughtfulness to the topic.

Oddly, Americans have developed defeatism about wars that they are winning or holding their own in and which they cannot afford to lose. They think they cannot afford to fight. If politicians weren't eager to squander our money on what lobbyists or popularists demand, they wouldn't be less eager to proclaim our military funds squandered.

They still complain that the war has raised our rate of national debt, even though this year's debt is less than half the percentage of GDP of four years ago. In other words, the burden of the new national debt has fallen.


A friend makes a point of calling the US war on Iraq "pre-emptive" and pre-emption unjustified. I think he is mistaken in both regards.

The current war is a continuation of the Gulf War whose conditions of armistice Iraq violated; the Security Council had authorized military means of enforcing its subsequent Resolutions that Saddam also violated. Islamists worldwide have declared war on the US. The US has the right to decide which front to open, and in which order to defeat members of the anti-US axis.


When I was a reporter, I put real estate tax issues in simple terms. First one explains the situation; then one proposes a solution.

If only that method were more common! Journalists and politicians writing Op.-Ed. pieces about their proposals intersperse explanations with proposals, tackling explanations on the fly. They lack skill in communication and in the logic of making something plain.

The latest example is about the controversy over capital gains taxes on hedge fund partnerships. I would understand a cogent explanation; I don't understand Sen. Grassley's. I do understand that some people favor the "solution" merely because they dislike other people making a lot of money and not paying a lot of taxes. I also understand my political science professor teaching us, "The power to tax is the power to destroy." New York City has lost a lot of financial business already. As a New Yorker, I am concerned that Congress (and the lawyers and unions) not choke the golden goose until it stops laying golden eggs.


At a birthday party, the son of a prominent NY Times editor was saying, "Why do the settlers want to live among so many hostile Arabs." I said, because the settlers are more tolerant and civil than their critics imagine and they live in the Jewish homeland. He hadn't heard that, before.

He countered with the myth, "Their presence diverts an enormous number of Israeli troops from defending the country (by defending what I had just said belongs to the Jewish people). I replied, "The opposite is true. Very few troops are assigned to a particular section. A small number patrol often. They gain cover from Israeli villages. It is the presence of the settlers that provides the ethical context for the troops to stay. In turn, the presence of the troops protects the State of Israel from terrorist attack." He did not seem convinced. After all, he had years of adverse propaganda in his head, and my few seconds in contrast.

So, suggested that without the Territories and settlers in them, Israel would have insecure borders. Another proof is Gaza. Israel did evacuate the settlers from Gaza. Terrorists took over Gaza and attack Israel from it constantly.

"Then what's the solution," the charming young man asked. I answered, "You are approaching the problem in a Western way: two sides resolve a problem to mutual benefit and keep their agreements. Muslim fanatics don't keep agreements. They want to conquer everyone, not solve problems. The solution is to defeat their global jihad." His premises all were false.


Jordan asked the government of Israel to transfer to its prisons four Jordanians serving life sentences in Israel for murdering Israeli soldiers. Its stated rationale was to offer more family visits. Israel concurred. The leftist Olmert regime did not inform its people that secretly it had acquiesced to Jordan's intention to release those prisoners after about a year and-a-half (IMRA, 7/2).

Right-wingers had suspected Jordan of intending to release the prisoners. That is what happened to the prisoners released to the P.A. in Jericho and to monk-kidnappers exiled to Europe. The right-wing cynics were right, again. They usually are right. When will the Left start listening to them?

Notice how sordid the players are! The Muslims break all their agreements with Israel. Nevertheless, Israel keeps making new agreements for Muslims to violate. The US is party to some of this. Now the government of Israel connived to deceive its people, who would not want murderers released early. Nobody stands up for the Jewish people, not even the Jewish state.

Among most of my friends, the Right is held in distrust and contempt, but not the Left, which far more deserves distrust and contempt.


Rep. Ellison, a convert to Islam, borrowed Thomas Jefferson's Koran, on which to take the oath of office. Ellison said he picked that one to show that our great President was willing to learn wisdom from the Koran. That is misleading!

When Jefferson was an Ambassador, he, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin negotiated an end to N. African raids on US ships and enslavement of their crews. Barbary Coast Muslims had murdered millions of black Africans and Europeans and enslaved others! The US initially paid about a fifth of its GNP in tribute for exemption from raids. Jefferson asked the Dey of Algeria why his co-religionists attacked the US, which never had harmed them. Citing the Koran and Muhammad, the Dey replied that his religion requires them to kill or enslave infidels until they convert to that religion.

Jefferson had secured a copy of the Koran not to gain wisdom from it but, the way I read Mein Kampf, to figure out how to combat an intolerant, cruel, and imperialistic war cult. When President, Jefferson sent warships instead of tribute to the Barbary Coast. Eventually, the US destroyed the piracy (Prof. Steven Plaut, 7/2). It was a military solution. Islam was the same, then, as now are the Islamists, wrongly accused of distorting Islam. Beware of Ellison!


Many cluster bomblets dropped by Israel in Lebanon remain unexploded. They endanger civilians after combat, so the US Senate voted to bar Israel from using US military aid to buy US cluster bombs. The Senate considers this a humanitarian issue, but really it is a financial issue. Incidentally, Sen. Leahy's further bid to reduce military aid to Israel was defeated.

The US conditions military aid to Israel on Israel spending it in the US. This aid subsidizes t he US arms industry. It also amounts to crimping the rival Israeli arms industry. When Israel must use the funds to purchase US weaponry, it does not have those funds available to finance its own weaponry.

Israel manufactures its own cluster bombs cheaper. Its rate of unexploded bomblets is one out of every 500. The rate of unexploded US bomblets is one out of every 3! (IMRA, 7/2).

I approve of the Senate vote. I would like the US to end its military subsidy of Israel (and cancel both Israel's debt to the US and continuing civilian aid to Israel). Israel and its industry needs independence from the US, whose State Dept. is hostile to it.

First, and on ethical grounds, let the US terminate aid to Islamic states and forces except when they actively are fighting together with us. Basically that means ending the subsidy of Fatah terrorists and Egypt's Army and maintaining it in Iraq and Afghanistan. We should not aid actual and potential enemies.


Liquidating al-Qaeda and other terrorist leaders does not always help. Their better trained and more professional replacements avoid their predecessors' mistakes. Their predecessors alienated the people by coming in with a massacre and neglecting civil society. The new leaders minimize bloodshed, encourage business and efficient government, seek alliances with tribes and other terrorist groups, and attempt to appear abroad as more moderate. They more fully utilize modern communication technologies. They present themselves domestically as more bona fide Islamics and in contrast to the corrupt governments they attack. Corruption can double business costs. Foreign volunteers help smother resistance. The new Islamist leaders are more effective and therefore more dangerous to us. We need to build stable societies and to deny Islamists foreign havens (MEFNews, 7/2).

Incidentally, Iran's Islamist regime is corrupt. S. Arabia's may be, too.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Ted Belman, July 24, 2007.

Saudi Arabia gave birth to its baby The Saudi Plan just before the invasion of Iraq in the expectation that it would come of age in the Roadmap. Thomas Friedman was the midwife. The Roadmap, making reference to the baby, was announced just days after the invasion. I forcefully recommended that Israel Reject the Roadmap and later traced the genesis of the Roadmap in Perfecting the Unifying Theory. To my mind there was undeniable linkage.

On March '02, JCPA issued a Brief Saudi Arabia's Op-Ed Diplomacy: A Public Relations Ploy or a Serious Initiative? and asked Has Saudi Arabia's Position Really Changed? It thought not.

But it was an unwanted baby even from the beginning. It suffered from child neglect but no one called the parent, Saudi Arabia, to account.

Now, apparently, the Saudis have abandoned its baby. Not to worry, Bush and Olmert have adopted it.

This story is so huge that the mainstream media has ignored it. It doesn't accord with their agenda and spin.

On February 8/07, Saudi Arabia brokered the Mecca Accords stressing unity between Fatah and Hamas. This reflected a split with Saudi arabia as to which side to support and also its concerns about Iran.

My take was that S.Arabia stabs the US in the back

Ever since Hamas was elected a year ago, the US has pursued a policy whereby it sought to isolate Hamas and starve it for money while at the same time building up Abbas as the great white hope. It insisted that Hamas recognize Israel, forswear violence and agree to be bound by all previous agreements. It also provided money to Abbas and trained his security forces to take on Hamas.

Saudi Arabia engineered the Mecca Accords whereby they brought Hamas in from the cold, agreed to finance them to the tune of one billion a year and forced Abbas to turn his back on the US and join in with Hamas. Hamas was not required to change its policy one iota.

In one fell swoop, it gutted American foreign policy in the conflict and left them powerless.

On March 4/07, NYT reported on an historic meeting, Saudi-Iran Meeting Yields Little Substance. Was this true? Perhaps they attempted to keep the Muslim world unified in the struggle against Israel.

The US was not pleased and continued their policy of isolating Hamas. This culminated in the Hamas coup in Gaza on June and I speculated Did US order Fatah to take a dive? Then confirmed my speculation with Yes, the US orchestrated Fatah's dive in Gaza.

I argued only by jettisoning Hamas and Gaza could the "peace process" go forward. Obviously a huge rift was developing between the US desire to isolate Hamas and the Saudi desire to keep it in the process. Many European countries are joining the Saudis in this effort.

In effect, the pro-Hamas people are aligning with Hamas' policy of rejecting the Roadmap and recognition of Israel. It would suggest that there never was an intention on the part of the Arab League which endorsed the Saudi Plan with the addition of the "right of return" to make peace with Israel.

Undaunted, Bush delivered an insipid version of his vision speech last week. I reported Bush distinguishes between "must" and "should"..In the speech he announced an international conference which Saudia Arabia and others "should" attend. Within a day Saudi Arabia declined. Why? Debka reports because of the rejection of Hamas.

In essence then Hamas is supported because it rejects recognition of Israel and all its supporters do too.

What do I think about the "peace process"? Its all about ending the "occupation" and not about achieving a peace agreement.

Bush and Olmert have already accepted the Saudi Plan providing it ends in recognition. This the Arabs are not prepared to do.

Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com

This article was posted today on the Israpundit website:

To Go To Top

Posted by Koira, July 24, 2007.

This was written by Hillel Halkin. It appeared today in the New York Sun
(ttp://www.nysun.com/article/58997). Mr. Halkin is a contributing editor of The New York Sun.

Some 12 or 13 years ago, when I was reporting from Israel for the New York weekly, the Forward, I wrote a piece on Kemal Atatürk, the founder of modern secular Turkey, that I submitted to the newspaper with some trepidation.

In it, I presented evidence for the likelihood of Atatürk's having had a Jewish -- or more precisely, a Doenmeh -- father.

The Doenmeh were a heretical Jewish sect formed, after the conversion to Islam in the 17th century of the Turkish-Jewish messianic pretender Sabbetai Zevi, by those of his followers who continued to believe in him.

Conducting themselves outwardly as Muslims in imitation of him, they lived secretly as Jews and continued to exist as a distinct, if shadowy, group well into the 20th century.

In the many biographies of Ataturk there were three or four different versions of his father's background, and although none identified him as a Jew, their very multiplicity suggested that he had been covering up his family origins.

This evidence, though limited, was intriguing. Its strongest item was a chapter in a long-forgotten autobiography of the Hebrew journalist, Itamar Ben-Avi, who described in his book a chance meeting on a rainy night in the late winter of 1911 in the bar of a Jerusalem hotel with a young Turkish captain.

Tipsy from too much arak, the captain confided to Ben-Avi that he was Jewish and recited the opening Hebrew words of the Shema Yisra'el or "Hear O Israel" prayer, which almost any Jew or Doenmeh -- but no Turkish Muslim -- would have known. Ten years later, Ben-Avi wrote, he opened a newspaper, saw a headline about a military coup in Turkey, and in a photograph recognized the leader that the young officer he had met the other night.

At the time, Islamic political opposition to Ataturk-style secularism was gaining strength in Turkey. What would happen, I wondered, when a Jewish newspaper in New York broke the news that the revered founder of modern Turkey was half-Jewish? I pictured riots, statues of Ataturk toppling to the ground, the secular state he had created tottering with them.

I could have spared myself the anxiety. The piece was run in the Forward, there was hardly any reaction to it anywhere, and life in Turkey went on as before. As far as I knew, not a single Turk even read what I wrote. And then, a few months ago, I received an e-mail from someone who had. I won't mention his name. He lives in a European country, is well-educated, works in the financial industry, is a staunchly secular Kemalist, and was writing to tell me that he had come across my article in the Forward and had decided to do some historical research in regard to it.

One thing he discovered, he wrote, was that Ataturk indeed traveled in the late winter of 1911 to Egypt from Damascus on his way to join the Turkish forces fighting an Italian army in Libya, a route that would have taken him through Jerusalem just when Ben-Avi claimed to have met him there.

Moreover, in 1911 he was indeed a captain, and his fondness of alcohol, which Ben-Avi could not have known about when he wrote his autobiography, is well-documented. And here's something else that was turned up by my Turkish e-mail correspondent: Ataturk, who was born and raised in Thessaloniki, a heavily Jewish city in his day that had a large Doenmeh population, attended a grade school, known as the "Semsi Effendi School," that was run by a religious leader of the Doenmeh community named Simon Zvi. The email concluded with the sentence:

"I now know -- know (and I haven't a shred of doubt) -- that Atatürk's father's family was indeed of Jewish stock."

I haven't a shred of doubt either. I just have, this time, less trepidation, not only because I no longer suffer from delusions of grandeur regarding the possible effects of my columns, but because there's no need to fear toppling the secular establishment of Kemalist Turkey.

It toppled for good in the Turkish elections two days ago when the Islamic Justice and Development Party was returned to power with so overwhelming a victory over its rivals that it seems safe to say that secular Turkey, at least as Ataturk envisioned it, is a thing of the past.

Actually, Atatürk's Jewishness, which he systematically sought to conceal, explains a great deal about him, above all, his fierce hostility toward Islam, the religion in which nearly every Turk of his day had been raised, and his iron-willed determination to create a strictly secular Turkish nationalism from which the Islamic component would be banished.

Who but a member of a religious minority would want so badly to eliminate religion from the identity of a Muslim majority that, after the genocide of Turkey's Christian Armenians in World War I and the expulsion of nearly all of its Christian Greeks in the early 1920s, was 99% of Turkey's population? The same motivation caused the banner of secular Arab nationalism to be first raised in the Arab world by Christian intellectuals.

Ataturk seems never to have been ashamed of his Jewish background. He hid it because it would have been political suicide not to, and the secular Turkish state that was his legacy hid it too, and with it, his personal diary, which was never published and has for all intents and purposes been kept a state secret all these years. There's no need to hide it any longer. The Islamic counterrevolution has won the day in Turkey even without its exposure.

Contact Koira at koira@dbmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Ben-Ariel, July 24, 2007.

During a 1995 Root and Branch lecture in Jerusalem, Professor Nahum Rakover, author and then Deputy Attorney General of Israel, publicly agreed with me that it isn't illegal for Christians or Jews to pray upon the Temple Mount, even though it is forcibly prevented by the police.

I had expressed the frustration we (the Temple Mount Faithful and thankfully, now, many others) feel when we follow the law, receive the necessary police permits for our legal demonstrations, and even obtain written Supreme Court approval of our actions, only to be denied "freedom of access" to our most holy site, the Temple Mount, and to be harshly treated with contempt for even trying to exercise our democratic rights!

I asked Deputy Attorney General Rakover why the Israeli government was, in effect, encouraging folks to act outside of the law (which they know we've never done, unlike other groups who feel why bother wasting your time trying to reason with corrupt officials), as well as rewarding militant Muslims for their terrorist threats of riots and violence (if Israel were to actually uphold their 1967 law that guarantees -- in writing -- "freedom of access" to the Temple Mount) and bizarrely punishing law-abiding people by denying them entry to the Temple Mount. Why not remove the threat? Isn't that logical? Isn't that legal?

Professor Nahum Rakover basically said that we're in this situation today because NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE WANT TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHT to that religious site -- the Temple Mount!

Why should Israel change the status quo when they're not under any pressure to do so? It's been said politicians don't see the light until they feel the heat. Shame on us! As I've written in a letter published in the Jerusalem Post, the Temple Mount isn't in our hands, because it's not in our hearts and minds.

I was later unjustly deported for highlighting the plight of the Temple Mount under Nazi-Muslim occupation within an article published throughout Jerusalem and Israel, calling for the restoration of the Temple Mount as the Temple Mount -- a House of Prayer for All Peoples -- which the High Court of Israel dismissed as dangerous ideas.

Why should Jews continue to pray at the Western Wall, a site designated by the Turks for Jewish worship instead of the Temple Mount, and continue to submit to such a Gentile decree rather than obey the biblical command to ascend the Temple Mount?

Why obey men over God? Isn't that idolatry? Isn't that immoral? Isn't God Israel's King, Israel's only Husband? Who are the nations to dictate what God's wife should do?

Why are Jews gathering at the pitiful Western Wall to mourn the destruction of the Temple? Do something constructive and DEMAND Jewish legal and biblical rights to the Temple Mount.

Thankfully, the Third Temple is coming soon!


June 27, 1967

1. The Holy Places shall be protected from desecration and any other violation and from anything likely to violate the freedom of access of the members of the different religions to the places sacred to them or their feelings with regard to those places.

2. a. Whosoever desecrates or otherwise violates a Holy Place shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of seven years.

b. Whosoever does anything likely to violate the freedom of access of the members of the different religions to the places sacred to them or their feelings with regard to those places shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of five years.

3. This Law shall add to, and not derogate from, any other law.

4. The Minister of Religious Affairs is charged with the implementation of this Law, and he may, after consultation with, or upon the proposal of, representatives of the religions concerned and with the consent of the Minister of Justice make regulations as to any matter relating to such implementation.

5. This Law shall come into force on the date of its adoption by the Knesset.

Levi Eshkol
Prime Minister

Zerach Warhaftig
Minister of Religious Affairs

Shneur Zalman Shazar
President of the State

David Ben-Ariel is a Christian Zionist and author of "Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall." Contact him by email at davidbenariel@earthlink.net or at http://www.beyondbabylon.blogspot.com/

To Go To Top

Posted by Carrie Devorah, July 24, 2007.

David Keene of the American Conservation Union (ACU), spoke on a panel at the National Press Club hosted by CAIR. CAIR has become the mouthpiece for contemporary ISLAM for challenging the law and community acceptance of Muslims pushing the envelope of America's melting pot of immigrants.

David Keene (Photo: Carrie Devorah).

CAIR is led by Ibrahim Hooper a convert to Islam formerly an American. Keene has been under fire for his growing affiliation as a reported mouthpiece for Muslims.

The article below is of interest to read. It is to be found at
www.californiaconservative.org/terrorism/ david-keene-grover-norquist-suhail-khan-radical-islam/. It is entitled "David Keene, Grover Norquist, Suhail Khan & Radical Islam" and it appeared on the California Conservative blogsite July 2, 2007. The original article contains live links to additional text material.

Earlier this morning, I posted about David Keene's 'transformation' into a CAIR mouthpiece on Islamophobia. There's more to the story. Much more. According to this post by Christine at Vigilant Freedom, David Keene of the ACU "appointed Suhail Khan to the ACU board." That's why I started digging. What I found out about Suhail Khan is troubling to say the least. First I found a bio of his father, a man named Mahboob Khan. Here's what that bio on Mahboob Khan says:

Dr. Mahboob Khan passed away on April 16, 1999, in Sunnyvale, California. Dr. Khan was born on March 31, 1939, in Madras, India. He was the second child of seven born to Zainab Khatoon and Khader Khan. He was the first of his family to complete his high school diploma, and likewise the first to complete his BS degree from Madras University. He immigrated to Boulder, Colorado, in 1966 to complete his masters and doctorate in solid state physics. He married Malika Begum, also of Madras, India in 1968 and in 1969 th ey had their first son, Suhail Khan. As a student, Dr. Khan helped establish the Muslim Students Association (MSA) which subsequently became the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). He was the Vice President of MSA, the West Zone Representative, and served on the Majlis Ash-Shura for ISNA.

Here's what Frank Gaffney wrote about Mahboob Khan in his Front Page Magazine article on Suhail Khan and the ACU (www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27008):

Suhail Khan's father was the late Mahboob Khan, a PhD in solid-state physics. His biography claims that he helped establish the Muslim Student Association (MSA) while a student in Boulder (presumably, this refers to the MSA chapter at the university as the parent organization was established in 1963). The MSA is present on scores of American campuses and serves to recruit, proselytize and indoctrinate on behalf of Saudi-backed Islamists.[1] It is pro-Hamas; the MSA at UC Irvine even demanded that its members be allowed to wear Hamas armbands at graduation; and openly sympathizes with terrorists. Dr. Khan held the post of MSA vice president and Western Zone representative.

The elder Khan also served as member of Majlis ash-Shura (the governing council) of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), which was created by the Muslim Student Association (MSA) in 1977 to promote the Islamist agenda among Muslims and the general population. Another MSA arm is the North American Islamic Trust, the Saudis' vehicle for providing the financing of, by some estimates, as many as 80% of the mosques in America. That financing, and the control arising from holding title for the mosques' real estate, affords the Saudis and their proxies the ability to determine: who will serve as imams in their American mosques; what materials are distributed to the congregations[2] and taught in the madrassas (mosque schools)[3]; to what purpose are the members' obligatory tithes applied; which congregants will be eligible to make the haj pilgrimage to Mecca; etc.

It's fair to say that there's a few discrepancies between the two bios, though I don't consider the discrepancies to be major discrepancies. That said, Mr. Gaffney's article contains verifiable references to his claims, I'll trust his bio on the elder Khan. Either way, though, both bios reference Dr. Khan's serving "as member of Majlis ash-Shura (the governing council) of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and of Dr. Khan's helping "establish the Muslim Student Association (MSA) while a student in Boulder (presumably, this refers to the MSA chapter at the university as the parent organization was established in 1963)."

Here's another troubling bit of information in the Gaffney article:

Mahboob Khan founded one such mosque after he moved the family from Colorado to southern California in 1975. The mosque, together with an Islamic center and an elementary school, comprises the Islamic Society of Orange County (ISOC), of which Dr. Khan served as president before moving on to San Jose in 1980.

The Islamist character of the ISOC was evident in a visit there in December 1992, by Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, better known as the Blind Sheikh, who was later convicted in connection with the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. On the occasion of his fundraising visit to Orange County, Rahman "dismissed nonviolent definitions of jihad as weak. He stressed that a number of unspecified enemies had 'united themselves against Muslims' and that fighting them was obligatory. 'If you are not going to the jihad, then you are neglecting the rules of Allah.'"

Here's another troubling bit of information from Mr. Gaffney's article:

He has repeatedly been a featured speaker at MSA, ISNA and CAIR events, as well as those of other problematic groups, including the California-based Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and the Islamic Institute (II, also known as the Islamic Free Market Institute or IFMI). For example, Khan spoke most recently at an II meeting in December 2006.

The Islamic Institute was established by Grover Norquist in 1998 with $20,000 in seed money from Abdurahman Alamoudi (who is currently serving a 23-year federal sentence for terrorism-related activities). II is the principal vehicle for the Islamists' influence operation aimed at the Bush Administration and Republican and conservative circles. Norquist was its founding president; Alamoudi's long-time deputy, Khalid Saffuri, was its first executive director; and II's offices continue to be housed in the downtown Washington office suite rented by Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform.

The name Abdurahman Alamoudi rang a bell so I checked him out. Here's what I found:

A self-described Muslim moderate, Abdurahman Alamoudi has had many public titles over the years: founder and executive director of the American Muslim Council; Islamic affairs advisor for the Clinton administration; official appointee of the Pentagon in charge of choosing Muslim chaplains; and State Department-selected Goodwill Ambassador to Muslim nations. In stark contrast, Alamoudi's private life has been devoted to supporting and fundraising for a host of anti-American/anti-Israeli terrorist groups and nations, from Hamas and Hezbollah, to Osama Bin Laden and al Qaeda, to the Libyan regime of Muammar Qadhafi.

This brings numerous questions to mind:

  • Did Hillary know what Mr. Alamoudi was all about?
  • Did Hillary know that Mr. Alamoudi supported Hamas and Hezbollah?
  • If she knew that Mr. Alamoudi supported Hamas and Hezbollah, why didn't they run him out of their administration immediately?
  • How extensive of a background check was run on Mr. Alamoudi?
  • What was found out about him through this background check?
  • Considering that Mr. Alamoudi was "openly raising funds for Omar Abdel Rahman, the Blind Sheikh's defense fund after he helped orchestrate the original WTC bombing, shouldn't that have raised a ton of red flags for Mrs. Clinton? Or was it just not that important to her?

Here's what Steve Emerson wrote about Mr. Alamoudi:

Hillary Clinton has worked particularly closely with the head of the AMC, Abdulrahman Alamoudi, who has openly collected funds for the legal defense of Mr. Marzuk, the Hamas chieftain arrested at JFK Airport, and for Mr. Abdurahman, who organized the World Trade Center bombing.

Here's what Discover the Networks says about Mr. Abdurahman:

  • In 1994 he said: "Hamas is not a terrorist group...I have followed the good work of Hamas...They have a wing that is a violent wing. They had to resort to some kind of violence."
  • During a March 26, 1996 appearance on Middle East TV, Alamoudi said the following about Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP) founder Musa Abu Marzook, who in 1997 would be deported from the United States because of his Hamas-related activities: "I am honored to be a member of the committee that is defending Musa Abu Marzook in America. I really consider him to be from among the best people in the Islamic movement, Hamas and I work together with him."
  • On December 29, 1996, Alamoudi told a meeting of the IAP: "I think if we were outside this country, we can say, 'Oh, Allah, destroy America,' but once we are here, our mission in this country is to change it. There is no way for Muslims to be violent in America, no way. We have other means to do it. You can be violent anywhere else but in America."
  • In October 2000, Alamoudi attended an anti-Israel protest outside the White House. Speaking to a group of Palestinian-terrorist-supporters, he declared: "I have been labeled...as being a supporter of Hamas. Anybody supporters of Hamas here?...We are all supporters of Hamas...I wish they added that I am also a supporter of Hezbollah."
  • Alamoudi defended Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind sheikh imprisoned for his role in plotting New York-area terrorist attacks, most notably the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

I just did a search on Grover Norquist's name. What I found isn't flattering to Mr. Norquist. The article that most caught my attention was a golden oldie from Powerline. Here's the section that most caught my attention:

Norquist's themes are those of the Islamist apologist organizations like CAIR and the American Muslim Council: informed critics of Islamofascism and advocates of American interests like Daniel Pipes and Frank Gaffney are portrayed as bigots, and key law enforcement tools against domestic terrorism are alleged to be nefarious infringements of civil rights. When Norquist attempted to enlist James Woolsey to his cause on the latter score, Gaffney powerfully established that Norquist was all but lying.

People will point to the work Mr. Norquist did at Americans for Tax Reform as reason to cut him slack. I'd simply respond by saying Mr. Norquist isn't irreplaceable. If he leaves ATR or if ATR shuts down, competent people will come along to start a similar organization up. What's inexcusable is how Norquist ignored the war against the jihadists while lambasting good men like Frank Gaffney and Daniel Pipes as Islamophobes. That's simply inexcusable. What's worse is Mssrs. Norquist and Keene being shills for the most radical terrorist-sympathizing groups in America.

Keene's willingness to be a panelist with Parvez Ahmed at the National Press Club is foolish, especially considering CAIR's being an unindicted co-conspirator in the federal trial against the Holy Land Foundation. If his goal was to reach out to the Muslim community, his better bet would be to reach out to Dr. Zuhdi Jasser of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy. As far as I can tell, Dr. Jasser doesn't have a history of ties with known terrorist groups.

How does Keene justify appearing with Parvez Ahmed? Doesn't he care about CAIR's terrorist ties? Or is it that he just isn't that particular about who he associates himself with? It seems to me that Keene should draw the line short of legitimizing a terrorist-sympathizing organization like CAIR.

I'd also question Mr. Norquist's decision to promote Suhail Khan's candidacy for the ACU board. What was he basing this decision on? Did he do a background check on Suhail Khan? If he did, why didn't he have concerns when organizations like the MSA, ISNA and CAIR popped up on Khan's resume? I think I can answer that with this tidbit of information:

The Islamic Institute was established by Grover Norquist in 1998 with $20,000 in seed money from Abdurahman Alamoudi (who is currently serving a 23-year federal sentence for terrorism-related activities). II is the principal vehicle for the Islamists' influence operation aimed at the Bush Administration and Republican and conservative circles. Norquist was its founding president; Alamoudi's long-time deputy, Khalid Saffuri, was its first executive director; and II's offices continue to be housed in the downtown Washington office suite rented by Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform.

In other words, Norquist placed a higher priority on lobbying the White House than on his client's terrorist ties.

It seems totally appropriate to say that national security and the fight against the jihadists must take precedence over commerce. Norquist and Keene forgot that lesson. Their dash for lobbying cash vetoed their national security concerns.

[Editor's Note: Read Frank Gaffney's essay on Norquist called "A Troubling Influence". Click here.]

Carrie Devorah is an investigative photojournalist based in DC. Former religion editor of "Lifestyles" Magazine, her areas of focus are faith, homeland security and terrorism. Devorah is the sister of Jewish Press columnist Yechezkel Chezi Scotty Goldberg, victim of Egged Bus 19 bombing, 1-29-04. Goldberg was a noted psychologist with expertise in at-risk youth. Contact her at editor@carrieon.com

To Go To Top

Posted by NGO Monitor, July 24, 2007.

Summary: The Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES), funded by the German government, claims to "work towards contributing to the attainment of a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians." While many of FES's activities are consistent with this mandate, other projects involve politicized NGOs, some of which focus their activities on ideological attacks against Israel, rather than on peace, good governance and development. FES partners include the Palestinian Diaspora and Refugee Center (SHAML), Gisha, Center on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE), and the Health Development Information and Policy Institute (HDIP). The activities of some of these groups include taking part anti-Israel boycotts, demonizing Israel as an apartheid state, promoting Palestinian claims to a "Right of Return," and issuing reports which use the vocabulary of international law and human rights for partisan political and ideological agendas. In February 2007, FES engaged a consultant, who undertook a research mission that produced a one-sided, highly politicized report which condemned Israel's anti-terrorism activities. In addition, FES funded the 2004 Beirut International Conference on The Islamic World and Europe, jointly organized with Hezbollah's "Research Department". The support of this German organization for NGOs that deny Israel's right to self defense and embrace anti-Israel propaganda is particularly disturbing.

Funded by the German Government

The Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) was founded in 1925 as a political legacy of Germany's first democratically elected president, Friedrich Ebert. FES's stated goals are "furthering political and social education of individuals from all walks of life in the spirit of democracy and pluralism, facilitating access to university education and research for gifted young people by providing scholarships," and "contributing to international understanding and cooperation." FES's total annual budget is over 100 million Euros, mainly from public funding. The foundation spends approximately half of its annual budget on international activities.

Funding for the major German political foundations, of which FES is the largest, is systematically and by law assured out of the German federal budget, in direct proportion to the representation in the Bundestag of the parties with which they are associated. The FES is closely linked with the German Social Democratic Party. As an organization receiving financial support from the state, FES is subject to a certain degree of governmental control and influence. According to a study published by the Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung (Federal Office for Political Education), the major German political foundations, including the FES, constitute "the most effective and reliable instrument of German foreign policy."

The FES is very active on Israeli-Palestinian issues, but the funding level for these activities is not readily available. (In response to NGO Monitor's requests for this information, the Jerusalem offices of FES referred us to their internet site, but we could not locate the information.) In examining the specific projects listed on the FES Israel website, the work of many of the projects and partners -- including universities, research foundations and NGOs -- are consistent with FES's stated mandate and do not pose a problem. Adva Center for Information on Equality and Social Justice in Israel, Na'amat, and The Floersheimer Institute for Policy Studies are among these constructive NGOs. (Funding for the so-called 'Geneva Initiative,' led by Meretz Party leader Yossi Beilin, is questionable as it viewed by many as an attempt to interfere with Israeli domestic and foreign policy.)

However, FES's extensive support for radical NGOs that operate in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict zone, as well as in Lebanon, is very significant, as can be discerned from the following analysis.

Palestinian Diaspora and Refugee Center (SHAML)

SHAML, which is listed as an FES regional partner, describes itself as "an independent non-governmental organization, dedicated to Palestinian refugees and the Palestinian Diaspora." SHAML's promotion of Palestinian claims of a "right of return", which constitute a major barrier to the realization of a two-state solution, undermines the efforts to foster peace that FES claims in its mission statement. This focus is emphasized in SHAML's Cine-Club -- a project run jointly with FES -- which screens films in the refugee camps. In an interview with the FES concerning the Cine-Club, the director of SHAML and the Cine-Club's initiator, Dr. Sari Hanafi, has openly stated his support for the "right of return."

SHAML sponsors programs and publications that label Israeli policy as "apartheid." A member of the Palestinian NGO Network (PNGO), SHAML is a signatory of the call for "a comprehensive academic boycott of Apartheid Israel." (PNGO was instrumental in producing many of the preparatory documents for the Durban 2001 conference including the document calling for embargoes on Israel, and has issued calls for the "activation of popular resistance against Jewish colonies and the Wall". PNGO members also coordinate activities under the heading of "defending Jerusalem against Israeli measures aimed at the 'Judaization.'")

Health Development Information and Policy Institute (HDIP)

As NGO Monitor has previously reported, HDIP, a Ramallah-based Palestinian NGO and FES regional partner, is a highly politicized organization functioning under the façade of "policy research and planning regarding the Palestinian health care system." Although the HDIP is involved as a consultant to the World Health Organization, European Community, UNDP, UNICEF, and the World Bank, HDIP refers to the security barrier as an "apartheid wall" in its publications. In addition, the HDIP also runs Palestine Monitor, a radical website which regularly uses the rhetoric of incitement, accuses Israel of "ethnic cleansing" and supports anti-Israel boycott campaigns.


Established in 2005 and based in Tel Aviv, Gisha, which receives annual funding from FES, describes its mandate as engaging "in litigation and advocacy that aim to help individuals exercise their right to freedom of movement while working for systemic change in military practices and abuses at Israeli border-crossings and checkpoints."However, as NGO Monitor has documented in detail, Gisha uses the vocabulary of international law and human rights to promote a partisan political and ideological agenda, erasing essential facts and different opinions. Gisha's January, 2007 report, "Disengaged Occupiers," for example, repeatedly uses "apartheid" rhetoric.

Center on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE)

COHRE is a Geneva-based NGO which has received funding from FES. COHRE has worked together with the Palestinian NGO BADIL, which actively campaigns for the "right of return". BADIL was 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. Together COHRE and BADIL issued a joint report using the demonization rhetoric of the Durban NGO Forum, in which Israel is charged with "the calculated theft of Palestinian land...through military aggression...the imposition of apartheid-like laws...a cruel form of ethnic cleansing." COHRE's director, Scott Leckie, is a former staff member at the PLO's Palestinian Negotiations Support Unit.


The Mossawa Center portrays itself as involved in "improving the social, economic and political status of the Arab citizens of Israel, while preserving their national and cultural rights as Palestinians." However, Mossawa has emerged as one of the main NGOs involved in the political demonization of Israel, using blanket charges of racism and similar terms. Its reports to UN committees often remove or minimize the context of terrorism to condemn Israeli security measures, and promote legal arguments to undermine the State. Together with the EU, Mossawa held a conference November 25-December 1, 2006, where it presented a publication entitled "The Future Vision of the Palestinian Arabs in Israel." This document called Israel an "ethnocratic state" which "cannot be defined as democratic," and claimed that only "Palestinian Arabs are the indigenous people of the country," ignoring Jewish historical ties to Israel and Jewish communal continuity. The report also called for the eradication of the Israeli flag and national anthem, for the right of the Arab minority to have a veto over matters of national import, and for the immediate implementation of the "Right of Return".

Beirut International Conference on The Islamic World and Europe: A Joint FES -- Hizbollah Project

In 2004, FES, in conjuction with Hezbollah's "research department," organized a joint conference in Beirut titled "The Islamic World and Europe: From Dialogue to Agreement." The conference featured speakers from Hezbollah and Hamas and the agenda included an item on "occupation and resistance". In response, the Simon Wiesenthal Center urged German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder to formally rebuke the FES for its participation in and funding of the conference.

Sponsorship of Politicized Events

In October 2006, FES sponsored a research mission to the West Bank and Gaza "to review human rights work" and "provide advice on the [FES's] own program" in these areas. The mission culminated in a February 2007 report entitled Defending Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories: Challenges and Opportunities. Although this "discussion paper" carries the disclaimer that "this report does not necessarily represent the views of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation," the Forward to the report, which offers a positive introduction to its findings, is written by Knut Dethlefsen, Director of the FES office in East Jerusalem. The report was authored by Iain Guest, founder and Executive Director of The Advocacy Project, a Washington, DC-based NGO with a prevalent anti-Israel political agenda and ideological emphasis. It is unfortunate that the FES selected a researcher whose credibility is problematic.

