| HOME | Featured Stories | July 2010 Blog-Eds List | Background Information | News On the Web |
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers
NOTE: Links to Videos are at the bottom
of this page.
|
ISRAEL THE BEAUTIFUL: SUNSET ON THE MEDITERRANEAN
Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, July 31, 2010. |
|
This is one of Yehoshua Halevi's Golden Light Images. HOW I GOT THE SHOT: 
Summer sunsets on the Israeli side of the Mediterranean Sea are fairly predictable. On most days, an afternoon cloud bank hovers offshore and moments before the sun disappears below the horizon, rays of golden light pour through holes in the clouds.I had seen this performance often enough to know it was coming, but I needed a little bit of luck to get one of the boats into alignment with the sun at the critical moment. I was able to control this somewhat by changing my position along the shore. I've been asked many times to provide outtakes from my photo shoots, to bolster the written explanation to my process. For reasons of simplicity, I've avoided doing it until this week. Here are three shots from the series. The shot under the main photo, taken first, is a general shot upon arrival at the beach, when I began to pre-visualize the final image I wanted to capture: a silhouette of the boat with strong light in the sky and on the water. The lower shot taken closer to sunset shows how I was studying the main elements of the photo and waiting for them to come together at the right moment. The selected image combines the best light of the series in both the sky and on the water in the foreground, as well as a full profile of the boat as it bumps along the choppy water. TECHNICAL DATA: Nikon D300, 70-200 mm zoom @ 105 mm, f16 at 1/400 sec.
Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at smile@goldenlightimages.com
and visit his website:
|
|
JEWS OF DISCOMFORT
Posted by Judea Pearl, July 31, 2010. |
|
What makes fog float in mid air, while raindrops fall straight down to earth? Physics teaches us that it is all a matter of "surface-to-weight ratio" — a simple parameter that determines whether soap bubbles rise or fall, and how many passengers a jet plane can carry. The larger the surface, so the theory goes, the easier it is for an object to lift its weight against gravitational pull. The analogy came to mind this past week, on Ti-sha B'Av, when I pondered the fate of the Jewish people and tried to assess our collective surface-to-weight ratio. It was a particularly cogent day to compare the amount of energy we spend at the boundaries of our existence, facing outward to defend our being, vis a vis the resources we waste facing inward, on self- congratulation, finger-pointing and other forms of added weight. Take the protest march on behalf of Gilad Shalit last month. Tens of thousands of Israelis took to the roads, tens of thousands stood by roadsides feeding the marchers, and millions watched the marchers on Israeli TV. I have not seen any of it on CNN, for it was aimed inwardly, toward the Israeli government. We would have surely seen some of it had this enormous energy been directed outwards, say as a protest against the UN or the Red Cross or foreign embassies for not doing their share in stopping the most blatant human rights violation of our generation. Or take Peter Beinart's much debated article "The Failure of the American Jewish Establishment" (New York Times Review of Books, June 10, 2010). Judging by the number of invitations I received to attend his lecture in Los Angeles, one would think that this creative intellectual has finally discovered a formula for peace or a new weapon to silence rockets without hurting civilians, or, at the very least, an Arab intellectual willing to accept Israel. None of the above. Reading his article again and again, all I hear is how uncomfortable he feels being a Jew at a time when Jews are accused of supporting a non-democratic entity called Israel, and how we can now extricate ourselves from this discomfort by speaking out, not against the distortions, but against a leadership that place their faith in the solid democratic character of Israeli society. I hear a desperate son coming home screaming: "Mother, the boys at school called you dirty names again. I hate you for causing me to face those bullies, and I hate you for making me feel so inadequate, unable to defend your honor except by joining them in amplifying your blemishes". Beinart was treated royally in Los Angeles because he is the prophetic voice for many Jews of Discomfort; they love him because he takes their discomfort and elevates it to a noble feeling of moral purity. They used to feel guilty for Israel's actions, still concsious of her problems, no more. Elevated in virtue, they now see every blemish on Israel's face as "the litmus test" for her impure personality — hers, not theirs. Observe another Jewish intellectual, the French philosopher Bernard Henry Levy, who is perhaps further to the left than Beinart. He too feels uncomfortable with some of Israel's actions, and he too proposed ways to correct them. Yet instead of pointing fingers at the Jewish establishment, he takes to the trenches and, using his column on the Huffington Post, he tells his leftist colleagues: Stop this madness, look at yourself in the mirror. Is your liberalism dead when it comes to Israel? (Jun 7, Huffingtonpost) It is all a matter of surface-to-weight ratio, says my physics book, Jews of spine confront their maligners, Jews of Discomfort blame their leaders. Deep inside, Levy knows perhaps that ours may well be the last generation in which Jews can earn respect in academic and intellectual circles; pro-coexistence scholars are already pariahs in academia, forced to hide their sentiments from colleagues. (See my column in this newspaper, "Our New Marranos," March 19, 2009), and if Israel goes under, Jews of Discomfort will certainly find themselves exorcised by the elite they now seek to appease. They would be remembered not for their discomfort, but for what they really were: members of a people who once supported a mistake called Israel — ruling elites do not easily forgive "mistakes" they labored to undo. I will end with a request to readers. If you agree with my views or share my concerns, do not simply succomb to the temptation of sending this article to another member of your synagogue. Take to the trenches and face outward. Knock on the door of your gentile neighbor or office mate and say: Remember, Joe, how I used to go along with all your sarcastic criticism of Israel? Times have changed, Joe. My people are in trouble, and there are things I must do even at the risk of testing our friendship. I want to tell you how strongly I feel about Israel, what is factual and what is malice in what you hear, and why our world will not be the same without that tiny, shining spot called Israel.
Judea Pearl is a professor at UCLA and president of the Daniel Pearl
Foundation, named after his son. He is a co-editor of "I am Jewish:
Personal Reflections Inspired by the Last Words of Daniel Pearl
(Jewish Light, 2004). Contact him by email at judea@CS.UCLA.EDU
|
|
THE BLOOD DIMMED TIDE
Posted by UCI, July 31, 2010. |
|
This was written by Rodger Parsons and it appeared July 26, 2010 in UCI. |
|
There's a rough beast slouching to be born. It's a wave of Islamic conquest that is spread out across the globe. The soft-core, politically correct liberal mentality of tolerance toward Islamists has become a disease of denial that allows the agents of militant Islam to masquerade as peaceful while acting to create a world in which only Islam rules. The moderate voices of Islam have been swept aside by strident violent theocrats, many wearing a pleasant facade designed to hide the truth. The rough beast plays with the western mind: taunting first with terror, then with the appearance of accommodation, then with a death threat for any perceived slight of Islam, then with a peace and freedom flotilla complete with al Qaeda terrorists armed to the teeth and bent on killing, always working assiduously toward the promulgation of Shariah Law. Anyone criticizing the infusion of Shariah Law into non-Islamic culture is criticized as being Islamophobic. But in the countries where Shariah governs, the climate is worse than Nazi Germany. See for yourself. Tenets of Shariah Law (From the Stop Shariah Now web site) Examples of Shariah Law include the following: (from the authoritative source Reliance of the Traveler, The Sacred Manual of Islamic Law.)
But an even more threatening trend in the works is Shariah-Compliant Finance. Financial institutions looking to bag some of the trillions of petrodollars have set up Shariah Compliance Boards, some of which have militant Islamists that have openly spoken of replacing the western system of finance with an Islamic model. "Leading Shariah authorities like Mufti Usmani, employed by Dow Jones and HSBC SCF funds, have called for violent jihad against the West. Usmani has even published a book in English explaining how and why this is obligatory for all Shariah-faithful Muslims." (Guilty Knowledge, Frank Gaffney, Jr.) The most dangerous aspect of this is the practice is known as zakat
(the tithing to charities required of observant Muslims with a
donation to the approved charities from the proceeds of the
investments that are not "tainted" by interest, speculation, pork or
other non-Shariah-compliant activities like the financing of
churches, the printing of bibles or the financing of many forms of
popular western entertainment). The difficulty is that some of this
"charity" finds it's way into the coffers of terrorist organizations
so that Shariah compliant finance can actually become a mechanism for
the material support of radical Islamic activates around the world.
The only way to stop this is to say no to Shariah, in any form, in
every democracy.
UCI — The Unity Coalition for Israel
(http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) — is "the largest worldwide
coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200
groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we
have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and
Secure Israel."
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: HEATING UP
Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 31, 2010. |
|
It's been fairly quiet on our border with Gaza, until the last couple of days. It was, of course, only a matter of time. It began on Friday morning when a Grad Katyusha rocket fired from Gaza hit central Ashkelon; thankfully there were no injuries but there was property damage and a number of people were treated for shock (which should not be minimized). We responded with an aerial attack on three different Hamas-connected sites in Gaza: a site where Hamas commandos were trained, a weapons manufacturing warehouse, and rocket-smuggling tunnel. Issa al-Batran, a commander in Hamas's Al-Kassam Brigades, was killed in one of the strikes and eight others were wounded. ~~~~~~~~~~ Hours after the Grad was launched, two mortars landed in the Eshkol Regional Council (which lies roughly south of Ashkelon). Then tonight, a Kassam hit an educational institution, outside of Sderot, in the Shaar HaNegev Regional Council. ~~~~~~~~~~ Whether this is the beginning of a sustained series of attacks, or will abate, it is too soon to say. Some analysts are connecting this to the prospect of direct talks between Israel and the PA — that is, an attempt to derail this by stirring up matters. ~~~~~~~~~~ Speaking of those direct talks, news has just broken of a letter that was sent to Abbas by Obama two weeks ago, in which he said, "it is high time to resume direct negotiations with Israel" as Netanyahu "is ready to resume direct negotiations." According to a PA official, the letter said that, "Obama will absolutely not accept the rejection of his recommendation to move to direct negotiations and that there will be consequences for such a rejection in the form of a lack of trust in President Abbas and the Palestinian side." Obama promised that he would work to extend an Israeli freeze on building in Jewish settlements due to expire in September if Abbas resumed direct negotiations. "But in case of a refusal its assistance on that issue will be very limited." PA negotiator Saeb Erekat confirmed the existence of this letter to AFP (Agence France Presse). ~~~~~~~~~~ There are several points of interest with regard to this letter. It was, you will note, sent before the Arab League meeting this past week, and may have had something to do with the response of the foreign ministers at that meeting with regard to (ambiguously) signing on for direct talks. But what has not happened is that Abbas himself was so intimidated by Obama's threats that he jumped to come to the table. There are other things that are frightening him a good deal more, I would say. What is more, if this report is accurate, it does indicate that Netanyahu has not caved with regard to extending the freeze. Although it tells us (as we have already guessed) that there will be huge pressure on him to do so, should Abbas cave in the end and come to the table. ~~~~~~~~~~ Of course (and also no surprise whatsoever), UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon is pumping for a freeze extension. The subject came up when Defense Minister Ehud Barak met with him on Friday. Said Barak to Ban: "We are hoping to start direct negotiations with the Palestinians soon, in order to move forward with an agreement which will be based on two nations for two peoples. The negotiations will not be simple, and courageous decisions will be required on our part and the Palestinians...We will need the help of the UN to go forward with the negotiations." This man needs to be muzzled! Bad enough to speak about the "courageous decisions" we have to make (= going back to the '67 lines), but for him to seek UN "help," with the UN's anti-Israel reputation? We are our own worst enemies. Barak should hang his head in shame. But then, the evidence of the past is that he's shameless. ~~~~~~~~~~ Barak then went into what might be seen as a comedy routine, if it were not so serious. He told Ban that the UN must act to prevent weapons smuggling by Hezbollah and to implement Resolution 1701. Come on! There will be no implementation of that resolution, and it's rather after the fact anyway. Under the nose of UN troops Hezbollah has already re-armed to a strength greater than it had before the Second Lebanon war. ~~~~~~~~~~ Meanwhile, that fine upstanding UN Human Rights Council — which devotes more time and energy to investigating Israeli human rights "violations" than all of the other human rights violations in the world — is going to investigate the flotilla incident. Word from our prime minister's office is that we are not likely to cooperate. I would hope not. Not only is the mandate stacked against us, but UN war crimes prosecutor Desmond de Silva, who has been chosen to head the panel, spoke against our actions before his appointment. At the same time, Ban is pumping for yet another UN investigation. ~~~~~~~~~~ Please see and broadly share "Hypocrisy's finest hour," by Shaul Rosenfeld. Rosenfeld exposes the world's hypocrisy when it comes to criticism of Israel: "...during Operation Just Cause in December 1989, US troops in Panama killed 300 to 1,000 civilians...in October 1993, a UN force (mostly comprising US units) killed more than 500 Somali civilians, while 'carrying out an operation,' of course. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@gmail.com and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
BIAS OR LAWFARE, OVER LONDON BUS?; TALIBAN OPPRESSING AFGHAN WOMEN, AGAIN
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 31, 2010. |
|
FOX NEWS ALLEGES ISRAELI LAND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST JERUSALEM ARABS Fox News' Jerusalem correspondent Reena Ninan repeatedly aired an anti-Zionist NGO's unverified claim that Israel discriminates in land sales against Arabs in Jerusalem. The Israeli NGO, Ir Amim, had a study alleging that 79% of the land in Jerusalem is earmarked by the Israel Land Authority for Jews and cannot be purchased by Arabs. When one boils down the claim's complex circumstances, little is left. In the U.S., much of the desert is owned by the government. Same in Israel. In addition, Israel started as a socialist state, with more land under government control. [In addition, the Jewish National Fund spent Jewish communal funds buying land for Jews. The Turkish Empire left behind a system under which much of the land was state-owned.] Israelis talk about buying land, but mostly they get it on 49-year leases. It works this way: (1) Israel Land Authority (ILA) property may be leased to Israeli citizens, including Arabs, and to foreign Jews. Arabs in eastern Jerusalem mostly are non-citizen residents; but (2) ILA regulations state that for purposes of leasing, residents are not considered foreigners. Therefore, Arabs in eastern Jerusalem may lease land there; (3) Where there is a conflict between the lease and the regulations, the lease-holder wishing to sell his house may choose to follow the regulations, which are the more liberal. Actually, the Ir Amim report admitted that Jerusalem resident Arabs could buy land: "On the other hand, despite the restrictions cited in the ILA leasing contract, they are not always actually enforced and in many cases the Palestinian buyer's blue identity card is sufficient to close the deal, without his status as a resident, rather than citizen, being investigated and posing an obstacle to the process. But even when such a transaction is completed, the danger of cancellation will always hover over it, because [of] article 19 of the ILA leasing contract ... (page 7). The NGO did not identify any Arab residents barred from leasing ILA land (CAMERA, 7/30/10)
NEW YORK, BRITAIN, AND MUSLIMS PREPARE FOR RAMADAN 
The Middle East Forum examines controversial public authorities' preparation for Ramadan in the U.S. and Britain, coming in a few days. Do those preparations follow the principle of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which "stipulates that 'employers must reasonably accommodate employees' sincerely held religious practices unless doing so would impose an undue hardship' on either the employers or other workers?" New York City will patrol mosques more, on Ramadan, in anticipation of hate crimes. Legitimate threats require safety measures. However, as terrorism expert Robert Spencer notes, Islamist groups have exaggerated hate crimes against Muslims, in order to present their faith as victim. Recently, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) suggested that a mosque in Georgia was torched because of anti-Muslim bias. Police later arrested a Muslim for it. What about Jewish and Christian holidays, which occasion many jihadist attacks? Do police increase patrols then, too? [I followed up with NYPD on 7/31. It does intend to increase patrols during other religions' holy days.] In 2007, the increasingly radical Muslim Council of Britain issued an Islamist document advising state schools how to meet the needs of Muslims pupils. The city council of Stoke-on-Trent in Staffordshire, England copied from that document to advise its schools about Muslims pupils who fast during the days of Ramadan. The advice is to ban swimming lessons for all, lest Muslims swallow water. Ban sex education for all, lest Muslims have sexual thoughts. Reschedule tests, which may be too difficult for hungry Muslim students. Prepare a bigger area for daily prayers. Do not have parent-school meetings in the evening, because Muslims are busy. "Build on this spirit" through "collective worship." The advice goes too far. It disadvantages all students so as not to let Muslims feel disadvantaged. It forces all students to observe Islamic law (David J. Rusin, 7/30/10, with links to support the statements). The author did not oppose considerately accommodating the minority but discommoding the majority. He did not oppose enhancing freedom of religion for the minority but partially imposing that religion on the majority. (This story is within an unstated context, described in other articles of mine over the past year, about Islam having a program of gradual encroachment in, and overturning of, non-Islamic areas.)
UN REJECTS HIZBULLAH CRITICISM ON TRYING ASSASSINS 
The UN has rejected Hizbullah criticism of its plan to try suspects for the assassination of Lebanon's former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri [whose son is the current Prime Minister]. The UN is expected to try members of Hizbullah. The UN expressed faith in the impartiality of international tribunals. Hizbullah accused the UN of political motives for having a trial. Hizbullah head Sheik Nasrallah called the investigation and proposed trial an "Israeli project" (IMRA, 7/30/10 from Egyptian Gazette). Interesting hypothesis that the Hizbullah chieftain accuses the UN, which devotes half its efforts against Israel, of following Israeli direction. It also is interesting that at first, some people supposed that Israel had ordered the assassination of the leader who sought to free Lebanon from domination by Syria, Hizbullah, and Iran. What credibility does that blame-laying leave Hizbullah? For many people, if the accusations are anti-Israel, they accept them, regardless of who makes them and how flimsy. They are not interested in truth but in an excuse for Israel-bashing. Victor Davis Hanson demonstrates that point by citing the many, significant, and truthful occurrences of contemporary antisemitism in Turkey, occupation, slaughter of innocent people, refugees, border disputes, "disproportionate" retaliation, and fascism. Why the obsession with Israel, coupled with unconcern about others? As a substitute for bald antisemitism (Summer 2010, A31 from National ReviewOnline, 6/11/10).
BIAS OR LAWFARE, OVER LONDON BUS? Two Muslim women students claim to have been ejected from a London bus by a "bigoted" driver who objected to their wearing head scarves. They have retained lawyers. The Muslim Council of Britain immediately expressed deep concern. Metroline reviewed video footage of the incident. The video shows the women forcing their way onto a bus that was out of service. There were argumentative and even abusive. Metroline rejected the women's complaint. The video was not accompanied by a sound track, which would disclose the words used. The Londonist is saddened by the students' exaggerating a minor disagreement into a bias incident ripe for lawsuit, and their eagerness to accuse the driver of bigotry and to speak to the BBC about it, hints at ulterior motive. The author explains that seemingly minor disagreements become predatory lawsuits, whose costs and efforts may intimidate the prey into making settlements despite innocence (Nathaniel Sugarman, Middle East Forum, 7/30/10 Predatory lawsuits and the threat of lodging them by prosecutors such as New York State Attorney Generals Spitzer and Cuomo, abuse the use of courts. Courts are intended for redress of grievances, not for causing grievances. It is becoming a major drag on the economy. We have documented the use of London courts to intimidate authors and publishers. About a year ago, we related the story of a group of Muslim men who boarded an airliner in the Midwest, arrayed themselves in the same seating as had the 9/11 hijackers, were loud and abusive and drew attention to their being Muslims and Arabs, and were ordered off the plane. Later they claimed discrimination, and sought to use their case to find out which passenger had complained to the crew. In effect, they ambushed the airline. It was thought that they sought to sue the passenger and intimidate Americans otherwise alert to prospective terrorist hijacking. The cry of discrimination can be as false as the accusations by fired employees of bias, who were not told anything bigoted but who immediately ask their lawyers whether they can ground a case on race, religion, gender, or age, whatever might work, however false. We all know of employees who, when warned about poor work performance, threaten to bring suit for discrimination, if disciplined.
WHICH CONTINUES, GAZA WAR OR CEASEFIRE? From Gaza, an advanced rocket, probably smuggled in, was fired into the Israeli city of Ashkelon, 10 kilometers away. It caused property damage. Previous rockets that landed there caused casualties. In retaliation, Israeli planes struck at three different parts of the Gaza strip, hitting an arms smuggling tunnel, a weapons warehouse, and a site of "terror activity." Since the end of the Israeli incursion into Gaza, Arabs have fired more than 400 rockets into Israel (IMRA, 7/31/10). The New York Times calls those Arab attacks "broadly upholding a shaky ceasefire." UN Middle East envoy spokesman Richard Miron declared that "indiscriminate rocket fire against civilians is completely unacceptable, and constitutes a terrorist attack." (Isabel Kershner, 7/31/10, A9). Perhaps those who are wounded or whose houses are wrecked by rockets whose capability Hamas keeps developing may not agree that those hundreds of rockets upholds the ceasefire. The UN urges Israel to put its faith in the "international community," and the U.S. urges Israel to rely upon "international guarantees." Before the Gaza War, Hamas and associates fired thousands of rockets into Israel, while Israel waited for the UN to condemn Hamas. Finally, the people of Israel demanded that their government protect them. After it did, the UN Goldstone mission condemned Israel and barely raised a sweat over the years of Hamas terrorism
ADL COMES OUT AGAINST NEW YORK MEGA-MOSQUE 
Mayor approved mosque without investigating (A.P./Henry Ray Abrams) The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has come out in opposition to building a mega-mosque near Ground Zero. ADL national director thinks that is the wrong place for it. Polls show that most Americans agree. Proponents reacted angrily, demanding that people "show tolerance" by welcoming the Muslim center. Mayor Bloomberg said that Americans and New Yorker welcome everybody. Sarah Palin demanded that moderate Muslims show tolerance by rejecting the Muslim center. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said that most Americans consider the proposal political rather than religious and as an offensive and aggressive act. The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership promotes inter-faith dialog. He called the proposed mosque's imam, Feisal Abdul Rauf moderate. The Center's programming director, Oz Sultan, said the center's Board would include Christians and Jews and become the model for moderate Islam, and would "build bridges" to other faiths. He defended the site as being where Muslims also were killed (Michael Barbaro, NY Times, 7/31/10, A1). Does one build bridges by burning one's bridges to the victims? The statement that Muslims died there is not relevant — Muslims are major victims of terrorism by radical Muslims. How much have mega-mosque proponents. other than those who proposed it, investigated the project financing and studied the history and ideology of Islam? Are they aware of the Muslim principle of permissible deception in behalf of the faith? Does the Mayor realize how Islam uses such edifices as monuments to victory? Is the imam moderate? Some time ago, I reported on interfaith dialogs that displayed attempts not to reconcile but to defame or to impose. Some people are native, in assuming that leaders of other faiths necessarily will be reasonable and not fanatical.
TALIBAN OPPRESSING AFGHAN WOMEN, AGAIN 
Traditionally, Afghan men kept their women as a sort of household furniture. The Taliban smothered women's lives even more [as by keeping them from becoming medical practitioners and denying them medical care from male doctors.] Women died in the name of the extremists' value of "modesty" and removing sexual temptation. When the Northern Alliance and the U.S. helped liberate Afghanistan, women resumed schooling, working outside of the home, and dressing more comfortably and with individuality. Now the Taliban are regaining power and intimidate areas nominally outside their control. Between the Taliban resurgence, and President Obama's plan to "de-surge" our troops there, Afghan women dread their future. They note that their government negotiates with Taliban, but does not demand women's rights. The females increasingly refrain from going out to school. They fear being attacked by Taliban, supposedly proponents of preserving feminine purity. Women who work or teach women to work have been murdered for it. Women are being squeezed back into the confines of the homes. Many women are marrying hastily, as they or their parents seek to preclude their marrying Taliban men. In the non-Taliban North, the Tajik region, women enjoy more schooling and freedom (Alissa J. Rubin, NY Times, 7/31/10, A1). For Afghan women, their country is becoming a big prison. More woman are or will be oppressed there than the whole Arab population of the Palestinian Authority (P.A.), while some "humanitarians" claim that Israel has made Gaza a prison. How come the humanitarians show little concern about the female Afghan millions? How come the humanitarians show little concern about the P.A. oppression of its own people and its war on Israel that requires security measures such as embargo? Readers have sent in comments accusing Israel in general terms, without evidence.
YOUNG GERMANS RADICALIZING MORE The numbers of known radicalized Muslim youth in Germany still is not large. However, it is growing. Terrorist recruiters have become more effective and more intent on Germany. Now they send out Internet messages in German. Sometimes, whole young families set off for Muslim areas, to assist jihad. Among them are converts. These new jihadists are told to bring their savings, to finance themselves and to help finance the militias. German authorities fear that some return in order to recruit more or to commit terrorism in Germany. Left behind are parents who purport to be moderate and who profess shock at what happened. They hope their children will communicate with them and will return. Often, the young people are not heard from again (Souad Mekhennet, NY Times, 7/31/10, A4). Germany treats radical Islam as a religion, entitled to free
expression, but it is more a war society, a society making war on
Germany, among many places. Embattled European police have good
detectives. What preventive measures will Europe adopt?
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
CLUELESS ABOUT GAZA
Posted by Mark Silverberg, July 30, 2010. |
|
The U.S. debt will top $13.6 trillion this year and climb to an estimated $19.6 trillion by 2015, according to a Treasury Department report to Congress. Bankruptcy filings are nearing the record two million level of 2005 and unemployment is nearly 10%, yet, in mid-June, President Obama pledged a $400M aid package for supposed housing, schools, water and health care system projects in the West Bank and Hamas-ruled Gaza. He described these projects as a "down payment on the U.S. commitment to the people of Gaza who deserve a chance to take part in building a viable, independent state of Palestine, together with those who live in the West Bank." He must have forgotten that the Gazans first act of "independence" after the Israeli withdrawal from the territory in 2005 was to destroy the lucrative greenhouse industry that the Israelis left behind, but that should have served as a reminder of the billions in aid that have been squandered in pursuit of this pipedream. According to the Heritage Foundation, since the 1993 Oslo Accords, the U.S. has showered $2.2 billion in bilateral aid on the Palestinians, in addition to more than $3.4 billion for humanitarian aid funneled through dysfunctional U.N. organizations since 1950 — and yet, they are still considered "refugees". That's because vast amounts of these aid funds have been diverted to allow terrorist organizations like Hamas to focus on building its war infrastructure such as bunkers, fortifying positions and digging tunnels, rather than on subsidizing education, paving roads, promoting commerce and industry, or providing for and advancing the long-term interests of their people. Should Congress approve this aid package, it will only serve to stabilize the Hamas regime, assist in consolidating its power, and inhibit the development of the social, political and economic infrastructures necessary to build a viable, unified and stable Palestinian state. Hamas's desire for more construction materials has more to do with rebuilding and strengthening its war machine against Israel than the needs of ordinary Gazans so it's fair to ask this administration: "Where's the strategic logic behind this pledge?" Money is fungible, so where are the assurances and accountability mechanisms necessary to insure that this money will not be spent on terrorism and missiles as has occurred in the past? Consider the nature of the regime that controls Gaza. In the wake of the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 which saw Israel expel and uproot 8,800 people from 25 communities and destroy its 26 synagogues, hundreds of businesses and 35 years of accomplishments, Hamas seized power from the Palestinian Authority in a bloody coup in June 2007 and, true to its roots as the ideological cousin of al Qaeda, and an offshoot of the extremist Egyptian Moslem Brotherhood, it fired over 7,500 missiles into southern Israeli cities and towns in the name of "resistance", declared its intention to annihilate the Jewish state, established "summer camps" for over a hundred thousand children to learn the Koran, paramilitary training, hatred of Jews, and the glories of "martyrdom", holds its population hostage, uses children as human shields and mosques, schools and UN facilities as weapons depots in violation of international law, proudly proclaims that its members cherish "death over life", has denied abducted Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit his fundamental rights under international law for four years, has diverted millions in humanitarian aid and supplies through UNRWA and other NGOs to maintain its war infrastructure in violation of 301c of the Foreign Assistance Act, inserted its "morality police" into the daily lives of Gazans, and introduced an extremist Islamic "statelet" on Israel's southern border that serves as a base of operations for Iran — an enemy that has made no secret of its regional ambitions and nuclear aspirations. Emboldened by recent moral support from states such as NATO member Turkey, Hamas' confidence appears only to be growing. It shows no sign of budging on the principles that have caused its international isolation. So, in making this undertaking and forcing Israel to ease its Gaza blockade, the Obama administration has confirmed that Gaza will remain firmly under Hamas control. It will not recognize Israel, renounce violence or support any peace agreement signed by its Palestinian rivals. In one stroke, he has rendered meaningless both the Oslo Accords and the conditions set by the Quartet — namely, the abandonment of terrorism, accepting Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, and recognition of the Palestinian Authority's rule as the legitimate government. The problem with his strategy (if that's what it is) is that it fails to consider the nature of the Hamas regime and the broader implications that arise from empowering a genocidal, virulently anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, anti-democratic, repressive, pro-Iranian organization on the southern border of our most reliable ally in the Middle East. Some $10B has been spent globally in the last decade on the Palestinians making them the largest per capita recipients of foreign aid in the world (with the exception of the Republic of Congo), yet places like Gaza remain as pro-terrorist as ever. Billions of dollars that are meant for schools, hospitals and infrastructure have been spent on luxury villas, casinos and payments to terrorists. Furthermore, since Hamas is a designated foreign terrorist organization (FTO) that controls the distribution of all goods entering Gaza, providing humanitarian aid through non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in Gaza may now constitute a violation of the "material support" provisions of the Patriot Act since such aid (according to the recent Supreme Court decision in Holder vs. Humanitarian Law Project) would "free up" other resources for Hamas to put towards its genocidal goals. It would also add legitimacy to its attempts to recruit and raise additional funds to further those objectives. By sustaining Hamas in power, this aid package may not only be illegal, but will undermine any future ability the Palestinian national movement may have of reaching a compromise with Israel. More disturbing is the recent leak from a senior Hamas official to the London-based Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper suggesting that this pledge of aid to Gaza is the forerunner to an even more dangerous planned Obama initiative in the coming months — one that would remove Hamas from America's designated foreign terrorist organization (FTO) list. On June 16th, a Washington-based Arabic newspaper quoted a senior official as saying that an American envoy is scheduled to meet with Hamas representatives in an Arab country and hand them a letter from the Obama administration. According to the report, Obama believes (wrongly) that he has no choice other than to deal with Hamas due to its influence in the Arab and Islamic world. Given that Obama's 'go-to guy' on issues of intelligence, John Brennan, has been reaching out to 'moderates' in Hezbollah, it would hardly be surprising to believe that the Administration is now talking to Hamas. And apparently, Obama isn't alone in this belief. U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) seems to have bought into it as well. Mark Perry, writing in Foreign Policy (June 30th) notes: "While it is anathema to broach the subject of engaging militant groups like Hezbollah and Hamas in official Washington circles (to say nothing of Israel), in a "Red Team" report issued on May 7th and entitled "Managing Hezbollah and Hamas", senior CENTCOM intelligence officers question the current U.S. policy of isolating and marginalizing the two movements." The Report notes that while Hezbollah and Hamas "embrace staunch anti-Israel rejectionist policies", the two organizations are "pragmatic and opportunistic." This contradicts Israel's position that these two extremist Islamist organizations cannot change their raison d'être and must be confronted with force. However, the Report suggests that "failing to recognize their separate grievances and objectives will result in continued failure in moderating their behavior." One senior officer even commented in private discussions: "Putting Hezbollah, Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda in the same sentence, as if they are all the same, is just stupid." Good grief. What's "stupid" is that CENTCOM fails to see the reality that all these particular Islamist terrorist organizations are the same in at least one respect: They all share a commitment to and common interpretation of Sharia, and as such, they are all pursuing the same objective — the global triumph of Shariah under a theocratic Caliphate. While their tactics may differ, they are united in their common goal. When Hamas leader Mahmoud Al-Zahhar proclaims (as he did on Future News TV on June 15, 2010 according to MEMRI): "This is our plan for this stage — to liberate the West Bank and Gaza, without recognizing Israel's right to a single inch of land ... without giving up the Right of Return for a single Palestinian refugee ... to liberate any inch of Palestinian land, to establish a state on it and ... [to have] Palestine in its entirety ... We will not recognize the Israeli enemy"... it's rather difficult to believe that deep down inside, this man is really a "moderate" who is "pragmatic and opportunistic". These are people professing a powerful ideology rooted in a radical interpretation of Islam, in whose name they propagandize, proselytize, terrorize and kill. The one thing that unites them is the jihadist vision in whose name they act. When these groups see Americans bending over backwards to justify flexibility toward militant Islamists, they assume, rightly, that their political strategy is working. You can pet these scorpions all you want, but you cannot change their fundamental nature. According to Perry: "The report argues that an Israeli decision to lift the siege might pave the way for reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas, which would be "the best hope for mainstreaming Hamas" as though the object of U.S. policy should be to facilitate Hamas' takeover of the West Bank as well as Gaza. Hamas will only integrate into the Palestinian security forces once it is sure that it won't be obliged to surrender its freedom of military action. And even more instructive is the following line: "The Red Team also claims that reconciliation with Fatah, when coupled with Hamas's explicit renunciation of violence, would gain widespread international support and deprive the Israelis of any legitimate justification to continue settlement building and delay statehood negotiations." By attributing ill-will on the part of Israel, that statement suggests that the Red Team's real agenda includes the delegitimization of Israel. Perry concludes that the report reflects the thinking among a significant number of senior officers at CENTCOM headquarters and among senior CENTCOM intelligence officers and analysts serving in the Middle East. The Administration's "soft power" team seems to feel that since engagement with Islamist groups failed with Iran and Syria, it should keep trying it with Hezbollah and Hamas based on the assumption that dialogue with Islamists can resolve most issues. Einstein would have called that insanity. In the end, if this is the paradigm of this Administration and CENTCOM — that radical Islamist organizations can be house-trained — they will be opening Pandora's Box. Recognizing Hamas, as CENTCOM and the Obama administration seem poised to do, would be a colossal blunder that will have major ramifications for American interests and American credibility in the Middle East for years to come, and provide Iran with its long sought after base within missile range of Tel Aviv. These types of actions are destructive to our efforts to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran, and to the American people, who have the right to expect their leaders to adopt realistic policies against those who threaten our way of life, our global interests, our security, and our allies.
Mark Silverberg is a foreign policy analyst for the Ariel Center for Policy
Research (Israel) and the author of "The Quartermasters of Terror: Saudi
Arabia and the Global Islamic Jihad". His articles have been archived under
www.marksilverberg.com and www.analyst-network.com
|
|
LEBANON ROILED OVER PALESTINIANS
Posted by M.S. Kramer, July 30, 2010. |
|
Druze Lebanese leader, Walid Jumblatt, recently created an uproar over the 400,00 Palestinian refugees in Lebanon. Jumblatt's father, who once led the Druze, was assassinated in 1977. The Druze are a group of non-Arab Muslims, whose sect is considered heretical by many other Muslims. Their origins date back to the 10th century and they comprise about 10% of the Lebanese population. The remainder of the Lebanese population is mostly Arab Muslim or Arab Christian. (Lebanon was once predominantly Christian. Many Christian Lebanese do not identify themselves as Arab, but prefer to be known as descendants of the ancient Canaanites and call themselves "Phoenicians".) Jumblatt, who heads the Progressive Socialist Party, recently questioned why Palestinian refugees are forbidden to own property in Lebanon. Jumblatt spoke to a group of Palestinian refugees from across Lebanon, who visited him in his residence in the village of Mukhtara. He said, "We allow other Arabs to own properties, arguing that this would encourage foreign investments, but we deprive poor Palestinians from [this right]." The MP said he insisted on granting Palestinian refugees labor rights, social security and property rights. This rhetoric is diametrically opposed to the constant strategy of the Palestinians: keeping their millions of so-called refugees in a wretched state to gain the world's sympathy for the Palestinian cause, while delegitimizing Israel's right to exist. Significantly, Jumblatt added that Prime Minister Saad Hariri and Speaker Nabih Berri were exerting efforts in the same direction. In June, Jumblatt's parliamentary bloc submitted a draft law to grant Palestinian refugees their rights, sparking a huge debate in the Parliament. The proposal is currently being examined by parliamentary committees. (reported on July 4 in the Daily Star newspaper, Beirut) Omar al-Issawi, a Lebanese journalist, director, producer, and television personality, wrote extensively on the refugees on the (English) Al Jazeera website in 2009: "There are thousands of Palestinian refugees across the globe, many of whom settled in neighboring Arab countries including Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. However, of all the Palestinian refugees in the Arab world, it is those who have taken shelter in Lebanon who have suffered the most. "According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the international body set up to ensure the welfare of Palestinian refugees, the highest percentage of Palestinian refugees who are living in abject poverty reside in Lebanon. There are about 400,000 officially registered Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, or approximately 10 per cent of the population. Just under half of the refugees continue to live in camps. While those Palestinians resident in Syria and Jordan, for example, do not enjoy the benefits of full citizenship, they do have access to education, healthcare and employment. [Jordan has lately de-naturalized thousands of its Palestinian citizens, who are the majority of Jordan's population. They live under a regime most accurately described as "apartheid", according to Mudar Zahran in the Jerusalem Post, July 24.] "Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, Palestinian refugee camps were under stringent Lebanese security control. For instance, travel from one camp to another was restricted and even reading newspapers in public was banned. Today, Palestinians in Lebanon continue to suffer from draconian measures which the Lebanese state claims are there to prevent them from becoming permanent guests. "As recently as 2005, Palestinian refugees were banned from taking up employment in 70 professions. Today, the number of restricted professions stands at 20 and includes senior medical, legal and engineering careers. While these restrictions were recently eased, applicants must have a valid work permit and membership in the appropriate professional representative body. Both are beyond the financial means of most Palestinian refugees. "A major bone of contention for Lebanese nationals has been the fact that armed Palestinian groups continue to thrive in the refugee camps. When the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was based in Lebanon between 1972 and 1982, it threw its lot behind the Muslim-dominated leftist forces that were engaged in civil war against the Christian-led right. [There were up to a quarter of a million fatalities during this period and one-fourth of the population were wounded.] "In 1976, Lebanese Christian militiamen overran the Tal al-Zaatar refugee camp in East Beirut and massacred or expelled all of its residents. In 1982, Israeli forces facilitated the entry of Lebanese Christian militiamen into the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in West Beirut. That massacre claimed the lives of about 800 residents of the camps. "Between 1985 and 1989, Lebanon was the scene of what became known as the Camps War, when Pro-Syrian militiamen from Amal, a Lebanese Shia movement, and anti-Arafat factions laid siege to Palestinian refugee camps in Beirut and the South. Palestinian refugees suffered grim atrocities, and according to journalist Robert Fisk, the Camps War was worse than the Sabra and Shatila massacre. "Many Lebanese believe the presence of armed Palestinians on Lebanese soil is a potential flashpoint and point to the clashes at the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp in Northern Lebanon as a case in point. Between May and September of 2007, Nahr al-Bared was the scene of a brutal conflict between the radical Fatah al-Islam group and the Lebanese army. [At least 446 people, including 168 soldiers and 226 militants, were killed.]"
As Walid Jumblatt's remarks indicate, the future of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon will be among the first items on the agenda of Lebanon's new parliament. In my opinion, this is revolutionary! Only one Arab country, Jordan, has allowed Palestinian refugees to become citizens and their rights there are circumscribed. Lebanon may open the door to begin integrating its refugees, after 60-plus years of segregation. This flies in the face of the usual Arab insistence that the Palestinians must be returned to their "homeland" in Israel. If this is a serious initiative, the "uprooted Palestinians" movement may be challenged by a parallel movement to assimilate the millions of Palestinian "refugees" scattered throughout the Arab world.
