HOME Featured Stories July 2011 Blog-Eds List Background Information News On the Web
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers

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

Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, July 31, 2011.

Remember... light is your crayon, and there's always another color in the box." - Tedric A. Garrison


As an Ashkenazic Jew, I have always admired the Torah scrolls used by our Sephardic brethren, simply because they are different and I encounter them less frequently. Sephardic Torahs are carried in a round case fashioned from either wood or metal and read in the upright position, as opposed to lying flat on a table in the Ashkenazic tradition. Although this makes photographing the reader more complicated, the scroll cases are often quite colorful and ornately adorned. In addition, they always have a piece of material hanging from the top to allow the oleh to mark the place where his reading begins and ends.

I photographed this Torah during a bar mitzvah reading at the Kotel. The case is crafted entirely from wood and was so large and heavy the bar mitzvah boy could barely lift it. A brightly colored tallit was clipped to the top and draped beautifully along one side. Normally, I might shy away from mixing the earth tones of the wood with the bright rainbow colors of the fabric, but here the two strong symbols of my heritage merged comfortably into visual harmony, helped along by the soft, diffuse light of early morning.

Technical Data: Nikon D300, 18-200 zoom at 105mm, f8 @ 1/125th sec., ISO 400.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Shimon Shapira, July 31, 2011.

Brig.-Gen. (ret.) Dr. Shimon Shapira is a senior research associate at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA).

The rest of this article is available at http://jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/~Decline.


Five years after the Second Lebanon War, a war whose results Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah considers a "divine victory," Hizbullah has currently reached one of its lowest points due to the endangered survival of the Assad regime in Syria, as well as the international tribunal that has demanded the extradition of four Hizbullah members suspected of murdering former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri.

Damascus functions as the primary bridge between Iran and Hizbullah in terms of all military and other assistance arriving from Tehran. This comes on top of the direct transfer of rocket and missile weaponry from the Syrian army's arms depots to Hizbullah's fighting units.

Hizbullah has adopted a clear-cut stand in support of Bashar Assad, and therefore Hizbullah flags are being burned in the streets of Syria together with Nasrallah's portrait. Without Syrian backing, Hizbullah will find it hard to continue dictating political moves in Lebanon.

Recent signs of Hizbullah's weakened position include the public revelation of an espionage network run by the CIA of people in important positions within the movement; the open sale of alcoholic beverages in Nabatiye, Hizbullah's capital in southern Lebanon; and the attempt by the Lebanese government to appoint a security chief for Beirut International Airport from within the Maronite community, contrary to Hizbullah's wishes.

In light of all this, Nasrallah is looking for a new pretext to confront Israel, focusing this time on the gas fields that Israel is developing within its maritime economic zone. Nasrallah believes his threats will distract attention from the decline in Hizbullah's status and the international accusations that it currently faces.


In light of all this, it would appear that Nasrallah is looking for a new pretext to confront Israel in order to make it clear that jihad - the movement's raison d'etre — is alive and well and that Hizbullah constitutes the spearhead of the struggle against Israel. The pretext this time is the gas fields that Israel has discovered and is developing in the framework of its maritime economic zone. Nasrallah is threatening a renewed conflagration and believes that his threats will distract attention from the decline in Hizbullah's status and the international accusations that it currently faces. Nasrallah has already argued in the past that had he anticipated the Israeli response, he would have refrained from kidnapping the Israeli soldiers in 2006, the event that triggered the Second Lebanese War. One can only hope that five years after this war, Nasrallah still remembers his grievous mistake.

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Taverna, July 31, 2011.

This was written by Elad Benari and it appeared today in Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com)
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/ 146269#.Tl-jyJmFftB

Glenn Beck explains why Judea and Samaria should not be referred to as the West Bank. "There's no such place as the West Bank."


American talk show host Glenn Beck explained to his audience on Friday why Judea and Samaria should not be referred to as the West Bank, as the Arabs and mainstream media customarily do.

Beck made his comments in response to an interview given by Huffington Post contributor Frank Schaeffer to MSNBC's Martin Bashir.

The interview dealt with the influence of religion on politics, and Schaeffer said that he believes such an influence exists, saying, "I think that the faith based politics is an immensely destructive thing. What do you think Iran, Saudi Arabia, or the settlers in the West Bank of Israel, who refuse to move and are jeopardizing world peace, are about? This is faith-based politics. We want reason-based politics."

The staunchly pro-Israel Beck, who played the clip on his show, said: "Does anybody know why they call it the West Bank? Technically, what is the West Bank? I don't think anybody in America knows.

"No Israeli calls it the West Bank because there's no such place as the West Bank," Beck added. His co-host then emphasized that the area's real name is Judea and Samaria, noting that Judea comes from the name Judah.

The term West Bank dates from the establishment of the kingdom of Jordan on the east bank of the Jordan in 1922. It refers to Judea and Samaria by their location on the west bank of the Jordan River and is an attempt by the Arab world to link them to Jordan, although they were originally slated to be part of the state of Israel. Jordan has given up all demands for Judea and Samaria, which it occupied from 1949-1967, when they were united with Israel after Jordan attacked the Jewish state in the Six Day War.

Beck then added, "By calling it the West Bank, they are trying to erase the well-known documented Jewish claims to that area. They call it the West Bank so it is a 'new place.'

"They're saying that Jews have no claim on that land and that's why they call it the West Bank," he said. "Never ever call it the West Bank. It's Judea and Samaria. Never call it the West Bank.

"They [the Arabs] are really really brilliant," added Beck. "This is really being played very well...There's no history of Palestinians [in that area]. You know what Palestine is named after? The Philistines. There were the Philistines. That's why they came up with the name Palestine later."

The Philistines were a warlike, sea people whose origins may have been Minoa, an island off Greece, and who lived on the southern coast of Israel, far from Judea and Samaria, during the time of the Bible after their attack on Egypt failed. They were the Jews' worst enemy during the time of the Judges and Kings, but were absorbed into conquering empires and disappeared as a distinct people by the 5th century B.C.E.

Glenn referred to the claims being made that Jews are "squatting in the West Bank" and said: "How can you squat in the land that you have all of that history written of that area is about you? In fact that area is named after you."

Beck visited Israel last month, where he addressed the Knesset's Aliyah and Absorption Committee, telling its members that the Biblical Esther and Ruth have guided him as he stands up for Israel.

Several weeks ago he addressed the annual Christians United for Israel conference and blurred the political and national — but not, of course, the religious — lines between Christians and Jews, whom they said are one and the same against common enemies.

"When we see Israelis not as part of us, but as us, we can move to the next level as human beings," said Beck. "Let us declare 'I am a Jew;' they cannot kill all of us."

Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Victor Sharpe, July 31, 2011.

During World War 1, Winston Churchill was widely blamed for the Gallipoli debacle; the attempt by the British to end the war by striking at Germany's ally, the Ottoman Turkish Empire.

But Churchill's decision to invade the Dardanelles, penetrate Europe's soft underbelly, and force an early end to the war was in large part born out of frustration at the exploits of two German battle cruisers, the Goeben and the Breslau.

These two ships had been sailing in the Mediterranean since 1912 and were to embark on an amazing voyage and desperate chase across the Mediterranean once war began in August, 1914.

Indeed, it can perhaps be said that the main reason the Middle East was to change forever was because of the fate of these ships and one in particular, the battle cruiser, Goeben.

On December 7, 1909, the keel of a powerful new addition to the Imperial German Navy was laid. Named after the German general, August von Goeben (1816-1880), a hero of the Franco-Prussian war of 1870, the Moltke class capital ship, Goeben, was eventually commissioned in July, 1912.

Boasting an armament of ten 11inch main guns, mounted two per turret with guns that could fire to both sides as well as forward, the Goeben was to become a thorn in the side of the French and British navies in the Mediterranean.

It also became a source of shame for Great Britain, whose fleet failed to intercept it or bring it to battle, instead allowing the Goeben and the Breslau to escape through the Dardanelles and reach Constantinople, now Istanbul.

On June 28, 1914, while the Goeben was anchored off the coast of Haifa, her Admiral, Wilhelm Souchon, along with the ship's officers were enjoying a reception given to them by the German colony.

Word came that Archduke Ferdinand had been assassinated. Admiral Souchon, sensing that war would soon follow, decided to head for the Austro-Hungarian port of Pola in the Adriatic for needed repairs. He telegraphed for the light cruiser Breslau to join him there.

It is interesting to note that on board the Breslau, a Sub-Lieutenant, Karl Doenitz, was serving; the same Doenitz who was to command the German World War 2 U-Boat fleets and who took over command of Germany in 1945 after Hitler committed suicide.

On July 31, 1914, Winston Churchill instructed the commander of the British fleet, Admiral Sir Berkeley Milne, that his first task was to protect the French transports and be ready to bring to action individual German ships, particularly the Goeben. On August 2, 1914, Churchill issued another order saying, "Goeben must be shadowed by two battle cruisers."

Some 12 hours before war was officially declared, Goeben and Breslau thus found themselves flanked by two British cruisers, Indomitable and Indefatigable, which for political reasons were constrained from taking military action.

Britain, fearing that an alliance would be formed between Germany and the Ottoman Empire, known as the "sick man of Europe" had earlier sent the battle cruisers, along with the Inflexible, into the Mediterranean to intercept the two German battle cruisers and eventually sink them. But the German ships were able to give them the slip.

Immediately after war had officially been declared on August 3, 1914, Admiral Souchon in the Goeben took matters into his own hands, even though he had earlier been ordered by Admiral Turpitz to head for Constantinople.

The powerful German ships headed west along the North African coast, bombarding the port of Philippeville in French Algeria. The Goeben tricked the French by running in under Russian flags.

Goeben then briefly dueled with the British light cruiser, Gloucester, which was unable to close because of the Goeben's greater firing range.

For a brief period, the Goeben and Breslau threatened French troopships bringing French-Algerian forces across the Mediterranean to reinforce the French armies fighting on the fast evolving Western Front.

On August 4, 1914, Berlin again ordered both ships to head for the Dardanelles. In the message received by Admiral Souchon, the German Admiralty baldly stated "... alliance with Turkey concluded August 3. Proceed at once to Constantinople."

The German ships changed course but were again pursued by the Indomitable and Indefatigable. They succeeded in out-running the two British battle cruisers but both Goeben and Breslau were eventually tracked to Messina in Sicily where they were taking on coal.

The British cruisers stood off shore waiting for the German ships to come out of port. Incredibly, the Goeben and Breslau slipped through the waiting British net and made for Constantinople. This was not the British Navy's finest hour.

On December 10, the German battle cruisers approached the straits separating European and Asian Turkey. Instead of being fired upon by Turkish shore batteries, as Admiral Souchon had feared, the German Mission advising the Turkish army had convinced the Turks to permit the Goeben and Breslau safe passage through the Dardanelles.

Everything that had happened up to then led to the eventual diplomatic decision by Germany to hand over the Goeben and Breslau to the Ottoman Empire as a gift to Turkey for allying itself with the Central Powers.

Henceforth the Goeben became the Yavuz Sultan Selim, though the German crew by agreement remained to work the ship and control the future military sorties it carried out in both the Black Sea and the Mediterranean.

Sultan Selim was known in history as Selim the Grim (1470-1520). He was the father of Suleiman the Magnificent who built the walls surrounding Jerusalem and was the greatest of all the Ottoman rulers.

The transfer of both German battle cruisers was both a defining moment and deciding factor in bringing Turkey into the war on the side of Germany and Austria (the Central Powers).

On November 4, 1914, the Russians, smarting after the German-Turkish ships had shelled Odessa and Sebastopol, declared war on the Ottoman Empire. The following day, the British and French Governments also declared war on Turkey.

During 1915, initial plans were drawn up by the Entente powers for the eventual dismemberment of the Ottoman Turkish Empire.

In May, 1916, the Sykes-Picot Agreement was discussed by Britain and France with respect to the geographical areas known as Palestine and Syria. The plan was abandoned at the time of the Paris Peace Conference in 1919.

Ultimately, the Turkish Ottoman Empire collapsed as British forces, including those drawn from the British Empire, rolled back the Turks throughout the Middle East.

In December 1917, Britain's General Allenby entered Jerusalem at the head of his army. Ottoman possessions throughout the Middle East were subsequently captured and initially set up as British Mandates.

Iraq became independent in 1932 and Trans-Jordan in 1946. Former Turkish areas that came under French control in 1920 also subsequently became independent: Syria in 1943 and Lebanon in 1944.

As a result of Britain's victories over Turkish forces in 1917 and 1918, some ten million Arabs in the Middle East were freed from 400 years of Turkish rule.

It is interesting to note that the area set aside for Arab rule in the region was 1,184,000 square miles while geographical Palestine, the only portion set aside for a Jewish National Home by Great Britain under the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, covered less than 11,000 square miles. That area was further reduced through subsequent political decisions by the British Colonial Office.

For instance the Golan Heights, in Anglo-French wrangling, was torn away by Britain from Palestine in 1923 and ceded to France, which made it a part of Syria. And in 1921, Britain arbitrarily gave away all the territory east of the River Jordan, comprising four fifths of geographical Palestine, to the Emir Abdullah and re-named it Trans-Jordan. Jews were immediately forbidden to live within its territory. But that's another story.

The remarkable fact is that all the subsequent internecine conflicts between the artificially created Arab states in the Middle East, as well as the continuing Arab war of aggression against the existence of a Jewish state in the region, can be traced back to the voyage of the German battle cruiser, Goeben.

Its transfer to Turkey, along with the Breslau, led that nation into war and to a crushing defeat, changing the region's map and transforming the Middle East into what it is today.

The Goeben was thus fated to become the ship that changed the Middle East.

Victor Sharpe is a freelance writer and author of Volumes One & Two of Politicide: The attempted murder of the Jewish state. This article was published in Renew America and is archived at
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/ sharpe/110731

To Go To Top

Posted by Gail Winston, July 31, 2011.

Why should the people of Israel apply Israeli Sovereignty over Judea & Samaria Now?

1. It's the right thing to do and always has been.

2. It will disable the propaganda ploy intended by the Arab Palestinians, the Arab League and those Leftists in Europe, Asia, the US and the UN who support them. They proclaim they will declare a new State of Palestine, [a Second State of Palestine] in Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights, the Jordan Valley and all of Jerusalem that was illegally occupied and desecrated by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan for 19 years from 1948 to 1967. And most of the world rolls over with them.

3. It will distract, disrupt, disturb the headlines of Barack Hussein Obama's opening moves in his election campaign for the 2012 election for President of the United States. He will fume, thunder and excoriate the Jews of Israel, America and the world — which will turn the voting Jews in America against him. IF the Jews of Florida cut their voting support for Obama in half, he may lose Florida and maybe the election. Then he cannot further harm the human, civil and religious rights of the Jewish people AND the American economy may be able to safely recover from the disaster he has spawned on the American people — which negatively affects people and countries all over the world.

4. The people of Israel can do this much better and more safely than if the Israeli government has to do it. This is a much bigger campaign than camping out in hot tents to protest the high cost and unavailability of housing — and the high cost of cottage cheese. These points have been adequately made and the protestors now know how to effectively be heard. To defend the Jewish Nation/State of Israel for the Jewish people and all of Israel's residents, this should be done now — not later after the General Assembly gives its approval to the Pals.

5. IF the people of Israel rise to this sacred challenge, I believe the world as a whole will be better off and safer. Israel and America can devastate Iran's nuclear weapons' and missile capability because they will then have the will to do so. They certainly have the means.

6. Judea and Samaria are the heart of the Jewish peoples' Nation/State of Israel and Jerusalem is her soul. Let's together work to defend her!

Contact Gail Winston at winston@winstonglobal.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, July 31, 2011.

This was posted by Eeyore and it is from the Iconoclast. It is archived in

Here is an article from the Iconoclast about a brutally antisemitic, Islamic piece of work who wanted to set several bombs and shoot all survivors of them at Fort Hood. Again. The camp where this already happened by another Muslim for Islamic reasons. There is a stunning silence in the standard media sources though, on the motives for his attempted crimes and the inspirations for it. Quite unlike the attention certain classical liberals are getting from the press over the monster of Oslo's manifesto was poured over and selectively reproduced to make all conservatives look as if they had pulled the strings of the Anders Breivik marionette. All the while of course, ignoring Anders praise of Obama and other left wing icons.


PFC Nasar Jason Abo

AWOL 21 year old Pvt. Nasar Jason Abdo was arrested for his purchase of weapons and bomb making materials for an attempted Jihad attack at Fort Hood in Killeen, Texas. More has been revealed about Abdo's aggressive proselytizing of his training unit mates and Islamic anti-Semitism directed at af Jewish soldier during training. Abdo should have been discharged by the US Army instead of being granted Conscientious Objector status for not willing to be deployed to fight fellow Muslims in Afghanistan. Clearly, someone screwed up at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, the home of the 101St Airborne-the screaming eagles. This is the latest disaster of the Army's diversity first program. One wonders how many of the 12,000 serving Muslims harbor similar Jihadi views as Abdo. There have been several other Muslim soldier perpetrating murderous attacks on fellow soldiers in Kuwait and, most spectacularly Maj. Nidal Hasan, about to be tried for his Jihadi massacre at Fort Hood in November, 2009. Was Pvt. Abdo engaging in a sympathetic me too attack for his fellow Muslim in the ummah at his former home town of Killeen, Texas?

More is coming out about this product of an American Christian mother and a Jordanian father. His father Jamal was deported to Jordan after serving a term in a Texas prison for soliciting sex with an undercover agent in a sex-scam posing as a minor. Note this from a MyPet Jawa post:

Jamal Abdo was arrested in 2004, accused of soliciting sex from a Garland detective posing online as Molly, a 15-year-old girl, according to records[...]

Jamal Abdo unsuccessfully appealed his conviction. He was released from a Texas prison in December 2009 and turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials. He was deported to Jordan in February 2010. Jamal, a Muslim, lived in Killeen for 25 years, he was divorced from Abdo's Christian mother.

Speaking from Jordan Jamal said the charges against his son were all lies from A to Z He also said the charges were trumped up because Abdo refused to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan. "My son loved people no matter who they are, whether Jews or Christians," Jamal Abdo said. "Naser is not the kind of a person who harbors evil for the other people, he cannot kill anyone and he could not have done any bad thing." POS just like his son.

This morning, Fox n Friends interviewed a Sgt Michael Payton who served in Abdo's training company at Fort Benning, Georgia-the Army Infantry School. He said that Abdo was aggressively trying to proselytize his fellow soldiers. Moreover, according to Payton Abdo was engaged in bigoted anti-Semitic rhetoric and harassed a fellow Jewish member of his training unit. Sgt. Payton used the careworn term taqiyya or deception to describe what Pvt. Abdo was engaged in. Sgt. Payton couldn't understand why Abdo joined the military during as he swore an oath to protect and defend this country and it's Constitution. Abdo identified himself as a Palestinian Muslim first rather than a US citizen.

Having also been through the Army Infantry School at Fort Benning, Georgia as an officer back in the early 1960's, I'm familiar with the training regimen and the objective of achieving unit combat readiness and esprit de corps in this combat arm — what the military refers to as the Queen of Battle. Sgt. Payton in the Fox n' Friends interview also referred to the Infantry as the tip of the spear in battle.

Watch this Fox n Friends interview with Sgt. Payton, here.

Gabrielle Goldwater is a Member of "Funding for Peace Coalition" [FPC] (http://eufunding.org.uk)
http://eufunding.org.uk/FPC2004Report.pdf She lives in Switzerland. Contact her at gabriellegoldwater@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Goldwater, Gabrielle, July 31, 2011.

What you might not know about Norway...

Hold onto your seats for this--and I'm not defending the indefensible--but stuff you still ought to know...

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/40417/ karma-norway-camp-breivik-shot-up- celebrated-hamas-jew-hatred/

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/40472/ karma-2-norway-utoya-camp-was-also-fatah- plo-terrorist-camp/#more-40472


This below was written by Jonathan S. Tobin, executive director of Commentary Magazine. It appeared July 25, 2011 in Commentary and is archived at
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/ 7/25/ayalon-video-drives-palestinians-nuts/

Israel-Arab Conflict: The Truth About the West Bank
Ayalon video is on:


For far too long, Israeli diplomats have spent much of their time trying to avoid the basic arguments about the Middle East conflict. Rather than take every possible opportunity to hammer home the facts about why Israel is in the West Bank and the right of Jews to live there, the country's foreign ministry has instead often concentrated its energies on smoothing over differences. It has also sought to avoid the arguments entirely with well-intentioned but largely pointless efforts to "brand" Israel in such a way as to make people think about pretty girls, beaches and scientific innovations.

But Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon has ignored this convention and created a clever and informative six-minute YouTube video answering the question of "The Truth About the West Bank." This is driving the Palestinian Authority up the wall.

PA negotiator Saeb Erekat issued a statement last week claiming that by asserting Israel's historical rights to the West Bank and debunking the conventional wisdom that claims the territory is "illegally occupied," Israel is pursuing a "pro-conflict agenda." Erekat went on to assert Ayalon's video is filled with false information showing Israel is "denying the Palestinian people their inalienable right to self-determination."

But all Ayalon does is tell the basic truth about the history of the last century. Israel did not capture the West Bank in 1967 from the Palestinians but from Jordan in a war of self-defense. Jordan had illegally occupied the area as well as half of Jerusalem in the course of its participation in a war to destroy the newborn state of Israel in 1948. Ayalon also says something that is indisputably true but almost never mentioned in the mainstream media: Jews were guaranteed the right of settlement in the West Bank by the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine.

To assert the Jewish state's rights is not the same thing as saying Israel should never retreat from an inch of the West Bank. The borders between Israel and a future Palestinian state can only be determined by negotiations. But for too long, Israel and even most of its defenders in the United States have been so intent on trying to appear reasonable, they have appeared to concede the Palestinians' false charge the land was stolen from them. That's the problem for those who worry about the nation's image and media coverage. If the West Bank is stolen property then it should merely be returned to its owners and not be a subject for talks. By rightly putting forth Israel's claims, Ayalon is buttressing his country's negotiating position, not undermining it.

So long as the Palestinians talk of rights and the Israelis speak of security, the Palestinians will win the argument every time. Thus, it's no surprise Erekat and the Palestinians are so exorcised by Ayalon's video. If it becomes, as it should, the model for a new Israeli diplomatic offensive, the deputy foreign minister's mantra that the terms "illegal occupation" and "67 borders" are "simply not politically correct" will become an effective talking point for the country's defenders.

Gabrielle Goldwater is a Member of "Funding for Peace Coalition" [FPC] (http://eufunding.org.uk)
http://eufunding.org.uk/FPC2004Report.pdf She lives in Switzerland. Contact her at gabriellegoldwater@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, July 311, 2011.

Yair Lapid, who has formed a party to run in the next Knesset election, bares the truth of the protest agenda: a secular State of Israel

Lapid, whose later father Tommy Lapid headed the anti-religious Shinui party, claimed in an op-ed in the Yediot Aharanot newspaper Sunday that he represents Israel's "largest minority."

He claims his "majority," meaning a plurality, "can now form alliances with other minorities. With the hareidim who happen to want to work, with the religious who don't think that Judaism is all about a hill in Samaria, and with the Arabs who want to perform national service.

"Israel's secular majority finally fighting back, starting to behave like a minority group."

His definition of "secular" apparently includes anyone who does not define himself as "religious" but includes what actually may be Israel's real largest minority — Jews who define themselves as traditional, meaning they keep many Jewish laws and customs but are not strictly observant or secular.

However, Lapid argued that his minority of 42 percent is the largest majority in Israel. It "does not know how to join forces for the sake of its own interests," according to Lapid. "The majority cannot afford to say 'to hell with everything'; the majority does not hire lobbyists, does not set up NGOs that would work for its interests, and does not know how to press Knesset members from its sector, because it's not a sector."

Without noting left-wing activist groups such as the New Israel Fund, Yesh Din and Peace Now, Lapid moved on to attack nationalists, alleging that "the majority also cannot build an illegal home, on illegal land, and then fight with the police officers who come to evict it, because the majority has a nephew in the police and loves its nephew....

"The majority's children are already in high school and one even finished his military service, yet his sister-in-law has two children in kindergarten and pays almost $1,000 per month. The majority looks at the minorities and knows that there's no chance they are paying similar sums, because they wouldn't be able to afford it. The majority isn't jealous, but wonders who arranged this for them? Who arranged life so that their sister-in-law doesn't pay the same as the majority's sister-in-law?"

In fact, the national-religious community's sons, proportionately represent the largest sector in the IDF, and the strictly secular community, as noted in statistics from secular high schools in metropolitan Tel Aviv and in secular kibbutzim, have a high rate of draft-dodging.

Lapid also charged that his "majority...is the only one that paid the full price" and that "all the others got some discount arranged.... They decided that G-d has to arrange a home on a hill for them for ideological reasons, with an ideological backyard." He was referring to Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria, where the government's official building freeze two years ago largely remains in effect unofficially.

Lapid, like his father, wants a State of Israel where Judaism is strictly a personal issue, a situation that is considered "secular coercion" by a large number of Israelis, both religious and traditional.

Meanwhile, Israel's mainstream media continued on Sunday to promote the protest movement. Although even left-wing outlets such as Haaretz, reported that 150,000 people protested nationwide — without noting that nearly twice that number protests six years ago against the expulsions of Jews from Gush Katif — the Jerusalem Post went one step further and headlined that "hundreds of thousands" people demonstrated.

The media also played down or ignored the appearance of uniformed IDF reservists at the protest against the cost of housing, education, food and just about everything else, blaming the Netanyahu government for the country's age-old ails.

Previous political appearances by uniformed soldiers against expulsions of Jews and against the demolitions of Jewish homes have been met by harsh punishment, including eviction from combat units.

Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu is a writer for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today.

To Go To Top

Posted by Hadassah Levy, July 31, 2011.

This was written by Alex Joffe, a research scholar with the Institute for Jewish and Community Research.

This appeared July 28, 2011 in Jewish Ideas Daily and is archived at
http://www.jewishideasdaily.com/content/ module/2011/7/28/main-feature/1/no-room-in-zion


Tent camps are appearing across Israel in protest over the high cost of housing. The high cost of everything in Israel (recall the cottage cheese boycott earlier this year) has led to widespread economic and social dissatisfaction, with otherwise serious commentators making overheated analogies to Tahrir Square and the Arab Spring. Something must be done, but what? Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has promised to address the crisis, this week announcing initiatives that may go some way toward mollifying protesters in need of housing. But protestors themselves seem unable to point to long-term solutions, and political rivals on all sides are sharpening their knives.

To say that the housing situation in Israel is distorted is to understate matters, as a brief look at the history of the country's settlement patterns illustrates. Very little of this history is "natural." Zionism, in its socialist and neo-liberal manifestations, has shaped the landscape as much as wars. Though Tel Aviv is the center of protests, the city itself is relatively new, having been founded only in 1909. Bat Yam, on Tel Aviv's southern border, was founded in 1926, while Herzliya to the north was created in 1924. Nearby Petah Tivkah, Rishon L'Zion, and Ramat Gan (cities within the Ayalon Highway belt, now each with populations over 150,000) were founded in 1878, 1882, and 1921 as agricultural settlements. Overall, the Gush Dan region of Israel's central coast and foothills, an area of less than 600 square miles, is home to over 3.2 million Israelis, some 42 percent of the population.

Meanwhile, Israel's development towns represent another path toward urban development. In the early 1950's, Jews flowed into Israel from Arab countries. The coast was already perceived as overcrowded, and strategic and economic decisions were made to spread these (non-Ashkenazi) Jews into the more thinly populated Galilee and the Negev. Sderot, Dimona, and Netivot in the Negev were created in 1951, 1953, and 1956. Their total population today is around 80,000. Kiryat Shmona (population 23,000) was created in 1949, while the ancient site of Beth Shean gained a Jewish majority only after 1948.

The Zionist imperative to settle the land has played out in different ways, but with predictable results. Housing pressures, commensurate with population growth, have increased. As the kibbutz movement collapsed during the 1980's, privatization schemes allowed many to sell their lands to pay off debts. This was especially profitable to those kibbutzim remaining in the Gush Dan region, while others have essentially been converted into garden suburbs. As for the massive immigration from the former Soviet Union, it also reversed a prior movement away from Tel Aviv to older cities such as Ashdod and newer ones like Modi'in.

Then there were strategic imperatives. Construction of Jewish communities in the West Bank under Labor and Likud governments entailed huge investments in infrastructure and defense. Another such strategic imperative saw additional waves of construction in and around Jerusalem to incorporate the north, west, and east into the Jewish city. The original 1970's belt neighborhoods like Ramot, Gilo, and Pisgat Ze'ev expanded and were joined by many others, such as Ramat Shlomo and Har Homa, several of which now have ultra-Orthodox majorities. But Jerusalem is a case in itself. In the center of the city, older neighborhoods like Mamilla have been completely remade with luxury residences, most owned by non-Israelis and occupied only on Jewish holidays. Belt highways to the north and south have been built and an expensive light rail system has been carved through the center of the city. But secular Jews continue to leave Jerusalem, Arabs continue to apply for residence permits, and the labor participation rate among remaining Jewish males is under 45 percent — over 20 percent lower than in Tel Aviv.

Obviously, economics has played a big part in many of these changes. The economic liberalization of the 1990's and early 2000's saw the decline of the last remnants of socialism and the rise of entrepreneurialism and high tech industries. New wealth creation spurred new demands for housing, new American-like patterns of consumption, and American-style social inequality. The average price for a four-room apartment in Tel Aviv, up 30 percent in 2010, increased another 12 percent in the first quarter of 2011 and now stands at over 2.25 million shekels (approximately $662,000). But overall Israeli wages have remained stagnant, along with investment in education and social services. Subsidies for ultra-Orthodox have increased, while prices have skyrocketed.