In the report Israel is blamed for the "humanitarian crisis" in the West Bank and Gaza. According to the report, "[T]here is consensus that the Israeli policy of 'closure' is responsible for the humanitarian crisis and has been made easier by the Oslo arrangements." (p.24) The report downplays the responsibility of Palestinian terrorist groups and the basic right of Israel to defend its citizens against attack. Furthermore, the report implies a moral equivalency between terrorist attacks against Israel, and Israel's defense against terrorism. The following paragraph provides a clear example:

"Intensification of war and occupation. The war intensified dangerously in 2006, leading to wide-spread abuses against civilians on both sides and exhibiting a disregard for basic principles of human rights. Hamas militia fired hundreds of Kassam rockets at civilian targets in Israel, while the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) returned to the policy of incursions, mass arrests, extrajudicial killings, and the use of lethal force against noncombatants." (p. 6) (emphasis added)

While Hamas' attacks are noted, only Israel's actions against terrorism have highly charged adjectives and terminology attached to them. And in the proceeding paragraph, Palestinian casualty figures are reported but mention of Israeli victims of terror is omitted.

The report also uses the highly charged term "siege" to describe Israel's policy in the West Bank and Gaza. The author lauds efforts of Palestinian and Israel-based groups to bring about the "right of return" (p.63).

The conclusion states that, "in a larger sense, this mission was told repeatedly that Israel has no interest in the welfare of Palestinians or in seeing a democratic state in Palestine. Palestinians are convinced that Israel views them solely as a demographic and security threat". (p.7) This conclusion cites discussions held with a number of Palestinians; no parallel discussions with Israeli individuals were cited. Shawan Jabarin, one of the Palestinians who is cited, is the General Director of Al-Haq (another "Durban" NGO). Jabarin was also convicted by Israeli courts for his involvement with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) group -- designated as a terrorist organization by the United States, the European Union, and Canada. The author also relied on testimony provided by Issam Younis, Director General of the Al-Mezan Center for Human Rights (Gaza). As NGO Monitor has previously reported, Al-Mezan's publications often exploit human rights and international legal rhetoric, refer to Israeli counter-terrorism operations and policies as "ethnic cleansing," and fail to mention the wider context of Israeli counter-terrorism operations.

In summary, these examples demonstrate the role of FES-funded activities and NGOs in promoting extreme Palestinian positions that contribute to conflict. The role of an official German foundation in supporting NGOs and activities that undermine the legitimacy of Israel and actively participate in the "Durban strategy" is particularly disturbing.

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 -- see http://www.ngo-monitor.org.

To Go To Top

Posted by Judy Lash Balint, July 24, 2007.

A brisk breeze blows through the concrete canyon created by the buildings that make up Jerusalem's municipal complex, Safra Square. The wind ruffles the sackcloth mourning garment worn by a youngish woman sitting alone on the hard ground in the middle of the square as Tisha B'Av descends on Jerusalem.

Along with hundreds of others, she's there to mourn the long litany of national tragedies that has befallen the Jewish people around this date all through Jewish history. While Yom Kippur is the day for personal reckoning, Tisha B'Av is the occasion for some national soul-searching over what led to our various ancient and recent disasters.

As we sit waiting for the start of the recitation of Eichah, the mournful lament for his people penned by the prophet Jeremiah, a friend reminds me that we spent last Tisha B'Av together at Mt. Herzl attending the heartrending funeral of IDF soldier Michael Levin z"tl, a young American immigrant killed in the Hizbollah war.

There were civilian casualties too last Tisha B'Av. Five people were killed by rockets fired into Israeli towns that day. Shimon Zribi, his 15-year-old daughter Mazal, Albert Ben-Abu, and Aryeh and Tiran Tamam all perished in Akko last Tisha B'av.

At this year's march around the Old City walls, Knesset member Aryeh Eldad and Rabbi Yosef Mendelevich, the former Soviet Prisoner of Zion, both drive home the message that last year's war as well as the previous summer's tragic expulsion of Jews from Gush Katif, both resulted from weakness. MK Eldad told marchers that the people are stronger than the leaders and expressed confidence that we could "turn the wheel back."

Mendelevich, one of Israel's most unsung heroes, explained that he felt compelled to say Kaddish at this spot just outside the Temple Mount "for the heroes who fell here." He turned to face the site of the Temple and the thousands of marchers who had listened quietly to his stirring talk rose behind him to gaze up at Lions Gate and join in the response to his passionate rendition of the ancient words of praise and hope.

Last night, more than ten thousand took part in the revival of the tradition of walking around the walls of the Old City on Tisha B'Av that has captured the attention of growing numbers of Jerusalemites in recent years. It's difficult to estimate the crowds, but it took the better part of half an hour for the masses to move out of Safra Square at the beginning of Jaffa Road and set off on their way after the public reading of Eichah.

This year marked the 13th anniversary of the revival of the custom, initiated by the Women In Green organization headed by Nadia and Ruth Matar.

Tisha B'Av is the one day of the year when Jewish prayers are broadcast over a public address system, in contrast to the daily call to prayer blasted out five times a day over amplification systems from mosques in eastern Jerusalem. It's actually a little disorienting to hear the Hebrew of Eichah amplified over the main city square.

As the marchers move off following a huge banner proclaiming a slogan of allegiance to Jerusalem, organizer Nadia Matar reminds the crowd that this is not a demonstration or a rally, nor is it a social event. In fact, no reminder is necessary, as the restrained mass of Jews soberly sets out to encircle the gates of the Holy City.

Scattered amongst the marchers are a significant number of non-observant Israelis. Women wearing pants walk side by side with others whose hair is carefully covered with a scarf or hat.

There are wheelchair "marchers" and a number of octagenarian walkers, some supported by younger relatives, who manage to reach the end of the hour-long route.

As we pass New Gate, the main entry to the Christian Quarter, we see that all traffic on Route #1 (the main north/south gateway through the city) has been redirected as we take over the streets and pour down the road toward Damascus Gate. Spotlights and snipers are dotted on the rooftops and although most of the Arab stores are shuttered tight, soldiers keep a tight watch over several dozen Arabs who watch us march by as we pass Saleh el Din Street, the main commercial avenue of eastern Jerusalem. Border police hold back a few dozen Arabs coming out of Herod's Gate as we stream past.

Walking down the hill toward Damascus Gate we turn to look back at those behind us. People as far back as we can see.

The march is a hands-on outdoor classroom for many parents. All along the way, fathers are explaining the significant sites to sons and daughters. "Saba (grandpa) fought here," one tall, bearded man tells his 10 year old son as we round the corner towards Lions Gate, where Israeli paratroopers entered to liberate the Temple Mount in the 1967 Six Day War.

"Look over there," says a young mother to her wide-eyed daughter. "You can see the stairs where the Jews used to go up to the Temple," she says as we walk up the hill in front of the southern wall.

In front of us we see the Mount of Olives crowned with its Arab and Christian institutions. There's a refreshing feeling of freedom as thousands walk freely down the road that overlooks the oldest Jewish cemetery in the world.

Many marchers wander over to the wall to gaze at the Kidron Valley below with Absalom's Tomb and the monument to the prophet Zechariah. Across the valley we can see the Maale Hazeitim development that acts as a buffer between Abu Dis and the Temple Mount.

Rounding the corner, we look up at the imposing Southern Wall of the Temple with the steps and Huldah's Gate, before making the ascent towards Dung Gate and the entrance to the Western Wall. Glancing backwards again, the sight of the crowds of people still behind us is awesome. Quiet and dignified, the march has gone off without incident.

Getting out of the area proves challenging, as the Egged bus company lays on dozens of buses to get people in and out of the Old City, causing their own traffic jams.

Close to midnight the road leading to Zion and Dung gates is still blocked by a line of the green Egged buses packed to overflowing with the faithful who will spend the night sitting or lying on the ground at the site of the catastrophe that gave us Tisha B'Av.

At 1 a.m. I see the young woman in sackcloth stretching out on a concrete ledge inside the tunnel that links the Kotel plaza to the Moslem Quarter. She's no longer alone.

Pictures of last night's Tisha B'Av march are at http://flickr.com/photos/jerusalemdiaries/

New release! Jerusalem Diaries II: What's Really Happening in Israel (Xulon Press) by Judy Lash Balint is now available at your favorite bookstore or from www. amazon.com and www.barnesandnoble.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Asher Eder, July 24, 2007.

Jerusalem, 22/8/07

Mr Shimon Peres
President of the State of Israel

Honorable Mr President,

In the last weekend's edition of the Jerusalem Post (p.14), you were recorded saying "We have to get rid of the territories", insisting that this is the majority view in Israel today.

That begs the question: "Who, or what, entitled us in the first place to that land, i.e. the Land of Israel"?

You may refer to the Balfour Declaration; or to the United Nation's decision of 1947 -- but are these the source of the title to the land? You know very well that our Arab/Muslim neighbors rejected and still reject them; accuse us of taking away from them their land (of the Dar-es-Salaam); and depict the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 as their "Naqbah" (=catastrophe, disaster).

I think we have to acknowledge the fact that our title to the land roots solely in the Tanakh, the Hebrew Bible, expressing the Word of the Lord God of Israel and Creator of all beings. Some may accept that, some may reject it, but the fact remains.

Proclaiming, and trying, "to get rid of the territories", is like despising the Land-Covenant and the central part of that land. In addition, it plays right into the hands of the "Jihadists". It is like cutting the branch upon which we are sitting. "Getting rid of the territories" may sound nice in the ears of Anti-Semites and self-enlightened European neo-pagans who would gleefully watch the Muslims doing now that "job" they themselves could not finish in Auschwitz...

True, after Auschwitz it was Israel's foremost task to serve as Miqlat -- shelter for the survivors -- but a miqlat is neither a goal of life nor its content: Being content with the land of Israel being merely a miqlat, would immediately entail the questions: What should be the borders of such a miqlat? What to do inside that miqlat -- discos and football games? The Arabs tell us plainly to go back to Europe; and let the Europeans settle there the problem of anti-Semitism...

Making peace with the Palestinians? Your efforts in that direction are enormous indeed -- but let's be aware that the essence of the conflict is not an Israel/Palestinian strive over some territories -- it is an Arab/Muslim all-out war against the State of Israel in which their leaders misuse the locals -- Palestinians- as kind of spearhead. against us. Making peace with a spearhead, or assault troop, is a contradiction in terms. We could have learned that latest from the outcome of Oslo...

Isn't it the foremost task of a President of Israel to be a father-figure for all its people, instead of pushing through the agenda of one of its fractions?

Dr. Asher Eder
Jewish Co-Chairman, Islam-Israel Fellowship

Contact Asher Eder at avrason@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 24, 2007.

Over one hundred thousand Jews flooded the Western Wall Plaza on Tisha B'Av to say Eicha -- the traditional lamentations over the destruction of the Temple.

From Arutz-Sheva

Last night I went with friends to participate in the reading of Eicha on the Tayelet, a scenic walkway in the Talpiot neighborhood of Jerusalem. We sat on the grass on a hillside and looked down on the Old City of Jerusalem and on the Temple Mount as we read. It was a stunning experience.

From Arutz-Sheva

Today I attended shiurim -- classes -- for Tisha B'Av. And what I came away with was the necessity of being "b'simcha" -- having happiness -- for what is ours. (Yes, Tisha B'Av is a day of mourning, but the message of the need to have heart-felt gratitude transcends this; without that appreciation we lose what we have.)

And so, whatever we must still confront, whatever we must be alert to and fight for, there is, first, this message of gratitude for Jerusalem that is ours.


Tony Blair met with Mahmoud Abbas and other Palestinian officials in Ramallah today. After the meeting Blair refused to answer questions. But Saeb Erekat was more than happy to speak with reporters:

"We made it clear that we are no longer interested in talks, declarations or even initiatives. We are interested in the creation of mechanisms in order to implement all the ideas for the establishment of a Palestinian state.

"The economic issue and the building of institutions are part of the overall diplomatic issue...

"What is needed, therefore, is a mechanism for the implementation of all the ideas as one in order to reach the goal, which is ending the occupation and establishing an independent Palestinian state in the 1967 borders."


It's no wonder, then, that Blair had nothing to say after this meeting. The message that was delivered to him was that the PA authorities weren't much interested in the economic programs and institution building he was offering. If he couldn't deliver on moving towards a state, they had little to say to him.

This is unmitigated gall. The Palestinian have done zero -- less than zero -- to entitle them to a state. They are lacking the economic base and the civic institutions that would make a viable state possible. If they were sincere about wanting a stable and self-sustaining state, they would be grateful for the assistance Blair comes to offer.

But, of course, they are not sincere. They pretend that Israel has blocked them from achieving the goal of a state and ignore their own self-defeating role in landing them where they now are. They talk about "occupation" but utter nary a word committing themselves to the elimination of the terrorist infrastructure that keeps an Israeli presence in their cities.

When considered rationally and objectively, this state of affairs is really quite incredible. There sits a bunch of bums with solid terrorist credentials and an enormous capacity for corruption and self-serving policies. Yet for a variety of very perverse reasons, the world is rushing to help them achieve something that should never come into being.

I would like to think that it would begin to dawn on the leaders of the international community whom they are dealing with. But I know better: of course it won't. The Palestinians have this incredible sense of entitlement precisely because the international community has cut them slack over and over again. And watch -- it'll happen again now.

The Palestinians want a state? That's fantastic. It represents a diplomatic breakthrough. Let's work to get it for them. No one will have the honesty and the courage to say, "You want a state? First get your act together and convince us that it's a good idea -- that the creation of a state will be a positive for world peace and the international community." Silly me, to even suggest such a thing.


I mention one other matter here which must be repeated again and again: There are no "1967 borders" (by which is meant the lines before the Six Day war). There are only armistice lines that were acknowledged as not being permanent; it was clearly understood at the time armistice agreements were drawn that final borders were still to be negotiated. And yet the world buys this notion of "borders to which Israel is obligated to return." Buys it because the lie is repeated so frequently.


Brett Stevens, former editor of The Jerusalem Post, and now with The Wall Street Journal, today wrote an article about Syrian encroachment in Lebanon.

An American NGO with UN consultive status, the International Lebanese Committee for U.N. Security Council Resolution 1559, has just done a survey of the Lebanese-Syrian border. It was a scrupulously done survey that utilized military maps, satellite images, photographs and more.

The finding: Right now Syria occupies 177 square miles of Lebanese soil. This was achieved via infiltration along the border and accounts now for some 4% of Lebanon. In one location, those doing the survey photographed Syrian military checkpoints a mile inside of Lebanon. Assad's response is a refusal to permit demarcation of the border between Lebanon and Syria.

This -- in and of itself -- shouldn't be surprising. We know that Syria is on the verge of overtaking Lebanon again. What is notable is that the results of the survey are considered so controversial that the authors wish to remain anonymous and have kept it quiet. When the UN suddenly decides that Shaba farms (which is only 12 square miles) is Lebanese after all and Israel should give it back, there is considerable noise made. But here everyone is quiet. For certain, Hezbollah, who claims the defense of the territorial integrity of Lebanon as a prime raison d'être, is not going to say anything.



With regard to Lebanon, The Christian Science Monitor today carried a startling story: International (UNIFIL) forces in Lebanon are being threatened by terrorists who are assumed to be radical Sunnis with a possible al-Qaida connection. (It should be noted that these radicals were referred to as "militants" by the Monitor. But these guys killed six UNIFIL soldiers with a car bomb recently, and that makes them terrorists in my book.)

So guess who UNIFIL is unofficially seeking help from? Yes, incredibly: Hezbollah. Agents from Italy, France and Spain met with Hezbollah in city of Sidon in April, and subsequently some Spanish UNFIL troops were escorted on their patrols by Hezbollah.

Pray tell, then, how, are UNIFIL forces going to come down on Hezbollah for being where they shouldn't and bringing in their weaponry? That's a rhetorical question. They're not.

The Monitor cites one expert who says threats against UNIFIL are such now that there is the risk that this international force will become so occupied with protecting its forces that it will patrol as little as possible.


A Kassam rocket launched from Gaza yesterday hit a house in Kibbutz Karmiya, which is south of Ashkelon. The rocket came through the roof and landed in the bedroom of the family's eight-month-old baby girl; the crib was smashed. The child, who suffered shrapnel injury, was saved because her mother, on hearing the warning siren, had snatched her from her crib and run to a safer part of the house. Talk about terrifying.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, July 24, 2007.

We need to save Israel from its government.

We need support and we need money.

One person who is helping to do just that is Tsafrir Ronen:

Tsafrir Ronen's Statement

Our Belief: For Eretz Yisrael Foundation (FEYF)

Mission Statement:

Eretz Yisrael, the land of Israel, belongs to one nation only -- Am Yisrael, the nation of Israel that gave this land its name.

Am Yisrael wrote the Bible in Eretz Yisrael. Since then, the Bible has become a foundation for world civilizations.

Palestine is a fictitious name created by the Roman Empire in 132 AC in the aftermath of the Jewish Bar Kochvah revolt. The Romans also began calling Jerusalem Aelia Capitolina in an effort to erase the connection between the Jewish nation and Eretz Yisrael. Aelia Capitolina no longer exists nor does Palestine.

The Palestine that Arabs want back never existed in the first place. If there is no Palestine, then it follows that there are no Palestinians either.

The ever-growing enemies of modern Israel have breathed new life into the hoax that is Palestine in order to perpetrate a monumental theft. The Arab world has reinvented the notion of Palestine through propaganda designed to rewrite Israel's history, steal Israel's land, and ultimately annihilate Israel. The misused term Palestine -- not Israel -- must be dashed from existence.

The nation of Israel established the "return to Zion" Zionism that attracted Arabs from neighboring countries who sought the work that Jews provided. They did not and do not belong to the land. They have no claim to the land, as they are not proprietors of the land.

The Arabs and Muslims occupied Eretz Yisrael for centuries. Today, the Arabs living in Eretz Yisrael are occupying the land and are eroding the successes of the Zionist movement. They are parasites eating away at the accomplishments of the Zionist endeavor.

The League of Nations granted the historical biblical land to the Jewish nation, which included what is today known as Jordan occupying today 80% of what is legally Eretz Yisrael, the land of Israel.

The Arabs possess twenty-two countries where they belong and should reside. Israel will never be turned into the twenty-third Arab Muslim country. Arabs living in the land of Israel can do so peacefully and prosperously. However, when they undermine and threaten to destroy their host nation, they should be treated as enemies of the state just as any country in the world addresses such treason.

The holy land belongs only to the people of the Bible! The people of Bible, therefore, cannot be occupying their biblical land! The Russians are from Russia, the French are from France, the Englishman are from England, the Arabs are from Arabia, and the Jews are from Judea.

Eretz Yisrael, the land of Israel, is not for sale or negotiation under any circumstance or condition. It is the nation and homeland of Am Yisrael, the nation of Israel, and shall remain as such for eternity.



"Buy a Brick for Chomesh: At Crunch Time, Jews Can and Will Be United"
By Nurit Greenger
July 18-07

Jews can live almost anywhere, but their hearts always remain in the land of Israel.

Heavy-hearted, angry, and frustrated most aptly describes those who attended a "salute and solidarity" gathering for Israel held last night, July 17 2007, in Los Angeles.

In the 1930's, Jews did not have a country. Within a five year span, Hitler slaughtered 6,000,000 Jews and dismantled thousand of European Jewish communities.

Since 1948, Jews have had a HOME. A home paid for with Jewish blood, sweat, and tears, not to mention an astronomical sum of money. We simply cannot give up on this home. If we do, we will become homeless once more, and this time it will be for good. No one will give us another parcel of land anywhere else that we can call the State of Israel.

For 2,000 years, the Jews dispersed all over the world, knew that there was a home waiting for them in the Land of Israel. All they needed to do was to go there and established it. Theodore Herzl knew this as well, but he was not just a thinker but also a doer. He knew that without the land of Israel there could never be the State of Israel.

The participants of last night's gathering know full well that the Zionist enterprise Herzl ignited must continue and must grow in strength. The 10,000 square miles of the land of Israel was given to all Jews, and it is the duty of all Jews to preserve and protect the Jewish nation and restore its pride. We are by no means seeking some outlandish victory. All we want is to live safely and peacefully in the homeland that our forefathers established.

No Jew, to whom the land of Israel has any significance, can remain silent in these times. The olive branch that we have offered our enemies time and again has been stomped on and destroyed.

"Save the Land of Israel" is an enterprise that rests in the hands of Jews alone. No one will undertake this task for us; they never have and cannot be expected to change course suddenly. In the 19th century, Israeli Jews began purchasing land that legally belonged to them. We can and must do it again. If each Jew buys at least one $10 brick (first in Chomesh and then in any other community that pops up in Judea and Samaria), we will posses a purchasing power in the sum of $150,000,000. Can we do it? Of course, we can!

This Sunday, July 23, 2007, the masses will be going to settle Chomesh. Remember, Chomesh is only the first one!

There are no moderate or radical Jews. Either you are a Jew, or you are not. There are no more ifs, ands, or buts. This is the time to ask ourselves what we can do for Am Yisrael -- the Nation of Israel. Our responsibility, as Jews anywhere and everywhere, is to perform at least one deed each day, each week, or each month to ensure the survival of Israel.

We must begin by telling each and every Israeli, "You are not alone. Come hell or high water, and through thick and thin, we are with you."

You can donate by writing a check to: Central Fund of Israel, subject line: 'Hilltop Settlers'
PO Box 15743
Beverly Hills, CA 90209-1743 USA

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, July 24, 2007.

Does anyone remember history....not so long ago actually....?

Hitler asks for permission to annex the half of Czechoslovakia known as the Sudatenland

At least he asked....now it's Syria but on the sly.....and remember we now have a worthless UN, who have forces on the spot, who must be sleeping.

This was written by Brett Stephens and it appeared today in Wall Street Opinion Journal (www.wsj.com) Mr. Stephens is a member of The Wall Street Journal's editorial board. His column appears in the Journal Tuesdays.

This is a land grab proportionally equivalent to a foreign power occupying Arizona.

As of this minute, Syria occupies at least 177 square miles of Lebanese soil. That you are now reading about it for the first time is as much a scandal as the occupation itself.

The news comes by way of a fact-finding survey of the Lebanese-Syrian border just produced by the International Lebanese Committee for U.N. Security Council Resolution 1559, an American NGO that has consultative status with the U.N. Because of the sensitivity of the subject, the authors have requested anonymity and have circulated the report only among select government officials and journalists. But its findings cannot be ignored.

In meticulous detail--supplemented by photographs, satellite images, archival material and Lebanese military maps predating Syria's 1976 invasion (used as a basis of comparison with Syria's current positions)--the authors describe precisely where and how Lebanon has been infiltrated. In the area of the village of Maarboun, for instance, the authors observed Syrian military checkpoints a mile inside Lebanon. In the Birak al-Rassass Valley, they photographed Syrian anti-aircraft batteries. On the outskirts of the village of Kossaya they found a heavily fortified camp belonging to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, in violation of U.N. resolutions and Lebanese demands.

This is a story to which I can contribute my own testimony. In May 2005 I paid a visit to Lebanon, just a month after Syria had announced that it had fully withdrawn its 14,000 troops from Lebanon in compliance with Resolution 1559. The rumor in Beirut was that a company of 200 or so elite Syrian soldiers remained encamped within Lebanon near the Druze village of Deir al-Ashaer. I decided to have a look. After a long drive over rutted roads, I found it.

Or rather, what I found was a hillside outpost that I was able to enter without crossing any apparent international border. The man in charge was a Syrian intelligence officer who "invited" me into a sweltering tent while he phoned his commanders for instruction. After a few tense minutes of silence with the soldiers inside, the officer reappeared, explained that the camp was 50 yards inside Syrian territory, and ordered me to go. From there I went to the village, where the mayor insisted the camp was several hundred yards inside Lebanon.

Who was right? Inclined as I was to believe the mayor, it was hard to sort out contending claims over remote parcels of land. A week later, then Secretary-General Kofi Annan announced the U.N. had "verified all [Syrian military units] had withdrawn, including [from] the border area." It seemed that was the end of the story.

I should have known then that anything "verified" by the U.N. must be checked at least twice. I should have known, too, that anything to which Mr. Annan devoted his personal attention would inevitably become worse. Last September, Mr. Annan paid a visit to Syrian dictator Bashar Assad after the latter had declared he would treat any attempt by the U.N. to deploy peacekeepers along the Lebanese-Syrian border as a "hostile act." To defuse the impasse, Mr. Annan simply accepted Mr. Assad's assurances that Syria would police its border and prevent arms smuggling. "I think it can happen," said the diplomat at a press conference. "It may not be 100%, but it will make quite a lot of difference if the government puts in place the measures the government has discussed with me."

What happened, predictably, was the opposite. In May, Fatah al-Islam, a terrorist group whose leadership was imported from Damascus, attacked Lebanese army outposts outside the Palestinian refugee camps of Nahr El-Bared and Biddawi, causing a bloody standoff that continues till this day. In June, current Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon issued a report citing numerous instances of arms smuggling from Syria to Hezbollah and the PFLP. Yesterday, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah boasted that he once again has missiles that can reach Tel Aviv--missiles he could only have obtained via Syria. Israel confirms his claims.

Mr. Ban's report is notable for its clarity and seriousness. Taken together with the border report, it paints an alarming picture. Though the land grabs are small affairs individually, they collectively add up to an area amounting to about 4% of Lebanese soil--in U.S. terms, the proportional equivalent of Arizona. Of particular note is that the area of Syrian conquest dwarves that of the Israeli-occupied Shebaa Farms. The farms, which Israel seized from Syria in 1967 and which amount to an area of about 12 square miles, are claimed by Hezbollah as belonging to Lebanon--a useful pretext for it to continue its "resistance" against an Israeli occupation that ended seven years ago.

Needless to say, Hezbollah--which purports to fight for Lebanese sovereignty--makes no similar claims against Syria. For his part, Mr. Assad refuses to agree to a demarcation of his border with Lebanon, just as he refuses to open an embassy in Beirut. The ambiguity serves him well: He can seize Lebanese territory without anyone appearing to take notice, supply terrorist camps without quite harboring the terrorists, and funnel arms to Hezbollah at will--all without abandoning the fantasy of "Greater Syria" encompassing Lebanon, the Golan Heights and Israel itself.

It would, of course, be nice to see the Arab world protest this case of illegal occupation, given its passions about the subject. It would also be nice to see the media report this story as sedulously as it has the controversy of the Shebaa Farms. Don't hold your breath on either score. In the meantime, the only countries in a position to help Lebanon are France and the U.S. They could strike a useful blow by closing their embassies in Damascus until such time as Damascus opens an embassy--with all that it implies--in Beirut.

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 24, 2007.


"Pres. Musharraf risked provoking the wrath of the Muslim world yesterday, when he ordered commandos to storm a pro-Taliban mosque in the Pakistan capital (Isambard Wilkinson, NY Sun, 7/11, p.7 from Daily Telegraph).

I think that if a journalist predicts a certain reaction, he should explain why he expects it. The predicted reaction either is a misperception by a Western journal, perhaps one that humbles itself before Islam, or it is a terrible commentary about the Muslim world. Mr. Wilkinson didn't say it might annoy Islamists, he said it might enrage the Muslim world. Why should it? The Islamists held hostage hundreds of civilians, probably all Muslims. Why sympathize with the kidnappers? What kind of people or faith sympathizes with such kidnappers?

Personally, I don't trust Musharraf. He was quoted years ago as having advised Islamists that sometimes he may have to seem to repress terrorists, in order that the West not hinder his underlying effort to foster Islamism. His government does have links with the Islamists. He seems to let the Pathans use the Afghan border areas as bases for attacking in Afghanistan.


Mayor Bloomberg and regime has done it again. They have misused statistics to make themselves seem to have achieved much, in education. This time they tout an apparent closing of a gap among the races.

Yes, blacks and Hispanics did, if the raw figures are to be believed, make a higher percentage gain in math and English, than the others. Since they started behind the others, however their bigger percentage gain on a lower base produced a smaller gain in test scores. Caucasians and Asians, having a higher starting point, actually gained more on the tests even though their percentage of gain was lower (Fred Smith, NY Sun, 7/11, Op.-Ed.).

To illustrate with simple numbers, suppose the two groups previously scored 50 and 100, respectively. Then the lower-scoring group gains 8%, while the higher-scoring group gains only 6%. Mayor Bloomberg would claim that the lower-scoring group is closing the gap. But the actual gains would be 4 points for the lower-scoring group and 6 points for the higher-scoring group. The higher-scoring group has widened the gap! The higher percentage would take years to have the anticipated effect. (That kind of statistics underlies fluoridation.)

It must be half a dozen times that the Mayor has manipulated statistics misleadingly. If I were the IRS, I would audit his tax returns most exactingly.


Here is what the State Dept. doesn't know about Islamism and we do. We know that all the organized Sunni Islamist groups committed to jihad by terrorism, are offshoots of the Muslim Brotherhood founded in Egypt. The founder was a Muslim who had lived in the US and abhorred its freedom sometimes allowing too much license, i.e., licentiousness. (We conceitedly suppose that foreigners must appreciate America, but Arabs think differently and have other values.)

Unaware of the Muslim Brotherhood organizations' commonality as common enemies of mankind, the State Dept. is trying to work out a mutual accommodation with some of them, because they call themselves moderate. They can call themselves anything they want, but that does not make them moderate. Hitler the aggressor called Germany the victim. Stalin the imperialist called the USSR peace-loving. Fellow travelers called the mass-murdering Chinese Communists "agrarian reformers." Now the State Dept. calls some of the Muslim Brotherhood groups "reformers."

"...the Islamist fundamentalists are enemies of religious and individual freedom, democracy, capitalism and everything Western and American and...their many affiliates are the perpetrators of suicide attacks everywhere." "Their goal: kill as many infidels as you can. Despite the evidence and repeated threats followed by terror attacks, Western officials treat Islamic fundamentalism rationally, as if the violence can somehow be negotiated away."

The State Dept. remains unaware of reality (i.e., history). Hence Pres. Bush flattered the Organization of Islamic Conference, despite its anti-Americanism. If he legitimizes it, how can he ostracize its P.A. branch, known as Hamas?

It isn't only the US that is blind to reality. "These days we see the "effectiveness" of Tony Blair's concessions to British Muslims before and after the July 7, 2005, attacks on London's transit system. Yet, Mr. Brown's new government now again seeks a "better understanding of the root causes" of Islamist attacks." (Rachel Ehrenfeld & Alyssa A. Lappen, 7/6.)

We can't work out an accommodation with evil, and they are evil. The answer is not to accommodate them but to annihilate them. The root cause is their imams and madrassas and our failure to pursue them worldwide.


The IDF reluctantly helped the government evacuate Gaza and northern Samaria. It was traumatic for the soldiers, especially by inflicting violence and deceit upon their own civilians rather than upon the enemy. The result was a disaster militarily in Gaza, because of ceding control over the arms smuggling route. The evacuation from northern Samaria at least retained IDF control, which not only kept arms out but Hamas down. The IDF did it as a one-time accommodation. It does not want the military misused again for civilian politics. The IDF warned the new Defense Minister not to ask the Army to do it again (IMRA, 6/29).


The new Prime Minister of the P.A. urged imams to stop calling some of their people collaborators or infidels. A leader of the PFLP terrorist organization agreed that mosques should not be used as places of political incitement. They should be used to promote love (IMRA, 6/29).

Leave it to the PFLP to promote hatred and violence?

It's an interesting change in approach for the P.A.. How profound is the change? Judge its sincerity by that part of the media controlled by the government.


He said Syria and Iran should halt the arms smuggling into Lebanon and respect the Security Council embargo (IMRA, 6/30).

A year of intensive arms smuggling, and the UNO still is at the stage of chiding the smugglers, after months of initially denying the smuggling that Israel reported. Does Mr. Ban think Syria will listen, now? What good is the UNO?


Foreign aid is less than 25% of all monetary transfers from developed to poorer countries. Most of the non-governmental aid is from private charity and ex-patriates' remittances. The private aid is distributed much more cheaply than governmental aid (Carol Adelman, NY Sun, 7/11, Op.-Ed.).

Governmental aid often is for improper political reasons (as to shore up Fatah terrorists and the Egyptian Army) or requires economic policies that hamper the developing countries. Perhaps we should discontinue foreign aid and dissolve the UNO.


Jews have to search title to land carefully. It doesn't always help. A Jew bought land in Jerusalem, but an illegal Arab alien squatted on it. The owner proved that the Arab had forged his documents, but police wouldn't expel the Arab without a court order. After 15 years, and much expense for the owner, the court so ordered. Now the police tell him he has to pay them a stiff fee to enforce the court order. Meanwhile, the Arabs are trying to make a political effort, with the help of the (anti-Zionist) Left, to overcome the court order. Often, Muslims threaten violence and the police let them keep stolen land (Arutz-7, 7/1).

Police should have expelled the illegal Arab alien squatter from the country.


The US still thinks that elements within the government of Iran are moderate and will work with us. False. The government is controlled by the Supreme Leader, whose goons crush dissent. The moderate-extremist conflict is a pose to deceive the West. During the prior, supposedly reformist period, foreign trade tripled. What did the reformist regime do with the proceeds? It invested more in missiles and in the covert nuclear program (MEPF News, 7/2). The US made the same mistake under Iran-Contra. The State Dept. didn't learn from it.


The prosecution "...will recommend sentencing right-wing activist Itamar Ben-Gvir to six months in prison for waving signs reading, 'Expel the Arab enemy' and 'Arab Knesset members -- fifth column.'" (IMRA, 7/2.)

He may be not a right-winger but a secret police agent who, by misbehaving, tries to discredit the Right. Those signs were truthful, but ran afoul of the "hate" law not enforced against the Muslims and the Left, who express much slander. What is wrong with expelling the enemies of one's country? That usually is done in wartime. Who can deny that the MKs in the Arab parties are a fifth column? They meet with the enemy in enemy states and cheer their war on Israel. Thus the treasonous Muslims express hatred of patriots, but patriots who seek national defense are prosecuted for "hatred."


He rationalized his release of 250 Fatah terrorists and some roadblocks. Removing roadblocks would give Israel "political clout," worth the increased risk. Releasing prisoners would show the Muslims that if they fight against Hamas, they would be rewarded. Nevertheless, he admitted terrorist still would attack from Judea and Samaria, "the Biblical names" for those provinces (IMRA, 6/2).

What political clout? Dismantling roadblocks would not increase the risk of terrorism, it would open the path to Israel for the very terrorists released. It would increase the certainty of terrorism. Appeasing the US brings death.

Releasing prisoners is like giving Hitler arms if his SA storm troopers fight against his SS storm troopers. Small difference. In the P.A., whichever faction dominated would make war on Israel, though Hamas has more connections. If Fatah needs a reward for fighting Hamas, then it isn't motivated well.

Haaretz knows that the Biblical names continued officially into the Mandate and beyond. Haaretz is trying to reduce their use and Jewish attachment to them.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, July 23, 2007.

We've often heard it said that the Arab Muslims never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

As you read the following DEBKA article, you may wonder why the Americans with all their technological superiority did not track and shoot down Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's aircraft and, therefore, the Americans missed an opportunity.

It would have been a lot like killing Adolph Hitler before he marched into Europe. That might have saved some 50 million people who were killed during WWII -- especially the 6 million Jews of whom 1,500,000 were children.

Recall how U.S. Intelligence discovered that Admiral Yamamoto who planned the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 was flying and America arranged to have that aircraft shot down over the Solomon Islands in 1943. American Intelligence could read the Japanese codes and Yamamoto was properly executed. That was the right thing to do.

I wonder why President George W. Bush is being so protective of Iran's Ahmadinejad? Is American Intel so limp that it falls into the category of an oxymoron? Is Ahmadinejad to be kept alive as is Osama Bin Laden?

Why was Arik Sharon ordered by the U.S. State Department to keep Yassir Arafat alive when he was in Israel's gun-sights in Lebanon. Arafat was responsible for the deaths of at least 100,000 Christians and Muslims in Lebanon's 12 year Civil War alone. How many others did he directly order killed in his 40 years as the grandfather of world terrorism?

We Westerners seem to have a bad habit of saving the famous dictators and terrorists who live among us and kill us. We claim they have their uses.

How many high-ranking Nazis and industrialists who built Hitler's war machine did America save after WWII because they were thought to be useful by some -- like the Dulles brothers, Allen (head of the CIA) and John Foster (head of the State Department)? (1)

As the United States supported Arafat with money and arms, so now, we fund and supply arms to Arafat's loyal servant, confidante, aide, companion and financial organizer, Mahmoud Abbas (better known by his nom de guerre Abu Mazen).

Think how many wars could have been stopped by assassinating cruel dictators. Millions of people could have been saved. But, we treat monsters as untouchable or deserving of patience and restraint. They ignore the law while implementing their butchery and we give them every benefit of law they do not deserve.

(Note! I recommend reading Oliver North's adventure novel The Assassins, wherein a team is assembled of assassins and judges to selectively kill off murderous dictators.) (2)

We could have finished with Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his unholy Ayatollahs with one well-placed bomb when they met to plan horrific crimes against humanity -- like wiping Israel off the map. Or when he met in Syria with the other major egocentric, megla-maniac, Bashar Assad of Syria on July 19th and Iran agreed to help Syria go nuclear. These "talks" suggest a tightening of the emerging alliance between Iran, Syria, Hezb'Allah, Hamas and Russia, even as Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert says publicly that Israel "can't hold onto the West Bank forever."

But, then again, the royalty of the Bush Presidency must accord honor to Iran's royalty much as we do for Saudi Royalty. Must we wait and see if Bush leaves office with the Legacy of preserving Iran's power, even expanding it while Ahmadinejad prepares to annihilate the Jewish State and murder millions?

DEBKAfile Exclusive: Ahmadinejad follows up Damascus talks with a council of war in Tehran Friday with Hizballah, Hamas and Jihadi Islami leaders July 21, 2007, 1:17 PM

Our Iranian and intelligence sources reveal that the Iranian president flew out of Damascus Thursday with this group saying: "I prefer cooler places but this region faces a torrid summer of victories."