Steve Kramer lives in Alfe Menashe. He has written a weekly opinion column for the Jewish Times of southern New Jersey (www.jewishtimes-sj.com) for the last ten years. He writes, "They're about history, politics, touring, or whatever excites me." He is author of "Encountering Israel — Geography, History, Culture." |
|
DELUSION VERSUS SOLUTION
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, July 30, 2010. |
|
Your comments and constructive criticism would be highly appreciated. Shabbat Shalom and have a pleasant weekend, |
|
Western policy-makers grow increasingly-reconciled to co-existence with a nuclear Iran. They assume that, notwithstanding the radical rhetoric, the Iranian leadership is pragmatic, cognizant of its limitations, unwilling to expose its people to devastating Western retaliation and considering nuclear capabilities as a tool of deterrence — and not as an offensive weapon — against the US, NATO and Israel. However, a nuclear Iran would constitute a clear and present danger to global security and peace, which must not be tolerated. In order to avert such peril, it is incumbent to disengage from illusions and engage with realism. Unlike Western leaders, the Iranian revolutionary leadership is driven by ideological and religious conviction, bolstered by ancient imperialist ethos: 1. Jihad is the permanent state of relations between Moslems and non-Moslems, while peace and ceasefire accords are tenuous. The religious Shiite zeal is intensified by the Persian-Iranian ethos, shared by secular and religious Iranians, who believe Iran has been a regional and a global power for the last 2,600 years. Iran's religious/imperialistic strategy has guided Teheran's tactical policy toward the US (the "Great Satan" and the key target for Iran's terror and nuclear), Central & South America (an anti-US terror platform), Iraq (the chief Sunni rival in the Persian Gulf and an arena to weaken the US), Saudi Arabia (an apostate regime), the Gulf States (targeted for revolution and takeover), Afghanistan and Pakistan (arenas to erode the US' image), international terror organizations and terror cells in the US and Europe (weakening Western societies), Syria, Lebanon, Hizballah and Hamas (threatening Israel and advancing regional hegemony) and Israel (the "Little Satan," a Western outpost in the Abode of Islam, the source of Judea-Christian values). Western leaders are top heavy on "pragmatism" and low on ideology and religion. Therefore, they are preoccupied with Iranian global tactical policy, minimizing the study of Iran's strategic infrastructure of religion, ideology and history, which consider Shia, Jihad, Shihada and Persian imperialism as Teheran's Pillars of Fire. Western leaders believe in engagement — and not in confrontation — with Iran. However, Teheran's revolutionaries regard such an attitude as a symptom of Western fatigue, of a tendency to "blink first" and of a modern version of the defeatist European slogan: "Better Red than Dead." Moreover, Teheran considers the US a superpower in retirement and retreat, gradually adopting the European state-of-mind and losing its posture of endurance since the 1973 retreat from Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, the 1979 terrorist takeover of the US embassy in Teheran, the 1983 retreat from Lebanon following the blowing up of the US embassy and Marine headquarters in Beirut until the 2011 expected US withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan. At the same time, Iran demonstrated its willingness to pay a brutal price for its principles and interests, when sacrificing some 500,000 persons on the altar of the 1980-1988 war against Iraq, including approximately 100,000 children who were dispatched to clear minefields. Teheran is encouraged by Western preoccupation with engagement and sanctions, which constitute a delusion and not a solution. For instance, Russia and China consider the US a rival and do not share the US assessment of Iran. They benefit from a weakened US and therefore they do not cooperate in the implementation of sanctions. Europe employs tough rhetoric, but displays frail action. And, the UN will not support a tough US policy toward Iran. The longer the sanctions and engagement process, the more time is available to Iran to develop and acquire nuclear capabilities. Teheran benefits from Western adherence to a supposed linkage between the Palestinian issue and a successful campaign against Iran. However, there is no linkage between the Palestinian issue — or the Arab Israeli conflict or Israel's existence — and the pillars of Iran's strategy. The more entrenched the "Linkage Theory," the heavier the pressure on Israel and the weaker the pressure on Iran. In 1978, President Carter's policy toward the Shah was perceived as the backstabbing of a US ally, providing a tailwind to the anti-Shah opposition and facilitating the Iranian Revolution. In 2010, Western policy toward Iran is perceived as an acknowledgment of the potency of the revolutionary leadership, thus serving as a headwind to a weakened domestic opposition and minimizing the possibility of a domestically-generated regime-change. A sustained Western policy toward Iran would confront the Free World with a brutal dilemma: Accepting radical diplomatic, economic, military and religious demands presented by a nuclear Iran, or facing a series of vicious wars, including a rapidly escalated nuclear race among rogue regimes. In order to avoid such a dilemma, it is incumbent to disengage from the illusive options of deterrence and retaliation and engage with the realistic option of military-preemption/prevention. Furthermore, the cost of military inaction would dwarf the worst-case cost of a military preemptive action against Iran. Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is a consultant on US-Israel relations as well as the Chairman of Special Projects at the Ariel Center for Policy Research. Formerly the Minister for Congressional Affairs to Israel's Embassy in Washington, DC, Ettinger also served as Consul General of Israel to the Southwestern US. He is a former editor of Contemporary Mideast Backgrounder, and is the author of the Jerusalem Cloakroom series of reports. Contact him at yoramtex@netvision.net.il This article was published yesterday in YnetNews and is archived at
|
|
TAKE THE ACID TEST FOR ISLAMOPHOBIA
Posted by Bill Warner, July 30, 2010. |
|
A favorite comeback for someone who is critical of Islam is — you are Islamophobic. Never mind that the term phobic means an irrational fear. Really, the charge is that you are irrational AND a bigot. A bigot is immoral and a hater and has no possible reason for their views. There is a cure for bigotry. If you are a bigot, learning about the subject of bigotry can cure it. Clint Eastwood's character in Grand Torino started out as a bigot about the Hmong Vietnamese who moved in next door. As he got to know them, he changed and gave the ultimate sacrifice of his life to help them. The cure for his bigotry was getting to know more about his neighbors, the Hmong. Notice this does not say that as you get to know them, you will always like them better. There are people and groups that the more you know them, the less you like them. As you see what they do and how they think, you may actually start to fear them. Not being a bigot doesn't mean that you love everybody and what they do. In the sixties, the Black Panthers had a revolutionary, "stick it to the man", image that was cool. However, the more you got to know them and see what they did, you learned that the Panthers were serious racist thugs and dangerous to society. So just because someone is "oppressed" does not mean that they are decent people. Want to see if you are an Islamophobe? Let's presume that you don't like Islamic doctrine, Sharia law as an example, and would like to take the test to see if you are a bigot. Remember, if you are a bigot, then the more you get to know Islam, the better you will feel. Here are some concepts from Islamic doctrine, so that you can understand it better. Islam says that non-Muslims are Kafirs. Allah hates Kafirs and He even plots against them. Kafirs can be tortured, deceived, enslaved, crucified, raped and robbed. How important are Kafirs to Islam? Islam has three sacred texts: Koran, Sira (life of Mohammed) and Hadith (his traditions). Look at how much of Islam is devoted to the Kafir: Amount of Text Devoted to Kafir
If the Kafir is "bad", then there is a lot of "bad". How does your cultural sensitivity feel now? Feel any closer to Islam, any less afraid? Maybe, you need a little more exposure to become warmer towards Islam. Jihad should cure your ills. Isn't the jihad thing overblown? There are only a few verses about that, aren't there? Look at the statistics: Amount of Text Devoted to Jihad
Now that you are learning more about Islam, are your fears subsiding? Still afraid? Every Muslim will tell you that Islam was the first ideology to give women their rights. If we take everything that is written about women in the Koran and rank it according to whether the woman is held in high status, equal status and lower status, we find: Women's Status in the Koran
How does the women's issue strike you? Are you feeling more simpatico? Less Islamophobic? So, you took the Islamophobia test. Now that you know Islam better, do you now understand and realize that your Islamophobia was bigoted hatred? Surely, this test is biased. There must be some goodness in Islam for Kafirs. If you go through the Koran and pick out every single verse that offers good words, doesn't that prove that Islam is good? If every single verse that seems to promise good to Kafirs is counted up, then 2.6% of the verses offer good to Kafirs. But, wait! There is that contradiction and abrogation contradiction principle. The Koran is filled with verses that contradict each other and in every case of good verses, the 2.6%, are cancelled or abrogated, by later verses. The net result is 0%, nothing, is unmitigated good in the Koran for the Kafir. You have finished the Islamophobe Test. Feel closer to Islam? Or more afraid? If you feel closer and warmer about Islam, then you were Islamophobic, but now you are cured. If not, then your fears are real, not a phobia. Islam is like the Black Panthers — he more you know, the less you like and the more you are afraid.
Bill Warner, is
Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
|
|
GINGRICH: CRUCIAL RADICAL ISLAMIST BATTLEFIELD IS U.S.
Posted by Chuck Brooks, July 30, 2010. |
|
This article was written by Michelle Phillips
and it appeared yesterday in
The Washington Times. It is archived at
Phillips is a student intern with the Washington Times through the National Journalism Center covering international affairs. |
|
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich on Thursday said the greatest threat to national security is radical Islam, but the greatest battlefront for that threat is at home. "This is not a war on terrorism ... this is a struggle with radical Islamists," Mr. Gingrich told a group of about 200 people at the American Enterprise Institute. In his "America at Risk" speech, he drew comparisons to the U.S.' situation in World War II and the Cold War, calling for today's leaders to use some of the same strategies from those earlier conflicts. The problem is that many leaders are "sleepwalking" and don't face the Islamic threat, said Mr. Gingrich, who is widely thought to be a possible contender for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. He did not limit the war to the fighting in the Middle East, saying there are two additional, more important fronts: the United States and Europe. He noted that 54 jihadists have been arrested in the U.S. on terrorism charges since President Obama took office. "Every one of these instances constitutes a breakdown in national security," Mr. Gingrich said. He emphasized that such talk does not demonize all Muslims. "Let me draw a sharp distinction between those Muslims who live in the modern world and those Muslims who would radically change the modern world," he said. "The people who want to worship God in their own way and live under American law — we're not in the fight with them," Mr. Gingrich said in an interview after the speech. Editor's Note; These are some Comments by Readers of the original article. tlwinslow says: Islam is the only major world religion that takes commands from its god to conquer territory in order to set up a sociopoltical system that makes Muslims superior to non-Muslims and men to women, hence it's subject to drastic legal controls no different than the Ghost Dance religion, Mormonism or Scientology. Too bad, the fact that a quarter of the world's pop. claims to be Muslim scares the U.S. govt. into bowing to it as if it weren't really political, and try splitting hairs to separate good from bad Muslims, when all Muslims get their religion straight from the Quran, which is where the commands to set up Sharia come from. Hence the U.S. must either wake up now and stop the Trojan Horse at the gates by stopping and reversing Muslim immigration, or accept increasing anarchy and subversion of the Constitution by the growing Muslim pop., there's no crystal ball needed here. Too bad too many people won't or can't take the time to study Islam's little known history and strange terminology to understand how deep the supremacy goes, but it's free anytime to all with the Historyscoper at http://go.to/islamhistory. JDD says: "We are told again and again by 'experts' and 'talking heads' that Islam is the religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatic rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers. The hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the 'silent majority,' is cowed and extraneous. Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people. The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet. And who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were 'peace loving'? History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up because they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun. Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late. As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts — the fanatics who threaten our way of life. Let us hope that thousands, world-wide, read this and think about it, and send it on — before it's too late. The point is, as history has demonstrated...though you keep quiet,
silent...you will not save yourself!"
Contact Chuck Brooks at chetz18@aol.com
|
|
INJUSTICE? STATE WORKERS WHO ID'ED ILLEGAL ALIENS FACE CRIMINAL CHARGES
Posted by Jim Kouri, July 30, 2010. |
|
"We live in a topsy-turvey nation and this story should anger all Americans. Suddenly our nation is prosecuting patriots while protecting lawbreakers," said a former NYPD police officer and private security firm owner. The Utah state employees, suspected of blowing the whistle on more than a thousand illegal immigrants living in the state, have been placed on administrative leave and will likely be criminally charged, according attorneys from a non-partisan, public-interest group. Last week a list of 1,300 suspected illegal aliens was circulated anonymously to various state and federal agencies as well as media outlets, according to a statement from the Washington, DC-based Judicial Watch. A letter was enclosed with the 29-page list that included the illegal aliens' phone numbers, addresses and birth dates. The letter, signed "Concerned Citizens of the United States," alleged that they "observed these individuals in our neighborhoods, driving on our streets, working in our stores, attending our schools and entering our public welfare buildings." Copies of the list and letter was sent to law enforcement agencies, news media outlets and Utah state lawmakers by the group, who demanded that those named be deported. Calling it the "deplorable" work of a "small rogue group," Utah Governor Gary Herbert quickly launched an investigation and vowed to punish any public employees responsible for participating in blowing the whistle. So far two workers with the Utah Department of Workforce Services have been suspended and at least eight others are under investigation. All face criminal charges for violating state and federal privacy laws, according to the governor. "We live in a topsy-turvey nation and this story should anger all Americans. Suddenly our nation is prosecuting patriots while protecting lawbreakers," said former NYPD police officer and private security firm owner Bill Fitzgerald. Latino Project director Tony Yapias told Reuters that his Utah office was "inundated with calls from concerned Hispanics asking if they were on the list." Utah Democrat Party officials are proud of their protecting illegal immigrants and providing them with endless public benefits, including discounted tuition at public colleges and universities as well as other perks not afforded under federal law. Two of the state's largest cities — Salt Lake City and Provo — have official sanctuary policies that forbid public employees or law enforcement officers from inquiring about a resident's immigration status, according to Judicial Watch. Earlier this year Utah proudly became the nation's first state to offer a special class of driver's licenses for illegal aliens who won't be ineligible to obtain the cards when new federal security standards kick in. For years, Utah was one of only a handful of states to offer illegal immigrants driver's license. However, some Utah lawmakers plan to introduce legislation similar to the new law in Arizona, which requires state and local police to determine the immigration status of anyone they encounter in the course of their police work whom they reasonably suspect of being in the country illegally.
Jim Kouri, CPP, is
Fifth Vice-President of the
National Association of Chiefs of Police. Contact them at
(201) 941-5397 or copmagazine@aol.com
|
|
SEE NO EVIL
Posted by Truth Provider, July 30, 2010. |
|
Dear friends, Today, quite a shocking bulletin. I am sure many of you ask yourselves the obvious question: Why the obsession with Israel? Why with all the persecution of innocents elsewhere in the word, tiny Israel (6 million Jews) occupies such a prominent space in world media, the UN, academia, "human rights" organizations, Internet bloggers, etc. etc. How many other such tiny countries do you hear about so incessantly every day around the clock? Is it really Zionism, the aspiration of the Jewish people to a country of their own, that is bugging them? Is it really the fate of the "poor" "Palestinians?" The "Palestinians" whom the entire world rushes to help and aid, "Palestinians" who see themselves as part of the petroleum-rich Arab world? (in case you forgot, here is article 1 of the PLO Charter: "Palestine is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible part of the Arab homeland, and the Palestinian people are an integral part of the Arab nation"). I can testify from many conversations I had with Israeli Arabs (about 1.2 million Arabs are citizens of Israel) that the vast majority of them would not dream of living in a "Palestinian" State should it become a reality. Israeli Arabs live in freedom, have democratic rights and previledges under the laws of one of the most progressive democracies in the entire world. They would never contemplate exchanging that with life in an Arab country under an Arab regime. I venture to say that the same is true with the Arabs in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. If their true agenda had been an independent country, they could have achieved it a long time ago. The truth is that for 62 years (and before) their only agenda was the demise of Israel. This is what they live for and what their leaders brainwash them with. This is also what their "friends" and "supporters" wish and push them towards. Which brings back the question above: Why the obsession with Israel and Zionism? Are Tibeteans, Darfurans, Kurds, Armenians, Chechnians and many other nations less important than the "Palestinians?" I am sure you know the answer: Neo anti-Semitism. After the Holocaust, old fashion anti-Semitism went out of fashion. Anti-Semites needed a replacement, so anti-Zionism took its place. As we say in Hebrew: The same lady with a different dress. And one more question: Have you ever heard or read a comment denying the history of the Tibetans people? The answer is NO! Have you ever heard or read a comment denying the history of the Jewish people? The answer is YES! Every day! Now please read carefully Caroline Glick's shocking latest article. Your Truth Provider,
This is by Caroline B. Glick and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=183073. She is the senior Middle East Fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post. She writes: I am sorry I wrote this column. Because an audience that demands an explanation of why evil is evil is an audience that has already sided with evil |
|
It's springtime for Jew haters. 
This week Oscar winning conspiracy theorist Oliver Stone joined Helen Thomas and Mel Gibson in the swelling ranks of out-of-the-closet celebrity Jew haters. In an interview with the Sunday Times, Stone said that Adolf Hitler had been given a bum rap and that through "Jewish domination of the media," the Jews have inflated the importance of the Holocaust and wrecked US foreign policy. In the wake of criticism in Jewish circles, on Wednesday Stone's publicist issued a mealy-mouthed clarification. Stone failed to retract or amend his statement that "There's a major lobby in the United States. They are hard workers. They stay on top of every comment, the most powerful lobby in Washington. Israel has f---ed up United States foreign policy for years." He also did not retract his view that Jews use the Holocaust to control American foreign policy. Stone simply referred to his claim that Jews make too much of the Holocaust because the Germans killed more Russians than Jews as "clumsy." He then broadened his initial allegation that Jews make too much of the Holocaust by allowing that we are joined in our efforts by non-Jews. And since non-Jews are involved also, he was wrong to criticize us. As Stone put it, "The fact that the Holocaust is still a very important, vivid and current matter today is, in fact, a great credit to the very hard work of a broad coalition of people committed to the remembrance of this atrocity." (Emphasis added.) Stone still believes that the rounding up and exterminating of three-quarters of Europe's Jews is really not as notable or morally troubling as high Russian wartime casualties, but it's not solely Jews' fault that people don't share Stone's views. Arguably even more despicable that Stone's display of Jew hatred was manner in which it was received. On the one hand, there was the thunderous silence of the media. And on the other hand there were the insistent, repeated attempts to justify his statements. Readers' talkbacks to write-ups of his remarks were rife with assertions that Stone's statements were not bigoted. Many agreed that Jews dominate the media and since they believe this is true, they argued that saying so is not a bigoted act. Others claimed that while Stone's statements were inaccurate, there is no evidence that he hates Jews and therefore, they weren't bigoted. At any rate, Patrick Goldstein of the Los Angeles Times and many others have argued, it would be wrong for Stone be discredited for his attacks against Jews. It is difficult to imagine that if someone trafficked in ethnic stereotypes about groups like blacks, and claimed that they wreck US foreign policy to serve their own nefarious aims, Goldstein and the talk backers would defend him. But then anti-Jewish bigotry has different rules than other hatreds. Stone and his defenders are not alone either in their attitude towards Jews or their denial of their attitude towards Jews. Indeed, they are part of a worldwide trend.
TAKE THE situation in Malmo, Sweden. Last Friday Jew haters set off firecrackers outside a synagogue in Malmo. The blasts came a day after Jew haters posted a bomb threat on the wall of the synagogue for the second time in two weeks. Malmo is a hotbed of anti-Jewish violence and the Jews of the city are fleeing in droves. Yet in the face of all this, Malmo's non-Jews cannot bring themselves to acknowledge that there is a problem with anti-Semitism in their city. Even those who are supposed to be responsible for combating anti-Semitism refuse to acknowledge that Jews in Malmo are being attacked because they are Jews. Bjorn Lagerback is the man in Malmo who is supposed to care about anti-Semitic violence. Lagerback serves as the coordinator of the local forum in the city charged with combating hate crimes. In an interview with Malmo's The Local cited by the World Jewish Congress, Lagerback tried to impress on the world that the bombing was serious. Not because it was violence aimed at Jews, of course. No, according to Lagerback, this bombing is serious because it might hurt non-Jews. He said "We condemn this completely. Such an event is not just directed against the synagogue, but also at other targets that could be described as ethnic or religious." Forget about the fact that only Malmo's synagogues, and not its churches and mosques require around the clock security. If no other ethnic or religious groups were targeted would bombing synagogues no longer warrant condemnation? The acceptance of anti-Semitism has reached epidemic proportions. In Amsterdam, anti-Semites are making the mundane act of walking around outside in broad daylight a dangerous prospect for Jews. Jews are regularly attacked verbally and physically by anti-Semites as they walk on the streets of the Dutch capital. In an attempt to catch and punish anti-Semitic thugs, the Amsterdam police force has dispatched policemen dressed as Jews to pound the pavement. The hope is that these decoys will be able to draw out the offenders and arrest them. Apparently, some Dutch have a problem with punishing anti-Semitic attackers. As Paul Belien reported in the Brussels Journal, "Evelien van Roemburg, an Amsterdam counselor of the Green Left Party, says that using a decoy by the police amounts to [entrapment], which is itself a criminal offence under Dutch law." In other words, Van Roemburg thinks that people who walk around while appearing to be Jewish are asking for it. Van Roemburg no doubt also believes that women in mini-skirts deserve to be raped. All of this brings us to a discussion of the most endemic form of contemporary anti-Semitism: Anti-Zionism. There is no reason for anyone to be surprised that anti-Semites deny that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism. After all, they deny that every other form of anti-Semitism is anti-Semitism. Why should anti-Zionism receive special treatment? It is self-evident that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism. To say that Jews — uniquely among all the nations — have no right to freedom and self determination is obviously anti-Semitic. Anti-Semites give a variety of excuses to justify their rejection of the Jewish people's right to freedom and sovereignty in our homeland. Sometimes they say they have no problem with Jewish nationalism per se. They are simply anti-nationalist generally. But remarkably, these anti-nationalist anti-Zionists invariably just happen to be outspoken supporters of Palestinian nationalism. Moreover, it is curious that universalist anti-nationalists only have a special term to describe their opposition to Jewish nationalism. No one ever mentions being anti-Irishist, for instance. When someone says they oppose Irish nationalism, the obvious conclusion is that they don't like Irish people. Just so, people who are anti-French tend not to like French people. And yet, the anti-Zionists would have us believe that their opposition to the Jewish state has nothing to do with their feelings about Jews. Beyond their nonsensical attempts to deny the fact that anti-Zionism is a specific rejection of a specific — that is Jewish — type of nationalism, there is the fact that anti-Zionists tend inevitably to drink from other anti-Jewish sewers as well. Take former British parliamentarian Clare Short for example. During her just ended career in the British parliament, Short became known as an outspoken anti-Zionist. Short rejected Israel's right to exist and castigated it for its "bloody, brutal and systematic annexation of land, destruction of homes and the deliberate creation of an apartheid system." But Short's Israel kick didn't end with her frequent condemnations of imaginary but lurid Israeli crimes. As time went by, Short began channeling centuries of British Jew hatred. Like her forefathers who blamed Jews for rain, drought, plague and fire, Shore blamed Israel for global warming. As she put it in a speech at the European Parliament three years ago, Israel "undermines the international community's reaction to global warming." As Shore saw it, European leaders are properly obsessed with attacking the Jewish state. But because Israel insists on existing and so requires Europeans to condemn it, Israel prevents the Europeans from attending to the threat of carbon which, if left unregulated will "end the human race." So if the world boils over, the cauldron will be made in Israel. One of the most prominent anti-Zionists today is Prof. Juan Cole from University of Michigan. Part of being a successful anti-Zionist involves claiming that Jews have no right to the land of Israel. So to be a good anti-Zionist, one needs to deny Jewish history. To this end, in March Cole published a piece of historical fiction at Salon online magazine. Titled "Ten reasons why East Jerusalem does not belong to Israel," Cole mixed half truths with flagrant lies to justify his denial of Jewish history and belittlement of the Jewish rights. Cole wrote, "Jerusalem not only was not being built by the likely then non-existent 'Jewish people' in 1000 BCE, but Jerusalem probably was not even inhabited at that point in history. Jerusalem appears to have been abandoned between 1000 BCE and 900 BCE, the traditional dates for the united kingdom under David and Solomon." This assertion is so mendacious that it takes your breath away. As anyone who has actually been in Jerusalem can attest, it is all but impossible to be physically present in the oldest areas of the city and not bump into relics dating from between 1000-900 BCE. Cole's allegation is the academic equivalent of Louis Farakhan's claim that white people are devils planted on earth by aliens. As an anti-Zionist anti-Semite, it was just a matter of time until Cole travelled into the fetid swamp of denying the historical record to facilitate his false claim that Jews are not a people and therefore bereft of rights as a nation to our national homeland. And why shouldn't he cover himself in anti-Semitic muck? So far, the stench has brought him great success. The very fact that I felt compelled to write an essay explaining why anti-Semitism is anti-Semitism and why anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism is depressing proof that anti-Semites have been wildly successful whitewashing their bigotry. What makes contemporary anti-Semitism unique is its purveyors' great efforts to hide its very existence. Their motivation is clear. Outside the openly genocidal anti-Semitic Muslim world, most anti-Semites are self-described liberals who claim to oppose bigotry. For these people, pretending away their prejudice is the key to their continued claim to enlightenment. And so the likes of Oliver Stone publish clarifications. And Cole invents history. And the Europeans blame Jews and Israel and Zionism when Jews inside and outside Israel are assaulted and killed. And I am sorry I wrote this column. Because an audience that demands an explanation of why evil is evil is an audience that has already sided with evil. Correction: In Tuesday's column I wrote that the US's upgrade in the PLO's Washington diplomatic mission gave added privileges to PLO representatives in the US. In fact, the upgrade is a symbolic gesture of support for the Palestinians. The representatives do not enjoy diplomatic immunity.
Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send
an email to ynz@netvision.net.il
|
|
GOT MILK, SHEIKH?
Posted by Family Security Matters, July 30, 2010. |
|
This article was written by Dr. Nancy Hartevelt Kobrin and Dr. Joan Jutta Lachkar Dr. Nancy Kobrin, a psychoanalyst with a Ph.D. in romance and semitic languages, specializes in Aljamia and Old Spanish in Arabic script. She is an expert on the Minnesota Somali diaspora and a graduate of the Human Terrain System program at Leavenworth Kansas. Her new book is The Banality of Suicide Terrorism: The Naked Truth About the Psychology of Islamic Suicide Bombing. Dr. Joanie Lachkar is a licensed Marriage and Family therapist in private practice in Brentwood and Tarzana, California, who teaches psychoanalysis and is the author of The Narcissistic/Borderline Couple: A Psychoanalytic Perspective on Marital Treatment (1992, The Many Faces of Abuse: Treating the Emotional Abuse of High-Functioning Women (1998), The V-Spot, How to Talk to a Narcissist, How to Talk to a Borderline and a recent paper, "The Psychopathology of Terrorism" presented at the Rand Corporation and the International Psychohistorical Association. She is also an affiliate member for the New Center for Psychoanalysis. |
|
While the Saudis might have a lot of oil, they seem to be running short on milk. So much so that one of their imams wrote a fatwa* recently permitting the breast feeding of adult males thereby getting around the gender apartheid of the Kingdom of the Deprived. This would allow the nursing adult male to become mahram[**] and the nursing woman can then be in close quarters with him. To clarify his status changes from say a frequent visitor to more like a quasi member of the family, even called a "milk" brother, sort of like a blood brother. This is not the first time a breast feeding fatwa has been issued. Several years ago in Egypt one was issued so that men could be nursed at the office by female workers, as if those poor women didn't have anything else to do? Imagine having to also contend with the henna dyed bristly beards of the devout, scratching the tender breasts of a postpartum ummi (mother). Is there no shame? Seriously, something is going on here. How can we understand it? Let us go a little deeper. After all even Al Qaeda has produced breast implant bombs for female suicide bombers. Why this obsession with the breast? Is Hooters moving to Saudi Arabia soon? Why this obsession with nursing? Saudi Arabia seems to be grappling with its age-old narrative in the Quran. Could we say that this goes back to even the Biblical narrative that the Prophet Muhammad has co-opted, that he got stuck with a dry desolate desert and the Jews got the Land Flowing With Milk and Honey. A sensitive issue... As the saying goes, form follows function and function follows fantasy. If one visualizes one's destiny as limited to the desert, one perpetuates that image and only gets a dry infertile breast whereas if one visualizes life, growth, one thinks fertility and greenery and that perpetuates life in that image. Just think — the color of Islam is green; could it be because of unconsciously searching for that fertile land? Israel's flag of blue and white on the other hand looks skyward to the Transcendental. Yet because Arab Muslim culture is so rife with deprivation and victimhood, nothing is ever enough. Tragically, they live within a black hole, a vacuum or space that can never be filled. Yet they demand and demand and even when the milk is offered, it is either never enough or insatiable to their desire. More! More! More! There is never enough milk and there is never enough land. The same holds true for other Muslims as well. Even Somalia's name means "Go milk the camel." And the Somalis believe that they are descended from the Arabians! What does this all mean and how does this impact the Muslim psyche? With deprivation and the accompanying defensive maneuvering, the first thing that goes is reality. Maybe someone needs to suggest to them to do DNA testing at National Geographic to discover that the Arabians actually came out of the Olduvai Gorge in Kenya/Tanzania like everyone else! So what does this have to do with the theme of milk? The nature of deprivation, shame/blame, preservation of honor, keeps Muslims locked into a cycle of revenge and attack. They perpetually envy the other who has the milk. Ironically the adult male who is to be nursed, is now attempting to get what he didn't get as an infant and now as an adult, he has to be nursed — hence the fatwa. This is why we refer to Muslim society as an "orphan society." Indeed the Prophet Muhammad himself was an orphan. The generic orphan also plays a leading role in the drama of the Quran. Mother Mary of Christianity becomes the Mother of Orphans in Islam. Yet sadly even though the New Testament with its nursing Madonna and Child has been co-opted, it is not truly Islamic foundational imagery. They borrowed it; they didn't create it. Saudis and other Muslims do not know how to mourn their losses. They stay glued together like a big enmeshed dysfunctional family defending their wounds and licking them. They bully to get what they want, but even then it is never enough. They avenge by the sword. Got milk? We don't think so. [**] In Islamic sharia legal terminology, a mahram (also transliterated mahrim or maharem) is an unmarriageable kin with whom sexual intercourse would be considered incestuous, a punishable taboo. Current usage of the term covers a wider range of people and mostly deals with the dress code practice of hijab. (Wikipedia) This article appeared in Family Security Matters (FSM). |
|
HOW THE CIA GOT IT WRONG ON IRAN'S NUKES
Posted by Daily Alert, July 30, 2010. |
|
This below is a resume of an Op-Ed written by Edward Jay Epstein that appeared July 29, 2010 in the Wall Street Journal. |
|
In a stunning departure from a decade of assessments, the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran declared: "We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program." Unfortunately, as the Obama administration has now acknowledged, the NIE's conclusion was dead wrong, costing us precious time in dealing with a serious threat. What caused such a disastrous mistake? As James Risen, the New York Times national security reporter, explains in his book State of War, in 2004, a CIA communications officer accidentally included data in a satellite transmission to an agent in Iran that could be used to identify "virtually every spy the CIA had in Iran." This disastrous error was compounded because the recipient of the transmission turned out to be a double-agent controlled by the Iranian security service. This allowed the Iranian security service to control the information these agents provided the CIA, which may have been vulnerable to receiving misleading secret intelligence that Tehran had abandoned its nuclear ambitions. 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 |
|
RUSSIA CONDEMNED EU SANCTIONS ON IRAN AS "UNACCEPTABLE";
EGYPTIAN DAILY ON GAZA ECONOMY
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 30, 2010. |
|
' RUSSIA CONDEMNED EU SANCTIONS ON IRAN AS "UNACCEPTABLE" The EU imposed its own sanctions against Iran's foreign trade, banking and energy sectors. The Russian regime contends that the additional EU sanctions on Iran, imposed shortly after the fourth round of UN sanctions, undermine "calibrated" international efforts to deal with Iranian nuclear development (IMRA, 7/29/10 from BBC News via Egypt Daily News). www.imra.org.il/ The Russian statements reveal two problems of logic and motive: (1) Suppose the purpose of the UN sanctions were to make it too difficult for Iran to proceed with nuclear development suspected of being military. How would national supplements to those sanctions on industries related to that development impede the UN goal? Now suppose the purpose of the UN sanctions were to calibrate difficulties for Iran below the level needed to deter Iran. EU supplements to those sanctions interfere with international efforts to pretend to be preventing Iranian military nuclear development. (2) Because Russia agreed to some sanctions, and Pres. Medvedev made a few favorable statements on other matters, the Obama administration hails its policy on Russia as bringing Russia around to the West's view of Iran as a nuclear menace. The newest Russian statement, by condemning the additional sanctions, fits a pattern of zig-zag. Russia condemns, concedes a smidgen, gets concessions or praise or spares Iran, and now it is back to condemning. The real story is that Russia still is protecting Iran. It is not changing, but deceiving. The Administration sacrifices U.S. national security and other national interests to Russia in the hope that Russia will make compensatory concessions to the U.S.. Not being asked to sign on the dotted line, Russia offers mostly hints. The new UN sanctions, following three rounds of ineffective sanctions against a die hard Iranian regime, amount to Russian-Chinese stalling. The U.S. still does not know who are its friends, foes, and friends of its foes. The U.S. still lacks a strategy for defeating Islamo-fascism. That term and synonyms are banned within the Obama administration. Obama refuses to identify the chief enemy of civilization. We lose troops and taxes fighting gunmen, without a strategy that identifies their ideology and prescribes ways of discrediting it so they don't take up arms against us. We let them indoctrinate people until we run out of money, troops, and patience.
EGYPTIAN DAILY ON GAZA ECONOMY Writing in the Egyptian daily, al-Ahram, Ashraf Abu Al-Houl describes Gaza's economy in July. His views on Israel may be taken from his calling Israel enforcement of its blockade a "crime." Mr. Al-Houl toured the new resorts and the markets. He found them mostly "grand." He was amazed by how well filled were the shops, including with luxuries. The blockade was neutralized before the flotilla from Turkey. It remains as a formal, political blockade, not much of an economic one. The author's view of Israel is that its enforcement of the blockade is a "crime." Most of the shops get supplied via Egypt. Despite the additional costs of bringing the goods in, their prices are lower than those in Egypt, especially for food. The markets suffer from over-supply and from consumer expectations that falling prices will drop even more. As inventories pile up, Merchants cut back on new purchases. Prices are not falling in the resorts catering to the newly wealthy smugglers. At one, sandwiches cost about $100. Most of the resorts are connected to Hamas leaders. The retail industry does not represent the whole economy in Gaza. Unemployment is about 45%! (StandWithUs (www.standwithus.com/, 7/29/10.) The Egyptian's observations indicate that contrary to rumor, Israel was not starving the people of Gaza. But the average resident is poor, because of the way the Strip is managed and devoted to jihad. The source article has photographs of water parks in Gaza. Why don't the New York newspapers?
CAMPUS WATCH CORRECTS LEFTIST AND RADICAL ISLAMIC CRITICS Campus Watch has issued another lengthy correction against the almost daily accusations and paranoia against it from the U.S. Left and apologists for radical Islam. We'll summarize the main ones. The source article provides a link for each complaint and for rebuttals. What is Campus Watch (CW): "Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum, reviews and critiques Middle East studies in North America, with an aim to improving them. The project mainly addresses five problems: analytical failures, the mixing of politics with scholarship, intolerance of alternative views, apologetics, and the abuse of power over students. Campus Watch fully respects the freedom of speech of those it debates while insisting on its own freedom to comment on their words and deeds." Founded eight years ago, the organization notes the irony that its critics, whose main complaint is being silenced by CW, continue shouting denunciations of it. (The Left often demands that its critics be silenced, as Prof. Steven Plaut has documented for us.) Dorit Naaman, Alliance Atlantis Professor of Film and Media at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario, names CW as part of a big conspiracy, based on a conference that CW was not involved in. Failing to differentiate CW work from non-CW material in its archives, Nora Barrows-Friedman, writing for the Electronic Intifada, accuses CW of "smear campaigns" against two professors. Actually, CW wrote one article about one professor and nothing about the other. No campaign and no smear. John J. Mearsheimer and Steven M. Walt, among others, keep accusing CW of being part of an Israel lobby that directs CW efforts. CW is an unaffiliated organization run by Daniel Pipes (shown in photo taken from a website ofhis).. CW challenges Mearsheimer and Walt to produce evidence of Israeli dictation. They do not; they just accuse. In the Palestine Chronicle, Franklin Lamb calls the Zionist Freedom Alliance "a spin-off of Campus Watch." CW replies, "That's news to us." Hebrew University of Jerusalem professor of political science Itzhak Galnoor claims that Israel-Academic-Monitor.com is connected to CW. It isn't. [Prof. Steven Plaut, who founded the Israeli organization, probably was inspired by CW. They operate independently and in different countries.] Sharmila Devi, in the National (Abu Dhabi), claims that Campus Watch criticizes professors for being "anti-Israel and pro-Islam." "In fact, we critique professors for being anti-objectivity and pro-politicization." In the Socialist Worker, Brian Napoletano claims that CW denounces scholars who criticize Israel and routinely accuses them of anti-Semitism. No, CW criticizes scholars for the substance of their work. [Critics of CW ignore the substance of CW criticism.] Ben-Gurion University political geography professor David Newman "calls Campus Watch a "disgrace for anyone who believes in the concept of freedom of speech." The professor, like many of the other critics, mischaracterizes free speech. Free speech lets a professor present a lecture and lets CW critique it. If CW is not allowed to critique it, it is denied free speech. David Newman accuses CW of McCarthyism, because some students go through CW to advise the public of campus discourse. Sen. McCarthy got people blacklisted, and without a hearing. In "the National (Abu Dhabi), Jonathan Cook associates Campus Watch with the terms 'neoconservative,' 'right-wing groups,' 'climate of fear,' and 'witch-hunt.' The first two labels are misused as epithets. There is no climate of fear against leftist professors. Nobody is being hunted down. "Guardian blogger Sunny Hundal relies on the old 'according to one critic' trick to make all manner of untrue and nonsensical accusations against Campus Watch. We're still waiting for Hundal to disclose the mysterious identity of his unnamed source..." (Cinnamon Stillwell, CW, 7/29/10.) Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
CLEARER THAN EVER WHY ISRAEL NEEDS THE JORDAN VALLEY
Posted by Hillel Fendel, July 29, 2010. |
|
Follow Israel news on
The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs presents a five-minute video that dramatically and clearly delineates Israel's critical security needs to protect it from attack. In addition, the JCPA recently hosted a first-of-its-kind gathering of senior Israeli generals who outlined the basic principles of a defense policy focused on maintaining defensible borders for Israel. It was held in light of recent events, such as the deterioration in relations between Israel and its erstwhile ally Turkey, which underscore how critical it is for Israel to be guided by the principle of defending itself by itself. The video below, which features state-of-the-art graphics to depict Israel's topography-related dangers, can also be seen on the JCPA website Background: After the Six Day War in 1967, when Israel was nearly overrun by four Arab armies on three fronts, the United Nations resolved that every country in the region has the right "to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats and acts of force." The video shows vividly that if Israel does not control both the Jordan Rift Valley and critical mountains of Samaria, its borders would be rendered absolutely indefensible — and thereby in violation of the spirit of the UN resolution. The video effectively utilizes 3D graphics to show, as no map can, how Israel is protected by the heights of the Jordan Valley on one side, and by those of the Samarian mountains on the other. "The Jordan Rift Valley on the east forms a natural barrier between Israel and the countries of Jordan, Iraq and Iran," the narrator relates. It rises from 1,200 feet below sea level to a height of 3,000 feet above, "creating a steep virtual wall opposite any force attacking from the east." Here, the film shows a Jerusalem-bound enemy tank failing in its attempt to scale and climb the steep mountainside. Similarly, the Mountain Ridge of Samaria is dramatically shown to dominate Israel's Coastal Plain, Tel Aviv area, industry, population concentration, and airports. The film shows how Palestinian Authority control of the mountains of Judea and Samaria would mean that Jerusalem, Israel's airports, and virtually every spot in the State of Israel would be within rocket range. "That's why any future arrangement must include Israeli control over key areas of the mountain ridge and a demilitarized Palestinian state," the narrator warns. video Another point emphasized in the clip is the importance of Israeli control of the airspace over Judea and Samaria. To avoid the threat of fighter jets crossing into Israel — a four-minute fly from Jordan to the Mediterranean — Israel must be able to identify enemy planes before they cross the Jordan River, so that they can be shot down in time. This means, the video reiterates, that Israel must control the airspace over Judea and Samaria. A summary of some of the main points made by the various generals who took part in the conference: Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Moshe Yaalon, former IDF Chief of Staff: "In his major policy speech at Bar-Ilan University in 2009, Prime Minister Netanyahu articulated a major shift in Israel's policy — a restoration of Israel's traditional security-based approach to achieving a lasting peace... In the aftermath of Arafat's rejection of Prime Minister Ehud Barak's peace offer, the Palestinian suicide bombing war that followed, Ariel Sharon's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, the Second Lebanon War, the failed Annapolis talks, and the recent war in Gaza, the Netanyahu government is re-adopting the notion that safeguarding Israel's vital security requirements is the only path to a viable and durable peace with our Palestinian neighbors. Maj.-Gen. (res.) Uzi Dayan: "It is commonly misunderstood just how vulnerable Israel actually is. Some 70 percent of its population and 80 percent of its industrial capacity are concentrated in the narrow coastal strip between the Mediterranean Sea and the West Bank. The adjacent West Bank hills topographically dominate the relatively flat and exposed coastal plain, providing a distinct advantage to an attacker... If the West Bank were to fall into hostile hands, the resulting situation would pose a constant threat to Israel's national infrastructure, including Ben-Gurion International Airport, the Trans-Israel Highway toll road [Highway 6], Israel's National Water Carrier, and its high-voltage electric power lines. Dr. Dore Gold, on How Washington Has Understood Israel's Security Needs: "The United States has historically backed Israel's view that UN Security Council Resolution 242, adopted in the wake of the Six-Day War on November 22, 1967, does not require a full withdrawal to the 1949 armistice lines (also called the 1967 borders). There is no basis to the argument that the U.S. has traditionally demanded of Israel either a full withdrawal or a nearly full withdrawal from the territories it captured in the Six-Day War. Maj.-Gen. (res.) Aharon Ze'evi Farkash explained the importance of the demilitarization of a Palestinian entity, and Brig.-Gen. (res.) Udi Dekel elaborated on the need for Israel's control of the airspace over Judea and Samaria. Maj.-Gen. (res.) Yaakov Amidror said that modern history in southern Lebanon, Bosnia, Egypt and Beirut has shown that peacekeeping forces cannot guarantee peace, and generally leave when one side attacks.
Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor at Arutz-Sheva (www.Israel National News.com).
|
|
THE DYNAMICS OF BECOMING ORTHODOX: DUTCH JEWISH WOMEN RETURNING TO JUDAISM AND HOW THEIR MOTHERS FELT ABOUT IT
Posted by Dan Wyman Books, July 29, 2010. |
|
Dear Friends, We are excited to offer to you the following fascinating study, just published, on the impact of increased religious observance by one generation on its relations with the generation preceeding. This particular study looks at chanages in generational dynamics in Holland brought about by the increase in ba'a lot teshuvah over the last few decades. Details follow; please submit your orders to us by phone or email. Many thanks, Dan Wyman THE DYNAMICS OF BECOMING ORTHODOX: DUTCH JEWISH WOMEN RETURNING TO JUDAISM AND HOW THEIR MOTHERS FELT ABOUT IT
The return to Judaism or the teshuvah experience emerged in the mid 1960s when young American Jews became involved in a spiritual search that eventually led them to discover and embrace Orthodox Judaism. It signaled the start of what would become a widespread phenomenon. Within a relatively short period, thousands of Jews in the United States, Israel, Britain, France, the Soviet Union, South Africa, the Netherlands and other countries committed themselves to Orthodox Judaism and became observant. A Jew who returns to Orthodox Judaism is known as a ba'al teshuvah; for a woman the term is ba'alat teshuvah (plural forms: ba'alei and ba'a lot teshuvah respectively).This study of ba'alot teshuvah in the Netherlands is a qualitative and exploratory investigation on how Dutch returnee women and their mothers experienced, perceived and interpreted the return to Orthodox Judaism. In short: How do these returnees and their mothers feel about the religious intensification? In this context the research also pays attention to the ways in which the Dutch returnees became involved with Orthodox Judaism, how they found their religious niche and whether their becoming Orthodox impacted on intergenerational and multigenerational relationships. Minny Evaline Mock-Degen (1945) grew up in the Netherlands, studied cultural anthropology at the University in Amsterdam, and taught at SOSA (Stichting tot Opleiding Sociale Arbeid). In 1985 she emigrated with her family to Israel, where she started volunteering at a hotline for Orthodox woman and participated in a graduate program in clinical sociology at Neve Yerushalayim, under the auspices of the University of Texas. She later joined the research team of a pilot study in Israel which sought to explore how ba'a lot teshuvah (woman returnees) and their secular mothers perceived the religious intensification and how it impacted on family relations. This participation led to undertaking research among Dutch returnees and their mothers which resulted in a doctorate thesis (2006) at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. This book is a revised and expanded version of Minny Mock's doctorate thesis. Please order today from Dan Wyman Book, 183 Ainslie St. Brooklyn, NY 11211. Email: dan@danwymanbooks.com; Phone: 718.963.0410 Thank you.
|
|
EMERGENCY!!!! OD YOSEIF CHAI: YESHIVA'S APPEAL AGAINST Demolition REJECTED
Posted by Robin Ticker, July 29, 2010. | |
| |
|
Dear Rabbanim, Print Media, Friends and Family, amv'sh This is a very bad OMEN. This can not be taken quietly. A Yeshiva and Synagogue destroyed in the Shomron or anywhere sends a terrible message to the world. I re-experience the destruction of Gush Katif shuls. A wound still festering, now reopened and in the process of being stabbed once again. What agitation did the Gush Katif people do to deserve the destruction of their synagogues, still not rebuilt? (All except 1 or 2 out of 26) Can a Yeshiva and a Synagogue be demolished retroactively at the whim of an Israeli minister heavily involved in politics after many have signed agreed, processed and built. This building has been faithfully serving the Shomron communities as a Beit Knesset and Jewish Center of Learning. It is also a Yeshiva Boys High School. Can this building be retroactively annulled, demolished, erased and blotted off the map? Can it's reason to exist cease based on the decisions of politicians and bureaucrats who say so? What explanation can you offer those high school students? Clearly it is "You have no rights in this place. Leave this area immediately. Your house and home and school and shul are not protected by a security system!!!! How can this civil administration, ruled by politics, override previous administrations that signed and approved??? What message does this send the world? Better left unsaid and Al Tiftach Peh LaSatan... Barak is in America and the timing of this is not coincidental! WOW! Can't beat this gift... Destruction in Judea and Samaria, a wonderful present to Obama from BARAK the "Defense" Minister of Israel under Netanyahu!! Beats cigars and watches. This Yeshiva was built by Israel and has been standing 11 years! It's Rosh Yeshiva is depicted as a dangerous agitator. So let's talk about agitation! Let's talk about how the government of Israel deals with real agitation from the Palestinians like trespassing, stealing, and arson on farms within Judea and Samaria Let's talk about the same scenario on farms in the Galil and the Negev. Let's talk about how the IDF sits with their hands folded and at times, from orders above, does nothing to protect the property of taxpaying Jews, citizens of the State, living in Judea and Samaria. The IDF is confused as per who they must protect and defend. They know that they must surely protect the stone throwing, arson setting Arabs from those "militant" settlers. If one of those settlers even dare to burn even a tire, that's it for them. Jail,. Isolation.. Even if they had the thought in their mind to commit the crime of burning a tire, now that's reallllllly bad... Compare their pre-sentencing jail term with proven Palestinian terrorists...And which right wing settler has the means to afford to pay the lawyers the fees that are necessary to defend themselves? The Palestinians have pockets that are a bottomless pit and the best lawyers are hired on their behalf. By whom? Shouldn't we ask? Their money flows from the European Union, America, Saudi Arabai and of course Iran and their proxies in Lebanon and Syria etc ...The Police accept the lies of Arabs as testimony without investigation of the facts and then send out stories based on lies and fabrication to the media throughout the world who are very quick to report this "news" . But the IDF is confused as to how to protect the tax paying settlers before they became "militant" having been provoked by destructive, trespassers, stone throwers and arson setting Palestinians. Why don't the Jewish newspapers carry real stories of agitation instead of prefabricated ones. How much provoking must the settlers take? PLEASE ASK YOURSELF THIS QUESTION. Would you willingly allow your home to be trespassed, vandalized, your goats and sheep stolen, Your vineyards ruined, your tractor and farm equipment vandalized and allow your families to be threatened and simply sit there with your hands folded as a sitting duck waiting for even worst things to happen? Would you throw up your hands and say i had better run away from my million dollar or million shekel house that I have been working so very hard for my whole adult life with the help of family and friends because no one is protecting me and when I defend myself I am called the agitator? In fact they will turn the table on me and even before I put a legal claim on them they might submit reports to the police that I was the one that vandalized their homes, stole their sheep, burnt their vineyards, destroyed their olive trees, shot them, and their grandmother and perhaps they will add that I beat their child etc, why not? it sounds good, all based on lies and fabrications and then the authorities will put me into jail and I will need to defend myself. Maybe the Police will release me that night because of lack of evidence, but not after all the fabricated charges against me are sent out to world wide press. Sometimes, they keep big mouths like me in jail or administration detention and won't even tell me the reason SO WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF THEY DID THIS TO YOU????? AND BTW...WHERE WOULD YOU RUN TO BY THE TIME THESE ANARCHIST REACH YOUR HOME???? and let us not sit smugly in the diaspora... Things are progressing at a very fast rate... Chas Veshalom... Contact Robin Ticker by email at |
|
THE FLOTILLA FARCE: FROM TURKEY, IRELAND OR CYPRUS, THE
PARTICIPANTS REEK OF HYPOCRISY
Posted by Eli E. Hertz, July 29, 2010. |
|
This was written by Danny Ayalon, Israel's Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs. It was published in The Wall Street Journal on July 29, 2010. |
|
A couple of years ago, a Palestinian refugee camp was encircled and laid siege to by an army of tanks and Armored Personnel Carriers. Attacks initiated by Palestinian militants triggered an overwhelming response from the army that took the life of almost 500 people, including many civilians. International organizations struggled to send aid to the refugee camps, where the inhabitants were left without basic amenities like electricity and running water. During the conflict, six U.N. personnel were killed when their car was bombed. Government ministers and spokesmen tried to explain to the international community that the Palestinian militants were backed by Syria and global jihadist elements. Al Qaeda condemned the government and the army, declaring that the attack was part of a "crusade" against their Palestinian brothers. A Palestinian refugee collects metal and plastic objects at a garbage dump in the Palestinian refugee camp of Beddawi near Tripoli. While most will assume that the events described above took place in the West Bank or Gaza, they actually took place in Lebanon in the summer of 2007, when Palestinian terrorists attacked the Lebanese Army, which struck back with deadly force. The scene of most of the fighting was the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp in Northern Lebanon, which was home to the Islamist Fatah al-Islam, a group that has links with al Qaeda. At the time, there was little international outcry. No world leader decried the "prison camps" in Lebanon. No demonstrations took place around the world; no U.N. investigation panels were created and little media attention was attracted. In fact, the plight of the Palestinians in Lebanon garners very little attention internationally. Today, there are more than 400,000 Palestinians in Lebanon who are deprived of their most basic rights. The Lebanese government has a list of tens of professions that a Palestinian is forbidden from being engaged in, including professions such as medicine, law and engineering. Palestinians are forbidden from owning property and need a special permit to leave their towns. Unlike all other foreign nationals in Lebanon, they are denied access to the health-care system. According to Amnesty international, the Palestinians in Lebanon suffer from "discrimination and marginalization" and are treated like "second class citizens" and "denied their full range of human rights." Amnesty also states that most Palestinian refugees in Lebanon have little choice but to live in overcrowded and deteriorating camps and informal gatherings that lack basic infrastructure. In view of the worsening plight of the Palestinians in Lebanon, it is the height of irony that a Lebanese flotilla is organizing to leave the port of Tripoli in the next few days to bring aid to Palestinians in Gaza. According to one of the organizers, the participants are "united by a feeling of stark injustice." This attitude exposes the dishonesty of the whole flotilla exercise. Whether it is from Turkey, Ireland or Cyprus, those that participate in these flotillas reek of hypocrisy. There are currently 100 armed conflicts and dozens of territorial disputes around the world. There have been millions of people killed and hundreds of millions live in abject poverty without access to basic staples. And yet hundreds of high-minded "humanitarian activists" are spending millions of dollars to reach Gaza and hand money to Hamas that will never reach the innocent civilians of Gaza. This is the same Gaza that just opened a sparkling new shopping mall that would not look out of place in any capital in Europe. Gaza, where a new Olympic-sized swimming pool was recently inaugurated and five-star hotels and restaurants offer luxurious fare. Markets brimming with all manner of foods dot the landscape of Gaza, where Lauren Booth, journalist and "human rights activist," was pictured buying chocolate and luxurious items from a well-stocked supermarket before stating with a straight face that the "situation in Gaza is a humanitarian crisis on the scale of Darfur." No one claims that the situation in Gaza is perfect. Since the bloody coup and occupation by Hamas of Gaza in 2007, in which more than 100 Palestinians were killed, Israel has had no choice but to ensure that Hamas is not able to build up an Iranian port on the shores of the Mediterranean. Until Hamas meets the three standards laid out by the international community, namely renouncing violence, recognizing Israel's right to exist and abiding by previously signed agreements between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, Hamas will continue to be shunned by the international community. While Israel's policy is to continue to see that all civilian needs are addressed, it can not allow Hamas to rearm and use Gaza as a base to attack Israel and beyond. For this reason, Israel initiated a blockade, fully legal under international law, to ensure that no items can be appropriated by Hamas to attack innocent civilians. Organizations that wish to join the U.N. and the Red Cross to deliver goods or aid to Gaza are welcome to do so through the Kerem Shalom crossing or even through Egyptian ports. Those that refuse and seek to break the legal blockade to boost Hamas are interested in provocation. If Israel allows these confrontational flotillas to successfully open up a shipping lane for arms smuggling for an Iranian proxy, then the region will suffer from continuous conflict. Actions that embolden the extremists will be at the cost of the moderates and this will pose a grave danger to moving the peace process forward. The latest flotilla preparing to leave from Lebanon fully exposes not only the hypocrisy but the danger of these provocative vigilante flotillas. The Lebanese flotilla, whose organizers claim injustice while ignoring the dire human rights situation of the Palestinians in Lebanon, amply demonstrate that these flotillas have nothing to do with humanita Eli E. Hertz is president of Myths and Facts, Inc. The organization's objective is to provide policymakers, national leadership, the media and the public-at-large with information and viewpoints that are founded on factual and reliable content. Contact him at today@mythsandfacts.org |
|
F-35 — TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT
Posted by UCI, July 29, 2010. |
|
This was written by Moshe Arens and appeared today in Haaretz. |
|
Just imagine Israel's position today had the Lavi fighter jet project not been canceled. Who would have believed it? Some years ago Israel was developing the world's most advanced fighter aircraft, the Lavi, while the Western world's aircraft manufacturers were beating their way to our door, eager to participate in the Lavi project, or trying to sell their competing plane to the Israel Air Force. And now Israel goes hat in hand pleading for a chance to be allowed to acquire the F-35 aircraft, at a price tag of $150 million each. But it's not only the astronomical price. Israel is told that the F-35 must be taken as is — no changes or modifications to suit Israel's specific needs, and absolutely no Israeli systems included. Take it or leave it. Just imagine Israel's position today had the Lavi project not been canceled. The IAF would be operating the world's most advanced fighter, upgraded over the years to incorporate operational experience and newer technology. Much of Israel's industry would have moved a great step ahead, Israel Aerospace Industries would have become a leading developer of fighter aircraft, and most importantly, a number of options would be open to the IAF in choosing its next fighter. 
What were the outlandish claims trumpeted by the opponents of the Lavi? The project, they said, was too big for Israel. These narrow-minded skeptics had not believed that we could convince the U.S. Congress to fund most of the project, and certainly were incapable of foreseeing Israel's economic growth in the years to come. Now they are staring at a $3 billion price tag for 20 F-35s. They said Israel should not be developing military platforms but only accessory systems to be mounted on the platforms. Now Israel will not be allowed to mount Israeli systems on the F-35. And where would we be today if we had believed that nonsense about not developing platforms? Out of the satellite-launching and unmanned-aerial-vehicle business. Where are they today, the people who at the time foolishly led the crusade against the Lavi? Surprisingly, 23 years later, some are still involved in decision-making on national security. They were against the development of the Lavi, against the development of an Israeli reconnaissance satellite, and against the development of the Arrow ballistic missile interceptor. But unfazed, they continue on. Do they admit they were mistaken? Admitting past mistakes is a rare human quality, but there are exceptions. Dan Halutz, a fighter pilot ace and former IAF commander and chief of staff, at the time like many senior IAF officers a supporter of the cancellation of the Lavi project, recognizes in his recent book that it was a mistake to cancel the project. So what's the use of crying over spilled milk? Are there alternatives to swallowing our pride and shelling out $3 billion for 20 F-35s? (The original plan had been to acquire 75 aircraft, which would have brought the price above $11 billion, but that was too expensive. ) Before we make that commitment, a little intellectual effort should be invested in looking at other options. Does Israel still have the technological capability to design a first-rate fighter aircraft? That needs to be examined in some depth. No doubt some of the capability that existed at the time of the Lavi project has been lost over the years, but as has been proved time and again, Israel has a world-class technological capability. Its success in unmanned aerial vehicles is only one of a number of examples. If it turns out that the capability to design the IAF's next fighter aircraft does exist in Israel, where could we go from there? Not to the U.S. Congress in search of funding, because we would have to remind them that 27 years ago they were fools to invest $1 billion in the development of the Lavi that Israel decided it did not want. We would have to look for partners who are prepared to invest resources in such a project, who have the necessary technological capability, and who are not involved in the F-35 project. Are there such candidates? In theory, yes. France, with a great aeronautical industry, chose not to participate in the F-35 project. India, with a considerable aeronautical capability and a meteorically growing economy, might be another candidate. And there is Russia. Perhaps none of them would be interested, and perhaps all of them would be. It's worth a try.
UCI — The Unity Coalition for Israel
(http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) — is "the largest worldwide
coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200
groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we
have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and
Secure Israel."
|
|
SHMUEL KATZ ON HENRY KISSINGER: KISSINGER'S GUILT
Posted by David Isaac, July 29, 2010. |
|
Recently declassified White House transcripts (featured in an editorial in the Israeli daily Haaretz) show former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger blaming Israel for the problems in the region, accusing Israel of being "deliberately provocative" and attempting "to create maximum commotion in the Middle East." In the newly released documents Kissinger refers to the Golan Heights as "Syrian territory" and the Syrians as "my friends." He confides to an Algerian diplomat that "a (new Arab-Israeli) war wouldn't be so bad for us. ... We could show (Israel) we are tough." Us? This strongly suggests Kissinger identified with the Arab side in the Arab-Israel conflict. While these documents do not cover the period of the 1973 war (they cover the end of the Nixon administration and eighteen months of the subsequent Ford administration), they bear out Shmuel Katz's devastating assessment of Kissinger's role during the war as crucial in turning Israel's military victory into a bitter strategic defeat. Just a year after the Yom Kippur War, in his 1974 pamphlet, "The Crisis of Israel and the West" Katz described Kissinger's actions and their repercussions. When Israel had recovered from her initial, nearly disastrous setback, the resourcefulness, and courage and qualitative superiority of her soldiers so succeeded that — in view of all the responsible military analysts — she was on the brink of achieving the greatest victory in her history. ... [T]he Israel army had created an excellent bargaining position for whatever negotiations might ensue after the Cease Fire had been formalized in a resolution by the UN Security Council. It held firmly a wide salient deep into Egyptian territory proper with the road to Cairo open. The Egyptian Third Army, one of the two Egyptian forces that had crossed over the east bank of the Suez Canal, was encircled and its supplies completely cut off. ... Twenty seven years later, in 2001, in a column "In Politics: No Friendships, Only Interests" Shmuel Katz returned to the theme of Kissinger's 1973 game plan, this time with Kissinger's own memoirs as evidence. Kissinger was determined, Katz wrote on a diplomacy that would result in Egypt's moving over from the Soviet orbit to the American. The price, as became evident, was to be a sacrifice of Israel...That is why the Egyptians to this day celebrate what they claim was a military victory over Israel. That is why, in Israel, the Yom Kippur War is remembered and felt as a bitter defeat. The harm done to Israel was and remains incalculable, not least in that sense of having been defeated. Moreover, Kissinger accomplished his goals through deception. As Katz details in "The Man with A Plan" (Oct. 23, 2003), with Israel facing a "dangerous shortage of materiel" Kissinger held up the arms shipments to Israel, claiming falsely it was Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger's doing. Kissinger then used Israel's predicament to pressure American Jewish leaders to abandon their efforts on behalf of Soviet Jewry in return for his support in expediting the delivery of the sorely needed materiel — arms and supplies which he was responsible for holding up in the first place. Kissinger also hinted to Defense Minister Moshe Dayan of a Soviet atomic threat if Israel didn't comply with his demands. Katz says this was a bald-faced lie. The Soviets had made no such threat. Katz writes: Dayan later realized that he had been hoodwinked, and indeed, on examination of Kissinger's blow-by-blow negotiations with the Russians, there is not a smidgen of a hint of an atomic threat by the Russians. In a public lecture in May 1974, Dayan declared: It is painful to think that someone who fled Nazi persecution as a young boy in 1938 should do so much damage to the Jewish State. Yet, a closer look shows that Kissinger has, at best, a tenuous connection with his Judaism. Rabbi Norman Lamm, former chancellor of Yeshiva University, spotted this early. In his article "Kissinger and the Jews" (Dec. 20, 1975), a devastating critique, he writes, "Dr. Kissinger is an illustration of how high an assimilated Jew can rise in the United States, and how low he can fall in the esteem of his fellow Jews." Lamm referred to a recent visit by Henry Kissinger and his parents to Furth, their hometown in Bavaria which they escaped before the war. They had only kind words for their native city, "but nary a word about the Holocaust, not a word about the Nazis who drove them out of that city!" On top of this, Lamm reveals that Kissinger didn't want to visit Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Memorial, during his first trip to Israel, and had to be "persuaded." He "accepted only when he was told that every other foreign minister visiting Israel had done so." This hasn't stopped Kissinger from portraying himself as one with the Jewish community, accepting awards from the Anti-Defamation League and bestowing awards on behalf of Jewish organizations like the United Jewish Appeal. Kissinger's guilt runs deep. Whether or not he feels it is another matter. Zionist writer William Mehlman offers a remarkable footnote involving Kissinger and Katz sometime after the Yom Kippur War. Kissinger got wind of a rumor — unfounded — that Shmuel had taken out a contract on his life (a fantasy Kissinger apparently believed based on the allegations about his role in delaying the resupply of munitions to Israel during the war). "Shmuel, informed of what had transpired and anxious to put the rumor to rest, arranged a face-to-face meeting with Kissinger at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York. 'From the moment I entered his suite until I left three minutes later,' Katz related to a small circle of friends in Tel Aviv, 'he did not stop shouting at me. He never gave me a chance to refute the rumor. In fact I never got a chance to say a word. Finally, I just turned around and walked out.'" Mehlman writes, "Whatever debt Henry Kissinger may or may not have felt he owed his conscience, he must surely have learned by now that it wasn't Shmuel Katz who had come to collect." Kissinger is 87. It doesn't look as if he will make amends in this world. Perhaps in the next. David Isaac is e-Editor of the Shmuel Katz
website. Contact him by email at David_Isaac@shmuelkatz.com or visit
|
|
HOW NOT TO CONDUCT DIPLOMACY: A CASE STUDY: UK PM IN TURKEY
Posted by Barry Rubin, July 29, 2010. |
|
British Prime Minister David Cameron's July 27 speech see here.) in Turkey will not live on in history. But it should, as an example of the decline of Western diplomacy, of suicide by Political Correctness, as a textbook example of how not to conduct international affairs. It crossed my mind that the speech was written by the Foreign Office for the express purpose of making Cameron look foolish, but then I realized that he and his top advisors probably have no idea why it was such a disaster. Suppose you are the British prime minister going to Turkey, or to just about any country, what should you say? The theme should be: We can cooperate and do mutually beneficial things. Here's what I can do for you, here's what I'd like you to do for me. And here's what you must not do in order to reap the benefits of my friendship and favor. Obviously, you need to dress that up in appropriate language. But everything should be conditional. The message to be delivered is that it is in your interest to respect my interests. Cameron did the precise and exact opposite. His message was: The UK needs Turkey. Turkey is wonderful. Its behavior has been perfect. We are desperate for your help. What is the effect? A man goes into a bazaar, points to a carpet and says: That is the most beautiful carpet I have ever seen. I must have it no matter what the price! How much is it? In addition, Cameron committed some other howling mistakes, several of which will amaze you. So please stick with me as I explain and document this. You won't be disappointed. And remember this is not just a matter of one speech, it is a fitting symbol for the entire contemporary Western diplomatic approach to the Middle East and much more to the world as well. By the way, it is doomed to fail miserably. Before we begin, remember that this is no longer the old Turkish Republic. Cameron is lavishing praise on an Islamist-oriented regime which has aligned itself with Iran and revolutionary Islamist groups. And all of Cameron's pandering, as if he were a Western barbarian in the court of the all-powerful Ottoman sultan, is driving a knife into the heart of a Turkish opposition which is genuinely friendly toward the West and horrified by the current regime's subversion of Turkish democracy. Cameron began by saying: "I've come to Ankara today to establish a new partnership between Britain and Turkey. I think this is a vital strategic relationship for our country." Note the cringing here. A proper prime minister might have said: "I think this is a vital strategic relationship for our countries." In other words, the speaker would stress there is a mutual benefit. Instead, this polite approach makes it sound as if Turkey is doing the United Kingdom a favor by having a strategic relationship to it while Turkey doesn't need Britain at all. And this is precisely the interpretation put on such things in the local context: The Turkish regime can take its Western alliances for granted while taking the side of the West's radical Islamist enemies. And here it is again: "People ask me why [I'm visiting] Turkey and why so soon. I'll tell you why. Because Turkey is vital for our economy. Vital for our security. And vital for our politics and diplomacy." So Turkey holds all the cards and the West can do nothing but give concessions in hope of winning favor in its eyes. One should remember that a major theme of Iran, Syria, and this Turkish regime is that nothing can be achieved without them and so the West must bow to their will and do everything they want. Cameron is feeding this monster. According to him, there are no problems with Turkey on security: "Turkey is a great NATO ally. And Turkey shares our determination to fight terrorism in all its forms — whether from Al Qaeda or the PKK. [But not, he fails to mention, from Hamas or Hizballah!] But perhaps more significant still is the fact that Turkey's unique position at the meeting point of East and West gives it an unrivalled influence in helping us get to grips with some of the greatest threats to our collective security." Look, you don't go to a country and criticize it (unless the country is Israel. Now why is that?) but you don't tell them that everything they are doing is great because if that's true they will keep on doing it and know there is no cost. Turkey under this regime is not a pro-Western state helping the West against its "Eastern" enemies — as Turkey was between, say, 1950 and 2000 — or is it a neutral meeting ground. At present, Turkey is on the enemy side. He continues: "Which Muslim majority country has a long-established relationship with Israel while at the same time championing the rights of the Palestinian people? Which European country could have the greatest chance of persuading Iran to change course on its nuclear policy?" Now this is after the Turkish regime trashed the relationship with Israel and stabbed the United States and UK in the back by cutting its own deal with Iran and even voting against sanctions at the UN. This is the policy Cameron praises! And then after all these things he adds: "Whether in Afghanistan or the Middle East, Turkey has a credibility that others in the West just can't hope to have. So I've come here to make the case for Turkey to use this credibility, to go further in enhancing our security and working for peace across our world." Does this include Turkish regime support for Hamas and Hizballah, alignment with Iran and Syria? He should be hinting gently that Turkey is losing its credibility because of the regime's behavior. And therefore Turkey needs to change its behavior, a point that the opposition will be arguing in the next election. By this time I can see the opposition tearing it hair out as another Western leader heaps praise on the regime. And have no doubt the regime will use all this in next year's elections: Extremist? Transforming Turkey toward Islamism? What do you mean? The West loves us! Cameron then goes on and makes it clear that Turkey would be doing the EU a favor by joining it, not the tiniest hint of leverage, that Turkish membership might depend on the regime's behavior. He could have said: While I, of course, support you, the path would be easier if... Followed by some polite and proper hints done with full British charm. But it gets worse. Cameron is about to insult several of Britain's closest allies, including Germany and France, by making opposition to Turkey's entrance into the EU as a form of racism and Islamophobia. For example, he says that opponents are: "The prejudiced. Those who willfully misunderstand Islam. They see no difference between real Islam and the distorted version of the extremists. They think the problem is Islam itself. And they think the values of Islam can just never be compatible with the values of other religions, societies, or cultures." All these arguments are just plain wrong. The problem precisely is the version of Islam embodied in the current Turkish government. There could be other perfectly pious Muslims ruling Turkey (and Iran, Syria, or the Gaza Strip for that matter) who would interpret Islam in a way relatively compatible with the values of other religions. But not the Islamists! He also complains of those who "see the history of our world as a clash of civilizations as a choice between East and West. They just don't get the fact that Turkey can be a great unifier. Because instead of choosing between East and West, Turkey has chosen both." But he doesn't comprehend that the current government of Turkey sees the world as a clash of civilizations. Its foreign minister even wrote a book to that effect, which has never been translated and which the regime is doing its best to conceal. This is not the Turkey of Kamal Ataturk and his successors but rather (at least temporarily) a country ruled by the successors of those who opposed Ataturk. If I were a German or French journalist my headline would be: Cameron Calls German (or French) policy bigoted and anti-Islamic. Yet Cameron sails on into even worse grounds. He actually praises a Turkish policy which has gone to the brink of war with Israel, sponsored a flotilla run by radical Islamists intending to create a violent confrontation, and is allied with a revolutionary terrorist group. One has to quote it to believe he actually said the following: "Turkey's relationships in the region, both with Israel and with the Arab world, are of incalculable value. No other country has the same potential to build understanding between Israel and the Arab world. I know that Gaza has led to real strains in Turkey's relationship with Israel. But Turkey is a friend of Israel. And I urge Turkey, and Israel, not to give up on that friendship. In other words, Turkey is 100 percent right, I have no criticism of Hamas's behavior, we should accept a permanent revolutionary Islamist, terrorist, genocidal, statelet on the Mediterranean. No problem. And we can ignore the Turkish regime's pro-Hamas policy and provocative behavior because without abandoning that approach Turkey can still play a productive role! This is the diplomatic equivalent of insane behavior on Cameron's part. And does Israel want this regime to mediate between it and the Palestinians? Even the Palestinian Authority doesn't want that: it knows that the Turkish regime is allied with its Hamas rivals, for goodness sakes! Doesn't Cameron know this? I don't want to take up too much of your time but I cannot let this next gem pass. True, Cameron urged Turkey to continue internal reforms (but there's no hint of the anti-democratic nature of the regime's manipulation of such reforms, for example, to seize control of the courts) and the massive repression of dissidents. He suggests that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons and he even criticizes the Turkey-Iran deal. But note the illogical leap: "Even if Iran were to complete the deal proposed in their recent agreement with Turkey and Brazil, it would still retain around fifty percent of its stockpile of low-enriched uranium. So we need Turkey's help now in making it clear to Iran just how serious we are about engaging fully with the international community. That meeting is a conference of Iran's supporters! Why would it lead Iran in the right direction? How about Turkey's opposition to sanctions? And again note the beggar's worldview: "We need Turkey's help..." Why should Turkey help? What will you give the regime in exchange for its alleged help? What behavior will you overlook in exchange for its alleged help? This regime wants to help Iran, not against Iran. Finally, remember that Cameron is a Conservative, the successor of Winston Churchill. That's how deep the appeasement disease has penetrated the Western ruling class. Andrew Sullivan Attacks Me Without Bothering to Consider What I Wrote
One of the amazing things about the intellectual scene today is that people attack you without any reference to what you actually say. It is as if you were talking to someone deaf who has his hearing aid turned off. You want to explain that there must be a misunderstanding only to find that the person doesn't care: he just wants to scream insults at you so that nobody actually considers whether you are making an accurate point. When I was growing up, someone considered your actual arguments and responded to them with rational arguments of their own. Some of us still do that. I wrote a serious and sober analysis of what was wrong with the UK prime minister's speech in Turkey, focusing on the basic misunderstanding of proper diplomatic leverage. Instead, Andrew Sullivan writes: (see here.) "Barry Rubin joins the chorus from the neocon right claiming that 'Turkey is on the enemy side.'" Let's consider this sentence. First, rather than argue the facts he merely throws in two words intended to get people to demonize me and not listen to anything I say: neocon right. Hey, nothing more need be said! But the central question should be whether the original statement was true or not, right? Then there's that word "joins." I've been studying Turkey now for 35 years. I've been there about 25 times. Regarding the direction of the regime, I've been saying the same thing for about two years, long before there was a collapse of Turkish-Israel relations. If I've joined anyone it's the Turkish socialists and liberals. Here's one of many examples: a Turkish woman from the left who angrily told me, "We've been warning the West about these people for years and the West just won't listen." In fact, though, I think I was the first person to say that the Turkish regime (NOT Turkey) has gone over to the other side. I have written literally dozens of articles proving it. I have quoted Iran's leader and Syria's government as having publicly stated it. Might Sullivan want to consult the evidence I have compiled? Of course not. And then he makes a remarkably revealing illogical argument: "It was once a given on the right that keeping Turkey close to the West was essential in defusing Islamism and winning the war on terror. But once Turkey took on Israel, that ended, because the war many neocons are waging is for Israel, right or wrong, not the West at large." This has an implication of antisemitism, doesn't it? He's saying that people are only angry at Turkey's rulers because they have fallen out with Israel, referring mainly to the flotilla issue. This makes me think of the argument in the 1930s that people were only critical of Germany because they were Jews or only cared about Jewish interests. Yes, it has been a given on both left, center, and right that keeping Turkey close to the West was essential. Yet what if the Turkish regime is no longer close to the West? Everyone's opinion is still the same, it's the situation that's changed. To ignore that change is incredibly dangerous. Indeed, I'd say that Turkey's change of sides (perhaps temporary) is the biggest defeat suffered by the West in the Middle East since the Iranian revolution. So how to keep Turkey close to the West? Act to constrain the current regime and, in appropriate ways of course, to help the opposition win the elections a year from now. Cheering the current regime, letting it claim that the West accepts its policies, assists that increasingly dictatorial government to remain in power. And if it does fall as I hope? Oh, dear! Then Turkey would have a socialist prime minister instead of a right-wing Islamist one. Seems to me that's what Western liberals and the left should prefer. As for the claim that it's all about Israel, in fact, I have been talking for months about: --Internal repression in Turkey, including the arrests of hundreds of peaceful dissidents on charges of attempting to overthrow the government with violence. Turks have been writing eloquently about this issue. Yet none of this matters, right? It's only all about Israel, we are supposed to believe, and talking about everything else is just an excuse! Sullivan has, however, taught me something important: why such people must keep harping on Israel. Forget about the canary in the coal mine analogy. The Israel card's use is to make people blind, to shut them up, to throw out every other issue and piece of evidence. They hope that anti-Israel passion (plus dark hints of a Jewish conspiracy) will keep people from actually looking at what's happening. In the phrase of Professor Richard Landes, Israel is a weapon of mass destruction. And the Jews have filled this function many times before in history. On top of this, my article's theme and tone are quite different from his claims. Here are the key sentences from my article: "Suppose you are the British prime minister going to Turkey, or to just about any country. What should you say? The theme should be: We can cooperate and do mutually beneficial things. Here's what I can do for you; here's what I'd like you to do for me. And here's what you must not do in order to reap the benefits of my friendship and favor. Does that sound like a call for war? Mr. Sullivan: There is something in diplomacy between war and appeasement. It is called carrots and sticks, costs and benefits, quid pro quo. Cameron's speech was a mess because he abandoned that principle and resorted only to simple-minded flattery. Middle Eastern peoples — Muslim or otherwise — know what that signals: weakness, which invites ridicule and aggressiveness. Sullivan also ignores my point — which I think is rather significant — that Cameron foolishly insulted France and Germany by strongly implying that the only reason they oppose Turkey's EU membership is because they are bigots. If Sullivan had been Britain's prime minister I guess he would have called them "neocon rightists." If Cameron had not mentioned Israel at all I would have written precisely the same article on all these points. Sullivan continued: "Keep it up, prime minister. Advance the interests of Britain, and resist the war of civilizations the far right wants to gin up. We will only defeat Islamism if we keep an open hand stretched to Islam. Isolating and demonizing Turkey's evolution as a regional Muslim power — prepared to be Israel's ally if Israel stops the persecution and colonization of the Palestinans — is about as dumb a geo-strategic move as one could imagine." The issue is not a "war of civilizations" but a war of ideologies. Is Sullivan really so dense that he doesn't understand that the people most similar to him in Turkey hate and fear the current regime? Doesn't Sullivan understand that the governments of most Muslim-majority countries in the Middle East don't want the West to support the Islamists? (Here's a list: Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, and Kuwait. And even the Palestinian Authority and the democratic forces in Lebanon. These are almost all Muslims, too, aren't they? And then let's add the majority of Muslims in Turkey and in Iran as well!) Turkey is not evolving into being a regional Muslim power as some kind of national project. This is in fact the policy of one party in Turkey which has less than 30 percent support according to recent public opinion polls, with probably twice as many Turks favoring non-Islamist opposition parties. And what does deifying the current Turkish government have to do with keeping an "open hand stretched to Islam"? Almost all Turks are Muslims, they just aren't political Islamists. That's why the West gets along with Egypt, Jordan, and even Saudi Arabia, for example, who are all Muslims but not on the side of Iran, Syria, Hamas, and Hizballah. It was a Socialist leader who once said that antisemitism was the socialism of fools. Today, the insane use of Israel as the cause of all issues and problems is the tool used to make fools on the left support the most reactionary forces on the Middle Eastern extreme right. And then, to make it laughable, they do so in the name of fighting evil rightists! Incidentally, don't think I didn't notice Sullivan's sleazy little trick: he didn't link to my article so those reading his blog item could easily check out what I actually said rather than what he claimed. That's the kind of behavior that tells a great deal about Sullivan's intellectual dishonesty. Update: Sullivan apparently read this article and added the link. I hope he learned something. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press). His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com |
|
STATUS OF ARAB 'REFUGEES' IN PA; CNN BIAS ON ARAB-ISRAEL CONFLICT; BRITAIN ON EU, TURKEY, GAZA, ISRAEL
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 29, 2010. |
|
P.A. NAMES SUMMER CAMP AFTER TERRORIST The Palestinian Authority (P.A.) has named a new summer camp, in Bethlehem, after terrorist Dalal Mughrabi, who led perhaps the worst terrorist attack against Israel. His squad hijacked a civilian bus, and murdered 37 passengers, including 12 children. This was the second P.A. camp in Bethlehem named after Mughrabi. Schools, youth centers, and landmarks also have been named after her. She is a major Palestinian Arab heroine for her attack on civilians. P.A. Deputy Minister of Education and Sports explained that P.A. summer camps teach, "through precept and example about the importance of dialog and tolerance in life." One Voice Palestine, which supports the camp, states that its members are "fed up with the ongoing conflict" and "ready and eager to support a serious process" for peace. The Fatah Party, which Abbas chaired, called Mughrabi's attack "the most glorified sacrifice action in the history of the Palestinian-Israeli struggle" [Al-Ayyam, July 13, 2008]. "The PA celebrated the 31st anniversary of her killings with an hour-long TV special that opened with the narrator glorifying the attack." (IMRA, 7/29/10 from Palestinian Media Watch. We cited other examples in earlier articles). Doesn't the glorification of terrorism set a precept about the importance of intolerance? Doesn't commemoration of a terrorist contradict the notion of an interest in peace? Some readers accuse Israel of being terrorist and of indoctrinating in terrorism, but give no evidence except when they mis-define "terrorism." Here are examples of the P.A and its organizations having committed terrorism and indoctrinating in it by celebrating it. The accusers of Israel ignore these actual examples of terrorism. Do they really object to terrorism?
STATUS OF ARAB 'REFUGEES' IN P.A. The usual definition of "refugee," according to the American Heritage College Dictionary, is "one who flees in search of refuge, as in times of war. The flight usually means from the country. That definition is not applied to Palestinian Arabs. The ones who went to Gaza, Judea, Samaria, and perhaps Jordan did not leave the area of the original Palestine Mandate, the nearest they had to a country [although at that time, most were relatively recent immigrants from surrounding countries, many so recently arrived as under the standard UN definition not to be considered refugees for that reason, too]. Most did not flee in search of refuge from war, their Arab leaders, domestic and foreign, ordered them out. A chief reason was not to keep the Jewish state, which was not expelling the bulk of them, form seeming humane, reasonable, and legitimate. Most of the people now in the refugee camps did not flee from anything. They are descendants of the Arabs who originally left. 20,000 such people live in a one-square kilometer Balata refugee camp within Nablus, in Judea-Samaria. In "quasi-apartheid" fashion, the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) does not let them build outside the camp, vote in Nablus elections, get municipal funds for roads and sanitation, and attend city schools. The camp children attend separate schools, provided by UNRWA, much of which is subsidized by the U.S.. (Sol Stern, senior fellow at Manhattan Institute, in Israel Resource News, 7/29/10) I consulted Arline Kushner, senior analyst at the Center for Near East Policy Research, where she has written major reports on UNRWA. I asked whether the P.A. applies the same policy to other refugee camps. Kushner said that the policy has exceptions. Gaza has more non-UNRWA schools than UNRWA schools. Some of the residents of refugee camps vote. More live outside the camps and even run businesses, but they usually live nearby, so they can enter the camps and avail themselves of services meant for refugees. In general, however, the P.A. rejects responsibility for refugee descendants Refugees have acknowledged in correspondence Kushner has seen that they willingly stay cloistered for the cause of entering Israel. That is one reason they oppose integration in the Palestinian Authority. Once they rioted at the prospect of becoming part of a new Arab state in the P.A. (e-mail, 7/29). Although the P.A. claims to represent these descendants of refugees, it treats them almost as enemy aliens. That is a hidden scandal. It gives critics of Israel, on the basis of an ostensible concern for Palestinian Arabs, something to criticize the P.A. for. Israel, by contrast, lets Arab citizens vote, move, and receive national funds for Arab cities in Israel and for Arab citizens in mixed Israeli cities.
MORE CNN BIAS ON ARAB-ISRAEL CONFLICT Today, not long after CNN fired a senior editor for bias on the Arab-Israel conflict, senior international correspondent Ben Wedeman presented his own bias. This was on Twitter, but the pattern of his reporting indicates that bias influences his reporting. 
Mr. Wedeman commended as "excellent," an article by the "harshly anti-Israel" Professor Juan Cole. Prof. Cole's article claimed that Israel's "isolation derives from Israeli policies, of illegal blockades ... and systematic land theft and displacement of occupied civilians under its control, along with aggressive war." Israel's wars resulted from Arabs committing kidnapping, bombardment, invasion, and other acts of war, not wanton aggression. (For the legality of the blockade, click here. What systematic land theft and displacement of civilians? I have documented extensive land theft by Arabs.) In his official capacity, Wedeman asserts that Israel prevents peace — PM Netanyahu refuses to make "confidence-building" measures, refuses to enter direct negotiations, and holds eastern Jerusalem that Wedeman writes belongs to the Arabs. Here, CAMERA, the source for this piece, documents the sacrifices Israel made for hoped confidence-building, including roadblock removal and construction freeze, the many invitations PM Netanyahu gave for direct negotiations rejected by Abbas, and the importance of eastern Jerusalem to the Jewish people. It is a mixed area under Israeli sovereignty. [There is no legal basis for assuming the area belongs to the Arabs.] In 2008, Wedeman asserted that Israel's security fence squeezed the tourist trade almost entirely out of Bethlehem's economy. Actually, since the fence was built, in 2005, the Christmas pilgrimage seasons in Bethlehem rose greatly. [Not because of the fence. I had reported special efforts by Israel to boost that tourism and facilitate entry of Christians to their holy sites.] Apparently, Wedeman's bias misinforms CNN news coverage (CAMERA, 7/29)
BRITAIN ON EU, TURKEY, GAZA, ISRAEL Britain's PM David Cameron visited Turkey and made these points on Turkey, Gaza, and Israel: 1. Britain signed an agreement with Turkey on trade and security and wants Turkey admitted into the EU for regional trade and security and to have more influence over Europe; 2. Turkey and Israel should not abandon their friendship; 3. Israel's attack on the flotilla was "completely unacceptable." Israel should end restrictions on Gaza, so Gaza does not remain "a prison camp." Some EU members oppose Turkey's admission because of what they consider its poor human rights record (Lawrence Norman, Joe Parkinson, Wall St. J., 7/28/10). Elsewhere, PM Cameron was said to have acknowledged, in generalized wording, Israel's security concerns. Considerations Cameron omitted: 1. Whether the EU needs the Islamist influence that Turkey now exerts. European leaders now speculate that their civilization is at a tipping point. Most of these leaders put it as forecasting a Muslim majority. Considering how far Europe is bending with the small Muslim minority, it would not take a majority. 2. Cameron thinks Turkey-Israel relations are up to both sides. What chance has such relations, as Turkey turns Islamist? What future for Turkey-EU relations? 3. The cause-and-effect of the Gaza-Israel problem: (a) Israelis evacuated from Gaza; (b) Hamas made war on Israel; (c) Israel has a legal, partial blockade to keep out heavy arms and terrorists; (d) If IHH merely were charitable, it could have brought goods to Israel to be inspected and trans-shipped to Gaza, but instead it tried to run and therefore ruin the legal blockade. If IHH were successful, heavy arms and terrorists would enter freely; (e) So the IDF enforced the blockade; (f) Radicals attacked the IDF troops. 4. Turkey has two main problems with human rights: (a) Treatment of Kurds; and (b) Military intervention against a government moving to overturn the Constitution. The EU and U.S. condemned Turkey on both counts. That helped paralyze the military. Turkish Islamists now are moving more readily against freedom of press and speech, the independent judiciary, and secular, non-radical indoctrination.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
NEW OFFICE BEGINS INVESTIGATING LOST PROPERTY OF ME JEWS
Posted by Daily Alert, July 29, 2010. |
|
This was written by Benjamin Joffe-Walt. Jerusalem Post staff contributed to this report. |
|
Pensioners Ministry: Jewish property in Arab countries valued in billions, and is worth 50% more than the property of Palestinian refugees. A new department set up by Ministry of Pensioners Affairs to manage the legal claims of Israeli Jews of Middle Eastern descent who lost their property when they left countries throughout the region has begun collecting information. The office will help identify, locate and seek compensation for the assets of the more than one million Jews who came to Israel from Iran, Iraq, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon and Syria. The initiative follows a law approved earlier this year by the Knesset requiring the compensation of Jews from Arab countries and Iran to be included in any peace negotiations. "The Palestinians have been collecting evidence of their losses for many years," said Yoni Itzhak, a spokesman for the Pensioners Affairs Ministry. "So we are not waiting until there is a negotiation for a peace accord. We need to be prepared, so that if there are negotiations and the Palestinians say, 'We are owed a few billion dollars,' We will say, 'OK, no problem,' and be ready with a much higher figure of what we are owed." The ministry says that as of 2007 "the estimated value of Jewish property in Arab countries is 50 percent more than the value of the property of Palestinian refugees and is valued at billions of dollars." The ministry did not provide specific figures. Following the establishment of the state, most Muslim states declared or supported war against Israel, and the status of Jews in these countries became threatened. According to estimates by the United Nations and a number of civil society organizations, during Israel's first decade about 265,000 Jews left Morocco, 140,000 left Algeria, 135,000 left Iraq, 120,000 left Iran, 103,000 left Tunisia, 75,000 left Egypt, 63,000 left what is now Yemen, 38,000 left Libya, 30,000 left Syria and 5,000 left Lebanon. More than half a million additional Jews have left these countries since. Most of the emigres headed to Israel, and just a few thousand Jews remain in the Arab world today. "People often forget that there is also the Jewish side to the refugee story in the Middle East," Itzhak said. "Almost every Jew who left Iran or an Arab country can tell you a whole story about what they left. These people left their things, their houses, their institutions — in some cases because of threats and laws that forced them out. So just like the Palestinians tell everyone that they have the keys to their old homes, we have our keys as well." The government refers to Jewish emigres from Middle Eastern countries as "refugees", but whether these Jews emigrated for economic or ideological reasons, or were pushed out of their home countries by anti-Semitic and political persecution, is a matter of debate. What is clear is that Jews who emigrated from Muslim countries throughout the Middle East and North Africa left extensive assets in their home countries, from houses, stores and businesses to land and bank accounts. Estimates of the total value of Jewish personal and communal assets left in Muslim countries range from $1 billion to more than $100b. Israeli Jews of Middle Eastern descent have been asked by the new department to report the details of their lost assets. "We have already collected evidence from a few thousand people, but it was being done by a tiny branch of a small department," Itzhak said. "Now we have set up an entire department to deal with this issue, and we are putting the pedal to the metal are in the process of identifying, registering and assessing the value of everyone's lost assets." The ministry is also searching public archives for documentary evidence of Jewish communal assets, such as synagogues, hospitals, event halls, retirement homes and ritual baths, which were abandoned when Jews left for Israel. The new department is also preparing a case to demand damages for discrimination against Jews in the Muslim countries, such as Jews who were prevented from entering educational institutions, Jews who were stripped of their citizenship or other freedoms, and Jews who endured pogroms. The department plans to collect compensation for Jews of Middle Eastern descent who were never paid their pensions, purchased plots in graveyards, anti-Semitic dismissals, etc. Once all the evidence is collected, the ministry plans to prepare a legal case for each Jewish Israeli individual of Middle Eastern descent to demand compensation through a process of indirect negotiations with the relevant countries, almost none of which have diplomatic relations with Israel. The initiative comes against the backdrop of longstanding and extensive Palestinian claims regarding their losses in the War of Independence. The degree to which these Arab fled voluntarily or were driven out by pre-state Jewish forces is a matter of extensive debate among Israeli, Palestinian and international historians. Following the War of Independence and the subsequent establishment of the state, the Arab refugees were not allowed to return and the government took control of somewhere between 2,000 and 16,500 square kilometers of abandoned or confiscated land, according to differing government estimates at the time. Following the passage of the nonbinding UN General Assembly Resolution 194 calling for Palestine refugees wishing to "live at peace with their neighbors" to be allowed to return to their homes, Israel passed a series of laws to formalize state ownership over absentee land and property. "Palestinian refugees' rights, including the right of return, is absolute and recognized under international law," said Nasim Ahmed, senior researcher at the London-based Palestinian Return Centre, which advocates for the rights of Palestinian refugees and their descendants. "We believe the right of return and claims for compensation by Palestinian refugees is exclusive and cannot be compromised by another claim. We also believe that to dissolve the Palestinian claim is a political tactic which undermines international law." 10. Jews have lived in Palestine for 2000+ years * Author: Denise * Country: USA * 08/20/2010 15:14 RE "No one asked the Jews to come to Palestine." Jews have lived in the area called Palestine for 2000+ years. They are indigenous to the area. Back in the 1940s Jews who lived in Palestine were called "Palestinians". The Palestine Post was a Jewish newspaper. The Palestine Brigade was all Jewish. 9. For Algeria the answer is simple * Author: Mourad
won't happen and no algerian will accept it so you wasting your time we are not easy and we won't give an inch of property nor a penny of our wealth to these so called immigrant 8. no 4 * Author: hebrew prophet
Hey Palestinian Joe in Ireland and his fellow Palestinian Steve in the US Jews don,t need permission from anyone including illiterate camel herders from Arabia to claim what was and is rightfully theirs,the ancient land of Israel has been a Jewish ancestral homeland millienia before Islam raised it,s fascist head and Jews who lost their land ,possesssions etc,due to Islam forcing them out of their countries of birth can and will claim from those Muslim states that stole their original properties ,whether you two Palestinians like it or not ,inshallah? 7. @No 5 * Author: Rick
You've got it exactly backwards, "Jewish land will no longer be usurped by anyone". Now go back to your pub and try not to hit anybody when you drunkenly throw darts. 6. You missed Libya in your list * Author: Albert Reingewirtz
I remember the camps of tents of Jewish refugees from all Arab lands and Persia. I remember the Musrara flooding Jews from Iraq on their beds inside tents while the water reached their mattresses. Where was the UN dedicating an organization for the Jewish refugees? Not a penny from the UN then for Jews but UNWRA was created for the Arab refugees as they were called before the Palestinian nation was invented in the 60's. Jews lived in those lands at least 1000 years before any Arab came out of Arabia and yet communities in existence since antiquity are non-longer. An account is overdue! 5. Property of ME Jews * Author: Joe Kelsall
I am not sure of the point of this misleading article. I acre of land in Los Angeles is worth hundreds of times the price of 1 acre in rural Alabama. We are not comparing like with like and I hope whoever is intended to be confused by this information takes this into account. Palestinian land is NOT for sale — at ANY PRICE! 4. Go back * Author: Steve Benassi
No one asked the Jews to come to Palestine. 3. IT WAS ABOUT TIME THAT THESE FACTS WERE COLLECTED * Author: JKF
These records need to form part of the recorded historical evidence; they need to be entered, into the pertinent international annals; and also they need to be distributed to pertinent organizations, that will expose the facts on these unjust persecutions. These records need to be placed alongside the recods of the forced displacement of the Jewish communities, and not just from Arab countries, but also from other countries that carrie out significant progroms. Claims for restitution need to be made. 2. Refugees * Author: Ben Azzai
I hope you will include Jews who came to France, the UK and USA as well. They left Arab lands and Iran because they felt endangered. World Jewry worked flat out to help Jewish refugees. I'm old enough to remember the Yom Kippur appeals to raise funds for these refugees. We never thought of locking them in refugee 'prison camps' as political pawns as the Arab states and UN did with Arab refugees. The Arabs had about 25 countries, but no room to accept fellow Arabs in need of support. 1. Restitution (Part 1) * Author: Michael Davison
Mr. Nasim Ahmed is full of shit. The "right of return" is far from being "absolute", since it is conditional on the returnees being willing to live at peace with their neighbors. Estimates of Jewish losses calculated on the same basis as Palestinian losses comes in at around five times the sum total the Palestinians are claiming. This makes sense when you consider that most of the Jewish population in Arab lands were urban merchants, business owners, doctors, lawyers, bank managers and other high-income professionals, while Palestinians were mostly argarians or small businessmen. |
|
ISRAEL AIR FORCE RESCUE UNIT DESCRIBES SEARCH FOR COMRADES IN ROMANIA
Posted by Daily Alert, July 29, 2010. |
|
This was written by Hanan Greenberg for Ynet. IDF rabbinate completes identification process; bodies to be flown back within hours; rescuers recount harsh weather, tough terrain, difficult emotions |
|
ROMANIA — IDF rabbinate representatives completed the process of identifying the six bodies of the IDF soldiers who lost their lives in the helicopter crash in Romania. The victims' families have been notified. Earlier, members of Rescue Unit 669 recounted the harsh terrain and weather conditions and difficult emotions they endured during the search for their comrades. The air force is ready to fly the bodies home, apparently within a few hours. The funeral dates are expected to be announced later. The searches continued over the last 24 hours, leaving rescuers exhausted at the crash site. "We had to go back and forth over the site to find all remains," said one officer. "It was impossible to stand on the steep slope, so we used ropes." The rescuers said the weather was poor. On Wednesday afternoon torrential rain fell, making their work even harder. In order to reach the crash site, the unit's members, numbering some 50 soldiers, had to climb for an hour and a half from where they had been dropped off by the helicopter. "It was a hard physical effort, combined with a desire to get to the site and start work," the officer said. "We had to climb in a stream bed," a team member told Ynet. "We took ladders to climb over the waterfalls and used ropes to avoid slipping on the rocks. We covered an area of some 80 meters by 30 meters (260 x 98 feet), on a slope of 60%, so in many places it was impossible to stand. We spread ropes over the whole area, and in some places worked while harnessed to the ropes. Every few minutes there was a downpour which completely soaked us." 