How is the government to respond in the face of market fluctuations, while also dealing with the multiple burdens of history, demographics, and geo-politics? Netanyahu has proposed reforming planning and building commissions and permitting rapid construction of another 10,000 housing units, half of which would be rental units. Proposals have also emerged to limit profits on investments in second (or additional) homes, as well as for rent controls. A proposed "affordable housing plan" for Tel Aviv would allocate new residence units to young families. Two exclusively ultra-Orthodox cities are also planned for the northern Negev and the outskirts of Haifa, each with a population of over 50,000. (When, or if, Jewish residents of the West Bank are resettled from across the Green Line, it will be necessary to find housing for up to 300,000.)

But, as with so many of Israel's crises, so long in the making, no solutions to the housing problem can emerge in the short term. Even with an admirable fiscal situation and what appears to be a historically low unemployment rate, any solution will encounter obstacles and entail trade-offs. Additional housing can come either at the expense of ever-shrinking green space and agriculture, or through the redevelopment of still higher-density housing, such as high-rises. But all this is the price of success, with the attendant rewards and costs of the revolutionary transformation of Israel into a global high-tech superpower. Whether neo-liberal or socialist solutions are adopted, the only things that are certain are that, for now, social discontent will remain high, and traffic will increase.

Hadassah Levy is the Website manager at http://jewishideasdaily.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Goldblatt, July 30, 2011.

ZOA Release:
http://www.zoa.org/sitedocuments/ pressrelease_view.asp?pressreleaseID=2084


The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has renewed its long-standing call for an end to U.S. taxpayer-funded aid to Mahmoud Abbas' Palestinian Authority (PA) following detailed revelations U.S. funds are reaching the hands of blood-soaked Jew-killing terrorists. A report, utilizing among other sources Palestinian statutes and official PA media reports, presented to the U.S. Congress by Palestinian Media Watch, demonstrates that Abbas' PA pays monthly salaries to 5,500 jailed Palestinians in Israeli prisons, including terrorists and that it funds these salaries from its general budget, a good deal of which is provided by U.S. financial aid.

This runs contrary to U.S. law, which prohibits funding of any person who "... engages in, or has engaged in, terrorist activity." U.S. law also prohibits funding "for the purpose of recognizing or otherwise honoring individuals who commit, or have committed acts of terrorism." Also, the 2010 legislation that authorized aid to the PA said that the State Department must "take all appropriate steps to ensure that such assistance is not provided to or through any individual, private or government entity, or educational institution that the Secretary knows or has reason to believe advocates, plans, sponsors, engages in, or has engaged in, terrorist activity."

The PA, as the ZOA has repeatedly documented, glorifies and honors individual terrorists, naming schools, streets and sports teams after them, as well as supporting an educational system which glorifies terrorism, including suicide terrorism.

An April 2011 PA law, PA Government Resolution of 2010, numbers 21 and 23, places all Palestinians and Israeli Arabs imprisoned in Israel for terror crimes on the PA payroll for the purposes of receiving a monthly salary from the PA. Already in 2004, the PA defined by law that "prisoners" refers to "Anyone imprisoned in the occupation's [Israel's] prisons as a result of his participation in the struggle against the occupation." Thus, for example, Palestinians jailed for theft do not receive a salary, but every terrorist in prison, including those whose acts led to the deaths of Israeli civilians, are on the PA payroll. The salary goes directly to the terrorist or the terrorist's family, and prisoners receive their salaries from the day of arrest. other findings included the following:

  • Terrorists receiving salaries include not only members of Fatah, but also Hamas.

  • In May 2011, the PA paid $5,207,000 in salaries to Palestinian prisoners.

  • The new PA law stipulates that payment of salaries "will be implemented... on the basis of available sources of funding" — indicating that foreign, including U.S., funding, which provide the vast bulk of the PA budget, serve as major sources for these salaries.

  • The US contributed $225 million in 2010 to the general PA budget from which the salaries are paid.

  • Prisoners' average salary is higher than that of either PA civil servants or military personnel in the PA armed forces ('PMW report presented to members of Congress on US funding of Palestinian terrorists,' Palestinian Media Watch, July 27, 2011).

ZOA National Chairman of the Board Dr. Michael Goldblatt said, "Recognition is slowly increasing that, on both moral and strategic grounds, the U.S. should cease funding Abbas and his anti-peace, terrorist-sponsoring PA. This became already clear earlier this month when the U.S. Congress passed an almost unanimous bipartisan resolution urging President Barack Obama to cease U.S. financial aid, following the Fatah/PA unity government agreement with the 'kill every Jew' Hamas terrorist movement.

"Almost every Republican and Democrat in Congress opposes the continuation of U.S. taxpayer-funded aid to the PA because of its unity government agreement with Hamas, its continuing refusal to negotiate with Israel and its violation of the Oslo accords by seeking a unilateral declaration of statehood at the United Nations. Indeed, it would be a national disgrace if aid to the PA — something that in any event should not have been occurring because of the PA's actions — continues now that Fatah and Hamas have signed a unity government agreement.

"It was always obvious that U.S. aid to the PA enables it to fund pro-terror activities and incitement. PA media, mosques, schools and youth camps that inculcate hatred are able to function because of this continuing inflow of funds. Now, it is even clearer that the PA funds terrorists as a matter of policy, using aid from foreign sources, including the U.S. We renew our call for the immediate termination of aid to the PA."

To Go To Top

Posted by Truth Provider, July 30, 2011.

Dear friends,

Most of my veteran readers, have known for a long time that I see a strong correlation between the anti-Israel pro-"Palestinian" lobby and the man-made "global Warming" oops "Climate Change" camp.

Both camps base their ideologies on false scientific facts, faked data
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news environment/article6926325.ece), political agenda, lies and propaganda.

The silver lining is nevertheless present and reveals itself in quite prominently and in a fast pace.

Truth tends to be extremely buoyant. It does not take very long to surface and slap the faces of all phoneys.

Naturally, you will never find the following news on NPR, but luckily there are those of us who bring the truth to your attention.

Lately, two bits of news emerged: (1) The Polar Bears are not drowning as Al Gorilla claimed in his fraudulent movie for which Oslo gave him a Nobel Peace Prize (Arafat) and the British courts barred its showing in England's schools.

And (2) according to latest NASA measurements (is this why NASA was eliminated by Obama?), the Hot House effect is nothing but hot air from the mouths of propagandists and proponents of socialist agenda.

Those who saw the Al Gorilla film would remember that the Polar Bears segment shows a cartoon of a bear drowning, not actual photos.

Below you will find both articles.

Your Truth Provider,


1. Global Warming Industry Rocked by Polar Bear Fraud
http://nation.foxnews.com/global-warming/ 2011/07/29/global-warming-industry-rocked- polar-bear-fraud

Arctic Scientist Under Investigation

Just five years ago, Charles Monnett was one of the scientists whose observation that several polar bears had drowned in the Arctic Ocean helped galvanize the global warming movement.

Now, the wildlife biologist is on administrative leave and facing accusations of scientific misconduct.

The federal agency where he works told him he was on leave pending the results of an investigation into "integrity issues." A watchdog group believes it has to do with the 2006 journal article about the bear, but a source familiar with the investigation said late Thursday that placing Monnett on leave had nothing to with scientific integrity or the article. Read more at Yahoo! News.

Junk Science Unravels

The scientist who claimed that global warming threatens polar bears is under investigation. There's a hole in Earth's greenhouse. A cooler era lies ahead. That hiss is the hot air coming out of alarmists' balloon.

The global warming fraud is coming apart faster than the alarmists can repackage and rebrand their fairy tale. Their elaborately constructed yarn can't hold together much longer. There are just too many loose ends.

2.  New NASA data blow gaping hole in global warming alarmism
James Taylor
Jul. 27 2011
Endpoint Analysis
http://blogs.forbes.com/jamestaylor/ 2011/07/27/new-nasa-data-blow-gaping- hold-in-global-warming-alarmism/

NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.

Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and US Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA's Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models.

"The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show," Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. "There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans."

In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted.

The new findings are extremely important and should dramatically alter the global warming debate.

Scientists on all sides of the global warming debate are in general agreement about how much heat is being directly trapped by human emissions of carbon dioxide (the answer is "not much"). However, the single most important issue in the global warming debate is whether carbon dioxide emissions will indirectly trap far more heat by causing large increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds. Alarmist computer models assume human carbon dioxide emissions indirectly cause substantial increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds (each of which are very effective at trapping heat), but real-world data have long shown that carbon dioxide emissions are not causing as much atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds as the alarmist computer models have predicted.

The new NASA Terra satellite data are consistent with long-term NOAA and NASA data indicating atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds are not increasing in the manner predicted by alarmist computer models. The Terra satellite data also support data collected by NASA's ERBS satellite showing far more longwave radiation (and thus, heat) escaped into space between 1985 and 1999 than alarmist computer models had predicted. Together, the NASA ERBS and Terra satellite data show that for 25 years and counting, carbon dioxide emissions have directly and indirectly trapped far less heat than alarmist computer models have predicted.

In short, the central premise of alarmist global warming theory is that carbon dioxide emissions should be directly and indirectly trapping a certain amount of heat in the earth's atmosphere and preventing it from escaping into space. Real-world measurements, however, show far less heat is being trapped in the earth's atmosphere than the alarmist computer models predict, and far more heat is escaping into space than the alarmist computer models predict.

When objective NASA satellite data, reported in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, show a "huge discrepancy" between alarmist climate models and real-world facts, climate scientists, the media and our elected officials would be wise to take notice. Whether or not they do so will tell us a great deal about how honest the purveyors of global warming alarmism truly are.

James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at The Heartland Institute and managing editor of Environment & Climate News.

Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il. Visit his website at www.truthprovider.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, July 30, 2011.

The inmates are running the asylum in once-Great Britain

Probe into secretive Sharia law courts scrapped as Muslim leaders close ranks

Ministers have abandoned an inquiry into the rise of secretive Sharia councils that deal in Islamic justice — because the Muslim courts refused to help.

The failure of the Ministry of Justice probe has generated new fears among politicians and pressure groups about the increasing influence of Sharia courts.

They are worried the courts' decisions may run against the law of the land, particularly in divorce settlements for women.

The scrapping of the inquiry comes in a week when Islamic extremists have launched a campaign to declare 'Sharia-controlled zones' across Britain.

Hate preacher Anjem Choudary has claimed responsibility for the scheme, which has so far seen posters put on lampposts in several London boroughs declaring that within the 'zones' there should be 'no gambling', 'no music or concerts', 'no porn or prostitution', 'no drugs or smoking' and 'no alcohol'.

The Daily Mail has previously published photographs of Choudary in his student days breaking all but one of the zone laws — holding a cannabis joint, downing a pint of cider, playing cards and leering at porn.

The number of Sharia courts here is unknown, although an estimate of 85 made by the Civitas think-tank in 2009 is widely accepted.

The failure of the Government's investigation was disclosed to MPs by Justice Minister Jonathan Djanogly.

He told Tory backbencher Kris Hopkins that before last year's general election his department acted to 'commission an exploratory study of Sharia councils in England with respect to family law'.

Mr Djanogly said: 'This identified a number of challenges to undertaking robust research in this area. The study was therefore limited and adds little to the evidence base.

Gabrielle Goldwater is a Member of "Funding for Peace Coalition" [FPC] (http://eufunding.org.uk)
http://eufunding.org.uk/FPC2004Report.pdf She lives in Switzerland. Contact her at gabriellegoldwater@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Truth Provider, July 30, 2011.

Dear friends,

Next time NPR is engaged in fund raising, call in and tell them you will not support NPR until its anti-Israel propaganda stops!

The morons in NPR think that the Middle East conflict is between Jews and Arabs. So they invite a Jew (in most cases a pro-Arab Jew) and an Arab to appear on their programs and believe they present two side of the issue.

The conflict, my friends, has never been between Jews and Arabs. It is between Israel, the national home of the of the Jewish nation, a member of the UN, on one side, and on the other Israel's mortal enemies who refuse to recognize Israel and employ all means to destroy her.

Therefore, a balanced media presentation is not between a Jew and an Arab, but between a national Israeli, for instance a member of a Jewish community in Judea & Samaria and an Arab. This combination is never to be found on NPR.

NPR always represents two Thomas Friedmans, one Jewish and on Arab.

Below is one of a most egregious such example of recent times.

The last line in this article is the most important, but do not jump there. Please read the entire article.

Another important article by Martin Sherman on a similar subject, dealing with anti-democratic forces in Israel, is posted on www.truthprovider.com

Your Truth Provider,

This article is archived at
http://fresnozionism.org/2011/07/ npr-presents-416-of-anti-israel-propaganda/


NPR presents 4:16 of anti-Israel propaganda

Four minutes and 16 seconds on NPR's premier daily news program, "All Things Considered," is a major story. The longest one on Thursday, July 28's program, about the difficulties facing the spouses of US military personnel, clocked in at 4:59.

Four minutes and 16 seconds were provided as a platform for Israel-bashing by one left-wing Israeli retired general, one Arab representing Fatah, the Arab terrorist organization that has killed more Israelis than any other — let's call it what it is — and Daniel Levy, the co-founder of J Street who famously said: "Maybe, if this collective Jewish presence can only survive by the sword, then Israel really ain't a good idea."

Did I mention that these gentlemen are in the US on a tour sponsored by the same phony 'pro-Israel' lobby, J Street? NPR did, but its piece didn't talk about J Street's funding from anti-Israel sources, or its history of lobbying against sanctions on Iran, for the Goldstone report, and for the condemnation of Israel in the UN Security Council.

As expected, the speakers blamed Israel for the lack of negotiations with the Palestinian Authority, and predicted disaster if Israel did not preemptively surrender to Arab demands. I won't repeat most of it — you can read it at NPR's site. But the most outrageous statement of all was made by Levy:

The U.S. hasn't helped matters, says Daniel Levy of the New American Foundation. He says that the Obama administration tried, but failed, to get its partners — the U.N., European Union and Russia — to sign onto a statement encouraging the Palestinians to drop the U.N. bid. The text, Levy says, looked like it was drafted in Jerusalem.

"That's where we got stuck. I think that isn't helping get past this U.N. bump. It's probably going to make a U.N. vote more likely and ... this kind of approach, it's really beginning to marginalize and almost make irrelevant U.S. diplomacy on such an important issue," he says.

So what extremist demand from Jerusalem did the US ask for that made it impossible to get the Quartet's agreement? Let me quote a news report:

One of the reasons the Quartet was unable to issue a statement was because [Russian Foreign Minister Sergei] Lavrov reportedly objected to a formula whereby the Quartet would have endorsed renewing Israeli-Palestinian negotiations based on a return to the 1967 lines, with agreed upon swaps, and Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.

Lavrov — reflecting Russia's desire to play to the Arab League — wasn't enamored of the Jewish state part of the equation. And it wasn't only Lavrov.

According to Israeli officials, the EU's Ashton came to the meeting hoping to get the Quartet to call for a renewal of talks based on US President Barack Obama's parameters of the 1967 lines, with mutually agreed swaps, but without other language Obama used during his two Middle East speeches in May: language much more amenable to Israel that affirmed the country as a Jewish state and called for ironclad security arrangements before any future Israeli withdrawal.

In other words, the Russians, who represented Arab interests in the negotiations, wanted an agreement calling for Israel to withdraw to (more or less) pre-1967 lines without getting anything in return — not even recognition of what will be left of Israel as a Jewish state!

The recognition issue is key, and the Palestinian Arabs have consistently refused to agree to it. Even the language of the Obama plan, which represented a sharp shift in US policy toward the Arabs, was not enough for them.

The NPR piece didn't mention recognition of the Jewish state, didn't mention the Palestinian Authority's refusal to negotiate anything other than acceptance of all of its demands, and — this goes without saying — didn't discuss doubts about the ultimate intentions of the Arab side.

It was 4 minutes and 16 seconds of unrelieved propaganda, without even a nod toward balance.

Remember this when your local public radio station asks for donations. I will.

Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il. Visit his website at www.truthprovider.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, July 29, 2011.

Muslims Write in U.S. Media on U.S. Foreign and Domestic Policy



A leader of Yemen's democratic youth movement, Tawakkol Karman, accuses the U.S. and Saudi Arabia of blocking democracy from Yemen.

Although Yemen's President seems to have left, his autocratic rule has not been transferred from his coterie to "a transitional presidential council endorsed by the people," she explains. Saudi Arabia and the U.S. block it, she complains. [Regime-supporting Saudi troops remain.] She asserts that the Saudis maintain influence by paying Yemeni tribes more than does the Yemeni government. She thinks that Saudi meddling will unleash civil war in Yemen.

Ms. Karman attributes U.S. support to regime cooperation against terrorism and to U.S. fear that a new order might turn on America. She counters by claiming that the regime killed more women and children than terrorists.

Karman reassures us that her cohorts respect Western civilization and its need to attack terrorist sanctuaries. She avers that her movement learned about liberty and non-violent protest from the West.

Her solution is U.S. partnership with a democratic native order. This would establish stability and eradicate the culture of terrorism. As for Saudi Arabia, let it cease meddling in Yemeni affairs! Saudi Arabia is afraid that her revolution might spread to it. Oddly, she admits that this revolution is spread electronically, not stopping at borders (NY Times op.-ed., 6/19/11).

Her essay expresses goodwill, but is incomplete, uninformed, and unfair.

Civil war had erupted before the allegedly democratic protests. Three factions Ms. Karman whose civil strife she neglects to mention or to assess are the independistas, the Shiites, and the Islamists. The Southi rebellion did spill over into Saudi Arabia, more as an invasion.

As did her counterparts in Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt, she asks us to trust an unknown group of unfathomed strength. Thanks to the U.S. helping to topple the Mubarak regime In Egypt, the Moslem Brotherhood is preparing to take over that country. Is that the democratic advance one may expect in Yemen? Elsewhere, Islamists may take over, too. In Jordan they would. In the Palestinian Authority, they have.

We have not figured out how the U.S. should behave, but has she? When the U.S. does not intervene, it is accused of favoring dictatorship for stability. When it intervenes, it is accused of enabling Islamist take-over. In Libya, we are flying blind. We spend and shoot, without having investigated. We did not learn from subsidizing Islamists in Afghanistan to look before we leap.

One has to question her understanding of democracy, when she assumes that her people understand it but she, herself, would start with elections. We the American people (but not the State Dept.) understand that elections are the culmination of a process of democratizing. A free media and other private organizations, a functioning government, a national society, and tolerance need be in place for democracy to flourish.


Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Chicago, Aziz Huq, argues against proposals in about 20 states to prohibit courts from considering or using Islamic law or other foreign law.

[I comment after each of his contentions, in ellipses. He fails to contrast Islamic law and its associated practices with American law and to explain most objections to instituting Islamic law. This failure forfeits his case.]

[Prof. Huq takes up this issue in isolation. I would place it in the overall context of global jihad. America is being attacked by jihadists. They have declared war. Efforts to establish Islamic law, first for Muslims, and then over the rest of us, are both part of the Islamic struggle to dominate us and the goal of that struggle.]

[Americans mistakenly believe that since Islam is called a religion, it is like the traditional religions in America. Christianity, however, has a much more limited sphere in life for religion than does Islam. Islam infuses its values into a way of life, governing almost everything. Therefore, Islamic law would clash with American law on, among other things: (1) Freedom of religion — by deeming other religions inferior and imposing constraints on them and by condemning apostates from Islam to death; (2) Freedom of expression — by condemning authors and publishers critical of Islamist persecution of others; (3) Equal rights for women -- by considering their testimony inferior and by punishing them for rumored and mild sexual expression.]

Prof. Huq declares the proposed laws discriminatory and pointless. After all, he writes, civil liberties organizations are suing and lobbying against the proposals.

[Discrimination would be serious, but why the State proposals are discriminatory is poorly explained. That flaws Prof. Hug's case. Nor are the civil liberties groups named. These days, they often work for discrimination and against civil liberties. Dozens of organizations calling themselves human rights NGOs, as a cover for anti-Zionist agitation, seek to destroy the Jewish nation's rights.]

More specifically, Prof. Huq complains that the proposals "would deprive Muslims of equal access to the law. A butcher would no longer be able to enforce his contract for halal meat — contracts like deals for kosher or other faith-sanctioned foods, are regularly enforced..."

[Not true about contracts. Muslims still may prepare meat ritualistically. Since Islamic preparation does not contravene public policy, the way polygamy does, contracts for the sale of such meat would be enforceable. What the government would not be allowed to do would be to make religious decisions about it and may not require that meat be prepared religiously for anybody.]

The other example of alleged discrimination is inability of Muslims to have Islamic banking rules enforced among Muslims. [This sub-topic is beyond my competence. However, it is not an example of discrimination. It does not pick on Muslims. This example really is of Muslims complaining that they are not given special privileges.]

Why are the State bills laws pointless? Prof. Huq contends there is no problem with Islamic law, because no government in the U.S. intends to adhere to Islamic or other religious doctrine.

[This is misleading. Let us consider the Islamic program as the context within which nests the issue of Islamic law. Bear in mind that Islam considers itself entitled to dominate every society, most Muslims favor imposition of Islamic law, and Radical Muslims tend to fight for it.]

[In Europe, Canada, and the U.S., Muslims constitute a powerful and contentious group that has imposed its views on society in various ways. In accordance with Islamic views, and as a result of extreme multi-culturalism, Europe, Canada, and some universities in the U.S. have enacted "hate speech" laws or rules. These laws or rules criminalize speech and writing that criticize religions and ethnic groups. The criticism may be truthful, may defend national security against Radical Islamic subversion, and may be objective and not expressive of hatred. Nevertheless, it can be penalized. Enforcement almost always is against critics of Islam, most of whom cite facts and do not exhort to violence. Seldom are such laws enforced against Muslims, who routinely slander other groups and do exhort to violence or, what amounts to the same thing with their volatile followers in a faith built upon violent jihad, praise religious violence. This unequal enforcement of the law is discrimination!]

[Then there is libel tourism. Some countries have libel laws that permit non-citizens to sue foreigners if anything they say or write critically about some religion or ethnicity makes its way into a country having such a law. The U.S. does not assume such universal jurisdiction. Neither does U.S. libel law equate criticism to guilt. America considers truth a defense, as is only fair. London permitted a wealth Saudi to sue over works that criticized aspects of Islam, even jihad, and force them to withdraw publication.]

[Some authors and publishers could not afford the cost of litigation. The Saudi was abusing the law and waging a form of jihad. In reaction, New York State and eventually the federal government passed a law barring foreign application of European libel laws to American citizens in such circumstances.] [Contrary to the author's assertion, Muslims are indeed campaigning to impose Islamic law on Western societies gradually. The emphasis is on gradual. The more gradual, the less noticed and the more successful.]

Ridiculing the proposals, Prof. Huq contends that American courts are not likely to assist in Islamic subordination of women. [But that is just what the agitation for acceptance of Islamic law, at least regarding women, seeks. Islamic rules for divorce are based on Islamic inequality of women.] [Leftist American liberals, including our President, have expressed admiration for foreign cultures and for subordinating American sovereignty to international organizations, some of which are dominated by Islamic members. They dislike American individualism and leadership. American judges have been urged, and some are receptive, to rule on the basis of foreign law and the ethos of international organizations. Such rulings really are unconstitutional.]

[Britain condones Islamic polygamy by granting welfare payments to multiple wives. Suggestions are made to be tolerant of "honor" slayings as expressions of the immigrant culture. In Israel, Arabs demand recognition as a separate nationality entitled to regulate themselves and schools there.]

[The next examples are not related to new law but to lack of enforcement of existing law. Muslims self-segregate themselves in France, Britain, etc., and then intimidate police not to enter. In those countries, students attack teachers who adhere to the curriculum on history. The effect is to steer education in an Islamic direction. Arabs set up university Middle East Studies centers in the U.S.. These centers follow the Islamic line and wage a propaganda jihad. Leftist professors and administrations permit some campus mobs to shout down speakers and intimidate Jews.]

The author also complains that the proposed bans would stimulate public bias against Muslims "by endorsing the idea that Muslims are second-class citizens. They encourage and accelerate both the acceptability of negative views of Muslims and the expression of those negative views by the public and government... Such indignities arise amid a pattern of growing animus toward American Muslims." The author attempts to buttress those claims by assertions of reports of employment discrimination, polls, and hate crimes. Some polls were taken by him.

[If his unknown polls are to be cited as evidence, did the newspaper vet his questions, the polls' reliability, and his own reliability? Not stated. Apparently the professor wants to squelch Americans' objection to honor killings, Islamic religious discrimination, and holy war. Americans have a right to reject those Islamic values.]

[Muslims who oppose bans intended to preserve the American way of life and liberty are asking for privileges for themselves, the very problem that the author denies. He fails to explain what about the bans would make Muslims second-class citizens.]

[Part of jihad is to pretend that Muslims are the victims rather than the aggressors. The U.S. government constantly calls for tolerance of Muslims, to the point of threatening national security by failing to recognize that Radical Islam, if not normative Islam, seeks to subvert the American way of life. Actually, hate crimes against Muslims are a fraction of the total. Most Americans realize it is wrong to blame and punish individuals for having beliefs that Islamist extremists abuse to the point of sedition. But Radical Islam calls for murdering all Jews regardless of their individuality and normative Islam follows the same Koran. Hence, many hate crimes against Jews in the U.S. and in Europe are committed by Muslims. Antisemitism might have died down, but Muslims have been spreading it, especially in Europe and the Muslim world. What says the professor about that? He lacks introspection and balance.]

The most serious criticism of the proposals is that they jeopardize national security. Prof. Huq warns that the proposed laws would chill cooperation by Muslims with anti-terrorism efforts.

[It already is chilled. He has not justified the demand for special religious laws (probably unconstitutional) by a group that mostly holds back on cooperating in American national security. An old Muslim Arab tactic is to threaten that their co-religionists will harm security if they don't get what they want. That is a form of blackmail. He and all the Muslims professors ought to encourage their fellow worshipers to cooperate against terrorism, not threaten us that the faithful won't cooperate unless they become a privileged faith. How come he doesn't demand more of his fellow worshipers?]

[We are left with the problem of mosques being not a universal but a significant source of national security problems.]

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

To Go To Top

Posted by FresnoZionism, July 29, 2011.

The Israeli Supreme Court has dismissed a libel suit against Israeli Arab filmmaker Mohammad Bakri. Here is some background, from a post I wrote in 2009 when the suit was filed:


You may recall that in 2002, after a horrendous wave of bombings and shootings in which hundreds of Israelis were murdered and thousands injured, Israel launched Operation Defensive Shield in the West Bank to root out the terrorists responsible for it. One of their strongholds was the city of Jenin, in Northern Samaria. According to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in the period of 2001-2002, 57 Israelis were killed and hundreds injured by terrorists based in or directed from Jenin alone. During April 3-11, 2002, IDF soldiers fought a fierce battle in Jenin with members of Fatah's al-Aqsa brigades, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas.

After the first day, the fighting moved to the adjacent 'refugee camp', which had been heavily fortified and booby-trapped by the Palestinians. Nevertheless, in order to reduce civilian casualties as much as possible, IDF soldiers fought house-to-house instead of employing artillery and air strikes. As a result — as ultimately attested to by the UN — only 52 Palestinians were killed, almost all combatants; but 23 Israeli soldiers were lost, 13 of them in one ambush on April 9.

After the battle, Palestinian spokesmen such as Nabil Sha'ath, Hassan Abdel Rahman, Yasser Abed Rabbo and Saeb Erakat, claimed that Israel had massacred hundreds of Palestinians, burying them in mass graves or leaving their bodies to decompose under the rubble. But unlike the situation in Gaza, the Palestinians did not control access to the area, and the truth ultimately came out (although, as CAMERA notes in the link above, the fact that they had lied through their teeth didn't seem to hurt the credibility of the Palestinian spokesmen with the international press).

The anti-Israel media, particularly in the UK, took up the story of the 'Jenin Massacre' with glee, embellishing it with ever-more bloody details and accusations of wanton Israeli cruelty. Alleged body counts rose to the thousands. And Mohammad Bakri's crude propaganda film won a film-festival prize for "Mediterranean Documentary Film-making and Reporting".

The film consists of after-the-fact interviews with Palestinians who tell ever more horrible stories, and 'visualizations' of events such as tanks crushing Palestinians which even Bakri admits didn't happen:

Bakri spliced together video footage shot during the offensive in which an Israeli tank [armored personnel carrier -- ed.] appears to trample a group of Palestinian prisoners. Bakri said there was no proof that incident ever took place, but that he was trying to demonstrate what an Israeli tank symbolized to Palestinians. — Joshua Mitnick in the NJ Star-Ledger, from Electronic Intifada [my italics]

As I reported once before, my daughter met Bakri in Tel Aviv a few years ago and asked him if he really believed that his film was accurate. He responded that he was an artist and not a historian, and that although perhaps all the details weren't accurate, the film was a true depiction of what Israel was doing to Palestinians. Bakri's theory of truth seems a bit different from mine.

The definitive refutation of Bakri's film is a short article by Dr. David Zangen, who was present during the battle as an IDF doctor, and even treated one of Bakri's interviewees. It's called Seven Lies about Jenin. Almost as interesting as his comments about the film is his account of the way the audience at a Jerusalem screening treated him.

The film was originally banned by Israel's film board, but the ban was overthrown by the Supreme Court. Bakri was then sued for civil libel by five IDF reservists who had taken part in the operation. However, the suit was thrown out because the judge ruled that while the film libeled IDF soldiers as a group, it did not single out these soldiers, so they did not have standing to sue.

Now the soldiers have appealed to the IDF Advocate General, who asked Attorney General Menachem Mazuz to indict Bakri on criminal charges. Bakri's response was typical: "This is the difference between me and the military advocate general: He is busy with murdering people and I am busy with art."

Bakri is wrong. He is as much a soldier in the war against Israel as any Hamas bomber. It is unacceptable that he be allowed to use 'art' as a shield and to benefit from Israel's free society as he does his best to destroy it. He should be indicted and held responsible for his actions.


Mazuz did not indict Bakri, but rather chose to support the appeal to the Supreme Court. Here is a Jerusalem Post news report from January 5, 2010:

Jenin, Jenin director Muhammad Bakri will not be charged by the state with libel, Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz decided on Tuesday. However, Mazuz stressed that he would attend a hearing on an appeal filed to the Supreme Court by representatives of former combat soldiers who took part in the IDF incursion into the Jenin refugee camp during Operation Defensive Shield in 2002. The soldiers and families are appealing a ruling by the Petah Tikva District Court in June 2008, which had rejected their civil libel suit against Bakri, whose film accused IDF soldiers of war crimes...