Aboard his plane were four Hezb'Allah leaders, Secy-Gen. Hassan Nasrallah, defense chief Imam Mughniyeh, chief of staff Ibrahim Aqil and chief of special operations Unit 1800 Hajj Khalil Harb; and Jihad Islami's Abdallah Ramadan Shalah and operations chief Zaid Nahle.

Head of Hamas' Damascus HQ Khaled Meshaal did not join the party flying to Tehran to avoid giving his Saudi and Egyptian friends the impression he was in Iran's pocket. Either he flew there earlier, or else assigned a Hamas representative based in the Gulf to represent his movement at the council of war in Tehran.

As for Syria's role, DEBKAfile's military sources reveal that 20 high-ranking Iranian officers were on the Iran president's flight to Damascus, headed by defense minister Mustafa Najar. They did not join Ahmadinejad's talks with Syrian president Bashar Assad. Instead, they were driven to Syrian General Staff headquarters, where they were awaited by Syrian defense minister Gen. Hassan Turkmani, chief of staff Gen. Ali Habib and corps commanders.

Our intelligence sources believe this conference was in fact round one of the council of war which continued in Tehran Friday with Hizballah and Palestinian terrorist chiefs.

The most urgent decision facing the Iran-Syrian alliance concerns Lebanon and how far they can go to get rid of the pro-Western Siniora government in Beirut. Both Iran and Syria understand the United States and France will not stand for its ouster by military or terrorist means. But time is running out. The international tribunal is about to be installed to start hearing the Hariri assassination case and must be stopped before Assad and aides are prosecuted. Tehran and Damascus must decide quickly whether to focus on subversive action inside Lebanon or resort to diversionary tactics such as fomenting trouble against Israel on the Golan, from the Lebanese border or from Gaza.

Before Ahmadinejad and party departed Damascus Thursday night, they visited two important Shiite shrines and prayed for victory in the near future. Witnesses heard the Iranian president sobbing loudly.

DEBKAfile sources refute the Shawq al-Awsat claim Saturday, July 21,that the Iranian president rewarded Assad for abandoning its quest for a peace track with Israel by one billion dollars for arms purchases from Russia and North Korea -- plus Iranian backing on Lebanon issues. The arms Iranian-funded arms deals have been in progress since the beginning of this year, long before Ahmadinejad's Damascus visit. (3)

Ahmadinejad and his sidekick, Assad


Disturbing news out of the last few days of talks between Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Bashar Assad, news that suggests a tightening of the emerging alliance between Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas and Russia, even as Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert says publicly that Israel "can't hold onto the West Bank forever."


* "Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad pledged to help Syria conduct nuclear research during a visit to Damascus earlier this week, the London-based Arabic-language newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat reported on Saturday. In exchange, Syria agreed not to engage in peace talks with Israel. On Friday, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert called on Syrian President Bashar Assad to begin direct peace negotiations, without American mediation. According to the report, Iran also pledged to provide Syria with $1 billion in military aid to purchase arms from Russia and North Korea."

* "Syria [will] purchase 400 Russian tanks, 18 MIG-31 fighter jets, and additional up-to-date military equipment.

Ahmadinejad also promised to train Syrian air force and naval officers in Iran, and pledged to construct a factory in Syria that would produce medium-range missiles. Iran will also supply Syria's navy with missiles, and provide the Syrian army with Iranian-made tanks and armored vehicles. In exchange, the Syrians agreed to continue supporting Iran's position on affairs concerning Lebanon."

* "During his visit to Damascus on Thursday, Ahmadinejad met with Assad, Hezbollah's leader Hassan Nasrallah, and Hamas political chief Khaled Meshal. Ahmadinejad welcomed what he called Hezbollah's victory over Israel in last summer's war in Lebanon and called for a similar 'victory' this summer. The source stressed while the two countries close relations had in the past been based on mutual animosity toward former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, the relations are now based on the fact that both countries face threats by the United States and Israel." (4)


1. "Splendid Blond Beast: Money, Law & Genocide in the 20th Century" by Christopher Simpson Grove Press 1993 & Blowback: America's Recruitment of Nazis & Its Effects on the Cold War by Christopher Simpson

2. "The Assassins" by Oliver North Avon Books (of Harper Collins) NYC 2005 www.avonbooks.com

3. DEBKAfile Exclusive: Ahmadinejad follows up Damascus talks with a council of war in Tehran Friday with Hizballah, Hamas and Jihadi Islami leaders July 21, 2007

4. London-based Arabic-language newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat Sat. July 21, 2007

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Sommer, July 23, 2007.

This essay was written by Itzhak Bam, Esq.

Attorney Itzhak Bam, drafted on behalf of the Legal Forum for the Land of israel, of which he is a member, the amendment proposed by MK Uri Ariel and others, which was approved in preliminary reading at the (Wednesday July 18, 2007) Knesset plenum by an overwhelming majority.

The Legal Forum for the Land of Israel acts to protect human rights in Israel, ensure sound government, and preserve the national interests of the State of Israel and the Jewish People.

The Legal Forum for the Land of Israel
(Registered non-profit organization #58-044-212-7)
POB 33044 Jerusalem 91033 Israel
Telephone: 972+2+5022-202, Fax: 972+2+5022-844

Yesterday, the Israeli left raised an outcry over the amendment to the Israel land Authority Act, aimed at ensuring that the Authority would manage JNF lands in accordance with the fund's guiding principals, namely lease them out exclusively for Jewish settlement. Meretz activists called the amendment racist, prompting this author to remind both them and the public of several important facts.

A certain political leader had this to say about JNF land, "The JNF land, purchased with the money of the Jewish people, is sacred for the Jewish settlement, just as the Muslim Waqf is sacred for addressing the social needs of the muslim community..." This statement was not made by Beni Elon, and not even by Benjamin Netanyahu, but by Yaakov Chazan, the founder and chairman of Mapam, the predecessor of Meretz.

The amendment to the Israel Land Authority Act, directing the Authority to manage JNF land in accordance with the fund's goals for the benefit of jewish settlement is concurrent with Chazan's principals. The amendment makes it possible to maintain JNF land for the very purpose for which jews throughout the worlds collected pennies in the little blue box, to settle Jews in the Land of Israel.

Anyone calling this amendment racist, either thinks Zionism is racism (an expected claim for Achmad Tibi, Wassel Taha, and the rest of Bashara associates), or completely misunderstands the current legal reality and misses the point of the amendment.

Over the years, the JNF acquired land, managing it by itself and leasing it to jewish communities. After the establishment of the State, the Israeli government, which suffered from a negative cash flow, sold some 300,000 to 400,000 acres of land, previously belonged to refugees, who had left the State of Israel after its inception, to the JNF. The JNF reimbursed the State and provided significant funds for israel's empty treasury.

After the establishment of the State, the JNF was incorporated as a private Israeli company, in accordance with the Jewish National Fund Act 5714-1954 and continued managing its property. In 1960, the Knesset passed three new laws, revamping land legislation. The law defined the land belonging to the JNF, the State, and the development Authority as "Israel Land" and entrusted it into the hands of the Israel land Authority (ILA), established by the Israel Land Authority Act. Consequently, a government agency was appointed to manage the JNF property.

The ILA committed itself to managing the land in accordance with JNF goals, namely expanding Jewish settlement. The commitment was anchored in an agreement between the JNF and the ILA, by virtue of which, the ILA continued to manage JNF lands in accordance with the latter's goals. Everything worked fine until fall 2005, when, following Addallah's appeal, the Attorney General wrote in an opinion to the high Court of justice that the ILA could no longer manage JNF property in accordance with its goals and had to lease the property under its management, including that belonging to the JNF, to any applicant, regardless of JNF's goals or the agreement between the ILA and the JNF. By doing so, Mazuz reneged on the commitment made by the State to the JNF and on Chazan's vision, by which the lands purchased with the money of the Jewish people were sacrosanct for jewish settlement.

The current amendment, establishes a legal basis for the ILA's authority to manage JNF property, purchased with the money of the Jewish people, in accordance with the fund's goal for the purposes of jewish settlement, and is thus aimed at preserving the status quo, which existed prior to mazuz's opinion. This amendment intends to circumvent Mani mazuz, not the High Court of Justice. In no way does it undermine the State's responsibility to lease land to all those who need it. It does, however, affirm that the State should not perform its responsibilities at the expense of the JNF. While the State of Israel must act to benefit of all its citizens, the JNF is under no obligation to encourage non-Jewish settlement. If this is racism, than so is the entire Zionist movement, including Yaakov Chazan and Mapam. Chaim Oron should keep that in mind.

Contact Barbara Sommer at sommer_1_98@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, July 23, 2007.

This essay was written by Pat Boone and it appeared July 21, 2007 in World Net Daily
(www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56783). Pat Boone, descendant of the legendary pioneer Daniel Boone, has been a top-selling recording artist, the star of his own hit TV series, a movie star, a Broadway headliner, and a best-selling author in a career that has spanned half a century. During the classic rock & roll era of the 1950s, he sold more records than any artist except Elvis Presley.

The above question, either in word or implication, is being voiced by way too many these days, as people and governments cast about desperately for lasting solutions in the Middle East.

Many Western and European political leaders -- having heard the deprecations and the determination to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, from the likes of Palestinian Yasser Arafat, Saudi Arabian Osama bin Laden, Iraq's Saddam Hussein, Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and so many other power brokers in the region -- have come dangerously close to deciding that little Israel is the "thorn in the side" of world order.

The next logical thought is: "Who needs Israel? Let her be erased, her people dispersed (or whatever), and the Middle East can settle comfortably into a harmonious Islamic community of states. Problem solved!"

What folly. What suicidal blindness.

I just returned from a momentous event in our nation's capital. An organization called Christians United for Israel, or CUFI, convened 4,000 people from all 50 states in several days of briefings and strategy sessions, culminating in an exhilarating, rousing rally in the D.C. Convention Center featuring Jewish leaders and top Christian ministers celebrating the things we hold in common and the spiritual bonds that unite us. The next day, several thousand of the participants fanned out over Washington and Capitol Hill, lobbying virtually every representative and senator on behalf of Israel and its sovereignty.

Why? Couldn't we all see this is an exercise in futility, an unnecessary bother -- that we'd all be better off if Israel didn't exist?

No, we all see clearly that the world needs Israel. The whole world.

What do I mean? Consider:

Israel, the 100th smallest country, with less than 1/1000th of the world's population, can make claim to an astounding number of society's advances in almost every direction!

Intel's new multi-core processor was completely developed at facilities in Israel. And our ubiquitous cell phone was developed in Israel by Motorola, which has its largest development center in the little land.

Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology was pioneered in Israel.

AirTrain JFK -- the 8.1-mile light rail labyrinth that connects JFK Airport to NYC's mass transit -- is protected by the Israeli-developed Nextiva surveillance system.

Bill Gates calls Israel "a major player in the high-tech world"; most of Windows NT operating system was developed by Microsoft-Israel; the Pentium MMX Chip technology was designed in Israel at Intel; both Microsoft and Cisco built their only R&D facilities outside the U.S. in Israel; and, with more than 3,000 high-tech companies and start-ups, Israel has the highest concentration of high-tech companies in the world apart from the Silicon Valley.

Get this: Israel leads the world in the number of scientists and technicians in the workforce, with 145 per 10,000, as opposed to 85 in the U.S., over 70 in Japan, and less than 60 in Germany. With over 25 percent of its workforce employed in technical professions, Israel places first in this category as well!

It goes on and on.

The Weizmann Institute of Science has been voted "the best university in the world for life scientists to conduct research." Israeli researchers have:

  • Discovered the molecular trigger that causes psoriasis.
  • Developed the Ex-Press shunt to provide relief for glaucoma sufferers.
  • Unveiled a blood test that diagnoses heart attacks ... by telephone!
  • Found a combination of electrical stimulation and chemotherapy that makes cancerous metastases disappear -- and developed the first fully computerized, no-radiation, diagnostic instrumentation for breast cancer!
  • Designed the first flight system to protect passenger and freighter aircraft against missile attack.
  • Developed the first ingestible video camera -- so small it fits inside a pill -- used to view the small intestine from the inside, enabling doctors to diagnose cancer and digestive disorders!
  • Perfected a new device that directly helps the heart pump blood,
  • an innovation with the potential to save lives among those with
  • congestive heart failure, synchronizing the heart's mechanical
  • operations through a sophisticated system of sensors.

These are only a few of Israel's recent contributions to the welfare of the world. There are just too many to list here. Water shortage, global warming, space travel, anti-virus, anti-smallpox, blood pressure, solar power, paralysis, diabetes, data storage -- these and hundreds more -- are being addressed by Israel's scientists. They're pioneering in DNA research, using tiny strands to create human transistors that can literally build themselves -- and playing an important role in identifying a defective gene that causes a rare and usually fatal disease in Arab infants!


Israel produces more scientific papers per capita than any other nation by a large margin; it has the largest number of startup companies globally, second only to the U.S.; it is No. 2 in the world for venture capital funds, financing all these advances; its $100 billion economy is larger than all of its immediate neighbors combined; and Israel is the only liberal democracy in the Middle East.

And while it maintains, by far, the highest average living standards and per-capita income, exceeding even those of the UK, Israel is the largest immigrant-absorbing nation on earth, relative to its population. It is truly an unparalleled marvel of our time.

So what's the point of all this?

Simply that the very idea of eradicating or even displacing Israel from its historic home is suicidal to the rest of the world, not just her Arabic neighbors. Though there are ominous biblical consequences pronounced on those who "curse Israel," there are also wonderful blessings promised those who "bless" her -- and we're seeing those real, practical, humanitarian blessings proliferate around the world, blessing all humanity.

Stop just for a second and imagine a world today that never knew Israel. And then go further: Given their living standards, ideologies and attitudes toward all who dare to disagree with them, imagine what our world would be like if Israel's enemies held sway. Would you rather live in an Iran, Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan? Or an Israel?

Who needs Israel? Let's be honest. We all do.

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Kannan Devan, July 23, 2007.

Palestinian Muslims are kept in refugee camps and victimized by rich Arabs as part of their Islamic game to tarnish Israel and Jewish people. Democracy, freedom, civil rights, human rights, women's rights, coexistence and peaceful living are not part of Islamic politics. The problem we face in the middle east is not settlement of Palestinian Arabs or democratic Israel. The root cause of unrest, violence and terrorism is the fanatic, non-compromising, rigid and totalitarian Islamic dogma.

This was written by David Frankfurter (david.frankfurter@iname.com>). This essay is archived at


Dear Friends,

Difficulties faced by Palestinian Arabs have been a focus of world attention for decades. But oppression of Palestinians by fellow Arabs barely rates a mention.

Often subject to political racism, Palestinian Arabs have been forced into refugee camp ghettos in many Arab states. Identical to the racist laws against Jews in those places, they are also unable to hold citizenship, own land, get jobs or otherwise integrate into their host states. And despite Palestinian Authority or Hamas control of Gaza, there have been no steps toward dismantling the camps there. This is a situation condoned and maintained by the UN and its institutions. If the Arab states were truly interested in helping the Palestinians, they would give them full social and economic rights.

The world appears oblivious to this apartheid policy; both East and West politically and financially encourage it. Taxpayers support it with hundreds of millions channeled annually through UNRWA to pay for basic education, housing and medical services. All of which could probably be paid for by the welfare recipients themselves, if they were only allowed to work freely and integrate into the society around.

It is outrageous that the Nahr el-Bared refugee camp in Tripoli, Lebanon, is nearly empty after months of bombing by the Lebanese army. The refugees, who were never allowed to integrate into their adopted country, have become refugees once again. In one day last week, a 16 year old was killed and a 13 year old girl was severely injured -- both bystanders in the fighting between the Lebanese army and Palestinian 'militants'.

Or in Gaza; after a bloody coup, summary 'justice' is being handed out by Hamas against their Fatah rivals. Hamas allows a humanitarian disaster to accumulate, while spending fortunes importing huge supplies of advance weaponry into Gaza. Vast quantities of weapons and military equipment are smuggled in -- and yet food and medicines are in short supply. It is easy to blame Israel for the poverty and distress and leave the Western taxpayer with the responsibility of picking up the pieces. No human rights group raises even an eyebrow.

Unfortunately, NGOs so vocal about Israel's infractions as she defends her citizens have more important things on their agenda than to be concerned about these innocent civilians. Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and Christian Aid (to name just three NGOs focusing significant resources on Palestinian issues) have yet to issue a condemnation of the attacks in Nahr el-Bared.

These same NGOs, supported by the world media, strongly criticize Israel for closing its borders to Gaza. Despite the use of these border crossings for the smuggling of weapons and terrorists that threaten her civilians, Israel assists the passage of food, medicine, stock feed and other basic necessities. In the last month I have counted reports of some 33,000 tons of solids and 1.2 million liters of liquids in these categories. Hamas response has been to attack those very border crossings, to scare away international supervisors, and force closures.

The last weeks have seen Israel release both hundreds of convicted terrorist prisoners and large sums of back taxes. Victims of violence in Gaza -- civilian and militant -- are receiving the best of medical care in Israel's hospitals. All this while the Kassams still rain down on the Israeli city of Sderot and its surrounds.

Those truly concerned about Palestinian welfare would best focus on making border crossings safe, allowing food and medicine to enter Gaza, allowing trade to flow in both directions; or help to stop the fighting in Lebanon; or prevent the destabilising arms build up in those two places; or end corruption in the Palestinian Authority that siphons billions in international aid away from the average Palestinian toward corruption and violence; or... the list is almost endless of important ways of helping the Palestinians which do not involve criticising Israel...unless, of course, the motivation is more sinister.


Contact Kannan Devan by email at kannanivmn@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, July 23, 2007.

These are two news items on the sentencing of Leandro Aragoncillo, who was aide to VPs Cheney and Gore and who spied while working in the White House, stealing classified defense documents because he wished to foment a coup in the Philipinnes.

News item #1:

This was written by Sharon Gaudin and it appeared July 19, 2007 in InformationWeek

Ten years for Aragoncillo, aide to VPs Cheney and Gore

Leandro Aragoncillo, a former U.S. Marine and FBI analyst, spied out of White House, gets only 10 years

A former U.S. Marine and FBI analyst was sentenced to 10 years in federal prison for espionage charges in connection with stealing classified national defense documents from the White House, the FBI, the Department of Defense, and the U.S. Department of State.

Leandro Aragoncillo, 48, received his sentence on Wednesday in U.S.

District Court in Newark, N.J. A release from the Department of Justice noted that there is no parole in the federal system, and Aragoncillo, who also was fined $40,000, can be expected to serve nearly the entire sentence except for potential "good-inmate" credits.

Aragoncillo used text messages, Web-based e-mail accounts and database queries to pull off the espionage. But it was the same technology that helped the government track him down and build a case against him. The e-mails sent, the phone calls made, and the stolen information archived on a set of CDs all left a digital trail that was his ultimate undoing.

"Those charged with protecting the nation have a special responsibility to maintain their oath of loyalty to the United States," said Kenneth L.

Wainstein, Assistant Attorney General for National Security, in a statement. "As a former U.S. Marine and FBI analyst, Aragoncillo betrayed that oath, violated our espionage laws, and now must suffer the consequences of his actions."

Aragoncillo's case marks the first time in modern history that someone has been charged with spying out of the White House.

The man who was a career Marine and had served under two vice presidents in the White House had pled guilty to stealing information in an attempt to foster a political coup in the Philippines, his home country. At his plea hearing last year, Aragoncillo admitted that he regularly transferred to his Philippine contacts national security documents classified as Secret. He also admitted traveling to the Philippines in January 2001 to meet his co-conspirators, including a visit to the Malacanang Palace, the official residence of the president of the Philippines.

In 2005, federal agents executed search warrants on the houses of Aragoncillo and his U.S.-based conspirator, Michael Ray Aquino, a resident of the Philippines who was in the country on a visa. Both men were arrested after agents found more than 736 classified documents between the two homes.

The arrests marked the end of what prosecutors called a "criminal conspiracy against the United States that spanned the globe, involved the theft of classified national defense documents" from the White House, the FBI, the Department of Defense and the U.S. State Department.

The scheme included a group of conspirators who ranged from the former Marine turned FBI analyst to an ousted Philippine president to a foreign intelligence officer on the lam from double murder charges.

"The sentencing of Leandro Arangoncillo brings to a close a harmful and disgraceful story of how a formerly trustworthy FBI employee and U.S.

Marine can turn into an enemy of the American people and the American way of life," said FBI Special Agent in Charge Weysan Dun, in a written statement. "Aragoncillo and his cohort, Michael Ray Aquino, have come full circle in the justice system, and for them the circle ends at a federal penitentiary."

News item #2:

Six years for Aquino, co-conspirator in espionage plot
by The Associated Press
July 18, 2007

Light sentence for co-conspirator of Aragoncillo.

A former Philippine National Police officer was sentenced in Federal District Court yesterday to six years and four months in prison for his role in a plot in which he obtained secret United States documents in an attempt to undermine the Philippine government. The former officer, Michael Ray Aquino, 41, pleaded guilty in July 2006, admitting he possessed the secret documents.

Also pleading guilty in the case was Leandro Aragoncillo, 48, a former marine who worked as a military aide to vice presidents Al Gore and Dick Cheney before becoming an F.B.I. intelligence analyst. Mr. Aragoncillo is scheduled to be sentenced tomorrow and faces 10 to 15 years in prison. He admitted to passing information to Mr. Aquino and opposition politicians in the Philippines.

Contact Justice for Jonathan Pollard by email at Justice4jp@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 23, 2007.


PM Olmert's regime is planning to expel Jews from "outposts" in Judea-Samaria. He says it is to fulfill a promise made to the US by predecessor PM Sharon. Dr. Aaron Lerner says the real reason is to placate the Labor Party, keeping it in the coalition and Olmert in the premiership and therefore out of jail threatened by the leftist Attorney-General Mazuz (IMRA, 6/28).

Olmert and Sharon both were most corrupt and broke promises to keep their people secure. Sharon's word for what? For meeting a State Dept. demand intended to help Israel's enemies and therefore likely to harm Israel. Olmert suddenly becomes scrupulous about keeping his country's word to the US on this appeasement. That's suspicious. Besides, the US broke promises to Israel. Let Olmert disclaim this one, for reasons of national security and national purpose!


The dominant theory of the cause of terrorism is that it is economic. The spate of Muslim doctors' plots in Britain is the most recent and powerful disproof. British people who want to consider themselves tolerant may overlook that proof, lest they have to admit that it doesn't pay to be tolerant of the intolerant. Not when the intolerant Muslims resort to murder and, even if by peaceful means, to repression (Theodore Dalrymple, NY Sun, 7/10, Op.Ed.).

How can one be a do-gooder, if one is an evil-allower? What can one accomplish by devising false factoids from theories instead of developing theories from facts?


Fatah gunmen robbed the P.A. school system of the high school matriculation examination questions it was about to distribute. They wanted to give the questions to their young relatives, in advance of the test. Fatah gunmen came to a ministry, kicked out employees who belong to Hamas, and installed their own relatives (IMRA, 6/28). To the victor belongs the spoils!

The P.A. remains chaotic, without Hamas trouble. Fatah is the faction favored by the anti-Zionist powers, including Israel's government. It would be like favoring Bluebeard the Pirate over Blackbeard the Pirate (if is one were better).


All Israeli factions oppose giving Judea-Samaria to the P.A. (IMRA, 6/28). None have thought of keeping it, and encouraging the Arabs to leave.


When Hamas rose up against Fatah, the EU monitors at the Gaza-Israel crossing fled to Israel (6/28).

They were useless from the beginning. They let terrorists smuggle arms through. They had no power except, if they even wished to exercise it, a moral power. Fatah fanatics are not amenable to moral power. As some of us remarked when they started monitoring, they were just an excuse to get Israel to stop guarding its own border properly. At any sign of trouble, they fled. Israel must learn to look after itself.


The P.A. demands that Israel release all prisoners, regardless of what crimes they committed and when. Regarding murderers of Israelis as heroes, they demand their release. Such a demand demonstrates the lack of moderation of Abbas (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 6/28).


P.A. head Abbas decreed abolition of all militias, leaving the P.A. police forces the only authorized ones. Fatah refused, because it is part of the "opposition."

Westerners immediately praised his decree, but so far he did not enforce it, so it is just words. Incidentally, Fatah objects to being designated a militia (IMRA, 6/28), without defining "militia."


PM Olmert rejected appeals from towns near Gaza to protect them from missiles. One type of measure would be defensive shields, which he called too expensive. (I agree.) The other type would be retaliation, which this time he depicted as massive bombardment of Gaza towns, which he called ineffective. (There also is boycott or invading and disarming the Muslims.) Instead, remaining residents of those towns (from which many have fled) to accept insecurity. After all, he said, in some countries, Jews have greater insecurity (IMRA, 6/28).

Destroying P.A. towns would be effective, but not popular or legal. When the Zionist call goes out to immigrate, will the invitation warn immigrants to expect to be bombarded with impunity, if they pick certain towns to move to? Will those who pick more distant towns be warned to expect bombardment, as terrorist weaponry improves or as Olmert relinquishes more territory, letting the Muslims come nearer Israel? Israel is one of the most unsafe states for Jews.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Janet Lehr, July 23, 2007.

The Prophetic Vision Of Isaiah Has Provided For Us The Time Capsule Into Tisha B'av Of July 2007 And The Sorry State That We Find Ourselves In Today. Though Ultimately The Message Of Tisha Ba'av Is That In The End Hashem Will Not Abandon The Jewish People Reminds Them Of Their Commitment To The Principles Of Righteousness And The Bond That Each And Everyone Of Us Has To Hashem And Israel We See Clearly That The Jewish People Are Their Own Worse Enemy.

Arieh Eldad writes in the following article, "Even the obvious need to be stated" which this weeks Haftorah of Devorim is restated to us over and over again throughout the millennium. The annual lesson serves to focus the national mourning of Tisha B'av not to the past but the present. The prophet Isaiah tells us that his vision shows us that during the era of the Kings of Judah that the Jews would rebel against Hashem. The prophet goes on to state that even when you ask for repentance "And when you spread your hands in prayer, I will hide My eyes from you: even if you were to increase prayer, I do not hear: your hands are full of blood." " Learn to do good, seek Justice, strengthen the victim do justice for the orphan, take up the cause of the widow." The prophet continues to explain how Yerushalayim has become like a harlot. Your princes are wayward and associates of thieves: the whole of them loves bribery and pursue illegal payments; again it says for the orphan they do not do justice, of the widow does not come unto them. Lastly, the prophet Isaiah assures us that Hashem will return his hand upon the Jewish people. Zion shall be redeemed with justice, and her returnees with righteousness.

The State Comptroller Lindenstrauss' report on the Home Front reads in part, "In exercising the critical authority of the State Comptroller's office, the norms of reasonableness and proportionality apply even to the highest office in the executive branch, the prime minister, and the Cabinet. In writing this report, we have taken into consideration the role and position of those being examined, but a [government] branch is not permitted to operate unreasonably or disproportionately, and this applies to the Cabinet and he who heads it.... The serious lapses we discovered in our examination unfortunately reached the level of an 'eclipse' in dealing with the Home Front."

A few days ago a report by the director of the Prime Minister's Office -- Department of Control, Mr. Uzi Berlinski, was published quietly. This was not written by the State Comptroller who has been charged by Olmert with seeking to persecute him. This time the Prime Minister's Office itself examined the status of shelters and other protection in Kiryat Shmona, Haifa and the towns around the Gaza Strip.

The residents of Kiryat Shmona who read this report should stand up, pack their bags, and flee. The government which abandoned them during the war has not raised a finger to better protect them in the past year. This of course is so for Sderot and other enemy targets as well.

"Even The Obvious Needs To Be Stated"
By Arieh Eldad

The State Comptroller's report on the Home Front does not tell the public anything it did not know.

Can words be mightier than the sights hundreds of thousands of refugees saw in the North? Can data and conclusions and recommendations be more deafening than the sounds of sirens and explosions? Can the governmental vacuum revealed in the report be emptier than the vacuum in our hearts caused by the absence of 160 war dead?

Seemingly, the Comptroller has not revealed anything new. We read, "The findings elaborated here show that the prime minister, Mr. Ehud Olmert, Amir Peretz, the government ministers, the former chief of staff Dan Halutz, the Home Front commanding officer General Yitzhak Gershon -- each of them to his own extent failed seriously in the decision making process, assessments and policy execution in their relating to and dealing with the Home Front during the Lebanese War." Did we not know all this during the war, even when we still hoped that the IDF would manage to make up for the nullity, carelessness and foolishness of the prime minister and his ministers?

We knew all of this but hoped, right after the war, as we stood facing not only the abandonment of the Home Front, but also the military failure, that the prime minister, the defense minister, and the chief of staff would do what would be demanded of them in any normal or sane country. Halutz resigned. Peretz waited until he lost the Labor party primaries and was forced to leave. And Olmert is still holding onto the chair in his office, mocking the will of the public, and scoffing at anyone who thought he still has any sense of shame or national responsibility, and he scoffs at us every day he goes to his office, holds meetings, throws out empty words and hollow speeches, acting as if he were prime minister. He is sure we will become accustomed to this and stop hoping for anything better.

Every day that passes proves that Olmert is right, that our people is tired and despairing and lacks enough fire to rise, take to the streets, and throw him into the dustbin of history. Another "spin," another "con job," another appointment of another corrupt minister, another convicted criminal appointed a deputy, and the people grow accustomed to this and sink lower.

Just because of the dullness, apathy, despair, the feeling that all is rotten and nothing can be changed, it is so important that the State Comptroller's report comes to remind us of what we have tried in our weariness to forget, and the report shouts in our ears: Danger! The man heading the Israeli government at this hour of danger to our existence is a failure in every field, in decision making, in his ability to make assessments, in his ability to execute policy, even in the way he relates to the people. And it is not enough that he has failed in what he has done, but this does not even bother him.

Often we strongly criticize a decision or move by a leader, yet we say he erred in his judgment, but to err is human, and his decisions, even if they appear wrong in hindsight, were reasonable within their context at the time.

The State Comptroller Lindenstrauss does not leave even this possibility open for Olmert. He does not allow us to play with the idea that maybe Olmert simply erred. The Comptroller writes, "In exercising the critical authority of the State Comptroller's office, the norms of reasonableness and proportionality apply even to the highest office in the executive branch, the prime minister, and the Cabinet. In writing this report, we have taken into consideration the role and position of those being examined, but a [government] branch is not permitted to operate unreasonably or disproportionately, and this applies to the Cabinet and he who heads it.... The serious lapses we discovered in our examination unfortunately reached the level of an 'eclipse' in dealing with the Home Front." They screwed up, they neglected and abandoned and ignored, and we paid the price. They sinned, an d we were afflicted.

And perhaps one may ask: They erred and sinned and screwed up, so maybe only they can fix things?

A few days ago a report by the director of the Prime Minister's Office -- Department of Control, Mr. Uzi Berlinski, was published quietly. This was not written by the State Comptroller who has been charged by Olmert with seeking to persecute him. This time the Prime Minister's Office itself examined the status of shelters and other protection in Kiryat Shmona, Haifa and the towns around the Gaza Strip.

The residents of Kiryat Shmona who read this report should stand up, pack their bags, and flee. The government which abandoned them during the war has not raised a finger to better protect them in the past year. Abandonment, dissolution, neglect, filth -- what stopped Olmert from fixing all these problems in the past year? Nothing stopped him. He is simply not able. We cannot let this fact be buried under our despair.

We must kick him out of office before it is too late for all of us.

Janet Lehr is editor/publisher of a daily e-mail called "Israel Lives." She can be contacted at israellives@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Janet Lehr, July 23, 2007.

Talk about shooting oneself in one foot. Israel's Education Minister is a Peace Now-nic. Teaching the "Nakba" to Arabs is the latest in a number of dramatic moves by Tamir, a left-wing professor and Peace Now founder who has campaigned against subsidies for Jewish religious education while backing Arab nationalist programs. Last year, she ordered that maps of Israel show the 1949 Armistice Line, also known as the Green Line, which draws the borders of Israel as it existed before the Six-Day War in 1967.

Moshe Feiglin, running for Likud Party Chairman on behalf of the party's Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) faction, said, "If it is OK to teach Israeli[-Arab] schoolchildren that the Jewish victory in the War for Independence and the establishment of the Jewish State are actually a catastrophe, this means that the State of Israel is an illegitimate and temporary body... Yuli Tamir hereby reveals that she does not identify with the Jewish claim over the Land more than with the Arab claim. If we do not hurry and give Israel a leadership that truly believes in the justness of our existence, Israel will be erased from the map."

"Israel Education Ministry 'Nakba' Curriculum"
by Hana Levi Julian and Hillel Fendel

(IsraelNN.com) Arab schoolchildren in Israel will be taught next year that the founding of the State of Israel was a tragedy (Nakba in Arabic) in accordance with a widespread Arab view of the event.

The Education Ministry, headed by Prof.Yuli Tamir (Labor), has approved adding the Arab version to the curriculum in response to calls by Arab nationalists who requested the "Nakba" version be taught in their schools.

The new directive approves a Grade 3 textbook "Living Together in Israel," which was written by Arabs who left their homes during the 1948 War of Independence and claim that Israel took their land. The textbook evenhandedly points out that the Arab nations refused to accept the United Nations partition plan creating the Jewish State and a new Trans-Jordan country.

"The Arab narrative deserves to be told in Israel," Tamir explained. Arab MKs congratulated her for her decision, though immediately raised new demands. Arab MK Hana Sweid said Tamir should now incorporate Arab poetry into Jewish school curricula, while MK Jamal Zechalke called for "Arab cultural autonomy" under which Arabs would solely determine Israeli-Arab schools' curricula regarding Arab history and culture.

Other Responses

Reactions from the right were very sharp. MK Meir Porush (United Torah Judaism) said that Prime Minister Olmert, as part of his gestures to PA chairman Abu Mazen, might as well propose that PA officials run Israel's Education Ministry. Porush said that Tamir's decision was shameful and should be retracted.

Former Education Minister Limor Livnat (Likud) declared that teaching Arab children the "Nakba" version of Israel's creation will encourage them to later work against the nation.

MK Zevulun Orlev (NRP), a former Director-General of the Education Ministry, called upon Prime Minister Olmert to fire Tamir for making an "anti-Zionist decision that erases Jewish history and denies the State of Israel as a Jewish state. The Education Minister gives Arabs the legitimacy not to recognize Israel as the State of the Jewish people. This decision marks the "Nakba" of Israel's education network."

Strategic Affairs Minister Avigdor Lieberman slammed Tamir as "expressing not only post-Zionism but also political masochism... The Israel left always complicates itself trying to justify the other side without understanding that there is nothing to justify."

Moshe Feiglin, running for Likud Party Chairman on behalf of the party's Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) faction, said, "If it is OK to teach Israeli[-Arab] schoolchildren that the Jewish victory in the War for Independence and the establishment of the Jewish State are actually a catastrophe, this means that the State of Israel is an illegitimate and temporary body... Yuli Tamir hereby reveals that she does not identify with the Jewish claim over the Land more than with the Arab claim. If we do not hurry and give Israel a leadership that truly believes in the justness of our existence, Israel will be erased from the map."

Tamir's History

Teaching the "Nakba" to Arabs is the latest in a number of dramatic moves by Tamir, a left-wing professor and Peace Now founder who has campaigned against subsidies for Jewish religious education while backing Arab nationalist programs.

Last year, she ordered that maps of Israel show the 1949 Armistice Line, also known as the Green Line, which draws the borders of Israel as it existed before the Six-Day War in 1967.

Janet Lehr is editor/publisher of a daily e-mail called "Israel Lives." She can be contacted at israellives@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Shamrak, July 23, 2007.

Israel has granted, for the first time, an amnesty to 178 wanted Fatah-affiliated terrorists in the West Bank. Additionally, 256 Arab terrorists have been released from jail.

It has also given extraordinary permission for several exiled officials of the PLO to attend a meeting of the group's central council this week in Ramallah, in the Israeli-controlled West Bank.

One of the PLO exiles whose entry has been approved is Nayef Hawatmeh, the leader of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, notorious for an attack carried out by his organisation on the northern town of Ma'alot in 1974, in which 22 Israeli schoolchildren were killed.

The scores of Fatah militiamen who will no longer be pursued by Israel have agreed to cease all activities against Israel and to lay down their arms, according to Israeli officials. "They were active terrorists who have chosen to deactivate themselves," said Miri Eisin, a spokeswoman for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. (When pigs fly! This is another low of Olmert's government. And I thought that it had hit the bottom of self-hate and treachery!)

Food for Thought.

It is not only 'poor Palestinians'! What about Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Wahabistic Saudi Arabia, Jamal Islamia, Al Qaida, Muslim Brotherhood, Syria, Fatah Islamia, Hisbollah etc...? It is deeply entrenched culture of death and terror! The sooner the West realizes this, the more quickly and effectively we'll be able to deal with the threat of Islamic invasion!

Beware of Enemy's Praise! Saudi King Abdullah praised US President George W. Bush initiative for a summit designed to revive the "peace process" in the Middle East. Arab League Secretary General Amru Moussa also voiced satisfaction with "positive sections" in Bush's speech. The PA Chairman's spokesman, Nabil Abu Rdeina, said Bush's speech was an important step and the summit is needed to create a mechanism for implementing the Road Map to Peace and the Arab Peace Initiative. (...and we have to question who our friends are after so many traitorous statements and deeds!)