"It was very important to us to bring them home," he continued. "Nobody stopped in the middle of the work to rest even though we spent 36 hours getting organized and flying, during which we slept maybe two hours. We had to remind people to drink water." "We are used to saving lives on rescue operations," he explained. "In this case we were dealing with bodies but we understood how important it was to bring them back to their families. At some point, you hope you won't find them dead, but you realize that success in this operation is to find the bodies and send them home, even if it's in coffins. That's the mission." 'We wanted to get them home' "This is awful work, because you don't want to miss anything, so you go back and forth over the area," A. said. "We lifted up metal plates, engines, and the helicopter's ramp to check underneath. The weather was particularly difficult, and the fear that stones would fall on us from above. We succeeded in our mission, but I suspect things will come up again when we get back to base." When they arrived at the crash site they saw the charred remains of the helicopter. "We were given instructions and guidance by the rabbis," one soldier said. "We looked for bodies in every possible place, including under the metal remains. It wasn't easy but it was clear to us what our work was. Everyone hoped we might return with good news but we rapidly understood this wouldn't happen. In the end we just wanted to get them all home, even in coffins." 
"We also gathered up parts of the helicopter," he continued. "We worked without break, almost without resting. Then we picked everything up, dozens of kilos, and carried it all back to the helicopter." The unit members feel they have completed the mission well, but difficult emotions remain. "Things will come up again in the future," they said. Some were reminded of the explosion of the armored personnel carrier on Gaza's Philadelphi Route in 2004, when hundreds of soldiers scoured the area looking for body parts — under the assumption that nothing should be left. "We lifted every part, looked under every stone," they said. "We knew there was a danger of bad weather and stones that could roll down from above, but we kept our eyes on our mission." In the late afternoon Wednesday, the officers evaluated whether it would be necessary to bivouac overnight. Towards 5 pm, it was decided to call off the search and return to the air force base in Romania. But for the soldiers the mission is still not complete. They are now waiting for the rabbis to identify the bodies, and the mission will be over only when they get back to Israel, they say. Attila Somfalvi also contributed to this report |
|
ESSAYS FROM THE IGBO ISRAEL WEBSITE
Posted by Remy Ilona, July 28, 2010. |
|
WHO IS IGBO? When I ponder over this question what comes to my mind is principally; what is the origin of the Igbos? For certain reasons which I will mention later I have always tried to solve puzzles by first of all looking at the history of the puzzles. An Igbo as understood presently is someone from the following Nigerian states: Anambra, Enugu, Imo, Abia, Ebonyi. And some indigenes of Delta State. I would also say that the Igbos also include some people that are indigenous in Edo and Rivers states. The Igbos in all the mentioned states inhabit a contiguous territory. I do not think that some people in the Rivers, Edo, Delta States, and even a tiny minority from Anambra State will view my submission agreeably. This is because huge numbers of people who bear Igbo names, speak the Igbo language, and practice Igbo culture in the afore-mentioned states have openly declared that though 'we speak Igbo, bear Igbo names, we are not Igbos'. These people actually speak Igbo. Close examination of their cultural practices reveal that Omenana; the Igbo culture, is also their culture. And clearly culture, and language which is an aspect of culture determines what or who one is; i.e, ones origins. So why do we have people who are Igbos disowning their identity? I would need a book to answer the question, but because this is a newspaper I'll try to compress my answer. I will get back to the question later, but for now I will try to work on what the tribal origin of the Igbos is, with the objective of trying to discover why there is so much complications with the issue of the Igbo identity. The Igbos have generally not taken their tribal identity serious. Igbo laxity has created room for certain people who do not know the importance of history, to introduce dangerous and mischievous distortions, and even fabrications into Igbo history. Presently we have Igbo "historians" who have without a shred of evidence "proven" that the Igbos existed before the biblical Adam did. And they were scholarly, and bold enough to admit that they got this information from Ile Ife. And that they were motivated by Afro-centrism, and black-colour pride. We also have some who say that the biblical Melchizedek was Igbo, and that it was he who taught Abraham, the Hebrew patriarch the importance of monotheism. Even though some of these scholars lack the basic skills (knowledge of the Hebrew language, Hebrew culture and history); that one requires to understand Hebrew sources, among which is the principal book (the Tanakh), that talked about Adam, Melchizedek, and Abraham; they have rushed to the press with their 'great discoveries'. Some Igbos have also claimed that they originated from Bini. A cursory comparison of the claimants', and the Bini cultures reveals that the claimants were motivated to make the false claim purely by the desire to make mischief, and inferiority complex. Distortions and fabrications should be kept out of history. Many of the conflicts that have shocked the world, and cost humanity dearly; especially the religious ones, wouldn't have arisen if recorders had written exactly what happened. Many chroniclers have written what did not happen, as what happened, and have led many gullible people into basing their faith on empty lies, and emotions. So, if the Igbo people have not treated their history as something that is sacrosanct, should it be surprising that some of the Igbos from Edo, Delta, and Rivers, deny that they are Igbos today? It shouldn't be surprising for many reasons, among which is the one that the groups that deny, do so because they are confused. And the second one which is that they learnt the fine art of self-denial from their kinsmen-those that admit that they are Igbos today. I will throw more light on what I'm getting at with the following illustration by talking about two episodes that were narrated in Things Fall Apart, and No Longer At Ease; two seminal works by that most clever Igbo; Chinua Achebe. Okonkwo; that great Igbo freedom fighter who stood against desecration of the Igbos through desecration of Omenana, and seizure of the Igbos' freedom by the invading British, died in the struggle. And his first son, Nwoye who had joined the enemies, refused to attend his funeral. And when Nwoye's wife died, the son, Obi, repeated what Nwoye did, by not attending the funeral of his mother, Nwoye's wife. The Igbos from Edo, Delta, and Rivers, are simply repeating what the Igbos as a people have been doing. The Igbos generally act as if they feel that where they came from is not important. The self-denying Igbos from the afore-mentioned states say that they are not Igbos. In other words; just as the Igbos generally do not attach much importance to their Israelitishness, so do some of the Igbos of Edo, Delta, and Rivers, whom I regard as self-denying Igbos feel that they are not Igbo, and say so. So at last who are the Igbos? Two Igbos; Peter Opara and Gavriel Ogugua, had after attending a meeting of the World Igbo Congress, visited the officials of the American Jewish Committee, and had told them that: '... Igbos feel a spiritual bond with Jews because, Igbos have not been able to trace their origin back to anywhere else other than Israel"1. If sharing of a similar culture is indicative of a common origin, I would agree with Opara, and Ogugua, and I agree with them. Credible and authentic research about Igbo origins have pointed only at Israel, as the place of origins of the Igbos. If this is an established fact, and I say that it is; because studies and comparison of Igbo culture (Omenana), and Judaism (the culture of Israel), asusu Igbo (the Igbo language), and Ibrit (Hebrew language), the Igbo and the Jewish DNA's, and Igbo history, have all indicated that the Igbos and the Jews were originally one people, and that the Hebrew culture which is the basis of their culture evolved in ancient Israel, why haven't the Igbos done the proper thing? The proper thing should be to introduce into the curricula of the schools and other institutions that impart knowledge to the Igbos the information about the Igbos origins. But in the curricula of all the schools, and the programmes of all the other institutions that cater to the Igbos educational needs such as the churches, which have existed for decades, and the synagogues which have started growing among the Igbos, information about the Igbos origins is totally absent. This is also what obtains in most of the print and electronic mass media. Save the National Times newspaper which has been impressive, and the Sun which reports on the subject occasionally, a follower of news is not likely to get enough information about where the Igbos originated from. And the Igbo organizations! Only the Igbo Israel Union (Society), and the Igbo Origin and Culture Research Society have prioritized the very important subject of the Igbos origins. So in the final analysis I say that the Igbos are the descendant of Israel that migrated from the Holy Land, through North Africa, the Sahara desert, and resettled in the rain forests of what became the South-East of Nigeria.
RECOVERY OF IGBO-ISRAEL From: Tuesday, January 6, 2009 Many Igbos are beginning to realize that the Igbo people will only be happy and fulfilled when they do teshuvah, return, and begin to practice Igbo-Jewish culture, which in asusu Igbo (Igbo language) is called Omenana. We already have a large body of literature about how the Dispersion, the Exile, and the relocation of the Igbo-Jews to the forests (ime ofia) of West Africa isolated the Igbos from other umu Yisrael (children of Israel). And how the Slave Trade and colonialism devastated the Igbo society, and paved the way for the colonialists to demonize Omenana, and attempt to replace it with the colonialists' culture which is at best very strange to the Igbo-Jews and thus unworkable. We also have information about how some Igbo-Jews thought erroneously that Omenana could be discarded, the colonialist's culture adopted, and the Igbo-Jews still thrive. Evidence exists that many Igbo-Jews entertained such thoughts, and even took steps to jettison Omenana. However the effort only resulted in disappointment, misery and unhappiness, because the Holy One of Yisrael, the God of Abraham, known by the Igbo-Jews as Chukwu Abiama made it clear in Deuteronomy 28, that happiness and well-being for Israel lies in practicing the culture embedded in the Tora(Omenana), and unhappiness and ruin, in jettisoning the Tora. It is the realization of many Igbo-Jews that the Igbo society can only be happy if and when it practices Tora/Omenana that we want to talk about here. Since some decades this realization that the colonialists' stories and models couldn't be absolute truths nor good for Igbo-Jews has been with many Igbo-Jews. And many have taken steps to return to Tora/Omenana. We can't pretend at this stage that we have a complete record of all the Igbo-Jews who have taken steps to do teshuvah, and how they have tried to achieve the return. Accordingly we'll discuss only the most high profile cases here.
The Igbo Sabbatharians Some three to five decades ago, some Igbos who had pass through the indoctrination of the colonialists just like other Igbos somehow realized that the Laws, regulations, etc of God-set out minutely in what they know as the 'Old Testament' couldn't be a shadow of things to come. That for a people (the colonialists) who brought laws when they came to Igboland to teach that the era of the Laws (of God for that matter) has passed is grand fraud. To head back to Law, and its observance they began the Sabbatharian movement. This movement believed that the Laws of God are alive, and that their observance will give the Igbos order in their society. Definitely what they began was a return to Tora/Omenana. After all what is Omenana? Omenana if translated to English is: doing (keeping) on the 'Land' the commandments that God gave Israel. Our work on the Sabbatharians: purchase the hard copy of the monograph in Nigeria. Contact: 080 6530 0351, 080 2223 7028. igboisraelpublishing@gmail.com, remy.ilona@gmail.com, drcaliben@yahoo.com Contact Chukwukaodinaka Remy Ilona at remy.ilona@gmail.com
or at 08065300351 by telephone.
Visit his website at
by
|
|
THE OLYMPIA WA FOOD CO-OP JOINS LONG, TRAGIC HISTORY OF HATRED
TOWARD ISRAEL
Posted by Edward Alexander, July 28, 2010. |
|
Olympia's Food Co-op has grandly announced its intention to boycott Israeli products unless that country disbands itself as a Jewish state. To earn a place for its products on co-op shelves, Israel must forfeit its right to defend itself by tearing down its security fence and must bring back the Arab refugees who, in an entirely self-inflicted calamity, fled in 1947-48 rather than accept the U.N.'s two-state solution. This is a policy of politicide: Israel may not exist as a Jewish state. The co-op does not require the numerous Islamic regimes or Christian states to justify a place for their products on the sacrosanct shelves of Olympia. No, there is only one country whose "right to exist" — though recognized by the League of Nations nearly a century ago and confirmed by the United Nations in 1948 — is considered a legitimate subject of debate. Instructing Israel on the most suitable method (one-state solution, no-state solution, final solution) of ceasing to exist is nowadays a ticket of admission to "progressive" circles. The instructors' motto resurrects the Reign of Terror slogan: "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity — or Death." Listen to Noam Chomsky: "Unless those who call themselves 'supporters of Israel' are willing to face ... moral and geopolitical realities, they may in reality be supporters of Israel's moral degeneration and ultimate destruction." If one dare suggest that singling Israel out for destruction if it does not dance to your tune is anti-Semitic, Chomsky has a ready reply: "Anti-Semitism is no longer a problem ... It's raised ... because privileged people want to make sure they have total control, not just 98 percent control; that's why anti-Semitism is becoming an issue ..." Beautiful and touching words, by no means unusual in the parlance of those who deem Israel uniquely evil and, with help from its "supporters," responsible for every misery on the planet with the (possible) exception of global warming. (I add "possible" because Clare Short, a prominent member of Tony Blair's cabinet until 2003, charged that Israel is "much worse than the original apartheid state" because it "undermines the international community's reaction to global warming.") Chomsky is (mistakenly) identified as "a critic of Israeli policy." Nor is he the only beneficiary of the euphemistic redefinition of "criticism" where Israel is its object. A Vassar professor refers to Intifada II, during which Palestinian Arab suicide bombers, pogromists and lynch mobs slaughtered almost a thousand people and wounded thousands more, as "a critique of Zionism." A writer in the Chronicle of Higher Education assures readers that "calls to destroy Israel, or to throw it into the Mediterranean Sea ... are not evidence of hatred of Jews," but merely "reflect a quarrel" with Israel. When Harvard and Columbia University were censured in 2003 for honoring and hosting the Oxford poetaster and blood libel subscriber Tom Paulin after he had urged that Jews living in Judea and Samaria "should be shot dead," his apologists defended his right "to criticize Israeli policy." But surely criticism means trying to see an object as it really is, not destroying that object. Indeed, a critic need not be an enemy at all. The "critics of Israel" who deny its "right to exist" and threaten it with boycotts and even destruction if it does not disband itself may be dishonest and despicable, but let us not begrudge them their triumph. In the war of ideas they have beaten us at every turn; and by "us" I mean those Christians and Jews for whom the foundation of Israel was one of the (few) redeeming acts of a blood-soaked and shameful century. A 2007 BBC poll of 28,000 people in 27 countries showed Israel as the "least-liked" country in the world, and, among Europeans, most disliked in Germany. Yes, in the very country where the Jews' "right to live" was once a popular topic and "Kauf nicht beim Juden" ("Don't Buy from Jews") a popular slogan long before it reached Olympia, Israel-haters outpolled Israel-admirers by 77 percent to 10 percent. Still greater triumphs in the contest for public opinion may await these "critics." Their threats are not idle. On their own, they cannot visit upon Israel the terrible fate they think it deserves as the devil's experiment station, but they know they have a powerful ally named Ahmadinejad, bent on translating politicide into genocide. The Iranian president daily promises to "remove Israel from the map" with nuclear weapons and watches with glee as the international noose tightens around Israel's throat and the umbrellas go up in Europe and Washington. Edward Alexander is a University of Washington professor emeritus.
|
|
GAZA — GOLDSTONE AFTERMATH
Posted by Ari Bussel, July 28, 2010. |
|
Recently, Israel seems to be engaging in negative sum games: A "humanitarian" flotilla (the Turkish Terrorist Flotilla of Lies) is arranged to end the blockade and siege on Gaza put in place four years ago. Lo and behold, there is now a free flow of goods into Gaza. The mission was accomplished with flying colors. Bonuses must be awarded to those who brought about the desired end! Israel's ruling elite claims it intended to ease the restrictions all along. Apparently the catalyst worked, but why was it necessary to pay such a dear price of seven soldiers wounded and universal condemnation of Israel? In December 2008 Israel embarked on an effort to stop the smuggling of ammunition and instruments of war via the tunnels into Gaza and to end the constant bombardment of rockets from Gaza into civilian centers in Israel. Israel seems to have learned from her previous folly, going into Lebanon, what would later be termed the "Second War in Lebanon." Israel's stated objective was to bring back two Israeli soldiers. Finally Israel was humiliated, and their body parts were later exchanged for hundreds of terrorists. This time around, Israel was very careful not to declare a third objective of Operation Cast Lead: bringing back kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. And so, Shalit remains in captivity to this very day. The action in Gaza lasted for three weeks, from December 27th, 2008 to January 18th, 2009. The smuggling did not stop, there are today in Gaza more rockets and missiles, more sophisticated, much more accurate and with a far greater reach than ever before. There are those, both in Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and in the Israel Defense Forces, who still claim the Operation was an astounding success and brought about the desired results. In a like manner, they (or others) would say that the Second War in Lebanon was likewise beneficial, for the North is quiet. Both Hamas and Hizbollah are today better equipped and more prepared to attack Israel than before 2008 and 2006 respectively. Rockets are continually launched from Gaza. They are still planning and preparing to kidnap Israeli soldiers and still determined to eliminate the Jewish State. All that is required is for Iran to give the "go ahead" and Israel, from its southern most border to its northern most border, will be under a Fourth of July attack of missiles. During the ground incursion into Gaza, Israel did not refrain, for the first time in history, from responding to rockets launched from mosques, UN building or schools. Previously, these were safe havens, but no more. Israel now realizes her enemy is manipulating world opinion. So, what is wrong with the picture? Israel has become accustomed to internal and external reviews. Yet, these commissions of inquiry and international complaints and lawsuits cannot be accomplished without inflicting pain to the Jewish State. Principally, debriefing and review are crucial in military action as in many other walks of life, from sports to business. It allows a review in a safe, controlled environment and to draw lessons. It often results in improvements if the lessons are properly implemented. For military action, debriefing and review must be internal. Instead, in Israel all is done in the public domain, under public scrutiny, available to the world and to our enemies alike. Israel failed to notice Hizbollah's leader, Nasrallah, laughing at her government and leaders, quoting or referencing particular sections from the Winograt Report. In a word; a circus. I remember sitting at a foreign press briefing during Operation Cast Lead. The IDF Spokesperson's officer-in-charge was asked about Israel's use of phosphorous bombs. She adamantly denied the charges. [She was since promoted to the rank of a Lieutenant Colonel.] A year and a half later, Israel committed to refraining from using these bombs with phosphorus elements to the UN. So were they used or not? A new report presented to the UN as a response to Judge Goldstone's Report shifts the focus of war from the battlefield to the courtrooms of international public opinion. In these courts, Israel is constantly demonized and found guilty, whatever she does. What is the utility in responding to the Goldstone Report if no one cares what Israel has to say? Will it prevent lawsuits against Israeli soldiers or politicians when traveling abroad? Will the accusation of committing war crimes be lessened or reserved? Since the answer to these questions is negative, one wonders about the utility in Israel's latest attempt at being whole and holy. The main messages of the report, as publicized and internalized in Israel are (a) investigating and launching judicial proceedings against soldiers, (b) the need for a "humanitarian officer" in each unit, (c) the incorporation of new guidelines about civilian protection and most egregiously (d) it submits to the international biased allegations. It also opens the doors to further legal action, including in Israel in front of Israel's Supreme Court against Israel and Israelis. Think of a boxing match. There are clear guidelines that must be adhered to by those engaged in the match. Then, think about such matches conducted in ancient times, or modern gambling matches between vicious dogs or roosters. In all these instances, there are no rules. All punches are allowed, anything that leads to one live victor and one dead opponent. Likewise here, Israel is trying to comply with unfeasible requirements she is to behave in a certain manner, although she, alone of all nations, already does. All the while, Israel's enemies do everything possible to destroy her: They kidnap soldiers from within Israel, fire at civilian population centers, declare their intention to destroy the Jewish State, hide behind mosques and schools, use ambulances for transport personnel and ammunition, use civilians as human shields and blame Israel for every untoward action they enlist. The true problem of the new report just released, the third in the series (the first was in July 2009 followed by a second installment in January 2010) is that it impedes the motivation of Israelis to fight for their country. If a soldier knows that he and she risk their lives during real-time fighting and later will need to defend every action, every thought, every split-second decision, they will prefer to err on the side of triple-extra-caution and thus do nothing. I am reminded of driving on the streets of Los Angeles. The signal drivers receive is very mixed; at some stoplights, when the time counter is down to zero, the light changes immediately from green to yellow to red in a scope of a second. Thus, the driver needs to stop. At other intersections, the stoplight counter goes down to zero, but the light remains green. When preparing to stop, looking at the cameras and thinking about the ticket (close to $500 for passing in red), I become confused. Zero time often, but not always, means stop now or get a ticket. Thus, I stop. But the light continues to be green, and those behind me find an outlet to honk, curse and express their opinion about my stupidity. Better safe than sorry. Why fight at all when the chances are that one will have to spend the time after the war not in recovery and recuperation, but in investigations by military police and the military advocate general? Not to mention the civilian courts, primarily the Supreme Court, and the likelihood of being prevented from leaving Israel to travel overseas. Our enemies are succeeding in turning our body elements against the body itself. In medicine, this is the description of cancer. Israel must change course and start fighting for her own survival, lest the cancer spread to the point of no return. Contact Ari Bussel at busselari@gmail.com |
|
'PARENTS OF SOLDIERS': PROTECT ISRAEL, DON'T EXPEL JEW;
STATUS OF PLO MISSION IN WASHINGTON RAISED
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 28, 2010. |
|
ISRAELI 'PARENTS OF SOLDIERS': PROTECT STATE, DO NOT EXPEL JEW 
An Israeli organization comprising religious and secular-minded people, "Parents of Soldiers," handed out a pamphlet to recruits advising them to follow the IDF code of ethics and protect the State, not expel Jews. The code quotes the Army's duty to protect independence and security, not to harm civilians, and not to follow illegal orders. The pamphlet refers to the Army expulsion of Jews from houses that the government calls illegal or are in areas the government wants to abandon. When the government abandoned Gaza and northern Samaria, it expelled almost 10,000 Jews from their houses. A member of Parents, Ron Breiman, also belongs to Professors for a Strong Israel. He points out that the soldiers' duty is to fight the enemy. He said that that mass-expulsion brought to realization his greatest concerns over it. [He must be referring to what Defense Min. Barak recently said was a result, Gaza "filling up" with rockets to fire into Israel.] Prof. Breiman concludes that, orders of expulsion should not only be disobeyed, they should not be given. Breiman remarked that all proposals for resolving the Arab-Israel conflict seem to involve expulsion of Jews. He said he wants peace, but not a peace based on non-Zionist, unethical expulsion The pamphlet states, "...You were not sent to serve in a political army that harms its own nation, or that plays a role in destroying our land and treats its citizens like enemies. Remember! Protect the army and its unity from attempts to turn it into a divisive and party-based army, activated by political interests. The expulsion of Jews from their homes is not security — it's politics!" (Arutz-7, 7/27/10). http://www.israelnationalnews.com/ Speaking of politics, the matter of illegal houses is not well understood outside Israel. To Americans, the term, "illegal," carries a negative connotation of law-breaking. In Israel, however, "illegal house" may not involve law-breaking. As a whole, the so-called illegal houses of Jews in Judea-Samaria do not involve violations of property ownership law or of zoning and building codes. Indeed, the government authorized such construction and may have built the infrastructure pre-requisites. The problem is that housing construction involves a series of government approvals. Final approval is up to the Defense Minister, who heads a party opposed to Jewish construction. He cites nothing out of order about such construction, and no wrongdoing by the builders, but disapproves of much of it arbitrarily. That makes it more a political than a legal matter. Some people demand demolition of those houses as a matter of enforcing the law. The simplest way to do that would be to grant final approval. Demolition would mean destroying houses that the government assured people were legal to construct. If demolition is an important tool of law enforcement, what about
the many thousands of houses that Arabs build on land in Israel and in
Judea-Samaria that they do not own or do not have building permits
for, and some of which is zoned for public amenities and not housing?
U.S. RAISES STATUS OF PLO MISSION IN WASHINGTON The U.S. has raised the diplomatic status of the PLO mission in Washington to that of a "general delegation." The new status is short of what states have, but it gives officials in the mission diplomatic immunity and enables them to display the PLO flag. The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) denounced the change: "This amounts to a reward for continuing P.A. incitement against Jews and Israel, promoting hatred and violence, as well as its refusal to negotiate." "The U.S. has given Abbas' PA this upgrade despite the complete absence of Palestinian action to arrest terrorists, and end incitement to hatred and murder against Israel in its controlled media, mosques, schools and youth camps." President Obama has arranged to double U.S. subsidy of the Palestinian Authority (P.A.), bringing the annual total up to $1.3 billion. P.A. Arabs get more foreign aid per capita than does anyone else. Obama had promised to hold the P.A. accountable for its incitement to violence (7/26/10 press release by ZOA, headquartered in New York and of which I am a member) Years ago, when the PLO first was declared a terrorist organization, Americans asked the government to close its offices in Washington and New York. The government refused. Does Obama feel that by inciting to hatred and murder and failing to arrest terrorists, the PLO deserves to be elevated closer to statehood? Recently, France made a similar change in PLO status.
BIGOTS ON U.C. BIAS COMMITTEE University of California President Mark Yudof has set up an advisory council on campus bias. None of the appointees has "demonstrable expertise" fighting antisemitism, which plagues U.C. campuses, but two have demonstrable experience fostering or favoring antisemitism. Therefore, while the purpose of the committee is meritorious, the composition of it is meretricious, reports the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA). One of the pair is U.C. San Diego Professor Jorge Mariscal, who praised an anti-Israel event on that campus, "Justice in Palestine Week 2010 — End the Apartheid," whose title, alone, defamed Israel. The event featured Norman Finkelstein and other Israel-bashers. At U.C. Irvine, events such as "Israel, the 4th Reich" and "A World Without Israel" run for a week or two every year, not to enlighten but to incite. That kind of event slanders the Jewish state in an inflammatory way whose heat then gets directed to scorch Jews on campus. [Many people do not distinguish between the Jewish state and Jews outside the state.[ The other member of the pair is Imam Jihad Turk, Director of Religious Affairs for the Islamic Center of Southern California (ICSC). ICSC has committed the very antisemitism that the advisory council is supposed to address. In recent years: A 1986 ICSC conference prominently displayed the anti-Semitic The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. "In May 2008, the ICSC hosted a conference on the 'Nakba,' i.e., the so-called 'catastrophe' for the Palestinian Arabs when the State of Israel was established. Speakers at this conference, according to The Muslim Observer," called Israel colonialist and worse than apartheid South Africa; falsely claimed that the State of Israel arose by ethnic cleansing; and contends that Israel does not deserve to exist." [That is not criticizing some policy of Israel but the Jewish right to independence.] "Maher Hathout, a co-founder and current spokesperson for the ICSC, supports attacks on Israel by the terrorist group Hezbollah, and has called Israel a land of 'butchers' who have set up a system of 'racist apartheid.' In January 2008, Hathout gave his Friday sermon at the ICSC on the 'Tragedy in Gaza,' and defended Hamas' rocket attacks on Israel's civilian communities." More than 700 Jewish UC students protested to the Administration over "anti-Jewish and Israel-bashing speech and conduct on campus." "As noted historian Paul Johnson wrote in his book, A History of the Jews, 'One of the principal lessons of Jewish history has been that repeated verbal slanders are sooner or later followed by violent physical deeds.' This has been true at UC Irvine and UC Berkeley, where Jewish students have been physically assaulted. At least two students actually left UC Irvine because they could no longer tolerate the anti-Semitic hostility there. This past May, more than 60 faculty members at UC Irvine signed a statement saying that students and faculty feel intimidated and at times even unsafe. Jewish students and faculty on other UC campuses are also experiencing problems." (7/27/10 press release by ZOA, headquartered in New York and of which I am a member) (In the past year, we have covered U.C. problems several times.)
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC IS NOT IRAN
Posted by Amil Imani, July 28, 2010. |
|
"We just don't get it. The Left in America is screaming to high heaven that the mess we are in, in Iraq and the war on terrorism has been caused by the right-wing and that George W. Bush, the so-called "dim-witted cowboy," has created the entire mess. The truth is the entire nightmare can be traced back to the liberal democratic policies of the leftist Jimmy Carter, who created a firestorm that destabilized our greatest ally in the Muslim world, the shah of Iran, in favor of a religious fanatic, the ayatollah Khomeini." Michael Evans, Jerusalem Times, Jan 20, 2007 In 1979, the U.S. Government, notably, Jimmy Carter and company, with the help of its allied forces created the greatest Islamic terrorist nation on the face of the earth and the rise of Islamofascisim elsewhere. In fact, Jimmy Carter by his mere interference in another country betrayed the most valued friend to the West, the late Shah of Iran, and he is perhaps responsible for the formation of Islamicterrorism, not only in Iran, but around the world, including the United States.There have been more than 10,000 Islamic terrorist attacks since 9/11 with 60,000 dead and 90,000 injured. "Carter's pro Human Rights campaign shocked the foundations of many American allies including the late Shah of Iran who was running an ancient country with cultural and historical complications that needed time to be corrected." It is interesting that Carter's UN ambassador, Andrew Young, called Ayatollah Khomeini, (an Islamist mass murderer) "a kind of saint." Ironically, after 31 years of devastation of civility by the radical Muslims, Mr. Carter is still active in siding with terrorist groups such as Hamas and other terrorist organizations, something the current administration appears to be following. "Jimmy Carter's belief that every crisis can be resolved with diplomacy has had many catastrophic results. What we encounter today, as Islamic Terrorism mostly backed by the current Iranian regime, is one of the few gifts of Carter's failed foreign policy. Had he shown resolve in dealing with the 1979 revolution and the US embassy hostage crisis, we would not be in this mess we are today. Diplomacy is a great tool to enforce your policies, if other tools of foreign policy including military might and economic incentive and disincentives correctly back it. Jimmy Carter didn't apply these tools properly in order to handle many crises he faced during his 4-year presidency. All the blame does not lie with Carter's failure but he played an important role in this." Michael Evans To most Iranians, including me, the name of the Ayatollah Khomeini was unheard of until the Western policy makers decided to remove the Shah (the best friend of the West) and install so called a "Holy Man" Ayatollah Khomeini and carelessly forced the Shah of Iran to leave his homeland. For 31 years, the U.S. is still making big mistakes with respect to its policy regarding Iran. It is as though the U.S. is unable to or unwilling to recruit experienced and capable people as advisors on Iranian affairs. For the past 60 years, every U.S. policy with respect to Iran has been failure upon failure. Currently, pro-Islamic Republic lobbyists known as the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) has been given carte blanche to the Obama administration. Instead of confiscating their assets, sealing their offices, and deporting them immediately, this pro-Islamic Republic group has comfortably found its way into the White House. As early as December 1954, the Shah noted, "the potentialities of friendly and close relations between the people of Iran and the United States are immense. There is a deep and fundamental identity of national interests which overshadows everything else. We both believe that the individual is the central figure in society, and that freedom is the supreme blessing... Iran has a great deal in common, in convictions with the Western world regarding freedom and democracy." During the revolution of 1979, the communists of course were very active in the original uprisings against the Shah. A very strange marriage took place early on between the Islamists (who were an insignificant minority) and the variety of communist factions. They buried their hatchets and supposedly "unified" the nation for a "common" cause, which was supposed to be the achievement of democracy and political freedom. Unbeknownst to most Iranians who jumped on the bandwagon with these two main groups, the communists had the dream of socialism and the Islamists wanted to bring about Islamic fascism. They both lied to the people and betrayed their trust. Periodically the Islamists used the idea of "Taqeyya" or an Islamic lie, took the nation and its revolution hostage. Then the Islamists started to arrest and murder the communists and anyone else they found to be against the establishment of an Islamic Ummah. This is exactly the way these forms of uprisings turn out. You can see it played out almost as a parallel in the October Revolution in Russia, which was the basis for George Orwell's book "Animal Farm." For the past 31 years, Iranian people have been kept hostage in their own county by a group of barbaric Muslim terrorists who despise anything Persian and are slowly purging the remnant of pre-Islamic Persia as well as Persian textbooks. These pro-Arab invaders are not Iranians by any means. Iranian is defined by a state of mind, not by a place of residence. The barbaric Islamist mullahs and their mercenaries presently ruling Iran are not Iranians. They are Islamofascists who have betrayed their magnificent heritage and have enlisted themselves in the service of a most oppressive, discriminating, and demeaning ideology, Islam. Iranians are proud spiritual descendants of King Cyrus the Great, the author of the first charter of human rights. Some of Cyrus' children live in the patch of land called Iran. The overwhelming majority — free humans with human beliefs — live in every country, city, and village of the earth. These world-wide people, one and all, irrespective of nationality, color, or creed are Iranians because they all adhere to the Cyrus Charter; they practice and defend its lofty tenets, and transfer this precious humanity's treasure to the next generation. What makes people different is not their biology, but the "software" that runs them. There is ample proof to support the above assertion. A case in point is the present menace posed by the people whose life is programmed by the software of Islam: an ideology anathema to the Cyrus Charter. And the results are self-evident. Hate, superstition, violence, and a raft of other inhuman beliefs drives these religious fascists. These captive followers of the primitive Islamic Charter are both the perpetrators and the victims of much suffering. The result is backward Islamic societies that are intent at dragging the rest of the world into the same sorry state. Misery likes company, it is said. We recognize that the dysfunctional Islamic software is deeply engrained in the minds of many Muslims who opt to remain in mental bondage rather than purge their minds of the Islamic programming and join the rest of the human family with a new emancipating program for life — liberty. Islamic clergy, the parasitic prime beneficiaries of Islam, are master practitioners of the carrot-and-stick strategy. By drawing heavily from the Quran and the Hadith, the conniving mullahs and imams have assembled a potent arsenal of threats and promises to keep the faithful in line. They had little trouble in so doing, since Islamic scripture is replete with graphic horrific punishment awaiting the wayward and the unbelievers, while the rewards for the obedient docile, if he is male, are described as an endless variety of sensual pleasures. Anyone daring to leave the corral of Islam is apostate and automatically condemned to death. And that's just for starters. The punishment awaiting the ungrateful deserter of the one and only true path, Islam threatens a raft of horrific eternal torment in Allah's hell. And for the true faithful — he mindless robot — he promised rewards, all physical pleasures, are infinite and eternal. In spite of these horrid threats and empty promises, more and more people are beginning to recognize Islam for what it is. It is difficult, but not impossible to leave fraudulent Islam's captivity. Millions of Iranians have done so successfully, yet aren't able to announce it for the obvious reason, and hundreds of thousands of non-Iranians have left Islam as well and are enjoying the blessings of liberty. A great threat facing free people is the recently petrodollar-energized Islam embarking on a campaign of recruiting more people under its dark banner. Millions of disenfranchised underclass in the non-Islamic world, and millions more mentally under-developed, may flock to Islam, deluded by its empty promises. Islam is no longer in its own self-made cage. It has broken out and has established a powerful presence in much of the non-Islamic world. Islam is a charter of submission. It is a sworn enemy of freedom and views the Cyrus Charter as heresy. Freedom and tyranny are incompatible. Free people must do all they can to preserve their birthright of liberty and assist others to break from the bondage of Islamic captivity. The interdependent world community faces great challenges that demand a united effort, uncompromisingly based on justice, to meet the various ills it faces. We can no longer be complacent about events in a distant world affecting alien people. Distances are bridged and alien people are now diverse members of the human family. We honor Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. for proclaiming from a Birmingham jail, "Injustice anywhere is threat to justice everywhere." To demand justice for others, he risked his life, left his native Georgia, and ended up in jail in the then-bigoted south — Birmingham, Alabama. We "Iranians" of the world — free humans — must do no less. We must demand justice for our belief-kin who are suffering under the yoke of Islamofascisim in Iran or anywhere in the world. Now the world is facing wall-builders of a different kind: the Islamofascists who have been at their shameless work for centuries. As their walls built with superstition, discrimination and blood are crumbling; they are intent at building walls in new territories. But once again, human decency is rising to the challenge, this time in the voices and actions of billions of free people who proclaim: we are also children of Iran in the spirit of Cyrus the Great; "we meet any challenge and pay any price" to defeat Islamofascisim; and, we will not rest until humanity is completely free of the despotic rule of Islam. We Iranians in spirit — free people of the world — greatly cherish liberty, where the mind is imbued with enlightenment, and every individual by the virtue of being born human is afforded measured freedom. It is within the open expanse of liberty that each and every person can be at his or her best. And when the individual person is at his best, humanity is at its best.
Amil Imani is an Iranian-born American citizen and a pro-democracy activist residing in the United States of America. Imani is a columnist, literary translator, novelist and essayist who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran. He maintains a website at www.amilimani.com.
This article appeared in Family Security Matters (FSM) and is archived at
|
|
"JEWISH WEAKNESS ENCOURAGES ANTI-SEMITISM AND OUR OWN DEMISE"
Posted by Robert Kunst, July 27, 2010. |
|
Dear "Chosen" Activists: The Anti-Semitic Oliver Stone's statements and then an apology on 7/27/10, World Jewish Daily, below, reflect the increased attacks upon Israel and Jews. If the Jews did control the media, they are doing a rotten job if we look to the self-hating Jewish sellouts like NYTimes Thomas Friedman or Trudy Rubin of Philly Inq., to name a few of the sleaze that has brought us to this insanity once again. But since when did the truth matter, when Israel bashing and Jew bashing has now become a real door opener to another Holocaust and the end of Israel and Jews everywhere are threatened again! There is also a story below on why we are in this mess, because of the lack of leadership and willingness to constantly let our enemies come ever closer to our demise. Caving into those who would destroy us, in hopes of being 'liked' if we just give up being 'Jews' for 5000 yrs. is much too high a price to pay, but we keep paying it with the sleaze in charge of dictating these insanities. A key example this week, is PA's Abbas saying that he won't negotiate till Israel goes back to 1948 borders and expects Obama to bring this about with East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, already wrapped up for him, before he will have 'direct talks' with Israel. This would be hilarious, except that Ehud Barak is meeting with Barack Obama people, this week, on giving away the shop, while BiBi on his last visit with Obama, left open the door of 'negotiating' Jerusalem, when in April, Jerusalem wasn't 'negotiable'. Then we see the latest public relations stunt from Bibi, which is to practically grovel and beg Abbas for 'direct talks'. Does is get any dumber or more repulsive? Does it get any more insulting, that now the PLO will get its flag flying in D.C., while Obama folks say 'no change in status', but in France, PLO now is a 'mission' in their pursuit of 'two states'. which is the end of the Jewish state, and total victory for the Nazis and rewarding all of those killers of Jews. As usual, the Jews have a litany of excuses that this isn't possible and really isn't happening. So if the Jews, who 'own the media', have pushed us to this brink of insanity and Jewish non-leadership is plugging away at giving the Nazis their ultimate victory, by dividing Jerusalem, then the point of these two issues is that we are our own worst enemy and are constantly inviting our disasters, as much as what the enemy out there is doing. Today is Shalom International's 317 rally/event and 1214 news interviews since Oct. 2007. We're at Fed. Bldg. in Ft. Laud. We are the consistant reminder of the need to go on the offense and not keep getting picked off by everyone coming after us, because the world is asking: "WHAT DO JEWS STAND FOR?" If everyone wants Jerusalem and only the Jews are willing to divide it, according to the demands of our enemies, then what is our point of existance? Shalom International is that 'constant reminder' that Auschwitz and Jerusalem are not negotiable and the public is with us, so what is Bibi's problem? Would Muslims divide Mecca? That's one thing they have going for them, while we still argue after 5000 yrs.if there is a G-d, which got us to this point in our history, the sell-out Jews only want to talk about the last 62 yrs. and that we beat the enemy in 5 wars and 2 Intifadas and now we are giving it all back to them for a non-existant peace, that will never come, while moving the Nazis closer to finishing us off. So,if our 3000 yr. old Jerusalem, that millions of Jews were slaughtered for, doesn't matter, why would the world respect these immoral politics, from Jewish people so ill defined and so ill and why would they want us to survive, when we have so little self-respect to survive? Please reread all of this. It is the essense of the entire picture. Please help us to help you. Donate to : "Defend Jerusalem", P.O.Box 4021263, Miami Beach, Fla. 33140, or on paypal, www.defendjerusalem.net If you understand that my running for Congress as an 'independent' in Dist. 20, against Obama's entire approach to Israel to divide Jerusalem and Israel and America and my willingness to 'impeach' him with legitimate malfeasance and misfeasance, while in office in violations of U.S. laws and if you understand our need to stop the 'Mosque at Ground Zero' and our need to Boycott Turkey and everyone boycotting Israel and our need to stop Iran before it stops the world, then why aren't you behind this national effort, when the person I'm running against is behind everything Obama is doing against Israel and America? Kindly donate: www.kunstforcongress.com or Kunst For Congress, P.O.Box 402263, Miami Beach, Fla. 33140 paid political advertisement, Robert Kunst, 'independent' for Congress, Dist. 20. The Oliver Stones and the Ehud Baraks and the Obama's and Bibis are why I must do this or lose it all! Yours in Shalom,
Robert Kunst is President of, Shalom International. Contact him at 305-864-5110, or at his websites: www.defendjerusalem.net and www.kunstforcongress.com |
|
IRAN'S MINI-EMPIRE AT THE U.N.