The district court agreed that the film was libelous, but ruled that the individual soldiers could not seek redress for libel committed against "an entire group."

Now the appeal has been denied on the same grounds:

In dismissing the suit, the judges ruled that even though Bakri's film was "full of things that are not true" and even though it was hurtful to the feelings of the five soldiers, there was no provision under the law for them to bring a civil claim against Bakri because the film made reference to the IDF's operations in Jenin as a whole and not to any specific soldier.

Almost certainly this puts a final end to the issue: Bakri, who deliberately made a film full of vicious lies in order to promote the destruction of the state of which he is a citizen and which gives him the opportunity to practice his 'art', will suffer no negative consequences for it.

And now, as the great Paul Harvey would have said, for the rest of the story:

Bakri's latest film was made in 2005, about his difficulties after Jenin, Jenin. On June 18, this film was screened in New York in an event paid for by the New Israel Fund (NIF). You can read the NIF's fulsome account of it here, including the repetition of some of the lies told by this "esteemed actor and director" (their words).

Let's see: the NIF supported most of the NGOs that provided material for the Goldstone Report, it supported a coalition of groups that advocate an economic boycott of Israel, and it supports groups who are practicing 'lawfare' against Israel, including the arrest of Israelis in Europe for 'war crimes' (all of this is documented here).

Now it is paying to provide an audience for an admitted liar and anti-Israel propagandist in the US!

How long will it take for the liberal American Jews who support the NIF — including Rabbi Richard Jacobs, head of the Union for Reform Judaism — to learn whom they are really helping?

This article is archived at
fresnozionism.org/2011/07/the-rest-of-the- story-about-mohammad-bakri/

To Go To Top

Posted by Sarah Stern, July 29, 2011.

I have a childhood memory of my grandmother in her small Brooklyn apartment crying while holding a faded picture of her huge, beautiful, Hungarian-Jewish family, who, with the exception of one other sibling, perished in the gas chambers of Auschwitz. One of my aunts, who had the sensitivity of a sledge hammer, yelled at her, "Oh momma, stop it. It was their own fault...they should have read the writing on the wall."

My seven year old psyche recoiled at the coarseness of those words. Yet, this had an indelible effect on me. I realized at a very tender age that the enemies of our people mean business and that we have a responsibility to take what they say at face value.

That is why I have often been shocked by the ability of many policy makers and pundits on both sides of the Atlantic to overlook, rationalize, minimize and spin the clear words of those who speak and write about their plan to destroy the people of Israel.

An extraordinary example of this bright flashing red light is today's perfectly clear statement made by none other than Nabal Shaath, the Palestinian Authority's Head of Foreign Relations. His chilling words were broadcast during an interview on Lebanese ABN television and aired on July 11, 2011. They were translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute, (MEMRI) and posted Monday, July 25th for everyone to read.

I plead with you, if you read any one thing this summer, please read Nabal Shaath's speech pasted below in its entirety. It speaks for itself.

Here is what Nabal Shaath said in his own words. I am putting his last statement first, because it is the most important one to read:

[The new French UN peace initiative has] reshaped the issue of the "Jewish state" into a formula that is also unacceptable to us — two states for two peoples. They can describe Israel itself as a state for two peoples, but we will be a state for one people. The story of "two states for two peoples" means that there will be a Jewish people over there and a Palestinian people here. We will never accept this — not as part of the French initiative and not as part of the American initiative. We will not sacrifice the 1.5 million Palestinians with Israeli citizenship who live within the 1948 borders, and we will never agree to a clause preventing the Palestinian refugees from returning to their country. We will not accept this, whether the initiative is French, American, or Czechoslovakian.

The recognition of a [Palestinian] state is basically a bilateral action, which receives the blessing of the UN. This act, however, will make many things possible in the future. Eventually, we will be able to sign bilateral agreements with states and this will enable us to exert pressure on Israel. At the end of the day, we want to exert pressure on Israel in order to force it to recognize us and to leave our country. This is our long-term goal.

In my view, it will be difficult for a Black president facing a white majority to exercise his right of veto [at the UN over Palestinian statehood] in order to defend his political platform on health, security, economy, and so on. President Obama will not make his presence felt in the coming 14 months.

Even though it is embroiled in domestic politics, the U.S. does not want to reach the point where it does not play the main role in the Middle East. But in practical terms, the U.S. does not play a role anymore in the Middle East, although it does not want to acknowledge or accept this.

What was the role of the U.S. in the "Arab Spring?" In the three weeks of the Egyptian [revolution], Obama changed his position six times. He is constantly reacting to events rather than generating them. What role does the U.S. play in Lebanon and Syria? What the role does the U.S. play in Iran? Do you even read about Iran in the newspapers? Nobody talks about Iran. They want to get out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Obama's problem is that he is being criticized by the Republicans for leaving so fast. With regard to Libya, he is trying not to get involved, but he is being criticized even for sending drones. The U.S. has no real presence.

That last statement clearly indicates that, to the Palestinians, the United States under President Obama has become a laughing stock, an irrelevancy, in the Arab world. And as proof, Shaath highlights the fact that Iran, the most dangerous, maniacal brutal — not to mention genocidal — dictatorship in the region is being ignored by both the Obama administration and the American public. So much for our president's "leadership from behind."

Any person with integrity and intellectual honesty, reading this public pronouncement of Nabal Shaath, knows that it will be suicidal for Israel to give away critical land — the very land that provides the state with the strategic depth necessary to protect its people from the clearly articulated goal of elimination sought by Nebal Shaath and the Palestine Authority. Protecting its people is clearly the most critical responsibility of any government — and the government of Israel is no exception.

Let it not be said in the next generation — that today's generation refused to "wake up and read the writing on the wall."

Sarah Stern is founder and president of Middle East Truth (EMET); visit its website at

To Go To Top

Posted by Maayana Miskin, July 29, 2011.

Thousands of Israeli Arab youth are being taught to defend Muslim dominance on the Temple Mount, under programs sponsored by the Islamic Movement, the Israel-based branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.

"This generation will be the generation of victory, the generation that defends the place from which the prophet Mohammed ascended to heaven," according to Dr. Hikmat Namna of the Organization to Develop Al-Aksa, which has played a part in the educational program.

An estimated 6,000 Israeli Muslim children from 33 Arab towns in Israel have taken part in the program, which includes a tour of the Temple Mount. Children are also given pamphlets with stories about Mohammed and the Al-Aksa mosque.

The northern branch of the Islamic Movement is lead by Sheikh Raed Salah, a Hamas supporter and open enemy of Israel who was recently jailed in Britain for violating a travel ban. Salah has previously stated that Jerusalem and the Temple Mount are exclusively Muslim, and has led attempts to boost the Muslim presence in the area.

The Al-Aksa Organization has released incitement regarding the Temple Mount as well, including accusations of Israeli attempts to damage the Al Aksa mosque and defile the area.

Maayana Miskin is a columnist for Arutz-Sheva, where this article appeared today.

To Go To Top

Posted by Ted Roberts, July 29, 2011.

Every year, as regular as Autumn, the world famous ASBEE Kosher Barbecue Contest rolls around. On September 18th over forty teams of cookers will perfume the skies over Anshei Sphard synagogue in Memphis, Tn. It's our twenty-third year of ribs, brisket, beans and games.

And this year it's bigger and better than ever. We always say that and it's always true. And unlike the recent cook-off here in Huntsville, there is no admission fee. Just walk right in and either sample the Sisterhood's cooking or find a friend who's grilling. Next, stare at his goods on the grill and look forlorn (It's important to look terribly forlorn.) Tears help, too. I've found that three out of four cookers will soothe your misery. If that doesn't work, just move on to the next cooker.

You can tell the mouth-watering event is approaching as clusters of Memphians hang around street corners whispering about sauce ingredients — secrets of the trade.

There's an old legend that a lost chapter of the Talmud addresses the oral legends of sauce application, rare spices for the sauces, cooking time, and other esoteric data from biblical days. Archeologists are still seeking the "Lost Book of Que". In the quest they stumbled across the Dead Sea Scrolls, but no barbecue recipes. Scholars were ecstatic — barbecue fans wept.

But basically, it's a festival of fun and games and face painting and pickle contests and sports. Plus crispy brisket and ribs (Over 3000 people attended last year.) Rumor has it that some farsighted chefs are already marinating their ribs. The core of the event is the usual question: Who can cook the best ribs, the best brisket? The question is answered by a gaggle of celebrity judges: last year we had Josh Pastner, coach of the Memphis State basketball tigers, Nick Vergos, boss of the world famous Rendezvous, Chuck Goldstein, famous local caterer, Jim Neely, nationally know rib connoisseur, and a ton of others. We'll have the same quality team this year.

Although the event is only 23 years old, ancient Spanish documents claim that the befuddled explorer Hernando DeSoto, lost in the wilds of Tennessee, detected a hypnotic scent in the air. And smoke. His starved band of explorers rushed to a clearing in the woods — later to become Yates and Rich Road — to find what they described as "definitely one of the lost tribes of Israel". He knew they were Jews because they were doing the Hora — a wild, Old World dance — around the campfire wherein many slabs of beef ribs were sizzling. And joyfully singing: "OY OY OY — barbecue Oboy". Nobody was hunting: most were fishing for the rare Gefilte fish, which in those days flooded the Mississippi River. And they were definitely NOT hunting buffalo. No, they were barbecuing; which explains to barbecue scholars such as myself how Memphis became Barbecue Headquarters, USA. And how Anshei Sphard Beth-El Emeth Orthodox Synagogue became the sponsor of the world's first and only kosher que. (Que — no, it's not Yiddish — it's the new, cool term for barbecue.)

The event, in case you're worried, is strictly kosher — all ingredients are supplied by the Synagogue, including grill and meat, of course. Awards are bestowed for best ribs, brisket, beans and booth plus the most cleverly named booth. And, naturally, all are welcome. As the Bible says in Genesis, we attract a "mixed multitude" including ancestors of those lost tribes that Desoto stumbled upon in the woods.

I haven't even told you about the games that lend spice to the events or all of the extra activities. Check it out on the ASBEE website at www.asbeekosherbbq.org. I'll see you there.

Ted Roberts' essays appear in the Jewish press, web sites, and magazines. He is author of The Scribbler On The Roof, a book of short stories and commentary. Visit his websites at
http://www.wonderwordworks.com and

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, July 29, 2011.

Dear S:

Thank you for your note clarifying the reasons for your participating in the tent protests in Tel Aviv and for clarifying your demands for "affordable housing alternatives."

I must say that I was a little unclear as to why you think there do not exist "affordable housing alternatives" in Israel and why you think it is the responsibility of the government to provide them for you.

First, you have made it clear that while you are interested in finding affordable housing in Northern Tel Aviv, you would also be willing to consider living in a two- or three-bedroom unit in Ramat Aviv, Ramat Gan, and — if nothing else can be found — in Givatayim.

Second, you have explained to me that since your current household take-home income is $2500 per month, affordable housing for you (if purchased) should be a housing unit costing at the very most $125,000 (or about 420,000 NIS), which would be 50 times your monthly take-home income. In other words, in theory if you worked 50 months and spent nothing at all, you could save up this amount for a housing unit, which you regard as "affordable."

Let me point out to you that there is no problem at all for you to obtain affordable housing in Northern Tel Aviv. And to do so you do not need the approval of Bibi Netanyahu, the government of Israel, the Minister of Housing, the capitalist class or even business professors. There are tens of thousands of privately-owned housing units in Northern Tel Aviv and in the other areas where you would like to live. These are owned by private individuals, not the government. All you need to do is find one single existing owner of a unit you would like to buy and persuade him or her to sell it to you for 420,000 NIS.

If you can negotiate such a transaction, you do not need ANYONE else to approve of it. It does not matter if Bibi Netanyahu approves or disapproves. You are not dependent at all on approval from any "capitalists." After all, it is unlikely that the seller with whom you will engage in the transaction is even a capitalist at all, other than perhaps in the sense of owning some capital in a Provident Funds (Kupot Gemel) or a pension fund. You would not need approval from anyone else.

Except of course from the seller.

As long as the seller is willing to sell you the property at the affordable price you offer, nothing at all stands in your way. You will have found affordable housing in the areas where you want to live. And all you need is that one single cooperative seller, out of a total population of tens of thousands of property owners. You certainly need not persuade ME of ANTHING! After all, I own no property in Tel Aviv.

I concede of course that you could run up against one minor difficulty. And that is that the owner of the property you would like to buy might prefer to sell it to someone else for three or four or five times the amount you are willing to offer him. Of course, no one is stopping you from trying to persuade him to sell it to you for YOUR affordable price, and if you are successful in persuading him, I am the first who will send you a housewarming gift!

And to tell you the truth, if you actually found someone willing to sell you a 3 bedroom flat in Northern Tel Aviv at your affordable price, I myself would be tempted to offer the seller several times more than that to buy the same unit in your place. But in consideration for yourself and you wife, I will sit out this round of bidding and not interfere.

Now it is of course conceivable that you will discover that none of those private property owners of housing units in Northern Tel Aviv and in the other areas where you are searching is willing to sign a deal with you for your affordable price. It is not because Bibi told them not to sign with you and it is not because the capitalist class ordered them not to. It is because the sellers prefer to get a higher price to getting a lower price.

I understand that the demand by you and your comrades-at-tents is that if you cannot find affordable housing in the areas you are searching at the prices you are willing to offer, then the government of Israel should either hand to you the difference between the asking price and your affordable price, or arrange for other machinations that end up achieving the same result. Where you can pay your affordable price to get a housing unit whose asking price is much higher

Now there are some complications with your idea of having the government of Israel hand you free money for purchasing housing. One problem is that the money has to come from someplace else or someone else. Yes, I realize your favorite solution is to "soak the rich" and raise the taxes on "the rich" so that there will be enough money for handouts to you. But there are some problems with that idea as well.

The first difficulty is that I think you will find that "soak the rich" taxes generate far, far less tax revenue than you think they do. But even if they could generate as much as in your socialist fantasy, what makes you think that the Israeli electorate wants those funds given to YOU?? After all, those funds have LOTS of uses, and there are lots of people who would like to have those funds granted to THEM!

In a vote by the public, either a direct vote via ballot initiative (you know, that idea the law professors in Israel keep insisting is anti-democratic) or by the elected representatives of the people, what makes you think it is the will of the people that any extra funds taken from the rich or diverted from other government budgets should be awarded to YOU? Is it because you demand affordable housing in greater Tel Aviv while sleeping in a tent?

Let me drum this point home a bit more. You and your wife are graduate students. The vast majority of Israelis never attend university. Those who attend university and get only a BA earn far more money on average than those who do not attend college. That means first of all that the Israelis who do NOT attend college and earn far less on average than those who DO attend college already paid for 70% or so of the costs of your college education. Once you earned your BA you joined the portion of the population that out-earns on average those who do not attend college. And now you want to persuade that same majority of Israelis who do not attend college that the very best use of fiscal resources is to hand them over to you so you can buy housing in greater Tel Aviv while only spending an amount you have defined as affordable.

I gotta tell you the truth. In a ballot initiative, if the general public were asked to approve of your plan, it would not stand a chance.

I do not see much difference if the affordable housing you want in Tel Aviv is rental housing and not purchased housing. Once again, no one is stopping you from convincing any of those many thousands of owners of private housing units to lease them to you at rents you regard as affordable. I cannot make them agree to do so, and neither can Bibi or anyone else. If you are successful and persuade one to rent to you at what you regard as an affordable rent, I will send you a housewarming gift.

There is one other problem with your idea of raising taxes to generate resources that can be handed to you. Among those who would be taxed are many Israeli families who purchased housing in the past, never at affordable prices, and who did so by working hard and long and saving what they earned. You are welcome to try to persuade them to vote for representatives who will tax themselves in order to hand over resources to you so that you can buy affordable housing. But I would not bet my own salary on your being successful in that campaign of persuasion.

Finally, you and your tent comrades are pretending that you are not simply out for handouts, but are generally "socially concerned" with poverty and hardship in Israel and that is why you demand major reforms in policy from the government. You are crusaders for social justice. You kind of lost me there.

If you are seriously concerned with hardship and poverty and inequality in Israel, why is the main proposal you are marketing that the government provide YOU with housing you say you can afford. You have a BA already and are working on a second degree. Only a tiny portion of Israelis get second degrees. You could not find anyone more in need of handouts than YOU?

Second, why do you need Bibi and the government to change policy as a means to assist the needy and those in hardship? Why wait for Bibi? Who is stopping YOU from stepping up and helping the needy and those in hardship right now? Who is stopping YOU from engaging in Tzedaka? Since when is the only legitimate form of Tzedaka the nationalized form, where the government takes away people's wealth to help those in hardship? Why not some privatized Tzedaka?

Oh, and since mankind has yet to come up with a set of policies that eliminate poverty and hardship and inequality, and no society on earth has managed to do that (although quite a few have succeeded in making poverty and hardship much WORSE), I am sure we would all be grateful to hear about the magical set of plans YOU have that will accomplish this mission for the first time in human history.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Steve Kramer, July 29, 2011.

In September, the Palestinian Authority plans to request the United Nations General Assembly to declare that "Palestine" be admitted to the UN as a member state. This initiative will be a sequel to the November, 1988 declaration of independence for the State of Palestine and the General Assembly agreeing to use the designation "Palestine" instead of Palestinian Liberation Organization (non-binding Resolution 43/177). Palestine was accorded status as first among equals of the UN's non-voting members. The United States has declared numerous times that it will veto accepting Palestine as a member state in the Security Council. So is another non-binding resolution in the General Assembly an earth-shattering event or one of little significance? Some historical background is helpful in deciding.

Abdullah, second son of the Sharif of Mecca Al-Hussein bin Ali, was declared the Emir of Transjordan by the British in 1921. Abdullah was one of the few Arab leaders of the time who was willing to talk to the Jews. He favored the partition plan for both a Jewish and an Arab state west of the Jordan River, which was advanced in 1937 by the Peel Commission as well as the United Nations Partition Plan of 1947 (UN Resolution 181). Abdullah approved these deals because he saw an opportunity to include the non-Jewish territories west of the Jordan River under his own rule.

Arab militias and other irregular forces immediately began attacking Jews and Jewish communities. Despite his former willingness to negotiate with the Jews, Abdullah, King of Transjordan (newly independent in 1946), joined the other Arab countries in fighting Israel immediately after its declaring independence in May, 1948. Abdullah's Arab Legion won control over the West Bank, the name coined to describe the territory east of the 1949 armistice line including Judea, Samaria, the Old City of Jerusalem and nearby Arab neighborhoods. All Jewish residents were transferred. Abdullah annexed the West Bank in 1950, offering Jordanian citizenship to all its inhabitants, as well as representation in the legislature, and renamed his country "Jordan". The annexation was recognized (excepting Jerusalem) by Britain, but rejected by all other countries, except for Pakistan. Many Palestinian Arabs moved to the east bank of the Jordan River, joining their cousins already living in Jordan. A year later, Abdullah was assassinated on the steps of the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem by a Palestinian Arab. Crown Prince Talal, became king for one year, but his reign was short due to mental illness.

King Hussein replaced his father in 1952 and reigned until his death in 1999. Though he fought against Israel in the Six Day War, in which Jordan lost control over the West Bank and many Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem, and in the Yom Kippur War, Hussein was relatively well-liked by Israelis. He walked a tightrope between Israel, rival Arab countries, and the Palestinians, who soon became the majority of Jordan's population, vastly outnumbering the indigenous Beduin population. Hussein secretly cooperated with Israel and the United States, which eventually lead to enmity between him and some Arab leaders.

In September, 1970 King Hussein retaliated against the militant Palestinian organizations which threatened his reign by killing thousands of Palestinian fighters during the period known as "Black September." The PLO leadership regrouped first in Lebanon and then in Algiers. In the summer of 1988, due to the Israeli presence and the growing influence of the PLO over the Palestinians, the king announced the severance of all administrative and legal ties with the West Bank except for its custodianship of the the holy sites in Jerusalem. In 1994, the king signed a treaty with Israel, becoming the second Arab country to make peace with Israel. In Article 9 of the treaty, Israel agreed to respect "the present special role of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in the Muslim holy shrines in Jerusalem."

Five years later, King Hussein succumbed to cancer, leaving his son Abdullah as heir. King Abdullah II has emulated his father in following a relatively moderate line among Arab rulers. But according to journalist David Singer, "Jordan's King Abdullah is clearly worried about the future direction of his country — if developments over recent weeks are any indication." (www.israelnationalnews.com)

This past June, King Abdullah told the Washington Post, "2011 will be, I think, a very bad year for peace. Although we will continue to try to bring both sides to the table, I am the most pessimistic I have been in 11 years."

As the probable cause of Abdullah's pessimism, David Singer cites the PLO charter, clause 2: "Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate is an indivisible territorial unit." Obviously, King Abdullah has to worry that a Palestinian state will inevitably want to include the East Bank of the Jordan River (Jordan), with its 4 million-plus Palestinian residents, which was still part of the British Mandate, though closed to Jewish settlement, until Transjordan gained independence in 1946.

Citing an article posted on www.worldtribune.com on July 3, Singer reported that a senior Jordanian official warned that Jordan would vote against recognition of a Palestinian Arab state scheduled to be put before the UN General Assembly in September. Also, that Jordan's top national interests will be in danger if the Palestinian Authority declares statehood unilaterally.

Prior to the remarks quoted above, Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, stated that he had no intention of a PLO takeover of Jordan and that the Palestinian people would turn down any proposal that involves resettling Palestinian refugees at the expense of Jordan, stressing that Jordan is for Jordanians and Palestine is for Palestinians. Evidently, King Abdullah doesn't believe Abbas.

Given the fact that King Abdullah's family has ruled in Jordan since 1921, that the Hashemites retain a protectorate over Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem, that the minority Beduin of Jordan are staunch supporters of the royal family and would be loathe to give up their favored status in the government and the army, it is very likely that Jordan will not support the Palestinians' UN initiative in September.

For sure, what happens at the United Nations in September will surely not be earthshaking, nor will it be the end of the story.

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." Contact him at mskramer@bezeqint.net and visit www.encounteringisrael.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, July 29, 2011.

Rabbi Elazar Abuhatzeira, the grandson of Rabbi Yisrael Abuhatzeira ("Baba Sali"), was stabbed to death in Be'erSheva late Thursday night. The funeral took place at 11 a.m. today, proceeding from the Porat Yoseph Yeshiva on Malchei Yisrael Streeet in Jerusalem to the Mount of Olives.

From Arutz-7:

"Rabbi Elazar Abuhatzeira's grandfather, the Baba Sali, was a Jewish Moroccan rabbi who was universally revered and believed to have mystic healing powers.

"The Baba Sali lived a spartan life devoid of material interests, often fasting and praying throughout the day. He was also one of the main leaders of the immigration to Israel and helped bring nearly the entire Jewish community from Morocco to live in the Holy Land.

"His home in Netivot was a site for pilgrimages of people seeking his blessing and advice during his lifetime and more than 100,000 people attended his funeral in 1984; since that time, his tomb has become a shrine for pilgrims and petitioners who come often to pray for assistance and intervention in their daily troubles. Many bring their three-year-old sons to his tomb for the traditional "chalaka", i.e. first hair-cutting. "


Rabbi Elazar Abuhatzeira

Israel really must do something about the violent anti-Rabbi incitement in the country, especially now that it has produced the cold-blooded murder of Rabbi Elazar Abuhatzeira. The Rabbi, aged 70, was grandson of the famous Moroccan Jewish kabbalist, the Baba Sali.
(http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/ 0,7340,L-4101678,00.html) He was stabbed to death by a 42 year old Jewish man. Clearly the murderer was inspired by the anti-Rabbinic barbaric rhetoric that has become so common in Israel.

Ok, I am being facetious.

The rabbi was not murdered by rhetoric. He was murdered by a deranged nut.

But let us bear in mind that this is the same Israel in which the entire political establishment, the entire media, and much of academia, have been chanting nonstop in mindless unison since 1995 that unrestrained political discourse produces murder. The Supreme Court of the country agrees, and proclaims rhetoric that involves criticism of illegal acts treason to be defamation.

The political establishment has proclaimed that the exercise of freedom of speech by non-leftists produces assassination and murder. The Israeli government itself has been leading the campaign against the "incitement" and "racism" of Rabbis. That is why it has been harassing and arresting so many Rabbis. I do not know what the ideological and political opinions of the Rabbi Abuhatzeira were, but if he had not been murdered this week it would not have surprised me if Shai Nitzan, the leftist Deputy Attorney General, and his little gang of crusaders against democracy would have arrested the Rabbi.

And then we have the latest anencephelic (that means born without a brain) mantras coming from the liberuhs and the Left in Europe and the US. They insist that the reason a Christian Norwegian Neo-Nazi conducted mass murders of Christian Norwegians is because of Right-wing web sites that criticize Islamist terrorism and Arab fascism. The Jews of course are also to blame, insist a growing number of anti-Semitic web pages. (Here is one you will enjoy:
http://kapodickie.blogspot.com/2011/07 silverstein-blames-jews-for-norway.html) Why the Jews? Well, after all, Jews are also active in criticizing Islamofascism and Arab terrorism, so the Norwegian murderer must have been inspired by them. Without those Jewish inciters, young Breivik would have taken up ice fishing.

So if anti-immigrant organizations in Europe and websites that denounce Islamofascism caused the Norwegian Breivik to shoot and bomb, and if Rabbis suggesting that Jewish women date only Jewish men are genocidal inciters and inspirers of murderers, responsible for the Rabin assassination, then surely we can all agree that the fashionable secularist defamation and harassment of Rabbis in Israel produced the murder of Rabbi Abuhatzeira! It is all Shai Nitzan's fault!

I mentioned this earlier, but it is worth repeating, now that the Norwegian ambassador to Israel is justifying Palestinian terrorism, and distinguishing it from the "Norwegian terrorism." Dersh has a nice piece on this here: You see, killing Scandinavians is bad. They are blond. But killing Jews is understandable and justifiable. Jews are Untermenschen.

The fact of the matter is that the Norwegian killings, horrific though they may be, were not acts of terrorism at all. They were more like the Columbine shootings, murderous acts of the deranged, with no real ideological motivation. The killer Breivik is far more Charles Manson than he is Yassir Arafat.

Terrorism is what Arab fascists do. It is ideologically and religiously motivated. Its aim is ultimately genocidal.

That is why the Norwegian Eurotrash thinks it is acceptable.

And that is why a Palestinian state should be erected only in Norway.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 29, 2011.

There's a great deal about UNRWA in the news these days, and I have no doubt that I'll return to this subject again before long. Now I want, first, to share a link to my latest report on the subject. This is more of a mini-report (my major reports can run 30 or 40 pages) -- an overview, with more information to follow. The subject: UNRWA's connection with Hamas.

In Gaza, members of a Hamas-affiliated group, the Islamic Bloc, go right into UNRWA schools and do programming with the goal of recruiting the next generation of members for Hamas.
http://www.israelbehindthenews.com/ library/pdfs/HamasAssociationwithUNRWA- July2011.pdf


Then, an article of mine that has just come out in Middle East Quarterly, which takes a close look at the anti-Israel statements of key UNRWA personnel:


I am sooo tired of Mahmoud Abbas. So tired of hearing of his conflicting statements and outright lies, and so tired of reporting them to you, when you are likely sooo tired of them. as well. Thus I will allude only briefly to the two following items:

Abbas is now calling for "peaceful resistance" in support of the venture in the UN. This is not a good sign.

First, because I've yet to see real peaceful resistance by Palestinian Arabs. He's riling the people.

And second because he's raising expectations of something really happening at the UN. When this turns out not to be the case, violence is likely to ensue because of frustration. The higher the expectations, the greater the violence is likely to be. That's the pattern, folks. And if he already called for "resistance" before the fact?


And then, Abbas is saying that it's not clear that the US rejects his statehood plan at the UN. "We heard about their opposition through mediators. The leadership has not received a clear American rejection of the idea to go to the UN." he told the PLO Central Committee.

This, reports Khaled Abu Toameh, "despite the fact that senior PA officials who visited Washington in the past two months clearly stated that the US administration had threatened to use the veto in the Security Council to thwart the PA plan."

Abbas is apparently waiting for a final go-ahead from the Arab League on August 4, but then expects to proceed to the Security Council. (What happened to skipping the SC and going to the General Assembly?)


There was a dry-run of sorts in the Security Council this week, when the Middle East was under discussion.

According to YNet, Palestinian observer Riyad Mansour called for the UN to recognize a Palestinian state, and then burst into tears.

Ron Prosor, our new Ambassador to the UN, then asked him, "On behalf of whom will you be presenting a proposal in September, Abbas or Hamas?"

See more here:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/ 0,7340,L-4100584,00.html


You can see Prosor's full statement to the Security Council here (top item). It gives us perhaps a sense of what will transpire in September:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Foreign+Relations/ Israel+and+the+UN/Speeches+-+statements/


Then see these articles regarding the fact that the PA is going broke:

Elliott Abrams, asks pointedly, in a blog for the Council on Foreign Relations, "Will the Arab League Pay for Palestine?"

A rhetorical question, for the Arab states are reneging on their commitments to the PA.

"This is a simple and quick test of the oil-rich Gulf states, and especially Saudi Arabia. With crude oil in the area of $100 a barrel, it is not a measure of their financial ability; they have the money. And that being the case, this is a far better test than speeches and UN votes of just how committed to Palestinian progress they really are." (Emphasis added)
http://blogs.cfr.org/abrams/2011/07/26/ will-the-arab-league-pay-for-palestine/


Lawrence Solomon draws the necessary corollary in, "An independent Palestine couldn't pay its own bills":

Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain, the five countries whose financial obligations burden the European Union, may soon be joined by another that the EU may unwittingly be taking on — Palestine. If Palestine declares statehood this September, as many of its EU underwriters are encouraging it to do, the EU would be implicitly assuming an open-ended financial burden for a country of over four million...