Hamas's Martyrdom Child Abuse. Nahoul the bee is a new character on "Pioneers of Tomorrow" a children's television show aired by a Hamas station, and urges youngsters to follow the path to martyrdom when they get older. "I want to continue in the path of Farfour -- the path of Islam, of heroism, of martyrdom, and of the mujahideen," Nahoul declared. (Child abuse comes in various forms. Raising children willing to die and kill others is the ugliest one!)

Gov't Protects Illegal Bedouin Housing. Israel's Housing Minister Zev Boim has urged Attorney General Menachem Mazuz to delay for one year the planned 34 demolitions in illegal Bedouin villages in return for a promise by Bedouin to cease further building. (What kind of deal is this? -- the government did not give an extra year to the Jews in Gaza who were there legally!)

Quote of the Week:

"Peres proved on his first day [as President] that he has no intention of uniting the nation, but instead wants to continue to undermine and endanger Israel's security... We call upon the Eretz Yisrael faithful to boycott the current President, who has proved he is not everyone's president." -- Saving the Nation and the Land statement.

Release Jewish Political Prisoners. In the wake of the government decision to release 256 convicted terrorist prisoners from Israeli jails, the families of 25 imprisoned Jews are demanding the release of Jews currently in jail due to offences committed in defence of Jewish cause. (Israel holding Jewish patriots as political prisoners! Harassment of Zionists in Israel is on going ugly 'normality'.)

Single-Minded Stupidity. US President George Bush announced his intention (again) to convene an international conference for "the establishment of a Palestinian state." (With such a one-track-mind, it is no wonder that the US is stuck in Iraq. Israel is used to deflect attention from the president's 'brilliance'!)

Back to the Same Game. The PA is keen to start final status negotiations, while Israel wants to focus on security issues and confidence-building measures. (How much more 'confidence-building' do we need to realise that Arabs will not change their terror-driven nature!)

Another Look at the Law of Return is Needed. "The law, in its current form, is being taken advantage of by people who forge documents." The MK Sheetrit declared at a conference in Jerusalem. "Today the law grants any grandchild of a Jew, even if he or she is not Jewish, the right to immigrate. We should give that some thought."

Peres Vows to Pursue Peace -- Traitor for a President! Shimon Peres, architect of the Oslo accords, was sworn in as Israel's president and pledged to seize the opportunity to encourage long-delayed efforts to achieve a diplomatic resolution to conflict in the Middle East. He has not changed his opinions: "We have to get rid of the territories (Judea, Samaria, Gaza)" he said. (With his peace, who needs war. Remember his "The Olso War"! Peres would be a good replacement to Abas.)

Hamas Hand in Kidnapping. Israeli soldiers and secret service operatives captured a member of Hamas terrorist cell, Muhammad Salameh Abed Soufi, 30, who had participated in the kidnapping of IDF Corporal Gilad Shalit in June of 2006. (Terror must be eradicated from Jewish land. The first step is to clear all 'rubbish' from Gaza!)

Jewish Contribution to Humanity:

David Schwarz (December, 1852, Zalaegerszeg, Hungary -- January, 1897, Vienna) An aviation pioneer of Jewish ancestry. Commissioned by the German army, he had constructed the first dirigible airship in 1896. (The pride of German Empire!)

Hizballah, One Year after the War. By now, after the last Lebanon War, Hizballah has 50% more rockets and an air defence system. By the end of the year, Hizballah will have some 2,000 highly trained commando troops and 15,000-16,000 fighting men in all. (All of this is due to the 'diligent' work of the UN -- 'Useless Nothing'!)

Another 'Friend' of Israel. The World Bank representative in the PA says Gaza's economy is at risk of "irreversible collapse" -- and blames Israel. Israel is accused of creating the conditions for an "irreversible" economic collapse in Hamas-controlled Gaza, blaming Israel for closures of the border crossings with the (enemy) region. (The bloodthirsty terrorist organisation, Hamas, has nothing to do with the problem, does it? Why must Israel care for and feed her enemies?)

Olmert is still Delusional. On the first anniversary of the war Mr Olmert tried to strike an upbeat note in spite of the fact that two Israeli soldiers remain in the hands of Hizbullah. "We had great achievements in this war." (4,000 rockets were fired by Hizbullah into Israel last summer have already been replaced!)

Destruction of Jewish Heritage. The Islamic Wakf is digging large ditches on the Temple Mount without archaeological supervision to protect antiquities at Judaism's holiest site. (For years Wakf has been destroying the holiest Jewish place, but politically paralysed Israeli lawmakers do nothing the stop cultural and religious Holocaust!)

We are all Sderot. Some 30,000 people attended the "We are all Sderot" solidarity concert at Rabin Square in Tel Aviv week ago, to show support for the residents of Sderot and other communities bordering the Gaza Strip, who live under the constant threat of Qassam rocket fire. (...living in our own country under rain of Arabs' rockets, in fear of being deported by our own government!)

Jerusalem the Capital? A Canadian Court of Appeal has upheld a lower court decision against the Jerusalem-born son of a Toronto rabbi who wanted his passport to show that that his birthplace is located in Israel. The judge reasoned that the Arab-Israeli conflict over the sovereignty of Jerusalem allows the Foreign Affairs Department to leave the city without a country. (Time to end the conflict, for our own sake. Forget about "Foreign Affairs" idiots!)

Israeli Left Praised by Enemy. Former Israeli Arab Member of Knesset (enemy within) Azmi Bishara said in his speech in Qatar that certain figures in the Israeli left wing (self-hating fools) who support the "right of return" of Arabs to Israel make it possible to bring about an Israeli retreat to pre-1967 borders. Bishara sharply attacked the Fatah faction and identified with Hamas.

Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement. He publishes internet editorial letters on the Arab-Israeli conflict independently, not as a member of any organization or political movement. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@mail2world.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 23, 2007.

"Tisha B'av"

Tonight at sundown begins Tisha B'av -- the ninth of Av -- the most solemn day in the Jewish calendar. It was on this day on the calendar (some 500 years apart) that the two Temples were destroyed and that other calamities befell us. We adopt the garb and behavior of mourning, sitting on the floor and reciting Lamentations.

But, this said, it is not a purely sad day. In fact, the day lightens as it proceeds.

During the day, we ask what we did to bring the calamities upon ourselves -- we ask how the behavior of the Jewish people resulted in the destruction of the Temples; we learn about causeless hatred and idle gossip.

This year especially, the relevance of all of this to our current situation is stunning. We contemplate the disaster that we are on the edge of bringing upon ourselves, and it cuts like a knife.

But the message of Tisha B'av is also one of hope. We are taught that from the lessons of our failings we have an opportunity improve ourselves -- and that the Almighty believes we have the potential to raise ourselves up. It would seem that we need to go way down before we can come up. We must focus now on lifting ourselves high.

We are taught that the Moshiach will be born on Tisha B'av.


Tony Blair is in the area and will be spending three days here on this, his first trip since accepting his new Quartet assignment to work on PA economic reform and strengthening of PA governmental institutions. He may set up shop in Government House, in Jerusalem, from which the British ruled during Mandate days.

He has gone to Jordan for meetings first, will then meet with a host of Israeli officials and move on to Ramallah to meet with PA officials.

Blair has already expressed the desire to expand his mandate to include involvement in peace negotiations, thus joining the legions who have approached this area with unrealistic expectations. Hamas is itching to talk with him, but Israel has advised him to steer clear.


There is in Judea and Samaria a terrorist offshoot of Fatah known as Martyr Abu Ammar Brigades. Their leader has declared loyalty to Fatah and Fatah's leaders, but there is yet another sign of their connection to Fatah: Abu Ammar was the epithet of Yasser Arafat. (Though I don't know when he became a "martyr." ) At any rate, the Abu Ammar Martyrs Brigades is refusing to turn in its weapons or renounce violence against Israel.

What I find just as interesting as this is the comment made by Maan, the Palestinian news service that announced this fact. They stated that this refusal occurred following "the declaration of the main military wing of Fatah, the Al Aksa Brigades, last Sunday in which the fighters abandoned the armed struggle against Israel." This, for me, is telling: An agency that claims to be "promoting understanding of the Palestinian situation" looks askance at the abandoning of weapons.


The news, as most of you are undoubtedly aware, is full of reports of renewed al-Qaida strength in Pakistan, with the threat of terrorist attacks against the US increased.

From the perspective here in Israel, this news has a particular relevance: There are reports, coming out of Israel, that Saudi Arabia has backed out of supporting the "peace plan" it had originally proposed, out of fear of terrorist attacks from al-Qaida, and has thrown the ball to an alarmed King Abdullah of Jordan.

Apparently Saudi Arabia has not indicated it will attend the conference -- intended to support Fatah -- that was announced by Bush recently, and which Egypt and Jordan have said they will attend. Saudi Arabia is instead standing by its support for the Palestinian unity government it helped foster and would like now to reinvigorate.

What further complicates this situation is a reported fear Saudi Arabia has of arousing the ire of Iran in this context (and yes, Shiite Iran does have connections with Sunni al-Qaida).

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

To Go To Top

Posted by John Q. Wiggens, July 22, 2007.

Well, of course Mr. Olmert, of course you know what's best for your people. See how well your plans have worked out so far! Not only that but what's an ignorant Jew to do when faced with running or fighting.

You do what any hair-brained, left-wing screwball politian would do. You cave in and crawl to the feet of the enemy and ask for their permission to let your heart keep beating.

Isn't it nice to have such moderate political opponents to deal with, Mr. Olmert. I mean just because he was involved in the Munich Massacre doesn't mean he's such a bad guy. Give the guy a break people. Even George Bush likes him and if George likes him he must be good. I tell you what you jews ought to do. Take my advice or not. Just hand your government to Abb-ass. He just may treat you as good as Olmert does.

After all you are just Jews. How on earth could you know what you want, especially when you got a savvy guy like Olmert looking out for ya. I think I'll go be sick now!! Please get him out!


I live here in America and I read all I can and watch the news and listen to all the reports I can that come from Israel. I cannot believe what is taking place in beautiful Israel. I am so mad about the way the citizens of that Little Great Nation are being treated by their Government. I really wish someone would really step in and say enough is enough.


Reality is not sinking in for a lot of people over there. You can't give enough, blood, childrens lives, moms, dads, couzins, sisters, brothers, aunts, uncles, babies,breath,love,anything, at all, to keep them from wanting you D-E-A-D. Do something besides appease.


Contact John Wiggins at johngwiggins@yahoo.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Barry Rubin, July 22, 2007.

As American diplomats hold their first high-level meeting with Iranian counterparts for many years, U.S. policymakers need to be reminded of a very simple but incredibly important point. Namely: What do all the current threats facing the Middle East--the Hamas takeover in the Gaza Strip, Hizballah's bid for power in Lebanon, political turmoil in Iraq, and imminent nuclear weapons in the hands of a radical dictatorship--all have in common? Answer: Iran.

Obviously, of course, these issues all have their local causes. But they are also linked by Tehran's drive for regional hegemony. Iran's strategy has basically been in place since the 1979 Islamist revolution but it has only recently begun to pay off. The often-stated goal of the revolution was to turn Iran into a utopian Islamist society and then to spread this revolution throughout the Middle East and the Islamic world in general.

While all Iranian leaders voice basic support for this program, the country has often been cautious in pursuing it, especially given the long war with Iran in the 1980s and the possibility of Western opposition. But now a number of events have given the regime renewed confidence and the extreme line taken by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has also produced more daring, and thus both dangerous and bloody, behavior.

Iran tries to extend its influence in three ways: propaganda and incitement; the promotion of client groups, and projecting the state's own power. Today, Iran sponsors radical Islamist groups in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, and among the Palestinians as well as in other countries. Its two most important clients are Hizballah in Lebanon and the Palestinian Hamas group.

This is not to suggest that these organizations are totally controlled by Tehran and have their every move dictated by it. Nevertheless, Iran does largely finance these groups, provides weapons and training, encourages them to launch attacks, and shapes their ideology. Without Iran's backing they would be much weaker.

The evidence indicates that Iran has been urging them to be more aggressive and to launch terrorist attacks and more general offensives.

Take Lebanon, for example. Hizballah, the large Shia Muslim group, closely follows Iran's line. In 2006 it launched attacks on Israel which led to a major war, steps it would never dared have taken unless Hizballah's leadership knew that Iran wanted such actions. Indeed, the head of Hamas, Muhammad Nasrallah, is the official representative in Lebanon of the Iran's "spiritual guide," its most powerful official.

Since the end of the summer 2006 war, Hizballah's emphasis has been to seek control over Lebanon, though it has simultaneously rebuilt its military power. On a number of occasions, Iran has been caught smuggling arms to Hizballah, through both Syria and Turkey. Iranian Revolutionary Guards act as military advisors to Hizballah. Opponents of an Iranian-Syrian takeover in Lebanon, both politicians and journalists, have been systematically murdered in terrorist attacks. Clearly, as many Lebanese have noted, Iran is seeking to turn Lebanon into a satellite state.

The same tactics are employed with the Palestinians. Hamas and the even more extremist Islamic Jihad follow Iran's line. Tehran has publicly urged these organizations to carry out terrorist attacks and provides them with examples of openly antisemitic rhetoric duplicated in their propaganda.

In June, there was a turning point in Palestinian history. Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip, expelled its nationalist Fatah rivals, killed many people because of their political views or activities, and made clear its intention of transforming the Gaza Strip into an Islamist state on the basic model of Iran. Many Palestinians and other Arabs publicly stated their fear and resentment at the idea that Hamas represented an Iranian effort to seize control of their land and cause.

These include two of the Arab world's top journalists. Tariq al-Humayd, editor of Al-Sharq Al-Awsat wrote, "The source of the funds is obviously Iran. Today, no one has control over Hamas...except Iran, its economic patron, and Syria," Iran's ally and the place where Hamas has its headquarters. Ahmad Al-Jarallah, editor of Kuwait's Al-Siyassa, noted: "By means of Hamas's takeover in Gaza, the Iran-Syria axis has managed...to sabotage the Israeli-Palestinian peace" and become the main arbiter of regional politics.

But this is only the beginning. On the horizon looms Iran's nuclear arsenal. If Tehran gets weapons of mass destruction it will rally far larger numbers of radical and terrorist forces in attacking the West and more moderate Arabs as well as Israel. If Iran gets the upper hand it will block any chance for peace and push the region into decades more of bloodshed.

This is why the details of events in Iraq, Lebanon, and among the Palestinians do not detract from but indeed reinforces the need to contain Iran and especially to ensure that it does not obtain nuclear weapons. Barry Rubin is Director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Interdisciplinary Center university. His latest book, The Truth about Syria was published by Palgrave-Macmillan in May 2007. Prof. Rubins columns can be read online at: http://gloria.idc.ac.il/articles/archives/oldindex.html.

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, July 22, 2007.

Ehud Olmert, Israel's most un-Jewish, anti-Jewish Prime Minister, has given permission to the Arab Muslims to continue digging on the Temple Mount. The Temple Mount, Har HaBayit, (Mountain of the House [of G-d] )is the site of the FIRST TEMPLE, built by King Solomon in the 10th century B.C.E., destroyed by the Babylonians in 587 B.C.E. The SECOND TEMPLE rebuilt in 515 B.C.E., enlarged by King Herod and destroyed by the Romans in C.E. 70. Each Jewish Temple stood for about 4 centuries.

Olmert's act of commission against the Jewish people is a violent extension of Leftist Doctrine to either destroy, abandon or surrender every significant holy Jewish symbol.

Recall Moshe Dayan's transfer of the Temple Mount's keys to the Muslim Arab Wakf within days of the IDF's recapture and liberation of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount. This was the consistent doctrine of David Ben Gurion and all those who followed the Leftist Labor Party leadership -- to this day.

They fully intended to deprive the Jewish people of any holy, religious symbol for observant Jews to rally around, lest they aspire to equal political power with the secular Left. The earlier trashing of the Temple Mount was approved through the Prime Minister-ships of Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Ehud Barak, Bibi Netanyahu, Arik Sharon and now Ehud Olmert.

Traitors to G-d and man seem to gravitate to high position in Israel's ruling elite.

This appeared in The Jerusalem Post   July 14, 2007.

A bulldozer was seen last week ripping up earth on the Temple Mount, at the Dome of the Rock platform. It slashed a long gash, purportedly to lay new electric cables. With crude, damaging handling, it exposed a largely gray deposit, which according to archeologists is a sure-fire indication of "archeologically significant" matter.

Incomprehensibly, despite TV air-time and print space, these revelations by the Archeologists' Committee for the Prevention of the Destruction of Antiquities on the Temple Mount (CPDATM) failed to cause much stir. The public has perhaps grown numb due to official abdication of control on the Mount. But the expedient turning of official blind eyes amounts to abetting the Wakf's ongoing construction at Judaism's most sacred site.

How does heavy earth-moving equipment climb to the Mount's top without anyone knowing? It doesn't. Someone tolerates its presence. In fact, three tractors of different sizes and capabilities are reportedly permanently kept by the Muslim Wakf on the compound. The CPDATM has long demanded their removal, to no avail. These are used, at the whim of the Wakf, to carry out harmful excavations without any archeological supervision.

In one of these tractor's latest escapades, it broke the earth roughly and hollowed out a long trench varying in depth from 50 to 100 centimeters. Signs of ancient architecture were exposed beneath the current platform slabs. The bedrock at this site is no deeper than the dig, hence whatever soil was overturned would have contained whatever artifacts could be found at that maximum depth. This travesty was perpetrated with Israeli policemen stationed nearby. Archeological supervision was nowhere to be detected.

Only videos taken with a hidden camera brought to the fore the destructive work at the site associated with Jewish history's most sensitive relics. The officers on hand, moreover, according to testimony by archeologist Prof. Yisrael Caspi, CPDATM head, forbade him from picking any remains out of the rubble.

Caspi and other archeologists were warned that they had better not even try to bend down, lest they stretch out an arm to touch anything. A policeman was finally dispatched to maintain particular vigilance against Prof. Eilat Mazar, most suspected of a proclivity to lay a hand on a pottery shard. Speaking for the CPDATM, Mazar expressed "the deepest distress at the continued official disregard and disrespect for the incalculable archeological importance of the Temple Mount."

The Israel Antiquities Authority refuses comment. It consistently adopts a hands-off attitude to the Mount, most likely fearing Wakf antagonism. Its representatives refrain from directly supervising any Wakf activities atop the Mount, preferring to shield themselves behind official police reports. Both the police and the Antiquities Authority, moreover, dread provoking Muslim riots, decline to take independent positions and pass the buck to the Prime Minister's Office, which would rather not acknowledge the existence of any problems on the Mount. Claims of Israeli control, if not sovereignty, are hollow in this context.

This, it must be stressed, comes subsequent to unfathomable damage already caused to the Mount over the past decade by the Wakf, most notably when digging up the Solomon's Stables area for new mosque construction. Tons of artifact-laden debris were discarded as refuse.

While Muslims under ostensible Israeli rule are free to physically impinge on the deepest Jewish sensitivities, they raise shrill outcries whenever Israel dares do anything even in the Mount's vicinity, such as the (now halted) construction of a new pedestrian walkway in lieu of the dangerously dilapidated one to the Mughrabi Gate.

Foreign governments acted as if this Muslim outcry were legitimate, even though Israel was acting with complete archeological supervision and international scrutiny, and the claims of structural threat to the Temple Mount or any mosque were obviously spurious. Yet when the same elements who protested then use bulldozers on the Temple Mount itself, with no supervision and causing obvious damage, they are "protected" from Israeli archeologists by Israel's own authorities.

There is no excuse for our government to allow, let alone provide official cover for, the movement of a single stone on the Temple Mount without full archeological supervision. Whether construction should be allowed that substantially alters the status quo there is another matter.

This article can also be read at
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1184168563437&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull


Posted: July 11, 2007 By Aaron Klein on www.WorldNetDaily.com

JERUSALEM Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has quietly granted the Waqf -- the Muslim custodians of the Temple Mount -- permission to dig unsupervised on the sacred site, WND has learned.

The permission was granted in spite of longstanding fears from leading Israeli archeologists the Waqf might hide or dispose of Jewish Temple artifacts discovered during any Muslim digs.

The last time the Waqf conducted an unsupervised excavation on the Temple Mount, in 1997, the Muslim custodians ultimately were caught by Israeli authorities disposing truckloads of Mount dirt that contained Jewish Temple artifacts.

Most Palestinian leaders routinely deny well-documented Jewish ties to the Temple Mount -- the holiest site in Judaism.

According to Palestinian sources, the Waqf last month requested permission from Israel to conduct what it said were needed excavations under the Al Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount to install new electrical and telephone infrastructures in the mosque. Olmert's office at first turned down the Waqf request, but after petitioning by the Jordanian government, the prime minister acquiesced and has allowed the dig.

The Waqf this week quietly began digging a massive tunnel that snakes from the Al Aqsa Mosque to the nearby Dome of the Rock, bringing in heavy equipment for the work.

According to Israeli and Palestinian sources, the dig is not being supervised by any Jewish archeologist, including from the Israeli government's Antiquities Authority, which boasts a board of leading Israeli Temple Mount archeological authorities.


Prominent Temple Mount archeologist Eilat Mazar, a professor of Hebrew University and a member of the Public Committee for Prevention of the Destruction of Antiquities on Temple Mount, slammed the Waqf dig.

Mazar said she was concerned the Muslims were excavating "without real, professional and careful archaeological supervision involving meticulous documentation."

Mazar, a third-generation Israeli Temple Mount archaeologist, is the discoverer and lead archaeologist of Israel's City of David, believed to be the palace of the biblical King David, the second leader of a united Kingdom of Israel, who ruled from around 1005 to 965 B.C.

The last time the Waqf conducted a large dig on the Temple Mount, during construction 10 years ago of a massive mosque at an area referred to as Solomon's Stables, the Waqf reportedly disposed truckloads of dirt containing Jewish artifacts from the First and Second Temple periods.

After the media reported on the disposals, Israeli authorities froze the construction permit given to the Waqf, and the dirt was transferred to Israeli archeologists for analysis. The Israeli authorities found scores of Jewish Temple relics in the nearly disposed dirt, including coins with Hebrew writing referencing the Temple, part of a Hasmonean lamp, several other Second Temple lamps, Temple period pottery with Jewish markings, a marble pillar shaft and other Temple period artifacts. The Waqf was widely accused of attempting to hide evidence of the existence of the Jewish Temples.


Speaking to WND in a recent interview, Waqf official and chief Palestinian Justice Taysir Tamimi claimed the Jewish Temples "never existed."

"About these so-called two Temples, they never existed, certainly not at the Haram Al- Sharif (Temple Mount)," said Tamimi, who is considered the second most important Palestinian cleric after Muhammad Hussein, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.

"Israel started since 1967 making archeological digs to show Jewish signs to prove the relationship between Judaism and the city and they found nothing. There is no Jewish connection to Israel before the Jews invaded in the 1880s," said Tamimi.

The Palestinian cleric denied the validity of dozens of digs verified by experts worldwide revealing Jewish artifacts from the First and Second Temples, tunnels that snake under the Temple Mount and over 100 ritual immersion pools believed to have been used by Jewish priests to cleanse themselves before services. The cleansing process is detailed in the Torah.

Asked about the Western Wall, Tamimi said the structure was a tying post for Muhammad's horse and that it is part of the Al Aqsa Mosque, even though the Wall predates the mosque by more than 1,000 years.

"The Western wall is the western wall of the Al Aqsa Mosque. It's where Prophet Muhammad tied his animal which took him from Mecca to Jerusalem to receive the revelations of Allah."

The Palestinian media also regularly state the Jewish Temples never existed.

'We are fed up with this crap nonsense'

In a series of WND exclusive interviews, Palestinian terror leaders denied the existence of the Jewish Temples.

"We are fed up with this crap nonsense of the Temple Mount," said Nasser Abu Aziz, the deputy commander of Fata's Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in the northern West Bank.

"We do not know where this story came from. There is no historical or archeological proof that your legendary Temples existed. We are sick of this story. But Allah warned us that Jews will look for an excuse in order to corrupt life on earth, so we are not surprised from the fact that you keep raising this issue."

Muhammad Abdul-El, spokesman for the Popular Resistance Committees terror organization, said the Jewish Temples "existed only in your dreams."

"Go look for your stupid Temple elsewhere. And I am not saying this for political reasons. I say that the enemy invented this story in order to justify its occupation of Jerusalem."

Abu Abdullah, considered one of the most important operational members of Hamas' so-called military wing, accused all Jews of being pathological liars.

"Stop lying and believing your own lies. Even if there was such a thing (as a Jewish Temple) do you really believe that Solomon, who was a prophet, would have built a Temple in the place that Allah wanted for the Al Aqsa Mosque?"


The Temple Mount is the holiest site in Judaism. Muslims say it is their third holiest site.

The First Jewish Temple was built by King Solomon in the 10th century B.C. It was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C. The Second Temple was rebuilt in 515 B.C. after Jerusalem was freed from Babylonian captivity. That Temple was destroyed by the Roman Empire in A.D. 70. Each temple stood for a period of about four centuries.

The Jewish Temple was the center of religious Jewish worship. It housed the Holy of Holies, which contained the Ark of the Covenant and was said to be the area upon which G-d's "presence" dwelt. The Al Aqsa Mosque now sits on the site.

The Temple served as the primary location for the offering of sacrifices and was the main gathering place in Israel during Jewish holidays.

The Temple Mount compound has remained a focal point for Jewish services over the millennia. Prayers for a return to Jerusalem have been uttered by Jews since the Second Temple was destroyed, according to Jewish tradition. Jews worldwide pray facing toward the Western Wall, a portion of an outer courtyard of the Temple left intact.

The Al Aqsa Mosque was constructed around A.D. 709 to serve as a shrine near another shrine, the Dome of the Rock, which was built by an Islamic caliph. Al Aqsa was meant to mark where Muslims came to believe Muhammad, the founder of Islam, ascended to heaven.

Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Quran. Islamic tradition states Mohammed took a journey in a single night from "a sacred mosque" -- believed to be in Mecca in southern Saudi Arabia -- to "the farthest mosque" and from a rock there ascended to heaven. The farthest mosque later became associated with Jerusalem.

Aaron Klein, WorldNetDaily's Jerusalem bureau chief, is known for his regular interviews with Mideast terror leaders and his popular segments on America's top radio programs.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 22, 2007.

One keeps hoping -- indeed, praying -- that the news will get better. But it doesn't.

Last week Iran President Ahmadinejad was in Damascus for meetings with Syrian President Assad. According to the London-based paper al-Sharq al-Awsat, Ahmadinejad promised Assad he would transfer funds totaling $1 billion for Syria to use for purchase of weapons in return for a promise from Assad that he would not enter peace with Israel.

Strategic Affairs Minister Avigdor Lieberman (Yisrael Beitenu) then called for a national emergency government to respond to this.

By last night, however, "key political sources" in Jerusalem expressed skepticism about the validity of the report, and aides to Olmert expressed his continued desire to have direct negotiations with Syria. [I.e., without the intermediary Assad had requested, and without pledging in advance to give up the Golan.]

Whether the report on the strategic alliance between Syria and Iran is true in all particulars or not, what seems to be escaping the notice of Olmert and his aides is the significance of Ahmadinejad coming to Damascus, where he met with not only Assad but also Nasrallah of Hezbollah and Mashaal of Hamas. This was definitely not a gathering of moderates. Syria is quite clearly on the wrong side here and under Iranian influence. After meeting with Assad, Ahmadinejad said Iran and Syria were allies and would remain so "united against the enemies of the two countries."

Teheran, by the way, denies that a strategic deal was struck with Assad, but this denial counts for nothing.


The IDF reports that most of Hezbollah's weaponry has been moved to civilian Lebanese villages in the south of Lebanon. There is a three-fold reason for doing this. Now it provides camouflage -- it's more difficult to spot the weaponry. Then, in time of war it will provide cover, making Israel reluctant to shoot for fear of hitting civilians. Lastly, if Israel does aim at the weapons or launching sites, civilians are more likely to be hit, which will provide excellent PR opportunities for Hezbollah.

This is all part of Foreign Minister's Livni's excellent work negotiating a diplomatic settlement to the Lebanon War that put in place international troops to help keep Hezbollah unarmed and out of the south. We need to remember what fine results she achieves when she tells the nation that she should replace Olmert as prime minister.


Knesset Speaker Dalia Itzik (Kadima) was in Jordan today, where she met with Abbas and Jordan's foreign minister, Abdullah al-Khatib, in a closed meeting from which the media were barred

A representative of the Israeli embassy in Amman said the meeting focused on ways to restart Palestinian-Israeli peace talks.


This meeting follows by days a talk Olmert gave to farmers in the Jezreel Valley, in which he said that Israel was going to have to make some "tough decisions" and "needs to withdraw" from Judea and Samaria. He didn't say from "parts of" Judea and Samaria. He didn't talk about sustaining major settlement blocs (where some 1/4 million Jews live). He suggested that this would happen via negotiations with the Palestinians and not unilateral withdrawal as in Gaza.

Did I not say it gets worse and worse?


But, speaking of the Palestinians...

PA officials are saying that Abbas could arrange for next legislative elections within 90 days, except for one problem: They want to hold them in Gaza too and Hamas is not cooperating. Not cooperating? Hamas said it would attack any international peace keepers sent in to assure free elections.

The most unpalatable fact is that Hamas -- which cites PA Basic Law that says legislative elections are held every four years -- is in the right legally. Serious analysts feel that it will be impossible for Abbas to hold elections without a Fatah-Hamas agreement.

Without such an agreement Abbas would only be able to hold elections in Judea and Samaria, thereby entrenching the split between Fatah and Hamas. And this is something he does not want to do.

Just possibly this is news that is not all bad. Once there is a Fatah-Hamas agreement a lot of people who want to maintain the fiction that "moderate" Fatah must be strengthened "against" Hamas will have a very hard time making their case. Not only that, it would be almost impossible to pretend that money given to Fatah wouldn't find its way to Hamas.


I recommend Caroline Glick's column on Friday in The Jerusalem Post, "Bush the talented politician."

Bush, she says, manages to say what people want to hear even as his policy suggests something very different. In his recent speech regarding the Palestinians, Mr. Bush had some strong words: the Palestinians must dismantle the terrorist infrastructure, arrest terrorists, confiscate guns, etc. etc.

However, these words "were wholly disconnected from the actual policy that Bush is advancing and that he spelled out clearly in his address.

"...his policy is predicated on the basic assumption that the Palestinians must be bribed with money, American legitimacy and Israeli lands, and that Israel must be pressured to make more and more concessions to the Palestinians before one can expect them to change their terrorist policies, values and goals.

"...the administration has made preventing a Hamas takeover of Judea and Samaria its immediate goal. Since the Hamas takeover of Gaza, US intelligence agencies have concluded that the only thing preventing Hamas from taking over Judea and Samaria is the IDF. As one senior intelligence official put it, 'Israeli military operations are the major factor restricting Hamas activity [in the areas].' Yet rather than urge Israel to maintain its counter-terror operations, Bush said that the Israelis should find 'ways to reduce their footprint' in Judea and Samaria.

"...Bush told the Palestinians that this is a 'moment of choice' for them. It is time for them to decide if they are for terror or peace. But then, he said the same thing five years ago. Since then, at every decision point, the Palestinians chose terror. They have built terror armies and amassed terror arsenals. The have strengthened their ties to Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and al-Qaida. They overwhelmingly elected Hamas to lead them. But in the interests of advancing its policy of appeasement, the Bush administration abjectly refuses to acknowledge that the Palestinians have already chosen.

"...Abbas is the man that Bush believes will cause the Palestinians to have a change of heart. Bush places his trust in Abbas -- the man who has pocketed billions of dollars in assistance from the US, the EU and Israel but has never lifted a finger against terrorists or done anything to end the corruption endemic in his government. Bush upholds Abbas, who equipped his US-trained forces with anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles which are completely useless for fighting terror cells but come in mighty handy for fighting Israel.

"...Israel's assigned role in this diplomatic farce is the patsy. Due to the exigencies of democratic politics, and in the absence of leadership on either side, over the past few years, US-Israel relations have taken on a sado-masochistic quality. To endear himself with the State Department and Europe, Bush has chosen to insist that Israel endanger itself."

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=3&cid=1184766022457&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Dawn Treader, July 22, 2007.

The Bible forbids Jews to participate in the uprooting of Jewish communities in the Land of Israel, ruled a council of chief rabbis from Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) on Thursday.

Israel National News reported that the rabbis had been asked by many Israeli soldiers whether or not it was lawful from a biblical standpoint to forcibly remove fellow Jews from portions of their God-given inheritance.

The response of the council was unequivocal: "It is forbidden to lend a hand to this task in any way."

Fearing a national backlash, many rabbis declined to issue such rulings or interpretations of scripture prior to the 2005 evacuation of all Jews from the Gaza Strip. But with polls showing that a majority of Israelis now believe the Gaza "disengagement" was a mistake, religious leaders are becoming more bold in their application of biblical precepts to modern political moves.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert last week said it was an unrealistic "dream" for Israel to retain control of all Judea and Samaria, and that he intends to uproot additional settlements despite the public's views on further land withdrawals.

Contact Dawn Treader at dawntreader3@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Sergio Tessa (HaDaR), July 22, 2007.

This is called "IDF more concerned with avoiding casualties than completing missions" and was written by Ron Ben-Yishai. It was published yesterday in Ynet News

One of the more widespread myths reinforced following the Second Lebanon War praised the remarkable performance of low-ranking combat soldiers and ground force commanders.

We were told that major-generals, brigade commanders, and some division commanders did not perform well -- but most battalion commanders, platoon commanders, company commanders and their subordinates fought like lions and defeated Hizbullah fighters in every encounter.

This is a nice myth that offers a little comfort to our hurt pride and self-confidence, which were both cracked during the war. But it isn't the truth.

The detailed inquiries undertaken by the IDF, some of which have not yet been publicized, present a much less encouraging picture. In reality, in almost any ground battle, the moment our troops encountered resistance, the force's progress stopped, commanders demanded assistance, and the fighting focused on evacuating casualties from the battlefield.

That was the case in Maroun al-Ras, Bint Jbeil, Debel, Aita al-Shaab and other locations. What's particularly frustrating is that most of these clashes involved a handful of Hizbullah fighters numbering no more than 20. In almost all the clashes, IDF forces enjoyed superiority in terms of the number of fighters and firepower.

Unfinished missions

Yet in very few cases we saw troops charge at the sources of fire. There was also no orderly fighting aimed at taking over the areas where Hizbullah members who ambushed our soldiers were located.

The commander and soldiers abandoned the mission they embarked on, took cover, and provided cover for the few who risked their lives and through incredible acts of courage rescued the wounded, treated them under fire, and pulled the bodies of killed soldiers back so that the enemy could not capture them.

As to completing the mission, the forces left that to the reinforcements who were called up urgently, who also joined the rescue efforts instead of fighting to secure the original objective.

I witnessed one of these cases at the end of the war. After one of the helicopters transporting troops was shot down by a missile, the fighting stopped.

The fighting force that was already on the ground and numbered several paratroop battalions was ordered to hide rather than continue towards the targets, even though it was only a few hundred meters away from the village where the missile was fired from.

For two days we waited in the bushes while a special forces unit searched for the helicopter team's bodies until it found all of them. Then, after the ceasefire was declared, we returned to the border with the body of flight mechanic Keren Tendler, may she rest in peace.

Not the IDF way

This was not the IDF way in any of the previous wars, ranging from the War of Independence to the First Lebanon War. Even during desperate battles, such as the Chinese Farm battle in the Yom Kippur War, the tanks charged at the Egyptians in the trenches time after time, even though they were being hit one after the other.

Only thanks to these efforts, the wounded and killed were eventually evacuated and the way was paved for crossing the Suez Canal.

In every command school in the world officers learn that carrying out the mission comes before rescuing and treating the wounded.

This principle is based on a simple rationale: Dedication to the mission is essential in order to achieve victory in battle (and in the war,) and without quick victory in the battle arena, the effort to evacuate and treat the wounded also exacts casualties and is not being undertaken effectively and quickly.

The abandonment of this principle in the Second Lebanon War made it mostly "the war of evacuating the wounded" rather than a war aimed at curbing Hizbullah's rocket and mortar fire.

Unclear instructions

Those who don't believe this should read the books written about the Lebanon war and the endless articles published in the media to mark a year since the war. In this entire sea of text you will not find even one story about a force that fought until it completed its mission or a Hizbullah force that was defeated.

Even in the IDF magazine Bamachane, all the stories were about treating and evacuating the wounded, or emotional accounts by fighters regarding the trauma they experienced when they saw their friends or themselves hurt. It appears we still fail to understand that wars are not won by crybabies or heart-to-heart talks with psychologists and journalists.

One of the main reasons for this phenomenon is that in a significant number of the cases, IDF troops did not receive a clear mission definition or one that was worded properly.

This is indeed the senior echelon's fault. In the absence of a clearly understood mission, fighters and field commanders were mostly dealing with urgent matters -- treating the killed and wounded, instead of focusing on what's most important -- completing the mission.

Another reason is the fighting habits and methods adopted by the IDF during the intifada in the territories, which it tried unsuccessfully to implement in Lebanon against a completely different type of enemy.

Yet the most important and critical reason is the change in the IDF's combat values as a result of a general change in the values within Israeli society. The sacrifice of few for the sake of the collective existence and security of all citizens is no longer taken for granted as it was in the past.