Posted by Daily Alert, July 27, 2010. |
|
This was written by Claudia Rosett and it appeared July 23, 2010 in
Forbes
Claudia Rosett, a journalist in residence with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, writes a weekly columnon foreign affairs for Forbes. |
|
Despite sanctions, Iran continues to exploit the U.N. itself. The United Nations has just created a new "entity" on women's rights, called U.N. Women. Elections to its governing board are now being organized. How long before Iran wins a seat? If the question sounds absurd, the realities at the U.N. are even more mind-bending. The most recent high-profile outrage on this score was Iran gaining a seat in April on the U.N.'s Commission on the Status of Women. But that's the least of it. The reality is that Iran, despite being under four sets of binding sanctions resolutions by the U.N. Security Council, has learned to manipulate the institution in ways that make a mockery not only of the U.N. itself, but also of U.S. claims of diplomatic competence. Rarely remarked upon, but even more appalling than Iran's beachhead on the women's rights commission, is Iran's seat on the 36-member executive board of the U.N.'s flagship agency, the U.N. Development Program, headquartered in New York. Iran actually chaired the UNDP executive board last year, during the thick of the bloody protests in which Teheran's mullocracy was beating, jailing and killing protesters calling for democratic development in Iran. That same UNDP executive board, with Iran still in its lineup today, also serves as the governing body for the U.N. population fund (UNFPA) and the U.N. Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM). Iran's three-year term on the UNDP board expires at the end of 2010. But have no fear that Iran will be shut out of U.N. high councils on the status of women — or, for that matter, issues involving children and food aid. The newly created entity, U.N. Women, with or without Iran on its board, will be holding joint meetings with the executive boards not only of the UNDP, but also of the New York-based U.N. children's agency (UNICEF) and the Rome-based World Food Program (WFP). Iran sits on the boards of both UNICEF and the WFP, where its terms extend, respectively, through the end of 2011 and 2012. Iran also fields a hefty presence among the governing councils of U.N. outfits involved in matters germane to weapons, outer space and global crime. Through 2012 Iran — the world's leading terrorist-sponsoring state — is a vice chair of the Executive Council of the U.N.'s Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). Iran sits on two major commissions of the Vienna-based U.N. Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC), including the UNODC's 20-member Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, where in 2009 it won a three-year-term. And this past April Iran won a seat with a four-year term on the U.N.'s Geneva-based Commission on Science and Technology for Development — never mind its brazen violations of U.N. sanctions on its rogue nuclear program. As for outer space, there's really no need for NASA to reach out to the Iranian portion of the Muslim world. Iran is already engaged in preemptive outreach. At the U.N.'s Vienna-based Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS), the Legal Subcommittee — which works on who controls what in "the rational and equitable use of geostationary orbit" — is currently chaired by the head of the Iranian Space Agency, Ahmad Talebzadeh. Iran also sits on the governing council of the U.N.'s Geneva-based refugee agency (UNHCR), and on the governing boards of the two U.N. agencies headquartered in Nairobi: the U.N. Environment Program (UNEP) and the U.N. Human Settlements Program (UN-Habitat). At the U.N.'s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), in Rome, Iran has just finished a stint as chair of the governing council — but don't worry, it will be back on the council next year, already listed as a member for 2011-13. Meanwhile Iran currently has an envoy on the FAO finance committee, spanning 2009-11. It was an Iranian initiative that paved the way for the U.N.'s current Alliance of Civilizations, launched in 2005. President Barack Obama dropped by one of its meetings in Istanbul last year, and the U.S., which declined to join under President Bush, has now signed on as a member. This Alliance, a murky globe-girdling exercise in "bridge-building," is a pet project of Spain and Turkey — where the Islamic ruling party, the AKP, has been unveiling itself as Iran's new bedfellow. All this comes along with the more prominent use made by Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of the U.N. stage, where he has spoken every year since 2005 at the annual September opening in New York of the General Assembly. It's a good bet that in just two months he'll be back for his sixth performance. Beyond that, over the past 15 months alone Ahmadinejad has taken the main stage at U.N. conclaves in Geneva (the anti-Semitic Durban Review Conference, April 2009), Copenhagen (the U.N. climate jamboree, Dec. 2009) and New York (the Nonproliferation Treaty review conference, May 2010). In sum, while it rarely gets much attention, there's a strong Iranian tang to the U.N. alphabet soup. This is a bizarre and alarming scene, given an Iranian regime that continues to indulge in the execution of juveniles and homosexuals; the stoning and mandatory veiling of women; the jailing, torture and murder of democratic dissidents; the spread and support of terrorist groups not only in the Middle East, but around the globe; and the sanctions-busting pursuit of nuclear weapons and delivery systems. Some of this orgy of Iranian influence at the U.N. developed on the watch of President George Bush. Yet more has been spawned since Obama took office. What has the U.S. been doing to push back? In Washington, the U.S. Treasury has staff working overtime trying to chase down the constantly morphing networks of Iranian front companies, reflagged ships and other Iranian maneuvers to dodge both U.S. and U.N. sanctions. What's the State Department doing to help? Officially, State finally shepherded through a fourth round of Iran sanctions at the U.N. in June. But here's how the diplomatic back shop works. When Ahmadinejad decided to attend the Nonproliferation Treaty review conference in New York this past May, Iran at the last minute filed a blizzard of visa applications for Ahmadinejad's entourage, most of them submitted just three working days or fewer before this entourage proposed to touch down in New York. That should have set off big alarms, given Iran's record of exploiting the U.N. system and abusing its U.N. foothold in New York to recruit sanctions busters and oversee a large alleged Iranian front operation, the Fifth-Avenue-based Alavi Foundation, right out of Iran's U.N. Mission in Manhattan — as described in a slew of federal court documents over the past three years. How did the State Department handle these last-minute Iranian visa requests? There was every opportunity to deliver a solid rebuke simply by letting the applications languish for more than three working days. State is usually more than adept at such delays, for reasons far less compelling. Instead, at Iran's behest, State hustled to approve, pronto, a staggering total of 80 visas for Ahmadinejad's retinue. Iran then complained to the U.N., because along with the 80 approved, one visa request was denied. Within the warped backrooms of the U.N., Iran continues to expand its web of access and influence. Instead of standing up to this, the Obama Administration — now dispensing more than $6 billion per year to bankroll almost one-quarter of the U.N.'s budget — keeps rolling over. Why's that? 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 |
|
ISRAEL'S PRESSING MATTERS
Posted by Ari Bussel, July 27, 2010. |
|
There are several major anti-Israel campaigns underway. Let us look at some ongoing and upcoming events: 1) Israel's alleged Apartheid's regime, ongoing Israel must be aware of some or all of these accusations and campaigns against them. After all, Israel is quite sophisticated. Its Ministry of Foreign Affairs has branches the world over and the Government Press Office follows global news, as does the Israel Defense Forces Intelligence Branch. There are NGOs that actually do this for existence, including Jerusalem-based Memri that follows the Arabic news media. There is also an Information Directorate at the Prime Minister's Office. They must be well versed in the above, as should Israel's Minister for Public Diplomacy and the Diaspora and his staff. Then there are the various "policy advisers" and well-paid strategists (all on the taxpayer's dime) who clearly are aware of these plans. None of the aforementioned areas of contention should come as news to anyone. After all, they have been readily and repeatedly advertised. Israel's enemies are not shy in announcing their plans. They do so explicitly, publicly and unabashedly. Israel and her diplomats, elected and appointed officials and respective support staffs are smart people. All are very well compensated. Clearly, there must not be any surprises in this dispatch, not to them. So what is Israel doing? Has she gone on the offensive? Are there drawer plans for these certain eventualities? Will she react, as in recent years, or come out with a more pro-active approach? What will she do when events take unexpected turns as in the latest Turkish Terrorist Flotilla of Lies? Like a script, finished and in the process of being filmed, the attacks against Israel are in advanced stages of production. All that is necessary is the addition of an effective public relations campaign to support the upcoming release. An enormous budget has been allocated for the new release, a war machine against the Jewish State. It dwarfs that of previous films and is greater than the sum total of all combined expenditures on movie releases in Hollywood for the past decade. What excuses will be provided next for Israel's failures on the Public Diplomacy Front? Lack of personnel? Insufficient funds? Politics? Corruption? The "Other" Party or "Someone Else is at fault," "We did not know," "We did not expect," "Events took an unexpected turn," "It concerns us not," "What is Israel to do?" There is more planning of excuses than strategies to avoid failure. Wake up Israel's leaders and guards. You are entrusted with preparing for such untold and unforeseen eventualities. The events I mentioned have already been acknowledged and your enemies have warned you time and again. Yet, you see not and listen not. You choose to ignore, and it is inevitable you will pay a price. Former glory will not sustain present failure. The Israeli public is constantly misled into a false sense of security by the plethora of ministerial and governmental entities entrusted with Israel's Public Diplomacy. More than all other failures, this is the most egregious, for the very existence of structures must be dismantled in order to improve the health and well being of the Jewish state. Israel must shift her thinking and understand the war machine must be equally divided between two fronts: the armory and public relations. News Alert for the near future: A defiant Israel is said to continue its harsh stand against the United Nations. In a surprising development, Israel has announced it will not grant entry to the three appointed members of the International Board of Inquiry appointed by the UN Human Rights Council. Observers in Israel report this opposition is unlikely to last. July 23, 2010, AFP, excerpts: GENEVA — The UN Human Rights Council named a panel of experts Friday to investigate whether Israel's deadly raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla breached international law and urged the Jewish state to cooperate. The script from AP, brought almost in its entirety alongside its key elements, is so elegantly played out that one does not need to engage any specialists to create a sequel. All that is needed are the appropriate name substitutions. I am already marking my calendar with great anticipation! Viva Palestine, the eternal homeland of the Palestinian People, created by those who write fiction! Soon millions of Palestinian refugees will trounce Jerusalem, their never before mentioned capital. Wake up Israel's guards and generals entrusted with public diplomacy. Where are your leaders Israel, as international public demonization mounts against the Jewish State? Contact Ari Bussel at busselari@gmail.com |
|
LEAKED DOCUMENTS
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, July 27, 2010. |
|
Wikipedia has released sensitive documents about America's war in Afghanistan. The matter of leaking these secret documents to Wikipedia now shifts to the source of these documents. I am reminded of the false report traced to the U.S. State Department wherein several State Department Arabists were assigned to infiltrate several of the 16 American Intelligence Agencies to plant erroneous information that Iran had ceased its nuclear development. The idea was to curtail any plans by the Bush Administration to bomb Iran nuclear development sites. In essence, the Arabist State Department was running its own Shadow Government and making its own secret policy. The Director of the CIA later apologized to Congress for this deliberately false report. John Bolton, former American Ambassador to the U.N., confirmed at the time of the released false report of the NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) December 2007 that three State Department agents were assigned this task of subversion. The title of the false NIE implied that Iran had ceased its nuclear research and development. That "false" impression was carried forward in all the world's media. However, John Bolton totally discredited that 2007 NIE. Ambassador John Bolton said in the Washington Post of December 6, 2007: "That such a flawed product could emerge after a drawn-out bureaucratic struggle is extremely troubling. While the president and others argue that we need to maintain pressure on Iran, this "intelligence" torpedo has all but sunk those efforts, inadequate as they were. Ironically, the NIE opens the way for Iran to achieve its military nuclear ambitions in an essentially unmolested fashion, to the detriment of us all." With that in mind it would not be too far a reach to conclude, subject to a deep investigation, that the Arabist State Department once again leaked documents in their possession to Wikipedia to subvert the war in Afghanistan and put our soldiers at further risk. So far the Arabist State Department has remained untouchable on many projects — especially in the Middle East. This includes funding terrorist organizations through NGO's and other venues such as the United Nations — as well as undermining the security and sovereignty of our only dependable, democratic ally in the Middle East — Israel. Iran's head, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has declared often and loudly, that he plans for Israel to be the first target of his upcoming Nuclear Bombs to "wipe Israel off the map". However, Ahmadinejad has also demonstrated that his missile throw capacity could bring Nuclear Weapons to threaten Europe and the 300,000 to 500,000 American and Allied soldiers in the Middle and Far East. We have observed many active and retired State Department diplomats on the payroll of Islamic nations upon retirement who lobby Congress and the President to ignore dangerous activities by these Muslim and Arab nations. Frankly, I don't think there will be a deep investigation of the Wikipedia leaks, particularly if it might lead into the bowels of the State Department. One last thought! I wonder if this is merely an clever move by President Barack Hussein Obama through his advisors John Brennan and Rahm Emanuel to get the American people riled up so Obama had an excuse to accelerate his withdrawal of American troops? This below is called "Website Releases Secrets On War: Leaked Documents Paint A Bleak Picture of Afghan War" by Julian E. Barnes &and Siobhan Gorman, Wall St. Journal, July 26, 2010. Write to Siobhan Gorman at siobhan.gorman@wsj.com Jeanne Whalen, Nathan Hodge and Maria Abi-Habib contributed to this article. |
|
WASHINGTON — he release by a Web-based organization of thousands of secret military documents that appear to present a bleak view of the Afghan war drew a range of reactions Monday, underscoring that they could have a profound impact on public perception of the war. The U.S., the U.K. and Pakistan condemned the huge leak of classified information, while Afghanistan focused on reported Pakistani support for the Taliban-led insurgency and reports of previously undisclosed civilian deaths to demand further tightening of rules of engagement. The Pentagon said it is trying to assess the damage caused. The release of the documents, which were obtained and made public by the website WikiLeaks, evoked the release of the so-called Pentagon Papers, the secret history of the Vietnam War, which, when published, contradicted the public narrative of that war and played a role in turning public opinion against it. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange told a London news conference Monday the documents appear to contain evidence of war crimes, adding it would be "up to a court" to make judgments. He cited especially Task Force 373, which he called a U.S. military "assassination unit" that he said killed seven children in a "botched raid." Asked how many incidents could potentially be investigated for possible war crimes or other reasons, he said "thousands," adding that the U.S. military would probably be forced to investigate some. Mr. Assange said information in the documents "really doesn't paint a flattering picture of the Taliban, either," noting that there are many reports of Taliban-planted explosive devices causing "significant loss of human life." He strongly suggested a coverup of civilian deaths during the war, pointing to U.S. military reports on the number of people wounded or killed during specific incidents. In some of these, a high number of those killed or wounded are classified as "enemy" while very few are classified as "civilians," which he called "suspicious." WSJ Afghanistan correspondent Matthew Rosenberg speaks with Amol Sharma about the significance of the leak of thousands of documents related to the Afghanistan war and the possible effects on the perception of the war among American and Afghani citizens. He said the documents don't just "reveal abuses" but paint a detailed picture of "the last six years of war," including the kinds of weapons used and the progress or setbacks experienced. Coming at a time when U.S. President Barack Obama's Afghanistan strategy has come under increasing criticism, the release will likely stoke criticism of the war effort, as well as spark a debate about the manner in which the information was made available. WikiLeaks allowed three publications — he Guardian newspaper in London, the magazine Der Spiegel in Germany and the New York Times — o have access to the documents for several weeks. Those news outlets released stories in a coordinated manner late Sunday. The documents are mostly raw field reports, some spare, some mundane and others rich with narrative details. Many of the low-level reports are the kind that some intelligence experts consider the equivalent of second-hand rumors, said one U.S. official. The White House condemned the release of the documents, as it has in the past when WikiLeaks has made classified material public. Even as it condemned the leak, the White House also noted that the bulk of the material released was from the Bush administration. An Afghan soldier searched a boy during a patrol in the volatile Arghandab Valley, Kandahar, Afghanistan, Monday. "On Dec. 1, 2009, President Obama announced a new strategy with a substantial increase in resources for Afghanistan, and increased focus on al Qaeda and Taliban safe havens in Pakistan, precisely because of the grave situation that had developed over several years," Gen. James Jones, White House national security adviser, said in a statement. WikiLeaks said it was releasing some 91,000 documents, reports that cover the period from January 2004 through the end of 2009. On its website, WikiLeaks also said it would delay the release of 15,000 reports at the request of its source. As it reviewed and redacted those documents, they too would be released, the statement said. The most surprising finding in the reports may be that the Taliban have used sophisticated heat-seeking missiles against aircraft operated by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Afghan resistance fighters used similar weapons, provided by the U.S., to great effect against the Soviet Army in the 1980s. The U.S. military has never publicly acknowledged that the Taliban possess such weapons. According to the reports, the Pakistani military's Inter-Services Intelligence agency provided the Taliban with havens in Pakistan, even as Islamabad was aiding the U.S. war effort. That charge has often been made privately by U.S. officials. Even in public, Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander in Kabul, has said the ISI retains ties with the Taliban. Other reports detail missions conducted by Special Operation Forces charged with hunting down top insurgent commanders. The reports claim successes but also note that mistakes have led to the death of Afghan civilians and, as a result, eroded U.S. standing in Afghanistan. The U.S. has increased the number of Special Operations teams and their operational tempo in recent months. Officials say rules put in place by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the former top commander, have minimized the collateral damage produced by the elite forces' raids. The reports note that a number of U.S. unmanned aircraft have crashed and collided, undermining the overall success rate. That finding also has been previously reported by news organizations. The swiftness of the White House's response when the first stories about the WikiLeaks documents appeared suggests it views the release of the reports as potentially damaging to the war effort. The administration has boosted the U.S. presence in Afghanistan by 50,000 troops but put in place a tight timeline, insisting it plans to begin a drawdown in about a year. At the beginning, the war in Afghanistan enjoyed widespread support, even from Bush administration critics who would later oppose the Iraq war. As it has dragged on, becoming the longest armed conflict in U.S. history, doubts about whether the U.S. can be successful in Afghanistan have grown. Antiwar members of Congress such as Rep. Denis Kucinich (D., Ohio) have seized on new revelations about the war to renew their arguments that the U.S. should begin to withdraw. A minority of lawmakers has so far supported withdrawal resolutions. The House is due to debate a resolution on U.S. involvement in Pakistan this week. The WikiLeaks reports will likely be used as ammunition in that debate. "However illegally these documents came to light, they raise serious questions about the reality of America's policy toward Pakistan and Afghanistan," said Sen. John Kerry (D., Mass.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in a statement. "Those policies are at a critical stage and these documents may very well underscore the stakes and make the calibrations needed to get the policy right more urgent." The release is sure to put attention on WikiLeaks, a Web-based group devoted to publishing state secrets. In April, the organization unveiled classified footage of a 2007 U.S. helicopter attack in Baghdad that killed two Reuters employees. In addition to video shot from a helicopter gunship, the group released a package of documents related to the attack; it sent correspondents to Baghdad to track down survivors of the incident and conduct follow-up interviews. At a news conference in releasing the video, Mr. Assange called the pairing of investigative reporting with leaked footage a "powerful combination." This month, the U.S. military said it would press criminal charges against an Army soldier, Pfc. Bradley Manning, for allegedly transferring classified military information to an unauthorized source. The charges appeared to be connected to the materials WikiLeaks released in April. The arrest of Pfc. Manning intensified the criticism of WikiLeaks and discussion about whether Mr. Assange was inducing people to leak classified data that could potentially put intelligence sources in danger. Launched in 2007, WikiLeaks has posted a wide range of leaked documents from the internal correspondence of climate researchers to information on secret sorority rituals. The organization has designs on being seen as a serious newsgathering enterprise. The unusual agreement to team up with the three major news organizations appears to be an effort to build on those aspirations. U.S. Marines and Afghan National Army soldiers walk during an operation to clear the area of insurgents near Musa Qaleh, in northern Helmand Province, southern Afghanistan, on Friday. In coming days, as officials and experts review the documents, new revelations are likely to come to light. The most important documents may be those dealing with the activities of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence and its relationship with the Taliban. Pakistan's ambassador to the U.S., Husain Haqqani, condemned the leak as irresponsible and not reflective of the current situation on the ground in the region, adding that the U.S. and Pakistan are "strategic partners" working to defeat al Qaeda and the Taliban. "These reports reflect nothing more than single-source comments and rumors, which abound on both sides of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and are often proved wrong after deeper examination," he said Sunday. The Pakistani government, he said, "is following a clearly laid out strategy of fighting and marginalizing terrorists and our military and intelligence services are effectively executing that policy." Several of the reports provide details behind the long-running U.S. contention that Pakistani intelligence officers — and veterans of the ISI — have been supporting the Afghan Taliban. One January 2009 intelligence report describes an Afghan Taliban meeting that included former ISI chief Hamid Gul. It focused on plans to launch a truck bomb to avenge the recent killing of Osama al-Kini, an al Qaeda leader killed by a Central Intelligence Agency drone. The participants at the meeting included several older Arab men with large security details, which may have indicated they were members of al Qaeda. Mr. Gul advised the group to focus their operation on Afghanistan "in exchange for the government of Pakistan's security forces turning a blind eye," the report said. Mr. Gul has denied links to terrorism. Pakistani officials strongly dispute the notion the government still provides support to the Afghan Taliban, saying they have severed all ties. A report from December 2006 describes a member of the ISI running a suicide-bombing network in Afghanistan that trained bombers, conducted reconnaissance, and performed other operational planning and support for attacks such as transporting bombers from Pakistan to Afghanistan. The aspiring bombers receive training at militant camps, including one run by a notorious militant group that has links to al Qaeda, the Haqqani network. According to WikiLeaks reports, the Taliban were expert in using heat-seeking missiles. Still, U.S. officials have never acknowledged the Taliban had access to such weaponry. One document released by WikiLeaks was a May 30, 2007, report that discussed a CH-47 transport helicopter destroyed by a heat-seeking missile, killing five Americans, a Briton and a Canadian. At the time, a NATO spokesman dismissed witness reports suggesting the helicopter was struck with a missile. The WikiLeaks report shows the military knew that the Taliban had used a heat-seeking device. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@gwinstonglobal.org |
|
SRAEL: US MILITARY AID TO LEBANON COULD GO TO TERRORISTS;
FIRST FEMALE ISRAELI ARAB COMBAT SOLDIER
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 27, 2010. |
|
ISRAEL PRAISES BUT SUSPICIOUS OF P.A. FORCE How to reconcile IDF praise for the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) military with IDF suspicion of it? The praise is that they "calmed" the area and repress Hamas. Yoni Ben-Menachem reported on Israel Radio (7/26/10) that Israeli Central Commander Avi Mizrahi warned his troops that the IDF must be prepared to see the P.A. forces, which U.S. General Dayton is training in Jordan, turn against Israeli troops and civilians. Gen. Mizrahi explained that the new P.A. military has been trained and equipped by U.S. experts far advanced beyond the hodge-podge gunmen of the Intifada at Jenin. The new P.A. military is a professional, deadly infantry force. It can take the initiative, and is not likely to throw down its weapons, as seen in prior wars. The general explained that with four snipers, it could pin down an area. The broadcaster went on to attribute to the suspicion Gen. Mizrahi expressed, Israel's precaution in not allowing delivery of the armored personnel carriers already shipped to Jordan by Russia. The U.S. comptroller reacted to the prohibition with a complaint that Israel hinders training of the P.A. military. To Israel, such hindrance means Israeli security. In the 1996 Hasmonean Tunnel and 2000 second Intifada conflicts, P.A. police turned their guns against Israeli forces. After the Camp David talks failed, the P.A. General Intelligence and Preventive Intelligence forces turned into armed terrorists, attacking Israeli civilians and soldiers. There were other examples. Israel would not object to Arab autonomy with sufficient forces to maintain internal security; it objects to forces sufficient to attack Israel. Yes, P.A. forces repress Hamas. But that is a tactical matter of immediate preservation of Abbas' Fatah regime. It is not a strategic alliance with Israel nor against terrorism. Suppose Fatah's strategy shifts to reconciliation with Hamas. Then the P.A. could redirect its new military against Israel. Israel would face forces trained at battalion level to fight in urban areas and to conquer strongholds, IDF outposts, and settlements (IMRA, 7/26/10).
P.A. MILITARY: MORE 
Adding to the prior article, Emanuel Winston of Winston Mid East Report and Analysis further explains that the U.S. trained the P.A. in intelligence and communications. He presented a JINSA (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs) report on this, #1009, 7/23. JINSA shares the Israeli general's concern. Israelis acknowledge that whatever P.A. forces do against Hamas, saves Israel having to do it. The American trainers coordinate the force's action with Israel. But Abbas' P.A. remains hostile to Israel. And U.S. officials already are talking about engaging with Hamas while training a P.A. force ostensibly against Hamas. Meanwhile, the P.A. is chafing at U. S. supervision, demanding that the U.S. stick to training and leave the P.A. independent in determining its security interests. The implication is that whereas the U.S. thinks it is training a force just against Hamas, the P.A. wants to be free to determine whom it is against. [An earlier article documented Abbas' call for war on Israel if negotiations do not give him everything he wants.] The problem may be that the U.S. states goals in mechanical terms, such as number of units prepared, rather than in broad terms of policy goals, such as P.A. compliance with Roadmap obligations to eradicate terrorism (7/26). Further considerations: 1. We have documented a number of times that Israel has had to raid terrorists in the P.A., at night, because the P.A. forces do not eradicate terrorism, they block Hamas, but not other terrorists. 2. In the link cited above, one can find documentation for Abbas' pro-terrorism. 3. There is a phenomenon of futile praising of other parties in the hope of motivating them to make peace or provide security. Examples are Israeli praise for P.A. forces, praise for obviously ineffective Egyptian efforts against tunnel smuggling, and Nobel peace prizes in advance of anything more than signatures for Obama, Abbas, and the North Vietnamese leader, Le Duc Tho. TURKEY HELPING SYRIA CRUSH KURDS 
As Turkey builds relations with fellow Islamist neighbors, reports are coming in of Turkey helping Syria crush Kurds in Syria, Iran crush its Kurds, as well as fight its own Kurds and those from Iraq. As a member of NATO, Turkey has advanced Western weaponry. Israel still furnishes Turkey with advanced arms, although Turkey's government has turned radical. Israeli officials rationalize their continued sales on the grounds of good relations with Turkey's military. Meanwhile, however, the government of Turkey has indicted many of the top brass there. Badgered by the religious Right and from the liberal side over past interference in government in behalf of the Constitution, the Turkish generals with whom Israeli officials have a relationship are losing power and losing touch. Al-Arabiya reports that Turkey is using unmanned aerial vehicles supplied by Israel, to track down the Kurds. Israel has no plans to cancel sales of more. The danger to the whole region but particularly Israel is that the radical regime will direct Turkey's army for jihad, which Israel was able to fend off before, when it had superior weapons to the Soviet ones used by the Arabs. Now Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan have the same U.S. weapons as Israel and an understanding of what Israel can do with them. The same type of danger from Turkey faces Israel and American interests from Egypt, whose regime may end soon. The Moslem Brotherhood may then gain increasing influence over Egypt's first-class military. Al-Arabiya reports that Turkey is using unmanned aerial vehicles supplied by Israel, to track down the Kurds. Israel has no plans to cancel sales of more. The Mideast is changing. Israel's concept of it does not seem to be. It tries to retain dead or dying relationships (IMRA, 7/24/10 from Carolyn Glick, Ed. Jerusalem Post). I followed up with Carolyn Glick to ask whether advanced weapons Turkey acquires from Israel may be given to Iranian laboratories to figure out. Then the Islamist axis could either counter the Israeli weapons or make their own (and not pay Israel). She agreed that indeed there is such a concern (email, 7/27). Before the Intifada, we reported personal relationships between officials of Israel and of the Palestinian Authority (P.A.). We also reported years ago, just as IMRA did on 7/24 about the present, the security cooperation the IDF felt it had with P.A. forces. Those relationships did not stop P.A. troops from suddenly opening fire on IDF troops on joint patrol with them. Neither did those relationships prevent Intifada. Without taking sides, the Kurdish conflict involves autonomy versus
conformity in the several countries in which the approximately 40 million Kurds are located and the terrorism and oppression in waging the conflict.
HIZBULLAH BLOCKS LEBANON-FRANCE SECURITY AGREEMENT The parliamentary delegation of Hizbullah and its Amal and Michel Aoun's Free Patriotic Movement) prevented ratification of a France-Lebanon agreement for cooperation on internal, civil, and administrative security. The objection was to the agreement's stated opposition to terrorism. Hizbullah and allies want the agreement to adopt the Arab League definition of "terrorism" and not the French definition. The French definition would apply to Hizbullah and Hamas [because they specifically attack civilians]. The Arab League definition exempts militias that attack civilians if fighting what the Arabs call "resistance to occupation." The government tried to conciliate the Hizbullah bloc by pointing out Lebanon's rights to reject French proposals and to withdraw from the agreement. When that did not work, the government offered to add to a signed agreement an appendix adopting the Arab League definition. The opposition bloc walked out, preventing the parliament from endorsing the agreement (IMRA, 7/27/10). The difference between the two definitions is that: (1) The new, Arab League definition arrogates to itself a right to murder civilians for its cause, and to call self-defense against that cause "terrorism" if civilians accidentally get killed during self-defense against jihad; and (2) The original definition is based on the traditional international law rules of warfare, which try to keep war between armies and not spread them to civilians and perhaps genocide.
ISRAEL: U.S. MILITARY AID TO LEBANON COULD GO TO TERRORISTS Israeli Defense Minister Barak's warning that, if Hizbullah attacks it, Israel would defend itself against the whole regime, got all the attention, but almost unnoticed is his further alert that U.S. military aid to Lebanon may fall into the hands of terrorists. President Obama announced intent to raise that subsidy to $100 million. More specifically, Min. Barak put it, "...the walls between the Lebanese armed forces and Hizbullah — it's quite porous. And whatever you give the Lebanese armed forces might end up in the hands of Hizbullah, be it technology or weapons or whatever." (Arutz-7, 7/27/10). This column's prior analysis made the same point about the Lebanese armed forces and Hizbullah, but warrants clarification. Since Hizbullah and the Lebanese Army are more or less allies, Hizbullah may not need to capture the U.S. arms, if it could direct the Lebanese Army whom to use them against. A prior article finds the U.S. in a similar position with the Palestinian Authority military. Has the West yet learned that other cultures whom it assists have different goals?
FIRST FEMALE ISRAELI ARAB COMBAT SOLDIER Cpl. Elinor Joseph is proud to be Israel's first female Arab combat soldier. She is building a fine record as a medic, after having served as a border guard and winning the respect of the border population and her fellow troops. A Christian, Cpl. Joseph realizes she is working for a Jewish state, but this is her country and she wants to help protect its people, including her own family. As she gets to know the people whom she works with and those whom she is assigned to protect, she gets to care for them. Joseph grew up in a mixed Arab-Jewish neighborhood. Her father was an IDF paratrooper, who wanted her to enlist. An early obstacle to her career choice was her friends' objection. She put the onus on them to show that their friendship for her was genuine and not political. When people tell her she may have to kill Arabs, she deflects the point from one of ethnic solidarity by pointing out that Arabs kill Arabs (Arutz-7, 7/27/10).
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
STOP HARASSMENT OF RAV OF OD YOSEF CHAI LETTER TO KNESSET MEMBERS
Posted by Robin Ticker, July 27, 2010. | |
| TO: ddanon@knesset.gov.il, myaalon@knesset.gov.il, mcachlon@knesset.gov.il, hkatz@knesset.gov.il, yiskatz@knesset.gov.il, llivnat@knesset.gov.il, gsaar@knesset.gov.il, zpinian@knesset.gov.il, ypeled@knesset.gov.il, mregev@knesset.gov.il, rrivlin@knesset.gov.il, kshama@knesset.gov.il, ysteinitz@knesset.gov.il, sshalom@knesset.gov.il, yedelstein@knesset.gov.il, meitan@knesset.gov.il, zelkin@knesset.gov.il, oakunis@knesset.gov.il, gerdan@knesset.gov.il, bbegin@knesset.gov.il, iaharon@knesset.gov.il, rilatov@knesset.gov.il, olevy@knesset.gov.il, aliberman@knesset.gov.il, ulandau@knesset.gov.il, slandver@knesset.gov.il, mmatalon@knesset.gov.il, anmichaely@knesset.gov.il, amiller@knesset.gov.il, smiseznikov@knesset.gov.il, amarh@knesset.gov.il, fkirshenbaum@knesset.gov.il, drotem@knesset.gov.il, lshemtov@knesset.gov.il, mgafni@knesset.gov.il, mmozes@knesset.gov.il, umaklev@knesset.gov.il, uorbach@knesset.gov.il, zorlev@knesset.gov.il, dhershkovitz@knesset.gov.il, dazulay@knesset.gov.il, aatias@knesset.gov.il, yvaknin@knesset.gov.il, nzeev@knesset.gov.il, eyishay@knesset.gov.il, amncohen@knesset.gov.il, amichaeli@knesset.gov.il, ymargi@knesset.gov.il, mnahari@knesset.gov.il | |
bs"d Dear Chavrei Knesset, amv"sh What exactly did the Rav say that deserved being awoken at 4:00 am traumatizing his family and dehumanizing him as if he was a criminal? Perhaps it's what he didn't clearly say. Perhaps he didn't clearly spell out or point a finger at the Palestinians who have used their children and ambulances as human shields and lie through their teeth for PR purposes. For them are we expected to endanger our Soldiers like we did in Jenin? The hypocrisy of Britain and America! They clearly would never stand for this cowardly excuse of fighting by the Palestinian enemy that endangered their own little Palestinian children and prey on our merciful nature. Mercy on our part thereby endangers human lives and and causes us to be cruel to our very own soldiers. Showing mercy to our enemy that behaves in such a despicable fashion merely encourages and escalates their choice of weapons such as using children and ambulances as human shields. Restraint on the part of Israel is not in the interest of innocent Palestinian children and GREATLY endangers Israeli fighting aoldiers since it forces our soldiers to sitting ducks or easy targets. IN Auschwitz the jEWISH prisoners would have embraced an attack on the railroads leading to Auschwitz and the Concentration Camps even if it meant that some Jews would have been killed. All understood clearly that the intention of bombing the tracks was to stop the process of mass murder of millions and not to kill the number of Jews that happened to have been there at the time. For shame on those reporters that made is seem like the Rav was a racist that treasures Jewish Blood over Gentile blood. What a blatant distortion. It'a obvious to me that it is the intent of such Gentiles that determine the Halacha and not their blood type, race or religion. Here is an article that slanders Rabbis as being racists against Gentiles based on bloodtype. The headline is quite blatant and accusatory. Shapira's distinction between Jewish, gentile blood Members of Knesset: Please do what you can to stop the slander and incarceration of G-d fearing Jews and the execution of the destruction of shuls and communities in Yehudah and the Shomron! Sincerely,
This email is L'Ilui Nishmat Yisrael ben David Aryeh ob"m (Izzy — Kaplan) a great activist and lover of Eretz Yisroel, Am Yisroel and the Torah. Yehi Zichrono Baruch. |
|
STOP KILLING YOUR COUNTRY
Posted by Paul Lademain, July 27, 2010. |
|
We are the Secular Christians for Zion. We stand firmly by the Patriots of Israel. We are appalled by the way your government ignores international law and the Treaty of San Remon which established the boundaries of Israel ca. 1920. These boundaries encompassed the region known as Gaza, most of the Golan Heights, Jerusalem, and Judah and Samaria. We have studied middle east issues for years and we are deplored by the rampant disintegration of your nation by misguided zealots both within and without Israel who are in favor of the "piecing away of Israel" in exchange for a "peace" that consists of air kisses, bribes, and flattery. Your people, the ones in leadership whose families spent most of their lives running from country to country to save their money and skins are the kind of people who do not want to understand that to have and keep a country you must fight for every inch of your land and not piece it away, chunk by chunk, for any reason, and certainly not to buy favor from the lunk-heads and embedded Saudi lobbyists that infest the US State. Dept. We are Americans who are appalled by the shenanigans of our US State. Dept. We are equally appalled by Israel's ignorant and morally weak leadership — ignorant because it apparently doesn't want to educate itself about the San Remo Resolution and morally weak because it fails to demand the restoration of all the lands of the Jewish Homeland. Stop arresting your Patriots — when you do, you merely incite disrespect from the Arabs who already detest you and you also invite sneers from the rest of the world who are willing to hate you because you blow big and crumble easily. In short you leaders are willing to pander to Islamic imperialism. Kindly understand that no matter what "gestures" you offer to your enemies, they are educated to disregard them and consider all Jews fools and knaves because they believe all Jews are as sappy as Israel's lax leadership. Your supreme High Court is a mess of Jewish contrarians who would, given a chance, reward arabs for keeping slaves. Why? Because these judges are the worst kind of Jews: contrarians and seditionists and smug loud-mouth poseurs. If you cannot hang together, then each of you will hang separately — so warned Ben Franklin to the founders of the United States. Israel needs similar leadership but unfortunately, lack wise leaders. Instead, they have cunning, short-sighted finaglers such as Ehud Barak and Shimon Peres, both known to have bargained away Israel's sovereign rights through their unlawful acts. They should be arrested, not the poor rabbi who dared speak his thoughts. Arrest Barak as soon as he steps off the plane. Throw Shimon Peres in jail until he rots. These fools are the bane of the Western world and the destroyers of Israel. We support Israel because Israel is the shining rock that stands on the Saudi path of Islamic imperialism. Obama will pass. We don't want a president who engages in international bow-movement tours. He'll most likely be a one-termer. We demand that Israel survive. Now you know why. Now you know how. Viva Israel!
Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net |
|
WE STAND AT A HISTORIC JUNCTURE (TEMPLE MOUNT PETITION)
Posted by Temple Mount Petition, July 26, 2010. |
|
Dear friends, Thank you so much for taking the time to read and sign the petition for the Temple Mount. A few months ago a historic debate was held in the Knesset Law Committee to decide if hearings should be held on the issue of Jewish ascent. A vote to hold the Temple Mount hearings passed by a vote of 12-0 along with 1 abstention. However the head of the Law Committee MK David Rotem of Yisrael Beitenu is stalling the hearings for political reasons. Friends, now is the time to act! The Knesset is on summer break and will resume in 3 months. This gives us time to rally the world Jewry and all those who love justices and mercy for the sake of the Temple Mount. We have an historic opportunity to return Jewish Prayer to the Temple Mount; we have an historic opportunity to turn the Mount as is written in Isaiah 56:7 into "A House of Prayer for all Nations". Where all Nations can find a common spiritual ground and stand as one before He whose Name is One. Maybe this place can help bring a little peace and tranquility to an increasing volatile world. Please urge all your friends and family to sign the petition for Jewish Prayer on the Temple Mount and help insure that all humanity can come together and pray together. I have spoken to Knesset Members and they want to hear your voice! They want to be empowered and emboldened to take the courageous steps that are needed to make this dream a reality. Help us reach an ambitious goal of 100,000 on the petition. Check the petition homepage for more actions in the coming weeks and months! Thank You. |
|
|
|
DESTRUCTION AND HARRASSMENT BY BARAK
Posted by Mattot Arim, July 26, 2010. |
|
At four o'clock this morning, Israeli security forces swooped down on Shomron Jewish community at Yitzhar, burst into the home of the local Rosh Yeshiva (head of rabbinical school) and arrested him in front of his 11 young children, on charges stemming from a scholary treatise he wrote — many months ago — relating to the dilemma of when it is permitted and not permitted to use force against non-Jews. Some sources say that pro-Palestinian minister Ehud Barak has also given orders to demolish the rabbi's yeshiva in Yitzhar during Barak's seminal visit in the U.S and indeed, a home of a young couple in Shomron was in fact demolished today. All this is being done while the Knesset, Israel's parliament, is in recess and cannot raise a fuss. ABROAD: It is vital that Ehud Barak upon arrival in the U.S. be swamped with reasonable requests to cease this barbaric treatment of the Jews in Judea and Samaria and to immediately order the cancellation of the directive to demolish the yeshiva — the pretext being a building code violation from 1998 (12 years ago). This could be a precedent for the IDF to destroy hundreds of public buildings in Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and in Jerusalem. What the Israeli government fears the most is feedback from abroad, so yes, many phone calls can certainly reverse the decisions that have been made. Therefore, foreign citizens pls contact Barak's spokesman, Mr. Seri, at cell phone number 972-50-629-8949. ISRAELIS AND ABROAD: Use fax or phone to try to get through: Fax (send to all numbers): 011-972-2-563-2580 (attention: Tzvi Hauser, Cabinet Secretary who reports directly to Netanyahu. And also: 011-972-2-670-5369, 011-972-2-649-6659, 011-972-2-6513955, 011-972-2-6535178, 011-972-2-5664838 Telephone -011-972-2-670-5532 (attention: Tzvi Hauser, Cabinet Secretary) and also: 011-972-2-675-3227, 011-972-2-640-8457, 011-972-2-6753333 (if told Prime Minister is not present, ask for any Likud aide or legislator) Dialling from Israel? Omit 011-972 — instead just dial zero. If you cannot get through by fax and phone, at least email Israel's ministers and MKs and ask them to get on the phone to Mr. Netanyahu, and to get into the press making strong statements, before it is too late for them to help (Timing Is Everything). You can write to all of the following: ddanon@knesset.gov.il; myaalon@knesset.gov.il; mcachlon@knesset.gov.il; hkatz@knesset.gov.il; yiskatz@knesset.gov.il; llivnat@knesset.gov.il; gsaar@knesset.gov.il; zpinian@knesset.gov.il; ypeled@knesset.gov.il; mregev@knesset.gov.il; rrivlin@knesset.gov.il; kshama@knesset.gov.il; ysteinitz@knesset.gov.il; sshalom@knesset.gov.il; yedelstein@knesset.gov.il; meitan@knesset.gov.il; zelkin@knesset.gov.il; oakunis@knesset.gov.il; gerdan@knesset.gov.il; bbegin@knesset.gov.il; iaharon@knesset.gov.il; rilatov@knesset.gov.il; olevy@KNESSET.GOV.IL; aliberman@knesset.gov.il; ulandau@KNESSET.GOV.IL; slandver@knesset.gov.il; mmatalon@knesset.gov.il; anmichaely@KNESSET.GOV.IL; amiller@knesset.gov.il; smiseznikov@knesset.gov.il; amarh@knesset.gov.il; fkirshenbaum@knesset.gov.il; drotem@knesset.gov.il; lshemtov@knesset.gov.il; mgafni@knesset.gov.il; mmozes@KNESSET.GOV.IL; umaklev@knesset.gov.il; uorbach@KNESSET.GOV.IL; zorlev@knesset.gov.il; dhershkovitz@KNESSET.GOV.IL; dazulay@knesset.gov.il; aatias@knesset.gov.il; yvaknin@knesset.gov.il; nzeev@knesset.gov.il; eyishay@knesset.gov.il; amncohen@knesset.gov.il; amichaeli@knesset.gov.il; ymargi@knesset.gov.il; mnahari@knesset.gov.il; Please pass this on to your pro-Israel friends (and friends in Israel). Contact Mattot Arim by email at mattot.arim@gmail.com |
|
HATE MAIL — FROM UNRWA
Posted by Honest Reporting, July 26, 2010. |
|
Unrwa_logo Hate mail from a UNRWA email address arrived in my in-box today. I'm omitting the first half of the email address so this person doesn't get bombarded with emails. From: A/RAHIM, Saadi
Dishonest reporting, That's your true identity, and your true character. Thank God that many people; including Jews, all over the world even inside Israel, whom you like to call self hating Jews; have started to see the big lies of Zionists including yours. I wonder how many truly of those around. If you really want to be fair and honest about it, which I doubt, go back and read history with a fair and nonbiased mind. I did some Googling, and found on LinkedIn a Saadi Rahim who works for the UNRWA — as an officer in charge of transportation and logistics in Jordan. What unstated big lies of the Zionists (and HonestReporting) is Mr. Saadi Rahim referring to? These?