"...there is something that the Europeans who assume a hypothetical, independent Palestine have overlooked: Without Israeli good will, a Palestinian state couldn't support itself. (The author explains this in his article.)

"...Palestine without Israel has no viable economy, and the Americans don't seem particularly eager to meet any shortfall (and have troubles enough with their own balance books). If Europe, through its encouragement of a premature Palestine, breaks the Palestinian economy, it could own it."
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/ independent+Palestine+couldn+bills/ 5164077/story.html


And one last, not very palatable article about the PA here. According to Haaretz, Shimon Peres -- the left wing octogenarian who holds the ceremonial position of president -- has been engaged in secret negotiations with PA negotiator Saeb Erekat to find a formula for negotiations that will bring the PA back to the table and stop them from going to the UN. Myself, I believe the chances are dim. But it riles me none-the-less. This is not the first time Peres has stuck his nose in where it doesn't belong.

According to Haaretz, this is being done with Netanyahu's sanction. Best I can figure is that he says, sure, why not, let's see what happens. For, whatever you think of Netanyahu, his policies and ideologies are not the same as those of Peres. But Peres speaks as if he represents the State of Israel.

What people like Peres don't wish to grasp is that there is no essential give from the other side.

Writes Haaretz journalist Akiva Eldar:

"The two went over maps of the West Bank and East Jerusalem in an effort to find a formula that would bypass the dispute over establishing the June 4, 1967 border as a basis for negotiations toward a final settlement between Israel and the Palestinians.

"One option explored was the exchange of territory, and others was to compensate the Palestinians for settlement blocs annexed into Israel, on the basis of the U.S. proposal that the area of a Palestinian state be equal to the territory of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip."

What unmitigated nonsense. Can anyone be that blind, except purposefully? If the Palestinian state is equal to the West Bank and Gaza, then the '67 lines ARE being used as the basis.

In deciding how seriously to take this, we must also keep in mind that Haaretz promotes the negotiations, and then some.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/ews/ peres-holds-secret-talks-with-palestinians-in- bid-to-restart-negotiations-1.375809


I've long felt that it's time for Peres to be sent to a home for seniors. But I think that it would serve our nation well if Ehud Barak, currently serving as our defense minister, would somehow be sent into retirement as well -- even though he's barely 70.

Barak, who has what is undoubtedly the best relations with the Obama administration of anyone in our government, has just met with US officials -- US Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and National Security Advisor Tom Donilon.

And now he's coming out pushing hard for an Israeli apology to Turkey. "I don't like it," he told the press, "but it's not a bad thing to have reasonable relations with Turkey in a region which has instability in Egypt, downsizing in Saudi Arabia and a hostile Iran."

But that's the Obama line -- that this will allow good relations with Turkey. But it's appeasement, and would be futile. Those in the know, including Minister of Security Affairs Moshe Yaalon, understand this.

I'll return to this issue, and other statements made by Barak.


Hezbollah, it would seem, is spoiling for a fight.

This Tuesday, in a televised talk in recognition of the fifth anniversary of its war with Israel, Hasan Nasrallah, Hezbollah's Secretary-General, alluded to the maritime border dispute with Israel, saying that when Israel demarcated its border with Cyprus it infringed on 850 square kilometers of Lebanese territorial waters:

"With regard to the 850-square-kilometer zone, as long as the state considers it Lebanese territory, it is Lebanese in the resistance's eye (resistance? Hezbollah sits in the government of Lebanon) and there is no disputed area. There is an area that has been infringed on. Lebanon has a diplomatic opportunity to recover it through the border demarcation. [A reference to Lebanon having submitted this demarcation to the UN.]

"We warn Israel against extending its hands to this area to steal Lebanon's resources from Lebanese waters. Until Lebanon decides to exploit this area, Israel must be warned against extending its hands to it.

"Whoever harms our future oil facilities in Lebanese territorial waters, its own facilities will be targeted."

The leader of the Islamic resistance movement also threatened to target Israel's oil installations if Lebanon's oil facilities are attacked.


Additionally, there was a bombing of a UNIFIL convoy in Lebanon recently that Israeli officials are interpreting as a signal from Hezbollah to back off.

According to UNIFIL's current mandate -- from Resolution 1701 -- this force is not allowed to enter Lebanese villages to search for Hezbollah arms without coordination with the Lebanese army. Israel has been lobbying countries that contribute to UNIFIL to secure a change in these rules, via the UN, so that Lebanese villages might be searched.


Can something good be happening here, can we be on the verge of changing policy on Har Habayit (The Temple Mount)? Or is this report from Arutz Sheva overly optimistic? (Sorry for my cynicism, but it's been fostered via long experience.)

In 1967, after we re-claimed the Old City and Har Habayit, Moshe Dayan, in an act of supreme foolishness, however well-intentioned it may have been, told the Islamic Wakf (Trust) that it could continue to control day to day affairs on the Mount, where Muslims come to pray at the mosques. What Dayan apparently didn't anticipate is that the Muslims know no compromise; slowly over the years they have attempted to usurp our influence over matters there.

Today, while we do handle security, in essence the Muslims conduct themselves as if the site of our holy Temples is exclusively theirs. Galling is not the word for this, for Jewish presence is restricted and there's been damage by the Muslims to archeological remains (they would prefer to obliterate evidence of Jewish presence there).

What has happened is that Jews are forbidden to pray on the Mount, and -- I'm ashamed to even write this -- it is Israeli police who enforce this with real vigor. The fear is of Muslim rioting on the Mount. Better deprive Jews of their rights than risk the ire of a Muslim mob prone to violence. Never mind that this is also appeasement.

This article describes a visit by the Attorney General, Yehuda Weinstein, to the Mount, to see matters for himself, at which time he indeed did discover police bias against religious Jews.

A group known as Ha Habayit Shelanu (the Temple Mount is ours) has issued an expectation that the Attorney General will now pursue this matter.

I will be delighted to write about this again if some progress is made.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/ News/News.aspx/146164

Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner18@gmail.com and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Betty Misheiker, July 29, 2011.

WE are indeed a race unique
Possessing that infernal CHEEK
Come Pogroms, Inquisition, Holocaust,
Darkest Night,
Accusations, Lies and Insults -
— Quite alright-
Absorbing all the vicious shocks
Bombs, Katushas, Daggers, Rocks,
All the world shows its concern in
Waiting for that cheek to turn

To please the world — our friends abroad,
Whose wishes cannot be ignored —
While dodging rockets,and note their track
Expect that we do not react
Are shocked in fact,
At the restraint we lack!

How come an unconcerned World
And wife
Aware of OUR TEN good Rules
Which guide our life
Suddenly presume to tell what's wrong,
What's right,
-AND have a hand in carving up
The only known
G-d-given Land.?

Forgive, Forget, Shake hands — be nice,
And be prepared to sacrifice!
Fallen soldiers cannot speak
Or weep a tear
. Forever silenced- cannot ask
"Why am I here? Was it in vain?"
"Did no one learn?"

For it seems plain that mild and meek
We are prepared to turn -
and turn
Yet, once again
The other cheek.

Betty Misheiker lives in Jerusalem. Contact her at largo@netvision.net.il and visit her website at www.BettyMisheiker.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Yaacov Levi, July 29, 2011.

This was written by Professor Paul Eidelberg. It is updated from a 1996 article.


Alexander Solzhenitsyn writes in The Gulag Archipelago: "In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand-fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations. It is for this reason that they are growing up "indifferent" Young people are acquiring the conviction that foul deeds are never punished on earth, that they always bring prosperity. It is going to be uncomfortable, horrible, to live in such a country.

Contrast Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In his July 10, 1996 address to a joint session of Congress, Mr. Netanyahu declared: "[We have no quarrel] with Islam. We reject the thesis of an inevitable clash of civilizations. We do not subscribe to the idea that Islam has replaced Communism as the new rival of the West, because our conflict is specific. It is with those militant fanatics who pervert the central tenets of a great faith toward violence and world domination.

Obviously Mr. Netanyahu was being discreet [i.e., "politically correct" about Islam; after all, he was speaking to a joint session of Congress. However, his reference to Islam was not only misleading, as any honest student of the subject knows, but unnecessary if not disarming. Anti-Israel and anti-Jewish propaganda not only floods the Arab-Islamic world, but makes Der Sturmer tame by comparison. Despite Egypt's peace treaty with Israel, Cairo's state-controlled media denigrate anything Jewish, including "Old Testament.

In fairness, it should be noted that Mr. Netanyahu wisely reminded Congress of the autocratic nature of Arab-Islamic states. Israel, he said, can have "peace arrangements" with such states, but this must be a "defensible peace," that is, "we must retain assets essential to the defense of our country and sufficient to deter aggression." However, the most important element of deterrence, as any military scientist knows, is the morale or spiritedness of one's people. The morale or spiritedness of any people will be undermined when peace is divorced from justice, that is, when people see that evil not only goes unpunished but is rewarded.

The people of Israel have seen countless Arab crimes go unpunished. Hundreds of helpless Jewish men, women, and children have been murdered by the PLO-Palestinian Authority. Yet the people of Israel have seen the PLO-PA rewarded with money, land, and power. They have seen their own political leaders hobnobbing with Jew-haters and Jew-killers. Not only have these politicians been silent about the evil acts of the Arab-Islamic leaders of the Palestinians, but they have consorted with and dignified these villains. By so doing they have obliterated the distinction between man and beast.

Nietzsche defined man as a beast with red cheeks. Unlike a beast, man blushes — he has a sense of shame. It seems, however, that many political leaders in the democratic world are shameless, else they would not have consorted with Arafat, let alone award this killer with a Nobel Peace Prize, as was done by Norway.

Come with me, then to Rumania. General Ian Pacepa, head of Rumanian Intelligence under the former Ceaucescu regime, had this to say when PLO-Chieftain Yasser Arafat visited Bucharest: "I've never before seen so much cleverness, blood, and filth altogether in one man. Yes, Arafat's hosts shook his hands, but Pacepa reports they could hardly wait to repair to the lavatory! If the political and intellectual leaders of the West continue to remain silent about evil — and to be more specific — "if they continue to appease the Jew-hating enemies of Western civilization — they will implant evil in the souls of countless men. THEY HAVE ALREADY DONE SO. The price, as Solzhenitsyn understood, is horrible to contemplate.

Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Truth Provider, July 28, 2011.

Dear friends,

When you listen to Shimon Peres, the President of the State of Israel, declaring that peace is just around the corner, as he did two days ago, you must conclude that

the architect of the 1993 Oslo debacle is either an incurable dreamer detached from any reality, or simply senile or gaga.

Just think about the following, out of many, three points:

1) PLO Invoking the UN for a unilateral declaration of independence.

2) PLO Courting Hamas

Nabil Shaath (left) shakes hands with Hamas leader Ismail Haniyya after Hamas/Fatah agreement this May.

3) PLO refusing to recognize Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish people.

False optimism in the service of peace is no virtue.

A press release from The Israel Project:

Jerusalem, July 26 — Israel's President Shimon Peres said Tuesday that Israel is closer than ever to peace with the Palestinians. He made the remarks at an event for Arabic press organized in cooperation with The Israel Project's People-to-People Arabic Media Program...

Peres said that both the Israeli people and their government support a two-stte solution.

"Peace is made even when it is considered impossible. Peace is just a matter of time, but I prefer that we move quickly," he said. "Today's youth are driving the push for peace," said Peres, noting that the Arab Spring resulted from the Arab public's desire for real, grassroots change...

A recent poll commissioned by The Israel Project shows that Palestinians in the West Bank are supportive of negotiations with Israel as a path to peace. The poll also shows that they view their well-being — getting jobs, healthcare and investments — as a new priority in the Arab Spring.

Both Peres and The Israel Project are wrong.

I analyzed the poll mentioned in the press release here, and it shows precisely the opposite. It shows that insofar as grassroots Palestinian Arabs support negotiations with Israel, it is as a path to replacing Israel with an Arab state. Many support Hamas' antisemitic principles, even if they do not want to live under a Hamas regime. And almost none believe that "Israel has a permanent right to exist as a homeland for the Jewish people."

Moty and Udi on Pal-Arab poll (From: Fresnozionism.org)

As far as economic issues, it's true that they chose jobs as the top priority of a Palestinian government — but only because no option relating to the elimination of Israel was offered!

If the Palestinian in the street doesn't want 'two states for two peoples', who does? How about the moderate elements in the leadership?

Afraid not. Thanks to MEMRI and Barry Rubin, we present here a smoking gun in the form of a statement made by the quintessential 'moderate', the US-educated Dr. Nabil Shaath, Deputy PM and Minister of Information in the Palestinian Authority:

Nabil Shaath: The recognition of a [Palestinian] state is basically a bilateral action, which receives the blessing of the UN. This act, however, will make many things possible in the future. Eventually, we will be able to sign bilateral agreements with states, and this will enable us to exert pressure on Israel. At the end of the day, we want to exert pressure on Israel, in order to force it to recognize us and to leave our country. This is our long-term goal...

[The French initiative] reshaped the issue of the "Jewish state" into a formula that is also unacceptable to us — two states for two peoples. They can describe Israel itself as a state for two peoples, but we will be a state for one people. The story of "two states for two peoples" means that there will be a Jewish people over there and a Palestinian people here. We will never accept this — not as part of the French initiative and not as part of the American initiative. We will not sacrifice the 1.5 million Palestinians with Israeli citizenship who live within the 1948 borders, and we will never agree to a clause preventing the Palestinian refugees from returning to their country. We will not accept this, whether the initiative is French, American, or Czechoslovakian.

600 million to the Palestinians each year, including $225 million that goes directly to the PA, the payment of these salaries is a violation of U.S. law.

As the authors of the report pointed out when they presented their findings to members of Congress on Tuesday, the 2010 legislation that authorized aid to the PA said the State Department must "take all appropriate steps to ensure that such assistance is not provided to or through any individual, private or government entity, or educational institution that the Secretary knows or has reason to believe advocates, plans, sponsors, engages in, or has engaged in, terrorist activity."

The PA's payment of salaries to convicted terrorists is a clear violation of this law.

In addition to speaking of the cash layouts to terrorists (which actually exceed the salaries paid to Palestinian civil servants), the report also discussed the incitement against Israel and Jews that is published and broadcast by the Palestinian official media. Another egregious example of Palestinian incitement was the fact that a summer camp sponsored by PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad divided children into three groups — each named for terrorists.

For those who have followed the history of U.S. aid to the Palestinians, this is familiar stuff. Ever since the original Oslo Accords, the State Department has made it a practice to either ignore or to deny all reports of PA support for terror or glorification of terrorists. Throughout this period, such outrages have been swept under the carpet by diplomats intent on pursuing an agenda of appeasement of the Palestinians in the vain hope this will cause them to make peace. But the United States has not been rewarded for its generosity.

We can only hope this latest evidence of Palestinian treachery will finally motivate Congress and the White House to hold the PA accountable and stop the flow of money from American taxpayers to terrorists.

UCI — The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) — is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel."

"Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!"

To Go To Top

Posted by Anne Bayefsky, July 28, 2011.

Member states of the U.N. General Assembly are busy hammering out how to slam Israel and restrict human rights like free speech at "Durban III" — the racist "anti-racism" event to be held in New York on Sept. 22.

With the recent pull-outs by the Czech Republic, Italy and the Netherlands added to the previously declared boycotts by the United States, Canada and Israel, negotiations at U.N. Headquarters continued Thursday over how offensive the final declaration of Durban III can become without more countries following suit.

The Durban III conference will commemorate the 10th anniversary of the conference held in Durban, South Africa, in September 2001. That event produced the Durban Declaration, which accused just one country on earth of racism, namely Israel. No negotiations, therefore, can hide the fact that Durban III is a commemoration — in the words of the authorizing General Assembly resolution — of a conference and an outcome remembered most notably for its overt anti-Semitism.

Nevertheless, the U.N.'s idea is that since the General Assembly hall in September will be filled with heads of government already present for the Assembly's annual opening, more than a hundred world leaders will embrace the Durban Declaration and its racist-Israel mantra for the first time. Durban I sported only a handful of such leaders — like Yasser Arafat and Fidel Castro -- while Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the only one to attend Durban II.

On the table Thursday was a draft of a "political declaration" to be adopted by the General Assembly at the end of the day on Sept. 22. Negotiations proved to be a toxic combination of U.N. members either pursuing a contorted cover-up strategy or preferring more open Israel-bashing.

The co-chairs from Cameroon and Monaco made the agenda painfully obvious. They insisted that the 2011 declaration will "not re-open previously agreed text" since their "mandate is clearly not to renegotiate the Durban Declaration." On the contrary, Durban III will have the Durban Declaration "at its core."

In light of such an admission, the maneuvering of Germany proved most pathetic of all. German diplomats announced that Germany was a beacon of fighting discrimination. They then declared that the draft declaration, which commemorates and reinforces Durban I, was a good basis for discussion, and they were happily prepared to keep engaging in this "constructive" manner. They did manage to note that singling out any country will not be acceptable to them.

In short, according to Germany, a square peg can be fit into a round hole. The Durban Declaration already singles out Israel. The purpose of Durban III is to applaud the Durban Declaration. At Durban II in Geneva in 2009, Germany pulled out just two days before Ahmadinejad opened the conference on the anniversary of Hitler's birth. True to form (which Germany would have known months beforehand) Ahmadinejad said: "The word Zionism personifies racism that falsely resorts to religion and abuses sentiments to hide their hatred and ugly faces." How long will it take the Germans to figure it out this time?

And then there is Australia. On Thursday, Australian diplomats said they were going to stay in the negotiations. They believed the draft declaration was a good starting point and were hopeful about the future. What happened to Australia's former voice, having pulled out of the Durban II conference in the firm belief that lipstick on a caterpillar does not suffice?

Australia, which is running for a seat on the Security Council this fall, is running scared. The Australians are well aware of what happened to Canada at the last Security Council election. The Canadians were defeated despite a huge investment spiritually, politically and financially in the U.N. for decades because the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper refused to abandon support for Israel, free expression and other rights in the face of repeated challenges from Islamic and Arab states at the U.N. Human Rights Council and General Assembly. Evidently, Australian principles aren't quite so dear.

Inspired by the weakness of democratic states across the U.N. human rights system — the United Kingdom and France evidently thought at Thursday's negotiations that dead silence was acceptable — the Russians pushed the envelope and circulated lengthy additional suggestions for a Durban III declaration. The Russians are undoubtedly working in collaboration with the 56 states in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

The Russian document demanded that the General Assembly on Sept. 22 "express concern about the use of the right to freedom of expression to propagate racism ... and recall that the exercise of this right carries with it special duties and responsibilities and may therefore be subject to certain restrictions." The Russians also insisted on recapitulating that the Durban Declaration is a "solid foundation for the struggle against racism."

Durban III — as was easily predicted — is a battleground between weak-kneed, anxious-to-please democratic countries and shameless, brazen non-democracies who hold the balance of power at the General Assembly. How many democracies will continue to play by rules where they cannot win is as yet unclear. What is clear is that there is no middle ground when it comes to being for or against the modern face of anti-Semitism.

For more United Nations coverage see www.EYEontheUN.org.

Anne Bayefsky is editor of EYEontheUN. Contact the organization at info@EYEonthe UN.org She is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and at Touro College. This article appeared today on Fox News.

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 28, 2011.

In my last posting, I described demonstrations by those who are unhappy with the housing situation in the country.

Everything I wrote with regard to this situation is true. In fact, there is strong indication that the Israeli governments of the last several years (it's not just this government) have failed to involve themselves in ways that would have ameliorated the situation.

The Knesset Research and Information Center has just released a report comparing Israeli housing policies to those of the US, Britain, Germany, Sweden and Australia. Its findings are that these other countries act to moderate housing market fluctuations, via such things as construction subsidies for contractors offering cheap housing.

By contrast, successive Israeli governments over the last 10 years have decreased involvement in the housing market. In the last two years there has been a sharp increase in housing costs. In fact, according to figures from Bank Hapoalim, the real value of housing here has increased by 9.7% just in the last year, and by an astonishing 41% since 2007.


And yet... this is not the whole picture of what's going on now.

In Israel, everything is politics. This is no exception:

There is solid reason to believe that the housing issue is being used to coalesce people with the goal of bringing down the Netanyahu government. Which is not to say they will necessarily succeed.

"Im Tirtzu," a student activist group that is identified as right-wing, had originally joined the housing protest but then just over a week ago pulled out of the main tent city on Rothschild Boulevard in Tel Aviv, because of questions about the political aims of the organizers.

Ronen Shoval, founder of Im Tirtzu, met with some of the protest organizers before the pull-out, and subsequently reported that they refused repeated requests to negotiate with the government to resolve the crisis.

"When one isn't interested in having a conversation with the government, the problem won't be solved. I was trying to convince them to speak to the government, but how many times can you try?

"Conversations with the Rothschild Boulevard organizers made it clear that the group is not looking for solutions; they are looking to protest."


At the same time, one analyst, looking at the make-up of the protesters, observed that very few were dati -- religious -- even though religious couples, who tend to have large families, are surely very much affected by housing shortages.

What are we looking at here? The religious are much more likely to be right wing, while the Tel Aviv crowd is significantly left. Is this a factor?


Now Netanyahu has come forward with a plan to address housing problems. Is it adequate? I am not sufficiently knowledgeable to respond with certainty. What I have heard is that the 50,000 units he projects for the next 18 months to two years would address the shortage to date but not provide for the future. But it's a start, which might reflect new policies. And it's coupled with a projected 10,000 new student dormitory units and other innovations.

One might expect either a wait-and-see-how-it-unfolds attitude among the protesters, or a readiness at last to meet with the prime minister and let him know that, while his announcement is a beginning, they think even more has to be done.

But what we're seeing instead is a digging in of their heels. The initial response was hostile: "You think we're fools, to accept this?" Some of the tent cities -- most significantly that in Tel Aviv -- are being dismantled by the police because they're illegal. But the protesters have let it be known that this will not deter them.


But wait!

In Tel Aviv, demonstrators have now produced a newspaper of sorts, being distributed free on the streets. It includes a poem that ends with the verses, "we have lost our rights to this country, and it's doubtful we'll get them back."

In Jerusalem, demonstrators carried a sign that said, "Welfare State Now!"


What we're seeing then is a clash of social ideologies that is much bigger than the housing problem.

Binyamin Netanyahu, during his tenure as Finance Minister (2003-2005), instituted several reforms that are credited with having strengthened the country, and with very sound reason. Under his stewardship, the welfare society that had been established by left-learning Labor governments at the founding of the State and for decades thereafter was no more. Increased privatization was in, and so were reduced benefits to the population.

Had those reforms not been in place, we certainly would not have weathered the recent global fiscal crisis as resoundingly well as we have, and would not be growing as we are. The welfare system would have sapped the nation impossibly.

But even as we have been seeing the strengthening of the nation as a whole, there are some citizens within who are struggling. The gap between the poorest and the richest has increased; those who run soup kitchens attest to this.

Please understand, however, that we're looking at a relative adjustment in our system, not an absolute one: we still have a socialized medical system, and a variety of perks are in place, including financial assistance (reduced but not eliminated) for those with large families.

We will not -- we cannot and must not -- return to the fiscal policies of the earlier Labor governments. But the concerns of those who are struggling -- as with regard to the housing -- must be addressed at some level.

The double-pronged question now is:

How productively/effectively can Netanyahu respond to the immediate issues of those who are demonstrating in the streets?

And -- the very real and significant flip side of this picture -- how prepared are the demonstrators to truly hear what he says, rather than simply hoping to bring him down?


Opposition leader Tzipi Livni (Kadima) is making the most of these protests. I would not have expected her to do otherwise.

But here's the irony: while the demonstrators have focused their ire on Netanyahu, the fact is that, with regard to housing problems, it is also Kadima that was guilty of decreased involvement. (Olmert of Kadima was prime minister from 2006 — 2009.)


One other significant political factor with regard to the housing problem must be mentioned:

In an unprecedented concession to the Obama administration, from November 2009 through September 2010, Netanyahu instituted a freeze on housing construction in Judea and Samaria. Although that freeze has been lifted officially, it continues de facto to a considerable degree not only in Judea and Samaria, but also in Jerusalem beyond the Green Line. This, without a doubt, has exacerbated the housing shortage.

On Tuesday, MKs from the Knesset Land of Israel lobby released a statement to the media with regard to this:

"We call on the prime minister to remove the political barriers preventing construction in Judea and Samaria, and to allow for an immediate housing solution for the thousands [of people who live] in areas of broad national consensus in Judea and Samaria and in [eastern] Jerusalem."

I would add a thought to this statement: Yes, young people in Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem have trouble finding adequate housing. But what this does is drive them into Israel within the Green Line searching for housing, thus further driving up the prices of apartments and diminishing the available supply there. Were there a concerted effort to do building in Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem, it would shift the entire dynamic for the better.


Nachi Eyal, who heads the Legal Forum for the Land of Israel, also sent a letter to Netanyahu, reflecting concerns similar to those of the Knesset lobby:

"Like many others, we listened attentively to the plan you presented today with the Finance and Housing ministers to solve the housing shortage in Israel.

"Unfortunately, the complex solutions and measures presented did not make one reference to an existing problem: the lack of construction in Judea and Samaria.

"A plan which ignores the housing shortage in Judea and Samaria and the cessation of construction there solely for political considerations of the defense minister [who must sign off on construction in Judea and Samaria] is a plan that is lacking. If the government really wanted to lower the housing prices it would allow construction and promote construction in Judea and Samaria."


Eyal wrote an opinion piece about this -- "The real root of the housing shortage" -- in the Jerusalem Post on Tuesday. And here he fingers yet another part of the problem:

"The demonstrating student who dreams of purchasing a three-room apartment in Kfar Saba doesn't understand that as well as the government's shortcomings and the not-so-simple market, leftist organizations are also to blame. The student sitting beside him on the grass, the one who volunteers for Peace Now on Saturdays and goes around settlements taking pictures of housing starts, is a hidden partner in the increase of apartment prices.

"Yes, pressure from extreme left-wing organizations such as Peace Now, Yesh Din and their allies from the New Israel Fund frightens the prime minister and his cabinet, and is stopping them from promoting building projects and authorizing tenders in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria."
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/ Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=230960


Eyal identifies members of far left organizations who lobby against construction in Judea and Samaria as individuals who increase the housing problem.

But here we come full circle:

"The student sitting beside him on the grass, the one who volunteers for Peace Now..."

Students of the far left are involved in the demonstrations. Their protests against the government because of housing shortages are disingenuous, and indeed do have a larger purpose. From their perspective, how desirable it would be to cause the fall of this prime minister.

Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner18@gmail.com and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Rachel Ehrenfeld, July 28, 2011.

This comes from
http://blog.usaid.gov/2011/07/first-shelter- for-male-victims-of-human-trafficking-opens- in-central-asia/. It was written by Bermet Moldobaeva, Program Officer in Central Asia, International Organization for Migration.


In January 2011, the International Organization for Migration (IOM) opened Central Asia's first all-male shelter for victims of human trafficking. The decision to open a shelter for men was made after a 2010 survey by IOM and the Regional Center for Migration and Refugee Issues revealed that nearly 69 percent of trafficking victims in Central Asia were male and that over 90 percent of trafficking cases involved labor exploitation. At that time, no shelters existed to serve the unique needs of these victims.

The first all-male shelter, located in Tajikistan, provides culturally appropriate rehabilitation and reintegration programs to male labor trafficking victims, many of whom are Muslim. The shelters offer medical assistance, vocational skills training, psychological support, and legal advice and representation. To respect cultural gender norms, IOM decided to staff the shelter with male social workers; this required the training of a cadre of Tajik men in social work, since previous shelters had been staffed by women serving female victims.

Central Asia's first all-male shelter now provides needed services, while enabling IOM to gather lessons learned and best practices for working with male trafficking victims — lessons that IOM will share across Central Asia and beyond. New shelters are already planned for the region, including rehabilitation and reintegration centers for male victims of labor trafficking in Uzbekistan.

These shelters serve another important function: awareness-raising. The emergence of centers supporting male victims belies the assertion that only women and girls are vulnerable to trafficking. In breaking down such stereotypes, the centers help increase understanding among government and the public that men and boys are at high risk of trafficking too.

IOM would like to express its gratitude to USAID and the American people for their continued support of the fight against human trafficking in Central Asia.

Rachel Ehrenfeld is Director of the ACD (American Center for Democracy).

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, July 28, 2011.

Israel is now awash in silliness with regard to the street protests and marches over housing prices. The media are proclaiming this a dramatic social revolution, something like those revolts in Tunisia and Egypt. One cannot read three sentences in the newspapers or listen to the radio without hearing pontifications about "social justice" and "social revolt." Indeed, media commentator after media commentator insists that "All Israelis are now leftists," because leftism is synonymous with the quest for social justice, and Israelis suddenly care out it. Just who told them that the leftist agenda produces social justice is not clear.

The Left itself sees the street grumblings over housing as rescuing it from its oblivion. Netanyahu himself has been forced to put everything else on the back burner and concentrate on making public relations gestures to appease and co-opt the tentsters, those bored middle-class-yuppie kids spending their break in between semesters in makeshift protest tents in Israeli city centers. The New Israel Fund provided the tents.

Just what changed so suddenly to persuade so many seemingly rational people that Israel suddenly is in a major housing crisis? I mean, weren't housing prices also high 6 months ago? So what changed? The answer is — Israelis convinced themselves that the cottage cheese protests held a few weeks back are the solution to economic problems and the only way to produce "social justice." If you make a lot of noise, get on TV, and whine about how unfortunate you are, you can force the political demagogues to buy you off. So why get a job and work hard and save when you can force Bibi and his chums to provide you with subsidized housing units at well below market prices? If you strip away the codpiece off the set of housing "reform" proposals that the government has been marketing, none of them actually will bring housing prices down. All they really will do is to boost the profit rates of insider construction contractors, those cronies of the politicians who will get sweetheart deals on land sales marketed below market prices.