Distorted value system

The victories of 1967 and 1973, just like the peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan, created the sense among Israeli citizens that we do not face a substantive existential threat, and certainly not on the part of an armed group such as Hizbullah. And if there is no existential threat, there is no point in making a sacrifice in order to carry out a military mission.

The fighting in the territories, which is perceived by many as "the war for settlements and enforcing the occupation" is also consistently eroding the soldiers' motivation. The suicide bombings during the second intifada changed something in this regard, but not enough.

Most importantly, safeguarding the lives and wellbeing of the "children" in uniform has become the ultimate value, which the cultural and social elites consistently nurture with the aid of the media.

This value and the "crybaby culture" that the media nurtures for the sake of high ratings overcome any other value, and certainly values such as sacrificing one's life for the sake of others, which is perceived as an ancient, outdated notion.

This, for example, is the reason why the government doesn't dare do what is needed in order to curb the Qassam rocket fire at the western Negev. A child who lives in fear in the bombarded Sderot or a civilian killed by a rocket in Haifa are worth less than a "kid" in uniform, whose death or capture in battle become a national disaster.

This distorted value system trickles down to the IDF and its commanders, who need to face the constant nightmare of bereaved families and media criticism.

Since the war, the IDF has been working intensively in order to fix the technical and professional flaws that were revealed last year. Yet this isn't enough.

Until Israeli society grasps and internalizes the realization that fanatically motivated radical Islam constitutes an existential danger that must be fought without compromise, even at the cost of sacrificing soldiers, the IDF won't be able to change its combat values.

Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net.

To Go To Top

Posted by Israel Academia Monitor, July 22, 2007.


Learn about what is happening on Israeli campuses. Be informed about what is being done with your gifts and generosity http://Israel-Academia-Monitor.com

Ariel Handel is a PhD candidate at the Cohn Institute for History and Philosophy of Sciences and Ideas, Tel Aviv University, (03-6994134 and arielhan@yahoo.com). He is writing his PhD about space, time and their relations at the Occupied Palestinian Territories at the Cohn institute for the History and Philosophy of Sciences and Ideas, Tel Aviv University. He wrote the Abstract below.

"Space and Time in the Occupied Territories, Uncertainty as Control Technology"
by Ariel Handel
Tel Aviv University

The Paper's main argument would be that Israel is controlling the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) by systematically dismantling the relation between space and time, or, in other words, by disassembling the correlation between spatial absolute value and usage value. Absolute value is what can be measured in uniform distance units, which are, basically, indifferent to the occurrences in the measured space: for example, aerial distance between two points. Usage value, in contrast, deals with spatial actual usage possibilities. If between two points stands impassable wall, no matter what is the absolute distance from one to another, the actual distance, considering the usage value, would be infinite. Spatial usage value always embodies time in it. Paving road between two points does not change the distance in kilometers, but shortens drastically the actual distance between them. In the same manner, blocking road lengthens the actual distance by containing time postponement within it.

In the Article I will attempt to analyze few basic modes of spatial control (i.e. clear sites in which space itself takes major part in control shaping), which are used for describing Israel's control mode in the OPT: prison, ghetto, siege, camp and "movement policing". The comparison would be done by spatial analysis tools, putting emphasis on relations between inside and outside, opacity and permeability, characteristics and locations of supervision points and the visibility relations (what is been watched, where from, where to and why). The analysis would show that although having few similarities among each of the mentioned models none of them fully describes the situation in the OPT, which can be understood only by referring to what I would like to call "technologies of spatial uncertainty".

These technologies consisting instruments (different kinds of barriers), signs (extensive regulations system) and people (soldiers aside settlers) are widely implemented in the OPT, in purpose of disrupting usage values of Palestinian spaces. This technology, simple and cheap, dismantling Palestinian space into many tens of cells that the size and borders of them are changing daily. The outcome is that the ordinary Palestinian cannot have clear knowledge which way is passable and which is forbidden as well as what is the sanction for the lawbreaker. Thus a spatial chaos is produced minimizing movement to the level of life maintaining activities on the one hand -- and creating a-priori guiltiness on the other hand (since nearly every movement is restricted and most of Palestinians are therefore movement criminals).

The main article's body would be dedicated to methodical description, supported by maps and graphs, of the mentioned technologies and their influence on Palestinian movement options in the OPT. When there are no fixed distances between places and journey times are changing almost infinitely, the space itself becomes liquid and discontinuous. In that, common writing about space and society is inverted. While usually planned space is thought of as supervised and rational -- and the pedestrians and users are changing it from "below" -- in the OPT the authorities are producing the chaos while the users are the ones trying to insert order and permanency in it. A distinguish will be made between three different zones of the West Bank (the Bank's core, the "Seam Zone", the Separation Barrier and its passages) according to the space-time relations prevailing among them. The resolution to be dealt will not be that of the sole structure but that of the village, the road and the "cell". In that the paper is to be placed on the seam line amidst architecture and geography, borrowing spatial analysis tools and language from both disciplines.

Further reading on Ariel Handel:

www.jnul.huji.ac.il/IA/ArchivedSites/Seruv31120303/www.seruv.org.il/ english/signers.asp/signer 572

Israel Academia Monitor can be contacted by email at e-mail@israel-academia-monitor.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Koira, July 22, 2007.


Very few Jews, know the story of how all 50,000 Bulgarian Jews were saved. Not a single Bulgarian Jew was deported to the death camps, due to the heroism of many Bulgarians of every walk of life, up to and including the King and the Patriarch of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church.

In 1999, Abraham Foxman, the National Director of the Anti Defamation League flew with a delegation to Sophia to meet the Bulgarian Prime Minister. He gave the Prime Minister the first Bulgarian language copy of a remarkable book, "Beyond Hitler's Grasp," written in 1998, by Michael Bar Oar, a professor at Emory University. (A Bulgarian Jew who had migrated to Israel and then to the USA ). This book documents the rescue effort in detail. The ADL paid for and shipped 30,000 copies to Bulgaria, so that the population could partake in the joy of learning about this heroic facet of their history.

This story is clearly the last great secret of the Holocaust era. The story was buried by the Bulgarian Communists, until their downfall in 1991. All records were sealed, since they didn't wish to glorify the King, or the Church, or the non Communist parliamentarians, who at great personal risk, stood up to the Germans. And the Bulgarian Jewish Community, 45,000 of whom went to Israel after the War, were busy building new lives, and somehow the story remained untold.

Bulgaria is a small country and at the outset of the War they had 8 million people. They aligned themselves with the Nazi's in hopes of recapturing Macedonia from Yugoslavia and Thrace from Greece Both provinces were stripped from them, after W.W.I. In late 1942 the Jews of Selonica were shipped north through Bulgaria, on the way to the death camps, in sealed box cars. The news of this inhumanity was a hot topic of conversation. Then, at the beginning of 1943, the pro Nazi Bulgarian government was informed that all 50,000 Bulgarian Jews would be deported in March. The Jews had been made to wear yellow stars and were highly visible.

As the date for the deportation got closer, the agitation got greater. Forty-three ruling party members of Parliament walked out in protest. Newspapers denounced what was about to happen. In addition, the Patriarch of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church, Archbishop Krill, threatened to lie down on the railroad tracks. Finally, King Boris III forbade the deportation. Since Bulgaria was an ally of Germany, and the Germans were stretched militarily, they had to wrestle with the problem of how much pressure they could afford to apply. They decided to pass.

Several points are noteworthy. The Bulgarian Jews were relatively unreligious and did not stand apart from the local populace by virtue of garb, or rites. They were relatively poor by comparison to Jews in other countries, and they lived in integrated neighborhoods. Additionally, the Bulgarians had many minorities, Armenians, Turks, Greeks, and Gypsies, in addition to Jews.

There was no concept of racism in that culture. The bottom line here is that Bulgarians saw Bulgarian-Jews as Bulgarians, and not as Jews. And, being a small country, like Denmark, where there was a closeness of community that is often missing in larger countries. So, here was a bright spot that we can point to as example of what should have been.

The most famous of those saved was a young graduate of the Bulgarian Military Academy. When he arrived in Israel, he changed his name to Moshe Dayan.....

Contact Koira at koira@dbmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, July 22, 2007.

As the Middle-East edges into a regional war I am flabbergasted at the deathly silence of the Church and American "Jewish" communities. The Islamic world's genocide of the original Christian communities in the Holyland, and their relentless quest to annihilate every Christian and Jew on the planet could not take place without the financial and military assistance of the American Government and Jewish and Chrsitian "Aid" organizations whose funds are used to arm and train the armies gathered against Jerusalem the West. Excuse my naiveté, but do the "Religious" organizations actually believe that they will be rewarded for participating in the genocide of their brethren, or has Replacement Theology become so insidious that this generation truly believe themselves as immune to the wages of sin?

"Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people: neither shalt thou stand against the blood of thy neighbor; I am the LORD." Leviticus 19:16

This item is called "Hizbullah moving rockets inside South Lebanese villages" and comes from today's Jerusalem Post.

Hizbullah guerrillas have moved most of their rockets in south Lebanon among civilians in villages in an apparent attempt to avoid detection by Israel and UN troops, IDF officials said Sunday.

The new moves are part of Hizbullah's reorganization after the Second Lebanon War, the officials said. During the summer's war, Hizbullah fired almost 4,000 rockets at Israel.

While Lebanon criticized the IDF for targeting civilian areas during the war, Israel said Hizbullah was to blame for operating among civilians and putting them at risk.

Last summer, many of Hizbullah's rocket batteries were located in unpopulated rural areas, where the guerrillas dug networks of tunnels and fortifications, the officials said. But the army's new intelligence indicates that those positions had now largely been abandoned in favor of populated villages, which provide better cover for the group's activities. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity.

The UN-brokered cease-fire that ended the war expanded UNIFIL, the international peacekeeping force in south Lebanon, to 13,000 troops, entrusting it with ensuring that Hizbullah was not rearming near the Lebanon-Israel border.

Yasmina Bouziane, a UNIFIL spokesman in Lebanon, refused to comment on the Israeli charges.

A Hizbullah official in Beirut also refused to comment on the allegations. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said only that in the past Hizbullah guerrillas fired rockets at Israel from valleys and mountainous areas and not from inside villages.

The officials said Hizbullah's postwar efforts also included the construction of new fortifications north of the Litani River, farther from the Israeli border and out of UNIFIL's jurisdiction.

A Lebanese boy waves a Hizbullah flag as he greets French UN peacekeepers patrolling in a tank in the southern village of Qalaway, Lebanon.

"Iran to pay $1 billion for Syria to procure arms Tehran to provide technical assistance in nuclear research, chemical weapons"
July 21, 2007

DEBKAfile Exclusive: Hizballah's Nasrallah records war speech from Tehran council of war. Al Jezeera TV bids for tape

DEBKAfile's Iranian sources report exclusively that the Hizballah secretary general Hassan Nasrallah whose fiery oratory is a byword in the Arab world, recorded a speech Sat. July 21, in Tehran. He is there secretly with top leaders of his movement to attend a council of war called by Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as DEBKAfile revealed exclusively Friday.

Our sources learn that his themes are Lebanon and the Palestinian question and will most likely also include threats to the United States and Israel. The network to air the speech -- the Arabic TV Al Jazeera in Qatar, Tehran's Arabic station, or the Hizballah's Al Manar which broadcasts from Lebanon -- is the subject of intense negotiation. We have learned that Al Jazeera is offering an extra-large fee for exclusive use of the tape, keen to preserve its lead as the preferred platform for top-line radical Muslims, such as al Qaeda big shots. Scheduling will be attuned to the timeline for Hizballah's military plans.

"The Persian Abyss: America & The House of Saud: A Failed Alliance"
Posted by Reza Zarabi
July 22 2007

It has become apparent that the billions of US dollars annually spent on Saudi oil seldom reciprocate loyalty anymore.

The recent military figures made available to The Los Angeles Times by senior American officials state that roughly 45% of all foreign combatants in the Iraq war theatre come solely from Saudi Arabia. However, this should, in no way, be a revelation.

For years, many in the West have overtly expressed their outrage at Wahabbist odium towards religious plurality, the backwards indoctrination of Saudi school children through their public educational system, the apocalyptic conspiracy theories that are rife in Saudi state-run media, and the profound antipathy that the majority in their religious establishment have towards western values.

In 2002, with the images of 9/11 still fresh in the American mindset and approximately nine months before the start of the Iraq war, scholar Victor Davis Hanson wrote a most detailed analysis about America's self-defeating "alliance" with the House of Saud.

In Our enemies the Saudis, Hanson examines the conundrum of why a western, liberalized society that bases its entire identity on pluralism can have any diplomatic relations, let alone a strong alliance, with the reactionary neo-Caliphate oligarchy of Saudi Arabia. The "anomaly raises the key question: why have close relations with the Saudis been a cornerstone of American foreign policy for decades?" Considering the complexities and sheer irrationality of Middle Eastern politics, one can imagine that this aspect of American foreign policy must certainly possess some esoteric meaning.

Yet, "the answer" could not be more salient. To Hanson, it is simply "oil, and nothing more" that the keeps the American government reluctantly married to the Saudi royal family. The US clearly lacks what they have and, as a result, practicality trumps the American motto of liberty and justice for all.

Hanson's analysis was 5 years ago and the brunt of his argument still rings true. Yet, the dynamics in this troubled region have since shifted dramatically. In removing Sadaam, what the US has ultimately done is uncover the unintended consequences and the nonsensicality of its long-held diplomatic ties to certain nefarious parties of the Middle East. The Saudi alliance is only one of several.

Think about it.

When on any given Monday, a sharply dressed official from the US State Department conducts a one hour harangue on the evils of Iran for supplying Shia militias in Southern Iraq with roadside bombs and then, that same official, only a few hours later, attends a "working lunch" with his Saudi counterpart, the utter stupidity of American foreign policy manifests itself to the world.

How can the American government expect to be taken seriously when it applies different standards to two parties, who in essence, commit the same offence? Why is Shia radicalism viewed as somehow more pernicious than Wahabbi fundamentalism when both parties engage in similar activities? In fact, Hanson himself clearly points out that "Saudi terrorists have killed more Americans than all those murdered by Iranians, Syrians, Libyans, and Iraqis put together."

It is time for the American government to stop splitting hairs and reconcile itself with the byproducts of decades of misdirected foreign policy.

What President Bush must understand is that the same Saudi delegate who is yearly invited to his Crawford ranch, who sits down to dinner with him as they exchange pleasantries, is just as evil and inimical to American interests as any mystic Ayatollah on the streets of Qom.

For years, successive American administrations have courted Saudi allegiance in return for American interests to be played out in the broader Middle East. Yet, they have turned a blind eye to the Saudi government's rampant human rights abuses, support for terrorism, and mass indoctrination of Stalinist ideology upon their public.

It is now a sober reality that the American alliance with Saudi Arabia is of no further use. It is disingenuous of the Bush administration to proclaim that they "will go after the terrorists" all the while attempting to "win hearts and minds" when they are clearly married to 'the makers of terrorists', those who vitiate young hearts and minds. If blind American allegiance towards the House of Saud stems only from energy concerns, then certain shifts in trade with Russia, Azerbaijan, Canada, Mexico, and dare I say, Iran, can easily alleviate those concerns.

Yes ... Iran, and why not? If the American government can do business with a nation like Saudi Arabia, which has a citizenry that is intoxicated with hate towards the West, teaches its children that Jews are monkeys, and actively supports "charities" that send money to the families of suicide bombers, then surely the US can do business with any other rogue regime. Follow the numbers: 80% of those who murdered 3,000 people on 9/11 were Saudis; and now 45% of foreign combatants in Iraq are Saudis.

American credibility is marred, not because of its stance towards Iran, its alliance with Israel, or Saudi subterfuge. The damage to US credibility comes from the schism between American rhetoric and action -- because of its inconsistency.

For years, America ignored calls to back away from the serpent that is Saudi Arabia. Therefore, now, it cannot complain if, every so often, it is bitten by it.

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Hana Levi Julian, July 22, 2007.

Hundreds of activists have erected tents on a hill near the ruins of the northern Samarian community of Homesh, and others are on their way to the site, determined to rebuild the town destroyed two years ago in the 2005 Disengagement from northern Samaria and Gaza.

Police are standing by, preparing to forcibly remove them.

National Union Knesset Member Aryeh Eldad has appealed to Labor party chairman and Defense Minister Ehud Barak to allow the rally to take place peacefully and to let hikers walk on the main roads instead of endangering themselves on side trails, several of which lead to Arab villages.

Organizers had already announced last week that they plan to rebuild Homesh. "We have no time limit," said one of the organizers. "Rebuilding the town will help the Jewish people to overcome the crisis it is facing." Activists were instructed to bring a brick or cinder block for immediate construction of the first house.

IDF soldiers and police were ordered to stop the marchers. Dozens were arrested by 7:00 a.m., including 40 activists who were caught in the early morning hours near Shavei Shomron and another 30 who were stopped near Elon Moreh, south of Homesh.

The arrested civilians were put on buses and will face criminal charges for participating in the march, police said.

Organizers told those who managed to reach the nearby towns of Kedumim and Einav to sleep for a few hours and then wait for further instructions.

In an official statement Friday, the IDF said that "any person or organization involved in transporting Israelis to Homesh or otherwise aiding them in securing supplies will be charged with a crime and [will be] prosecuted to the full extent of the law."

Several police patrols were already on the road by Friday morning. The ranks swelled Saturday night, with police and military vehicles lining Road 55 from Kfar Sava and the Ariel-Emanuel Road, the main routes leading to access roads to Homesh.

A number of cars were pulled over and their drivers questioned at security checkpoints.

UPDATE: "Media Silent on Police Violence at Homesh" Arutz Sheva, July 23, 2007

(IsraelNN.com) Israeli media have maintained an almost total blackout on police violence at Homesh. Reports that police are hitting youth and confiscating cameras that document the violence have been relegated to one-line statements on the radio and on web sites. Media were not present at the site.

Several hundred people circumvented police Sunday night and Monday morning and reached the site of the demolished Jewish community and a neighboring hilltop. They vastly outnumbered police and began building a synagogue, but police sent reinforcements and were forcibly dragging people onto buses.

Homesh supporters at the site reported that police also took bottles of water away from activists.

Hana Levi Julian writes for Arutz Sheva (www.israelnationalnews.com), where this article appeared today.

To Go To Top

Posted by Alex Traiman, July 22, 2007.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert reiterated his belief that Israel "needs to withdraw" from the biblical Jewish provinces of Judea and Samaria.

Speaking at a gathering of farmers in the Jezreel Valley, Olmert maintained that Israel would have to make "tough decisions" with regard to territorial compromise.

According to the Prime Minister, anyone who thinks Israel can continue to hold onto the provinces captured in the defensive Six Day War of 1967 is "living in a dream."

"Everyone understands that the State of Israel can't exist without a guarantee of a Jewish majority," Olmert added.

Although many in Israel believe the question of Jewish majority to be a fundamental problem, recent research suggests otherwise. A major demographic study published in 2005 by Bennett Zimmerman, Roberta Seid and Michael L. Wise revealed that the status of a Jewish majority between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea is much more stable than previously reported, with Jews representing at least 60 percent of the total population.

The data further suggests that the numbers of Arabs living in Judea and Samaria (commonly referred to as the West Bank) in particular have been grossly overstated.

Olmert added in his address that any territorial compromise to giveaway all or parts of Judea and Samaria would not occur unilaterally -- as was the withdrawal from Gaza 2005 -- but rather through a negotiated solution with the Palestinian Authority.

The statements came on the eve following Olmert's release of 255 convicted terrorists serving terms in Israeli prisons, back into the general population of Judea and Samaria, a move which drew the criticism of many throughout the country. Olmert did not demand any information on the whereabouts of kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit in exchange for the release of the terrorists, but rather said that letting the terrorists out of jail was a "goodwill gesture."

According to the Council of Jewish Communities in Judea and Samaria, there are over 260,000 tax paying Jewish residents living in the region. When including the outlying neighborhoods of Jerusalem, the Jewish population of Judea and Samaria reaches close to half a million.

The provinces of Judea and Samaria are also home to many of Judaism's holiest cities including Hevron, Shechem, Beit El, Beit Lechem, and Shiloh. Each of these cities (and others) play key roles in Jewish History as chronicled by the Jewish Bible.

On Saturday, Olmert stated his intention to run for a second term as chairman of the Kadima party, despite numerous calls for his resignation, allegations of criminal activity, and public approval ratings in single digits.

This appeared in today's Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNN.com).

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, July 22, 2007.

This was writen by Hillel Fendel and it appeared in Arutz-Sheva (www.israelnationalnews.com).

(IsraelNN.com) Speaking from the Ketziot prison, where over 250 terrorist prisoners were released this morning, terror victims' activist Meir Indor says many Israelis are disgusted at the idea.

Indor, head of the Almagor Terror Victims Association, was on hand to watch the 255 terrorists being released. "I came with just one other person," he said, "a man whose son was murdered by terrorists several years ago and who came straight from visiting a monument to his son, and yet the authorities here didn't let us come near the reporters. They called this mission 'Fresh Breeze,' and they didn't want to let anything ruin the refreshing atmosphere..."

"But I can tell you," Indor continued, "that even though the politicians and the higher-ups in the army and those who are waiting to be promoted don't object to this release, the fact is that as you go further down in the army and security forces, there is a lot of opposition and disgust. In the Supreme Court, as well, at least one judge -- Elyakim Rubenstein [the lone dissenting voice in the 2-1 decision upholding the release] -- showed, let's say, dissatisfaction with the release."

"You can also tell by the talkbacks on the websites," Indor said. "Opposition to this deal is very widespread... It's just a terrible deal for Israel. And the authorities tried to hide its full extent. Even today, the commander of the southern region of the Israel Prison Service was quoted as saying that all the prisoners to be released had served 70% of their time -- when in fact he's either stupid or a liar. About 3/4 of them have served only between a third and a half of their sentences, and we showed this in the Supreme Court yesterday!"

"We also forced the State's representative to admit that several of them were repeat offenders. Judge Rubenstein asked, 'Don't you think that this is an indication that they should not be freed?'"

Later, Indor was allowed to speak with reporters, and he expressed satisfaction at having been able to explain his case to several news outlets. "I don't wage these battles in order to win," he said, "but merely in order to hopefully ensure that the next time, more terrorists will remain in prison."

Gesture to Abu Mazen

The 255 prisoners were freed today as a gesture by Prime Minister Olmert to Fatah leader and Palestinian Authority chairman Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas), in order to strengthen his waning stature. Olmert promised the release four weeks ago at the Sharm el-Sheikh summit with Abbas, Jordan's King Abdullah and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

"Olmert just threw out the number 250," Indor said, "and then told the security services to deal with finding the right ones. And then when they came up with a list, Olmert behaved like a gangster and said, 'That would be insulting to Abu Mazen. I need bigger fish!' And so they gave him bigger fish -- people who placed bombs, who used to be sentenced to 20 years and now are sentenced to only 10, and now they got out after 3-4 years, just because they were lucky and the bomb didn't kill anyone but only damaged the car. And they included attempted murderers, and those who fired shots and missed, etc."

Reminded that the terrorists signed a commitment not to return to terrorism as a condition for being released, Indor said, "We have 196 families whose loved ones were murdered by terrorists who were once in prison. The lesson is simply not learned, and we see that Olmert's decisions are made hastily, not only in last summer's war, but here as well." Fatah claimed on Friday morning that 30 of the 255 freed prisoners were Hamas members, but both Israel and Hamas denied this.

Scattered Throughout Yesha

The terrorists were taken to the Bituniya checkpoint, north of Jerusalem, from where buses took them to the various area of Judea and Samaria. The release of one terrorist was canceled when he was found to be a Hamas member, and that of another one was delayed when he refused to sign the commitment; he was finally persuaded to do so, and was freed.

On hand to greet the freed prisoner terrorists outside Ramallah was Arab-Israeli Knesset Member Ahmed Tibi, together with Abu Mazen and others.

Among the 255 is Abdel Rahim Mallouh, who was Deputy Secretary General of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). Mallouh's PFLP terrorists were behind the assassination of Tourism Minister Rehavam Ze'evi, the suicide bombing in a pizzeria in Karnei Shomron, murdering two teenagers, and more. Mallouh, a personal friend of Abbas, was sentenced to seven years in prison, and was scheduled to be released two years from now.

In another Olmert gesture to Abu Mazen, 178 wanted Fatah terrorists have been taken off of Israel's wanted list for the coming three months, unless they are found to be actively engaging in terrorism. If they succeed in acting peacefully for the next three months, their names will then be taken off the wanted list permanently.

Contact Avodah by email by avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arutz-Sheva Staff, July 22, 2007.

(IsraelNN.com) The annual outdoor Ninth of Av (Tisha B'Av) afternoon prayer service will be held at 2 p.m. (EDT) Tuesday at the Isaiah Peace Wall opposite the United Nations.

Jews are asked to pray in the face of the danger of growing influence of Iran, Hamas and Hizbullah terrorist organizations and for the return of kidnapped IDF soldiers.

This news brief is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Koira, July 22, 2007.

This was written by Josh Gerstein, Staff Reporter of the New York Sun
(http://www.nysun.com/article/58852). It was published July 20, 2007.

A lawyer for victims of terrorism is decrying a new federal appeals court ruling that could delay or even prevent private litigants from seizing funds belonging to terrorist groups.

On Wednesday, 15 judges from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously rejected an appeal from relatives and the estates of Yaron and Efrat Ungar, a couple killed by Hamas gunmen in 1996. The unusual decision from the appeals court's full bench upheld a restraining order a lower court issued in September 2004 blocking private legal action to take over bank accounts and other assets belonging to the Holy Land Foundation of Richardson, Texas. The order was issued at the government's request soon after the foundation and seven of its officials were indicted for providing material support to Hamas, which has taken responsibility for dozens of terrorist attacks in Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank.

"The money was literally about to be wired to me. Then the Justice Department went to court in Texas and targeted the Ungar orphans in the restraining order," an attorney for the family, David Strachman, said. Early in 2004, he won a $116 million default judgment against Hamas on behalf of the family.

The New Orleans-based appeals court's decision overruled a 21-year-old precedent, which required notice to affected parties before blocking funds that the government sought to have forfeited in a criminal case.

"It would be a significant burden on the Government to have to defend the forfeiture order from attack by a third party during the course of an ongoing criminal prosecution," Judges Fortunato Benavides and Carl Stewart wrote.

The trial for the foundation and five of the seven indicted officials began earlier this week in federal court in Dallas and is expected to last five months. Appeals could go on for years.

Mr. Strachman called the appeals court's ruling "upsetting," but he directed most of his anger at the Justice Department. "The Justice Department has taken an adverse position with respect to terrorism victims almost universally and has done virtually nothing to help terrorism victims have their judgment satisfied," the lawyer said. He noted that the family won its court award months before a grand jury indicted the foundation.

Mr. Strachman noted that one of the Ungars' children narrowly escaped death in the drive-by shooting attack that killed the couple in Beit Shemesh, near Jerusalem.

"These are kids who really suffered, and it's sort of like the government is toying with them and playing with them," the attorney said.

A Justice Department spokeswoman, Jaclyn Lesch, cited the pending trial as she declined to comment on the ruling or Mr. Strachman's assertions.

A lawyer who handled another terrorism-related lawsuit seeking money from the foundation, Stephen Landes, said the government probably felt obliged to block the Ungars because ordinary creditors could have used the same logic to seek money targeted in run-of-the-mill criminal prosecutions. "It's not just because its terror victims. It had an impact that was much, much broader," the lawyer said.

Mr. Strachman declined to say how much money the Holy Land Foundation had when the government effectively shut it down in 2001. However, he said the foundation was permitted to spend $2 million on legal fees for a civil suit that it brought against the government. With more money being spent on the foundation's defense against the criminal case, it is possible the coffers could be bare by the time the Ungars' claim is considered, he added.

Mr. Strachman said federal officials are frustrating Congress's decision to allow terrorism victim to sue. "Why would anybody bring a terrorism suit when their own government thwarts any possible means to collect?" he asked.

Contact Koira at koira@dbmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Koira, July 22, 2007.

This was written by Bob Unruh and it appeared yesterday in World Net Daily

Bob Unruh is a news editor for WorldNetDaily.com.

Many would endorse 'Velvet Revolution' or even foreign military intervention

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose people in Iran by a 6-4 majority are in support of having him removed from power by foreign military action

A new survey reveals that 92 percent of the subjects of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's totalitarian government do not believe their nation's role is positive, and two-thirds would support a "Velvet Revolution" to remove him from power.

The survey, by the Center For the Promotion of Democracy and Human Rights, found that almost six out of 10 Iranians would support a foreign military action for the purpose of taking Ahmadinejad out of the role as dictator.

"There is clearly a huge distinction between the Islamic Republic of Iran and its intentions as a regime and its people," reported Said Jabbari, a senior analyst with the center.

"As a totalitarian regime it does not represent the aspirations of the Iranian people," he said. "Don't use 'Iran' and 'this regime' to represent each other."

"We need to create such a huge distinction. We never referred to Nazis as Germans. We clearly wanted to create a distinction between Germans and Nazis," he said. In this instance, Jabbari said, "we need to turn around and say the Islamic Republic regime, and the Iranian people, have two different paths."

He noted that another recent survey, done by Terror Free Tomorrow, produced nearly the same results.

"Through both surveys, what comes out loud and clear is the fact that the people of Iran neither approve of their government's policies nor of its structure. Indeed in the CFPD poll 67 percent said they would support a 'Velvet Revolution' for the removal of the regime and 58 percent went as far as saying that they would support a foreign military action for the purpose of changing the regime," Jabbari said.

Ahmadinejad, meanwhile, has said he expects both Jesus and the Shiite messianic figure, Imam Mahdi, to return and "wipe away oppression." Ahmadinejad also has been urging Iranians to prepare for the coming of the Mahdi by turning the country into a powerful and advanced Islamic society and by avoiding the corruption and excesses of the West.

He sees his main mission, as he recounted in a Nov. 16, 2005, speech in Tehran, being to "pave the path for the glorious reappearance of Imam Mahdi, may Allah hasten his reappearance."

With Iran's continued development of nuclear technology in defiance of the West, some analysts fear Ahmadinejad's intent is to trigger the kind of global conflagration he envisions will set the stage for the end of the world.

He has also described the Nazi Holocaust as a "myth" and called for Israel to be wiped off the map.

"The Zionist regime will be wiped out soon the same way the Soviet Union was, and humanity will achieve freedom." he said.

The CFPD study was developed with the advice of a long list of experts, and was done during the second quarter of 2007 by students hired inside Iran to ask the questions.

The results came from a random sampling of 600 responders from Tehran, Isfahan, Tabriz, Shiraz and Mahabad, with the male-female ratio split 320-280. The respondents were equally divided among the following age groups: 20-30, 30-50, and over 50.

"Being proud and nationalistic, Iranians overwhelmingly want to have access to nuclear technology, including military nuclear technology," the study said.

"But a plurality does not want the current regime to have the nuclear bomb and does not trust its pronouncements to the effect that it is not pursuing such technology."

Iranians also oppose their government's support for Hamas and Hezbollah, and disagree with Ahmadinejad's expressed desire to eliminate Israel. Among the questions, and their responses:

Should Iran possess nuclear technology? 78 percent yes. 18 percent no. 4 percent don't know.

Should Iran possess military nuclear technology? 72 percent yes. 8 percent no. 20 percent don't know.

Should Iran have the nuclear bomb? 46 percent yes. 47 percent no. 7 percent don't know.

Do you believe the Iranian government wants the nuclear bomb? 88 percent yes. 10 percent no. 2 percent don't know.

Will Western Europe accept a nuclear Iran? 52 percent yes. 47 percent no. 1 percent don't know.

"Perhaps the most important elements in both surveys were the implications they contained about attitudes towards the regime,"

Jabbari said. The TFT results show 61 percent opposed their current government, 79 percent said they wanted a democracy and "only 11 percent said they would strongly oppose having a political system in which all of their leaders, including the supreme leader are chosen by popular election."

"The CFPD survey went even further," Jabbari noted.

"Fully 72 percent of Iranians said given the chance to go back they will not support an 'Islamic Revolution.' Sixty-seven percent do not consider the Islamic Republic to be a political system that satisfies the needs of the Iranian people."

He said 61 percent opposed the government's support for Hezbollah, 56 percent opposed support for Hamas, 70 percent did not advocate the destruction of Israel and two out of three disagreed with Ahmadinejad's claims casting doubt on the Holocaust.

The TFT survey was done by telephone from outside Iran, while the CFPD assessment was done in face-to-face interviews inside Iran.

"We believe that the logical conclusion of both surveys is for the West to stop confusing the people of Iran with talks of engaging the very regime that Iranians consider to be extremely suppressive, incompetent and corrupt, and instead focus its attention on isolating that regime and supporting the people of Iran," Jabbari said.

"In pursuing our national security objectives in the region, our biggest assets are the interests we share with the people of Iran. Based on the facts uncovered by both surveys it would appear that clear cut Western support for democratic movements inside Iran, coupled with a policy of isolating that regime on the diplomatic and economic fronts, are not just welcome by the Iranian people but may indeed prove to be the only remedy for avoiding the need for military action against the Iranian regime."

The survey showed that 64 percent of Iranians believe there will be war to stop the nation's nuclear program, but only 14 percent believe Europe would participate in that. Forty-three percent of Iranians would support a military strike against the nuclear program, and 58 percent would support a military action to change the regime.

Only 32 percent said the Iranian political system satisfies the needs of Iranians, and only 43 percent said a "reformed" Iran could do that.

Jabbari told WND the Iranian people's nationalism was evident, but just as evident was the distrust they have for their government.

"They feel nobody has the right to come and tell Iran and Iranians that they don't have the right to have nuclear technology. The same majority believe that the government's intentions stating that this is only for peaceful purposes is not their true intention," he said.

Contact Koira at koira@dbmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, July 20, 2007.

Commentators (including myself) have noted the distressing irony inherent in the fact that much of the Muslim world flies in to a lethal violent destructive rampaging stentorian rage when a 'kafir' state or person slights Islam or its Prophet (PBUH) or the Qur'an or Allah, such rage including threats to kill, genocide, behead, the miscreant non-believer and others of his race or religion, that same Muslim world is utterly silent (or complacently complicit) in the face of:

endless internecine butchery in Iraq with Sunni killing Shi'ites and vice-versa, including blowing up each other's mosques (what could be more extreme a 'slight' than burning Muslims alive and incinerating the Qur'ans in a mosque?)

civil war in Gaza where Muslim killed Muslim(including tying victims' hands and feet and throwing them to their death from the tallest building in Gaza city)

genocide of Black African non-Arab Muslims in Darfur (Sudan) and theft of their land at the hands of Sudanese Arab Muslims

the civil war in Algeria which has gone on for 12 years and rendered 2,000,000 homeless and c. 200,000 dead Muslims

the civil war in Nigeria which has gone on for c. 20 years and has rendered tens of thousand dead and hundreds of thousands homeless (the majority of victims being the Christians in the south of Nigeria)

the Saudi repression of, and discrimination against, its Shi'ite Muslim citizenry

Saddam Hussein's mass murder of Muslim Kurds and Shi'ites (hundreds of thousands over the 32 years of his reign, not counting the c. 800,000 casualites in his war with Iran)

and, not unexpectedly, almost no Muslims speaking out against the el-qaeda and spin-off terror groups and their mass murder of tens of thousands of non-believers in India (Kashmir and Gujarat), East Asia, and the West.

The West too is largely silent, especially the Western mainstream media.

It is as though the Muslim world gets a free pass on barbarism, butchery, mass murder, attempted genocide, and the triumphalist apartheid supremacist nature of the extremist Islam that motivates much of the violence described above.

Well, here is another atrocity to add to the list: government sanctioned and religiously legitimized slavery. Mauritania, Sudan, and Arabia are the three countries in the world which have slavery as a major part of their economy. All three are Muslim Arab countries.

Christians take note: in Sudan many of the slaves are Christians.

There is a problem with Islam.

The article below is called "The Persistence of Islamic Slavery" and it was written by Robert Spencer. It appeared today in Front Page Magazine
(http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=29227). The original article has live links to additional material.

Robert Spencer is a scholar of Islamic history, theology, and law and the director of Jihad Watch. He is the author of six books, seven monographs, and hundreds of articles about jihad and Islamic terrorism, including Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World's Fastest Growing Faith and the New York Times Bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad.

David ML

The International Criminal Court recently issued warrants for the arrest of Ahmed Haroun, the minister for humanitarian affairs of Sudan, and Ali Kosheib, a leader of that country's notorious janjaweed militia. The Sudanese government has refused to hand over the two for prosecution. Charges include murder, rape, torture and "imprisonment or severe deprivation of liberty." Severe deprivation of liberty is a euphemism for slavery. Egypt's Al-Ahram Weekly observed not long ago that in Sudan, "slavery, sanctioned by religious zealots, ravaged the southern parts of the country and much of the west as well."

Muslim slavers in the Sudan primarily enslave non-Muslims, and chiefly Christians. According to the Coalition Against Slavery in Mauritania and Sudan (CASMAS), a human rights and abolitionist movement, "The current Khartoum government wants to bring the non-Muslim black South in line with Sharia law, laid down and interpreted by conservative Muslim clergy. The black animist and Christian South has been ravaged for many years of slave raids by Arabs from the north and east and resists Muslim religious rule and the perceived economic, cultural, and religious expansion behind it."