More importantly, by using a UNRWA email address, he may technically be representing the UNRWA. Do Rahim's views of Zionism represent the UNRWA? What does this say about the organization Rahim works for? Even if Rahim's views don't technically represent the UNRWA, he did use an official email address the same way Octavia Nasr had CNN written all over her tweet. Honest Reporting monitors the media for inaccuracy and unfairness in how they report the news about Israel. Ther website address is http://www.honestreporting.com. Contact them by email at action@honestreporting.com |
|
BLOCKADES AND GENOCIDE
Posted by Boris Celser, July 26, 2010. |
|
This was published July 24, 2010 at O Globo newspaper and by the Brazilian
Foreign Ministry's daily selection of media articles.
|
|
Turkey assumed the defense of "peace ship " and poured their bile on Israel, which had kept relations of mutual cooperation in various sectors. Another manifestation criticism of Israeli policy with respect to the territorial sea of Gaza has one of the most renowned personalities in Britain, Tonny Blair, a participant in the international scheme you want, deaf and blind, to solve the centenary of conflict between Jews and Arabs. Without going into the event which shook the world so grossly disproportionate to their reaction to the magna violence that have occurred in various parts of the planet, with sacrifice of thousands of lives, we need to analyze the authority of Turkish and English to criticize the lock Sea that Israel imposes on the Gaza coast. In Turkey occurred in 1915, the first great tragedy of the twentieth century — a genocide of 1.5 million Armenian Christians, driven from their homes, taken to the sea and drowned, dragged into the streets and tortured to death — men, women, Old men, children, in an unspeakable massacre, led by government authorities, largely unknown tragedy of humanity. Hitler, when warned by advisors on the risk of executing the liquidation of millions of Jews, he replied that there was no problem, exclaiming: "Who remembers the Armenians?" he knew that nobody would come to the rescue of the Jews, the Armenians as nobody came forward. After the war of 14/18, the League of Nations and the great powers have behaved cynically, failing to give any support to survivors and rewarding the Turks with an expansion of its territory, to the detriment of the Armenian people, who found himself exiled from his land. The Treaty of Lausanne, 1923, between the great powers and the new Turkish republic, completely ignored the survivors of genocide. The Satanic crime of the Turks against the Armenians took the diabolical crime of the Germans against the Jews. And currently reigns the hypocrisy of Western nations and international organizations with their critical burning to Israel without regard to the terrorist policy of the Palestinian leadership, supported by Muslim governments. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chause. Successive Turkish governments have refused to acknowledge the genocide committed against its Christian minority, the Armenians. The current government maintains the same policy. And nothing to dissuade this cruel indifference, as I said jus — renowned internationalist, is to kill the victims a second time. The British cooperated with Germany by closing the doors of Palestine to the Jews who wished to flee the Nazis. The White Letter May 1939 — just when the war began — has imposed a quota immigration to Palestine to 15,000 Jews a year. At the same time encouraged the arrival of Arabs from different regions for the territory under its mandate. The mandatory power gave full support to Arab aggression, remaining inert in the face of pogroms perpetrated against the Jewish population and preventing armed defense by victims. In the Middle East, as in all areas colonized by the British Empire, this made it planted the poisoned seeds of future internal crises and armed struggles. The British cruelty during the war years, preventing the saving of hundreds of thousands of Jews escape from Europe to Palestine, culminating in the maintenance of the policy after the war when, in the years 1945-1948, the blocked port Haifa to all victims of Nazi persecution, creatures reduced to abject physical and moral misery, trying to reclaim their lives in the Holy Land. Vessels approaching the port were sent back to Europe. Some were taken to Cyprus, the passengers forced into internment camps. Remember the movie "Exodus." The blockade maintained by the government of St. Britannic Majesty before and during the war led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands and the deepest humiliation of thousands of Holocaust survivors. Turkish and English should remember his criminal past before taking action against a country that blocks the entry of weapons and missiles to a terrorist group that sets out in its Charter in order to destroy the State of Israel and annihilate its population through the operationalization of its wish through terrorist actions and thousands of missiles on the Israeli population. Blockades and genocide they have — British and Turks — known experience and would do better to be silent on the defensive policy of the State of Israel. |
|
A LETTER TO HANIN ZUABI, ISRAEL MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT
Posted by Susana K-M, July 26, 2010. |
|
This comes from www.takeapen.org |
|
Miss Zuabi, First and foremost "chapeau" for a very effective P.R. I must admit: I didn't know of your existence until the flotilla provocation. In fact I still don't know anything about you but almost everyone in the country knows of you and that is quite an achievement! Please allow me then to ask you: Besides of fame, what were you trying to achieve? You know, as well as we all do, that there is no shortage of food in Gaza, or any other commodities for that matter. Yes, alas, there is a constant shortage of ammunition or materials that could be used in the production of weapons, and so it should remain! Gaza needs no protection! Gaza is not under attack! On the contrary, Gaza is a nasty aggressor who for years has been rocketing civilians on a daily basis! (never heard you comment on that!). Let's be honest: You did not truly believe that the flotilla was going anywhere! So, what were you thinking when you saw all those hooligans armed with knives and clubs and hatchets, that kept your company aboard the ship? That it was a masquerade ball? Did it occur to you that, as Israel's Parliament Member you should have warned our army of what awaits our soldiers aboard? Did you try to stop that outburst of violence? What did you expect would happen? That maybe like the "Sarajevo Assassination" that ignited 1st World War, your flotilla will ignite the Middle East? And then what? Let's try to understand your logic: You feel frustrated, bitter, discriminated, you believe that the regime in Israel is oppressing and ruthless and should be overthrown. Do you have any idea at all what awaits you personally should your aspirations God forbid, be realized? Do you think that in a regime controlled by Hamas or Hezbollah or Al-Qaeda or Taliban, women have any rights? Particularly independent ambitious women? What about nine year old girls? You may not have children of your own, how about little nieces? Can you imagine life in a regime where any dirty old man can purchase himself a nine year old girl and penetrate her vagina? And appalling as it may sound it would be legal and lawful and even encouraged!!! Did you think of that Miss Zuabi? Do you have any idea what oppressing tyranny is really like? Did you know that the Islamic revolution in Iran was enthusiastically supported by the intellectuals? Who, like you, considered the Shah's regime an oppressing tyranny that should be overthrown? Try to find out what they think today (Those who survived...as most of them didn't!!). Ask them about life in the Islamic Republic, about freedom, about human rights, about women's rights. I suggest you read "Reading Lolita in Teheran" by Azar Nafisi, or "A thousand Shining Suns" by Haled Husseini, or "Not without My Daughter" by Betty Mahmudi. Did you ever wonder why all the so called Arab countries in which over a billion Muslims live are all defined as "3rd world countries"? Did you ever wonder why although the Shiite leaders condemn western culture as blasphemous and decadent, for their billion subjects the "west" is a desired immigration target? Did you ever wonder why all those who apply for Family Reunion wish for it to be in Israel and not in Gaza, or "Palestine" or Syria? Is it because of our standard of living? Or our human rights and freedom? Or our social and health security? So maybe, after all, we are not that evil ! Mentioning Palestine and Palestinians: Have you ever wondered whatever happened to the hundreds of millions (yes! Hundreds of millions!!!) refugees scattered all over Europe during and following 2nd World War? Entire cities were bombarded and destroyed! Dozens of millions of homes ruined! About fifty million lives lost, twice as many wounded and crippled! Hundreds of millions found themselves away from home, out of their countries! So, where are they? They couldn't have vanished! No! They did vanish! They were rehabilitated!!! That is the answer of the "blasphemous" "decadent" west to refugee issues! Any refugees! And indeed the "west" poured incredible amounts of money in order to rehabilitate the Palestinian refugees, not knowing or refusing to acknowledge that the Palestinian leaders had no interest in solving the refugee issue! On the contrary, they did everything within their power in order to p r e s e r v e it! At the same time, they did like the idea of the money, so they preserved that too! Very carefully, in their (not so little) own private bank accounts! In other words, Miss Zuabi, The solution does not lie in destroying Israel and replacing its free democratic regime with an extreme Islamic one. Should that, God forbid, happen, you may enjoy, for a split second, the sweet taste of profound satisfaction, and the next split second you will watch not only your privileges being taken away from you, but all your basic human rights! The Shariah Law does not acknowledge human rights, let alone women's rights: Women are men's property to be treated as they please! But you must know that ... No, Miss Zuabi, destruction is never a solution! Your solution lies in Education, and more education!!! Not brain wash!!! Not that childish nonsense about Paradise with it's seventy virgins (In any event not meant for you ...) Real free plural western — yes, Western — education that will raise free, moral decent human beings, capable of standing up for their rights without the use of knives and clubs, aware of their duties and place in society. Miss Zuabi, I so much hope that the day will not come, when from the depth of an open grave into which our bodies would be thrown, I will whisper to you: " I t o l d y o u u u u u ..." Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
PEACE DOES NOT EXIST!
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, July 26, 2010. |
|
What difference will it make if Israel abandons Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights, the Jordan Valley and all those parts of Jerusalem (north, east and south) that were illegally occupied by Jordan for 19 years from 1948 to 1967? If there is one religious leader for Muslims, the Koranic injunction to disperse all "infidels" (non-Muslims) so the Muslim Caliphate is to be pure, then the very word: "Peace" remains a sick delusion. We are all too familiar with the homily that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Incisive commentary wherein research experiments that have failed will continue to fail when repeated with the same components while yet expecting different results. Albert Einstein said that was insane. Jews, of all peoples, should not expect new results from a primitive people who produce nothing of real value but who still cling to a pagan mythology which embodies all manner of conquest, murder, human sacrifice (either their own people or a suitable infidel enemy), child abuse (teaching their children to hate and kill). Asking Muslims to abandon their pagan moon god Zin (aka Allah) along with the Koran and Mohammed's thoughts in his "Hadith" (oral laws) is like asking them to stop breathing. We should be stunned by the useless efforts of the nations to pacify and change the ways of Muslims whose entire being is saturated with a poison which cannot be eliminated or treated. Jews, above all, should recognize the facts of aberrant behavior, given their history of being pursued from ancient times to their death. The Church morphed into a killing machine, using a dead Jew on a Roman torture instrument which, like the swastika, became a mystical symbol which demanded human sacrifice. Granted, each symbol had its high priest cult to guide and provoke — all of which is still with us today. Only Genocide would temporarily quench their blood lust and sacrifice which is why the Muslim "Ummah" (people) cannot be pacified, appeased or reasoned with. On a practical level, a remnant of Jews have gathered from all corners of the earth in Israel as a refuge from European Christianity and Arab/Muslim countries — only to find that the savage pagans of Islam are still willing and anxious to carry forward the Genocide from which the Jews thought they had escaped. Granted, Jews have a large contingent of fools who can't seem to remember history and wish to repeat the same failed experiments. It is understandable that Jews, hunted throughout the centuries, want peace and barriers to keep out the packs of predators who desire their flesh. Every real Jew who harkens to his inborn National Memory knows that Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights and Jerusalem will be used as was Gaza as a point from which to launch missiles to kill Jews. The Christian nations know that the Arab Muslim
Charters calling for the elimination of the Jewish Nation/State and
her people remains uncancelled and in full force. The Nations know
this and have become willing partners because these Charters of death
are merely an extension of their own past.
ARE THERE ANY SOLUTIONS? Indeed, solutions exist but, it is doubtful that the Jewish leadership of today has either the courage or the foresight to implement them. First, we must accept the fact that there will be no peace with Islam. We might reach a stand-off but, no permanent peace. The Muslims' codes mandate against it. An example of weak leadership can be observed as the so-called Jewish leadership of American institutions are listening to an arch killer of Jews and the facilitator of Yassir Arafat's schemes to eliminate Israel as he lies in English just like Arafat. Mahmoud Abbas, Head of the so-called "Palestinian Authority" is that lying man to whom the Jews listen in rapt attention, with polite applause for Arafat's "money bag-man" who assisted the Munich Massacre of the Israeli athletes — among other Terror acts. How did this group of "useful idiots" sit there and listen to an unrepentant killer of their own people and then carry his message to President Barack Hussein Obama to pressure Israel into surrendering defensive territory of their ancient homeland so the Jews of Israel could suffer a rain of missiles from Judea and Samaria as they now do from Gaza? The strong leadership of Ariel Sharon (at the end in the completely wrong direction) followed by Ehud Olmert, with Tzippi Livni and Ehud Barak, are also examples of Jewish leadership gone bad. Earlier one observes Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres sacrificing Jews to Yassir Arafat through the Oslo fiasco. Are there no Maccabees to be found among such rabble that are today drawn to l eadership positions by money, power, crippled ideology — calling for the genuflecting to enemies who promise death or slavery? If one reads the biblical instructions in the Torah to the Jewish people, we are not to adopt the gods of others nor use images to worship. Yet, here we are today, observing Jewish leaders who are urging the Jewish people to honor a false messiah from America who in leading both America and Israel into national suicide. Groveling never brought peace to the Jewish people wherever they happened to be. One can recall the bribes paid to appointed local Commissars in Russia and Europe. Maybe the Jews got a few moments of peace until the Czar or the Church decided the peasantry needed a release from their poverty and called for a pogrom to ease their tensions and, of course, all the loot they could steal from the Jews. In August 2005, we observed the abandonment of Gaza, a once prosperous Jewish community of 10,000 Jewish men, women and children from 21 towns, exporting unique bug-free produce, organic fruits and vegetables as well as flowers. As soon as Olmert unleashed the Jewish thugs known as Yassam to drive the Jews from their homes, farms, greenhouses, schools, synagogues and cemetery, the Arab Muslim Palestinians could not restrain themselves from their national tendencies as looters. Instead of retaining the infrastructure built by the Jews but left for the Muslim Arabs to use for their benefit, the Arab Muslims looted, burned and destroyed. The greenhouses which produced insect-free produce were ransacked. Pipes, valves, electronic controls were torn from their frames. Everything the Jews left was looted and destroyed. Later, when the Arabs tried to grow produce as the Jews had done on arid soil, they could not do it. So, they set up rocket launchers and shot 10,000 rockets, missiles and mortars into civilian Israel. The Jewish leadership who caused this catastrophe did nothing to stop the missiles for 41/2 years, until their weak attempt in December 2008-January 2009. But, even then they stopped short of clearing Gaza of the Muslim Palestinian Terrorists. Regrettably, the Jewish leadership was not brought up on charges of collaborating with the enemy and sentenced to punishment in prison or a "Nuremberg" equivalent. In summation, creating a Palestinian Muslim State of Terror in Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley and dividing Jerusalem herself, should be considered a capital crime. All of its participants should face a jury of the people whose lives they've destroyed and they should be judged on the basis of all those killed by their perfidy. Let not one ever be buried in the Holy soil of Israel but in a place in the wilderness as was done with the goat Azazel. Talks are irrelevant for Israel but, very relevant for Abbas, Fatah and the Arab/Muslim countries. These "talks" will be their way into gaining support from Obama and the International community. Israel will be pressed hard to abandon her real assets — such as Land, Water, Defensive positions for the promises of Islamists and Arabists. Since the Koranic mandate demands that true Muslims must lie to infidels, none of what they agree to will matter. Mohammed practiced the art of making false treaties — like the Hudabaiya Treaty — followed by building his military strength and then breaking the Treaty, slaughtering his misled victims. We are seeing even today the results of criminally weak Jewish leadership, accepting the lies of Islam thus sacrificing their own Jewish people and the sovereignty of their own Jewish Nation/State. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@gwinstonglobal.org |
|
THE COMING SUCCESSION TO POWER IN EGYPT
Posted by Professor Alexander Bligh, Ph.D., July 26, 2010. |
|
A couple of months ago when President Husni Mubarak of Egypt celebrated his 82nd birthday no one believed that the next Egyptian succession would be acutely relevant so soon. Along with the 87 year old king of Saudi Arabia (his ailing Heir Apparent is 84) these two moderate Arab countries are poised to enter the eye of the storm any day now. The imminent regime changes in these two countries may revolutionize the pace of regional politics for years to come as well as having major repercussions for the US. So far President Husni Mubarak has refused to appoint a vice president or to announce his preference for a successor. This and the fact that Mubarak made sure that no other public figure achieves significant national popularity nor gains any independent political standing has been interpreted by many as his intention to leave the position for his son Gamal. Although Mubarak and his son vehemently deny such interpretations, his actions point at this direction. Technically, the issue of Presidential succession is regulated by the Egyptian Constitution. Article 76, as amended in 2005, created the legal conditions which ensure that the ruling National Democratic Party would have been left without competitors in the next election and that the next president neither comes from legal or illegal opposition circles, nor from the military or security services complex. It envisions the next president as coming from the same establishment as his predecessors, meaning from Mubarak's close circle, the successors of the original 1952 "Free Officers". However, no such figure has emerged yet and with the short time available to make such decision it is difficult to point to a natural successor. For the short term, until Mubarak leaves the scene, Egypt basic strategic orientation, including peace with Israel and tacit cooperation with potential enemies of Iran is unlikely to change. Once Mubarak leaves the scene three possibilities emerge bearing in mind that a "black sheep" is always a possibility. All are equal in their chances of materializing: 1. Mubarak's son, Gamal (b. 1963), becomes president in a smooth transition. Each of the three possibilities would entail a different policy: 1. Gamal Mubarak would try to use all of his father's connections and bases of support and with all likelihood would continue Husni Mubarak's policies. Significant segments within the Egyptian public would consider his assumption of the presidency illegitimate, but he would be most acceptable to the US. His succession may herald a long period of competition over the presidency. Conclusion The best course of action at this point is a "wait and see" approach. However, conditions may rapidly escalate and deteriorate and diplomatic and military precautions are called for. Prof. Alexander Bligh, Ph.D.is an international strategic consultant. Contact him at stalex018@att.net |
|
THE QUIET BEFORE THE STORM
Posted by Marc Prowisor, July 26, 2010. |
|
Do you here that? Listen, sshh... Seems quiet, doesn't it. I have been told that the eye of a hurricane can be very deceiving, apparently also regarding a few months prior to congressional elections. The sudden drop in pressure and calm from DC does not calm me down, indeed, I take it as a warning to the continuation of the storm, just like the passing of the eye of a hurricane, I've been told the storm is usually much worse in the second half. The best advice would seem to be to take advantage of this calm and inspect the damage sustained, batten down the hatches, shore up the loosened boards, and strengthen the weak parts of the house. Because, have no doubt, the storm will be back. The waters of the political arena in the US regarding Israel are definitely stirring, there is an undertow that could drag a buffalo down to the abyss. It seems quiet to those of us that aren't aware of the "ins and outs", but never less, the quiet waters are dangerous, shark infested too. Congressmen realize that their seats may not last forever, President Obama is not a duck fan, especially not a lame duck fan, and the "Minyan" (quorum) on Pennsylvania Ave. also does not wish to leave the "Bimah" (prayer platform) in shame. Quite suspiciously "pressure" is being put on PA Prez Abbas to start direct talks, I know he is laughing, in fact it is the big laugh at the new Gaza Strip Mall. When this White House starts showing hints of even "miniscule" support for Israel, time to watch out. The game is called, "lets fool the Jews again", and it's played with loaded dice. Pretend Palestinian President Abbas claims to have found new friends in the US. We know Peace Now and J Street are his natural allies, but now Abbas claims that the leaders of AIPAC and the "Conference of Presidents" also back him in his claims and desires to set up a new Arab entity in the Middle East on Jewish land. The scary part is I haven't heard any denials yet.... The worse part is that I believe him. I believe most people are sitting back in disbelief... that is those that care. Divide and conquer aren't just words, they are a proven strategy. It is a strategy that our enemies have adopted and are working overtime to fulfill. The division of our land, our people, anything to weaken us has now become a "cause", hey! Even Oliver Stone is getting involved. Most of the Jews in the Diaspora do not understand the depth and danger of the "Two State Solution", indeed, most of them do not even venture out (when in Israel) to their own historical sites, their own heritage. They have been infused with fear, and deceit, not just by our enemies, but also by our own. The "Conservative and Reform Jewish" movement in the US wont even cross the "Green Line" to show it's youth our rich history, in our land, stating its dangerous and the political over and undertones. They prefer to keep them afraid in their own land. Is it no wonder that they are loosing so many each year to assimilation? They wont even show their young their own identity and where they came from. It is not from Europe, nor the concentration camps...IT IS ISRAEL! SHOW THEM! Imagine if a few years back if we would have acted the same way, I doubt we would have had a nation today. I am amused how we in Judea and Samaria are often described as "Religious fanatics", I admit to taking pleasure telling the 50% of secular Jews out here that fact. It is no surprise though, especially when the media outlets of the world focus on a few individuals to describe over 300,000, so much for objective and honest reporting. It comes down to this, there are whole bunch 'o bad folk out there whose main purpose and focus in life is to make life for the Jews difficult. If we stand by quietly, idly and do nothing, they will succeed and the price we pay will be in blood. There are plenty of "Think Tanks" out there, brilliant Columnists and Bloggers, all ready and willing to give you every bit of information you may need to understand the situation better, but you must make the effort. And when the words do not suffice, and you hunger for more, then you must come and see for yourself. We must take full advantage of this illusion of calm and act, learn, see, shout, speak, write and do, and now. If your "movement" will not show you, we will. If your "leader" will not guide you, we can. If you want to know where you are from, come visit. We are here and welcome you with open arms. The storm is not over, get ready and be prepared. By the way, I love duck. Contact Marc Prowisor by email at marc@friendsofyesha.com. And
visit
|
|
CENTCOM PLANS FOR DAYTON'S ARMY?
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, July 26, 2010. |
|
Since President Barack Hussein Obama was elected, many — including me — have identified him as a Left-Leaning Arabist of Muslim extraction. As Commander-in-Chief he, along with the hostile Arabist State Department have used their privileged offices to subvert the Jewish Nation/State of Israel at every possible level. Although the Arab and Muslim nations have proven they are the enemies of the Free West, including America, Israel and Europe, the Arabists in American government have bonded with the Terrorist Muslim nations in a Faustian bargain with the devil of oil. Even as they kill American soldiers in Afghanistan, Iraq and America — as on 9/11/01, Obama — as Commander-in-Chief — issues orders to first Gen. Dayton and now to Centcom (Central Command) to build the Muslim Arab Palestinian Army (known to be Terrorists) who without question will attack the Jewish Nation/State, using American-taught technology and arms — including secret intelligence, communications skills, as well as sleeper cells placed in sensitive positions. Clearly, President Obama does not represent the American people or the American Congress who support Israel's right to defend herself and maintain her sovereignty as a Jewish nation. Given what Obama is doing to bring America to her knees in national bankruptcy and his personal biased hostility to the only democracy in the Middle East, he deserves nothing less than impeachment as a clear and present danger to the American nation and the Jewish Nation/State. The following analysis by JINSA (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs) explains Gen. Dayton's role and his replacement — all at the hands of President Obama. |
|
JINSA Report #1009
JINSA has long expressed concern about military skills being transmitted by the U.S. to a Palestinian Authority military force while the Palestinian government remains openly hostile to Jewish sovereignty in the Middle East. The Israelis tell us, "The more they do against Hamas, the less we have to do." The Americans tell us, "Everything we do is coordinated with our friends in Israel." We believe them both, while remaining enormously skeptical about the ultimate wisdom of the plan and right now have a queasy feeling about the future of what has been called "Dayton's Army." LTG Keith Dayton, USA, who for the past five years was the U.S. Security Coordinator for the Palestinians, is being replaced by MG Michael Moeller, USAF (who will receive his third star along with the assignment). Interestingly, while LTG Dayton's career in the Army centered on EUCOM, the European Command of which Israel is a member, MG Moeller comes to the job from CENTCOM, which specifically does not involve itself in matters involving Israel or the Palestinians. Until now? MG Moeller, currently director of strategy, plans and policy at CENTCOM, is said to have had no contact with the Palestinians to date, but is it possible that the U.S. is thinking that Americans working with a Palestinian army should be integrating their thinking with CENTCOM — an operationally largely Arab command — while the Americans working with the IDF continue to be EUCOM? Is someone thinking that a Palestinian army should not be partnered with the IDF, but with Arab armies? Yes, we are channeling a report from January that said overtures had been made to move the PA to CENTCOM — to which Gen. Petraeus said such overtures had not been made, and we believed him. Yes, we are also channeling a report that said CENTCOM was "red teaming" the idea that the U.S. should engage Hamas (and Hezbollah). The reports were by the same person, and refuted by people we trust, but still, it is hard not to think that somewhere in the U.S., military people are taking the approach that Hamas (and Hezbollah) is not an enemy of the U.S., but only of Israel. From there, they can "solve" the "Palestinian problem" with the "two-state solution" and declare victory. In fact, Hamas is an avowed enemy not only of Israel, but of Fatah, Israel and America's current Palestinian partner and the object of Dayton's army's training.[1] It is impossible to consider American engagement of Hamas while training the army that wants to destroy it — unless you are training a PA army for national purposes regardless of what the future Palestinian government decides to do with it, for example, use it against Israel, not Hamas. MG Moeller will take over a force with three immediate issues — one Palestinian and two American. 1) Over the past several months, reports of Palestinian dissatisfaction with LTG Dayton have surfaced along with increased resistance to his management. Fatah clearly wants American money and training, but then wants us out of the way. Salam Fayyad, the American governments' favorite Palestinian, said LTG Dayton is involved in "training and only training," and "does not interfere in the security mission of the Palestinian Security Services." The PA appears to believe LTG Dayton is too "hands on." 2) The U.S. GAO, on the other hand, believes he is too "hands off." On 10 July, GAO issued a critical report entitled, "U.S. Assistance Is Training and Equipping Security Forces, But the Program Needs to Measure Progress and Faces Logistical Constraints." The report says, "Although U.S. and international officials said that U.S. security assistance programs for the PA have helped to improve security conditions in some West Bank areas, State and USSC have not established clear and measurable outcome-based performance indicators to assess progress." The report, quoting State Department officials, notes the failure of the NSF (the "army") to coordinate with the PCP (the civil police) "despite U.S. programs that encourage NSF units to work with the police and other security forces." Perhaps because they have different end games in mind. 3) The third problem is definitional — Americans often state Palestinian goals in terms that work for the US, not necessarily for the Palestinians (see Andrew Shapiro's definition of Palestinian national goals in JINSA Report #1008). The GAO notes, "[Documents] for the U.S. Consulate General in Jerusalem identify performance indicators... however, the targets they set to measure progress toward these indicators focus on specific program outputs, such as the number of battalions or personnel trained and equipped, rather than on broader program outcomes such as helping the PA meet its Roadmap obligations to achieve the transformation of its security sector and create a professional, right-sized PASF [Palestinian Authority Security Forces]." Has anyone ASKED the Palestinians if they PLAN to meet their Roadmap obligations? Has anyone ASKED the Palestinians if they WANT to create a "right-sized PSAF" and what "right-sized" means to them? We didn't think so, but if you don't know that, the PALESTINIAN emphasis on "specific program outputs" unrelated to the UNITED STATES considers the political goals of the Palestinian Army is precisely what we've been worried about. And the fact that MG Moeller's focus on American security issues is CENTCOM-oriented makes us worry that the Palestinian force will be disconnected not only from American policy goals, but from the IDF that currently shares its obsession with Hamas, but which may find itself with a Palestinian army relating to Arab state armies on its borders. [1] And similarly, Hezbollah is an avowed enemy Israel, a multi-ethnic and democratic Lebanon AND of the United States and a forward arm of Iran. email: feedback@jinsa.org
Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@gwinstonglobal.org |
|
CHRISTIANS SPEAK UP: HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS FIND THEIR VOICES
Posted by UCI, July 26, 2010. |
|
This was written by Peggy Shapiro and it appeared yesterday in the American Thinker. |
|
They were both teenage Holocaust survivors who experienced the anti-Semitism of the church even before the Nazis entered their hometowns in Poland. The two eighty-three-year-old women, both named Mania, both short with carefully coiffed blond hair, were in the audience with over 4,000 Christian Zionists at the opening plenary of Christians United for Israel (CUFI) Summit on July 20. Seven pastors spoke, and the two women listened with incredulity to words which defied everything they had ever experienced. The ministers proclaimed that "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. It's a Christian issue. It's an American issue." The underlying tenant of CUFI is "I will bless those who bless you [Israel], And I will curse him who curses you [Israel], Genesis 12:3.3. John Hagee, founder of CUFI, reviewed the history of those who cursed Israel. "What you predict for Israel will be your destiny. Pharoah wanted to drown Jewish children, and he was drowned. Haman wanted to hang Jews and he was hung. It has taken Christians 2,000 years to catch on... We will strive to be a blessing to Israel." The audience, a cross section of America, included high school students, CUFI on Campus groups, senior citizens moving with the assistance of canes, families with children, African-American ministries, Hispanic churches, cowboy churches, urbanites, suburbanites, ranchers, scientists, bond brokers, travel agents and golfers. They were from all fifty states and as diverse as a group can get, yet they spoke with one voice and cheered wildly as the speakers reaffirmed the CUFI pledge that: The Jewish people have a right to live in their ancient land of Israel, and that the modern State of Israel is the fulfillment of this historic right. There is no excuse for acts of terrorism against Israel and that Israel has the same right as every other nation to defend her citizens from such violent attacks. Christian Zionists will "stand up, speak up and never shut up for Israel" until the attacks stop and Israelis are finally living in peace. No one had stood up or spoken up for the Manias the last time Jews were on the precipice of death. Their non-Jewish neighbors turned their backs and closed their eyes. The world was silent when their homes were confiscated, when they were thrown out of schools because Jewish children were not to be educated, and when their families were starved, tormented, and sent off in cattle cars to their deaths in Auschwitz. Now sixty-five years after their liberation from concentration camps, the women heard words which calmed their souls. Here were over 4,000 Christians, and behind these 4,000 were more than 400,000 members of CUFI offering themselves as allies to Jews and the State of Israel in the battle for survival. It was time to pick sides and these Christians were mobilizing on the Jewish side. On one side is Israel, a democracy with shared values for human life, freedom of religion, and the dignity of the individual. "On the other are the unsavory characters of Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and the United Nations. The US must stand on the right side." Hagee was certain of the winning side. "Egypt could not enslave Israel; European nations could not assimilate the Jews; dictators and thugs will not annihilate Israel. We are part of the covenant in a battle for the entire Earth... This time Jews do not have to stand alone." One of the Manias, my mother, turned to me and said, "However long I was destined to live, I will now live ten years longer." The outspoken and genuine support throughout the three-day summit did more than apply a salve to deep wounds; it empowered these women to speak up as they had never done before. My mother, almost manic in her excitement, spoke to dozens and dozens of Summit participants, who listened to her story with compassion and gratitude. Everywhere we went in the giant convention center and later on Capital Hill, people greeted her by name. It was the last morning of the Summit when she truly found her voice.
My mother had never spoken to a Senator before. She certainly had
never spoken up to a person in such a high office. When we met with
our two senators, they were both very disappointing in their responses
to our requests to ask the president to implement the Iran sanctions
legislation that had passed the Senate unanimously. One senator, who
had actually co-sponsored the bill, never read it and thought is was a
resolution asking for the UN to act. The other senator equivocated.
When the short meeting ended and the legislators were ready to take
photos with their constituents, my mother walked up to one senator. He
asked her if she wanted a photo. "No, I want to speak to you." "Hmm.
Well I am taking pictures." "I will wait." Wait she did. She asked
him about enforcing strong sanctions against Iran and he said he was
against war. "I am against war. I was in a war, and I know what it
means," She explained. "If Iran gets a nuclear bomb, they told us what
they will do, and I believe them. They will kill Israelis and they
will attack us. We won't be able to avoid war then." He was not able
to placate her with gratuitous statements about his support of Israel.
"Those are nice words. I want to know where you stand on issues that
will determine the fate of Israel, the U.S. and the world."
THE OTHER MANIA'S SILENCE WAS BROKEN LESS PUBLICLY but even more profoundly. First about her silence. Three years ago, Mania went with my family on a first and last journey back to Poland. She was quiet for most of the trip, muttering only soto vocce disparaging remarks. We were walking through the remnants of the Birkenau death camp and passed a flimsy wooden barrack, which was intended for 52 horses and converted into housing for more than 500 inmates. "I was here," she said quietly. No one had known, not even her daughter the story she was about to tell. In the summer of 1944, there were orders for the final liquidation of the Lodz Ghetto, where Mania, her parents, and her little sister had survived starvation and typhus. Knowing that the final days were near, her father had arranged for his family and several others to hide behind the false wall of what had once been his store. Two days before they were set to go into hiding, he was grabbed off the street and sent to Auschwitz. Her mother was frantic with the choice forced upon her. The night that the others went into hiding, she fought with herself whether to join them or try to meet up with her husband, wherever he might be, and share whatever fate awaited him. There were no correct answers in this world turned upside down, so she held on to what she knew to be true-keep the family together. The next day, she and her two daughters were arrested and packed into a cattle car. When the car had its determined number of human cargo, the outside bolts slammed shut and the three set off in the dark. Mania was seventeen when she arrived in Auschwitz after torturous days crammed in a cattle car with her mother and seven-year-old sister. The train doors opened to shouts, barks, clubs, screams and chaos. Her little sister was pushed to one line and she to another. Her mother faced another agonizing decision and only moments to make it. Which daughter would she accompany? She chose the younger. Mania was ignorant of what that decision meant as she was herded into the barracks. She sat on the barrack floor back-to-back with hundreds of other girls, with no room to stretch her legs, no food, no water, and no relief from an awful stench. When the more seasoned inmates spoke about the ovens, Mania was horror struck to learn that her mother and sister were among the ashes. She did not scream. She couldn't. She had lost her voice. For three days, she sat starved and crushed on the floor and could not utter one word. (Language no longer served her.) Since that day, she has remained a very quiet woman, speaking only when other options aren't available. At the CUFI Summit, Mania was not able to articulate her reactions other than, "I can't believe it. I can't believe it." At the Wednesday evening Night to Honor Israel, she was stunned to hear a beautiful rendition of the Israeli national anthem and a medley of songs about Jerusalem, all in Hebrew and all accompanied by thousands of Israeli and US flags waving in a sea of people. There she was, proudly, joyously standing and waving flags. When people started dancing, this woman who never dances, ran up and grabbed the hands of two strangers, and joined in. It was the end of a long day in blazing heat, but she was indefatigable. We returned home on Thursday and met with the family for Shabbat dinner on Friday night. I was describing our experiences at the Summit when Mania interrupted me. It was the first time in the thirty years that I have known her that she has ever interrupted anyone to say anything. Christians speaking up in support of Israel and the Jewish people allowed two Holocaust survivors to renew their hope in the world and find their own voices to shout to the world, "Am Yisroel Chai!" Long live the people of Israel. UCI — The Unity Coalition for Israel
(http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) — is "the largest worldwide
coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200
groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we
have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and
Secure Israel."
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: CHURNING WHEELS
Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 26, 2010. |
|
I am here and functioning. Intense summer heat, grandchildren sleeping over... other writing to be done... With it all, I took a look each day at what there was to write about and thought, this can wait another day. :-) But today I felt it was time. ~~~~~~~~~~ Those churning wheels are moving (if at all) very slowly. Abbas is playing the same game, in spite of pressure from Obama. He is refusing to come to the table for direct negotiations unless we agree upfront to the '67 lines as borders, freeze additional construction in Jewish communities past the Green Line, etc. etc. We all know the litany. He has now received the backing of both Fatah and the PLO for this position. ~~~~~~~~~~ But never mind! Obama is apparently pleased with Abbas and sees the U.S.-PA relationship as "improving." At least this is what we're hearing from the State Department: Just days ago, the State Department announced that the status of the Palestinian Authority/Palestinian Liberation Organization Mission in the United States will be changed from "bureau" to "general delegation." This will allow the mission to fly the PLO/PA flag outside of its office. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said the change represented an improvement in the U.S. relationship with the Palestinian Authority. In light of that refusal by Abbas to go to direct talks — even as this is being strongly urged by Obama — it is difficult to understand on what basis the "improvement" is being assessed. There has been no mention by the U.S. of "tough decisions" the PA is being expected to make (in parallel with the tough decisions we are expected to make), and there has not even been a stipulation that the PA terminate its blatant and pervasive anti-Israel incitement. Here we can learn a great deal about U.S. intentions: For anyone hoping that Obama's love offensive with Israel might be serious, this provides food for thought. ~~~~~~~~~~ Abbas made a statement the other day that caught my eye: He said that Israel was creating stumbling blocks to peace; in fact, he claimed, the IDF had entered the West Bank (i.e., Palestinian Arab areas of Judea and Samaria) 900 times in the last three months. Now, I know that the IDF does nightly incursions into these areas to catch terrorists and uncover weapons caches. But according to Abbas's figure, the IDF is averaging 10 operations per night. This struck me as a bit high, and I currently am awaiting an official answer from the IDF on this. It is a stunning figure if it is true. But in any event the point I want to make here stands: The very fact that the IDF has to do many operations nightly (be it 10 or 6) into PA areas is one more reason why we cannot pull out. The PA security forces are not, by themselves, equipped (or motivated) to stop terrorism as we do. There would be a serious increase in terrorism, were the IDF to withdraw. This, obviously, is not the case Abbas intended to make. But it stares us in the face. ~~~~~~~~~~ Recently, Foreign Minister Lieberman made a suggestion: Let's wash our hands of Gaza entirely. Build a fence at the border with Gaza so nothing goes in, stop the naval blockade, and permit the EU and whoever else to build electric generators and desalination plants in Gaza. Then tell the people there they're on their own. They'd generate their own electricity (we now supply 70%!), produce their own water (we help in that respect now too), bring in their humanitarian and commercial goods via the sea (instead of our supervising and monitoring by land), and we'd have no more responsibility for anything, and — in theory — no headaches. While I understand the desire to be rid of this situation, I consider this a terrible solution. For the most important goal in monitoring what goes into Gaza is to stop the transfer of weapons. That's what the sea blockade is all about. Were we to take down that blockade, Iran would have a field day, freely transferring sophisticated weaponry to the terrorists of Gaza. The rockets and missiles would sail easily over that fence and we'd have headaches aplenty. ~~~~~~~~~~ I mention this because of a piece written by Yonaton Halevi, a senior researcher on the Middle East and radical Islam for the JCPA, on this very subject. Halevi is looking at an entirely different, and very important, aspect of this situation. For it seems that the PA and Hamas — who, says Halevi, have an identical goal — are opposed to setting Gaza free in the fashion described by Lieberman. The Palestinian Arabs, suggests Halevi, want to "keep the lava of the refugee problem at full boil, as this constitutes the key to the ultimate objective of the historic Palestinian odyssey — the liquidation of the State of Israel as a Jewish state. This is the real reason behind the Palestinian love affair with the "Israeli occupation." (Note: the Palestinian Arabs claim that Gaza is still "occupied.") This merits a careful read.
~~~~~~~~~~ A two ship flotilla may be leaving soon from Lebanon, to try, once again, to break the Gaza blockade. In response to a letter addressing this matter sent to the UN by Israeli Ambassador to the UN Gabriela Shalev, UN Spokesperson Martin Narisky said: "There are established paths for the transfer of goods into the Gaza Strip by land. This is the proper way to transfer aid to the residents of Gaza. We prefer that any additional aid will be sent via land, especially during this sensitive time following the recent proximity talks between Israel and the Palestinians." A switch. ~~~~~~~~~~ With regard to the blockade, you might want to see this: "The Legal Basis of the Blockade of Gaza," by Ruth Lapidoth, Professor Emeritus in International Law at Hebrew University: http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=1&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=442&PID=0&IID=4402&TTL=The_Legal_Basis_of_Israel's_Naval_Blockade_of_Gaza ~~~~~~~~~~ I have never found arguments for our retention of the land in Judea and Samaria that are based exclusively on security issues to be satisfactory. For they totally overlook the legal right we have to the land, our history in the land, and all the rest. If doing so doesn't put us at risk from a security perspective, it's OK to give away our heritage? That said, I concede that there is a certain power (forgive the pun) to this bottom-line argument. It is valid as one reason for not surrendering the land — one very serious and solid reason. And it has impact in places where arguments about our heritage might not carry the day. The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, and Director Dore Gold in particular, have actively promoted the argument for secure borders. Recently, the JCPA put out "Israel's Critical Security Needs for a Viable Peace." This is a study of the issues that brought together a group of senior IDF generals. The link below brings you to a page that includes a video, a summary of the study, the assessment of each of the generals independently, and an opportunity to download the full study.
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@gmail.com and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
LOCALS AND NATIONALS WEIGH IN ON GROUND ZERO MOSQUE;
ISRAEL WATER TO PA VILLAGE
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 26, 2010. |
|
U.S. FINES N. KOREA FOR TERRORISM BY PALESTINIAN ARABS AND JAPANESE A U.S. court has fined North Korea for terrorism in Israel by Palestinian Arabs and Japanese. U.S. District Court in San Juan, Puerto Rico ordered defendants to pay $378 million to two families for an attack by the Palestinian Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Japanese Red Army in Lod Airport, Israel, in May, 1972. The terrorists loaded weapons on an airplane going from Italy to Israel. When they got their baggage, they retrieved the weapons and shot 26 people dead and wounded 80 others. The tried to blow up airplanes, but did not succeed. Most of the victims were Catholic pilgrims from Puerto Rico. Two of the terrorists were killed, and the third was imprisoned. The Court found that North Korea provided the terrorists with, finances, intelligence, training, and materiel. For 20 years, N. Korea ran 30 training camps for terrorists, at which N. Korean personnel conducted the training. More recently, N. Korea helped Hizbullah build the underground bunkers that helped it resist Israeli retaliation. Assistance to terrorism was one reason that the State Dept. listed N. Korea among the terrorist states. The Bush administration removed N. Korea from the list, in the hope that would encourage it to negotiate and negotiate over its nuclear weapons development. N. Korea still was on the list when the suit began, and was a major factor in the court's ruling. Defense attorneys declare, "For the first time the terror victims are showing North Korea that there is a cost involved for its blatant support for terrorism." For More Information: info@israellawcenter.org (received from IMRA, 7/24/10). Years ago, proof came out that Arafat was coached in diplomatic ruses by North Vietnam and given Soviet help, particularly through Communist Romania.