So is there really a housing crisis and emergency in Israel? No, there is a summer boredom emergency of pampered teenagers and 20 year olds.

Here are some inconvenient facts:

>From 1997 to 2007 housing in Israel got cheaper, dramatically so!

>From 1997 to 2007, nominal housing prices in Israel rose 19%, compared with 24% for the consumer price index, which means a real price decrease of less than 1% per year, and that was without adjusting for the fact that housing quality is slowly increasing and units slowly getting largely, which distorts the statistics (and means quality-controlled housing measures got even cheaper). From 1996 until 2008, the Israeli real (inflation-adjusted) prices for housing dropped continuously, losing about 20% of value on average. While prices started rising fairly rapidly in 2009, by the beginning of 2011 they had essentially simply reverted to their real levels (after adjusting for inflation), from the late 1990s. See
http://www.bankisrael.gov.il/deptdata/neumim/ neum397h.pdf Oh and measuring housing prices in dollars is highly misleading because of the rapid collapse in the world value of the dollar.

It is true that prices in Tel Aviv are higher than elsewhere and rose faster than elsewhere, but there are large swaths of the country where prices have not risen at all or not by much. Sales of newly constructed Israeli housing units were 50% higher in 2010 than in 2008. In the central (Tel Aviv metropolitan area) district they were almost three times as high. Of course, those tentsters insisting that living in Northern Tel Aviv is an entitlement and inalienable natural right will not care about that. Funny how residency on Park Avenue in NY was never considered a natural right.

During recent years when prices were rising in Israel, they rose considerably less rapidly than housing prices in many other developed countries. (But not the US, where prices have crashed)

High housing prices hurt some people and benefit other people. They are obviously NOT an unambiguous curse.

The main reasons for the recent rises in Israeli housing prices, especially in Tel Aviv, are all demand side, and demand factors are causing the bidding up of those prices. An important reason for this is mortgage credit, which was made extremely cheap (for a while with interest under 3%) by Bank of Israel policy. The Bank of Israel was concerned about employment in Israel during the global crash and printed up lots of money and drove down interest rates. One can debate how wise that was, but it had a strong impact on the housing market.

The quantity of mortgage credit in Israel rocketed up, rising more than 50% from 2007-2011. In late 2010 the Bank of Israel started making noises about reining in mortgage credit. They have not had much effect to date. Loose and cheap mortgage credit allows people to bid high prices for existing housing units and drives prices high. Ironically, the only effective short-term policy that can bring housing prices down rapidly is to make it much more difficult for Israelis to be able to afford housing, and to make Israelis considerably poorer. That is not exactly what the tentsters and the "social justice" posturers are seeking!

In addition, Israelis are getting wealthier, and higher income and wealth feed into the housing market and drive prices up.

Israeli salaries (not household income) rose on average about 20% since 2005 (fluctuating from quarter to quarter), which resembles the real rise in housing prices after 2008.

Technically on the supply side, although probably just a reflection of the boom in housing demand, construction materials in Israel have risen since 2004 about 25% faster than CPI.

See more here:
http://www.globalpropertyguide.com/ Middle-East/Israel/Price-History

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Sommer, July 27, 2011.

Prime Minister's Bureau confirmed that the National Security Council is discussing alternatives ahead of September, and would present them to the political echelon for a decision when it is done.

This was written by Ravid Barak and it archived at
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/ israel-looking-into-revoking-oslo-accords-in- response-to-palestinian-un-bid-1.375060


A team headed by National Security Adviser Ya'akov Amidror is looking into calling off the Oslo Accords in response to the Palestinian Authority's unilateral plan to gain United Nations recognition for an independent state.

The Prime Minister's Bureau confirmed yesterday only that the NSC was discussing many alternatives ahead of September, and would be presenting them to the political echelon for a decision when it was done.

Israeli officials did confirm that recent discussions held by Amidror had mentioned the option of voiding the Oslo Accords. However, this is not considered a leading alternative, they said. "It is one of the options that will be presented to the political echelon," a source said.

Meanwhile, the PA is continuing its preparations ahead of the UN General Assembly meeting in September. Palestinian ambassadors who met in Istanbul over the past two days were informed that a meeting on the final draft of the UN resolution would be held in Doha, Qatar, with representatives of the PA, Qatar, Egypt and Saudi Arabia on August 4. The resolution will call on the United Nations to recognize a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders as a full UN member.

The Palestinian diplomats were instructed to launch a public relations campaign among international Jewish communities, in an attempt to explain the significance of the move. Meanwhile, Israel is working to rally support from states to oppose the UN move. It is also making preparations for the "day after."

A senior Israeli official said that three weeks ago, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Amidror to start drafting day-after plans with other government bodies. These include recommending a potential Israeli political response.

Skirting the Security Council

Israeli officials believe the Palestinians will skirt the Security Council and will appeal directly to the General Assembly, in order to avoid a potential American veto. The Palestinian proposal is expected to receive the backing of more than 140 UN members.

Another senior Israel official noted that Amidror has started initial discussions at the NSC with representatives from the foreign, defense, finance, industry and trade, and justice ministries, as well as from the Israel Defense Forces Planning Bureau and the Military Advocate General's Department of International Law.

The NSC asked the various government offices to consider the implications of Israel announcing that it considers the Oslo Accords void due to the unilateral Palestinian move, should the General Assembly approve the bid.

Israel is concerned that the Palestinians may use the General Assembly resolution in order to launch a legal fight in the International Court at the Hague, or to try to alter the economic and security arrangements reached over the past 18 years.

NSC officials told representatives of the various government and military bodies that Israel would not initiate such a move, but may do so in response to the Palestinian actions. The various bodies were asked to present their views and legal opinions, and to offer possible responses. The matter has still not been discussed by the ministers.

"Netanyahu is opposed to actions such as annexing settlements to Israel in response to a Palestinian move at the UN," said an Israeli source familiar with the discussions. "Therefore, the NSC is evaluating other possibilities, one of them being voiding the Oslo Accords. In any case, there is no decision yet."

The Oslo Accords between Israel and the PLO were struck between 1993 and 1995, and are the legal framework for the relationship between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in matters including security, economy and infrastructure. Doing away with the accords would require reexamining key issues, primarily the status of the PA in the West Bank.

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman had mentioned doing away with the Oslo Accords during a meeting with European Union High Representative Catherine Ashton on June 17. Even though Lieberman supports such a response to a unilateral Palestinian move, officials at the Foreign Ministry consider such action "counterproductive."

Contact Barbara Sommer at lsommer_1_98@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by UCI, July 27, 2011.

This was written by Jonathan S. Tobin, executive editor of Commentary Magazine. This appeared in Jewish World Review and is archived at
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0711/ tobin.php3?printer_friendly


U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority has become an increasingly controversial matter in the wake of the group's decision to bypass peace negotiations and go to the United Nations for recognition of an independent state. But the outlay of funds to the Palestinians may become even more toxic after the release of a report by a media watch organization detailing the payment of salaries from the U.S.-funded PA to imprisoned terrorists.

The report from Palestinian Media Watch, an Israeli-based organization that monitors the Palestinian media and culture, said that more than 5,500 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails are getting salaries from the PA. Though Palestinians held by Israel on charges of terrorism have always received stipends from the PA, the practice was formalized this past April when a new law to that effect was promulgated. The law was reported in the Palestinian official press but went unnoticed by the international media. Given that the United States gives more than $600 million to the Palestinians each year, including $225 million that goes directly to the PA, the payment of these salaries is a violation of U.S. law.

As the authors of the report pointed out when they presented their findings to members of Congress on Tuesday, the 2010 legislation that authorized aid to the PA said the State Department must "take all appropriate steps to ensure that such assistance is not provided to or through any individual, private or government entity, or educational institution that the Secretary knows or has reason to believe advocates, plans, sponsors, engages in, or has engaged in, terrorist activity."

The PA's payment of salaries to convicted terrorists is a clear violation of this law. In addition to speaking of the cash layouts to terrorists (which actually exceed the salaries paid to Palestinian civil servants), the report also discussed the incitement against Israel and Jews that is published and broadcast by the Palestinian official media. Another egregious example of Palestinian incitement was the fact that a summer camp sponsored by PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad divided children into three groups-each named for terrorists.

For those who have followed the history of U.S. aid to the Palestinians, this is familiar stuff. Ever since the original Oslo Accords, the State Department has made it a practice to either ignore or to deny all reports of PA support for terror or glorification of terrorists. Throughout this period, such outrages have been swept under the carpet by diplomats intent on pursuing an agenda of appeasement of the Palestinians in the vain hope this will cause them to make peace. But the United States has not been rewarded for its generosity.

We can only hope this latest evidence of Palestinian treachery will finally motivate Congress and the White House to hold the PA accountable and stop the flow of money from American taxpayers to terrorists.

UCI — The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) — is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel."

"Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!"

To Go To Top

Posted by P. David Hornik, July 27, 2011.

"The main, immediate beneficiaries of what is known as the 'Arab spring' are Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip," Israeli military analyst Ron Ben-Yishai reported on Ynet the other day.

His and similar reports haven't attracted much attention, and perhaps it's understandable. There's been a mass murder in Norway, and, in Israel, raucous public protests over housing prices. But the deterioration in Gaza is surely worthy of note, and, for Israelis, likely to be more significant than the cost of flats.

Ben-Yishai, noting the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt since Mubarak's downfall, says "the group's influence prompted Egypt's government to completely halt construction" of an underground metal wall between Egyptian Sinai and Gaza. Built with U.S. assistance, it was supposed to block smuggling tunnels.

Now, though, "the Egyptian regime is making no effort to curb new tunnels and has virtually suspended its battle against smuggling...to the Strip."

This is bad enough, but in addition, "Egyptian security forces preoccupied with domestic developments [have] completely lost their hold on the Sinai...." That means, along with the enhanced global jihad presence in the peninsula, that

[s]ome 300,000 Bedouins belonging to four or five large tribes are now the Sinai's true rulers. These tribes' main income is based on smuggling in general, and on smuggling to Gaza in particular, and they quickly exploited the security vacuum in the peninsula in the wake of the revolution.

Last February when the "Arab spring" was still young, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman was in Cairo harshly berating Israel for not reacting enthusiastically. But if Israel wasn't celebrating the events at that time, it has even less reason to do so now.

"As a result," says Ben-Yishai, of the abandoned work on the wall and Sinai's descent into a Wild West,

arms shipments to the Strip have been surging...: everything that has been sent by the Iranians and their emissaries in recent years and was hidden by the Bedouins...has flowed freely into Gaza in the past five months. Meanwhile, new shipments arrived and were transferred to Hamas and Islamic Jihad without delay or a need to hide them.

Hence the terror groups have "doubled their rocket arsenals" so that they now "possess some 10,000 rockets of all types, a similar number to the Hezbollah arsenal in the Second Lebanon War," including "thousands of mid-range Grad rockets and a few heavy Fajr rockets that...can reach the outskirts of...Tel Aviv."

The Iranian-supplied merchandise also includes "three times (!) the quantity of industrial explosives compared to the quantity handed over throughout 2010," along with "large quantities of anti-aircraft weapons...creating a greater threat for Air Force choppers and jets."

Another Israeli military correspondent, Haaretz's Amos Harel, cites "senior defense officials" blaming "[t]he revolutions in the Arab world, especially the Egyptian security forces' diminished control in the Sinai" for allowing the Palestinians to "exponentially increase" the smuggling into Gaza.

And to the Egyptian example Harel adds another, confirming earlier reports that

the civil war in Libya opened new opportunities for weapons after the Libyan army lost control of vast weapons stores in the east of the country. Local arms dealers made contact with Gaza smugglers, and new weapons began to flow by a much shorter and easier route than the ones originating in Iran.

The Israeli government, too, has chimed in, with the home front minister warning that "metropolitan Tel Aviv...will be bombed by missiles in the next Gaza war" and adding: "There is no country in the world that is threatened like the State of Israel. The only country that approximates it is South Korea."

Israel, too, has been building up its capacities and is, of course, far from helpless before these threats. But the rapid demise of what's left of the Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty is a story that shouldn't sink under the radar, uncongenial as it may be to many.

That treaty, signed in 1979, entailed a total Israeli evacuation of armed forces and civilians from Sinai, which was supposed to become a vast buffer zone and guarantor of peace between the two countries. Sinai has, in fact, been a weapons-smuggling route to Gaza since the 1990s, when, as part of another "peace" venture dubbed Oslo, Israel partially transferred security control of the Strip to Yasser Arafat's forces.

The situation only worsened — dramatically — when Israel totally withdrew from Gaza as well in 2005. Note that, if Israel had remained in Sinai, then relaxing control of the million-plus hostile Arabs in Gaza — something most Israelis wanted in principle — might have been doable without incurring unbearable security costs. But leaving Gaza after Sinai, on which it borders, was totally out of Israel's hands — as "disengagement" opponents warned at the time — was a recipe for strategic disaster.

At least, toward the end of its existence, the Mubarak regime in Egypt tried to do more to stop the smuggling. Now, with that regime gone, the Islamists ascendant, and Sinai in anarchy, the situation is as described above.

Going back, though, to the 1979 treaty, it was widely touted as showing that Israel could make real, stable peace with its neighbors. Yet, with or without Israel's blunders, it now emerges clearly that the treaty's unraveling was a matter of time and a function of intra-Arab dynamics. It will be the same with any other contrived "peace" Israel makes, or is pushed into making, with any other of its neighbors.

David Hornik is a freelance writer and translator living in Beersheva. He blogs at http://pdavidhornik.typepad.com/. He can be reached at pdavidh2001@yahoo.com. This article appeared in Front Page Magazine
http://frontpagemag.com/2011/07/27/ sinai-from-buffer-to-badlands/

To Go To Top

Posted by Dr. Steve Carol, July 27, 2011.

Have Judea and Samaria been figuratively lost? Judea and Samaria are the historically biblical names for the highland regions of the Land of Israel, with Samaria in the north and Judea to the south. They are the definitive and proper political and geographic names for the region and have been in general use since Clearchus, a disciple of Aristotle. These two areas have no other names. These names were used during the League of Nations Mandate period. They appear in British government documents, United Nations documents including the UN Partition Plan of 1947. They appear in U.S. State Department documents, including a July 18, 1948 map. Even as late as 1961, the Encyclopaedia Britannica refers to "Judaea" and "Samaria" in an article on "Palestine" (Vol. 17, p. 118).

Trans-Jordan illegally invaded Judea-Samaria in 1948 and as a result of its aggression occupied that region. It then unilaterally annexed the area on April 4, 1950, which was recognized by only two nations, the United Kingdom and Pakistan.

The Arab League, their Muslim supporters, anti-Israel elements and anti-Semites, deliberately sought to rob the region of its correct political and geographic name. They had to fabricate a brand new name for they could find no other name for the territory. Mislabeling was their technique of disinformation and de-legitimization. The "West Bank" was the name concocted by King Abdullah I of Trans-Jordan and his British advisors, allowing the king to annex land outside of his artificially "created" kingdom. He then changed the name of his kingdom twice, first to "The Hashemite Kingdom of the Jordan" but that was quickly rejected since it gave the appearance of a kingdom only along the banks of the Jordan River. The name then was changed again to the "Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan." The term "West Bank" eradicates all Jewish historical connection to the area. It is a sad commentary that many in the West, including the political left, many Israel's supporters, some Israelis themselves, as well as the naïve and self-delusional who think the name does not matter, have acquiesced to this unilateral change of names and use it in common parlance. But the name does matter. Similarly, the Arabs insist on calling the Persian Gulf, the "Arabian Gulf" and Iran's Khuzistan province, "Arabistan." Why then doesn't much of the world call the Persian Gulf "Arabian?" Is there a double standard at work here?

Besides the political origins of the phrase, one must wonder from a geographical perspective how wide a river bank can be? A river bank may be a few feet or so, but not some 30 miles deep from the river! Just because a new name is invented, does not mean the world should adopt it in common usage. Does an aggressor get rewarded with the additional bonus of a geographic name change designed to eradicate the historic name of a region? In March 1939, Germany renamed the present-day Czech Republic, "Böhmen und Mähren" after seizing that land by aggressive act. During World War II, Germany invaded, occupied and annexed part of Russia calling it "Ostland." Do we use those terms today? Do we call Mexico the "South Bank" because it borders on the Rio Grande? Should we rename Serbia, the "West Bank" (of Europe) because it lies to the west of the Danube River and re-designate Poland the "East Bank" due to its location east of the Oder-Neisse Rivers?

Long before most of media capitulated to protests over Danish cartoons and statements by the Pope, the media and many in the world, out of fear and intellectual laziness agreed to obfuscate the truth by surrendering the use of the name Judea-Samaria and adopt the term "West Bank."

The Roman emperor Hadrian in 135 CE after suppressing the Jewish revolt led by Bar Kochba, attempted to eradicate Jewish nationhood, statehood and any connection to the Land of Israel. He renamed the territory "Palestina" — after the Philistines, the ancient adversaries of the Israelites. Seeking to erase the Jewish connection to Jerusalem the Romans razed the city and named the city built atop the rubble, "Aelia Capitolina." Nevertheless as late as the 4th century, the Christian author, Epiphanius, referred to "Palestina, that is Judea." Despite this "Palestina" is still Israel, Aelia Capitolina is still Jerusalem and the West Bank is still Judea-Samaria.

Dr. Steve Carol is Professor of History (retired).

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Ginsberg, July 27, 2011.

If you are interested in buying Rabbi Meir Kahane writings in a new 7-volume collection, "Beyond Words," write to Levi Chazan at: Levi1@hotmail.com For people outside of Israel "Beyond Words" in soft cover is in the printing process and will shortly be sold at Amazon.com.

If you did not receive this article personally and would like to, contact me at: BarbaraAndChaim@gmail.com

To view previously sent Rabbi Kahane articles go to:



What causes the Jew in Israel, afflicted by daily murders, attacks, stoning, terror and deadly fear, to sit by passively, acquiescing in the process of his own gradual destruction? In China, where the citizens are not threatened daily by the enemy that wishes to destroy them, people rose up and demonstrated openly for democracy in the face of a totalitarian, brutal government. In Jordan, when gasoline prices were raised, people rioted and burned automobiles. President Marcos of the Philippines was forced out by a people's upsurge in the streets, not because the people's lives were in danger but because they were furious at corruption. The list is a long one and only sharpens the question: What is wrong with the Jew in Israel? What is it that paralyzes him and keeps him from taking to the streets in the hundreds of thousands and demanding fundamental change, a change in the government and system, both?

The Ibn Ezra, one of the greatest and deepest of the Biblical commentators, asked the same question in a different context and his answer remains a light unto our feet. Concerning the children of Israel who were standing at the Red sea and seeing the Egyptian army approaching, began to weep and wail hysterically, the Ibn Ezra asks:

"One must wonder. How can a large camp of 600,000 men fear because they are being pursued, and why did they not fight for their lives and their children? The answer is that the Egyptians were masters over Israel, and the generation that left Egypt learned from youth to suffer the yoke of Egypt, and its soul was degraded and how could it fight against its masters..."

A degraded soul. A soul that is low and humble, fearful and apprehensive. The soul of the Jewish slave who had just left the Exile of Egypt and the soul of the Jew of ghetto mentality who left the Exile of our time and took large parts of it with him (and how much easier is it for the Jew to leave the Exile than for the Exile to leave him!). The Jew of Israel, despite all the nonsense of "the soul of a Jew yearning," and the "New Hebrew," remains with the same soul of the slave, degraded and frightened, terrified of the gentile while bereft of any faith in G-d or belief in himself as the chosen People of that G-d. And so, there remains in him a slave mentality and soul of massive proportions that, on the one hand, sees himself fully cognizant of the reality of Arab savagery and intention to wipe out the Jewish state, while, at the same time, with a fear of rising up and acting in a way that will save him, his family, his people and state.

And the Ibn Ezra continues: "And the L-rd, who alone does great things and weighs events, caused it to come about that all the males who left Egypt died out, for they had no strength to fight the Canaanites. Until there arose a new generation of the desert, that had not seen the Exile and which had an elevated soul..."

The generation of Egypt, with its soul of degradation, was kept from entering the land. The generation of our times, with all its degrading lowness and complexes, succeeded in entering Eretz Yisrael. The generation that removed itself from the Exile must now complete the work by ripping the Exile from itself. We must free the Jew spiritually so that he rises up.

Printed in J.P., June 30, 1989


That unity is a thing which we devoutly hope and pray is axiomatic. The unity is not the supreme value is rather less understood. As with everything else, the authentic Jewish value clashes with liberal fluff and perversion. Unity is a positive Jewish value only when those who are being unified do not openly and arrogantly deny and reject authentic Jewish values and Torah commandments. There is not only no mitzvah to unify under Jewish leaders who are un-Jewish, anti-Jewish and despising of Jewish values, but there is rather a great mitzvah to disperse them, to break away from them.

"The coming together of the righteous is good for them and good for the world," say the rabbis (Sanhedrin 71). "and the scattering of the wicked is good for them and good for the world." To accept the leadership of Hellenists and rejecters of Jewish Law in the name of "unity" is to pervert Jewish values and G-d's commandments.

...I raise the issue because it is clearer and clearer to me, daily, that the greatest danger to the Jew, both in Israel and in the Exile, is the Jewish leader. The ones who make up the Jewish Establishment are the anti-Jewish spiritual dregs of the earth. Astoundingly ignorant of anything authentically Jewish, they are chose only for their money and power, and it is precisely those that create within them an arrogance and haughtiness that leads them to contemptuously declare war on Torah and true Jewish values. The words of Kind David in the Psalms (73) ring too true:

"Arrogance is their necklace . . . . Their eye bulge from fat, they have exceeded the fantasies of their heart. They consume, and speak evilly about oppression; they speak as if there were none on high. They have set their mouths against the heavens."

Printed in J.P. November 17, 1989

Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Israel Resource Review, July 26, 2011.

When you examine the websites about the United Nations Relief and Work Agency, you get glowing reports of its wonderful humanitarian work.

You're told of an agency that is helping care for an estimated 1.5 million Palestinians in refugee camps.

The pictures are inspiring and heartwarming. It's impossible not to feel sympathy for the refugees.

But the sanguine picture painted on the Web is, in many respects, just a facade.

Israeli investigative journalist David Bedein has looked underneath the surface and has found some very sinister activity.

Bedein, the Jerusalem bureau chief of the Israel Resource News Agency, has raised many questions about the refugee camps and the U.N. agency supporting them.

Bedein has discovered that the camps are funded by donations from individuals and countries from throughout the world. As might be expected, the United States is one of the largest contributors, providing more than 30 percent of the funds.

Americans are told that their money supports social services, nutrition and educational programs. But we're not told about the biased indoctrination that maybe be provided under the guise of education.

Bedein said while the U.N. agency is responsible for the camps, administration of them and the money obtained is done by Hamas, the terrorist organization that has vowed to wipe Israel off the map. Hamas is not too fond of the United States either.

He notes that unlike other refugee camps, where efforts are made to relocate the inhabitants, no such work is being conducted for the Palestinians.

As Bedein notes "Palestinian refugees are staying refugees. The U.N. is not making an effort to resettle them, but instead is financing what appears to be an Hamas-administered population that is being taught that they will stay refugees until they return to their 1948 homes in Israel.

"Those homes obviously don't exist anymore, and it would mean displacing Israelis. In fact, they're not against killing Jews."

The United States says it supports Israel, yet through its donations to the refugee camps, it is figuratively providing guns to terrorists. In this case, the "guns" are in the form of hateful propaganda, but the damage can be just as severe. Bedein said hundreds of thousands of refugees are being brainwashed and taught to despise Israel and accept nothing but its complete destruction.

All of this is going on under what has been termed "Right to Return" policy, which says refugees have a right to return to their native countries.

However, if their native countries no longer exist, how long should they be housed — or imprisoned — in refugee camps?

As Bedein notes, the Palestinian camps are the only ones sponsored by the U.N. that do not make an effort to relocate their inhabitants. There are numerous Arab countries where these poor souls could find kindred spirits and be relocated.

But there's no such effort. Instead, the extremists in the Middle East are using them as pawns in their fight against Israel.

There is some hope. In recent news reports, congressional Republicans and Democrats have said the U.S. aid to the Palestinians is in jeopardy if Hamas' direct involvement in the camps continues.

Obviously, our leaders must be aware of the situation. We just hope they have the courage to follow through and stop the aid. Whatever good it is doing is being negated by the hateful messages it supports.

This article is archived at http://israelbehindthenews.com/bin/ content.cgi?ID=4463&q=1

To Go To Top

Posted by Mech'el Samberg, July 26, 2011.

This was written by Jonathan Rosenbaum and it appeared June 22, 2011 in Mishpach Magazine. It is archived at
http://www.jewishmediaresources.com/1457/ korach-5771-something-new-something-old-look-who


Because all Jewish marriages in Israel are performed under the auspicies of the Chief Rabbinate, every kallah is required to receive some basic instruction on Jewish married life from the local religious council. Traditionally, that instruction provided in a group setting and sometimes lasting no more than half an hour was experienced by secular Israeli women as a bore and burden at best. Too often one of the few contacts most non-religious Israelis have with a chareidi Jew ended up as an off-putting and traumatizing experience.

About ten years ago, Feivi Arnstein and Akiva Houghtling asked themselves a question: What if an organization were created to subcontract the services of the local religious councils? What if the instruction took place in a pleasant setting, at the convenience of the kallot, and the instruction was given one-on-one and by sensitive, dedicated counselors. Such a project, they concluded, could potentially have a potent impact on large numbers of secular Israelis. A similar initiative in South Africa, where all Jewish couples receive marriage guidance, contributed to the teshuva revolution in South Africa.

Thus Lahav was born. So far Lahav has established centers in Jerusalem, Rechovot, Modiin, Bat Yam, and Ramat Gan, and is teaching approximately 3,000 kallot annually. The Tel Aviv Religious Council, with 4,000 secular couples annually, has expressed interest in sending kallot, if Lahav can find a suitable facility, as have Ramat Hasharon/Herzilya, Kiryat Ono, and Rishon LeTzion.

The intuition of the two founders (who were subsequently joined by a third partner Shmuel Horowitz) that a negative experience could be transformed into an intensely positive one proved correct. Each kallah is asked to rate the sessions, describe the anticipated impact of the learning on her future married life, and state her level of interest in future workshops and lectures.

On a scale of 1-5, with five the highest, the average rating given by the kallot in 2010 was 4.939. Over 65% of the couples who went through the Lahav preparatory program in the last two years expressed an interest in continued learning. And of the 9,500 couples who passed through the program in the last five years, 3,000 have been put in contact with various kiruv organizations.

But even these statistics don't begin to convey the impact of the program. For that one must read the forms that all kallot fill out. Many had little concept of the Jewish approach to marriage before starting their sessions, and most of what they imagined were crude distortions. Many of them commented that they could not have imagined the course having the slightest impact on their future marriages at the outset, but that they now expect the Torah approach to be central to their marriages.

One high school teacher, for instance, wrote that as a result of the course, "I have started to get interested in the mitzvoth in general, and, in particular, the mitzvoth which are related to women, and I have even started attending classes on Judaism where I live."

The kallot almost all remarked on the rapport that they had with the woman guiding them. "Sari suits her explanations to the kallah who is sitting across from her. She accepted me as I am, did not interrogate me, and did not try to press her opinions on me," wrote one. "I really enjoyed the meetings and with joy will be happy to come to more." Another teacher described the material as "fascinating and moving," and her madricha as "a wonderful woman, warm and cordial, who knows exactly how to teach." "I enjoyed it so much and I'm so happy I came to Lahav," wrote one economist. She expressed her "surprise" at her desire to keep the mitzvos she had just discovered.

The impact of the madrichot is not accidental. Each of the 500 madrichot was already an experienced teacher, and has been carefully screened. The eight-session preparatory class includes a detailed discussion of what to teach from Rabbi Yisroel Gans, a wide range of material on relationships, and classes on the mindset of a secular woman approaching the sessions. The teachers are highly committed — over 200 teach 7-8 kallot a year for free.

Lahav demonstrates a point I have made frequently: When chareidi and secular Israelis meet, with open hearts and in an atmosphere of mutual respect, they can connect at a deep level. And when the secular member of the relationship understands how the Torah approach works in one area of life, he or she is often willing to explore further. Lahav has provided a model that would allow such a relationship with 24,000 secular couples annually. We must not miss the boat.

Contact Mechel Samberg at mechelsamberg2@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 26, 2011.

Let me begin with an issue of the rights of Americans born in Jerusalem, Israel:

The case of Menachem Zivotofsky v. Secretary of State Clinton (No. 10-6990) will be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in November 2011 and decided by the end of June 2012. At issue is the right of a Jerusalem-born American citizen to self-identify as born in "Israel" on his or her US passport and Consular Report of Birth Abroad ("CRBA").

The general rule for American citizens born abroad is that their US passports list their country of birth as their place of birth. The only mandatory exception is for American citizens born in Jerusalem. The US Department of State refuses to list "Israel" as the place of birth for American citizens born in Jerusalem because it claims that doing so would interfere with the President's authority to "recognize foreign sovereigns." Instead the State Department lists "Jerusalem" as the place of birth.

In 2002, Congress passed a law that required the State Department to list the place of birth on US passports as "Israel" for those American citizens born in Jerusalem who request it. When the law was enacted, President George W. Bush issued a "signing statement" declaring that the law impermissibly interfered with his constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs and so he would not follow it.


Menachem B. Zivotofsky is an American citizen born in Jerusalem shortly after the law was passed. His parents requested that the place of birth on his US passport be listed as "Israel." The State Department refused. Nathan Lewin and Alyza D. Lewin of Lewin & Lewin, LLP, agreed to represent the Zivotofskys and have litigated the case pro bono for eight years. Their case has now made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which will hear arguments in November 2011.

The National Council of Young Israel, together with the International Israel Allies Caucus Foundation has established a website: www.borninjerusalem.org. Via this site, you can:

[] Secure additional information.

[] Send a letter to your U.S. Senators and Congressional Representatives urging them to sign an amicus brief that will be filed on August 5, 2011 in support of Zivotofsky on behalf of Members of Congress.