The BBC reported in March 2007 that slave raids "were a common feature of Sudan's 21-year north-south war, which ended in 2005....According to a study by the Kenya-based Rift Valley Institute, some 11,000 young boys and girls were seized and taken across the internal border -- many to the states of South Darfur and West Kordofan....Most were forcibly converted to Islam, given Muslim names and told not to speak their mother tongue." One modern-day Sudanese Christian slave, James Pareng Alier, was kidnapped and enslaved when he was twelve years old. Religion was a major element of his ordeal: "I was forced to learn the Koran and re-baptised "Ahmed." They told me that Christianity was a bad religion. After a time we were given military training and they told us we would be sent to fight." Alier has no idea of his family's whereabouts. But while non-Muslims slaves are often forcibly converted to Islam, their conversion does not lead to their freedom. Mauritanian anti-slavery campaigner Boubacar Messaoud explains: "It's like having sheep or goats. If a woman is a slave, her descendants are slaves."

Anti-slavery crusaders like Messaoud have great difficulty working against this attitude because it is rooted in the Qur'an and Muhammad's example. The Muslim prophet Muhammad owned slaves, and like the Bible, the Qur'an takes the existence of slavery for granted, even as it enjoins the freeing of slaves under certain circumstances, such as the breaking of an oath: "Allah will not call you to account for what is futile in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed ten indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or give a slave his freedom" (5:89). But while the freeing of a slave or two here and there is encouraged, the institution itself is never questioned. The Qur'an even gives a man permission to have sexual relations with his slave girls as well as with his wives: "The believers must (eventually) win through, those who humble themselves in their prayers; who avoid vain talk; who are active in deeds of charity; who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess, for (in their case) they are free from blame..." (23:1-6). A Muslim is not to have sexual relations with a woman who is married to someone else -- except a slave girl: "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you" (4:24).

In the past, as today, most slaves in Islam were non-Muslims who had been captured during jihad warfare. The pioneering scholar of the treatment of non-Muslims in Islamic societies, Bat Ye'or, explains the system that developed out of jihad conquest:

The jihad slave system included contingents of both sexes delivered annually in conformity with the treaties of submission by sovereigns who were tributaries of the caliph. When Amr conquered Tripoli (Libya) in 643, he forced the Jewish and Christian Berbers to give their wives and children as slaves to the Arab army as part of their jizya [tax on non-Muslims]. From 652 until its conquest in 1276,

Nubia was forced to send an annual contingent of slaves to Cairo. Treaties concluded with the towns of Transoxiana, Sijistan, Armenia, and Fezzan (Maghreb) under the Umayyads and Abbasids stipulated an annual dispatch of slaves from both sexes. However, the main sources for the supply of slaves remained the regular raids on villages within the dar-al-harb [House of War, i.e., non-Islamic regions] and the military expeditions which swept more deeply into the infidel lands, emptying towns and provinces of their inhabitants.[1]

Historian Speros Vryonis observes that "since the beginning of the Arab razzias [raids] into the land of Rum [the Byzantine Empire], human booty had come to constitute a very important portion of the spoils." As they steadily conquered more and more of Anatolia, the Turks reduced many of the Greeks and other non-Muslims there to slave status: "They enslaved men, women, and children from all major urban centers and from the countryside where the populations were defenseless."[2] The Indian historian K. S. Lal states that wherever jihadists conquered a territory, "there developed a system of slavery peculiar to the clime, terrain and populace of the place." When Muslim armies invaded India, "its people began to be enslaved in droves to be sold in foreign lands or employed in various capacities on menial and not-so-menial jobs within the country."[3]

Slaves faced pressure to convert to Islam. In an analysis of Islamic political theories, Patricia Crone notes that after a jihad battle was concluded, "male captives might be killed or enslaved...Dispersed in Muslim households, slaves almost always converted, encouraged or pressurized [sic] by their masters, driven by a need to bond with others, or slowly, becoming accustomed to seeing things through Muslim eyes even if they tried to resist."[4] Thomas Pellow, an Englishman who was enslaved in Morocco for twenty-three years after being captured as a cabin boy on a small English vessel in 1716, was tortured until he accepted Islam. For weeks he was beaten and starved, and finally gave in after his torturer resorted to "burning my flesh off my bones by fire, which the tyrant did, by frequent repetitions, after a most cruel manner."[5]

Slavery was taken for granted throughout Islamic history, as it was, of course, in the West as well up until relatively recent times. Yet while the European and American slave trade get stern treatment attention from historians (as well as from reparations advocates and guilt-ridden politicians), the Islamic slave trade, which actually lasted longer and brought suffering to a larger number of people, is virtually ignored. (This fact magnifies the irony of Islam being presented to American blacks as the egalitarian alternative to the "white man's slave religion" of Christianity.) While historians estimate that the transatlantic slave trade, which operated between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries, involved around 10.5 million people, the Islamic slave trade in the Sahara, the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean areas began in the seventh century and lasted into the nineteenth, and involved 17 million people.[6]

And when pressure came to end slavery, it moved from Christendom into Islam, not the other way around. There was no Muslim William Wilberforce or William Lloyd Garrison. In fact, when the British government in the nineteenth century adopted the view of Wilberforce and the other abolitionists and began to put pressure on pro-slavery regimes, the Sultan of Morocco was incredulous. "The traffic in slaves," he noted, "is a matter on which all sects and nations have agreed from the time of the sons of Adam...up to this day." He said that he was "not aware of its being prohibited by the laws of any sect" and that the very idea that anyone would question its morality was absurd: "No one need ask this question, the same being manifest to both high and low and requires no more demonstration than the light of day."[7]

However, it was not the unanimity of human practice, but the words of the Qur'an and Muhammad that were decisive in stifling abolitionist movements within the Islamic world. Slavery was abolished only as a result of Western pressure; the Arab Muslim slave trade in Africa was ended by the force of British arms in the nineteenth century.

Besides being practiced more or less openly today in Sudan and Mauritania, there is evidence that slavery still continues beneath the surface in some majority-Muslim countries as well -- notably Saudi Arabia, which only abolished slavery in 1962, Yemen and Oman, both of which ended legal slavery in 1970, and Niger, which didn't abolish slavery until 2004. In Niger, the ban is widely ignored, and according to a Nigerian study, as many as one million people remain in bondage there. Slaves are bred, often raped, and generally treated like animals. The BBC's Hilary Andersson reported from Niger in February 2005: "The slave owners encourage the slaves to reproduce to increase their numbers, sometimes even determining when they have sexual intercourse. They treat the slaves like their cattle....There are documented cases of slaves being stripped naked in front of their families to humiliate them, of female slaves being raped by their owners, and even of male slaves being castrated by their owners as punishment."

A shadow cast by the strength and perdurability of Islamic slavery can be seen in instances where Muslims have managed to import this institution to the United States. A Saudi named Homaidan Al-Turki, for instance, was sentenced in September 2006 to 27 years to life in prison, for keeping a woman as a slave in his home in Colorado. For his part, Al-Turki claimed that he was a victim of anti-Muslim bias. He told the judge: "Your honor, I am not here to apologize, for I cannot apologize for things I did not do and for crimes I did not commit. The state has criminalized these basic Muslim behaviors. Attacking traditional Muslim behaviors was the focal point of the prosecution." The following month, an Egyptian couple living in Southern California received a fine and prison terms, to be followed by deportation, after pleading guilty to holding a ten-year-old girl as a slave. And in January 2007, an attaché of the Kuwaiti embassy in Washington, Waleed Al Saleh, and his wife were charged with keeping three Christian domestic workers from India in slave-like conditions in al-Saleh's Virginia home. One of the women remarked: "I believed that I had no choice but to continue working for them even though they beat me and treated me worse than a slave."

All this indicates that the problem of Islamic slavery is not restricted to recent events in the Sudan; it is much larger and more deeply rooted. The United Nations and human rights organizations have noted the phenomenon, but nevertheless little has been done to move decisively against those who still hold human beings in bondage, or aid or tolerate others doing so. The UN has tried to place peacekeeping forces in Darfur, over the objections of the Sudanese government, but its remonstrations against slavery in Sudan and elsewhere have likewise not resulted in significant government action against the practice. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have also noted the problem, but as HRW observes, "the government of Sudan has stonewalled on the issue of slavery, claiming it was a matter of rival tribes engaging in hostage taking, over which it had little control. That is simply untrue, as myriad reports coming out of southern Sudan have made abundantly clear." For Islamic slavery to disappear, a powerful state would have to move against it decisively, not with mere words, and accept no equivocation of half-measures. In today's international geopolitical climate, nothing could be less likely.


[1] Bat Ye'or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1996, p. 108.

[2] Speros Vryonis, The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of Islamization from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century, Berkeley, 1971. P. 174-5. Quoted in Bostom, Legacy of Jihad, p. 87.

[3] K. S. Lal, Muslim Slave System in Medieval India, Aditya Prakashan, 1994. P. 9.

[4] Patricia Crone, God's Rule: Government and Islam, Columbia University Press, 2004. Pp. 371-372. Quoted in Bostom, Legacy of Jihad, p. 86.

[5] Giles Milton, White Gold: The Extraordinary Story of Thomas Pellow and Islam's One Million White Slaves, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2004. P. 84.

[6] Andrew Bostom, The Legacy of Jihad, Prometheus, 2005, pp. 89-90.

[7] Quoted in Bernard Lewis, Race and Slavery in the Middle East, Oxford University Press, 1994. Reprinted at http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/med/lewis1.html.

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, July 20, 2007.


The World Likud is coming to Texas! Mark you calendar and join us on this historical event July 27 & 28 Southlake TX. right by DFW airport.

You will get to hear first hand how the World Likud has changed their platform to a Biblical stand.

Please take a minute and read the platform (Click below. Finally, they are getting it. This is the key to unlocking their inheritance. This is their birthright!

We have spent years trying to wake the Jewish people up to these Biblical truths now they are taking this bold stand, and we need to show them that we support them and stand with them. Please join us for this historical event.

There is no charge for this conference. Bring your friends and come join us in a weekend of great speakers, music, food at no cost to you.

Please register so we can prepare for all of you coming to a Texas style conference greeting the World Likud!


* Tell each hotel you are with the World Likud conference @ Lonesome Dove Ranch.
* All hotels have airport shuttles.
* The Super 8 has just been renovated and is really nice. The Marriott is under some construction.

Super 8
$69 and up
Contact person: Lee Ivory

Marriot Westlake
$89 and up
Clara Hines

Gaylord Texan
$159 and up

Baymont Inn
817 329-9300 ext. 101,
jmiles@baymontinn.xohost.com. Use the name Ebenezer when you call her.
301 Capitol St.
Grapevine TX 76051



This document presents the background and plan for the creation of a lasting peace in the Middle East. It proposes a blueprint for solving the Palestinian refugee problem, while maintaining a secure and strong Israel.

Traditional approaches to the Middle East conflict have been based on a land-for-peace paradigm. This approach has failed repeatedly because it has always placed the onus of solving the Palestinian refugee problem on Israel alone.

This proposal differs from previous approaches by involving all Arab countries in solving the Palestinian refugee problem in terms of territory, funding, culture, and religion.

For reasons of practical implementation, this proposal divides the plan into long-term and short-term components.


1. The Jewish nation has earned its right to exist within secure borders.

a. Jews conquered the land of Canaan 3,000 years ago; they reconquered it in 1882, 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973.

b. There has been a continuous and significant Jewish presence in Palestine for over 2,000 years.

c. With the Balfour Declaration in 1917, Britain (the Mandatory ruler at the time) not only recognized the Jews' right to a home in their ancestral land, but also committed itself to working to create such a home in an area including both sides of Jordan River (including today's Jordan).

d. The League of Nations and the international community reaffirmed the Balfour Declaration on August 12, 1922.

e. United Nations Resolution 181 (II) of November 29, 1947 confirmed once again the right of the Jewish nation to live in Israel, and proposed a division of Palestine into two states. While the Jews accepted this resolution, all Arab countries opposed it, and attacked Israel on May 14, 1948, the day of its rebirth.

f. According to international law, land lost by an aggressor belongs to the successful defender.

2. Only a strong Israel can survive

a. Israel has never called for the destruction of another sovereign country. In contrast, even today, the destruction of Israel is a stated aim of many of its neighbors and factions within them, such as Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah.

b. Israel is therefore under continuous threat. It needs to substantially improve its surveillance and intelligence. It needs to equip itself to repel such threats.

c. Land for peace has not worked in Gaza, and it will not work in the West Bank. Arab rhetoric, Palestinian schoolbooks, and mosque sermons consistently deny the legitimacy of the Jewish state. Any sign of negotiated land for peace is understood by the Arabs to show weakness. This situation provides Israel's enemies with the possibility of Israel' piecemeal destruction.

d. Consistent and unceasing demonstration of effective military power, coupled with a unified diplomatic ideology, should eventually disabuse the Arab dream of Israel's destruction. Jihadist ideology will never give up on the destruction of Israel as long as Israel and its allies show weakness. Unfortunately, compromise is interpreted as weakness.

e. Therefore, any hostile activities should be effectively neutralized. Wavering political will and lack of military preparedness, which hampered combat in the recent Lebanon war, must never occur again.

f. Israel exists in a de facto state of war with many of its neighbors; it cannot allow hostile elements operating within its borders. Any activities that sabotage the democratically elected government, regardless of the perpetrator's ethnic affiliation, should be treated harshly and punished accordingly, e.g., Knesset Members cannot decide on their own to meet with enemy countries such as Syria.

3. The Palestinian refugees are a shared problem.

a. A major portion of the Jewish homeland has already been given to the Palestinians. In 1923, Britain tore away more than two thirds of the area designated for the Jewish homeland and gave it to King Abdullah to form Transjordan, in violation of the 1922 League of Nations resolution and the spirit of the Balfour Declaration.

b. Arab countries were and are parties to the Palestinian refugee problem. Arab countries encouraged Arabs to leave Israel in 1948, promising them a victorious return upon the annihilation of Israel. As a result, more than 650,000 Arabs left Israel.

c. Arab neighbors have exacerbated the Palestinian refugee problem. Arab countries enacted laws to deprive Palestinian refugees and their descendants of citizenship, as well as equal participation in the local economy and society.

d. Arab neighbors have the capacity to solve the Palestinian refugee problem. First, total Arab lands measure 500 times the size of Israel; second, most of this land is uninhabited and short on human resources; third, these Arab countries, which are largely Muslim, share a religious, linguistic, and cultural heritage with the Palestinian refugees.

e. Arab countries also created a Jewish refugee problem. With the creation of Israel, most Arab countries engaged in state-sponsored anti-Semitic propaganda and pogroms against Jews. As a result, more than 800,000 Jews left Arab countries and emigrated to Israel, France, Canada, the US, and Latin America.

f. Israel, along with other Western countries, solved the Jewish refugee problem. Israel and the West have absorbed all Jewish refugees from Arab countries, built the necessary infrastructure, and provided Jewish refugees economic assistance, as well as everything they needed to get situated in their new home. As a result, a Jewish refugee problem no longer exists.

4. A Palestinian State within existing Israeli territory is not feasible. The land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea and the natural resources therein are insufficient to sustain two independent states.

Also, giving up the West Bank will create a major security threat to Israel, as is already apparent by the ongoing hostility from Gaza, wherefrom Israeli civilians withdrew.

The Plan: The Immediate Phase

1. Talks on the establishment of a Palestinian State will cease, effective immediately, as per the facts provided above.

2. Israel will declare its right to exist within its current borders, with no further surrender of territory, including the Golan Heights. After the lesson of the Gaza withdrawal, Israeli citizens will be assured, once and for all, that they will never again be forced from their homes. Israelis will continue to establish and develop communities wherever they so choose.

3. Israel will annex most of Judaea and Samaria. Annexation is a key element of this plan, to be applied immediately. The annexed areas will include all of Judaea and Samaria except for Arab population centers such as Ramallah, Nablus, and Jericho, which will be designated as Arab Self-Ruled Areas. Arab residents of the annexed areas will be offered Israeli citizenship with all due rights and obligations under Israeli law.

4. Israel and its neighbors will jointly bear the costs of relocation. Israel will work together with neighboring countries to create a joint compensation and relocation program for those individuals residing in the annexed territories who choose to relocate.

5. Arab self-ruled areas. The population of the above-mentioned areas excluded from annexation will enjoy self-rule and eventually be confederated with Jordan. These territories will include accessways that ensure uninterrupted contiguity, so that life in these areas is conducted independent of Israel. The population of these areas will also have access to Jordan via a corridor that runs through the Jordan Valley.

6. Citizenship. All citizens, Jewish and Arab alike, will have equal rights and duties under Israeli law. Every citizen, including Arabs, must perform compulsory IDF or alternative civilian service.

7. Any threat to Israel and Israeli citizens will be dealt with decisively. Gaza, with the current buildup of terror and hostile acts, will be the first issue dealt with. Israel should not tolerate its citizens being under ongoing attack. Gaza has declared war on Israel, and Israel needs to respond swiftly and decisively. Unlike how the Hezbollah was handled during the 2nd Lebanon War, all sources of hostility in the Gaza Strip must be removed.

The Long-Term Plan: Peace and Security

1. Lasting peace in the Middle East is our long-term goal. We do not call for further territorial expansion, nor do we call for the destruction of any nation.

2. The Arabs must recognize Israel's right to exist. This requirement must be met unconditionally before negotiating peace. Recognizing Israel's right to exist must be an explicit and clear act, in contrast to unkept promises, e.g., the Oslo Accords.

3. Peace through partnership. All Middle Eastern countries must participate in solving the refugee problem.

a. Upon adoption of the Immediate Plan, described above, Israel will absorb the Arab residents of the annexed areas.

b. Arab countries, which are fellow stakeholders in peace, will help the remaining Palestinian refugees as follows:

I. Self-ruled areas within the West Bank -- Financial aid will be required to support the self-ruled territories.

II. The Gaza Strip -- Two elements are needed here: (a) territorial extension -- Egypt will allow the Gaza Strip to reach El Arish. The Gaza Strip can more than quadruple in size by Egypt making a concession on a relatively marginal area; and (b) all Arab countries will provide financial aid.


The Long Term Plan: Social Welfare and Economy

This portion of the plan is not directly related to solving Israel's securities issues. However, it is an essential component of the overall plan, as only a prosperous and united Israel can successfully face the challenges ahead. 1. Infrastructure. Continue massive investments in infrastructure, favoring underdeveloped areas, e.g., the Galilee and the Negev; investment in high-tech, including pharmaceuticals and biotech.

2. Expand tourism

3. Address the substantial economical gaps. Enable disenfranchised groups to progress financially and socially; invest more in re-energizing the declining educational system; provide better safety nets for those most vulnerable.

4. Taxation. Reduce taxation and create incentives for increased productivity and investment.

5. Privatization. Privatize most state-owned companies to enable fair competition and private initiative.

6. Incentives for increased legal immigration.

7. Simplify and increase land allocation.

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, July 20, 2007.

Talk about falsifying history! Now the pro-Palestinian cheerleaders in academia and elsewhere are claiming that the Palestinians are direct descendents of the Jebusites.

This ploy allows Palestinian and other arab spokespersons to lay claim to jerusalem as a 'Palestinian capitol' for a millennium prior to King David. To read David Wenkel's article, "Palestinians, Jebusites, and Evangelicals" click here for the rebutal of this fable-fantasy claim.

The spuriousness of this claim is immediately evidend when one considers that the population of the area today is the product of two major trends:

TREND #1.)

the eternal and non-stop mixing of invading and in-migrating popuations of:

Pre-historic peoples (= c. 4,000 BC = 6000 years before the present)
Early Bronze and Middle Bronze Canaanites (3,000 BC)
Sumerians (2,500 BC)
Akkadians, (2,000)
Babylonians, (2,000)
Hittites, (1500)
Hamitic Egyptians, (1500)
Hurrians, (1500)
Amorites, (1500)
Phoenicians, (1500)
Late Bronze Canaanites (1500)
Jebusites (1200)
Hebrews, (1200)
Ammonites, (1200)
Moabites, (1200)
Edomites, (1200)
Israelite Kingdoms (1000)
Philistines (1000)
Arameans, (900)
Samaritans, (700)
Chaldeans (Neo-Babylonians), (600)
Medes (Persians), (600)
Nabateans (south Arabian language), (300)
Greeks, (200)
Romans, (50)
Parthian Persians (50)
Byzantines, (200 AD)
Phrygians.(300 AD)

and, then, finally, in the 7th century AD (=CE), Arabs.

And Arab rulers were never indigendous, but rather varied with the internecine wars of Muslim leaders, such that the area changed rulers many times, from/to

Umayyad (originally Western Arabia, capitol moved to Damascus)
Abbasid (capitol in Baghdad)
Fathimid (Egyptian)
Seljuk (Turkish)
Crusader (European)
Ayyubid (Kurdish, out of southeastern Turkey)(Salah ed-Din = Saladin)
Mongol (Mongolian -- pagan, but some later converted to Islam)
Mameluk (Egyptian)
Ottoman Empire (Turkish: 1512 to 1917)
British (European: 1917-1948)

TREND #2.)

The in-migration of Arabs from surrounding areas in to Ottoman and British Mandatory Cis-Jordan (British Mandatory Palestine/Israel to the west of the Jordan River) during the period following c. 1855, after the beginning of the very salutary improvements in the economy of the region that were wrought by the influences of the British and the Zionists. Tens of thousands of Arabs on an almost yearly basis entered legally or illegally, accounted for much of the meteoric rise in population documented by Justin McCarthy in his 1991 'Population of Palestine' (Columbia University).

According to McCarthy, for the 400 years prior to 1855, the population of the region had remained more or less level at c. 340,000 Arab Muslims and Christians (for sound demographic reasons he does not include Jews in this number). This long-standing population equilibrium was broken suddenly and forcefully at the very beginning of the influx of British and Zionists. Except for the period of WW1, the population growth curve is almost continuous. By 1947, the Arab population was c. 1,400,000 (almost a fourfold increase), accounted for largely by the in-migration of Arabs looking for work, pasture, and a better life than what they could achieve in Egypt, Jordan, or what would later become the Arab states of Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.

When one consideres the 6000 years of racial and cutural and lingustic and religous groups mixing, and the endless injection of new racial and cultural types, and the influence of the Arab invasion in the early 7th century AD which decimated the local (mostly Christian) population and replaced it with Arabs; and which in turn was in-mixed with Egyptian and Mongol and Turkish and European in-migrating or conquering people.....the idea that the Palestinians as a people can trace descent to the 'Jebusites' is beyond risible.

The distortion of history is palpable, and the political motivation is transparent.

Yet what begins as obvious political and cultural bias with the Palestinian encyclopaedia, soon appears in Palestinian scholarly tomes (Sami Hadawi), and then migrates in to legitimate and highly respected western sources such as the Webster's New World Encyclopaedia, and then appears in college curricula as legitimized history by polticized college professors such as Rashid Khalidi.

Soon we will have our college sophomores (next year's senators) finishing their BA with the unexamined assumption that the Palestinians were the Jebusites -- driven from their native homeland by the imperialist King David, and then, compounding the injury, driven from it again by the imperialist and racist and apartheid colonialist Zionists 3000 years later!!

The power of an unchallenged lie is beyond imagining!

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Rachel Ehrenfeld, July 20, 2007.

This was written by Robert Spencer and it appeared today in the Washington Times
(washingtontimes.com/article/20070720/EDITORIAL/107200016/1013/editorial). Robert Spencer, a scholar of Islamic history, theology and law, is director of Jihad Watch.

One of the most potent weapons that global jihadists have to advance their cause is one of the least-remarked: censorship. And Rachel Ehrenfeld, founder and director of the American Center for Democracy, stands today as one of the primary targets of this tactic -- and, by her ongoing resistance, one of the foremost defenders of the freedom of speech against encroaching attempts at legal intimidation that, if successful, will effectively silence the anti-jihad resistance.

Billionaire Saudi financier Khalid Salim bin Mahfouz sued Miss Ehrenfeld in the U.K. for libel: in her book, "Funding Evil," she wrote that he was involved in funding Hamas and al Qaeda. Mr. bin Mahfouz denied that he had knowingly given any money to either. Taking advantage of British libel laws that place the burden of proof on the defendant, rather than the plaintiff, Mr. bin Mahfouz sued not in the United States, where Miss Ehrenfeld lives and published her book, but in Britain, where neither he nor Miss Ehrenfeld live and where his entire case depended upon a handful of copies sold in that country mostly through special orders from Amazon.com, and the appearance of one chapter of the book on the Internet, where it may have been read by British readers.

Britain's libel laws have given rise to the phenomenon of wealthy "libel tourists," who sue there on the slimmest British connection in order to ensure a favorable ruling. Mr. bin Mahfouz had the good fortune of having the case heard by Judge David Eady, who has a long history of strange rulings in libel cases -- rulings that generally ran in favor of censorship and against free speech. In connection with another of these rulings in May 2007, British journalist Stephen Glover wrote: "Mr Justice Eady is beginning to worry me. Is he a friend of a free Press? There are good reasons to believe that he isn't."

In May 2005 Justice Eady ruled that Miss Ehrenfeld must apologize to Mr. bin Mahfouz and pay over $225,000. This fine remains uncollected, and Miss Ehrenfeld sees no reason to apologize. Now she cannot travel to Britain, and her writing and research work has of course been banned there -- thus preventing important information from reaching the public.

Miss Ehrenfeld countersued in New York, asking the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals for a declaration that the British judgment was contrary to the First Amendment and hence unenforceable on an American citizen. And on June 8, the appellate court handed down a landmark decision, ruling that Miss Ehrenfeld's case was valid, and that she could appeal for relief from American courts in order to keep the British court order from being carried out in this country. Said Circuit Court Judge Wilfred Feinberg: "The issue may implicate the First Amendment rights of many New Yorkers, and thus concerns important public policy of the state." He also declared that the case had implications for all writers -- since they, like Miss Ehrenfeld, could be subjected to harassment. This decision could also have great impact on the September 11 victims lawsuits, in which Mr. bin Mahfouz is also a defendant.

Lost, meanwhile, amid the legal wrangling surrounding Miss Ehrenfeld's case has been the release of a September 13, 2001, note from France's foreign intelligence agency, the General Directorate of External Security (DGSE). The French news site Geopolitique.com obtained the note in late June 2007, and has revealed that already in 1996 Mr. bin Mahfouz was known as one of the architects of a banking scheme constructed for the benefit of Osama bin Laden. Moreover, the report claims that both U.S. and British intelligence services knew this. This is just the latest addition to the mountain of evidence from which Miss Ehrenfeld constructed her case in "Funding Evil." Even if this evidence is all mistaken, the British libel judgment against Miss Ehrenfeld appears all the more fantastic and unjustifiable in light of the fact that French intelligence agents had documents allowing them to came to the same conclusion she did.

This calls for open and thorough investigation, unhindered by legal intimidation. If Saudis or others who have indeed supported the global jihad are able cover their tracks using British libel laws to silence investigators, the only winners are the jihadists. "The British legal and political leadership's constant appeasement of the jihadists," says Miss Ehrenfeld, "facilitated the rise of terrorism." She sees consequences for both the United States and Britain in her legal struggle: "My fight against bin Mahfouz is not only to prevent the extension of that influence here -- to defend our First Amendment from British laws. My success here would deter other jihadists from using the British courts to silence U.S. writers and publishers especially since it would -- in similar situations -- render U.K. court decisions useless."

For that reason, all who wish to remain free and resist the encroachments of global jihadism and Islamic supremacism should hope and pray that she prevails.

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, July 20, 2007.

I find it amazingly coincidental that the academic community has produced, over the past few years, a growing number of propagandistic works, apologetic of terrorists or lionizing of the Palestinians, disguised as scholarship.

Patrick Seale, a British journalist, wrote books and articles praising Hafez el Assad.

Charles Smith, a USA academician, wrote Palestine and the Israel Arab conflict as a textbook in Mid-east history but which is actually a propaganda whitewash of Palestinan terrorism and especially Yassir Arafat.

Keith Whitelam, a UK scholar, wrote The Invention of Ancient Israel: The Silencing of Palestinian History as a history and archaeology textbook which seeks to validate the spurious claim that the Palestinians are the real original inhabitants of the Holy Land and the Jews have sneakily and slyly invented a Bible and an Archaeological record which obfuscates the true Palestinian millenia-long ancient history and replaces it with a false Jewish/Israelite history.

Nadia abu-el-Hajj, a Palestinian born American scholar at Barnard,

just published Facts on the Ground, a critique of Israeli archaeology of the past 50 years, asserting that the Israeli scholarly community and its allies in the fundamentalist Christian world have falsified the results of their excavations and spun the facts in order to validate the spurious Jewish claim that Jews are the real original inhabitants of the Holy Land, and asserting that the Jews have sneakily and slyly invented not only a Bible but also a fabricated and misinterpreted Archaeological record which obfuscates the true Palestinian millenia-long ancient history and replaces it with a false Jewish/Israelite history.

And now Augustus Richard Norton, at Boston University, with his history of Hezbollah, is doing the same thing. Note the critical review below.

Y'all notice a pattern here?

It sounds to me as though someone somewhere with an awful lot of money is covertly paying dishonest scholars, wherever they can be found, to take a false propagandistic premise (we must make the world think that Israel really never existed, the Jews have no claim to Palestine, Zionism is racist and apartheid, the Palestinians are the original people of the Holy Land, and Jews work hard to make up lies about themselves that discredit the Palestinians), and to insert it in to the academic community, with the stature of academician-authors, so that the false premise will eventually become history (per the Goebbels strategy: repeat the lie often enough, and people will believe it), and students (later to become voting adults: and dont' forget, this year's sophomore is next year's senator) will eventually simply accept that false premise much as we accept that Columbus discovered America.

I don't know who that/those rich person/s might be. I can guess, but I don't know.

But it does seem like this wave of revisionist history/archaeology is part of the on-going Arab war against the Jews and against Israel.

Same as the war in the UN, which the Arabs won in 1974; and the war in the media, which the Arabs are winning now; and the war in churches, which the Arabs are losing because they over-extended their extremism and turned off much rank-and-file; and the war for boycott/divestment movement which the Arabs are winning even though boycotts and divestments are being voted down, but the Arabs are still winning because they continually find new forums in which to mount the israel-bashing pr over and over (and that is the real purpose of the boycott/divestment movement) and the war on college campuses (intimately tied in with the PR war of faux-academicians per the email info above)....which is still very much in flux.

Matt Brooks, who is Executive Director of the Jewish Policy Center writes:

Dear Reader,

Please forward this troubling book review to Boston University alumni, trustees and donors. Those with an interest in BU's academic standards should be made aware of Professor Norton's work.

Sincerely, Matt Brooks Executive Director

So, if you can find the time, do what Matt Brooks says: send a letter to BU, complaining about this book and using Jonathan Schanzer's input.

Hezbollah: A Short History
by Augustus Richard Norton
Princeton University Press; 187 pages; $16.95
Reviewed by Jonathan Schanzer
Jerusalem Post
July 20, 2007

Here we go again: yet another American 'scholar' who apologizes for an Islamist terrorist group that exists first and foremost to murder, maim and destroy. With Hezbollah: A Short History, Augustus Richard Norton, a Boston University professor of international relations and anthropology, has joined the ranks of dozens of US academics who inexplicably teach the kinder and gentler side of terrorists.

Norton, a former observer with the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization, states in his prologue that he seeks to provide 'a more balanced and nuanced account' of Hizbullah, which he calls a 'complex organization.' Of course, there is little that is complex or nuanced about a group that receives an estimated $100 million a year from the radical Islamic regime in Iran to carry out violence, and has used violence as its raison d'etre dating back to the 1980s.

Indeed, Hizbullah exists to further the violent aims of Iran, to demonize and attack the US and to destroy Israel. Norton neglects to state this unequivocally and, for that reason, he should be publicly shamed.

To know Hizbullah's violent history is to know Hizbullah. The group was implicated in the 1983 bombings of the US Marine barracks (241 dead) and French paratrooper barracks (141 dead) in Beirut, as well as a string of kidnappings and bombings against Western targets in Lebanon and beyond in the 1980s. Hizbullah was also responsible for the 1992 bombing of the Israeli Embassy (29 dead) and the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center (95 dead) in Argentina. It later became known for hit and run attacks against IDF targets (killing or wounding dozens) in southern Lebanon. After Israel withdrew to the UN-recognized border in 2000, Hizbullah continued to attack Israel in the Shaba Farms region, even though the UN verified Israel's withdrawal as complete and legal, according to international law. Last summer, Hizbullah launched thousands of missiles indiscriminately into Israel, killing and wounding mostly civilians and causing billions of dollars in damage. The group launched its weapons from within heavily populated civilian areas in Lebanon, putting the local population in danger of reprisals.

Norton's book tries to explain away this violence. He writes that the term 'terrorist' is a 'rhetorical bludgeon' used to 'dehumanize radical or revolutionary groups.' Interestingly, he admits that Hizbullah was 'deeply implicated' in the June 1985 hijacking of a TWA flight. He concedes that Hizbullah killed an American serviceman in that attack, which he admits was a 'terrorist' operation. However, Norton attempts to explain that Hizbullah was attempting to free prisoners in Israeli jails who had 'participated in resistance operations,' while other prisoners 'were merely suspects that Israel held hostage.'

In ascribing logic to Hizbullah's terrorist violence, Norton exposes himself as an apologist. By using the word 'resistance' instead of 'terrorism,' he indicates that he has adopted Hizbullah's parlance. By alleging that Israel was holding innocents in jail on a whim, he indicates that he is now complicit in spreading Hizbullah propaganda.

Norton cites one of Hizbullah's founding documents, which states that every Hizbullah fighter 'is a combat soldier when the call of jihad demands it.' He acknowledges that the 'ultimate objective [for Hizbullah] is to destroy Israel,' but when he discusses Hizbullah violence against Israel, that violence is described as 'resistance.' He writes admiringly of Hizbullah's 'careful planning and well-practiced professionalism,' and has the audacity to state that Hizbullah 'usually' did not 'intentionally target Israeli civilians.' This seems to imply that the occasional Katyusha barrage on Israel's northern towns was acceptable. Moreover, he lauds Hizbullah restraint for killing only nine Israeli soldiers during the 'six years of relative stability' from 2000 to 2006.

Norton also attempts to explain that whatever ordnance lands in Israeli civilian areas is the result of Hizbullah 'firing anti-aircraft weapons at Israeli planes violating Lebanese airspace, but as they were firing southward, in the direction the planes were coming from, the spent ammunition rounds would land in Israel.' Indeed, Norton seems to have a logical explanation for naked Hizbullah aggression.

Disturbing, also, is Norton's description of Hizbullah's reasons for violence against Israel after the 2000 withdrawal to UN-approved borders. He praises Hizbullah's 'clever pretext' to continue 'paramilitary operations against Israel,' by attacking IDF patrols in the Shaba Farms region. Thus, while the UN condemns Hizbullah for its continued violation of international law, this Boston University professor finds it 'clever.' If one had any question as to how Norton views Hizbullah violence, page 86 sums it up. He claims that all 12 of Hizbullah's suicide attacks against the US, France and Israel were 'legitimate resistance targets.'

Tellingly, only 24 of the 159 pages of written text in this book deal with the question of Hizbullah's violence. That constitutes about 15 percent. The rest talks about the group's founding, political activities, social infrastructure and even its participation in Shi'ite Ashura ceremonies (mourning the death of Hussein, the prophet Muhammad's grandson, at the Battle of Karbala in 680 CE).

Upon reading this book, one cannot help but be struck by the similarities between Norton and British author Patrick Seale, the 'court biographer' of the Assad regime in Syria. In exchange for the unfettered access he has received over the years, Seale has produced numerous books and articles that heap praise on the autocratic and terrorist-sponsoring state of Syria. Norton, who explains in his acknowledgments that he was given 'an unusually privileged, if fortuitous, entrée to local Shi'ite politics,' appears to have had similar exposure to Hizbullah leaders and mouthpieces.

Seale, however, is not an academic. Norton is. As such, he has failed the academic community by trading access for objectivity, honesty and integrity. Knowing where Norton stands on Hizbullah, one can only wonder what he teaches his students.

Jonathan Schanzer, a former US Treasury intelligence analyst, is director of policy for the Jewish Policy Center. He is author of Al-Qaeda's Armies: Middle East Affiliate Groups and the Next Generation of Terror.

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, July 20, 2007.

Twenty-nine presumably outraged United States labor leaders issue a statement denouncing several British unions calling for a boycott of Israel over her presumed occupation of so-called Palestinian territories; land in fact, based on worldwide precedent, justifiably secured by Israel in 1967 as a consequence of vanquishing, in a defensive war, Arab militants intent on wiping out the Jewish State. "There are victims and victimizers on all sides," U.S. union leaders assert, "We have to question the motives of those resolutions that single out one country." Perhaps clinging to the notion that the aforementioned territories are of disputed sovereignty, nevertheless American labor leaders are spot on when alluding to an anti-Israel, anti-Semitic taint permeating the mind-set of those British labor leaders, no doubt disregarding recent foiled anti-British attacks by deranged Arab Muslim medical professionals, no doubt disregarding alas successful mass homicides committed not so long ago in London by kindred spirit deranged Muslim militants. Are not such Muslims bent on jihad, yearning to annihilate the infidel, much like those Palestinian terrorists that Israelis must deal with on a daily basis? Would not a logical fellow be baffled that British union leaders choose to support a community that harbors jihadists, the very prototypes that murder Brits, while so disrespecting a nation that fights jihadists? Franz Kafka would have had a field-day in writing about such an absurdity, although most readers would be apt to attribute the work, if it truly was not based on real events, to one fertile imagination hitched to a surreal never-never land. Then again, counter-intuitive behavior can be true and indeed stranger than fictional behavior in many instances.