ABBAS CLAIMS TO HAVE WON OVER U.S. JEWRY Palestinian Authority head Abbas told his Fatah Party central committee that his trip to Washington won over U.S. Jewry. He claims their support against Israeli PM Netanyahu now, not only from the leftist Americans for Peace Now and J Street, but also from AIPAC, Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, and Anti-Defamation League. Abbas said that although PM Netanyahu advised those organizations not to believe him, Abbas' speech to them, condemning incitement to violence, violence, and Holocaust denial, persuaded them that Israel has a peace partner in him. Now, he says, they wonder whether he has a peace partner in Israel. He claims they told him they were going to demand of Netanyahu that he disassemble his coalition or agree to a two-state outcome (Arutz-7, 7/23/10). (For documentation of Abbas' role against peace-making,
click here.)
NEW YORKERS AND NATIONAL FIGURES WEIGH IN ON GROUND ZERO MOSQUE New Yorkers, Democrats, and Republicans are reacting to the proposed mosque near ground zero, as the issue spreads beyond the city. Republican gubernatorial candidate, Carl Paladino reportedly said in a radio ad that he would prevent the mosque construction by using eminent domain to buy the land. Mr. Paladino called the mosque disrespectful to people killed at that site and to U.S. troops fighting the terrorism that attacked New York's World Trade Center. He senses widespread opposition to the mosque site by New Yorkers outside of Manhattan. His spokesman suggested to the Wall St. Journal that New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is too narrowly focused on Manhattan to see the broader issue and public opinion. Minimizing Mr. Paladino's vow, Mayor Bloomberg predicted to the Wall St. Journal that the candidate would lose the election. Bloomberg framed the issue as a matter of tolerance. Speaking for Gov. David Paterson, Morgan Hook agreed with the Mayor on both the election and the issue. Mr. Hook finds that state officials do not believe that the power of eminent domain could apply to this situation. Both U.S. Senators from New York, Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillebrand, do not oppose the mosque. Sen. Gillebrand accused opponents of exploiting the issue for political reasons and based on intolerance. Another Democrat, Andrew Cuomo, who is a candidate for governor, already had supported construction. Still another candidate for governor, but on the Republican ticket, Rick Lazio, had asked Comptroller Cuomo to investigate the source of funding for the mega-mosque, as have, states Mr. Lazio's spokesman, Barney Keller, Americans from all over demanded. Two Republicans, Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House, and Sarah Palin, former candidate for Vice-President, both oppose a mosque being put there (Michael Howard Saul, Wall St. Journal, 7/23/10, A19). In my series on that mosque, most sentiment on the placards and by the people I interviewed at a rally against the mosque opposed the mosque only at that site. The series cited indications that the mosque is being funding by radicals; mosque public relations efforts stress moderation. The imam describes the prospective mosque as a center for reconciliation; opponents describe it as symbolizing a successful attack on the U.S. and as a natural gathering place for radicals. From the New York office of Hudson Institute, director Herb London, who spoke at the rally against the mega-mosque, told me that "nobody is demanding that Muslims not build mosques and worship." Opponents of the mega-mosque object only to that site, as "inappropriate" and a matter of taste and understanding. It is inappropriate where "radical elements of that religion killed 2,800 Americans." So this is "not a matter of the First Amendment" [freedom of religion.] Mr. London said, "Tolerance does not mean license without limits." (Telephone, 7/26/10.) I also elicited written comment from Narain Kataria of Queens, New York, president of the Indian American Intellectuals Forum. Mr. Kataria cast his opposition to the mega-mosque as principled dissent, an American right and privilege, not a matter of intolerance. Rather, the use of invective against dissenters is a ploy to silence their Constitutional freedom of expression. Mr. Kataria said: 1. The murderers of the 3,000 civilians at Ground Zero considered themselves devout Muslims. They were indoctrinated mostly in Wahabbi Saudi Arabian mosques. Those mosques foster an "extreme form of Islam" that "extols the virtue of violence and hatred." Their goal is to subjugate the world, and establish Islamic law, in the U.S. and everywhere. 2. About three-fourths of mosques in the U.S. are controlled by Wahabbi Muslims. 3. Turkish PM Erdogan, said "The Mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers." He is describing mosques not just as places in which to worship but also as rallying sites for jihad. 4. Yes, "It is not right to say that all the Moslems are terrorists. But it also is a well known fact that all the terrorists who mercilessly slaughtered innocent men, women and children in Mumbai, Bali, Madrid, Beslan, London, Delhi, Nigeria, Africa and Thailand were the followers of Radical Islam. Since 9/11//2001," they "have killed more than 75,000 people." "It is inappropriate and unjustified to lightly dismiss the views of those who have seen Islam, Hadith and Sira in action in South Asia. Hindus have suffered unprecedented brutalities and savagery at the hands of Islam during the last 1400 years." They slew millions and "...have converted one third of Hindus in India at the point of a sword." Their way is "incompatible with our Constitution" and democracy. 5. "Citizens who oppose a mosque near Ground Zero believe that it is not only offensive," Kataria states, "but also reprehensible to build the mosque where 3000 innocent people were mercilessly murdered by devout Moslems "
UN ADVISES LEBANON FLOTILLA TO USE LAND ROUTE Referring to the Lebanon flotilla, United Nations Spokesperson Martin Narisky said, "We prefer that any additional aid will be sent via land, especially during this sensitive time following the recent proximity talks between Israel and the Palestinians." Israel's UN Ambassador Gabriella Shalev observed that the flotilla's only purpose is to break the arms embargo. She reserved Israel's right to self-defense against arms importation. In addition, she wrote, the flotilla may very well be carrying weaponry or people seeking confrontation. Israeli Defense Min. Barak finds the flotilla "an unnecessary provocation." (IMRA, 7/25/10.) Background: There are two land routes to Gaza: (1) Through Israel, from its port at Ashdod overland to Gaza. Israel inspects and then transfers legitimate goods; (2) Through the Sinai. Egypt does not always let convoys through. The UN statement implies concern that a clash would leave the Palestinian Arab negotiators feeling constrained to break off negotiations with Israel. The clash with the Turkish flotilla put Turkish PM into position to denounce Israel, thereby boosting his popularity in the Arab world and before Turkish elections. We reported some people's impression that this was intended. What is the intent behind the Lebanon flotilla, whose stated purpose is humanitarian, when the blockade had ended for all but weapons and dual use materials?
ISRAEL WATERS P.A. VILLAGE Although the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) is responsible for providing water to towns in its area, the P.A. village of A'Tawani, in the Hebron Hills area, appealed to the Israeli Civil Administration for water. To accommodate, Israel is hooking the village up with the Israel National Water Carrier (IMRA, 7/25/10). Background: Israel has had a long drought and water shortage. It is spending large sums, as we reported, on desalination plants.
HAMAS AND HIZBULLAH SOLIDARITY WITH SUDAN AGAINST ARREST WARRANTS Hamas and Hizbullah back Sudan against the UN, as the International Criminal Court issued a second arrest warrant against Sudan President Omar al-Bashir. The warrant is for genocide. Both organizations condemned the international justice system as a tool of the great powers, especially of the U.S.. Ironically, those organizations prompt supporters to use international and national justice systems as tools for publicity against the legitimacy Israel. They sue Israeli leaders. The second warrant is for: "genocide by killing, causing serious bodily or mental harm, and 'deliberately inflicting on each target group [of three groups) conditions of life calculated to bring about the group's physical destruction.'" The first warrant, still outstanding, is "for five counts of crimes against humanity (murder, extermination, forced transfer, torture, and rape) and two counts of war crimes (intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities, and pillaging)." Hamas chief Isma'il Haniyah stated his objection: "Even as the international community remains silent over real crimes and state-sponsored terrorism directed against the Palestinian people in Gaza and those who sympathize with them, [false] allegations are leveled against the Sudanese president, Omar al-Bashir". Hizbullah echoed the sentiment IMRA, 7/25/10).
LEBANON FLOTILLA CLASH WITH ISRAEL LIKELY The Terrorism Intelligence and Information Center [in Israel] assesses a violent clash by the Lebanon flotilla, not yet headed for Gaza, as likely. Although most passengers do not seek violence, the organizer, Yasser Qashlaq, may. He already anticipates a clash, but states it would be started by Israelis. The flotilla sponsor is the Free Palestine Movement, but the Terrorism Intelligence and Information Center believes that the Movement is a front for Iran and Syria. Implication is that Iran and Syria, which sponsor terrorism, want violence. Mr. Qashlaq made his inclination to violence clear in an interview with Hezbollah's Al-Manar TV on June 19, 2010. He said that "the day will come when the ships will take the remainder of the European garbage which came to my country back to their homelands, Gilad Shalit will return to Paris, and they [the leaders of Israel] will return to Poland. Let the murderers go home. After they return we will pursue them everywhere all over the world and try them in court for the slaughters they have carried out from Dir Yassin to this day." The Center believes that the purpose of the flotilla is another media circus like the one Turkey achieved (IMRA, 7/25/10).
IS UN GOLDSTONE FOLLOW-UP COMMITTEE OBJECTIVE? The UN has a three-member committee to follow up on the Goldstone Report: to evaluate how efficient, independent, and in line with internationally accepted standards Israel's court system is. Is that committee objective? The committee comprises Christian Tomuschat of Germany, Param Cumaraswamy of Malaysia, and Mary Davis of the U.S., all in the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ). According to Gerald Steinberg of NGO-Monitor, critics of the ICJ accuse it of anti-Israel bias, first noticed during Israel's 2002 offensive against Jenin. Mr. Steinberg puts this into the pattern of UN cooperation with ideological NGOs [some of which provided the bulk of the Goldstone Report[, as we documented months ago and again here]. In a 2002 study of counter-terrorism, Mr. Tomuschat suggested, "In such instances, there is little hope that the judicial system of the state concerned will conduct effective investigations and punish the responsible agents. Nowhere have excesses committed by security forces been adequately punished." "If a state strikes blindly against presumed terrorists and their environment, accepting that together with the suspects other civilians lose their lives, it uses the same tactics as the terrorists themselves. In this perspective, many actions carried out by the Israeli military in the occupied Palestinian territories would also have to be scrutinized very carefully." "Normally," he went on, "states see themselves as guardians of human rights. However, by ordering the systematic commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity they themselves deserve the same blame as those targeted by them." In 2007, Tomuschat, discussed Israel's assassination of Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin three years earlier: "Targeted killings are as ruthless as the attacks of terrorists." Tomuschat said that Israel's targeted killings are close to being "state terrorism." Tomuschat asserts non-bias partly on the basis of having participated in forums in Israel. Tomuschat refused to recuse himself when it was learned that he had helped prepare a report for the Palestinian Authority on legal aspects of the "peace process," in which he advised it to bring a case before the UN General Assembly for referral to the International Court of Justice. He had not disclosed that interest in one side of the Arab-Israel conflict to Israel, when he was appointed to the monitoring committee (IMRA, 7/25/10 from Benjamin Weinthal of Jerusalem Post). In an earlier report, we quoted an Israeli explanation that targeted killing is a part of warfare that minimizes casualties by not having to bring heavy ground forces into a civilian area against a legitimate military/criminal target. Such forces would encounter resistance and therefore produce more casualties. Israel tries to minimize collateral casualties. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
HOW THEY VOTE IN THE UNITED NATIONS
Posted by Ralph Rubinek, July 25, 2010. |
|
Below are the actual voting records of various Arabic/Islamic States which are recorded in both the US State Department and United Nations records: Kuwait votes against the United States 67% of the time Qatar votes against the United States 67% of the time Morocco votes against the United States 70% of the time United Arab Emirates votes against the U. S. 70% of the time. Jordan votes against the United States 71% of the time. Tunisia votes against the United States 71% of the time. Saudi Arabia votes against the United States 73% of the time. Yemen votes against the United States 74% of the time. Algeria votes against the United States 74% of the time. Oman votes against the United States 74% of the time. Sudan votes against the United States 75% of the time. Pakistan votes against the United States 75% of the time. Libya votes against the United States 76% of the time. Egypt votes against the United States 79% of the time. Lebanon votes against the United States 80% of the time. India votes against the United States 81% of the time. Syria votes against the United States 84% of the time. Mauritania votes against the United States 87% of the time. U. S. Foreign Aid to those that hate us: Egypt, for example, after voting 79% of the time against the United States, still receives $2 billion annually in US Foreign Aid. And we buy their oil with our money? Jordan votes 71% against the United States And receives $192,814,000 annually in US Foreign Aid. Pakistan votes 75% against the United States Receives $6,721,000 annually in US Foreign Aid. India votes 81% against the United States Receives $143,699,000 annually. WHY? WHO IN THE HELL STARTED THIS AND WHY? We need to cut off their allowances THEY ACTUALLY BITE THE HAND THAT FEEDS THEM. Perhaps it is time to get out of the UN and give the tax savings back to the American workers, who are having to skimp and sacrifice to pay their taxes (and gasoline). Pass this along to every taxpaying citizen you know. Disgusting isn't it? http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/unvote.asp |
|
WE HAVE CREATED THIS MESS; BAD EXCHANGE RATE; BARAK MUST BE COURT-MARTIALED!
Posted by Steven Shamrak, July 25, 2010. |
|
We have Created this Mess!
Only by acknowledging our own mistakes we are able to fix them, change direction and make a difference! We ourselves (from a common man to the top of the pyramid, including the courts and police) have taught Israeli Arabs that they are allowed to do everything they want. They can build houses and villas without a mortgage or construction permission. They can pay no municipal taxes. They can live on land which does not belong to them. They can even get electricity for free just because they are Muslims. Those of them who go to Mecca get free immunization (if a Jew goes to Africa, he/she pays for immunizations). They are allowed to have their local councils run a deficit of tens of millions NIS — we pay for them out of our pockets. They are allowed to have several wives and dozens of children, receiving tens of thousands of shekels a month from National Insurance. (When I retired the National Insurance Leumi told me that the cashier had no money). They can engage in criminal racketeering in Beersheba and extort money from businesses and yet the police take no action. They can steal equipment from Jewish farmers worth of tens of millions and 'not be found'. They can drive a car even having dozens of traffic violations. They can demand and receive unemployment benefits and work for cash. They can cheer the enemies of Israel during a war, but if a "Katyusha" hits them accuse us of killing them. After all of this — they are still citizens of Israel and they are allowed to vote and elect members of the Knesset. Their representatives receive a government salary, go into hostile countries and slander the country they are supposed to represent. In the Knesset they feel free to criticize and lecture the state of Israel and the IDF. All of those 'privileges' they have been receiving from your own hands. And we are still silent in the name of freedom of speech (and fake political correctness and due to gutlessness of the Jewish leadership). Would they be allowed to behave in this way in other countries (especially a Muslim one)? If and when Israel tries to do something about their dreadful behaviour, we are immediately criticised and demonised: "Racists!", "Discrimination!" This is their tactic and the scam run by their international anti-Semitic backers! In my own home I feel like a second class citizen. I do not like the fact that they are called "citizens" of my beautiful country. Arabs have become first class citizens in Israel and have been enjoying all of their civil rights without any of the responsibilities! Jews are now the second class people in their own country, carrying the burden of all responsibilities on their shoulders, but still need to fight for their rights. We need a leadership that understands that if we continue with this shameful behaviour by the state, in a few years, Galilee and the Negev will not will be ours! We need a leader who understands that, with all due respect to every Arab, Israel is more important to Jews than anything else. The whole point of the long overdue and needed leadership is to restore order and remove all this rot from Jewish land! This letter is dedicated to memory of my mother
Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak There were never any Jordanian or Palestinian nations! There were never countries Jordan or Palestine! In 1922 over 80% of land, which was called at the time Palestine and was designated by the League of Nations to the restoration of a Jewish state — "Eretz-Israel", was ceded to Arabs by the British in a business transaction! Bad Exchange Rate. Israel has transferred 50 million shekels to Gaza banks and is slated to offer another 50 million shekels (around 26 million U.S. dollars) in total in the recent days. In return Gaza Arab terrorists fired four Kassam rockets at Israeli targets over Shabbat. No Pressure — Fake Peace Process Goes Nowhere! US President Barack Obama urged Abbas in a telephone call to move from the current indirect or proximity talks to direct negotiations with Israel. But the Palestinian Authority said it would start direct negotiations, suspended since December 2008, only after progress in the proximity talks on borders and security. New Luxury Mall for 'Poor Refugees' in Gaza. As Hamas leaders complain Israel is causing poverty, a new luxury mall opens in Gaza, complete with air conditioning, Israeli and foreign goods. (It is the best kept secret that so-called Palestinians, due to anti-Semitic international attitude and oil dependency, are the best kept professional refugees in the world!) Greece Moves into Turkey's Slot. After losing its "only Middle East ally", Israel and Greece are heading for an advantageous strategic partnership. Prime Minister Papandreou hopes for help in overcoming Greece's economic crisis and upgrading his armed forces. 'Progress' Made with Muslim Women's Rights. The Muslim teacher, Abdullah Aal Mahmoud, in what is apparently a mark of progress for Muslim women's rights, states that the Quran teaches the limitations "if the husband wants to use beatings to treat is wife." He ruled that wife-beating should never be done in front of children and "must not cause bleeding or bruises to her body." Breaking bones also is forbidden. Europe is Always Committed to Enemies of Jews. The foreign affairs chief for the European Union said on Saturday that the alliance is committed to so-called Palestinian statehood and to improving the situation in Gaza. Ashton announced the allocation of additional 40 million euros ($52 million U.S. dollars) in direct financial support from the EU to the PA. Turkey Betrayed NATO's Trust. Syrian troops have been locked in battle with Kurdish fighters since Assad's army blasted four north-eastern Syrian Kurdish towns in late June. Hundreds of Kurds are reported dead. The Syrian forces are backed by Heron spy drones which Israel sold to Turkey, which has become the first NATO member to share advanced western military technology with a state that sponsors terror. (Once again, the international press has shown no interest to cover this story! Neither do we any hear 'noise' and rebuke from Washington, London and Brussels ! In the past, Israel came under intense pressure from the US not to sell arms even to India.) Quote of the Week: "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." — Plato, Greek philosopher. Faking Progress of the Fake Peace Process. In a symbolic move, the US on Friday upgraded the status of Palestine Authority's diplomatic mission in Washington. Officials told media that the Palestinian mission in Washington will now be called the "General Delegation of the Palestine Liberation Organization," with permission granted for flying (this terrorist organisation) the PLO flag for the first time. Barak Must be Court-martialed!
Israel's chief of staff Lt. Gen. Gaby Ashkenazi, and Navy commander, Maj. Gen. Eliezer Marom, reported that a fierce clash developed aboard the ship as the soldiers dropped on deck from helicopters and were mobbed by passengers... Each Israeli commando who shinnied down the ladder from a helicopter was besieged and separated from the unit, then beaten, stabbed and assaulted with flying objects. Some were pushed down into the hold and stripped of their anti-flak vests first. The soldiers reported they barely escaped lynching or possibly being taken hostage... Surely the operation's planners (if they were not blinded by political stupidity) must have taken into account that the 600 mixed nationals aboard the Turkish vessel... The Border Police was bettered qualified to handle themselves against the arsenal the activists aboard the Turkish vessel used against the navy men, of firebombs, stun grenades, broken glass, slingshot, iron bars, axes and knives — and with far less risk of loss of life& This error was compounded by the planners seriously underestimating expected resistance and sending the men in armed with paintball guns and pistols with orders to shoot only if their lives were at risk. They did open fire, but only after half a dozen of their number were badly hurt... "Israel's current Defense Minister Ehud Barak may be the worst General ever produced by the IDF (Israel Defense Forces). Moreover, he should have been court-martialled many times over for his stupidity that cost the lives of so many soldiers" — Emanuel A. Winston: In 1973, Barak botched a rescue operation during the "Chinese Farm" battle near the Suez Canal and failed to rescue soldiers under the command of General Yitzhak Mordechai. In 1982, during Operation Peace for Galilee — in which Israel attacked PLO and terrorist groups in Lebanon — Barak commanded the IDF in the eastern region of South Lebanon. He ordered an attack at Sultan Yakoub, in which Israeli soldiers were ambushed by Syrian army commandos and PLO guerrilla units. Five years later, when the "first intifada" broke out, Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin assigned Ehud Barak, Amram Mitzna, and Dan Shomron — whose political views trumped military necessity — to quell the rebellion. They failed miserably. This not only encouraged Palestinian terrorists, especially Fatah and Hamas, but led to the PLO's rehabilitation and the disastrous Oslo Accords in 1993, which Barak implemented (and still supports by anti-Jewish acts). In May 2000, Barak ordered a retreat from South Lebanon. Although the action was debatable, the chaotic manner in which it was carried out and the abandonment of the SLA has been widely condemned. Barak's action gave Hezbollah its first victory. In January 2009, as defense minister, Barak was directly responsible for the Cast Lead operation in Gaza. While the action to stop terrorists and missile bombardment was necessary, it (was a complete failure as there were no clear objectives set and) resulted in the Goldstone Report and international condemnation. Hamas remained in power, more smuggling tunnels were built, and Gilad Shalit is still in captivity. As prime minister and former chief of staff, Barak receives more than NIS 400,000. In addition the state funded his bureau at a cost of NIS 3.2 million in 2004 and NIS 1.8 million in 2005. They estimated Barak's total annual income at NIS 10 million. Barak was involved in a number of companies and hedge funds. His business interests today are held by members of his family. PS: "Barak caused us to run away from Lebanon, supported the disengagement, and managed the Cast Lead debacle, and now he wants to conduct more withdrawals in the future. He's like a battered woman, who instead of standing up to her attacker thinks again and again about how she should make more concessions" said Infrastructure Minister Uzi Landau. Steven Shamrak was involved in the Moscow Zionist movement. He worked as a construction engineer at the Moscow Olympic Games project and as a computer consultant in Australia. He has been publishing an Internet editorial letter about the Arab-Israel conflict since August 2001 and has a website www.shamrak.com. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@gmail.com |
|
THE TERRORIST WHOSE DAUGHTER WAS CURED
Posted by Barry Rubin, July 25, 2010. |
|
You might also like to read:
This is a remarkable story in human terms but there is an extremely important point for understanding the Middle East embedded in it as well. On June 14, Palestinian terrorists opened fire on a police car travelling on a road, en route from Beersheba to Jerusalem. One policeman, Yeheshua Sofer was killed. Two others were wounded. Sofer was due to be married in three months. It took a month but members of the cell were finally captured. They spoke quite freely about this attack and others they had planned for killing Israelis. During the interrogation, one of the leaders remarked that only two weeks earlier his six-year-old daughter had been given a free operation in Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem to remove a tumor from her eye. The operation had been paid for by an Israeli organization. Reading this, I recall a number of similar past instances. In one famous case, the Palestinian who later attacked Israel had been saved from injuries inflicted by another Palestinian in a quarrel. There have also been examples of terrorists playing on the sympathy of Israelis claiming they needed medical attention — especially in one bloody attack on the Gaza-Israel border — not to mention the use of women and children to smuggle weapons or even to carry out suicide attacks. The Western reader — if he doesn't go in for some elaborate theory in which somehow Israel is still to blame — might see this and other such cases as examples of human ingratitude, the kind of thing often found in private life. There is also a psychiatric explanation: the person involved is in some way deranged, causing him to behave in an "illogical" manner. Yet beyond irony and insanity, both falling short of the needed explanation, this kind of situation is important because it challenges the common Western theme of kindness and concession as inevitably leading to moderation and peace. There is another misleading flip side of this view, too: the concept that what seems like inexplicable violence or "fanaticism" is a direct response to ill treatment. Thus, for those locked into the kindness breeds kindness model (which often does work in personal life), terrorists must be shown to be suffering from poverty or personal suffering (even though statistics show this to be untrue) or understandable outrage at bad treatment (ignoring the possibility of their engaging in alternative behavior, like making a compromise peace or building a democratic society). Yet the main missing explanation explaining such behavior is ideology and world view. If you think that the divine being has ordered you to wipe out Israel and the Jews (or Christians and the West also), if you have no self-critical facility whatsoever, if you believe (and are told by the West) that you are always a victim, if you put a priority on revenge rather than improving your situation, and if you view your opponent as sub-human (racism is more frequently deployed by elements in some parts of the "Third World" against the West than vice-versa nowadays, whatever was true in the past), then your conscience will be untroubled by having your daughter healed as a gift and trying to kill the maximum number of Israelis thereafter. Where have things been different? Obviously, one can insist on one's dignity and right to have a country of one's own without developing such behavior. We have seen this in dozens of cases over previous decades. You don't have to invoke such names s Nelson Mandela or Martin Luther King Jr or Mahatma Gandhi in this case. Quite average nationalist leaders far from sainthood have pulled it off repeatedly. Indeed, such an approach is not only more moral but more effective. After all, if you are willing to compromise with your opponent, the latter is more willing and able to give you more of what you want. If the Palestinian movement had adopted such an approach — which is still lacking to this day — there would have been a Palestinian Arab state in 1948 (UN partition), or in 1979 (Anwar al-Sadat peace initiative) or in 2000 (Camp David/Clinton plan), or at many other times in history. Of course, there are cases — fewer but genuine — of individual Palestinians saving the lives of Israelis who would otherwise have been murdered. But here's the catch: those people have to hide their identities from other Palestinians while to kill deliberately Israeli children, even in 2010, makes one a hero. Moreover, it is also misleading to conclude that people want to wipe out Israel because it is doing something so horrible — that there is a proportionality at work here — as to justify such treatment. Again, the problem lies in the ideology and worldview of the radicals, as well as their expectation of total victory, that drives the process. Israelis as a whole discovered this between 1992 and 2000. Sympathy, an attempt to provide a balanced narrative, aid, payments, concessions, compromises, offers all failed. Indeed, not only did they fail but in many respects these actions made things worse — at least more dangerous — for those who tried that method. One of the times I came closer to being killed so far was when an Arab driver returning from taking supplies to the Gaza Strip or bringing workers into Israel so they could make living smuggled in a suicide terrorist. Six months after the day I saw the dead killed by that attack in the street around the corner from my home, a high-ranking U.S. diplomat told me — with pomposity and a slur on Israel that would have marked him as a vicious antisemite if he weren't a Jewish careerist — that no terrorist had ever come into Israel that way. Incidentally, and this is an absolutely true story, the day before the March 1996 bombing, I had passed by a woman in full Islamist dress (by no means normally dressed for an Israeli Arab Muslim woman who might merely wear modest clothing and a hijab) outside the Dizengoff Center mall looking at the door (and possibly checking out the security) about 20 yards from where the suicide bomber blew himself up some hours later. I thought to myself: what a great democratic and open country this is that in the midst of a terrorist bombing campaign she could walk through Tel Aviv without anyone bothering her in the least. I wondered later if this was coincidental or part of the terrorist operation. If you want to compare the reality of Israel from the way it is portrayed in biased media and academic writings, ponder that story. These stories are in no way to say that you don't treat children with eye tumors, or not let people make a living or send in supplies, or look askance at people merely because they belong to a specific national or religious group. But you also let wishful thinking take over your mind or allow hopes of gratitude to bolster your expectations in an irrational manner. And you never ever strengthen individuals or organizations who want to kill you and wipe you out on the basis of believing that generosity will make them moderate. This basic calculus, of course, does not apply just to Israel's situation but to a West facing attacks by revolutionary Islamists — including the September 11 terrorists and those in Britain's tube or Spain's railroad attacks — as well. The idea that compromises, concessions, flattery, and gifts are going to buy popularity or immunity will simply not work. Note to Western leaders, academics, and journalists reading this: Remember to condemn the people who commit deliberate terrorist murders and refuse to make real peace, not the ones who operate for free on the "enemy" side's children and take risky concessions to try to achieve peace. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs
(GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and
"Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press).
His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan).
Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at
http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html.
Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com
|
|
THE TWO-STATE SOLUTION IS DEAD. LONG LIVE WHAT?
Posted by Ted Belman, July 25, 2010. |
|
Before delving into the question of what follows the death of the two-state solution we must get a certificate of death. This may prove to be more difficult than getting a certificate of live birth for President Obama. Everyone prefers to kick a dead horse, so to speak, than to acknowledge it is dead. The Arabs were against the creation of Israel in the first place. They opposed the Palestine Mandate, The Partition Plan, The Declaration of Independence by Israel and Resolution 242. In 1968 they decided at the Khartoum Conference on the three "no's"; no recognition, no negotiation and no peace. Nevertheless both Egypt and Jordan broke with this policy and signed peace agreements with Israel. Anwar Sadat paid for this breach with his life. Arafat had to accept Res 242 as the condition for entering the Oslo accords, He also had to agree to amend Fatah's Charter which called for the destruction of Israel but never did amend it. The Hamas Charter also calls for the destruction of Israel. So the PA is only paying lip service to Res 242 and has no intention of complying with it, The Arab League has yet to accept Res 242. Instead, at the Beirut Conference in 2002, it endorsed the Saudi Plan with certain amendments and called it the Arab Peace Initiative. Neither the Plan nor the Initiative were ever published officially but a communiqué was issued. It demanded full withdrawal, a "just settlement" of the refugee problem and the creation of a "sovereign independent" state with East Jerusalem as its capital. In exchange, they would enter into a "peace agreement" and establish "normal relations" with Israel. Whenever the Arabs talk about peace I am suspect as "peace" in Islam is only achieved when Islam is dominant. Besides Israel will never agree to all these demands. In effect they substituted these parameters for the ones in Res 242. The US cooperated by including the Arab Peace Initiative in the Roadmap. Obama goes so far as to favour the Arab Initiative over Res 242. By putting forward these demands, the Arabs have decided to wage war on Israel diplomatically. The peace process demanded by the Quartet (U.S., E.U., UN and Russia) buttressed by the Arab's nebulous offer of peace, enables them to make demands on Israel and to force her compliance. It is not really about negotiating a settlement so much as it is about imposing a settlement. As times goes on Israel's wiggle room gets smaller and smaller. So, though an ultimate agreement is not achievable because Israel won't agree to the Arab terms and the Arabs won't compromise on them, the Arabs still want to continue the process. Abbas is spared the necessity of compromising and why should he. The Palestinians are doing well economically with the cooperation of Israel and the financial support of the US and the EU. Why look for trouble. For the U.S., it's the only game in town. They are not prepared to pack their bags and go home or to change the paradigm. Better to go through the motions. The process is working to Israel's disadvantage so why is Israel content to go along? So long as the prospect of a two-state solution is out there, Israel does not have to resist calls for bi-national state or for citizenship for the Palestinians. In the meantime, the Palestinians have their autonomy and Israel has its security, insofar as Judea and Samaria are concerned, and an undivided Jerusalem. While Israel would dearly love to sign a settlement deal to put an end to the deligitimation and demonization, the price is too high. The status quo is better. But that doesn't preclude putting facts on the ground. Israel must end the freeze and commence building in Jerusalem and the settlements. Aside from strengthening Israel's hold on Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria, Israel is thereby putting great pressure on the Palestinians to compromise. Due to such construction, time would no longer on the side of the Palestinians. That is why the Palestinians have suggested they would unilaterally declare a state or ask the UN to recognize a Palestinian state on all lands east of the '67 borders. Were they to do so, it would be a game changer. Israel has said she wouldn't allow it. It would end the peace process. There is talk in Israel of extending Israeli law to the major settlements presently under occupation law. The Israelis living in them would dearly love the change and it would not affect the Arabs at all. Such a change would effectively make the settlements part of Israel. Another factor that argues for the status quo is that Israel is facing a well-armed Hamas and Hezbollah and genocidal Iran who is about to get the bomb. In the next year there may well be war with Iran. Israel wants to have the US participate. This is not the time for dramatic concessions. Israel must know whether Iran will remain an enemy before determining what if any concessions to make. p>In the meantime the mayor of Jerusalem Nir Barkat intends to implement Jerusalem's ambitious Master Plan presently being finalized. The Plan aims to reverse the current trend whereby Arabs are moving into Jerusalem to be on the west side of the fence and Jews are moving out. The main reasons for this exodus are expensive housing, limited housing opportunities, scant employment opportunities, and relatively low salary levels. The ultimate goal is to have a demographic balance in the city, Jews to Arabs of 60:40 by 2020. It is now 65:35. This is an urgent task for Israel exacerbated by the defacto construction freeze. Its implementation will not be without international and domestic opposition. There are currently 300,000 Arabs living in Jerusalem. Reason enough to consider dividing the city. Even that will not be simple. The City of David, Mount of Olives and Rachel's Tomb are all located in that part of Jerusalem east of the '67 line where the Arabs live. Israelis would never agree to part with this part of their heritage. Five years ago, I advocated annexing Judea and Samaria. Then I was odd man out. No longer. Haaretz, Israel's New York Times, just published, Endgame. " Therefore, I say that we can look at another option: for Israel to apply its law to Judea and Samaria and grant citizenship to 1.5 million Palestinians. Just think; no division of Jerusalem, no transfer of Jews, no border dispute, no international forces,, no air-rights dispute, no water dispute and no right of return. The challenge for Israel will be to avoid civil unrest. She succeeded in Israel. She will succeed in the expanded Israel. Long live the democratic Jewish one-state solution. Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. He now lives in Jerusalem. Contact him at tedbel@israpundit.com |
|
THE ZIONIST LEAGUE FOR PREEMPTIVE SELF-DEFENSE
Posted by Boris Celser, July 25, 2010. |
|
This comes from Fresno Zionism. Is is archived at
|
|
Recently, a fellow mentioned that he was putting together a new pro-Israel organization and that he was trying to decide what to name it. He was considering something like "Peace and Justice for the Middle East." My first thought was that this sounds like an anti-Israel group. All he would need to add would be something about human rights and it would be perfect. Of course this is because the people who want to see an end to the Jewish state have co-opted the language of peace, justice and human rights. They own it now, despite the fact that this entails an Orwellian reversal of meaning. For example, let's take a local organization, Peace Fresno. They support the 'right of return' for Palestinian Arab 'refugees'. Now I know a number of their members and they say they are against all war. I would like to ask them how the influx of several million violently hostile Arabs into tiny Israel would affect matters of war and peace. Would it make things more peaceful? We know that it would be the beginning of a bloody civil war, 1948 all over again except with ten times the number of combatants. We know this because the Palestinians themselves tell us. But they would say that the Palestinian refugees deserve justice. Really? Is it just that the Palestinian Arabs, who started the 1948 war under the leadership of the Nazi Mufti al-Husseini and lost it, should have the result of that war reversed after 62 years? Is it just that other refugees, like the 800,000 Jewish ones who fled Arab countries between 1948 and the 1960's were absorbed by Israel and other countries, but the Arab nations refuse to absorb even one Palestinian? More generally, is it just that there are 23 Arab nations with a combined population of 358 million and one Jewish state with about 5.5 million Jews, and this is intolerable to the Arabs? Is it just that one unelected royal family rules all of Saudi Arabia, where they have institutionalized racism, misogyny and antisemitism? Is it just that Arab terror organizations are rewarded for their murder campaigns? Peace Fresno also calls for justice for the 'victims' among the 'peaceful activists' (Turkish IHH thugs) on board the Mavi Marmara. Justice must mean that you can beat somebody with an iron pipe until his brains start coming out and he is expected to do nothing. 'Justice' must mean something different for Israelis and Turks. And Peace Fresno wants no restrictions on traffic of goods or people in and out of Gaza. Their Hamas friends in Gaza need more building materials, so they can rebuild after the recent war that they started and were losing, at least until the incoming Obama administration made Israel stop fighting. They have already started rebuilding — fortifications and tunnels and a big new prison (with a reinforced basement bunker, I'm sure), not homes. That's how to promote peace. Speaking of human rights, the 'activists' on the Gaza Flotilla, who belonged to multiple organizations with 'peace', 'justice' and 'human rights' in their names, were asked to deliver a message to Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier who was kidnapped four years ago (when he was 19 years old) and has been held incommunicado — in violation of international law — ever since. They refused, because apparently 'human rights' mean something different for Israelis and Arab residents of Gaza. So who wants peace? Israel, which wants to negotiate with the Palestinian Authority (PA), or the PA, which refuses to negotiate unless Israel agrees to all of its demands in advance? Hamas, which — still — fires rockets into Israel and continually probes the border, trying to kidnap more Israelis? Who is more concerned with justice? Israel, whose Supreme Court often issues orders that Palestinian rights require changes in the route of the security fence, whose army command arrests and tries Israeli soldiers for improper behavior in wartime, and which allows security prisoners — even those convicted of multiple murders — access to television and university courses in prison? Or Hamas, which executes 'collaborators' and political opponents without trial, and will not let the Red Cross visit Gilad Shalit in his underground bunker? But it's no use. The language is corrupted. Better he should call his group "The Zionist League for Preemptive Self-Defense," in keeping with the adage that if you can't be liked, you might as well be respected. |
|
SMUGGLERS RENDER EGYPTIAN FENCE USELESS; DOES U.S. IGNORE EVIDENCE OF ILLEGAL FUNDRAISING FOR HAMAS?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 25, 2010. |
|
SMUGGLERS RENDER EGYPTIAN FENCE USELESS 
Two Egyptian officials separately acknowledged that Sinai-Gaza tunnel smugglers pierced the Egyptian fence placed both above-ground and below-ground to stop them. Smugglers have made hundreds of below-ground openings, one per tunnel. One smuggler said it took him five hours to burn a hole through the iron fence. A.P. filmed a smuggler utilizing a blow-torch. Now that Israel lets most goods through, smugglers are not using many tunnels. Fence construction started last year. The half of the fence already built failed to fulfill its ostensible purpose (IMRA, 7/23/10). Unstated was whether Egypt intends to build the other half. IMRA reported then that the U.S. seemed to be subsidizing the project with $50-100 million. IMRA head, Dr. Aaron Lerner, predicted failure. He suggested surer methods for blocking smuggling.
LEBANON LETTING HIZBULLLAH ESCAPE RESPONSIBILITY FOR AN ASSASSINATION According to Hizbullah head Nasrallah, Lebanon PM Saad Hariri told him he will let Hizbullah escape blame for its suspected assassination of his father, Rafik Hariri. The UN is expected to find Hizbullah responsible for that assassination. PM Hariri is expected to excuse the organization by pinning responsibility on the lower level operatives who performed the assassination, as doing it on their own. Narallah supposes that PM Hariri anticipates that if he blames the organization, he would share his father's fate or a renewed civil war that he would lose. Haaretz believes that PM Hariri considers survival more
important than preserving family honor and punish all his father's
murderers. The Israeli daily debunks PM Hariri's distinction in
advance as a false rationalization: "Hizbullah is well known for its
rigid hierarchy, iron discipline and involvement of senior officials
in all decisions at the field level. That makes it highly unlikely
that Hizbullah operatives would have been involved in such an incident
without the senior leadership's knowledge." (IMRA, 7/23/10).
UN ANTICIPATES FINDING ON LEBANON ASSASSINATION 
The UN official said that the UN refuses to let itself be humiliated, and is asking Lebanon to send another 5,000 Lebanese Army troops to help defend UNIFIL. The official described previous instances of stoning of UNIFIL trips by women and children as organized by a "side." He did not name that "side." (IMRA, 7/23/10). Earlier articles have reported that Hizbullah is part of the Lebanese government, that Hizbullah is the dominant military force in the country as proved by its victory in a civil war in which the Lebanese Army was neutral, and that the Lebanese Army is slow to assist UNIFIL is timely inspection of illegal Hizbullah military emplacements. Note that the UN official did not identify the "side" that organized the stoning of his troops. Earlier discussions of the purported evidence seemed to indicate responsiblity further up the chain of command to President Assad of Syria or to Iran.
FORMER HOUSE SPEAKER GINGRICH ON NEW YORK MOSQUE Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich explained his opposition to a mega-mosque proposed for a site near the World Trade Center in New York, the Washington Post reported on July 24. Mr. Gingrich explained that New York City has more than a hundred mosques; this one is not being proposed for lack of access to a house of prayer. He contrasted that number with the number of churches and synagogues in Saudi Arabia: Zero. Time to end the double standard, Gingrich said. In fact, he added, Christians and Jews are banned from Mecca. Gingrich framed the issue not as a matter of tolerance in America but as a matter of American submission to aggressive jihad. He explained that the mega-mosque is important for what it means to Muslims, who perceive symbolism that unsophisticated Americans do not. The proposed mega-mosque is called "Cordoba House." "It refers to Cordoba, Spain — the capital of Muslim conquerors who symbolized their victory over the Christian Spaniards by transforming a church there into the world's third-largest mosque complex. Today, some of the Mosque's backers insist this term is being used to 'symbolize interfaith cooperation' when, in fact, every Islamist in the world recognizes Cordoba as a symbol of Islamic conquest. It is a sign of their contempt for Americans and their confidence in our historic ignorance." After all, Gingrich points out, the large, proposed mosque complex would overlook "the World Trade Center site — where a group of jihadists killed over 3000 Americans and destroyed one of our most famous landmarks..." Adding to the suspicion, Gingrich said that the Mosque officials refuse to divulge the source of the estimated $100 million cost of the proposed complex. Gingrich challenged those who back the mosque in the name of tolerance: let them demand that Saudi Arabia show the same tolerance to other religions! (IMRA, 7/23/10.) Somewhat fewer than 3,000 were killed in New York. The same plot killed a small number in Pennsylvania. The U.S. had stationed troops in Saudi Arabia, and held off Saddam from conquering that country. U.S. troops were not allowed to practice Christianity openly. We reported some time ago about Christian Bibles being confiscated on arrival at the airport. Saudi Arabia is not known to have Jewish residents.