[] Join the ad-hoc Association of Proud American Citizens Born in Jerusalem, Israel, if you are an American citizen born in Jerusalem and wish to have your place of birth recorded on your US passport as "Israel." The Anti-Defamation League, together with the law firm of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C., is preparing an amicus brief to be filed in the Zivotofsky case on behalf of the ADL and the Association.

(Thanks to Dorraine W. for calling my attention to this material, and to Jeff D. for his hard work on the issue.)


Strong and Shaky:

In a host of ways, Israel is demonstrating great strength:

Internationally, we've been coming out with PR that is effective and securing greater understanding in many quarters.

Domestically, we have come through recent economic turmoil far better than most Western nations and now see a shekel that is much stronger than the dollar. (Who would have thought?) Our unemployment rate has hit a new low at 5.9%, while the US is struggling with the highest rate of unemployment since the Depression.

But all of this does not mean we are without difficulties. Two issues have come to the fore domestically in recent weeks. I do not intend to analyze them in any detail. But I cannot proceed without mentioning them, as they are important matters for Israel.


One issue involves a labor dispute between members of the medical profession, in good part residents, and the government, or the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Finance (the Treasury), more specifically; the Labor Court is playing a role, as well. The issues are both pay and hours — with the need to bring in more doctors to reduce current work loads deemed critical. At present there are strikes in different places, with reduced hours and services in some public medical facilities (emergencies and oncology cases are always responded to); Chairman of the Israel Medical Association, Dr. Leonid Eidelman, has said he is about to begin a hunger strike.

It must be mentioned here that Netanyahu is involved not only as prime minister, but also as titular head of the Ministry of Health. (Yakov Litzman, a Ger Hasid and member of the party United Torah Judaism, serves as Deputy Minister and deals with day to day matters, but for reasons of ideology declined to assume the position of Minister. Netanyahu consented to carry that title.)


A second issue is that of housing in Israel: there is a shortage of housing in absolute terms, and a shortage of lower income housing in particular. Students, young couples and demobilized soldiers are being hit the hardest. There have been major demonstrations in the last few days, with tent cities set up in protest.

Involved here are the prime minister, the Ministry of Finance, and the Ministry of Construction and Housing.

As a resident of Jerusalem, I am keenly aware myself of the enormous cost of housing in the city. What exacerbates the situation is that one developer after another constructs "upscale" buildings that the average resident cannot touch. (Unfortunately, many of these apartments for the wealthy are sold to people who live outside of Israel and want to come for only weeks during the year. This drives up the cost of housing for everyone.)

Netanyahu called a press conference this afternoon to announce a set of reforms that is supposed to ameliorate the situation. The reforms include: the removal of barriers to planning and to the sale of land for housing; a discount in the price of land for construction; new apartments to be built that will offer reduced-cost long-term rentals — with 50,000 affordable units to be available within two years; the building of 10,000 new dormitory units for students; and transportation discounts to make it more possible to acquire housing on the periphery.

The parties to the left are criticizing this as inadequate, but so, it seems, are many of the protesters.


There are those suggesting that these crises — especially with regard to housing — spell the beginning of the end for this government. I'm not ready to go there yet. Netanyahu is savvy, and might yet pull the government out of its current difficulties.

And so I say here what I frequently do: We must watch and see how it plays out.


There has also been a suggestion in some quarters that these demonstrations have been inspired or motivated by the uprising in surrounding Arab countries. But nothing could be further from the truth. Israel is a vibrant democracy with a history of strikes and demonstrations. Even if some of the current problems might cause the fall of the government, this would be part of the democratic process and would be followed by elections. This current unrest is not, in any sense, a rebellion against a repressive tyrant or an effort to overturn the system!

Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner18@gmail.com and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by GWY, July 25, 2011.

This comes from Right Side News
(http://www.rightsidenews.com/ 2011072414123/world/terrorism/global -jihad-marches-islam-and-apostasy.html) (RightSideNews). It was written by Vin Ienco, who blogs at http://vinienco.com/


Similarly to what we know of the Mafia, Islam has an inbuilt clause that instructs its followers, 'if you leave, you die'. Most Islamic countries advocate death for apostates though some people are jailed until they recant or in some instances, their families are also harassed or kidnapped and tortured. Yet another of Islams' insecurities is exposed in hanging the

  • threat of death over a person's head, for having freedom of conscience. If this wasn't such a serious issue, it wouldn't be that different to a cheap, Hollywood gangster movie. Welcome to Islam.


    1. The person has understood and professed the Shahada ('there is no God but Allah, and Mohammad is his messenger').

    2. Understands the code of conduct or religious law of Islam (Sharia Law).

    3. Is of sound mind.

    4. Has reached or surpassed puberty (Reliance of the Traveler: Islamic Law 08.1 — "When a person who has reached puberty, is sane and voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed").

    5. Has consciously and deliberately rejected or consciously and deliberately intends to reject as untrue either the Shahada and Shariah Law and all that it entails.

    6. Scholars from the Sunni schools of jurisprudence (Maliki) additionally require that the person in question have publicly engaged in the obligatory practices of the religion.

    In his early years, Mohammed preached peace and tolerance. This proved catastrophic in getting people to believe in the rehashed moon God, Allah. Barely a handful of people converted to Islam in its early years. In 623 AD, Mohammed ordered raids on Meccan caravans and discovered that robbery, murder and enslavement were more satisfying to his desires and far more lucrative. The verses of peace were out and violence, rape, mutilation and murder were now in. Enter abrogation. It is important to note that Muslims will lie and use a superseded (abrogated) verse from the Koran when confronted with the question of apostasy.

    Late last year, Pamela Geller was interviewed with an Imam from New York over the plans for the World Trade Center mosque. During the interview the issue of apostasy was raised by Geller. The Imam calmly opened his Koran and quoted, 'there is no compulsion in religion, it is stated right here in the Koran.' The verse reads:

    (2:256) "Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth has been made clear from error. Whoever rejects false worship and believes in God has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that never breaks. And God hears and knows all things." (Quran 2:256)

    That seems innocent enough, though unfortunately that verse is irrelevant. Hence, apostates from Islam are on the run and in hiding, if they are still alive. It isn't too hard to find an article about an apostate and the challenges they face. Here is one _resource_
    (http://www.answering-islam.org/Testimonies/) . This is what the Koran and Hadith says about apostasy:

    (004.089) "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them".

    (009.066) "Make ye no excuses: ye have rejected Faith after ye had accepted it. If we pardon some of you, we will punish others amongst you, for that they are in sin"

    (4:52:260) Narrated Ikrima: Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.'"

    (9:83:37) Narrated Abu Qilaba: "By Allah, Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate."


    Rifqa Bary: Rifqa was an outgoing seventeen year old girl originally from New Albany, Ohio. She completed her Junior year at New Albany High School, a nationally recognized school of excellence. She was a model student, earned good grades, was a popular cheerleader and even held a part-time job at a local restaurant.

    Rifqa's life was publicly shattered when she abruptly fled her Ohio home in fear for her life and surfaced in Orlando, Florida three weeks later. She had been living a private life and was constantly fearful of being discovered. When this secret was exposed to her parents by members of the Bary family's religious congregation — threats were made that scared Rifqa to the point where she felt forced to undertake drastic measures to save herself.

    What was her secret, her crime? She converted from Islam to Christianity.

    Bary had alleged that her father had said, "If you have this Jesus in your heart, you are dead to me!" She says her father then added, "I will kill you!" In September 2010, she was granted residency status and has not been in contact with any family members as she is still afraid of them.

    Kamariah Ali: A 57 year old female school teacher from Malaysia was originally jailed for 20 months in 1992 and again in 2005 for apostasy. Over 60 percent of Malaysians are Sunni Muslims. Islam is the state religion and Malaysia claims to support freedom of religion though Muslims are not permitted to convert to other religions.

    Passing sentence in her most recent court appearance, the Sharia judge Mohammed Abdullah said, "The court is not convinced that the accused has repented and is willing to abandon any teachings contrary to Islam. I pray God will open the doors of your heart, Kamariah."

    "This has to stop. They can't be sending her again and again to prison for this," her lawyer, Sa'adiah Din, told reporters. "She informed the court that she is not a Muslim. She doesn't come under Sharia court anymore."

    Yosef Nadarkhani: A 32 year old pastor from Rasht, Iran that converted to Christianity in 1998 and arrested in 2009 for apostasy. He had refused to teach Islam to children at a Christian school and was sentenced to death by hanging. An appeal was won by Yosefs' legal team but he is now required to attend court again to answer the charges of organizing evangelistic meetings, sharing his faith, inviting others to convert, running a house church, and 'denying Islamic values'.

    Yosef was born to Muslim parents, though he had never practiced any faith until his conversion at age 19. Islamic law dictates that being born to Muslim parents makes him a Muslim and as such, apostasy from Islam is forbidden.

    Tahie Yusuf al-Qaradawi has many claims to fame in the Islamic world, including the creation of the extremely popular website,Islamonline. (http://www.islamonline.com/) He is also considered to be in the top 3 of Muslim intellectuals in the world and has long had a prominent role within the intellectual leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood. Tahie has a popular show on Al Jazeera called 'Shariah and Life', with an enviable viewing audience of some 40 million Muslims worldwide. When he speaks, Muslims listen.

    Qaradawi believes that punishment for apostasy is an established Islamic tradition and that all the jurists are unanimous on this. He writes:

    "All Muslim jurists agree that the apostate is to be punished. However, they differ regarding the punishment itself. The majority of them go for killing; meaning that an apostate is to be sentenced to death. Authentic Hadith have been reported in this regard. Ibn 'Abbas reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "Whoever changes his religion, you kill him."

    Ali P, personal friend and apostate of Islam: "How this cult of hate has darkened my Haj going (pilgrimage to Mecca) super Muslim mother's heart so much that she claimed in her own words, to her only son (me), that she will cut my throat with her own hands if she sees me in person? My own mother! This is what Islam does to your mind and soul when you surrender to it. Do you know why? It's because you are surrendering to Satan",

    It is easy to conclude that there is freedom of religion in Islam. You are free to be a Muslim or you are to be tortured, harassed, jailed or put to death. Over-breeding, forced conversions and death to apostates all add up to the ever entangling web of stealth jihad, that is slowly choking our freedom and enveloping the planet.

    Contact GWY at gwy123@aol.com

    To Go To Top
    Posted by Roz Rothstein and Roberta Seid, July 25, 2011.

    When news emerged that "Freedom Flotilla 2" was tied up in Greece for weeks and unable to carry out its plan to breach Israel's blockade of Hamas-controlled Gaza, a song from Camelot came to mind. Queen Guinevere asks, "What do the simple folk do... when they are blue?" and King Arthur tries to explain.

    You have to ask the same question about the Flotilla Folk. Who are they, what do they do and why do they do it? Almost 1,500 of them from around the world planned to fly to Greece, board ships and sail across the Mediterranean to the Gaza Strip in July.

    The Flotilla Folk say they are just ordinary folk committed to human rights. But how do ordinary folk have time for the complicated preparations necessary for such an adventure, and for spending weeks in Greece and Gaza? Don't they have jobs? Or do they get their summers off? And how do ordinary folk have the funds to buy ships fly to Greece and spend weeks in hotels waiting to launch the latest publicity stunt they have concocted to smear Israel?

    How do they pay for their expensive human rights hobby? Apparently they don't have to do much preparing. Established radical groups affiliated with Hamas take care of all the details, like the Union of Good (UoG), a coalition of European charities affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, and the International Solidarity Movement (ISM). The ISM has praised Palestinian suicide bombing as "noble," spent the last 10 years training international volunteers to sabotage Israel's security, and received official invitations from Hamas to come to Gaza.

    These groups raise the money through their various affiliated "charities," which sometimes generate funds through mainstream businesses. Or they raise money by misinforming well-meaning people about their purposes, as the US delegation to Gaza did by having the audacity to name its boat after President Barack Obama's book, The Audacity of Hope.

    But why would Flotilla Folk spend their vacations trying to violate Israel's legal naval blockade of Gaza in order to visit and embrace Hamas, the terrorist organization that controls the territory? Flotilla Folk leaders like UoG and ISM support Hamas and its battle against Israel's existence. Others, like Medea Benjamin, Col.Ann Wright and Hedy Epstein have turned activism against Israel into full-time careers. Some Flotilla Folk are well-meaning people who simply accept, uncritically, the distorted facts used to demonize the country. Still others were once on the front lines of the battle for civil rights and against Apartheid.

    BUT WHAT do such idealistic folk do when the problems they once fought have been resolved? Many, like Alice Walker, try to recapture those idealistic, heady times and camaraderie by seeing the same injustices even where they don't exist, and ignoring them where they do exist. They gullibly accept the misinformation propagated by the UoG and ISM, and superimpose the lens of the civil rights or anti-Apartheid movements on the Arab-Israeli conflict. They are entirely unaware that the multicultural Jewish state is among the most progressive in the world and has sought peace with its Arab neighbors since it was reestablished in 1948.

    Many are journalists just looking for another great story about Israeli brutality. It always sells.

    But Flotilla Folk want to be human rights heroes without really putting themselves in harm's way. So they don't go to help the victims of the brutal regimes in Syria, Iran, the Congo or Darfur.

    Instead, they choose to fight Israel because they know it strictly follows Western humanitarian standards and the rule of law. They get to pretend they are brave warriors, when in fact, they are only play-acting on a safe stage.

    Whatever they do in their private lives and whatever lens they use, Flotilla Folk share a basic philosophy. They believe that the way to bring peace to the Middle East is through acts of civil disobedience that will get media attention, not through encouraging negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians.

    They aren't like ordinary people. They think it is okay to ignore terrorism against Israelis, to overlook the 8,000 rockets Hamas has fired from Gaza into Israeli communities over the past five years, turning everyday life into a lethal game of Russian roulette. They think it is okay to ignore the fact that Hamas is an Iranian proxy, and that Hamas's founding document calls for the murder of Jews, the "obliteration" of Israel and its replacement with a fundamentalist theocracy that opposes all the freedoms and social justice values for which the Flotilla Folk claim to stand. And they think it's okay to embrace Hamas, even though its founding document cites the anti-Semitic Czarist forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion — a racist tract that was once called a "warrant for the genocide" of Jews.

    They think it is okay to ignore terrorism from the West Bank — even the murder of the Fogel family, including a three-month-old infant, and the fact that the murderers showed no remorse for their savage act. And they act as though it is okay to ignore the hate-filled incitement that saturates Palestinian society and creates people like the Fogels' murderers.

    The Flotilla Folk are not like other people. They use repressive methods and manipulate information. Dutch journalists who had been part of the flotilla abandoned it in disgust after seeing these methods used. The one small boat that did finally attempt to sail to Gaza didn't have any humanitarian goods on board — only Israel-haters. These flotilla folk spread hate, not hope. They support repressive forces in the Middle East, like Hamas, not the moderates seeking peaceful coexistence. They abuse and pervert human rights values instead of upholding them. They are enemies, not friends, of Palestinians and Israelis, and of the brave demonstrators in Syria, Iran and elsewhere, whom they ignore.

    Fortunately international leaders, especially those in Greece, exposed the hypocrisy of the Flotilla Folk and their false pretenses, and stopped them. But Flotilla Folk don't give up. With their zealotry, they will try to devise other media ops to destroy Israel's international image. It is time to denounce these destructive campaigns and get serious about promoting peace. Anyone who truly yearns to see Israelis and Palestinians living in peaceful coexistence should stop indulging in disingenuous stunts and urge Palestinians to return to the negotiating table.

    Roz Rothstein is the co-founder and CEO of StandWithUs, and Roberta Seid, PhD, is the director of education and research for StandWithUs. This article appeared in Jerusalem Post
    http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/ Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=230957

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Truth Provider, July 25, 2011.

    This was written by Steven M. Goldberg, national vice chairman of the Zionist Organization of America, and sits on the Executive Board of the World Likud. He is a graduate of Harvard University and New York University Law School, and a tournament chess player.

    Short and to the point, his article below sums up brilliantly what Israel must do immediately. It appeared in the Jerusalem Post http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/ Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=230796


    The Palestinians are about to make a fatal error. Israel must not hesitate to declare "checkmate."

    Israel is engaged in a war for survival that started even before its declaration of independence and continues to this very day. Its enemies have prosecuted this war militarily, economically, politically, diplomatically, legally and psychologically. Because of the length and complexity of this struggle, an appropriate metaphor is a game of chess — one in which the stakes for Israel are life and death.

    Winning a game of chess is no simple matter. It requires strategy, patience, steady nerves, the proper balance between aggression and caution, and the ruthlessness to checkmate one's opponent when the opportunity presents itself. Impulsiveness and emotionalism usually lead to defeat. When a grandmaster makes a mistake, he must not panic; instead, he must extract himself from danger with care and determination.

    Israel's leaders have not played like grandmasters.

    Instead, they have mixed brilliant moves with blunders.

    Among the former, the preemptive strike on Egypt of June 5, 1967, that led to Israel's victory in the Six Day War and Menachem Begin's decision to destroy Iraq's nuclear reactor in Osirak in June 1981 stand out.

    Both moves required boldness and careful preparation, and both were highly successful.

    Unfortunately Israel has subsequently made serious strategic errors. It allowed Egypt to strike the first blow in October 1973, and almost lost the Yom Kippur War.

    The Oslo Accords of 1993 allowed Yasser Arafat and the PLO to return from exile, and have resulted in the murder or maiming of thousands of Israelis. Israel's precipitous withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000 and its forcible eviction of Jews from Gaza in 2005 compounded the error of Oslo.

    THE CAUSE of these errors was emotional exhaustion, best summed up by former prime minister Ehud Olmert's tragic admission that "we are tired of fighting.

    We are tired of being courageous. We are tired of winning.

    We are tired of defeating our enemies." Such a mentality is frankly catastrophic.

    Fortunately for Israel, its enemies have made even worse mistakes. Most important have been their serial refusals to accept overly generous offers by prime ministers Ehud Barak and Olmert to sacrifice strategically vital territory in Judea and Samaria for a Palestinian state. More recently, the Palestinians have also shortsightedly insisted on a complete settlement freeze as a condition for negotiating with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, despite his misguided eagerness to make a bargain similar to those offered by his predecessors.

    The Palestinians are about to make their worst blunder yet — one that is potentially fatal to their cause.

    Specifically, the Palestinian Authority, knowing that its leadership status is failing and that the clock is about to run out, has announced its intention to seek recognition as a state from the United Nations. This desperate gambit flatly abrogates both the Oslo Accords and UN Resolution 242, providing Israel with the legal justification to cancel both agreements and simply annex portions of Judea and Samaria.

    TO WIN this chess game, Israel must correct the life-threatening mistake it made by agreeing to a Palestinian state. The land west of the Jordan River can hold a Jewish state or another Arab state; it can't hold both.

    Israel's leaders, including Yitzhak Rabin, recognized this truth before weakening in the face of international pressure. It's time to declare categorically that there will never be a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria.

    The Arabs who live there may continue to be residents of Israel with full civil and religious rights and local autonomy, but any national or political rights must be exercised in affiliation with Jordan — the already existing Palestinian state.

    Taking advantage of the Palestinian blunder by terminating all discussions of Palestinian statehood won't be easy. There will be powerful international pressure against Israel for making such a bold move. Many will implore Israel to just surrender, or to make a reckless, needless sacrifice that will lead to its defeat.

    But Israel can't afford to be checkmated. Now it must play like a grandmaster.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Steven Shamrak, July 25, 2011.

    Zionists Bought and Built Eretz-Israel by Daniel Pipes

    Zionists stole Palestinian land: that's the mantra both the Palestinian Authority and Hamas teach their children and propagate in their media... The accusation of theft also undermines Israel' s position internationally. But is this accusation true?

    No, it is not. Ironically, the building of Israel represents about the most peaceable in-migration and state creation in history... Zionist efforts to build a presence in the Holy Land until 1948 stand out as astonishingly mild, as mercantile rather than military. Two great empires, the Ottomans and the British, ruled Eretz Yisrael; in contrast, Zionists lacked military power. They could not possibly achieve statehood through conquest.

    Instead, they purchased land. Acquiring property dunam by dunam, farm by farm, house by house, lay at the heart of the Zionist enterprise until 1948 (including most of the land in Judea and Samaria, as well as some Jewish land which is still occupied by Syria and Jordan). The Jewish National Fund, founded in 1901 to buy land in Palestine "to assist in the foundation of a new community of free Jews engaged in active and peaceable industry," was the key institution — and not the Haganah, the clandestine defense organization founded in 1920.

    Only when the British mandatory power gave up on Palestine in 1948, followed immediately by an all-out attempt by Arab states to crush and expel the Zionists, did the latter take up the sword in self defense and go on to win land through military conquest. Even then, as the historian Efraim Karsh demonstrates in Palestine Betrayed, most Arabs fled their lands; exceedingly few were forced off.

    This history contradicts the Palestinian account that "Zionist gangs stole Palestine and expelled its people" which led to a catastrophe "unprecedented in history" (according to a PA 12th-grade textbook) or that Zionists "plundered the Palestinian land and national interests, and established their state upon the ruins of the Palestinian Arab people" (writes a columnist in the PA's daily). International organizations, newspaper editorials, and faculty petitions reiterate this falsehood worldwide. (All those inflammatory accusations are made in violation of the Oslo accord!)

    Israelis should hold their heads high and point out that the building of their country was based on the least violent and most civilized movement of any people in history. (Most of so-called Palestinians, who claim that they owned the land, had been working for or renting it from Arab, Turkish or Egyptian landlords who sold it to Jews with a hefty profit!)

    Food for Thought by Steven Shamrak

    Public opinion is deliberately manipulated by bias and skewed news information, but nobody protests. Last week, most news publications ran a headline "Assad loyalists kill 10 in Homs". Only few of them barely mentioned that this major sectarian violence was sparked after the mutilated bodies of three "regime supporters" (members of Alowi sect, which Assad belong to), who were killed by members of 'democratic movement', were found in the central of the city. I am not an Assad fan, after all Syria is technically in the war with Israel, but press has been using the tricks reporting news about Israel the same 'integrity'!

    Hate for Israel is Stronger than Hate for Each Other

    Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan has asked Cairo to arrange for him to visit Gaza. Obstacles still to be overcome are concern that al Qaeda operating in the Gaza Strip and Sinai will try to assassinate him; and strenuous objections from Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas, who sees the visit as de facto Turkish and Egyptian recognition of the Hamas government.

    Dangerous Advancing of Hizballah

    On the fifth anniversary of Israel's second Lebanon war this week, as former IDF generals and military experts hailed its outcome as the winning deterrent keeping the Shiite terrorist Hizballah at bay ever since, Hassan Nasrallah quietly completed the organization's takeover of Lebanon's security and intelligence agencies and took delivery of advanced ballistic missiles from Syria. Hizballah is therefore going from strength to strength in Lebanon.

    Well Done Stuxnet

    Intelligence sources report that the Stuxnet malworm which played havoc with Iran 's nuclear program for eleven months was not purged after all. Tehran never did overcome the disruptions caused by Stuxnet or restore its centrifuges to smooth and normal operation as was claimed.

    What Global Warming — Arabs don't Care

    The Burj Khalifa, the world's tallest building, uses 150 megawatts of power, equal to 1/10 of the output of the world's biggest nuclear reactors. Dubai 's non-stop running air-conditioners help drive the emirate's summer peak demand per person to more than three times that of Spain, where cooling demand from its 47 million citizens has also surged over the last decade.

    Greed was a Motivation for 'Peace'

    Former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has told investigators that Israel pays a much higher price for natural gas than any other country to which Egypt sells the fuel. In fact, Mubarak claims that Israel pays three times as much as anyone else. He claimed that Israel was forced to pay prices three-times above market value.

    Corrupt Politicians Protect anti-Israel Organizations

    The Knesset voted not to establish parliamentary committees of inquiry into foreign-funded non-governmental organizations NGOs operating in Israel. Proponents of the bills said that such organizations are currently undermining Israel's security and political standing, and are funded by hostile governments.

    Arab Dictators are 'Palestinian' Supporters

    The regime of embattled Syrian President Bashar Assad has recognized the Palestinian Authority as a sovereign state. Syria now regards the Palestine Liberation Organization office in Damascus as the official embassy of the 'Palestinian state.' (Most so-called Palestinians, including Abbas family, came from Syria. Why not make Damascus their capital and Syria their country?)

    Are You Ready to be Whipped?

    A Sydney man has appeared in court over an alleged Sharia law whipping of a man forty times with an electric flex. Police said a recent convert to Islam was held down and whipped for having gone drinking with friends. Police have arrested and charged another man in relation in relation to the attack, and are still seeking two others. Ritual was performed in accordance with Sharia law, with complete disregard toward laws of Australia. Two years ago there was an international outcry when a woman in Sudan was sentenced to forty lashes for wearing trousers. (Anti-Semites of all kinds must realise that if Israel falls, they are next. Israel is the front line of defence against global Islamization of the world! In some Western countries Muslim communities are already demanding legalisation of the Sharia law.)

    Quote of the Week:

    "If you make the (UN) General Assembly into something more than what it is, than you are giving it authority and legitimacy it doesn't have." — John Bolton, the former US envoy to the UN — Many sovereign states, including the United States and Muslim countries, regularly disregard unfavorable, unjust or bias UNs resolutions. It is time for Israel to start exercising its independence!

    Endless anti-Israel Support

    So-called Palestinians are better off than some of the people who are footing most of the PA bills. Percentage of the population who live below the poverty line:

    West Bank (under PA control) 16%
    Washington, D.C. 18.9%.
    Greece 20%.
    Israel 24%.

    Palestinians are already receiving more money in international financial assistance than other groups who are struggling in far more dire circumstance. Per capita Foreign Assistance 2009:

    Palestinian Authority $725.00
    Afghanistan $219.00
    Sudan $56.00
    Central African Republic $53.00
    Ethiopia $48.00
    Democratic Republic Congo $34.60
    Niger $31.20
    Bangladesh $8.00

    In fact, the Palestinians are the top per-capita aid recipients in the history of the planet. Its not just how much, but how long Palestinians have received international welfare that breaks all records. For 63 years, the US, European nations and the UN have been nonstop donors. While all refugees in the world receive assistance for a few years from the United Nations Refugee Agency, UNHCR, Palestinians have their own, seemingly eternal source of UN welfare under the auspices of the United Nations Relief United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

    Set up in 1949 with a temporary, three-year mandate (UNGA Resolution 302IV) to provide aid and jobs for 700,000 Palestinian refugees, UNRWA has grown into a permanent institution for the only people allowed to hold refugee status for over sixty years. The number of 'refugees' has inflated to 4,618,141 since refugee status is an inheritance which is passed on to all descendants and their descendants no matter where they live. (International anti-Semitic idiots claim that it is all done in the name of peace and humanitarian aid. In fact, they have been assisting Arabs to destroy Israel, the only Jewish state.)

    Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement and currently lives in Melbourne, Australia. He publishes internet editorial letters on the Arab-Israeli conflict. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak.e@gmail.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 25, 2011.

    Before I touch on this theme, I want to return just for a moment to the issue of perks for terrorists in our prisons. It made the news a few days ago that Marwan Barghouti — who is in the Hadarim prison, west of Netanya — called for a million-person march of Palestinian Arabs when the UN vote on a state was taking place. I pondered then — and a reader wrote to ask the same question — how it was that he could get out the word this way and make headlines. Barghouti is serving five life sentences and should never be heard from again.

    It has subsequently been reported by the Israeli Prison Service that during a routine search of prisoners' cells (to be certain no one is hiding knives, contraband, etc.), a cell phone was discovered in Barghouti's possession. He was sent for a disciplinary hearing and sentenced to two weeks in isolation.

    Perhaps the situation truly is shifting with regard to taking a tougher stance with terrorists. Or maybe the Prison Service is simply now publicizing what would have gone unnoticed previously. It is noteworthy that the phone was reported as having been discovered during a "routine" search, and not because a search was done specifically in response to Barghouti having made the news.

    Barghouti, it should be noted, is with Fatah, not Hamas.


    The zig-zagging I refer to has to do with the Palestinian Authority. Last week Nabil Amr, a member of the PLO Central Committee, became the first senior PLO official to publicly state opposition to plans to go to the UN in September. In an interview in Al-Quds Al-Arabi (London) he expressed fears that the US and major European countries will be alienated and that this will rebound badly on the PA:

    "The council will discuss the September issue and the intention to go to the UN. "I personally will advise the leadership to delay the UN bid by another year so that we would be able to make better preparations than what has been done until now."

    According to Khaled Abu Toameh and Herb Keinon, who reported on this in the JPost, several other PA leaders are also opposed to the UN bid, but have refrained from saying so publicly.


    However, at the very same time, PA negotiator Nabil Sha'ath has declared, "We are serious about going to the UN and won't backtrack..."

    And, according to Abu Toameh, Fatah and Hamas have decided to try again to come to terms on the details of the reconciliation accord. This follows a phone call between Azzam al-Ahmed, who has headed the Fatah delegation for negotiations, and Musa Abu Marzouk, deputy head of the Hamas polit bureau.

    The effort by Fatah to achieve reconciliation is understood to be an expression of its desire to go to the UN presenting one government that represents all the people.

    On the other hand, if it were not for Fatah insistence on retaining Salam Fayyad as prime minister, something that Hamas adamantly opposes, the issue might have been resolved by now.

    Zig zag. A reflection not only of indecision, but also diverse opinions within the PA.


    Meanwhile, Abbas is putting his own spin on matters.

    The decision to go to the UN, he has now declared, does not constitute a unilateral act. The UN vote, after all, will not prevent the Palestinian Arabs from returning to the table: "there are issues that won't be solved through the UN, but only through negotiations."

    What the UN vote will do, you see, will enable them to enter negotiations with Israel as "equal partners." Then, once there is a Palestinian state, it can sit down with Israel and "discuss sticking issues, including borders, Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, water and security."

    This is his have-his-humus-and-eat-it-too approach.