If we were to delve into any analysis of this British 'theater of the absurd' boycott proposal, crafted to hurt not only Israeli commerce, but to shun Israeli academics as well, the latter proposal oozed by leaders of Britain's largest teacher's union, we would likely conclude that radical Muslim residents of the erstwhile empire had more than a bit to do with cultivating say a subtle collective anti-Semitism ingrained in certain union movers and shakers into a tangible policy. Pro-Palestinian Arab Muslims united in common cause in fact, as might be expected, did weigh in heavily on the boycott proposals, yet it was the union leaders themselves that yielded to such influence, overriding the obvious observations that Jews do not practice the mutated act of martyrdom, do not explode or set bombs wrecking havoc to British transportation systems, markets, buildings, thoroughfares, airports, or anything else! Across the Atlantic labor leaders see this, comprehend that it is in their interest to support Israel, and likely cannot fathom why many of their British counterparts are so dull-witted.

Furthermore, many British labor leaders likely labor under a false assumption, nurtured by a lack of understanding of the Arab Muslim culture, that supporting the pro-Palestinian agendas of Arab Muslim radicals, especially those dwelling within British neighborhoods, is the proper thing to do, thus will make their homeland safer and more secure, insuring militant Islamists will be soothed and ne'er again attack a nation willing to see the light through an anti-Israeli filter. Such Brits refuse to comprehend that extremist Arab Muslims will never live in peace with the perceived infidel, including those in the labor movement that metaphorically hold hands with their 'poor abused Palestinian brothers' and sing Kumbaya. Furthermore, non-Muslim British women do not wear burkas, are not subject to misogynistic sharia laws, so how might a radical Arab Muslim, no doubt a religious fundamentalist bound by Koranic interpretations not in sync with liberal minded Westernized blokes, feel any comradeship whatsoever no matter how anti-Israeli/Semitic any non-Muslim Brits might be? If anything, any manipulative radical Arab Muslim, subtly or not so subtly obsessed with jihad, will sense a certain weak mindedness born of naivety emanating from his British non-Muslim wannabe pals, will do whatever he can to exploit that collective weakness, and in the end will not be reticent to blow away those 'infidels' with an act of martyrdom, or by other means, if his Koranic instincts lead him in that direction. Might one visit to any Wahhabi spewing mosque, perhaps disguised in de rigueur Muslim garb including a beard, be an enlightening experience for any such labor leader that doesn't get it?

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 20, 2007.


Favors strengthen fanatics without engendering goodwill.

What goodwill towards the relatives of murdered people is release of terrorist prisoners? What goodwill towards future victims of recidivist terrorists is their release?


Newspapers pass on half-baked proposals, which their audiences then adopt without thinking them through. As goals, the proposals and, when even stated, their premises sound nice, if they could be achieved. The means for achieving them are not laid out; their difficulty often would be daunting. Policymakers fail to consider what counter-reaction their moves would induce.

The biggest such example is the Iraq war. First, the US failed to anticipate local reaction to its moves. When the US finally got a strategy for repressing terrorism there, whose financing and commanding general the Democrats approved, Members of Congress want to end its financing and declare defeat. Iraq would turn into a dangerous terrorist state. That would be far worse for us.

Here comes the "Jordanian option." Let Jordan govern Judea-Samaria Arabs, people suggest. They ignore the ramifications. I think strategists should consider these things, not just what they would like happen.

The P.A. Arabs are well-armed and terrorist. At first, they probably would allow the arrangement, to reduce Israel's strength. Then they would resume terrorism, first against Israel. Jordan would be put into a position of having to put down its own people. Considering how Islamist Jordanians are, and that they are Palestinian Arabs, their repressing the jihadists and their hate-propaganda would be unpopular domestically. Jordan might not do it or persist at it. If it did, and perhaps in any case, local Arabs would start fighting against the Jordanians.


When Hizbullah claimed the Sheba Farms area of the Golan in Israel, the UNO surveyed the area, and declared it part of the Golan. It was part of the area Israel annexed legally. If Israel wanted to give the Golan away, Sheba Farms would go to Syria. Now, the UNO declares it part of Lebanon. I think that does not change its legal status. Some Internet Israel-basher concluded that Israel "stole it." He thus reduced complicated territorial claims to a condemnation of an earlier action based on the reversal of a likelier conclusion, reached by a later surveyor. He did not consider the politics of the surveyor's boss, the UNO.


PM Olmert wants to turn the security patrolling of Judea-Samaria over to another country. Right now, that country is Jordan.

Suppose Jordan intended to do a sincere job. Terrorists, however, would use Jordanian troops as shields. It would be difficult for Israel to move against the terrorists without confronting the Jordanians and war. Jordan would be more likely to turn Islamist, after a confrontation. That would leave its troops right alongside Israeli cities, no secure borders for Israel.

Israel doesn't need foreign help. Its security forces restrain terrorism from Judea-Samaria quite well. The problem is not difficulty in maintaining security but in steadfastness (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 7/5).

Israel's problems are defeatism, otherwise known as appeasement, and anti-Zionist sentiment among the ruling elite.

The dangerous proposal follows the disastrous withdrawals from Lebanon (twice) and from Gaza (and from Sinai). The lesson is not to withdraw.


When withdrawing from Gaza, PM Olmert admitted not having any idea what would result. That might take some thinking (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 6/27).

Fatah ran the P.A. media for years. It indoctrinates children in suicide-murder. Fatah is not moderate (Arutz-7, 6/27).

Don't confuse Rice and Olmert with the facts.


Israel's Arab prisoners enjoy visits from relatives, but Muslim captors deny Israeli prisoners that joy. Jihadists consider Israel's humane treatment a disadvantage. Former prisoner of Zion Ida Nudel urges Israel to cut off visits to its Arab prisoners until Muslims treat Israeli prisoners decently. She considers it important that Israel not allow double standards against its people (IMRA, 6/27). PM Olmert wants to release hundreds of Fatah members "not directly" responsible for the deaths of Israelis (IMRA, 6/26). He'd release bombing planners and riggers, not the triggermen. How mendacious are his counter-intuitive distinctions, mere rationalizations for loosing killers against one's own people! Nudel would be right if Israel could hold firm against the hypocritical cry, "We hold Israel to a higher standard."


The government of Israel authorized the release of funds and prisoners as goodwill gestures to shore up the Abbas regime. An adviser to Abbas did not think much of the prisoner release, because he wanted more (Isabel Kershner, NY Times, 7/9, A5).

The release of scores of terrorists and hundreds of millions of dollars are substantial concessions and not mere "gestures." I think that the word, "gesture," is used to obscure how dangerous are those concessions.

Israeli officials claim they are creating goodwill, but the advisor demonstrated the opposite. The Muslims never accept concessions gracefully but always demand more. They more they get, the more they demand. Better not to give them anything, for what they get they turn into murder of Israelis. Let us coin the term, "murdered by goodwill," to designate Israelis murdered as a result of Israeli "goodwill" concessions to Muslim terrorists.

Would you bet on a regime that needs a constant flow of concessions that promote its agenda to destroy your country? In return for nothing?


Former US Ambassador John Bolton, observed that sanctions and diplomacy have failed to stop Iran from developing military nuclear technology, and that there barely is time to use military means to disrupt a-bomb manufacture.

Israeli officials responded that they think he is too pessimistic, and that sanctions and diplomacy are working and soon may stop further Iranian development (IMRA, 6/28). They gave no reason for their optimism, belied by the evidence.

How could they give a reason for optimism? Iran's rulers remain fanatics who don't care how many deaths they inflict or their people suffer or their economy suffers, if it furthers jihad. Iran has steadily mocked the sanctions, which are weak. Iran has developed the technology. It now is making the weapons-grade materials. Israel is in a state of psychological denial.


Israel refuses to open its gate to Gaza, lest it strengthen the Hamas regime (IMRA, 6/28). Then why open it to Judea-Samaria P.A.? Israel justifies its inconsistency by pretending that Fatah terrorists want peace.

Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Jacob Richman, July 20, 2007.


Tisha B'Av is the saddest day on the Jewish calendar because of the incredible series of tragedies which occurred on that date throughout Jewish History.

Tisha B'Av means "the ninth (day) of the Hebrew month of Av."

Tisha B'Av primarily commemorates the destruction of the first and second Temples, both of which were destroyed on the ninth of Av (the first by the Babylonians in 586 B.C.E.; the second by the Romans in 70 C.E.).

Although this day is primarily meant to commemorate the destruction of the Temple, it is appropriate to consider on this day the many other tragedies of the Jewish people, many of which occurred on this day, most notably the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 1492.

This year, the fast begins Monday night, July 23, 2007 and continues till after sundown on Tuesday, July 24, 2007.

I posted on my website links to 37 educational sites that describe practices, prohibitions, insights and explanations about this sad day in Jewish history. All 37 links have been reviewed/checked this week.

Click here.

May we see the rebuilding of the Temple in our days and that Tisha B'Av becomes a day of celebration.


Contact Jacob Richman at jrichman@jr.co.il

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, July 19, 2007.
TO: Palo Alto Daily News
July 18, 2007

Democracy and oppression

Dear Editor: Paulette Dolin (letters, July 13) correctly points out the distinction between Israel's well-established traditions of democracy and free speech and those of the nascent democratically elected Palestinian government. Although to be fair, there have been leaders on the Palestinian side such as President Mahmoud Abbas, legislator Hannan Ashrawi and newly appointed Information Minister Mustafa Barghouti, who have consistently spoken out for peace and reconciliation.

But while democracy and free speech provide the best safeguards against oppression, they do not always guarantee justice. Take for example slavery and segregation in this country, apartheid in South Africa and the legacy of ethnic cleansing, expansion and occupation in Israel.

Democratic institutions are certainly conducive to positive change, but which policies are most likely to promote Palestinian democracy? I think most would argue that Israel's oppression and dispossession of Palestinians thwarts democracy by radicalizing the Palestinian public and marginalizing those working on behalf of peace and democratic values. Furthermore, a flourishing democracy depends on a sizable, educated middle class. In that sense, Israel's economic strangulation and impoverishment of Palestinians is also counterproductive.

The best way to further peace and democracy in the Middle East is to end and redress the long-standing injustices committed by Israel toward Palestinians: a comprehensive end to Israel's occupation and illegal network of settlements and walls, the establishment of a viable Palestinian state and a just solution to the plight of Palestinian refugees.

Eugene O'Carroll,
Palo Alto

Mr. O'Carrol's letter is a good example of how Arab propaganda leads to obvious errors of logic.

error #1: confusion of cause and effect

Arab propaganda has for decades insisted that mid-East unrest is due to 'radicalization ' of the Palestinians because of Israel's 'occupation.'

Few notice that Arafat and his minions formed el-Fatah in 1953, almost 25 years BEFORE Israel's conquest of the West Bank and Gaza Strip during the 6-day war. Egyptian president Nasser and the USSR formed the PLO in 1964, three years BEFORE the 6-day war.

The rule of cause and effect is obvious. Cause must come BEFORE effect. Palestinian leaders and some significant portion of the Palestinian rank and file have been 'radicalized' against Israel and against Jews for decades before the 'occupation'. Obviously, therefore, Israel's sovereignty over the West Bank and Gaza Strip could not have been the cause for this radicalization.

Fatah and PLO are the radicals which foment the unrest in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

error #2: misplaced causality

Arab propaganda insists that Israel is stealing Arab land, and thus, the terrorism and incitement are just and reasonable attempts to regain the land that Israel stole.

Few notice that the entire history of Israel's peace-making efforts with the Arabs has been an on-going offer of land for peace. Israel accepted the Peel partition plan of 1937 even though it gave Israel only 4% of the original area designated by the League of Nations as Israel's homeland. The other 96%, including trans-Jordan, was for the Arabs. The Arabs rejected the partition and went to war, and lost.

Israel accepted the 1947 UN partition plan even though it gave Israel only about 18% of that original homeland. The other 82%, including trans-Jordan, was for the Arabs. The Arabs rejected the offer, went to war, and lost.

After Israel conquered the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967, UN Ambassador Abba Eban made his famous speech in which he expressed Israel's willingness to cede almost all of what it had just conquered, in exchange for peace. The Arabs rejected that offer with the infamous 3 Khartoum 'NO's.

In the context of peace with Egypt, Israel ceded all of the Sinai.

In the context of peace with Jordan, Israel ceded thousands of acres of land east of the Jordan river.

In Israel's quest for peace with Arafat, Ehud Baraq offered to cede almost all of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip. Arafat said no, and started the 2nd Intifada.

In Israel's quest for peace with the Palestinian Authority, Israel ceded all of the Gaza Strip. But Hamas said: 'Great. Terrorism has brought us this victory, so we will win more if we do more terrorism'.

In Israel's quest for peace with the Palestinian Authority, Israel's Kadima party offered to cede, in addition to the Gaza Strip, almost all of the West Bank. Hamas said 'NO...we will win by more terrorism and more violence'.

It is therefore obvious that if the Arab terrorism were, as Arab propaganda claims, a struggle for liberation, that liberation could have been achieved 70 years ago. The fact that Arab leadership has rejected every offer of land for peace makes it clear that the purpose of the terrorism is not liberation of land or political self-determination.

Error # 3: Ignoring the obvious.

The terrorists make it easy for us. They tell us exactly what they intend to do. Just as Hitler wrote in 'Mein Kampf' that he intended to annihilate every Jew in the world, and no one paid any attention until it was too late; so too the Arab terror leaders tell us, in no uncertain terms, that their intentions are to utterly annihilate Israel and genocide its Jews. That is why they have maintained a 70-year state of war with pre-state Zionists and with Israel. That is why they perpetrate relentless terror attacks. The lies about 'Israel stole our land' and 'just end the occupation and then there can be peace' are the white-wash, the legitimization, the excuses for the endless terror war. And all too many, like Mr. O'Carroll, are deceived.

Error #4: Ignoring recent history.

After its victory in the 6-day war, Israel began its 'Mini-Marshall Plan.' Israel poured vast sums in to the reconstruction and modernization of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Roads, electricity, sewerage, waste treatment, water resources and water purification, and phone service for the Arab population were brought in to the 20th century. Modern medical services were made available all over the West Bank and Gaza Strip. As a result, the economy flourished and local Palestinians enjoyed a boom-time unprecedented in the entire history of the region. Tourism skyrocketed, foreign currency flowed in. Arabs shopped in Tel Aviv, Israelis shopped in Ramallah and Bethlehem. The economy grew by leaps and bounds, and the Arab population of the West Bank and Gaza Strip more than tripled between 1967 and 1994.

All of this came to a grinding halt when the Oslo Accords placed Arafat in control in 1994. By 2004, the West Bank's GDP was one-tenth of what it had been in 1993.

Israel did not impoverish the Palestinians. Arafat's terror war, which is now in its 14th year thanks to Hamas, impoverished them. Arafat embezzled approximately 20% of the billions of dollars of aid money that was intended for the Palestinians. Most of the rest went to fund his terror armies and terror campaigns. Little, if any, reached the people.

Error #5: failing to ask the critical question.

Many, like Mr. O'Carroll, bemoan the Israeli restrictions, the road blocks, the lock-downs, the curfews, the defensive barrier (chain-link fence over 94% of its length, thick high wall over the other 6%). And indeed these do interfere with the normal life of the Palestinians. But almost none of these were in place during the 27 years of Israeli sovereignty (1967-1994), the boom times noted above. These oppressive and humiliating restrictions began solely as a response to Arafat's terror war.

So Mr. O'Carroll and others sharing his confusion need to ask, and answer, the obviouis question: 'where do you want the casualties?'

With Israel's defensive restrictive measures, the casualties are the inconvenienced and humiliated Palestinians.

Without these measures, the casualties are the dozens or scores or hundreds or even thousands of Israelis shot or blown up or burned alive or stabbed or kidnapped or raped by all the terrorists who successfully reach their target victims because these measures have been rescinded, and who would have been stopped had they not been able to reach their victims.

Absent the terror war, there would be no restrictions and the economy could return to its flourishing state prior to 1994. Given the fact that Palestinian leadership has waged this terror war for 14 years and shows no signs of stopping, Israel has little choice but to continue its defensive actions.

The bottom line is very simple, but somehow elusive to those who have been deceived by Arab propaganda.

If the terrorists would put down their weapons, there would be no more violence.
If Israel would put down her weapons, there would be no more Israel.

I encourage all to add this input to your own and write letters to the Palo Alto Daily News at letters@dailynewsgroup.com

David Meir-Levi

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Sergio Tessa (HaDaR), July 19, 2007.

This was written by Yarden Frankl. Yarden Frankl lives in Neve Daniel. See his website:

Got Tears?

A little less than two years ago, they built a new playground in Neve Daniel.

Any warm afternoon, you can hear the laughter of children playing on the brightly colored swings and slides. It sits next to a Bet Knesset, so that the young kids can play while their parents are just inside on Shabbat morning.

Most of the kids don't know where this playground came from, and it doesn't really concern them. They love it because they know they can have fun and play safely there.

A plaque at the entrance explains that the playground used to stand in Gush Katif, in a Jewish community that was destroyed by the government of Israel two years ago.

Tisha B'Av, the ninth day of the month of Av, is a day set aside for Jews around the world to remember destruction and to grieve.

Two years ago, we arrived joyously at our new home in Israel.

Two years ago, thousands of Israelis were expelled crying from their homes in Gaza and the Shomron.

I remember listening to a former resident of Gush Katif speaking about the day the Army came. About a dozen Israeli Air Force officers arrived at her home where she had gathered with her married children and grandchildren. They presented an eviction notice and told her that she and her family would have to leave within two hours. She pleaded with them to listen to her story. She knew that they had no choice, she and her family would have to go. But she wanted them to hear what she had to say first.

The tough soldiers wore poker faces as she explained how they had come to Gaza because that's where the Israeli government told them pioneers were needed. She told them how the local Arabs had welcomed them and laughed at their attempts to grow carrots in the sand dunes. She then explained how grateful many of the Arabs became when they gained employment in their hothouses because they actually did grow carrots in the sand.

Yet it seemed to have no impact. The soldiers were there on a mission. They could not let their emotions show. Finally, her daughter grabbed an officer and dragged him into her parent's bedroom. She closed the door and said to him "Look at the beds where my parents slept for 35 years. My father who served proudly in the IDF. My mother who came here and raised a family. As children we played around this neighborhood that is now encircled by bulldozers. No one can see you now, tell me you know what you are doing is wrong." The soldier didn't say anything, but the tears streaming down his face gave him away.

One by one, she took these tough Israeli soldiers into the bedroom and repeated her words. One by one they broke down and cried because they knew that to throw an innocent person out of their home is wrong. Yet, they did no more than cry.

Today, all the dire predictions have come true. It is not the ravings of the right-wing that point to the tragedy that disengagement became. The former communities used to have schools, synagogues, and playgrounds. Now, they are nothing but rubble, the launching ground of rockets of terror aimed at even more Jewish communities.

The world's leading experts in mathematics gave a Nobel prize to Israeli professor Robert Aumann for his development of a model for predicting the outcome to various events. He predicted that the outcome to disengagement would be simple: more terror. Look into the eyes of a child from Sderot. Aumann was right.

And what of the former inhabitants of these communities? Unemployment is still rampant, marriages have ended, teen drug use is high. The leaky "temporary" homes have only stopped leaking because it has stopped raining.

Yet Tisha B'Av does not end in mourning. The end of the day is uplifting. We acknowledge tragedy but know that we have not been abandoned. No matter how bleak things can look, we know that a better day is right round the corner.

Let's get up from the floor after Tisha B'Av and think about the former residents of Gush Katif and the current ones of Sderot. Let's teach our children about the kids who used to play on those slides and swings. And let us rededicate ourselves to fixing what is broken in this wonderful nation that has so much potential.

Shabbat Shalom from our Blessed Nation

Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net.

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, July 19, 2007.


The following describes a re-run of then Prime Minister Ehud Barak's offer to Yassir Arafat at the Camp David summit on July 11-24, 2000 to give up Judea and Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights and that part of Jerusalem occupied and desecrated by Jordan for 19 years from 1948 to 1967. Arafat rejected that too generous sacrifice offer and 3 months later started his second "Intifada" on Rosh HaShanah September 29, 2000.

The re-run I speak of is described in the following essay, wherein President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice are following the plan of James Baker III (Father Bush's Secretary of State) to decide the fate of the Jewish nation.

The body copy will reiterate what Bush and Baker plan to extract from Israel. What Bush did NOT expect was another replay of the rejection by Arafat -- only this time the rejectionists were the Saudi Arabians. On July 16th King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia told Bush he would NOT attend the proposed Bush International Conference. Not only did the Saudis decline but neither would President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt attend. (1)

In brief, they demonstrated that there was to be no effort made by either the Saudis or Egyptians to help establish another State of Palestine. Even if Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, under U.S. and International pressure caves in to their demands to surrender Judea and Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights, and Jerusalem to Arafat's old group called Fatah. Apparently, the Saudis believe Israel is a state in free-fall under the guidance of Olmert, new President Shimon Peres and new Defense Minister Ehud Barak and will collapse of her own weakness. They see this happening without the trickery of another International Conference assembled to force another State of Palestine into existence, which would be a great danger to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and, of course, Israel.

I suppose the next step for Bush, Baker and Rice is to now assemble a smaller Regional Conference, dominated by the State Department, the so-called "quartet" of the U.S., U.N., E.U. and Russia and Mahmoud Abbas with Olmert, Peres and Barak acting as the Quislings.


Bush, following Baker and Lee Hamilton's Iraq Study Group Report has invited, or rather commanded that Israel attend another "International Conference" under the guise that it will (finally) settle the Arab/Israel conflict over what was the Palestinian Mandate and is now the Jewish State of Israel.

Perhaps, not so strangely, the last such Conference was held in Madrid on October 30,1981 under the command of James Baker, III and his notorious Jew Boys...Dennis Ross, Aaron Miller, and Dan Kurtzer. Then Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir was warned again and again that it was a Spider's Trap. But, like most Israelis, he was certain he could handle whatever they threw at him. (2) He couldn't comprehend that he was a Jew going to the equivalent of the Wannsee Conference where the Nazis' "Final Solution to their Jewish Problem" was decided. The coming Bush Conference will not have Eichmann, Heydrich or the other Wannsee participants because most of them were judged at the Nuremberg Tribunal and hanged. (Eichmann escaped to South America and was caught, tried and hanged in Israel May 31, 1962)

I would expect to have Bakers' Jew-Boys or some like them working the crowd as they did in Madrid. During Madrid I opined that one of the State Department boys would encourage one of the Arab Muslim countries to call for Israel to stand down her nuclear deterrence. I was right because toward the end of the Madrid Conference a well-rehearsed Egyptian delegate popped up and demanded that the Mideast become a nuclear-free-zone. (2 ibid)

Take that to mean that Israel was to adopt the vulnerable position of disposing of her nuclear deterrence so that millions of Muslims and Arabs could invade the Jewish State and then only face conventional weapons. The pro-Arab State Department had been working on castrating Israel and her nuclear deterrence for decades.

This newly proposed International Conference will be somewhat different. This time the Arabs, Muslims and the Arabist U.S. State Department has inside recruits to insure that Israel will be blind-sided, sandbagged, sabotaged and otherwise also beaten to a pulp.

While Baker at Madrid had his Jew Boys subverting Israel, this upcoming planned Conference will have its own set of Jew Boys, namely, Ehud Olmert, Shimon Peres and Ehud Barak -- everyone of them a proven traitor to Israel in that each has pledged and succeeded in giving away her G-d given Land under the repeatedly failed slogan of "Land-for-Peace". (Perhaps you have noticed that whenever and wherever Israel gave up "Land-for-Peace" they only received more war, increased terror and demands for more concessions. The only benefit "Land for Peace" established was a great graveyard for Israelis.

Remember some other "Fate-Of-The-Jews" Conferences: At Evian, France July 1938 convened by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt where for 9 days delegates from 32 countries met at Évian-les-Bains, France where most of the western countries decided not to accept Jewish refugees and NOT to rescue the Jews from the Nazis overreaching grasp and certain death. This fact was widely used in Nazi propaganda. Lack of action further emboldened Hitler, proving to him that no country had the moral fortitude to oppose Nazism's assault on European Jewry. (3)

Again, under Roosevelt's guidance, they held the Bermuda Conference April 19-29, 1943 as a Public Relations ploy where the public would not be able to see or hear what was happening. No Jewish organizations were represented. The full extent of the Nazi extermination of the Jews was already known by the world's leaders, but the Bermuda Conference was organized in a way that prevented it from producing results, restricting what the delegates could even talk about. After 12 days of secret deliberations. Their decision NOT to rescue, feed or house Jewish refugees until after the War was greeted with outrage. One Jewish organization took out a 3/4 page ad in the New York Times with the headline "To 5,000,000 Jews in the Nazi Death-Trap, Bermuda was a 'Cruel Mockery.' " There was no way of measuring how many Jews died as a result of the procrastination at Bermuda. (4)

But, there was an even more infamous Conference deciding the fate of the Jews.

The Wannsee Conference with senior officials of the Nazi German regime held in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee on January 20, 1942 led by Reinhard Heydrich, notes recorded Adolph Eichmann. The Nazis determined to eliminate all eleven million Jews in Europe and Russia -- and to conquer the rest of the world for a 1000 Year Reich, World Domination by the Nazis. (5)

Henri-Philippe Pétain led the right wing government of Vichy France from July 1940 to September 1944 had their own small conferences where they decided to hand their Jews over to the Nazi SS, even before losing France to the Nazis. He was condemned as a traitor in 1945 and sentenced to death but this sentence was never implemented. He died in bed at age 84. (6)

The Vatican, heart of the Catholic Church and the supposedly neutral Swiss Red Cross, ran what was called a "rat-line" to help the Nazis escape, mostly to South America -- especially the German high officers and scientists. (7)

The U.N. of today is a perpetual World Conference, mostly devoted to condemning Israel..

What does Bush, Baker, Rice hope to get out of this ganging up on Israel in a world kangaroo court. They aim to please Saudi Arabia just as Father Bush promised King Abdullah that his son, George W. -- as the new President would take care of Saudi Arabia and so he has.

It's no secret but Father Bush and his former Secretary of State James Baker hate Jews more than Leftist secular Jews hate observant Jews. Remember when Baker said to Father Bush: "F... the Jews. They didn't vote for us anyway" ? But, outside of the personal gratification of sticking it to the Jews, what do they expect to gain out of crushing the world's one Jewish nation? Perhaps they expect to get more oil leases and the right to explore as they did in Iraq before Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait.

You do recall Father Bush giving his Cabinet a waiver from indictment and also a "pre-pardon" for any deals that they had made with Saddam. As with Iran-Contra, everybody escaped jail, all it took was a claim that it was "in the interests of National Security" and a waiver/pardon.

But, let's get back to the Bush-Rice-Baker International Conference to decide the fate of the Jewish nation.


Do you recall any demand for World Conferences when it became well known at the U.N. and in Washington that Saudi Arabia was a main source of funds to build Mosques and Madrassas (Muslim schools teaching strict Wahhabi and Sharia Islamic laws)? The Saudis are establishing centers of hate for all "infidels" (non-Muslims) all over the world, to teach hatred and killing of all non-Muslims -- to subvert their host nations. No Conferences or condemnations here.

Hostile Muslims have been flooding all western, free nations. When they become a "critical mass", their sleeper cells trained in terror and the usually calm Muslim civilians rise up together against those nations into which they migrated. The Saudis funded terror globally, especially if the terrorist organizations followed Wahhabiism. Today's Terror and slavery have rarely been raised to the level of a Global Conference at the U.N. But, they should be.

But, did you hear any protesting words from America, the U.N., or the E.U.? No. While Israel's research universities were developing cures for mankind, the world's nations gathered to condemn the Jewish nation while Islam and Islamic autocratic countries, kingdoms or dictatorships have always been treated deferentially.

When Yassir Arafat was butchering Christians and Muslims for 12 years in Lebanon from 1970 to 1982, the U.S. State Department was funding him and the PLO. No outrage was heard from the U.N. or the State Department when Arafat took the 16 year old daughter of a village chief (mukhtar) who refused to cooperate with Arafat's terrorists, raped her in front of him, killed her, cut off her breasts and dumped her in a gunny sack on the mukhtar's doorstep. (8)

How about the world's silence about Arafat's cruelty? Israeli soldiers entered Lebanese hospitals, to find corridors stacked with the bodies of dead Christians, drained of their blood to be used for transfusions for Arafat's PLO Muslim terrorists -- now called "Fatah" under Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) who was Arafat's companion, aide, associate and financial organizer for Arafat's 40 year reign of terror. He was the master creator of Terror, the godfather of Terror, etc.

Recall the silence of the world's nations when Saddam Hussein used a combination of Sarin and Mustard nerve gas to kill 5000 of his own civilians in the Kurdish village of Halajba. Did you a hear one word from the President of America criticizing this atrocity? Not a word from Father Bush or James Baker, the U.N. or the E.U. Of course, the U.S. was pumping money and arms into Saddam's killing regime so why should we expect one of Baker's infamous International Conferences? While all this was going on, the State Department and the U.N. continually conducts permanent sessions excoriating Israel.

Now, as Bush is politically crushed by a badly run war or, rather, the peace after the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush desperately needs the illusion of a Middle East victory as his heritage. Enter the secret half of the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group Report. Repeat the trap of Madrid as conducted by Baker and blame Israel for Muslim/Islamic Terror in this regional kangaroo court proceedings called the "International Conference".

As Iran and Syria push effective Terror against the U.S., American soldiers, allies, construction crews and Iraqi civilians are being murdered and blown up by the hundreds daily. Bush, with Baker in the "Shadows" are orchestrating a hanging jury against Israel with the word "Peace" lavishly smeared all over the staged event.

Yes indeed, said the spider to the fly, "Come into My Parlor". "We'll discuss what you will surrender to the Arab Muslim Palestinians to achieve peace." Giving up your life really isn't too much to ask IF it benefits the Muslim Arabs, the U.S. State Department, the Bush legacy and, of course, the promised cessation of Global Terror so the oil magnates can post even higher profits.

One problem is that according to Koranic Law, Muslims can sign any such agreements with "infidels" but, such agreements become null and void on the day they are signed. Whenever the Muslims are stronger, they can (and must) attack their "peace" partners.

So, the Bush, Rice, Baker's Regional Conference will produce all sorts of documents like the Oslo Accords, knowing that they will be discarded even before the photo-ops of the signing.

One is reminded of Dr. Mengele's experiments on Jews in the Nazi death camps -- only now the experimenters will be under the guidance of the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group's plans, spoken through the mouths of Bush and Rice.

Regrettably, pseudo-Jews like Olmert, Peres, Barak are the "agents provocateurs" to insure the plans of eviscerating Israel will be consummated. Olmert, before being made Prime Minister, (and often since) pledged to divest Israel of Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights and those parts of Jerusalem formerly occupied and desecrated by Jordan. That's what Olmert's "Divestment" policy means. But, each abandonment of the Jews' G-d given Land, will bring the Katyusha Missiles closer to Israel's main population centers and Ben Gurion International airport.

Barak is already known for his cowardly retreat from Lebanon while he was Prime Minister and is very well known for his offer to donate to Arafat 97% of everything which Olmert later pledged to abandon.

Finally, just prior to Shimon Peres being sworn in as Israel's new President, Peres made the statement: "We must rid ourselves of the territories". This makes him and the others the perfect conspirators with Bush, Rice, Baker, the U.S. State Department, the Arab League, the so-called quartet in the coming International or Regional "Peace" Conference to once again settle "The Final Solution to the world's Jewish Question".

The Jewish nation and her people are at the cliff's edge. If they remain silent then they will be hurled into the abyss as a sacrifice to the nations and the Ishmaelites. Let us see if the Israeli and World Jews awaken in time or if G-d will step in with sun-baked earth, huge floods, earthquakes, volcanoes erupting, tsunamis, forest fires which all prevent life-sustaining crops from growing, etc.

Let us see if sacrificing G-d's people will keep the Muslim Jihadists (holy warriors for Islam) from blowing up more cities in America and Europe with "dirty bombs" causing radio-active debris to make them uninhabitable. Will this then be the reward that Bush, Baker and the gathering nations expect from sacrificing Israel at the coming hanging in their International Conference to decide the fate of the Jewish Nation?


1. "Bush's Middle East peace conference plan peters out after telephone conversation with Saudi King Abdullah" DEBKAfile July 18, 2007

2. "Missile Defense & Stand-Down of Nuclear Deterrence" by Emanuel A. Winston GAMLA April 2005

3. "Évian Conference" from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: full list of all delegates & 200 journalists.

4. "The Bermuda Conference, April 19-29, 1943" Public Broadcasting

5. "Wannsee Conference" from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: full description, participants & history of Nazi planning.

6.. "Vichy France" Encyclopedia Britannica

7. "UNHOLY TRINITY: The Vatican, The Nazis & Soviet Intelligence" by John Loftus & Mark Aarons St. Martin's Press 1991

8. "Rape, for Political Revenge" Jerusalem Post July 23, 1982

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

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, July 19, 2007.

The fact that PR/Propaganda attacks on Israel never cease, keep on recurring, with the same subjects being regurgitated, the same message being repeated....even as Israel supports Abbas and joins Bush et al in a new round of peace talks....tells us something very important about the motivation for these attacks.

I have noted in previous emails how the divestment movement migrated from universities to churches to political parties to professional unions, and now back to universities....and even after the motion is defeated, the supporters regroup and re-raise the issue months or years later even knowning that the motion will be defeated again.

Same with the boycott movement in the UK...it is put on the agenda by the elite leadership of the union, gets voted down by the rank-and-file with some condemnation sometimes by lower level leadership, but then gets resurrected a year or so later despite the negative press that it generated for the union......OR....it gets transplanted to another union or professional organization....and the cycle starts all over again.

Now we see, in a local USA newspaper, a sudden re-appearance of the USS Liberty incident, with all the same old canards and lies and mis-information that have been rebutted a dozen times since the US Navy released its findings that the attack was an accident. It does not matter how many times the lies are exposed, how many times the arguments are proven false. It does not even matter how high level is the court or panel or advisory group which re-affirms, for the umpteenth time, the original findings that the attack was an accident.

The purpose of all of these anti-Israel PR/propaganda attacks is to keep anti-Israel messages very clear and empasized in the minds of American media users. Keep repeating the same lie.....and eventually people will believe it. Each of these frameworks for a propaganda attack on Israel is a dais, a forum, a podium for more and more anti-Israel diatribe. If enough people hear the same message often enough, they'll just sort of assume that at least some of it is right.

So it does not matter that these attacks come very much 'behind the curve' of the peace process. They come even as Abbas and Olmert and Bush are again engaged in an endeavour the end of which should be peace. Accusing Israel of being an aggressor even as it is making peace is quite irrational. But that does not matter. What matters is that there is yet another opportunity, yet another podium, for bashing Israel.

So what do we learn from this? What do these endless relentless attacks tell us?

In my opinion we learn that for the forces that are sponsoring these propaganda attacks, and for the agents who implement the attacks here and in the UK, the goal is not:

to prod Israel in to making peace (Israel is already doing that),

nor is it a Palestinian state (they could have had their state 12 times over in the past 70 years),

nor is it justice for the Palestinians (justice could far better be achieved at the peace table rather than in car bombs and suicide bombings and qassam attacks),

nor even an end to the conflict (if it were, it would make sense to hold the anti-Israel pr in abbeyance and see what develops with the new round of peace talks).

The goal is the destruction of Israel.

If the goebbelian tactic of serial lies, repeated ad infinitum, is to work, then the lies must be repeated ad infinitum...with the intention that the audience will eventually come to the conclusion that Israel really must be a state that has no right to exist, has no moral or legal or historical foundation, and should indeed be dismantled.

If this strategy of deceit works, nations in the west will agree that the world is better off without Israel. The US government will agree that such an evil country as Israel is not a fit partner for an alliance with the USA, nor an appropriate recipient of US aid.

So, in that case, the Arabs will be doing the world a favor when they destroy Israel.

It is in order to create that mind-set in the hearts and minds of everyone in the West, the Arab sources sponsor articles that regurgitate lies that were debunked almost 40 years ago.

It is very helpful that we have Mr. Crystol's explanation to remind us of how we know that the Arab propagandists' assertions about the USS Liberty are indeed lies.

The article was written by A. Jay Cristol, who lives in Florida. He has been a Navy pilot, Navy lawyer (Judge Advocate General's Corps) and a lecturer in the law of naval warfare. It was published July 15, 2007 in the Arizona Republic
(www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/viewpoints/articles/0715cristol0715.html) and was entitled "Myths debunked on Israel's 1967 attack on USS Liberty."

David ML

PS. note that Mr. Crystol locates the source of the funds for the American institutions that serve as the propagators of the Arab anti-Israel propaganda.... Saudi Arabia... our putative ally in the war against terror.

Unfortunately, without any footnote as to the provenance of this information, I cannot validate it.

The June 3 Viewpoints article "Questions remain over 1967 attack on U.S. intelligence ship Liberty" is replete with false statements, inaccuracies and half-truths.

On June 8, 1967, the fourth day of the Six-Day War, the USS Liberty sailed into the middle of a hot war, having failed to receive at least five naval messages directing it to stand clear of the combat zone. The Liberty was misidentified as hostile and attacked, resulting in tragic loss of life and injury.