DOES U.S. IGNORE EVIDENCE OF ILLEGAL FUNDRAISING FOR HAMAS? The U.S. appears to have ignored evidence of illegal fund raising for Hamas at U.C. Irvine. Because the US. declared Hamas a terrorist organization, raising funds for it violates the law. In September, 2009, Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) began furnishing the Justice Dept. with evidence. What had happened? At U.C. Irvine, the Muslim Student Union sponsored a talk by British MP George Galloway on May 21, 2009. He touted an organization, Viva Palestina, which brings convoys of goods and money to Gaza. Gaza is controlled by Hamas. As a videotape shows and witnesses confirm, MP Galloway and the Muslim Student Union passed around collection boxes. The previous March, Galloway brought in a Viva Palestina convoy. In front of top Hamas officials and on Arab TV, he said, "We are giving you now 100 vehicles and all of the contents, and we make no apology for what I am about to say: We are giving them to the elected government of Palestine." Israel's Haaretz newspaper reported that Hamas' minister of social affairs hailed Galloway as a 'hero.'" Later that October, the Investigative Project on Terrorism, run by Steven Emerson, documented Viva Palestina's objective as not charity but support for Hamas. The Project reported, "Viva Palestina's most visible leaders call for the elimination of the State of Israel ... They treat Hamas leaders as the legitimate representatives of the Palestinian people and provide both material and moral support to the terrorist organization." Based on this evidence, ZOA urged the U.S. Justice Dept. to investigate for violation of federal law. The request was seconded by U.S. Rep. Brad Sherman, Chair of the House Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade, the Anti-Defamation League, and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. The Conference is an umbrella organization, in which ZOA is one of about 52 members groups. In November, the FBI asked ZOA for a copy of the campus fundraiser videotape. ZOA supplied it, and offered to furnish witnesses. The FBI did not ask for the witnesses' names. There is no indication that the Justice Dept. is proceeding on this. ZOA suggests that it is bad enough if an American campus is used to raise funds for terrorism, but it would be more frightening if the Justice Dept. abdicated its responsibility to prosecute it (7/23/10 press release by Zionist Organization of America, headquartered in New York and of which I am a member)
ISRAELI RIGHT-WINGERS PROPOSE A KIND OF 'ONE-STATE SOLUTION' Israeli right-wingers are proposing a kind of "one-state solution." Former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ahrens of Likud and some Jews of Judea-Samaria propose annexing Judea-Samaria and granting its Arabs citizenship, under certain conditions. The primary condition is that they would have to accept Jewish sovereignty. Another condition is that the Islamist Movement in Israel be banned. Mr. Ahrens says he is afraid that some day the Arabs of Judea-Samaria may, like Hamas, fire rockets into Israel. He concludes that making them citizens would eliminate their bellicosity. Most of the other arguments put forward are lengthy and emotional references to earlier Zionist figures (IMRA, 7/24/10). Considerations not dealt with in the news of the proposal: The Jewish homeland already has been divided. Israel comprises 17% of it, Judea, Samaria and Gaza comprise 4%, and Jordan comprises 79%. The 4% includes strategic heights and natural tank traps, as does the Golan Heights now part of Israel, that in Israeli hands makes for secure borders and in Arab hands would facilitate conquest of Israel. Gaza's omission from the proposal is another division, contradicting Ahren's principle of not dividing the homeland. Why does Mr. Ahrens differentiate the Arabs of Gaza from the Arabs of Judea-Samaria? As we have documented, the leaders of both areas state their view that the whole of Israel belongs to them. Both sets of leaders honor terrorism. If, based on the stated conditions, many Arabs do not want to join the new state and do not want to move away, Israel would, in effect, still have a division, but by population rather than geographically. It would have hundreds of thousands of new Arab citizens sympathetic to the non-citizens opposition to Zionism. The early Zionists were idealistic toward the Arabs. They lacked experience with them. Not a valid basis for contemporaries who have had much, sad experience to predicate proposals on disproved assumptions. In the two generations since then, Palestinian Arabs and other Arabs made more than one attempt to eradicate the Jews. Why would Arabs indoctrinated in hatred of Jews, as we have documented, be more cooperative with the Jews than were their forebears? It sounds determined to say that before letting additional Arabs into the Jewish state, Israel first should ban the Islamist Movement. If those Israelis who set this condition are so determined, why can't they impose the ban now, and see how it works? If they can't impose the ban now, how later, when the demographics are less favorable? They say they would condition citizenship on acceptance of Jewish sovereignty. How do they now they could believe a pledge of allegiance from those whose ideology includes deception of non-believers? Ahrens did not give any signs of understanding and considering the religious basis for the jihad against Israel. While still a minority, the prospective citizens could agree to Israel remaining a Jewish state, though it clashes with their view of Islam. The addition of up to two million Arab citizens would make the minority very large. Sooner or later, they may no longer agree to Israel being a Jewish state. Then what would the Jews there do? When the Palestinian Arabs find that they get concessions because they are willing to fight, and to fight in a terrorist manner, might they not conclude that they could get more concessions by fighting more? Has Ahrens considered all the alternatives, or only the politically correct ones? How would he deal with the perilous or inconsistent aspects of his proposal?
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
KULTURKAMPF ON THE LEFT
Posted by Israel Academia Monitor, July 25, 2010. |
|
In Israel, a bitter battle is being waged between two camps on the left. On Dr. Yehuda (Yehouda) Shenhav's book 'The Time of the Green Line' Yehouda Shenhav, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Tel Aviv University. This article was written by Aryeh Tepper and it appeared April 28, 2010 in Jewish Ideas Daily http://www.jewishideasdaily.com/content/detail/continue-reading- kulturkampf-on-the-left Aryeh Tepper recently completed his Doctorate at Hebrew University in the Department of Jewish Thought. He writes for Jewish Ideas Daily. |
|
Political struggles are usually waged between the left and the right. In contemporary Israel, a bitter battle is being waged between two camps on the left. The issue that divides the two camps is Zionism. The Zionist left wants to consolidate a Jewish-democratic state within the "green line" — hat is, the borders that existed from 1949, fixed by the armistice that ended Israel's war of independence, until the June 1967 Six-Day war — and to help engineer a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The post-Zionist or "radical" left is in favor of a one-state solution, i.e., doing away with Israel as a Jewish state and creating a "state of all its citizens" in its stead. To the Zionist left, the post-Zionist left isn't so much post- as anti-Zionist. But to the post-Zionist left, the Zionist left isn't liberal — or leftist — at all. The latter position is argued vehemently in The Time of the Green Line, a recently published Hebrew book that offers a deep critique of the liberal Zionist left from a radical perspective. Its author is Yehuda Shenhav, an established public intellectual with academic credentials. Shenhav puts forward two large claims about the Zionist left, the first being that it lives in a state of complete denial regarding the fundamentals of the Israel-Palestinian conflict. According to Shenhav, the Zionist left has persuaded itself that the basic point of contention in the conflict lies in the results of the Six-Day war, which ended with Israel having seized the Sinai peninsula (long since returned to Egypt), Gaza (now under Hamas), the Golan Heights (claimed by Syria), and, especially, the West Bank with its large Palestinian population. Therefore, reasons the Zionist left, once Israel hands back the West Bank, "1967" will have been reversed and peace will become possible. To Shenhav, this is a delusion. Zero hour for the Palestinians, he contends, was and remains not 1967 but 1948: i.e., the founding of Israel itself. Averting its eyes from this fact, the Zionist left has fabricated an artificial starting point in time (1967) and space (the green line) in order to preserve to its own satisfaction the basic legitimacy of Israel's establishment in 1948. The trouble is that the Palestinians will never agree to this construction of history, because it fails to take into account their most fundamental grievances. Shenhav's second claim is that the Zionist left's stubborn fidelity to the notion of a specifically Jewish state is inherently anti-democratic. How so? Democracy, writes Shenhav, is more than a matter of individual rights; it is also a matter of collective rights. So long as the collective rights of native Palestinians living within the state of Israel go unrecognized — and, in a state that calls itself Jewish, they are by definition unrecognized — hat state, no matter how much it pretends otherwise, cannot be regarded as democratic in any meaningful sense. Predictably, the heated contentions of The Time of the Green Line have ignited reciprocal heat from the Zionist left. Thus, Gadi Taub, a prominent intellectual and one of Shenhav's favorite targets, has attacked the book as meretricious and utterly irresponsible. An example: in his final chapter, Shenhav offers a number of one-state schemes for sharing the land, including something called "consociational democracy"; in doing so, he silently passes over the inconvenient fact that this fanciful arrangement has already been tried and found wanting in such distinguished islands of tranquility as Cyprus and Lebanon. "Any reasonable person," Taub sums up, "realizes that the one-state solution would constitute a chronic civil war," a war from which posturing professors like Shenhav will be able to escape while those "with nowhere to go — both Jews and Arabs — will end up ... drowning in rivers of blood." Taub's assault on the fantasy of a one-state solution — he demand, as he puts it, that of all the parties to the conflict, the Jews alone must surrender their right to self-determination — is cogent enough. Unfortunately, it is not matched by a sustained engagement with Shenhav's point about the arbitrary character of 1967 and the green line. But that is also understandable. The dimming hopes of Zionist leftists are now pinned to the latest in a very long string of efforts to "solve" the Israel-Palestinian conflict on the basis of the 1967 paradigm. Today's version is associated with the proposal of the Palestinian prime minister, Salam Fayyad, to establish a Palestinian state in the West Bank and east Jerusalem within two years. Fayyad is backed by the Obama administration, the international community, the Zionist left, and liberals everywhere. If he succeeds, alternative ways of thinking about the conflict will have been rendered ipso facto irrelevant. But what if Fayyad's plan fails, like so many others before it? Will Zionist leftists (like Taub) urge Western peacemakers to go back to the drawing board yet again? An Israeli rightist might charge that the clash over Shenhav's book reflects the incoherence of both sectors of the Israeli left, an incoherence born of the refusal to face the hard reality of Arab obduracy and determination. Be that as it may, one can easily imagine the counter-charge: namely, that the Israeli right, in declining to count the diplomatic price the country is paying for clinging to the status quo, is at least as blind as the Israeli left. What, then, is one to conclude? Perhaps only that the harsh light of the Mediterranean sun remains too intense for anyone to gaze into it without the aid of colored glasses. This article is archived at
|
|
DESTRUCTIVE SOFT JIHADIS
Posted by Dr. Babu Suseelan, July 24, 2010. |
|
How can a soft Jihadi who misdiagnoses the social disease effectively suggest a remedy? we listen to soft Jihadis, many of them are hard core hidden Jihadis with a mask. They are propagating Jihadism at the expense of gullible infidels. Soft Jihadis are telling us what we want to hear. And more often than not, soft Jihadis do not want to address Islamic reality. To understand hidden agendas of soft Jihadis we need a renewed sense of social responsibility. What we really need is to reexamine our pacifism, tolerance of intolerance and carefully observe soft Jihadis hidden agendas. Everywhere we turn today, we are bombarded by pseudo secularist, Marxist liberals, and soft Jihadis with slogans that exhort us to keep an open mind and not be judgmental. In the middle of all this soft Jihadi muddle is an attitude that prevents any discussion of Jihadi terrorism and evil promoted in the name of Islam. In the real sense, soft Jihadis are engaged in mind manipulation to make us zombies. To move, let alone root out the dead weight of Jihadism, we need an intellectual assault on the political Islamic dogma paraded as religion. Pure Islam promoted by soft Jihadis is against democracy, secularism and freedom of the will. These are essential in a democratic society to make a choice. Soft and hard Jihadis cannot make a choice. Islam forbids choice, freedom of thinking, coexistence with infidels, and all inclusive thought system. In this new world soft and hardcore Jihadis must make a choice between right and wrong, good and evil. After years of aggressive war, looting, plundering and invasion of non Islamic countries by fanatic Islamists, soft Jihadis are still carrying the dysfunctional, destructive dominant Islamic values. Jihadis are anchored in their destructive, sixth century wrong Islamic values. Choice and selection of positive values is a fearful burden for Jihadis. They cannot overcome their limitation since they are permanently imprisoned in Islamic prison serving life term. jihadis often appearing to cling tenaciously to a dysfunctional dogma that is dangerous. They, perhaps by provocative means, instigate death and destruction of kafirs. The subtlety consists in the deftness with which soft jihadis manipulate the system and capitalize upon it, all deliberately of course. In this context, citizens living in democratic countries have a choice to make to save our life and liberty. we have to force Jihadis to freedom. BEWARE OF DESTRUCTIVE SOFT JIHADIS There are several soft Jihadis like John Esposito working for Islamists for few Jihadi breadcrukmbs. How can these soft Jihadis who misdiagnoses the social disease effectively suggest a remedy? we listen to soft Jihadis, many of them are hard core hidden Jihadis with a mask. They are propagating Jihadism at the expense of gullible infidels. Soft Jihadis are telling us what we want to hear. And more often than not, soft Jihadis do not want to address Islamic reality. To understand hidden agendas of soft Jihadis we need a renewed sense of social responsibility. What we really need is to reexamine our pacifism, tolerance of intolerance and carefully observe soft Jihadis hidden agendas. Everywhere we turn today, we are bombarded by pseudo secularist, Marxist liberals, and soft Jihadis with slogans that exhort us to keep an open mind and not be judgmental. In the middle of all thissoft Jihadi muddleis an attitude that prevents any discussion of Jihadi terrorism and evil promoted in the name of Islam. In the real sense, soft Jihadis are engaged in mind manipulation to make us zombies. To move, let alone root out the dead weight of Jihadism, we need an intellectual assault on the political Islamic dogma paraded as religion. Pure Islam promoted by soft Jihadis is against democracy, secularism and freedom of the will. These are essential in a democratic society to make a choice.Soft and hard Jihadis cannot make a choice. Islam forbids choice, freedom of thinking, coexistence with infidels, and all inclusive thought system. In this new world soft and hardcore Jihadis must make a choice between right and wrong, good and evil. After years of aggressive war, looting, plundering and invasion of non Islamic countries by fanatic Islamists, soft Jihadis are still carrying the dysfunctional, destructive dominant Islamic values. Jihadis are anchored in their destructive, sixth century wrong Islamic values. Choice and selection of positive values is a fearful burden for Jihadis. They cannot overcome their limitation since they are permanently imprisoned in Islamic prison serving life term. jihadis often appearing to cling tenaciously to adysfunctional dogma that is dangerous. They, perhaps by provocative means, instigate death and destruction of kafirs. The subtlety consists in the deftness with which soft jihadis manipulate the system and capitalize upon it, all deliberately of course. In this context, citizens living in democratic countries have a choice to make to save our life and liberty. we have to forceJihadis to freedom. |
|
FBI GETS THOUSANDS OF BLOGS CLOSED; ARTIST APOLOGIZES
TO SLANDERED RABBIS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 24, 2010. |
|
FBI GETS THOUSANDS OF BLOGS CLOSED The FBI told BurstNet Technologies that thousands of blogs on one of its sites contain links to terrorist material. BurstNet reports that those materials include lists of Americans to be assassinated and instructions on making bombs. As a remedy, BurstNet shut down the Blogetery website, which offers free space. BurstNet did not have to go as far as it did, because the FBI did not oppose the whole clientele. BurstNet offered another reason. It stated that Blogetery violated the terms of service. Blogetery claims that 73,000 blogsites were canceled, but BurstNet estimates the number as far fewer. Another site, lpbfree.com, also was closed. Opposing the change are the Center for Democracy and Technology and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. They complained that innocent sites suffered unfairly. A Congressional Committee earlier had expressed concern over terrorist use of Internet, but the Committee and many who testified before it would not go so far as to recommend shutting such sites. For example, Brian Jenkins of the RAND Corp., called online terrorist recruiting largely a failure. Why? He explained that only about 15 Americans recruited to terrorism each year. FBI Director Robert Mueller emphasized not how many were recruited so far, but the potential effect on the growth of "home-grown" terrorism (Arutz-7, 7/23/10). I asked the Center for Democracy and Technology whether it thought Burstnet's reaction to a violation of terms of service was warranted. Speaking for the Center, John Morris cast the issues in a different light. Mr. Morris told me that the Center leaves matters of terms of service violations up to the responsible parties and is not issuing criticism but expressing concern. The Center is concerned about the "fragility" of freedom of the press on Internet. Poof! Tens of thousands of writers cut off. Internet freedom of expression hangs on the thread of owner discretion; when discretion frays? Morris explained that section 230 of the pertinent federal statute protects Internet service providers from liability for the content on their sites. If this vital section 230 were repealed, Internet service providers would be inclined to censor their sites to prevent lawsuits against them. Censorship invites abuse (Telephone, 7/23).
ARTIST APOLOGIZES TO SLANDERED RABBIS Yossi Evan-Kama's recent exhibit at the Shenkar College of Engineering and Design, renders a fictional account of a right-wing revolution in Israel, including calls by rabbis to kill Jews who are not religiously observant. Rabbis whom he named objected. He apologized. Mr. Evan-Kama explained that for authenticity, he used a list of rabbis, but altered most of their names. He said it was carelessness and not intent to include actual names; he has nothing against those particular rabbis. The exhibition included scenarios of the political and religious right starting a civil war in which they bombed dozens of people, and a black Star of David inside a white circle on a red background, which some critics noted is similar to Nazi symbolism. The head of Shenkar College is Yuli Tamar, former Education Minister. Danny Dayan, head of the Yesha Council, shuddered at the notion that someone who gives a platform to such hate-filled propaganda, called art, was in charge of educating Israel's children. Rabbi Azriel Ariel of Ateret, among the libeled rabbis, remarked that the exhibit reflects hatred, a form of "mental illness" from an "inner emptiness." (Arutz-7, 7/23/10). The artist apparently found no rabbis who do suggest murdering non-religiously observant Jews. Usually, fiction bear a resemblance to reality.
ISRAELI POLICEMAN SENTENCED FOR SHOOTING ARAB CAR THIEF Introducing the original story, Prof. Steven Plaut cited several other cases of Israeli government prosecution of Israelis who defended themselves from Arab attack. In the current case, Israeli Supreme Court Chief Justice doubled a Haifa court's 'sentence of police officer Shahar Mizrachi, to 30 months in prison with common criminals such as ones he had gotten convicted. The officer's crime was catching a car thief in the act and shooting him to stop it. The police chain of command insists that Mizrachi acted properly. This car thief was an Arab. According to Prof. Plaut, Arab police who have shot Jewish criminals were not prosecuted (Prof. Steven Plaut, 7/22/10). I do not know the circumstances. Maariv editor Ben Bror Yemeni has fleshed out the case. First, officer Mizrachi has some not so benign experience with car thieves. He was badly injured by another car thief, getting away in a stolen car. With that car, the thief struck Mizrachi's partner, putting him into a coma from which he has not emerged. This time, the thief threatened Mizrachi with a screw driver, jumped into the stolen car, and tried to run Mizrachi down. Hence the shooting. Why the prosecution? (Plaut, 7/2/10). Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
COGNITIVE DISSONANCE ON MIDDLE EAST GROUNDHOG DAY
Posted by Paul Rotenberg, July 23, 2010. |
|
This was written by Melanie Phillips and it appeared July
23, 2010 in the Spectator (UK)
|
|
Khaled abu Toameh asks a question: When was the last time the United Nations Security Council met to condemn an Arab government for its mistreatment of Palestinians? How come groups and individuals on university campuses in the US and Canada that call themselves 'pro-Palestinian' remain silent when Jordan revokes the citizenship of thousands of Palestinians? The plight of Palestinians living in Arab countries in general, and Lebanon in particular, is one that is often ignored by the mainstream media in West. How come they turn a blind eye to the fact that Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and many more Arab countries continue to impose severe travel restrictions on Palestinians? ...A news story on the Palestinians that does not include an anti-Israel angle rarely makes it to the front pages of Western newspapers. The demolition of an Arab-owned illegal building in Jerusalem is, for most of these correspondents, much more important than the fact that hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Lebanon continue to suffer from a series of humiliating restrictions. Not only are Palestinians living in Lebanon denied the right to own property, but they also do not qualify for health care, and are banned by law from working in a large number of jobs. Can someone imagine what would be the reaction in the international community if Israel tomorrow passed a law that prohibits its Arab citizens from working as taxi drivers, journalists, physicians, cooks, waiters, engineers and lawyers? Or if the Israeli Ministry of Education issued a directive prohibiting Arab children from enrolling in universities and schools? I think we all know the answer. Meanwhile, if anyone wants to know why the Middle East 'peace process' aiming to bring about a 'two-state solution' never gets anywhere, they will find the answer here in Professor Efraim Karsh's superb and truthful summary of the tragic history of the past century. As he writes, a 'two-state solution' has been agreed over and over again during that time by the Jews, the British, the Europeans and the Americans. The only people who haven't agreed, and have instead repeatedly and without interruption tried to annihilate the Jewish state, are the Arabs. And as Karsh observes, nothing has changed today. It is not just Hamas which refuses to accept the existence of Israel in a 'two state solution', but Fatah, headed by the 'moderate' Mahmoud Abbas. As Karsh writes: In a televised speech on May 15, 2005, Abbas described the establishment of Israel as an unprecedented historic injustice and vowed his unwavering resolve never to accept it. Two-and-a-half years later, at a U.S.-sponsored peace conference in Annapolis, he rejected Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's proposal of a Palestinian Arab state in 97 percent of the West Bank and the entire Gaza Strip, and categorically dismissed the request to recognize Israel as a Jewish state alongside the would-be Palestinian state, insisting instead on full implementation of the "right of return." But instead, it is Israel that has been turned by the west into the pariah state. Go figure. |
|
FIGHTING AN UNNAMED ENEMY WAGING AN UNRECOGNIZED WAR
Posted by Daniel Mandel, July 23, 2010. |
|
Since arriving in office, the Obama administration has delved deeply into its thesaurus to find ways of speaking about Islamism without mentioning it. In his June 2009 Cairo speech, a not atypical example, President Obama referred repeatedly to 'extremists,' 'violent extremists' and 'violent extremism.' He even referred at one point to anti-Israel terrorism by its Palestinian euphemism — 'resistance.' Add to this the philological ingenuities of his officials: 'man-caused disasters' (terrorism) and 'overseas contingency operations' (fighting Islamists in Afghanistan), and the omission of any mention of the terrorism and the ideology animating it is virtually uniform in this administration. However, following last week's terrorist outrages against Ugandans, Obama has referred now to 'terrorists' while also hitting on a new term: 'racist.' As an administration official helpfully explained, al Qaeda does not deploy its black African recruits except in their "lower level operations." Are we then to assume that the administration would be pleased to see a higher proportion of black Africans in al-Qaeda's operational cadre? A cynic might argue that this reaction to the terrorist outrages affords hope that this race-preoccupied administration might be about to take Islamists seriously, if only because of al Qaeda's contempt for inclusiveness and diversity. Unfortunately, any such hope would be frivolous. Consider, for example, the rationale advanced by the Obama administration for banishing the words 'Islamism' and 'jihad' from the governmental lexicon. In May, John O. Brennan, Obama's chief national security adviser for counterterrorism, contended that to use such terms "would lend credence" to the notion "that the United States is somehow at war against Islam ... Nor do we describe our enemy as jihadists or Islamists because jihad is holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam meaning to purify oneself of one's community." Yet, according to all schools of Islamic jurisprudence, jihad has always constituted a struggle by all means, including waging war, to establish and extend Muslim dominion over non-Muslims. Purification is seen to reside in attaining this objective, not in some conception of personal or communal development that Brennan artlessly drapes over it. The United States is not at war with Islam, but Muslims who wage jihad are at war with the United States. Then consider who else of Brennan's ilk Obama has appointed — or sought to appoint — to senior posts: Rashad Hussain, envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the 57-member inter-governmental group of Muslim majority states: A former Justice Department official and White House deputy counsel, Hussain claimed in a 2007 article that restrictions placed on non-immigrant visitors from countries which have produced Islamist terror threats are "racist." Hussain has also called the prosecution of a Florida professor who was found to have been illegally funding the terrorist group Palestinian Islamic Jihad (presumed politically correct name: Palestinian Extremist Man-Made Disaster-Causers) "politically motivated persecution." This impossible to satirize line-up suggests that this administration cannot win — itself an objective consciously discarded in Afghanistan by Obama in favor of 'shoring up security in the country' — over an unnamed enemy waging an unrecognized war. Daniel Mandel (PhD Melbourne, 1999) is a Research Fellow in the
Department of History at Melbourne University and author of H.V. Evatt
and the Establishment of Israel: The Undercover Zionist (Routledge,
London, 2004). He is
director of the Zionist Organization of America's Center for Middle East Policy.
|
|
BEHIND THE MOSQUE
Posted by Bostom, Andrew, July 23, 2010. |
|
Imam Feisal Rauf, the central figure in the coterie planning a huge mosque just off Ground Zero, is a full-throated champion of the very same Muslim theologians and jurists identified in a landmark NYPD report as central to promoting the Islamic religious bigotry that fuels modern jihad terrorism....Wahhabism. Whether in the form promoted by Saudi money around the globe, or in the more openly nihilist brand embraced by terrorists, Wahhabism is a totalitarian ideology comparable to Nazism or, closer still, the "state Shintoism" of imperial Japan. We would never have allowed a Shinto shrine at the site of the Pearl Harbor carnage — especially one to serve as a recruiting station for Tokyo's militarists while World War II was still on. For the same reasons, we must say no to a Wahhabi mosque at Ground Zero This fact alone should compel Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly and Mayor Bloomberg to withdraw their support for the proposed mosque. In August 2007, the NYPD released "Radicalization in the West — The Homegrown Threat." This landmark 90-page report looked at the threat that had become apparent since 9/11, analyzing the roots of recent terror plots in the United States, from Lackawanna, NY, to Portland, Ore., to Fort Dix, NJ. The report noted that Saudi "Wahhabi" scholars feed the jihadist ideology, legitimizing an "extreme intolerance" toward non-Muslims, especially Jews, Christians and Hindus. In particular, the analysts noted that the "journey" of radicalization that produces homegrown jihadis often begins in a Wahhabi mosque. The term "Wahhabi" refers to the 18th century founder of this austere Islamic tradition, Muhammad bin Abdul al-Wahhab, who claimed inspiration from 14th century jurist Taqi al-Din Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyah. At least two of Imam Rauf's books, a 2000 treatise on Islamic law and his 2004 "What's Right with Islam," laud the implementation of sharia — including within America — and the "rejuvenating" Islamic religious spirit of Ibn Taymiyyah and al-Wahhab. He also lionizes as two ostensible "modernists" Jamal al-Dinal-Afghani (d. 1897), and his student Muhammad Abduh (d. 1905). In fact, both defended the Wahhabis, praised the salutary influence of Ibn Taymiyyah and promoted the pretense that sharia — despite its permanent advocacy of jihad and dehumanizing injunctions on non-Muslims and women — was somehow compatible with Western concepts of human rights, as in our own Bill of Rights. In short, Feisal Rauf's public image as a devotee of the "contemplative" Sufi school of Islam cannot change the fact that his writings directed at Muslims are full of praise for the most noxious and dangerous Muslim thinkers. Indeed, even the classical Sufi master that Rauf extols, the 12th-century jurist Abu Hamed Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Ghazali, issued opinions on jihad and the imposition of Islamic law on the vanquished non-Muslim populations that were as bellicose and bigoted as those of Ibn Taymiyyah. Also relevant is the Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow program run by the American Society for Muslim Advancement, an organization founded by Rauf and now run by his wife. Among the future leaders it has recognized are one of the co-authors of a "denunciation" of the NYPD report, a counter-report endorsed by all major Wahhabi-front organizations in America. Another "future leader" of interest to New Yorkers: Debbie Almontaser, the onetime head of the city's Khalil Gibran Academy. More revealing is the fact that Rauf himself has refused to sign a straightforward pledge to "repudiate the threat from authoritative sharia to the religious freedom and safety of former Muslims," a pledge issued nine months ago by ex-Muslims under threat for their "apostasy." That refusal is a tacit admission that Rauf believes that sharia trumps such fundamental Western principles as freedom of conscience. Wahhabism — whether in the form promoted by Saudi money around the globe, or in the more openly nihilist brand embraced by terrorists — is a totalitarian ideology comparable to Nazism or, closer still, the "state Shintoism" of imperial Japan. We would never have allowed a Shinto shrine at the site of the Pearl Harbor carnage — especially one to serve as a recruiting station for Tokyo's militarists while World War II was still on. For the same reasons, we must say no to a Wahhabi mosque at Ground Zero.
Andrew G. Bostom, M.D., M.S. (Providence, RI), is the author of the highly acclaimed The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims. More on his work can be found at www.andrewbostom.org, including a preview of his eagerly anticipated forthcoming book, The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism: From Sacred Texts to Solemn History. |
|
WHEN ARABS TWEET
Posted by Daily Alert, July 23, 2010. |
|
This was written by Rami G. Khouri and it was published at
the New York Times
Rami G. Khouri is editor-at-large of The Daily Star, and director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs at the American University of Beirut. |
|
BEIRUT — I was intrigued to see several recent calls for bids by the U.S. Agency for International Development for programs that would, among other things, train young Arabs how to better use the Internet and other digital technologies for political activism, advocacy, greater transparency and accountability, and other such democratic practices. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton has repeatedly stressed Washington's commitment to such programs as part of President Barack Obama's call for greater engagement between the United States and Islamic societies. Two important questions come to mind, which I hope the U.S. government is pondering seriously. The first is about the actual impact on the political culture of young Arabs and Iranians who use the new media. The second is about the most appropriate way for the United States, or any other foreign party, to promote this sector. We are witnessing a continuing social revolution in how youth throughout the Middle East use Web sites, cellphones, chat systems, blogs, Twitter, Facebook and other rapidly evolving new media. Millions of young people communicate with each other digitally, express their views and identities, and sometimes mobilize for causes as disparate as promoting a new movie, arranging a dance party, sharing photos or bemoaning a tired old dictator. In some countries like Iran and Egypt, we are told, tens of thousands of bloggers are at work expressing their independent views and challenging the established order. But what do young people actually do, or aim to achieve, with the new media? Are the new digital and social media a credible tool for challenging established political orders and bringing about political change in our region? My impression is that these new media today play a role identical to that played by Al Jazeera satellite television when it first appeared in the mid-1990s — they provide important new means by which ordinary citizens can both receive information and express their views, regardless of government controls on both, but in terms of their impact they seem more like a stress reliever than a mechanism for political change. Watching Arab pundits criticize Arab governments, Israel or the United States — common fare on Arab satellite television — is great vicarious satisfaction for ordinary men and women who live in political cultures that deny them serious opportunities for free speech. Blogging, reading politically racy Web sites, or passing around provocative text messages by cellphone is equally satisfying for many youth. Such activities, though, essentially shift the individual from the realm of participant to the realm of spectator, and transform what would otherwise be an act of political activism — mobilizing, demonstrating or voting — into an act of passive, harmless personal entertainment. We must face the fact that all the new media and hundreds of thousands of young bloggers from Morocco to Iran have not triggered a single significant or lasting change in Arab or Iranian political culture. Not a single one. Zero. This is partly because the modern Middle Eastern security state is firmly in control of the key levers of power — guns and money, mainly — and has learned to live with the digital open flow of information, as long as this does not translate into actual political action that seeks to change policies or ruling elites. How should interested foreign parties engage in such an environment? The first thing is to rid themselves of some nagging blatant contradictions that largely nullify their credibility, and, in fact, make them look pretty silly. One cannot take seriously the United States or any other Western government that funds political activism by young Arabs while it simultaneously provides funds and guns that help cement the power of the very same Arab governments the young social and political activists target for change. Feeding both the jailer and the prisoner is not a sustainable or sensible policy. I would not be surprised if some wise-guy young Arab soon sends a tweet to Hilary Clinton saying, "you're either with us, or you're with the security state." This is an awkward and untenable position for any foreign government that wants to promote political activism and pluralism in the Middle East. It damages Western government credibility, leads to no significant changes in our political cultures, and often discredits the local activists who become tarred with the charge of being Western lackeys. The antidote is simple, but humbling: lower the contradictions in Western policies towards Middle Eastern governments and activists, and grasp more accurately the fact that young people use the digital media mainly for entertainment and vicarious, escapist self-expression. Like I said, the United States and other Western governments should apply more honesty and intellectual rigor to their assault of our digital world than they did in their military invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. 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 |
|
BAD NEWS RE PEACE PROCESS
Posted by Barry Rubin, July 23, 2010. |
|
If you have any belief that there is going to be Israel-Palestinian peace in the near future or that the Palestinian public has been in any way prepared for a two-state solution by its leadership here's a simple point that proves the contrary. The year is 2010. A child born on the day the Oslo agreement, the basis for a supposed peace, was agreed to by Israel and the PLO would soon be celebrating his 18th birthday and be an adult. The "peace process," however, is still in diapers. Yet according to the latest Palestinian poll, 82 percent of West Bank residents won't give up the demand that any peace agreement must let all Palestinians who were refugees in 1948 or their descendents return to live in what is now Israel. In fact, even if compensated for lost property they still demand repatriation. The Palestinian Authority has done nothing to oppose this position, which makes peace with Israel impossible, on the contrary it has consistently supported the idea. This has always been a peculiar concept. If Palestinians were nationalist they would not go and live in another, non-Palestinian and even non-Arab and non-Muslim country. The point of this demand is, of course, to eliminate Israel's existence over time. The amount of bloodshed that would ensue if this idea was implemented would be catastrophic. And don't get me started on the ridiculousness of trying to make peace with a revolutionary Islamist, genocide-seeking Hamas ruling the Gaza Strip. Remember, though, that the American people — and others in the West — are smarter than much of their elites. The respected Gallup poll last February, at a time when President Obama was evincing anger at Israel, shows that 63 percent of Americans support Israel as compared to only 15 percent backing the Palestinians. This is a record, except for a short period in 1991 when Israel was under Scud attack and the PLO was siding with a country, Iraq, that U.S. forces were fighting. Asked if they were favorable toward Israel generally, 67 percent of Americans said "yes," one of the highest scores of all countries. Will peace some day come to the Middle East? Of the respondents, 67 percent said "doubtful" and 30 percent said "there will come a time." Among Republicans only 25 percent said there would be peace some day while the number was 39 percent, still quite low, among Democrats. So the claims of the media, academics, and government officials have not persuaded people. (And the question underestimated this factor since "there will come a time" could mean in 50 years.) By the way, it is being said that U.S.-Israeli security ties are stronger than ever before now under the Obama Administration. This is a bit misleading since many of the programs cited were agreed to under the preceding president. I would phrase it in this way: they are as strong as they have ever been. Here's a detailed account: Glenn Kessler, "U.S.-Israeli security ties grow amid diplomatic disputes," Washington Post, July 16, 2010. Unfortunately, that's just in the United States though — forgive me for saying this — that's the place that counts most. Professor Richard Landes has a portrait of the UK today, however, that is profoundly disturbing, and I'm told by people there is pretty accurate, about just how bad things have become. Since presumably after reading this you will be quite depressed, for encouragement read a poll of British Jews which shows overwhelming support among them for Israel. Then to follow that up read Robert Fulford's view that all the anti-Israel boycott and disinvestment movements have produced close to zero material effect in practice (though obviously the propaganda value is something else). Another interesting new report is this one showing how at least seven and probably all nine of those killed had previously declared their desire to become martyrs in the operation and at least eight of them were members of the radical Islamist IHH group which had previously sent armed fighters to other countries and functions largely as a support group for Hamas. Thus, these were not innocent humanitarian-oriented bystanders but among those who launched an attack on Israeli soldiers and kidnapped three of them. The U.S. government is now thinking of designated the IHH main group in Turkey as a terrorist group. But there's a problem here: the IHH is very close to the Turkish regime so if the IHH is terrorist than the Turkish Islamist regime is sponsoring a terrorist group, right? Presumably we won't hear more about any classification of the IHH as terrorist no matter how much evidence there is. Watch this one. Khalid Abu Toameh of the Jerusalem Post, whose work is awesome in part because it is so vastly serious to everyone else doing the Palestinian beat, writes: "In recent weeks Hamas leaders are beginning to show signs of optimism. Since the late May incident involving the Turkish flotilla of aid ships, some Americans and Europeans have been campaigning in favor of engaging Hamas. "Al-Qaida, Muslim Brotherhood and jihadists around the world all have their eyes set on the Gaza Strip. They are waiting to see if Hamas manages to win recognition of the international community. "A victory for Hamas is a victory for Islamic fundamentalists not only in Gaza, but in many different places, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sudan and Iraq.... It does not seem that Hamas has any incentive to change its position amid increasing calls in the West to "break" the isolation of the radical Islamist movement. On the contrary, talk in the West about the need to launch dialogue with Hamas has only served to toughen their stance.... "Not only is Hamas unwilling to accept the three conditions imposed by the Quartet members, but it has now toughened its position on the issue of reconciliation with Fatah...." Among the latest members of the pro-Hamas camp are Muhammad el-Baradei, "reformist" candidate for the presidency of Egypt. He says that if he is elected he will accept Hamas's rule of the Gaza Strip and open the border completely to them. That's quite a reform. Speaking of aggressive Islamism, here's the latest in Gareth Jenkins remarkable and scholarly analysis of how the Turkish Islamist regime uses false conspiracy charges to arrest and intimidate opponents. This story is either not covered at all in the West or the media actually swallows the repressive regime propaganda that it is arresting real conspirators! Jenkins has actually read the charges and finds them ridiculous. I think there's a pattern here: the exact opposite to the one believed in the West. Remember Fatah, the group controlling the Palestinian Authority (PA)? Well it has come out against direct negotiations with Israel. But wait! Isn't President Obama always saying the PA is really moderate and wants peace? Well, I keep saying that Fatah is still controlled by radicals who are far from ready for a peace agreement with Israel. Who are you going to believe? And what happens when the PA, including Mahmoud Abbas himself, openly opposes the direct talks that Obama wants? Does there come a point when the U.S. government realizes that its big problem is the PA and not Israel? Speaking of people throwing a pie in the face of Obama and dissing [American slang for disrespecting] U.S. interests, how about the open Russian declaration that it is going to help Iran get around sanctions? This follows U.S. government hints that since Russia voted for the UN sanctions it won't actually be expected to apply them. Do you know what this means? The sanctions are not so much a hurt-Iran-to-discourage-nuclear weapons plan but a make-lots-of-money-for-Russia-by driving-out-Western-dealings-with-Iran-so Moscow-can-get-the-business. At the same time, despite these shortcomings, the Obama Administration should get credit for the following: keeping strong U.S.-Israel security ties, working hard now on anti-Iran sanctions (though Congress deserves much of the credit), and beginning to lay the groundwork for containing Iran. |
|
NOT LEFTISTS, JUST CRAZY CONTRARIANS
Posted by Paul Lademain, July 23, 2010. |
|
We read somewhere that during the time of Jesus, a Jew who appointed himself a community spokesman, cursed his fellow Jews because they failed to save Jesus from the Roman Centurions and he, the community loudmouth, cursed and damned the members of his religon forever and ever more. This Jew, who did nothing himself to save Jesus, was the first Jewish Contrarian — a Jew who was willing to promote the collective damnation of innocent and unarmed Jews who could not possibly prevail in a battle against the Roman troops. Here was born the first self-loathing Jew who wanted other Jews to loath themselves, too. Some call this sort of Jew a "leftist". We we have a different view because with hindsight one can see that this Contrarian Jew was then, in his time, as cowardly as was the Egyptian born terrorist, Yasser Arafat, in his time. Both men, each of a different millenium, instead of sacrificing themselves, urged others to sacrifice themselves for their ambitious notions. Look at Yasser Arafat, the Egyptian-born fascist muckraker: here was a self- aggrandizing conniver, entirely opposed to strapping on his own bomb belt and blowing himself "to paradise" for the cause he and his Saudi sponsors invented. Today, in Israel, aided and abetted by ignorant sentimentalists, there are clutches of Jews who cling to the notion that their knee-jerk contrarianism is a badge of their intellectual purity. They feel they must trumpet a position contrary to whatever the majority view might be. Should the majority favor democracy, the Jewish Contrarian will wrack his or her brain to oppose a democratic state that gives equal rights to Jews — the Contrarian Jew demands the rights of a democracy, but only for Muslims: Jews should sacrifice themselves for Muslims. Should the majority oppose slavery, the Jewish Contrarian will argue in its favor and predictably, voice no protest against the slavery that fuels the productive engines of adjacent Islamic states. If the majority of Israelis support the state of Israel as a Jewish State, the Jewish Contrarian will do his or her utmost to open the floodgates to invading Islamics with the aim that "Israel should be a state for all people" which raises the entirely false inference that it isn't so now. (It already is — simply because it is an all-inclusive Jewish State.) Should the majority of Israelis seek to enforce their boundaries, the Contriarian will be the first to throw a wrench into the mandates of international law enacted during the Twenties to protect the boundaries set for Israel during the last century. And so it should come as no surprise that the Contriarian Jew will gather stones to be hurled by Islamics at innocent Israeli women and children. Similarly, the Contrarian Jewish Israeli will smugly undermine the legal rights of all other Israeli Jews and reward the foreign invaders occupying the Jewish Homeland, and so forth and so on. It should come as no surprise then, that a mind schooled in Jewish knee-jerk contrarianism would align itself with an opposite view when it comes to the idea of freedom and security for all Jews in the Jewish Homeland. (A Jewish Homeland that has been vastly diminished by the ultra vires acts of the British during their brief period of mandate over the Jewish Homeland.) We therefore do not wonder that there are Jews to be found in Israel who will oppose their own nation for the simple reason that other Jews, Christians, Hindus, and Buddhists support the nation of Israel. The latter do not question Israel's sovereign rights. They do not question its existence — only Jewish Contrarianists do. Some would call them guilty of treason. Or Traitors. Many do. Our opinion comports with such views. We think that the notion that a Jew can with impunity destroy the very nation that protects them is a notion that destroys not only Israel, but also and equally the democratic values that stem from Magna Carta, the French Revolution, the US Constitution and the US Bill of Rights. In short, we have sadly reached a conclusion that the Jewish Contrarian clings to his or her Jewishness only for the sake of having an excuse to hate and to destroy the nation of Israel instead of building Israel into a nation that stands strong against Sharia, fascism, and Islamic imperialism. Viva to the Patriots of Israel from the Secular Christians for Zion. (SC4Z) Have a good day. Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net |
|
JEWS HAVE LEGAL TITLE TO JUDEA AND SAMARIA since 4/24/1920.
WHY DON'T WE ACCEPT AND ENJOY IT?
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, July 23, 2010. |
|
What is troubling is that Jews, and particularly successive governments for the Jewish Nation/State of Israel, accept absurd international laws and rules that impinge upon the sovereignty of Israel and the Jewish people in their ancient homeland from over 3,822 years. More troubling is that most Jews and most governments of Israel do not adequately protest accepting the diktats of hostile nations, hostile religions, hostile institutions like the United Nations and its various adjunctive bodies. Most troubling is that Israel and the many leaders of the Jewish people world-wide accept diktats from leaders of formerly friendly nations which amount to voluntary national suicide. Why doesn't Israel, her sovereign government and world Jewry follow the International Laws described below? Why have Israel and world Jewry denigrated these International Laws that inure to Israel's benefit? |
|
Original Message From: Fishbein Associates, Inc. To: Fishbein Associates, Inc. Subject: JEWS HAVE LEGAL TITLE TO JUDEA AND SAMARIA
Finally we see clearly exposed the right of Israel UNDER
INTERNATIONAL LAW to the Land of the Mandate of Palestine. What is
incomprehensible to me is the inability of the various governments of
Israel to state their case and the rights of Israel to the world. They
should shout it and hammer it continuously at the UN and to all the
hostile governments of the world and of Eurabia in particular.
"The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International
Law" by William Mehlman writes on "The Legal Foundation and Borders of
Israel" by constitutional scholar and lawyer Howard Grief. Read
Mehlman's article here.
|
|
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 23, 2010. |
|
TWO NEW CONVERTS TO ISLAM IN TERRORISM CASES A convert to Islam, Zachary A. Chesser of Fairfax County Virginia, exchanged e-mails with terrorist recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki, himself a convert and now in hiding. Then he posted to the Internet a statement that the producers of "South Park" may be assassinated for portraying Mohammed in a bear suit. Mr. Chesser was arrested the second time he tried to fly to Somalia. That time, He had his infant son with him. The government says he told his wife he was taking the son in order to "provide cover," presumably to seem less suspicious. However, he was on the no-fly list. Another American convert to Islam, who admits being radicalized by Mr. al-Awlaki, is Paul G. Rockwood of King Salmon, Alaska. Mr. Rockwood pleaded guilty to making false statements during an investigation of terrorism. He was sentenced to eight years. Rockwood had prepared a list of 15 people whom he believed should be slain for "desecrating Islam." "Homegrown terrorists" are a growing menace (Scott Shane, NY Times, 7/22, A15). As earlier articles have shown, violent felons were converted to a violent version of Islam, because the prison imams were radical. Chesser and Rockwood were converted outside of prison. Can psychologists fathom why such people new in their faith, are ready to murder non-believers? Is there some way to persuade them to wait for further seasoning, and not be presumptuous? Does a high percentage of converts select a radical ideology? If so why? Could they be persuaded that murder over alleged insult is extreme, and that they should try argument? |