    And speaking of Israel's borders, Danny Ayalon has hit home with his six-minute historical narrative video, "The Truth About the West Bank."

    Saeb Erekat, calling the video "offensive," says, "Now, the international community knows the Israeli government is committed to denying the Palestinian people their inalienable right to self-determination and on continuing their illegal and colonial enterprise in the occupied Palestinian territory."

    Not quite. Now the international community has been presented with truths that combat the PA lies, and the PA does not like it, not one little bit. Right on!

    Ayalon has challenged Erekat to a debate. Seriously doubt his challenge will be accepted.

    I share the link here for the second time. If you haven't seen it, please do, if you haven't shared it, I encourage this, as well.


    Some four months ago, the Knesset passed what is known as the Nakba bill.

    As most of my readers know, nakba means catastrophe in Arabic and refers to the founding of the state of Israel — Israeli independence day is viewed as a day of mourning for the Arabs.

    The bill, advanced by Yisrael Beiteinu, requires the state to fine local authorities and other state-funded bodies for holding events marking the Palestinian Nakba Day by supporting armed resistance or racism against Israel, or desecrating the state flag or national symbols.

    These fines are to be deducted from the operating budget of the state-funded groups that hold such events, with the deductions amounting to three times the cost of funding the objectionable event. The finance minister is charged with deciding when to withdraw funds from various groups, after consultation with the attorney general and a designated team comprised of members of the ministries of finance and justice.


    Sure sounds logical — and appropriate — to me. It is one of those measures that was long over due and indicates a strengthening of a nationalist sense in this country.


    But here nothing is simple, and it was to be expected that there would be objections to this from Israeli Arabs and their supporters on the left. They never miss an opportunity to claim, in the name of democracy and "human rights," that Israel must be denied expression as a Jewish state. The Arab-Israeli NGO Adalah, for example, objects to a Jewish star on the Israeli flag.

    And so... MK Ahmed Tibi (United Arab List-Ta'al), attempted to submit a bill to the Knesset that would empower the minister of finance to cut state funding for organizations that "deny publicly that Nakba Day was a historical, real event that constitutes a disaster for the Palestinian people."

    Knesset Speaker Ruby Rivlin refused to accept it because it rejects the State of Israel as a Jewish state.

    Said Rivlin:

    "...it's place is not on the Knesset's table.

    "This bill says the State of Israel is the reason for the Palestinian tragedy. If the nakba is a tragedy, then the establishment of the State of Israel is a tragedy. The Palestinian experience is a catastrophe that was brought on by their leaders, but the establishment of the State of Israel is not the reason for it."


    Tibi, declaring the rejection of his bill "a dark day for democracy," claims he had submitted it in an effort to convince MKs that the Nakba Bill was "an injustice to the Palestinian minority in Israel."

    I hasten to point out that Israeli-Arab mourning of the nakba was not criminalized by this bill: people who participate in ceremonies or events that express sadness for Israel's founding will not be charged or fined. It simply says that the State of Israel should have no part in funding such events. You want to mourn the founding of the State of Israel? Don't ask the State of Israel to pay for it. In fact, it actually says, don't ask the State of Israel to pay for it if you are planning on desecrating the flag, or showing support for armed resistance against Israel.

    Now Tibi has submitted a petition to the High Court against Rivlin because he rejected the bill. I personally will spit if the Court takes this seriously.


    This seems a small story, but it is not, because it is emblematic of the struggle for Israel's soul.

    Ahmed Tibi — an Israeli citizen by virtue of his place of birth — describes himself as an Arab Palestinian. He was an advisor to Yasser Arafat for years and represented the Palestinian Authority at the Wye River negotiations of 1998. In 2002, during Tisha B'Av (when the destruction of the Temple is mourned), he led a large group of Arabs chanting "With blood and fire will we redeem Palestine," while blocking the way of a group of Jews attempting to ascend to the Temple Mount.

    Attempts by members of right wing Israeli parties to ban Tibi's right to hold office in the Knesset because of his support for Israel's enemies were overturned by the High Court in 2003. Tibi is a member of the Knesset. What is more — I kid you not — he is a Deputy Speaker of the Knesset.

    In spite all of this, Ahmed Tibi, who does not believe there should be a Jewish Israel, would gladly subvert the State of Israel. The question of how much in the way of rights should be accorded those who would work from within to destroy our essence is a serious one.

    Accusations of "apartheid" and "racism" leveled at Israel should be considered within this broader context — although those ready to believe such accusations are most likely not interested in context. And when persons such as Tibi level charges that we deny human rights and democracy, the source of those charges should be examined.

    As — please G-d — our Knesset is increasingly prepared to assert itself with nationalist positions, we can expect other such incidents to arise.


    The UN has postponed release of the Palmer Report on the Mavi Mavara incident for a month, to give Israel and Turkey additional time to achieve reconciliation and resume full diplomatic relations.

    The prospects of this happening, however, seem as dim as ever. The Turkish have declared they will "never forget" the nine men "massacred" by the IDF on the Mavara. Additionally, Prime Minister Erdogan has just called the Gaza blockade "illegal and inhuman" and has declared solidarity with the Palestinians. Let us say that Israeli officials are noting an absence of goodwill on the subject of reconciliation among their Turkish counterparts.


    Floating in the air, still, is the prospect of a limited apology by Israel. Turkey is considering a downgrade in its diplomatic staff in Israel, if no apology is forthcoming.

    As it turns out, it's not simply a question of a disagreement on the issue among members of the Israeli Security Cabinet — with Security Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon, Foreign Affairs Minister Avigdor Lieberman, Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz, Interior Minister Eli Yishai and Minister w/o Portfolio Bennie Begin said to be opposed, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, and Intelligence Agencies Minister Dan Meridor in favor, and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu undecided.

    According to the latest reports, the Obama administration — eager to see good diplomatic relations between Israel and Turkey — is (surprise!) putting pressure on our prime minister to go along with a proposed formula for resolving the dispute: Israel would apologize for "operational mishaps" and pay compensation via a fund set up by the Turkish, while Turkey would consider the matter closed and make no legal claims either against Israel or individual soldiers (the last point presumably addressing Israeli concerns on the matter).

    Were this proposed agreement accepted, it would obviate need for the release of the Palmer Report.

    Netanyahu knew how to assert himself against Obama's demands when he was in Washington, and splendidly so. We must hope that his backbone is still in place. An apology is not the way to go.


    "The Good News Corner"

    This is fantastic.


    From Second Temple period. (Photo: Vladimir Neichin)

    A tiny golden bell, thought to be 2,000 years old, has been found in the course of excavations in Ir David — the City of David — south of the Old City walls.

    The excavations were taking place in a drainage tunnel that runs from the Shiloah Pool beneath the City of David to near the Western Wall. In the region of the excavation, during the Second Temple period, there was a main road above the channel, which was linked with a bridge, known today as Robinson's Arch, that led up to the Temple Mount.

    According to an Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) press release, the rare gold bell, which has a small loop on its end, is presumed to have come from the edge of a garment.

    In Shemot (Exodus) 28:33-4, the robe of the high priest Aaron is described: "You shall make on its hem pomegranates of turquoise, purple, and scarlet wool, on its hem all around, and gold bells between them all around. A gold bell and a pomegranate, a gold bell and a pomegranate, all around."

    Says the IAA, there is no way to know that this bell came from a high priest, but the possibility cannot be discounted. It certainly seems to have come from the garment of a high official: "apparently, the high official was walking in the Jerusalem street in the vicinity of Robinson's Arch and lost the gold bell that fell from his garment into the drainage channel beneath the road."

    At the request of Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director of IMRA, a recording of the bell has been provided by Udi Ragones, Ir David Foundation spokesman. And so we can hear what the bell, last heard some 2,000 years ago, sounds like:

    Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner18@gmail.com and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Elder of Ziyon, July 25, 2011.

    Hamas came out with a press release on Saturday condemning the terror spree in Norway:

    The Hamas movement is saddened by the terrible attacks that occurred in Norway, which have left dozens of innocent civilians as victims, which... caused widespread destruction.

    We in the Hamas movement denounce these heinous crimes and express our full solidarity with the people of Norway and the families of the victims at this difficult time, wishing a speedy recovery to the wounded.

    These attacks show the dangers of extremist tendencies which promote and incite hatred against Islam, this time aimed at youth camps that were expressing their solidarity with the Palestinian people under occupation and the lifting of the siege.

    This confirms that the crime of the incitement campaigns of the unjust ongoing Zionist and American siege against the Palestinian people...The free world must stop providing cover for Zionist extremism.

    Isn't that sweet, that one of the leading terror organizations in the world is condemning attacks against civilians — when they have been responsible for purposefully targeting and killing thousands of civilians themselves!

    The Ma'an News Agency published the Hamas condemnation but for some strange reason, no doubt related to its newsworthiness, it didn't mention the part where Hamas blamed Zionism for the Norway attacks and praised the victims as supporters of Palestinian Arabs. In other words, it treated what was purely a political statement as if it was a real expression of sympathy for the victims.

    Compassion and cynicism are not the same, and by reporting it as the first and not the second, Ma'an has once again obfuscated rather than illuminated.

    (h/t Challah Hu Akbar)

    UPDATE: Ma'an updated the article somewhat, after I tweeted their editor. SEE:
    http://www.maannews.net/eng/ ViewDetails.aspx?ID=408119

    This article is archived at
    http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2011/07/ hamas-tries-to-tie-norway-terrorist-to.html

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Jim Kouri, July 25, 2011.

    On early Sunday morning, a bomb explosion killed as many as five Yemeni soldiers and wounded others in the coastal city of Aden, a Law Enforcement Examiner confidential source stated.

    The massive explosion occurred as Yemeni troops were preparing to leave for the nearby province of Abyan. They were being deployed to fight al-Qaeda linked terrorists who are called Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula or AQAP.

    Yemen has been a hotbed of civil unrest and rioting during the so-called Arab Spring, while deadly combat in the south between security forces and radical Islamists goes unabated .

    Opposition parties in Yemen are preoccupied with preventing the re-emergence of President Ali Abdullah Saleh who's in self-exile in Saudi Arabia, where he's convalescing from wounds sustained in an attack on his presidential palace last June.

    U.S. and Yemeni officials have repeatedly expressed concern that al-Qaeda linked militants have been taking advantage of a power vacuum in Yemen to expand their operations.

    On early Sunday morning, a bomb explosion killed as many as five Yemeni soldiers and wounded others in the coastal city of Aden, a Law Enforcement Examiner confidential source stated.

    The massive explosion occurred as Yemeni troops were preparing to leave for the nearby province of Abyan. They were being deployed to fight al-Qaeda linked terrorists who are called Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula or AQAP.

    Yemen has been a hotbed of civil unrest and rioting during the so-called Arab Spring, while deadly combat in the south between security forces and radical Islamists goes unabated .

    Opposition parties in Yemen are preoccupied with preventing the re-emergence of President Ali Abdullah Saleh who's in self-exile in Saudi Arabia, where he's convalescing from wounds sustained in an attack on his presidential palace last June.

    U.S. and Yemeni officials have repeatedly expressed concern that al-Qaeda linked militants have been taking advantage of a power vacuum in Yemen to expand their operations.

    Several national security and counterterrorism experts have told the Law Enforcement Examiner that Yemen or Somalia may become the new Afghanistan if terrorist organization seize control of those nations' weak governments.

    The loss of President Saleh will have an adverse impact on U.S. national security since al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is a power to be reckoned with, an intelligence source told the Law Enforcement Examiner.

    Al Qaeda in Yemen poses a threat to the United States and U.S. interests as well as posing a threat to the stability of Saudi Arabia and oil producers in the region, according to a Law Enforcement Examiner intelligence source.

    Senator Bob Casey (D-PA), the homeland security subcommittee's chairman, told his fellow lawmakers that AQAP poses a "direct threat" to the United States. In the past, there have been incidents involving suspected terrorists from Yemen on the U.S. mainland.

    Senator James Risch (R-Idaho), a ranking member, agreed with Casey and called Yemen an important element to U.S. homeland security.

    Since the rebellion against President Saleh's government began, al-Qaeda terrorists have been successful invading more and more territory, including taking control of some southwestern cities in Yemen. Terrorism experts believe al-Qaeda could control cities throughout that region.

    "Instead of nipping it in the bud, the U.S. will kick the can down the road until it has no choice but to take action against either Yemen or Somalia or both," said former Marine intelligence officer Sid Franes, a former NYPD detective.

    "During the Clinton years we allowed Afghanistan to metastasize until finally on 9-11 [2001] al-Qaeda killed 3,000 Americans and destroyed a while business complex in lower Manhattan," said Franes.

    Jim Kouri, CPP, is Fifth Vice-President of the National Association of Chiefs of Police (copmagazine@aol.com). This article is archived at
    http://www.examiner.com/ public-safety-in-national/yemen-continues -on-path-to-radical-islamic-rule

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Jim Kouri, July 25, 2011.

    "One of them said how she left her sick child on the road because he was too weak to make the journey to Kenya. Burdened by other small children, she left him to die alone in the desert." — BBC account of Somalia's famine and terrorism.


    Babies are being left to die by fleeing Somalis who must contend with murderous Islamists and famine. "One of them said how she left her sick child on the road because he was too weak to make...

    Somalia's terror group Al Shabaab has reneged on lifting its ban on aid agencies and has accused those, who speak out about the famine, of engaging in "sheer propaganda".

    The United Nations in New York on Wednesday said several areas in Somalia are suffering from a deadly famine after the Horn of Africa nations experienced the worst drought in 60 years.

    Al Shabaab, a radical Islamist organization which has ties to al-Qaeda and controls much of the country, accused the banned humanitarian groups — including Non-Governmental Organizations such as the Salvation Army and Christian missionary groups — of being political in nature and not welcomed.

    The U.N. insists that a horrible famine indeed exists and that the humanitarian aid must continue.

    Most Western aid agencies stopped aiding Somalia in 2009 following Al Shabaab's threats, though some claim they have managed to continue operating through local partners.

    Millions of people are said to need food aid across East Africa but Somalia is the country suffering the most, since there is no real national government to co-ordinate aid after two decades of fierce fighting.

    Thousands of people have been fleeing Al Shabaab's territories in search of food and water — some to Mogadishu, where aid agencies are operating in areas controlled by the weak interim government, and others are fleeing to Ethiopia and Kenya.

    U.N. officials say there are planning an airlift of food into the capital city of Mogadishu within the next few days to help the thousands of malnourished children who face starvation in the country.

    "We've seen the evidence of the emergency in the faces and wasted limbs of the malnourished children who are being forced to trek out of the famine zone, sometimes for days and for weeks," an eyewitness told U.N. aid workers who've since left the region.

    Jim Kouri, CPP, is Fifth Vice-President of the National Association of Chiefs of Police (copmagazine@aol.com). This article is archived at
    http://www.examiner.com/law-enforcement- in-national/somali-people-suffer-from-islamist- cruelty-and-famine

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Truth Provider, July 24, 2011.

    Dear friends,

    I invite you to watch a remarkable video of about 11 minutes. A speech given in Toronto, Canada, by the Muslim Tarek Fatah.

    But before you click on the link http://livestre.am/Pfu4, are you aware of the fact that the day before the massacre in Norway, the very victims on that island were engaged in pro-Palestinian activities?

    I do not in any way, size, shape or form, condone the horrible act by this fringe lunatic, as I do not condone any act of terrorism (the planned killing of innocent civilians) no matter by whom. The reason I bring to your attention the following piece of news is to show you how atmosphere of tolerance to terrorism can open the flood gates to disaster. Norway's blindness in the face of danger created a vacuum beyond stupidity. It was only a matter of time before a crazy lunatic with a sick brain will decide to act and will find no obstacle to his despicable act.

    The question we must all ask ourselves is: Was it not the self-destructive policies of the Norwegian government that provoked that sick lunatic?

    Was the government of Norway within its democratic rights to support a "Palestinian" state conceived out of terrorism and a PLO National Charter which calls for the destruction of the State of Israel by means of terrorism? Were the the poor young victims within their democratic right to land their support to the same? Were the Germans within their democratic rights to elect Hitler to power? Was Quisling?

    Think of it for a moment: Who are the perpetrators of modern terrorism? Who since the 1970s are those who forced billions of passengers to be subjected to airport searches all over the world every single day? Who were those who invented suicide bombers? Here are the answers:


    Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. Thus it is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it.

    Article 10: Commando action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war.

    And as a result of this blind tolerance, should the Norwegian government not take full blame for not finding a single helicopter to land forces on the island within 10 minutes or less, or have at least one or two armed guards protect the children?

    Tolerance to terrorism breeds terrorism. No terrorist should ever be allowed to gain advantage as a result of his/hers act. That includes the "Palestinian" terrorists and all "Palestinians" who lend their support to terrorism by remaining silent. So are all those in the west, who help the "Palestinians" gain independence before they recognize Israel as the Jewish Homeland and completely denounce terrorism.

    Now. please view the incredible speech by Tarek Fatah, the link at the top of this dispatch.

    Your Truth Provider,



    Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il. Visit his website at www.truthprovider.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Truth Provider, July 24, 2011.

    Dear friends,

    Two events are currently confusing Israel's otherwise stable government of PM Netanyahu:

    First, the large demonstration in Tel Aviv last night for cheaper housing.

    Before my comments, can you imagine a demonstration in New York city for cheaper housing in Park Avenue?

    It is reported that PM Netanyahu asked his ministers to come up with solutions to the housing shortage in Israel, particularly in Tel Aviv.
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/ netanyahu-rebukes-likud-ministers-give-me- ideas-to-solve-housing-crisis-in-israel-1.374999

    As you all know, Israel is a tiny country with very limited space. Since Tel Aviv is the commercial center of the country, many wish to live and work in this densely populated city. Housing is therefore extremely expensive, as it is in all heavily populated cities anywhere in the world.

    The undersigned is convinced that those who demonstrated yesterday mixed a genuine desire for cheap dwelling with a leftist political agenda to bring down the government (many carried red flags). Camping in the main Tel Aviv avenue among the shady trees point to the fact that many of the demonstrators are students on summer vacation looking for some activity, camaraderie and excitement.

    The mainly leftist Israeli media pounced on the demonstration with the joy of gold diggers who found gold.

    So the question remains what to do with providing cheaper housing to struggling young families and students?

    The solution is more than simple, yet I have not heard anybody discussing the option:

    The government must offer huge incentives and cheap housing to any first-time buyers who are willing to settle in Judea & Samaria.

    While this pioneering project is under way, the government must immediately invest in a fast train from J&S to the center of Tel Aviv. The distance of 20 to 30 miles could thus be traveled faster than from the north to the center of Tel Aviv in a typical Tel Aviv rush hour.

    Offering this constructive (pun intended) solution to the demonstrators of last night would instantly reveal who among them are genuine seekers of affordable housing and who are not.

    THE OTHER EVENT IS THE RIDICULOUS DEMAND BY THE TURKISH PRIME MINISTER that Israel must offer official public apologize to Turkey for the events of last year's the flotilla.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/ 23/us-turkey-palestinians-idUSTRE76M1DV20110723

    PM Netanyahu, at the behest of his semi-leftist Minister of Defense Ehud Barak, was almost ready to offer such an apology which would have made Israel's government the laughing stock of the Muslim world. FM Avigdor Lieberman was correctly strongly against it.

    You may remember that the flotilla last year was organized by a Turkish semi-terrorist Muslim organization whose trouble seeking armed members occupied the Mavi Marmara, a boat supplied by Turkey. Their aim was to break Israel's maritime blockade on Gaza under the pretext of "humanitarian supplies" to the Gazans who voted a Hamas government into power.

    Israel's blockade outside its territorial waters was a legally recognized act, as was the American blockade on Cuba during the 1962 missile crisis. Israel offered to have the Mavi Marmara and the other ships download their cargo in the Israeli port of Ashdod and after inspection allow it to be trucked to Gaza. The organizers refused, which proved that the goal was not humanitarian to begin with.

    Turkey's Muslim PM used this incident to sever most of Turkey's relations with Israel and point its axis towards the good company of Syria and Iran. In turn, thousands of Israeli tourists preferred to vacation in Greece at a loss for Turkey of huge revenues.

    Following recent events in Syria which strained relations with her neighboring Turkey, attempts were made by Israel to renew the good relations with Turkey. Despite the fact that Turkey stands to benefit much more than Israel from cooperation with Israel, the Turkish PM has chosen to continue digging in his heels.

    Again, it is abundantly evident that the participation of right-wing parties in Netanyahu's government must be seen as the best thing that ever happened to him. As long as PM Netanyahu continues to appear strong due to his strong partners on the right, his government will survive, the left media will continue to gripe and the Israeli nation will continue to prosper.

    All you need to do is compare the two years under the Olmert-Livni leadership to that of Netanyahu-Lieberman, but that is material for another article.

    Please log into www.truthprovider.com to read Yoram Ettinger's article about Israel's economic triumphs.

    FINALLY, HERE IS A COMMENT, received from a reader, to my article yesterday about the horrible events in Norway. While reading this, think about the brave passengers on United flight 93 on 9/11:

    "Exactly my thoughts today. Norway has just received a grim message of the reality of the Oslo peace mentality."

    I haven't written anything about the attack today. Maybe I won't write about it, I'm not sure. But my thoughts are racing.

    Only in private will I say: How could that man indulge in his shooting spree for one and one half hours before he was stopped? In Israel, someone, or several people would be armed, and would shoot him. If they weren't armed, they would jump him, at the risk of their lives.

    I haven't heard reporters asking how it was possible for him to continue shooting for one hour and a half. The kids had cell phones. No one called the police? I actually heard a reporter in France say that it took so long for a helicopter to get there because it's an island in the middle of a lake!

    If there is something I don't understand, I wish a Norwegian official would explain it. How can it take a helicopter more than an hour to get to an island off the shore from Oslo?

    There is this inexplicable police passivity... or something else that remains to be explained. And there is the dismal mental passivity of this population that has been fed on peace pablum and anti-Zionism.


    Believing that Israel was the world's demon, they were unable to defend themselves against a mad killer." N.P.

    Your Truth Provider,

    Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il. Visit his website at www.truthprovider.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Gil Ronen, July 24, 2011.

    An attack on an Iranian nuclear physicist Saturday may or may not have missed its mark, but the attack is very similar to one eight months ago that narrowly missed Dr. Fereydoon Abbasi, a nuclear physicist.

    Following that missed attempt, Iran's mullahs decided to place Abbasi in charge of the Islamic republic's nuclear program. The result, experts, is quickening of Iran's production of nuclear material.

    The selection of Dr. Abbasi earlier this year was itself a clear message to the West. As a university scientist, he was barred from traveling outside Iran by the United Nations Security Council because of evidence that his main focus was on how to build nuclear weapons, rather than power plants. But in recent weeks he has publicly declared that his country is preparing to triple its production of a type of nuclear fuel that moves it far closer to the ability to produce bomb-grade material in a hurry.

    Filtering out the hyperbole surrounding recent proclamations about Iran's tangible progress is always difficult, especially at a time when the country is determined to show that neither the Stuxnet computer worm, which crippled part of its nuclear infrastructure last year, nor Western sanctions have proved to be more than modest setbacks. Dr. Abbasi himself is rarely seen or heard outside of Iran.

    But international nuclear inspectors and American officials say that all the evidence points to the imminent installation of centrifuges at an underground nuclear plant on a military base near the city of Qum. Iran revealed the existence of the plant in 2009, after learning that the United States and European powers were about to announce that they had discovered the complex, deep inside the Iranian base.

    What concerns inspectors and European and American officials is Iran's announced effort to increase production of uranium enriched to nearly 20 percent purity. Iran insists that it needs that fuel for a medical research reactor. But last week William Hague, the British foreign minister, dismissed that assertion as a cover story.

    "When enough 20 percent enriched uranium is accumulated at the underground facility at Qum," Mr. Hague said in the British newspaper The Guardian, "it would take only two or three months of additional work to convert this into weapons-grade material."

    Gil Ronen is a columnist for Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com), where this article appeared today.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Steven Plaut, July 24, 2011.


    1. ANDERS BEIVIK IMAGINED cautious alliance with Jihadists: "We both share one common goal"
    Cross-Post, July 23rd 2011, 10:00 pm
    by Joseph W
    http://hurryupharry.org/2011/07/23/anders-beivik-imagined- cautious-alliance-with-jihadists-we-both-share-one-common-goal/

    He said:

    An alliance with the Jihadists might prove beneficial to both parties but will simply be too dangerous (and might prove to be ideologically counter-productive). We both share one common goal. They want control over their own countries in the Middle East and we want control of our own countries in Western Europe. A future cultural conservative European regime will deport all Muslims from Europe and isolate the Muslim world. As a result, the Islamists will gain the necessary momentum to retake power in several countries: Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Jordan, Syria, Yemen, Oman, Algeria, Morocco and a few others. The Jihadists know this very well. An Islamic Caliphate is a useful enemy to all Europeans as it will ensure European unity under Christian cultural conservative leadership.

    How this type of scenario could play out:

    Approach a representative from a Jihadi Salafi group. Get in contact with a Jihadi strawman. Present your terms and have him forward them to his superiors:

    1. Ask for "hudna" (temporary truce) during the discussions/proposal and demand assurances not to be harmed if they reject our offer. Ask if this is acceptable to them.

    2. If they accept, try to meet at a neutral place (not like there is a neutral place on Muslim territory) or at least a relatively public place (which will make it harder for them to betray your arrangement) and present your offer. They are asked to provide a biological compound manufactured by Muslim scientists in the Middle East. Hamas and several Jihadi groups have labs and they have the potential to provide such substances. Their problem is finding suitable martyrs who can pass "screenings" in Western Europe.

    2. Foreign Minister Of Norway:
    http://frontpagemag.com/2011/07/20/ the-quislings-of-norway/
    "We no longer recognize the State of Israel. We could not recognize the apartheid regime of South Africa, nor did we recognize the Afghani Taliban regime. Then there were many who did not recognize Saddam Hussein's Iraq or the Serbs' ethnic cleansing. We need to get used to the idea: The State of Israel, in its current form, is history. The State of Israel has raped the recognition of the world and shall have no peace until it lays down its arms."....


    The Quislings of Norway
    Posted By Joseph Klein
    July 20, 2011
    Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere

    The infamous Norwegian Vidkun Quisling, who assisted Nazi Germany as it conquered his own country, must be applauding in his grave. In the latest example of Norwegian collaboration with the enemies of the Jews, Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere declared during a press conference this week, alongside Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, that "Norway believes it is perfectly legitimate for the Palestinian president to turn to the United Nations" to seek recognition of an independent Palestinian state.

    Despite Abbas's decision to throw his lot in with the Hamas terrorists as part of some sort of "unity" government, Stoere signed an agreement with Abbas on upgrading Palestinian representation in Norway. Under the agreement, which effectively rewards Abbas for joining forces with Hamas, the Palestinian representative will have the full diplomatic rank of ambassador.

    The foreign minister of Norway, which chairs a group of Palestinian donor nations, also used the occasion to hold the tin cup out for Abbas. Foreign Minister Stoere chided those who have decided to hold back on their contributions. "All donors should make an extra effort to support the Palestinians this summer and autumn," he said. None of this should come as a surprise. Let's not forget, for example, that Foreign Minister Stoere is in charge of the same Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs in which Socialist Ingrid Fiskaa — who said in April 2008 that she sometimes wished the United Nations would send "precision-guided missiles against selected Israeli targets" — so proudly serves as a state secretary.

    During the Nazi occupation of Norway, nearly all Jews were either deported to death camps or fled to Sweden and beyond. Today, Norway is effectively under the occupation of anti-Semitic leftists and radical Muslims, and appears willing to help enable the destruction of the Jewish state of Israel.

    For example, one of Norway's leading intellectuals, Jostein Gaarder, published an op-ed article in a major Norwegian daily newspaper in 2006 arguing against recognizing the state of Israel in its current form and claiming that Judaism is "an archaic national and warlike religion."

    Gaarder equated the Jewish state of Israel's attempts to defend itself against Islamic terrorists with apartheid and ethnic cleansing: We no longer recognize the State of Israel. We could not recognize the apartheid regime of South Africa, nor did we recognize the Afghani Taliban regime. Then there were many who did not recognize Saddam Hussein's Iraq or the Serbs' ethnic cleansing. We need to get used to the idea: The State of Israel, in its current form, is history. The State of Israel has raped the recognition of the world and shall have no peace until it lays down its arms.

    Norway's Labor Party lawmaker Anders Mathisen has gone even further and publicly denied the Holocaust. He said that Jews "exaggerated their stories" and "there is no evidence the gas chambers and or mass graves existed." While the Norwegian political establishment and opinion-maker elite may not have reached that point of lunacy just yet, they do tend to treat Muslims as the victims of Israeli oppression — as if today's Muslims are filling the shoes of the Jewish victims of the Holocaust and today's Nazis are the Israelis.

    Thorbjørn Jagland, former prime minister of Norway, the president of the Norwegian Parliament, and the head of the Nobel Prize committee that gave President Obama the Nobel Peace Prize, sided with Turkey and condemned Israel for the defensive actions it took last year against the so-called Free Gaza flotilla.

    Socialist leader Kristin Halvorsen has been leading the boycott Israel campaign. While serving as Norway's finance minister, she was amongst the demonstrators at an anti-Israel protest, in which a poster read (translated): "The greatest axis of evil: USA and Israel." Among the slogans repeatedly shouted at the demonstration was (as translated) "Death to the Jews!"

    Halvorsen has recently supported a measure calling for military action against Israel if it decides to act against Hamas in Gaza, based on the reasoning that the world community's credibility in confronting the Qaddafi regime would be undermined if it does nothing to help Hamas repel Israeli air attacks in Gaza.

    Last year, the Norwegian government decided to divest from two Israeli entities working in the West Bank. Norway's sovereign wealth fund divested from the Israeli company Elbit, because it has worked on the Israeli security fence that keeps out Palestinian suicide bombers. Israel has also been blocked from bidding for Norwegian defense contracts.