June 8, 1967, was not a "calm clear day off the Sinai Peninsula." A war was raging within eyesight. The Liberty deck logs report observing explosions and pillars of smoke along the coast. Many warplanes crisscrossed overhead going to and from the battle. The day before, June 7, an Egyptian warship had shelled the beach from the approximate position where Liberty was sailing. advertisement

Was the attack deliberate? Secretary of State Dean Rusk never said so. Clark Clifford, chairman of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, stated in his July 18, 1967, report: "Based upon a thorough review of all information on the incident which has become available thus far, I wish to submit the following conclusions: The information thus far available does not reflect that the Israeli high command made a premeditated attack on a ship known to be American."

The CIA stated in its intelligence memorandum dated June 13, 1967: "None of the communications of the attacking aircraft and torpedo boats is available, but the intercepted conversations between the helicopter pilots and the control tower at Hatzor leave little doubt that the Israelis failed to identify the Liberty as a U.S. ship before or during the attack."

The CIA restated its official position in 1978: "It remains our best judgment that the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty was not made in malice toward the United States and was a mistake."

The National Security Agency in its 1981 report stated that "while these reports revealed some confusion on the part of the pilots concerning the nationality of the ship, they tended to rule out any thesis that the Israeli Navy and Air Force deliberately attacked a ship they knew to be American."

Although Adm. Thomas Moorer subscribed to the deliberate-attack story in his 80s, decades after the event, on March 25, 1968, while he was serving as chief of naval operations, his office endorsed the findings of the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry with the affirmative comment: "Retain the report for historical purposes."

In his Viewpoints opinion, Mark Genrich claims that, "The only American government investigation of any kind was the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry in 1967, which examined only the performance of the crew and the adequacy of the communications, avoiding entirely the question of whether the attack was deliberate."

False! The U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry, consisting of more than 700 pages and including 154 pages of the sworn testimony of the most-involved officers and crew members, made 55 findings of fact. The two most relevant are:

  • Available evidence combines to indicate that attack on Libertywas, in fact, a case of mistaken identity.

  • There are no available indications that the attack was intended against a U.S. ship.

Adm. Isaac C. Kidd, president of the Court of Inquiry, presented its record to Adm. John McCain, commander of U.S. Naval Forces, Europe (and coincidentally the father of Arizona Sen. John McCain) on June 17, 1967. Adm. McCain added the following endorsement to the Court of Inquiry: "The foregoing comments by the convening authority lead to an overall conclusion that the attack was in fact a mistake."

Genrich says, "But, there has never been a congressional investigation."

False! There have been several. See Report of Armed Services Investigating Subcommittee, May 10, 1971, or hearings before the Committee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate on June 12, July 14 and July 26, 1967, to name just two of several.

Genrich claims as fact "that a flight of rescue aircraft was launched from the Saratoga within minutes of the start of the attack on the U.S. ship. ... For reasons yet to be explained, those aircraft were recalled. ... The attack on the USS Liberty continued for at least another 90 minutes while personnel on the USS Saratoga and elsewhere listened to and ignored our radio calls for assistance."

Totally false. The Liberty was off Sinai and the 6th Fleet, including the aircraft carriers Saratoga and America, was off the island of Crete about 500 miles away. The attack did not last 90 minutes. The Liberty's own log and messages record that it began about 2:00 p.m. and was over about 2:35 p.m. or 2:40 p.m. The Saratoga's logs reflect that the first distress call from Liberty was received at 2:09 p.m. and authenticated and understood at 2:32 p.m. The 6th Fleet's commander, Adm. William Martin, immediately ordered aircraft to be launched to defend the Liberty. The first planes were not in the air until 4 p.m., more than an hour after the attack ended, with an estimated time of arrival over Liberty in 1½ hours, about 5:30 p.m.

When the Israelis discovered their mistake, they offered assistance to the Liberty (it's in the log and in Capt. William McGonagle's testimony) and advised the U.S. naval attache, then-Cmdr. Ernest Castle, who sent a flash message at 4:14 p.m. to the White House, the 6th Fleet and others informing of the report from Israel. Naval message U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry, Exhibit 48: DTG 081414Z June 1967, USDAO Tel Aviv 0825.

When Adm. William Martin at 6th Fleet received this message, he recalled the flight of aircraft as documented by naval message DTG 081502Z June 1967, COMSIXTH FLEET to USCINCCEUR, sent at 5:02 p.m.

U.S. Naval Attache Castle was the first Navy officer to reach the ship. He was quoted on Thames TV as saying, "Let us presume it was a premeditated plan for whatever reason, to get rid of a United States ship. Then the nation that had just, in 22 minutes, destroyed an entire Egyptian air force, had captured all of the Egyptian armor in the Sinai. If they had decided they had to sink a United States ship, I believe they would have done so."

What about the charges of war crimes and violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice? They were first by Lloyd A. Painter, more than 10 years after the attack. Painter testified under oath at the Navy Court of Inquiry on June 13, 1967. In his testimony, Painter did not mention war crimes, nor did any other Liberty officer or crew member, including the commanding officer, McGonagle, when they testified under oath five or six days after the event. (See, record of U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry: 154 pages of sworn testimony at Pages 55 to 59.)

The claims that these charges were ignored by the Army and Navy are false. Both the Army and the Navy have responded many times. (See, the official letters at www.theliberty incident.com under Documents: Official Correspondence Responding to Requests for Additional Investigations.)

Most recently on May 15, 2006, the Army rejected the charges, "It is clear from records maintained by the Department of the Navy that a prompt investigation was conducted by the Navy ... therefore, further investigation by the U.S. military is unwarranted."

Similarly, a few months before, on Feb. 24, 2006, the Navy's judge advocate general rejected the charges. "Further investigation with respect to the report on war crimes is not warranted."

Genrich ironically points out in his article that friendly fire happens, as in the tragic death of Arizona's Pat Tillman. The history of warfare is replete with this type of tragedy. In the Gulf War, U.S. forces mistakenly killed Canadian soldiers. On April 14, 1995, the Air Force shot down two of its own Blackhawk helicopters, mistakenly killing 19. In Afghanistan, U.S. forces mistakenly killed British soldiers. On the opening day of the Iraq war, the U.S. shot down two of its own and one British aircraft.

The United States accepted multiple abject apologies from Israel, as well as millions of dollars for humanitarian compensation and damages, and closed the matter by exchanges of diplomatic notes on Dec. 18, 1980.

What or who is behind the continuing false charges? A small but well-funded and very vocal group of people and organizations principally supported by Saudi Arabian money such as American Educational Trust (AET) operated in Washington, D.C., by former U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia Andrew Kilgore and a circle of others whose agenda is to attack the current excellent symbiotic relationship between the United States and Israel.

It all started with former Illinois Congressman Paul Findley (who was defeated for re-election after he announced his support for the terrorist organization, the PLO) and former California Congressman Paul "Pete" McCloskey, also defeated for re-election. McCloskey speaks regularly at meetings of Holocaust denial organizations in California and Washington.

Findley and McCloskey were the moving force in founding the Liberty Veterans Association. Findley served as its adviser, and McCloskey incorporated the association and served as its attorney. They continue to manipulate and distress Liberty survivors and their families by prodding this old wound and preventing its healing, all for their own political agenda. And what is that agenda? Findley and McCloskey are also the founders of the Council for the National Interest (CNI), whose publicly announced purpose is to be the anti-Israel lobby.

After 40 years, it is time to close the book. Let those who lost their lives rest in peace and be honored in treasured memory.

David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lee Caplan, July 19, 2007.

"We are in the midst of a social and political turmoil, evil winds surround us and there are failings, social gaps are widening, poverty is spreading throughout certain groups and there is a lack of trust in all the institutions that the public needs." -- Supreme Court President Dorit Beinish, 5/6/2007.

The following two articles show so clearly what a farce the Israeli justice system is. In reading these articles, one can only respond to the statement made by Supreme Court President Beinish that there is a lack of trust in all the institutions that the public needs by saying WHAT DO YOU EXPECT?

by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz

(IsraelNN.com) In a decision handed down on Thursday, the High Court of Justice rejected a petition against the planned release of 256 convicted and imprisoned terrorists. The petition was filed by a terror victims' association, Almagor, which sought an interim injunction against the mass release until the government provided more details on the prisoners' backgrounds.

The majority opinion, drafted by Deputy Chief Justice Eliezer Rivlin, focused on the issue of the court's lack of jurisdiction in the case: "We found no cause to intervene in the decision of the [State]. In this instance, as in similar previous cases in which the government decided to release prisoners prior to completion of their sentences, the matter is a policy decision that the government is empowered to make, acting within the sphere of its responsibility, and basing its decision on a totality of the security and policy considerations which that entails."

Justice Rivlin wrote that the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed in several precedents that the decision to release Arab terrorists from jail in the context of international diplomacy "is an essential act of state and one in which the court will not intervene. It is a matter for the consideration of the competent authorities...."

Justice Elyakim Rubinstein disagreed with the majority and felt that a temporary injunction against the release of the Palestinian Authority terrorists should be granted. In his dissenting opinion, Justice Rubinstein wrote, "In my view, with all due respect to the efforts made by the state's attorneys in a short time-frame, we have not received the necessary full explanations in this sensitive matter...."

Justice Rubinstein went on to describe the serious crimes for which the terrorists on the release list were jailed, calling them "among the most serious and severe offenses." He noted that, in a similar case from over two years ago, terrorists were released from jail in the hope that the PA would thus be encouraged to combat terrorism; however, the Justice asked, "Has the Palestinian Authority government acted against terrorism during these two and a half years in such a way that there may have been some purpose in that previous prisoner release?"

Justice Rubinstein wrote that the court was simply not given sufficient information to judge whether all considerations were, in fact, weighed by the relevant authorities in the decision to release the terrorists in question. "In order to make a sound judgment, we should have been convinced that the respondents' decision was critical and arrived at reasonably...."

According to a report released by Almagor in March, two thirds of freed terrorists returned to terrorism after their release. Attacks by such freed terrorists over a seven-year period took the lives of 179 Israelis, according a statement released by the organization on Wednesday. The head of the Justice Ministry's Amnesty Department, Emmy Palmor, said that the recidivism rate among Arab terrorist prisoners granted amnesty and released by Israel was about 17%.


JERUSALEM -- An Israeli court has overturned a lower court's decision to acquit a Jewish dissident on charges of insulting a government official who played a major role in the expulsion of 16,000 Jews from the Gaza Strip and northern West Bank in 2005.

On July 19, the Jerusalem District Court ordered the re-trial of Jewish dissident Nadia Matar, who had been acquitted of insulting a public official. Matar, head of Women in Green, was the first Jewish nationalist prosecuted under a 1936 law of the British Mandate.

"It was once again proven that the judicial system in Israel pushes for the enemy of the Jewish people," Matar, a mother of six, said. "That means it has no problem to persecute anyone who shows loyalty to the Land of Israel."

The decision came one day after the Knesset Constitution and Law Committee approved a bill to cancel the indictments of non-violent demonstrators against the expulsion. The legislation must be voted by the full parliament.

In 2004, Matar wrote a scathing letter to Disengagement Authority director Jonathan Bassi, responsible for the eviction and resettlement of Jewish residents of the Gaza Strip and the northern West Bank to trailer parks in Israel. Matar said Bassi's role was similar to that of the Judenraat, the Nazi-appointed Jewish administration that helped liquidate the ghettos in Eastern Europe during World War II.

Matar contended that her letter was a legitimate act of protest. The defense cited numerous examples whereby authorities refused to prosecute left-wing activists who condemned officials and military commanders. Defense attorney Yoram Sheftel pointed to the daughter of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert who in a demonstration in 2006 called then-Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz a "murderer."

"I have shown that the decision to prosecute individuals from one side of the political spectrum contrasts to the decision to prosecute individuals on the other side of the politicial spectrum," Sheftel said. "The prosecutor's office cannot decide what is legitimate for public debate and what is not."

On Sept. 10, 2006, Jerusalem Magistrates Court Judge David Mintz, himself branded a war criminal by a left-wing critic, dismissed the indictment against Matar. Two months later, the state appealed Matar's acquittal in Jerusalem's District Court.

In its ruling, the appeal court said Matar failed to prove that authorities had targeted her while ignoring violations by left-wing activists. The court ordered the case returned to the Jerusalem Magistrate's Court for another trial.

"If they think they can scare us, just the opposite," Matar said. "We will increase our activities for guarding the Land of Israel."

Lee Caplan can be contacted by email at leescaplan@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Olivier Guitta, July 19, 2007.

ISLAMISM IN INDIA -- from the 12th issue of The Croissant

I- Background:

1- Attacks:
-- On May 18, a terror attack inside a 17th century mosque killed 11 and injured over 30 in Hyderabad (South Center of India);
-- This, after the September attack in Malageon, which killed 31, provoked riots where hundreds of [Muslim] youngsters (among the 10,000 worshippers coming for the Friday prayers) attacked the police, ensuing in 2 additional deaths
-- This terror attack and the ensuing riots brought back fears, recurrent in India and in particular in Hyderabad, of fighting between the Hindu majority and the Muslim minority

2- A new problem:
-- 2nd in the world with 140 million people (out of 1 billion Indians), the Muslim community is allegedly not immune anymore to Al Qaeda's ideology
-- While no Indian Muslim has been so far implicated in an Islamist operation, the arrest of young local Muslims for their involvement in recent bloody terror attacks in India is raising concern of a potential change of behavior
-- Manmhan Singh, the Prime Minister and Sonia Gandhi, the president of the Congress Party recently warned about that danger: Singh insisted on giving Muslims a larger role in society and in particular in the security apparatus: in fact, the Raw (Research Analysis Wing, India's intelligence service) does not employ a single Muslim and the Intelligence Bureau (the equivalent to the FBI) just a few:
beyond the operational problems that this entails, this phenomenon shows the mistrust towards a community, which picked India in 1947 at the time of the partition

II- Islamism in India:

1- Overview:

a) Dr Subhas Kapila, consultant of the South Asia Analysis Group:
"The pan Islamism did not reach the point where Indian extremists would have a link with Al Qaeda. But India is today besieged. If the government fails to look at some of the worries of the Muslim community, then I think that Islamist extremism will increase and move towards terrorism. The government should not treat all Muslims like terrorists, otherwise it will be running into trouble"

b) According to experts:
-- for the time being, the Islamist extremist cells are still isolated from each other and one cannot really talk about a network
-- but the increase in the number of incidents (only in Delhi, 75 incidents implicating Islamist groups were numbered between 2004 and 2006, according to Ajai Sahni, executive director of the institute for conflict management), plus the more and more frequent seizure of weapons and explosives prove an increasing activity

c) Limited to a tiny minority of Muslims, the militant pan Islamism has entered India and as M.K. Subramian, member of the National Security Council, stated right after the Mumbai terror attacks of July 2006 (200 dead): "One cannot exclude the presence of local Al Qaeda sympathizers."

IRAN'S NEW ROLE IN AL QAEDA -- from the 12th issue of The Croissant

I- According to well-informed Arab sources some Saudi militants from Fatah Al Islam [FAI] [a Palestinian terrorist group supported by Syria and manipulated by Al Qaeda] entered Lebanon via Iran and others via Syria:

1- According to a security expert who wanted to remain anonymous, this new information is worrying experts who fear an Iranian hand in Al Qaeda

2- Who are these Saudis?

a) Abdallah Al Bichi:
-- He is one of Al Qaeda's theorists
-- He arrived in Lebanon at the Beirut international airport, coming directly from Tehran to help FAI fight the Lebanese army

b) Abdul Rahman Al-Yehya:
-- He is sought after by the Saudi security services
-- He got back to Iran by land via Syria and Iraq

c) Fahd Abdul Aziz Al Mogharness, aka Abu Jaafar Al Tayyarf:
-- He was arrested by Lebanese authorities a few days ago in the Bekaa along with 4 other members of the cell he headed (2 Syrians and 2 Lebanese who came to Lebanon via Syria after having gone to Iran and Iraq)
-- They seized at his residence booby-trapped cars

3- Their goal:
-- stir up conflicts
-- create anarchy
-- exploit terrorist groups in order to reach regional political objectives

II- The sources added that Iran and its allies remote controlled some elements from terrorist groups on Iraqi and Lebanese soil:

1- These elements were sent to Lebanon about a year ago:
-- at that time, Lebanese security services started watching these terrorist cells (whose intensions were unclear) infiltrate the country
-- but they could not arrest them then because: they had no legal ground and furthermore some of the terrorists were Lebanese

2- Some states, "friends of Lebanon", helped track these elements:
-- Lebanese authorities were informed about this more than 8 months ago
-- they were also informed about the terrorists' positions inside some Palestinian camps in Lebanon


New forms of communication for Al Qaeda
Algeria: ambition to become a regional power
Northern Niger in a state of war
Tough decision for some Taliban fighters
Hezbollah is rearming in South Lebanon
GICM#3 arrested
Kabylia vs. Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb
France sends an emissary to Syria
UNIFIL soldiers on high alert
The French-Iranian-Syrian axis in Lebanon
Olivier Guitta is a foreign affairs and counterterrorism consultant based in Washington, D.C. He speaks four languages, including Arabic; he has long experience in international banking and portfolio management; he has a solid reputation for significant articles in serious journals and newspapers; and he is a contributing editor for the prestigious counterterrorism blog: http://www.counterterrorism.org. He has recently launched The Croissant (http://www.thecroissant.com/), a foreign affairs and counterterrorism newsletter.

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 19, 2007.

An unnamed "senior IDF officer" has given a briefing with regard to the situation in Gaza that is being broadly cited. I am assuming that he remains unnamed because he is criticizing the government; what he has to say must be attended to with the greatest seriousness:

Hamas has developed enormous military sophistication in Gaza since the "disengagement," he says, and Israel has a limited window of opportunity for confronting that threat. That window of opportunity exists both because the world has not yet become accustomed to the Hamas entity in Gaza, and because Hamas has not yet completed its military buildup and thus does not find that it serves its interests to attack us yet. But its ultimate goals are clear.

"They have an organized military. They have the manpower, they have the training, they have the motivation."

Some 13,000 Hamas recruits now constitute a full-fledged army, consisting of four brigades, made up of a number of battalions and platoons. In the past two years hundreds of Palestinians have received training in Iran. Hamas, in the past two months, has smuggled over twenty tons of explosives from the Sinai into the Gaza Strip. They have obtained anti-tank missiles, as well as an unknown number of anti-aircraft missiles. Hamas also reportedly is in possession of old models of Katyusha rockets, and they are working to improve the range of their Kassam rockets.

The IDF, says this officer, has the ability to confront this threat: The IDF Southern Command has operational military plans for Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and recently conducted several weeks of training.

"I don't see the Egyptians, the Americans, the Europeans or Abbas, being able to restrain Hamas. Israel is the only one capable of making the change...

"The IDF has gone through the necessary preparations for a widespread operation in Gaza."



And speaking of the government...

The report on the Home Front just released by State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss was thoroughly predictable. Anyone who was here last summer during the war or followed events carefully already knew what happened with the Home Front in the north. For all practical purposes the people were abandoned by the governments -- national and municipal. Instead, volunteers, acting independently and in concert via NGO agencies, attended to the people. There was at one and the same time shame and disgust because of how officialdom acted and enormous pride in how the Israeli people acted. (This has become a theme of mine, has it not?)

Lindenstrauss is a man who minces no words and cuts officialdom no slack. In his 582-page report released yesterday, he wrote: "The facts show that the prime minister, Ehud Olmert, the former defense minister, Amir Peretz, the former chief of General Staff, Dan Halutz, and the head of the Home Front Command, Maj.-Gen. Yitzhak Gershon, each one according to his own role, gravely failed in the decision-making process and in their appraisals and actions in dealing with the home front during the war in Lebanon."

As to volunteers, he said: "The enlistment of the private sector and voluntary organizations to help out during the war substantially helped overcome the vacuum left by government authorities. We should not spare our praise for the outstanding expressions of volunteerism on the part of organizations that made contributions and volunteer organizations and individuals who 'cared.' Their contribution during the fighting was the epitome of the spirit of brotherhood, solidarity and shared fate. It was the epitome of the essence of the good and beautiful Israel at its finest."

He also had words of praise for the health system -- especially hospital and Magen David Adom staffers -- for working above and beyond the call of duty and even endangering their lives. And he said that the police performed well.


The are two aspects to be considered in all of this. One is the very immediate and pragmatic one of correcting weaknesses in the system, as now critiqued, because there is a very good likelihood that we will be facing a similar situation with war in the north again soon, as well as because the Home Front has been sorely remiss in Sderot (which was not specifically the subject of the report). The government is committing itself to addressing this and we shall see.

Then there is the political aspect, which also has potentially pragmatic implications. Is this damning report going to weaken Olmert's hold on the government? Olmert, fearing that it will, has lashed out at the report, saying that it has to be separated into the professional report, which must be addressed seriously, and the gratuitous personal attack on him -- especially in a strongly worded introduction -- that makes him very angry.

Lindenstrauss's response to Olmert was direct: "There is no compromise in criticism, no mediation, no use of pretty language and no obfuscation. Criticism must be sharp, definitive, piercing, transparent, direct and above all professional and based on facts that have been checked and rechecked. The criticism must be courageous and fair. That is how the State Comptroller's Office has always behaved and this is how we behaved this time as well,"

Knesset Speaker MK Dalia Itzik (Kadima) appealed to the prime minister to respond in a way that is not personal, in the interest of helping the people of Israel. "It is important to take the personal issue off the agenda."

State Control Committee Chairman MK Zevulun Orlev (NRP) said. "The phenomenon of delegitimizing the comptroller disturbs me. No 'spin' can undermine the findings of the report or keep anyone from coming to conclusions, even if they turn out to be personal."


What will follow this report is the final Winograd report on the conduct of the war, which will, similarly, be damning and is expected to have a greater impact. There are those predicting that Olmert won't last past the release of this report, but I have to see it to believe it. Originally it was supposed to be out in the summer, but has now been delayed until fall presumably because of technical factors. On the table right now is the issue of giving advance notice to those criticized in the report.


So the question remains: when will this nation get a government worthy of it -- a government that will act decisively on behalf of the people?


The PLO Central Council, meeting in Ramallah, is expected to pass a resolution today endorsing a plan PA President Abbas has put forth to hold early legislative elections. This is Abbas's way around Hamas control, as the PLO ostensibly represents Palestinians everywhere; he says once there is PLO approval, he will have the authority to move ahead. The PLO is still Fatah dominated.

Such elections likely would not be held in Gaza, and Hamas says under no circumstances would it recognize them. Hamas, for its part, intends to convene the legislature, which it dominates, on Sunday and call for a vote of non-confidence in the "illegitimate" government Abbas has put in place.


I note here that Abbas, even as he speaks of elections, says he will not speak with Hamas until it ends its violent coup. He doesn't say "never." And I've already reported on steps Mashaal indicated he was willing to take to turn Gaza back to the PA.

A PA news agency is reporting that Hamas and Fatah prisoners are drafting a document that should solve the crisis between the two factions. It is scheduled for release in a few days, and includes such items as "a comprehensive and truce between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank," "confirmation of the geographical unity of the Palestinian territories of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip" and "rejection of the Palestinian internal conflict and the use of weapons as a means to solve differences."

Please remember that the Mecca accord that forged the (ultimately very unstable) unity government had its genesis in a letter from Palestinian prisoners held by Israel. (The final accord was actually more radical than the letter, as Abbas acceded to Hamas demands.)

Additionally, according to a new poll -- done by Fafo, a Norwegian research institute -- Palestinians see national reconciliation as more important than peace talks with Israel. Eighty-five per cent of those polled would like to see negotiations between Fatah and Hamas.


My take (still without a crystal ball) is that there will be further negotiations and perhaps even accords between Fatah and Hamas, which will put the lie to Abbas's claims to moderation. However, I don't believe there will ever be a stable Palestinian "nationalist" movement, as there are competing ideologies and loyalties at work here, with power struggles that transcend any goals of unity.


After agreeing to grant "pardons" to 180 Al Aksa members in Judea and Samaria, Israel was prepared to entertain a request by the PA that another 260 also receive "pardons." Yes, you read this correctly. But that has now been put on hold because some of the Al Aksa people on the original list are refusing to sign the document renouncing terrorism and to surrender their weapons.

I guess you might say these people have a sort of perverse integrity -- they insist on being what they are and not pretending to be otherwise. But it creates complications for the PA, and for an ever-eager- to-make-concessions Israeli government. Now they can't act as if these guys are reformed peaceniks.

A Palestinian source (also unnamed) speaking to YNet claims that the PA and Israel are in negotiations for transferring various areas in Judea and Samaria to Palestinian security control, operating in three stages, starting with Jericho and Kalkilya, and excluding problematic Jenin and Nablus entirely.

I would say this isn't going to happen because the Palestinians aren't going to come through in a way that makes such nauseating concessions possible even for the Olmert government. But I don't doubt for a moment that our government may have been in preliminary dialogue with the PA with regard to this.


The Almagor Terror Victims Association filed a petition with the High Court today to block the release of the 250 prisoners scheduled for tomorrow. According to the association, 177 people have died in terrorist attacks in the last seven years as a result of past prisoner releases. Whatever Olmert's professed diplomatic concerns, they say, such considerations should not be more important than Israel's security needs. I could not agree more. Unfortunately, I doubt that the court will agree.

The association attorney noted that some of those being released had only served 40% of their terms, which contravenes a cabinet decision of 2005 that only prisoners who have served 2/3 of their terms could be released. Other procedural problems were noted as well. At the very least, the association requested that the release be held up so that the list might be examined with greater thoroughness.


According to, Guy Bechor, who is with the Interdisciplinary Center at Herzliya, writing in YNet ("Back to Oslo Illusion"), Israel has had the experience that "80 percent of released Palestinians, all of whom had made a commitment not to be involved in terror, immediately resumed their terror acts against Israel."

There are solid reasons for this, says Bechor: "For released prisoners, terror is livelihood, a way of life, their honor and self determination. Moreover, those released within the framework of a prisoner deal must prove that they have not changed; they must reaffirm their status, and the only way to do so is by means of perpetrating terror acts against Israel."

In his piece Bechor also addresses the issue of Israel's halting of night operations to undermine terrorist infrastructure in Judea and Samaria. This, he says, has been "one of the IDF's key successes in the war against terror." Terrorists have been so busy running for cover they haven't had time to successfully plan attacks. Now this will change.

Abbas was seeking a halt to Israel's operation because it wasn't only Hamas that was impeded, it was also Fatah's Al Aksa Brigades. Abbas's argument to Israel is that he needs those Brigades as part of his security forces to act against Hamas in Judea and Samaria, and, it seems, Israel bought this. The problem is that members of the Brigades are also very much terrorists who act against Israel.

"The West Bank will once again become an immune paradise; anti-Israel terror will be restored without interference and will pose a serious threat to Israeli society, which has experienced relative stability and calm in recent years."

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Ted Belman, July 19, 2007.

A month ago, the WSJ published an Op-Ed by Michael Oren, "Fatah Isn' t the Answer -- Israel is," in which he argued for Israel keeping the West Bank and offering autonomy only for the Arabs. He should have left it at that.

Today, the WSJ published another Op-Ed by him "The Bush Doctrine Lives" and sub-titled, "The president isn't selling out Israel or relaxing his call for Palestinian democracy." I beg to differ.

To be sure, Oren points out all the demands Bush made on the Palestinians and on the Arab countries but failed to point out the same demands were made in his vision speech and in the Roadmap. They didn't satisfy them since and they won't hereafter.

At least before they were a condition precedent to moving to the second phase. Now, he proposes moving to the final stage notwithstanding that the Arabs have done nothing regarding the demands made on them.

Secondly, Oren is making the central issue the acceptance of Israel and the ending of terror and incitement. I object.

Firstly, Bush bypasses the requirement for "secure borders" as set out in Resolution 242. He now proposes to substitute an American guarantee of Israel's security for "secure borders".

Secondly, I don't like the deal. It's a lousy deal. Israel has to retreat from lands given it by the Palestine Mandate and never cancelled. The West Bank was given to Jews, not the Arabs. Israel had to defend itself from aggression in '67 and recovered the land that was illegally taken from them by the Partition Plan. Its ours and we want it. But Bush is forcing us to give it away. Oren seems to think that's okay, because Bush is still asking for the Arabs to play nice.

Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, July 19, 2007.

Snake Oil Sam offers opinion on Talk Radio programs, topical issues of interest in the news as well as whatever else happens to be on his mind at any given moment. He is a Twelfth Generation American, descendant of Stephan Hopkins, signatory of the Mayflower Compact. Contact him at snakeoilsam@gmail.com

Below he writes about Paul Williams lawsuit

Nashville's Cumberland House Publishing is facing a lawsuit from an author described in the legal filing as a "respected factual reporter of the Islamofascist terrorist threat to the United States."

Pennsylvania writer Paul L. Williams has sued after the local publisher backed away from his claims, made in a book it had brought out last year, that terrorists bent on carrying out an "American Hiroshima" have stolen 180 pounds of nuclear material from a Canadian university.

McMaster University, in Hamilton, Ontario, has sued Williams for libel, seeking the equivalent of $1.9 million in damages. The dispute arose last year after the publication of Williams' book The Dunces of Doomsday: 10 Blunders That Gave Rise to Radical Islam, Terrorist Regimes, and the Threat of an American Hiroshima.

The book asserts that McMaster, which has a number of faculty members of Egyptian origin, was so lax in its security procedures that it let members of Al Qaeda enroll under fictitious names and carry off radioactive material from a university facility that housed a five-megawatt nuclear research reactor. A lawyer for the school said the claims are "on a par with UFO reports and JFK conspiracy theories," and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has termed them "false."

Since there are many aspects to the legal issues of this story it is difficult to separate that which is important from that which is unimportant. Perhaps it is all important at some level. Clearly there are many issues to be sorted out and sorted out they will be by the courts. After all that is what courts are designed to do isn't it?

In an article sent to me by Michael Travis, a man for whom I have come to rely on to send me compiled lists of information which usually has the ability to scarNashville's Cumberland House Publishing is facing a lawsuit from an author described in the legal filing as a "respected factual reporter of the Islamofascist terrorist threat to the United States." Pennsylvania writer Paul L. Williams has sued after the local publisher backed away from his claims, made in a book it had brought out last year, that terrorists bent on carrying out an "American Hiroshima" have stolen 180 pounds of nuclear material from a Canadian university. McMaster University, in Hamilton, Ontario, has sued Williams for libel, seeking the equivalent of $1.9 million in damages. The dispute arose last year after the publication of Williams' book The Dunces of Doomsday: 10 Blunders That Gave Rise to Radical Islam, Terrorist Regimes, and the Threat of an American Hiroshima. The book asserts that McMaster, which has a number of faculty members of Egyptian origin, was so lax in its security procedures that it let members of Al Qaeda enroll under fictitious names and carry off radioactive material from a university facility that housed a five-megawatt nuclear research reactor. A lawyer for the school said the claims are "on a par with UFO reports and JFK conspiracy theories," and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has termed them "false." e me half to death or at least question the wisdom of our leaders, I find the subject matter upon which to comment today.

Indeed Michael Travis fills my mailbox with so much information I am usually in overload simply trying to keep up with all of it. Travis is a one man army for the fight against Islamic extremism. Indeed if all Jews were as dedicated to advancing this fight as is Travis, then everyone in America might just be a little bit safer.

But let me get on with the issue at hand. Paul Williams has in his published writing made some very serious allegations related to Canada's McMaster University. So when publication laws which differ from country to country occur, apparently issues arise. It is important for any publisher wanting to publish a book in any country be familiar with the laws of that country.

The question then is who here is at fault? Williams wrote the book for publication in the United States of America. Obviously his publisher had taken the standard precautions which any reasonable publisher would take before putting anything into print.

The publisher, in addition to publishing books which they believe will make money for them, have in their own best interest the obligation to confirm that there is no issue which might lead to a lawsuit.

Or perhaps I should say more appropriately not any issue which cannot be reasonably defended in a court of law. In truth anyone can take anyone else to court just about any day of the week.

But when a publisher puts out a book they are responsible to stand behind the thing which they published. It is they who are the publisher and have placed upon that published work, their brand.

They have the final edit authority and they stand to become a party to any legal action. They also, in my opinion, have an obligation to stand behind their client, in this instance Williams. That is in my humble estimation an important aspect of any imprint.

But the issue is much more than this lawsuit. It appeals to the far ranging effect on the entire book publishing industry. By way of this lawsuit issued by Williams against his publisher this story has taken an extreme left turn along the way.

In time of war and worldwide fear of an obvious nuclear threat the rules of the game change. Or do they? This is an area which adds a new dimension to the publishing industry. It is a world where everyone becomes a player in some way or other.

Those who profit by publishing stories about the issues within the issues all share a degree of responsibility to write or publish in such a way that they are covered and protected by law. But the same laws which protect them can be countered with laws which protect the other team.

Can a writer sue the individuals who publish his or her book? The reasons sited by Williams in this lawsuit raise some interesting points. In reality when any individual or entity which causes another individual harm it is reasonable to conclude that such person can sue.

Merit is always an important factor in any lawsuit. Williams asserts that the actions of Cumberland House Publishing has by those actions as reported in a Nashville Post article left him in a position whereby he will be hard pressed to find another publisher in the future.

Mr. Williams should consider that when writing things which, whether truthful or not, cause significant controversy and then sue the publisher of that controversial book than he is going to have difficulty in finding a publisher of any merit anyway.

Since the publishing industry like all industry doesn't take kindly to being sued then the person bringing the lawsuit effectively becomes a pariah. His only hope then, short of self publication would be to find a publisher with the courage and conviction to stand behind him and his message.

Most publishing houses are not dedicated to a cause as is Williams and the bottom line as in all business shall always be the final deciding factor in corporate America. The question which interests me is how far reaching will the lawsuit be.

Can publication laws which apply to a book publisher be considered by those same courts to hold true to the internet? After all anything which can be stated in print can be stated just as well and with far more ease in the electronic media.

If something is written in the United States of America with those laws in mind is read in Zambia is the author to be judged by Zambian law. Must the author of a blog beat a drum as a warning that such information might get the reader in another land placed upon a pike in the town square?

Can a blogger get in hot water simply by reporting and commenting on what is being said by an investigator about a place like McMaster University? After all, those good folks do read everything written here about them. Could I be named as a co-defendant along with Williams?

Consider what they have said in regard to the comments of Williams. [A lawyer for the school said the claims are "on a par with UFO reports and JFK conspiracy theories," and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has termed them "false."]

I can't speak for Paul Williams however my mainline defense remains as was the case of the well known comedian Flip Wilson, "The Devil made me do it!"

This is a case which bears close watch. It seems that I will have to consult with my legal department. Oh boy, I just remembered, I don't have a legal department. Better learn to walk on thin ice I guess.

This is something which the blogging community had better be thinking about. I suppose that I can go back to building model airplanes.

Interestingly Williams remains committed to exposing what he claims are the facts of the McMaster issue. He remains true to his cause. And for that reason if for no other Paul Williams is a man to be admired by everyone who has any concern for safety in the fight against Islamic fascism.

Don't forget to support the Paul Williams legal defense fund.

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Stan Goodenough, July 19, 2007.

As many as 4,500 American Christians reportedly descended on Washington DC this week to demonstrate their support of Israel and lobby senators and congressmen on Capitol Hill to stand strongly with the Jewish state.

The event was sponsored by Christians United for Israel, an organization started two years ago by Texas pastor John Hagee, and which is described as having quickly become one of the most powerful lobbying groups for Israel in the United States.

Two messages sent to the White House and Capitol Hill by the gathering were 'Move the US Embassy to Jerusalem' and 'Neutralize the Iranian nuclear threat.'

"Night to Honor Israel. (photo: Carrie Devorah. editor@carrieon.com)"

Conservative presidential candidates were invited to speak at the banquet on Monday night and at a special "Night to honor Israel" event on Tuesday evening.

Former Speaker of the House and potential Republican candidate for the presidency Newt Gingrich used the occasion to fire a broadside at the Bush administration for its policy on the Palestinian Arabs.

He said President George W. Bush could easily "send a signal to Hamas tomorrow morning" by moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

The Jerusalem Post quoted Gingrich as warning that the US was "in greater danger than you can imagine.

"We lie to ourselves. We have suffered in the West an enormous defeat in Gaza. We have suffered a significant defeat in South Lebanon, and we lie about it. We don't have a peace process. We have a surrender process," he said.

Arizona Senator John McCain, a declared Republican candidate, also addressed the gathering, saying that radical Islam was perhaps "the greatest evil" Israel and America have ever faced.

He further warned that Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is arming Iran and Syria, "wants somehow to restore the old Russian empire."

And he said it was vitaly important that the US win its war in Iraq and not be driven out by Iran's proxy insurgency forces.

A premature American withdrawal would spark a regional conflagration, he said.

Stan Goodenough is editor of Jerusalem Newswire,
(www.jnewswire.com) a news service operating out of Jerusalem. Their writers are Bible-believing Christians, who support the Jewish state of Israel.

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 19, 2007.


As the Nazi retreat began, the Reich organized about six thousand people of all ages into terrorist bands, called Werwolf. They employed many of the war criminal methods now used by Islamist terrorists. They attacked Allied troops and German civilians for "collaboration."

Since they operated outside the rules of warfare, they usually were shot on sight. Most of the Allies, Americans less so, retaliated brutally against the civilian populations among whom the Werwolfs hid and moved. The Allies bombarded towns rather than risk casualties from the activists inside.

The terrorist movement was totally repressed. Forceful measures worked; the more extreme measures probably were not needed. People