    The state-owned TV NRK aired the one-sided movie "Tears over Gaza," photographed by several Palestinian cameramen during and after Israel's Operation Cast Lead. Its film director Vibeke Løkkeberg had the gall to compare Israel's defensive military actions in Gaza, which protect Israeli civilians from Hamas bombs, to "the massacres Qaddafi is conducting against Libyan insurgents."

    As explained by Bruce Bawer, an American literary critic, writer and poet who lives in Norway and has criticized European anti-Semitism and radical Islam, in an interview with the Jerusalem Post, contemporary Norwegian anti-Semitism is alive and well in Norway especially amongst "the cultural elite — the academics, intellectuals, writers, journalists, politicians, and technocrats."

    It is such anti-Semitic tripe and moral equivalency that embolden the Muslims living in Norway to legitimize their own anti-Semitic conduct, which Norwegian officials have been tolerating in the name of multiculturalism.

    As Bawer explained:

    Part of the motivation for this anti-Semitism is the influx into Norway in recent decades of masses of Muslims from Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia and elsewhere. Multiculturalism has taught Norway's cultural elite to take an uncritical, even obsequious, posture toward every aspect of Muslim culture and belief. When Muslim leaders rant against Israel and the Jews, the reflexive response of the multiculturalist elite is to join them in their rantings. This is called solidarity. In 2009, when Muslims rioted violently in downtown Oslo to protest Israel's actions against Hamas, resulting in extensive damage, there were few consequences for those responsible.

    Teachers at schools with large shares of Muslims reported that Muslim students often "praise or admire Adolf Hitler for his killing of Jews," that "Jew-hate is legitimate within vast groups of Muslim students" and that "Muslims laugh or command [teachers] to stop when trying to educate about the Holocaust."

    Norway is repeating its Quisling treachery of the Nazi era, this time in league with a growing radical Muslim population. And once again the Jews are the victims.

    Joseph Klein is the author of a recent book entitled Lethal Engagement: Barack Hussein Obama, the United Nations and Radical Islam.

    3. NORWEGIAN LABOR PARTY YOUTH Movement Bashes Israel
    By Erez Uriely

    The Norwegian Israel Center (NIS) is a voluntary politically independent documentation and resource center that works at promoting a more balanced view towards Israel, and therefore fights antisemitism. At the same time, we try to build a bridge between Jews and Christians

    On 10.07.2002, Mrs. Eva Kristin Hansen, the leader of the Norwegian Labor Party Youth Movement (AUF), called upon the Attorney General of Norway to investigate whether "Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and other Israeli leaders can be put on trial for crimes they committed" (http://norskisraelsenter.no/engl/auf-sharon-vg-engl.htm). Kristin explained that this AUF demand for an indictment comes in light of "...$nbsp;killing of ambulance personnel, occasional destruction of civil targets and the illegal execution of civilians". Less than a day after this AUF petition was sent to the court, Norwegian former Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg (Labor) spoke before the AUF and attacked Israel. NIS notes that it was not so long ago — 20.4.2002 — that Stoltenberg gave a speech attacking Israel, while Nazi Swastikas and other horrible anti-Jewish banners were held up in front of the Norwegian parliament
    (http://norskisraelsenter.no/engl/ap-stoltenberg-eng.htm). Such symbols are otherwise forbidden for use in demonstrations organized by Neo-Nazis.

    NIS is aware of the important position that the AUF has in the political life of Norway, particularly concerning the Norwegian Labor Party. AUF has produced many important leaders of the Labor Party. Naturally, their opinions influence their environment and Norway. As young AUF members, future central Norwegian Labor Party leaders, called in 1971 for the destruction of Israel: "The qualification for lasting peace must be that Israel cease to exist as a Jewish state". (As quoted by Haakon Lie, former Secretary General of the Norwegian Labor Party, in his book: Slik Jeg Ser Det — As I See It — part II, p. 132.)

    This destruction is what the Labor Party calls "peace". Former Foreign Minister Bjorn Tore Godal was the leader of the same AUF that formulated this declaration, which shows obvious religious antagonism towards Judaism. Can we trust that Godal was neutral and clean of prejudice while he handled Israel under the Oslo Process?

    Since the 1970's, Norwegian Labor leaders have supported the PLO. The PLO, we remind you, is committed to destroy Israel, a point that did not prevent Norway from awarding it's leader no less than the Nobel Peace Prize. Torbjoern Jagland, Gro Harlem Brundtland, Jens Stoltenberg and Terje Roed-Larsen have followed the line that supports PLO. NIS finds it difficult to understand how such leaders can contribute to a more peaceful Middle East.

    NIS notes that racism is defined as negative discrimination of an ethnic group. Racism against Jews is defined as Jew-hatred, or antisemitism.

    NIS is aware that the leadership of the Norwegian Labor Party Youth Movement does not necessarily represent the majority opinion. We therefore warn against labeling the whole Norwegian Labor Party, and all of its daughter organizations, as antisemitic.

    NIS is, however, very concerned by the fact that the leadership of the Norwegian Labor Party and its daughter organizations might stimulate and encourage Jew-hatred, which is already well developed in Norway.

    In 2002, Jews are being harassed, Jewish children are being discriminated against in schools and some of the Jews "feel the earth burning under their feet".

    Therefore, it is not surprising that Jews try to maintain a low profile and, especially, deny any connection to the Jewish state, the target for modern Jew-hatred. Norway has never been a place in which Jews could feel equal and permanently safe, particularly before and during the Holocaust (http://norskisraelsenter.no/index-engl.htm). This attack by the Labor Party on Israel came only a short time after 1.5.2002, when the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) called upon Norwegians to boycott products produced in the Jewish state, Israel. LO is traditionally controlled by the Labor Party. Therefore, we ask the leader of The Norwegian Labor Party and its Youth Movement branch: If you really care about human rights,...$nbsp;

    What have you done about the Syrian and PLO responsibility for the massacre of more than 100,000 Christians in Lebanon between 1974 and 1982? Did you try to save them, or punish those responsible? Why do you blame the prime minister of the Jewish State for acts committed by Christian phalangists — led by a Syrian agent — as revenge for a continuous Moslem massacre? Why not blame the Christians and Moslems involved?

    Have you tried to stop the ongoing massacre of Christians in Sudan? During the past several years, more than 1.5 million Christians have been massacred there. Where have you been? Where are you now? What will you do to improve the life of millions of Moslem Arabs, suffering from tyranny under every single Arab regime, and especially under the PLO?

    Israel, surrounded by Moslem countries to the north, east and south, and the Mediterranean Sea to the west, is fighting daily for its survival. The Arab League established the PLO in 1964 as an umbrella-organization for various Arab groups, with the explicit aim of wiping out Israel as an independent state. This is clearly incorporated into the PLO charter and into the "constitution" of al-Fatah, an organization led by Arafat since 1958. With Israel as an exception, the Moslem Arabs have managed to eradicate any non-Moslem minority in the Middle East. But they still refuse to give up. This is the real background of the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. NIS therefore encourages The Norwegian Labor Party Youth Movement to consider a change in its radical line. Please support democracy in the Middle East and fight for equality and human right for Jews, Christians and Moslems in the Arab-occupied Middle East.

    4. THE TAKE ON NORWAY by an anti-Semitic blogger:
    http://kapodickie.blogspot.com/2011/07/ silverstein-blames-jews-for-norway.html

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

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Nurit Greenger, July 24, 2011.

    In the Book of Joel, Chapter 2, Verse 3-5 the Jewish prophet prophecy states: "...will display wonders in the sky and earth, blood fire and columns [pillars] of smoke. The sun will turn to darkness and the moon into blood; before the terrible and great day of the almighty God; and all who will call the name of God, the Lord shall flee; because in Mt-Zion and Jerusalem they will find refuge and be saved, as God said, and the remains that God calls."

    Is it only me who is sensing that each day passes the world is more confused, is a more dangerous place to love, and there is more fire and blood spilt?

    Yesterday, evil woke up Norway, the small Parliamentary democracy and a constitutional monarchy, with King Harald V of Norway, as its head of state, and Jens Stoltenberg as its prime minוster. About 4.9 million Norwegians, living on the western portion of the Scandinavian Peninsula, with an extensive coastline that is facing the North Atlantic Ocean and the Barents Sea, the home of the picturesque fjords, were rattled to their core.

    The enlightened, Nobel Prize rendering country, a founding member of NATO, joined the band of terror victims' states.

    At this point, it is not important the cause of the terror attack; what is important is that now, the Norwegians know what is the meaning of innocent civilians killed, due to some person's ideology and belief, he or she expresses by an act of horrific terror.

    The scene of damaged government headquarters' buildings, the terrorist blew up in Oslo, reminded many Americans of the terror job Timothy James McVeigh pulled off on April 19, 1995, when he detonating a truck bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrha Building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people and injuring 450. The property damage in Oslo may be as extensive as the one in Oklahoma, but the fatalities were lighter, by comparison.

    The lengthy shooting spree, the terrorist also carried out on youth camp attendees, on the small Utoya Island near Oslo, is unprecedented. However, it may remind many of the Beslan school siege, or Beslan massacre, in Russia, of early September 2004. It began when a group of armed Chechen Islamic militants took more than 1,100 people, including 777 children, hostage, on 1 September, at School Number One (SNO) in the town of Belsen, North Ossetia, in the North Caucasus region of the Russian Federation. Ultimately, at least 334 hostages were killed, including 186 children, hundreds more were injured and many were reported missing.

    Like in every terror attack, there was fire, smoke, debris and bleeding people everywhere in Oslo and Utoya Island.

    For few days Norway will be the focal point of the news. And then, when the coverage of the terror attack will arrive at some satisfactory conclusion, the reporters and their cameras will move on, to another location, where fire, smoke, debris and bleeding people will be everywhere.

    Terrorizing civilians began years ago and the precautions the civilized world has taken against this phenomenon have evolved, as terror occurred. The fall of the Twin Towers, in New York, on 9/11, was a major turning point; to add to it were several other frightening terror attacks on civilians, in the USA, Spain, England, Indian and Pakistan, to mention a few, and also too many to count unsuccessful terror attempts, all have put the entire free world into a mode of living in fear.

    In Israel, where a possible terror attack is the norm, you are watched and checked on every turn. You want to enter a mall, a movie house, the opera, a theatre, a supermarket, a shop, a restaurant, a building, an airport or airplane, etc., you are checked to make sure you are not a terrorist in the making. Other countries, slowly, are adopting the Israeli security mechanism. Norway, that until yesterday considered itself invulnerable to terror, will have to change its entire way of thinking. Now it is vulnerable and the countries it shares a border with, to the east, Sweden, to the north, Finland, and in its south Norway borders the Skagerrak Strait, across which Denmark is situated, are now on edge too.

    In general we can blame Islam jihad for what is taking place in our world today. When a terror attack occurs, we expect Moslems to be involved. However, as we have just seen in the Norway terror case, it is not always the case. But terror attack is a terror attack, and when it takes place innocent people die or get hurt. And terror installs fear and demoralizes people. It shakes the core or freedom and safety in humanity.

    We live in world of no certitude. There are wars, fire, smoke, and blood everywhere. A wave of rage is spreading and growing out of control throughout the world.

    The biblical Prophet Joel was correct when he said that there will be blood, fire and pillars of smoke all over.

    Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 23, 2011.

    Motzei Shabbat (After Shabbat)

    Before discussing news tonight, I want to share information about a group in Jerusalem called "Keep Jerusalem-Im Eshkachech" which is dedicated to sharing information about the importance of a Jerusalem united under Israeli sovereignty.

    The group offers eye-opening tours of eastern Jerusalem which I strongly recommend if you're visiting here. You'll learn a great deal and very likely come away with a brand-new perspective.

    Four-hour tours will be offered on August 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 22, 24, 29 — and possibly other times, as there is a demand. For more complete information write tours@keepjerusalem.org or call Russell (0)50 238 7260 (drop the first 0 outside of Israel). A 100 shekel donation will be recommended, and it is well worth it.


    The progress? I am seeing it on several fronts, along with the routine quota of frustration and disgust.

    First, more signs that we are not alone.

    This past week, in the words of Anne Bayefsky of Eye on the UN, the UN "quietly circulated a draft of the final declaration that will be adopted at the conclusion of Durban III. Although the writing had been on the wall for a very long time, the alarm bells could no longer be ignored. The 'political declaration' focuses particularly on what it calls 'victims of racism.' And the Durban Declaration emanating from South Africa names only one state victimizer — Israel. The Palestinian people are listed as victims of racism."

    You can read Bayefsky's full description of what's going on with regard to Durban III at:
    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/durban-circulates- draft-resoltuion_577321.html?nopager=1

    But the net result, and a key point of her piece, is that, "The Czech Republic rightly decided they'd had enough." The Czechs pulled out. Only Canada, Israel and the US had done so until this point.


    Now we learn from Eye on the UN that Italy and the Netherlands have also pulled out. Apparently this happened just today. The Dutch had specifically requested that Durban III include a statement that "all participating states emphatically distance themselves from the linking of subjects that have nothing to do with the fight against racism." This was ignored.

    Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini has stated that "The [Durban] Process has been transformed ... into a tribunal for accusations against Israel."

    Let's hope this snowballs.


    Another small step in the right direction, this time in terms of Israel's domestic political situation, is this:

    MK Uri Ariel (National Union) has put forth a bill that would allow museums in Judea and Samaria to apply for government funding. This sounds like a small matter, but it is not.

    Judea and Samaria are not part of Israel proper, never having been annexed or had Israeli civil law applied. These areas are under military jurisdiction and in all cases rules and laws that apply within the Green Line do not necessarily apply in Judea and Samaria.

    This is a small and very conscious step towards making the laws the same, at least in Jewish areas, on both sides of the Green Line.

    MK Ariel says he has come to believe that the best way to advance the notion of full annexation of Judea and Samaria is via these small steps. And so, to initiate the process, he began with this legislation on museums. It has received government backing and the explicit approval of Limor Livnat, Minister of Culture and Sports, and passed a preliminary reading in the Knesset by 51 to 9. It still has several hoops to jump through before becoming a law

    MK Ariel says that every week a legislator will propose an amendment to existing laws that do not apply to Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria, so that in the end they would be applicable.

    Right on!


    A brief comment here — this is something I will return to in greater detail several times, without a doubt.

    There is now a movement towards annexation of Judea and Samaria — something I applaud. In fact, I deeply regret that this wasn't done in 1967.

    But it is my own opinion that, at this juncture, the ultimate form that this will take has yet to be fully thought through. There are differing opinions here, different ways we might move, and there is a great deal of examination and exploration that needs to go into final decision making.

    Among the possibilities is the annexation of the areas where Jewish communities are located, possibly with further annexation to follow; annexation of all of Area C as specified under Oslo — which is area fully under Israeli control; or all of Judea and Samaria. If it is everything from the river to the sea, then the question is how the Arabs living in these areas would be handled — full citizenship, local autonomy, enfranchisement via Jordan. There are several proposals.

    What matters now is that the Israeli electorate (yes, there are Israeli citizens who are oblivious) and the world at large should start to understand Israeli rights in this area and to see Israeli sovereignty — in precisely whatever form it ultimately takes — as not only viable, but the best possible solution. Then it becomes time to examine the various options, while doing education.


    As to frustrations and disgust:

    There has been flip-flopping with regard to the business of Israel doing some sort of truncated apology to Turkey for the Mavi Marmara incident. A news report indicating that the government was giving this consideration is what I wrote about the other day. It was followed by a statement to journalists by Minister of Security Affairs Moshe Ya'alon, who said he did not see the possibility of reconciliation with Turkey and did not believe that Israel should comply with Turkish demands.

    Thank goodness! I thought. A bit of sanity.

    But, I was premature. While Ya'alon said that Israel was not ready to apologize (i.e., no decision to do so had been made) he indicated that he had voiced his own opinion, and that debate on this might still take place in the government.



    But if the above would be called frustrating, what follows here falls more in the "disgusting" category:

    It wasn't so long ago that Prime Minister Netanyahu announced that the party was over and privileges for terrorist prisoners would be cut in the face of Hamas intransigence with regard to Gilad Shalit. That announcement, long over due, was most welcome.

    But now a Prison Service representative has reported to the Knesset that most privileges are still being enjoyed by the terrorists. The only thing that has been taken away is the right to secure a degree while in prison. They apparently still have TV in their rooms, access to Internet and cell phones, etc. etc.

    This was always an unacceptable situation, but is doubly so now.

    What seems to be the case is the fear of prison riots. And if this indeed is so, it is deplorable. We have to be afraid of them? Unfortunately, fear of Arab violence influences government decisions not infrequently.


    I refer above to the issue of sovereignty over Judea and Samaria. Recently I reported in some detail on a mini-conference on this subject held in Jerusalem. Now videos of the talks of three of the four speakers of that evening — Caroline Glick, Danny Dayan and Mordecai Kedar — have been made available by the Center for Security Policy. http://www.youtube.com/user/securefreedom#p/ u/1/0xHT-MluF8M
    (With thanks to Daled Amos for this information.)

    I note here that this past week a mini-conference on the same issue was held in Hevron. I was not at that gathering; if I secure information I will be delighted to share it.

    Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner18@gmail.com and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Steven Plaut, July 23, 2011.

    1. Well, golly gee. The entire world media is suddenly denouncing "terrorism." Not a single Norwegian government spokesman or newspaper referred to the killer as an activist or a militant. This is the same Norwegian government that has been lobbying for a Palestinian state and condemns Israel whenever it uses force against terrorists.

    CNN was suddenly using the "T" word. NY Times commentators were not referring to the killer as a peace activist, whose grievances and sense of justice forced him to turn to violence. European politicians were not insisting that the shootings of the kids on the island were protests against occupation. Israeli leftists were not insisting that all the demands of the shooter be met in full. Shimon Peres was not insisting that the shooter be given his own state before the really violent Norwegian extremists nudge him aside. After all, there are no military solutions to the problems of shootings of Norwegians.

    The great irony is that the Norwegian attacks do not appear really to be terrorism. They appear to be the acts of a mentally deranged person, something like the Jonestown massacre. Certainly not organized terrorism like the atrocities perpetrated by the "Palestinians" so beloved by the Scandinavians. (Timothy McVeigh may also be more correctly regarded as a madman than a terrorist.)

    2. AS YOU KNOW, Israel recently passed a law allowing victims of economic boycotts to sue the organizers of those boycotts in court for damages. The Israeli Left is hysterical. The unelected anti-democratic justices in the Israeli Supreme Court may soon try to veto the law. The Israeli leftist media are denouncing the law in totalitarian unison. Foreign Israel-bashers are denouncing the law as creeping "fascism" in Israel.

    All of which makes the following story even more delicious. It turns out that a bill was submitted to the Knesset in 2006 that would prohibit boycotts in Israel. The sponsor of that bill stated at the time: "In the reality of modern life a boycott is an anachronism whose only purpose is to advance narrow special interests, and to extort public figures and coerce them into altering their decisions, and whose aim is to harm public figures and private persons."

    The sponsor of the bill in question and the proclaimer of that quote was none other than Knesset Member Ophir Pines (pronounced "offer penis"), one of the leaders of the Labor Party and a contender for party leader and Prime Minister. He submitted the bill because at the time some rabbis were talking about possibly boycotting some stores. Ophir Pines-Paz, as he has recently been calling himself, thought it was the height of democracy to prohibit boycotts.

    Except that these days he and his party are leading the jihad AGAINST the new Israeli law, which does exactly that. NOW these same people insist that an anti-boycott law is anti-democratic and fascist. So does the New Israel Fund, with which Pines has intimate ties. The New Israel Fund of course has also been funding the leftwing NGOs attempting to block the anti-boycott law and all other bills designed to rein in Israel's foreign-funded subversive leftist NGOs.

    3. SUMMERS ARE OFTEN THE SILLY SEASON in Israel, and this summer the silliest of all are the hordes of bored young Israelis, including students waiting for the next semester and "youth movement" teenagers, moving into tents in central Tel Aviv and in some other places, ostensibly to "protest" the high prices of housing in Israel. It is pretty obvious that the "tent cities" were inspired by the recent boisterous "consumer boycott" against cottage cheese, launched after the dairy cartel in Israel drove cheese prices sky high. The "success" of the consumer boycott inspired the bored tent dwellers to try to drive housing prices down with a similar loud media campaign and with publicity stunts.

    The problem is that the dairy cartel and the three producers of cottage cheese know they are dependent on the government's preservation of the anti-competitive structure in the dairy industry in Israel, and so respond to public pressure and governmental threats by cutting prices. But rental housing is a competitive market in which 300,000 landlords lease out property. And competitive markets could not care less about loud bored teenagers in tents or about governmental threats to "investigate" and reform the market. The government can scare the bejeebers out of the dairy cartel by threatening to import cheese. No landlords can be scared with threats to import apartment buildings.>Beyond that, the tent protests are just the latest illustration of the gross idiocy that takes place whenever populists and demagogues in Israel decide to get "socially aware and concerned." When public figures in Israel start demanding action in the name of "social justice," it is time to grab your wallet and race for the hills. The tent protesters have already been co-opted by the Far Left, and the New Israel Fund has been exposed as bankrolling the "protesters." Non-leftists who had joined the tentsters in their first days, like the Im Tirtzu students, have abandoned the "protests" after the role of the Far Left there became clear.

    Essentially the tent protesters are teenagers and older people whose ideas never matured beyond those of teenagers, who continue to fantasize about Israel becoming a utopia operating with 19th century socialist "ideas." The more immediate demand of the "protesters" is that they want rent controls. Yes, the same sorts of rent controls that destroyed the housing stock of New York City and of all other cities in which they have been implemented. (See
    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/ 0,7340,L-4099043,00.html)

    The protesters are quite candid about what they want. It seems they cannot afford the rents in the most popular sections of Northern Tel Aviv. And they insist that it is their "right" to live in those areas at rents that they deem "affordable." This is a bit like college students in America insisting that all apartments along Park Avenue in Manhattan be rented to them at rents of $400 per month because this is what they can afford. The fact that apartments on Park Avenue are more likely to rent out at $10,000 per month is just proof of how unjust society is and how important it is for the government to control prices.

    Now some reporters ask the protesters what is wrong with moving to the more distant suburbs of Tel Aviv, where rents are much lower. Nothing doing, respond the crusaders for social justice, all the cool pubs are in Northern Tel Aviv. Really cynical reporters sometimes ask what is wrong with moving to Ashkelon or Ashdod, where rents are REALLY low. But we do not WANT to live so far away, respond the crusaders for justice. We demand the right to live on Israel's version of Fifth Avenue and cross streets in the 60s. Besides there is nothing worth doing pub-wise in Ashdod.

    Of course young crusaders who want to live CLOSER to the action can live in very-cheap Lod and commute into pub-land in Northern Tel Aviv in 10 minutes by train. But no, train commuting is beneath their dignity.

    Oh, and about those impoverished young people living in the tents. The tents were provided by the New Israel Fund. But the shiny brand new cars in which they arrived at the tent cities were provided by mommy and daddy. SO if mommy and daddy can buy junior cars, why can't they also chip in for his rent and his tuition? I marvel weekly at all the shiny new student cars jamming up my own campus when I arrive at the same campus by bus.

    Now the biggest problem of all for the junior crusaders for social justice and their cheerleading squads in the Israeli media is their refusal to take courses in basic economics. Those bellowing that Israeli housing prices are "so high that no Israelis can afford them" are missing the point that the housing prices are high precisely BECAUSE so many Israelis can afford them, and THOSE Israelis are the ones bidding the prices up! Part of the price surge is a reflection of Bank of Israel policy that has been holding down interest rates as macroeconomic policy during the recent world financial crisis. Every Israeli can borrow oodles of shekels at really low interest rates and bid for the housing. That policy was foolish, although nothing close to the stupidity of the policy of Obama to spend a year's GDP worth of wampum bailing out institutions and buying up toxic assets, so I guess we should not be complaining too much.

    If the demagogues in the Knesset decide to pander to the crusaders for justice, they just might introduce rent controls, which will really produce mass pauperization of Israelis and destruction of the housing stock. Students now complaining about $1500 per month rents in Tel Aviv will really have something to bitch about when those rents become infinity.

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

    To Go To Top

    Posted by GWY, July 22, 2011.

    This was written by Professor Paul Eidelberg, President of the Israel-America Renaissance Institute. Professor Eidelberg is an internationally known political scientist, author and lecturer.


    America and Israel are said to have a "special relationship." To grasp the essence of this relationship, one has to understand America's as well as Israel's world-historical function.

    America is Exceptional. By virtue of its democratic universalism America represents to mankind the example of a nation in which diverse peoples can live together in abiding peace and friendship, and without negating the particularism of other nations.

    This means that America, at its best and to the glory of its Founding Fathers, is to provide the pragmatic test of various universal laws of morality embodied in its Declaration of Independence — the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God," the very laws Jews bestowed on America and mankind via Christianity.

    Now, in order for America to represent the one nation in which people of diverse ethnic, racial, and religious backgrounds can thrive in peace under the same laws and institutions, there must exist, of logical necessity, a welter of nations having significantly different ways of life. This being so, America's world-historical function is to preserve the political independence and integrity of other nations against any imperialistic power that would obliterate the particularism of nations by means of any universalist ideology.

    America errs profoundly, therefore, when it expects Israel to subordinate its particularism to the universalism which Israel's own Torah prescribes for mankind as a whole, the Seven Noahide Laws of morality. (Incidentally, the failure of the Soviet Union to impose a universalistic creed on a welter of nations is not a victory of democracy so much as a victory of nationhood.)

    To be more precise: America violates its world-historical function when it seeks to impose on Israel a set of democratic principles which can only distort Israel's unique character or hinder Israel's restoration as the unique commonwealth of the Jewish People.

    This is not to denigrate democracy, which has brought many blessings to humanity. But let us examine this term which countless intellectuals have thoroughly Americanized and homogenized.

    Of Greek origin, "democracy" means the "rule of the people." But what is a "people"? A people is not a polyglot as in "one-man-one-vote" America. The essence of peoplehood or nationhood is particularism, not universalism or humanism. A people must have a distinct ethnic character or way of life. Whatever the differences among the individuals composing a people, these will not be as important as their shared beliefs and values derived from a common past, its venerable tradition.

    A living and vibrant people must have a vivid sense of national consciousness and even of national pride, sustained by the memory of national triumphs and tragedies. Therein is the heart of a people's authenticity and the reason why their government will not readily bestow on heterogeneous elements dwelling in their midst citizenship or equal rights unless these elements swear loyalty to, and act in accordance with, the basic convictions and aspirations of their benefactors.

    Unfortunately, the Zionists who founded the modern State of Israel did not apply this ethnic implication of democracy. Animated by humanism and socialism, they had no intention of establishing a government whose primary goal would be to restore the sovereignty of Judaic law and institutions in the Land of Israel. Indeed, they sought to purge Judaism of its particularism. Only then would the Jews become a "normal" people acceptable to others. Thus did these humanists (vainly) expect to overcome the scourge of anti-Semitism.

    But in seeking to make the Jewish people "normal," these humanists deprived many Jews of peoplehood — a basic reason why hundreds of thousands of secular Jews have abandoned Israel for the melting pot of America.

    All honor to the architects of the modern State of Israel; but let us not conceal their shortcomings. No less than David Ben-Gurion penned this piece of self-effacing universalism for posterity: "An Arab should also have the right to be elected President of Israel."

    This egalitarianism would be appropriate in America, where any native-born Arab citizen has a legal right to become president of the United States. But Israel is supposed to be Jewish; that was the raison d'être of its reestablishment in 1948. In fact, however, Israel is so far from being Jewish in Structure as well as in Statecraft that its prime minister stoops to Arab despots imploring them to recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people!

    Contact GWY at gwy123@aol.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Fern Sidman, July 22, 2011.

    Elliott Chodoff, an American born political and military analyst and an IDF reserve major, spoke at the "Middle East Briefing" session of the sixth CUFI national summit in Washington this week.

    Citing Israeli military intelligence, Chodoff was quite forthright in his analysis of a possible attack by Iran. "Israel cannot survive a nuclear attack. You cannot trust a nuclear deterrent. Israel cannot wipe out Iran's nuclear arsenal but the US can." Chodoff added that the Iranian regime has been developing bombs that have the capability of hitting US cities on the East coast.

    He delivered an account of the history of radical Islamism, saying, "The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt in 1928 and its leader imbibed the Nazi ideology that focused on the extermination of the Jews." Noting that Iranian cleric Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran who came to power during the Islamic revolution of 1979 was active in disseminating the Muslim Brotherhood ideology to school children, he said that it was Khomeini who was the first to label Americas as "the great Satan" and referred to Christians as the enemies while declaring that America is run by Jews.

    American perception of Khomeini was skewed according to Mr. Chodoff, who revealed that at the time, the US representative at the United Nations Andrew Young said that Khomeini was "a great humanitarian" and dismissed his flagrant hostility. He added that Hizbullah (the party of G-d) that was founded in 1980 is currently "the most dangerous organization on earth" and is responsible for developing the terrorist strategy of suicide bombings with most of them directed at American targets. Chodoff said that it was weakness on the part of the US as manifested by their decision to leave Lebanon in the throes of terrorism that emboldened the enemy. "When Hizbullah saw that Americans were taking leave of Lebanon they knew they could push us out," he said.

    Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu addressed the session via satellite from Jerusalem. Greeted with over 10 minutes of applause and enthusiastic cheers, Mr. Netanyahu extended his appreciation to those Christian supporters of Israel who have the "courage to stand up and speak the truth."

    Drawing the largest applause was Netanyahu's reference to the biblical connection of the Jewish people to their ancestral homeland. "The Jewish people are not occupiers in the land of Israel. We have returned to the land of our forebears; of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David and Solomon and we are here to stay." Speaking of Israel as America's only reliable ally in the Middle East, Netanyahu underscored Israel's initiatives at the peace table. "This conflict is not about Israel refusing to accept a Palestinian state. Israel wants peace with the Palestinians, but we can't build a peace based on lies."

    Colonel Ben Tzion Gruber of the Israel Defense Forces took the audience through a video and slide presentation that described how the IDF takes great pains to avoid civilian casualties during military strikes and during wartime. He said that the nomenclature of the code of ethics can be divided into three categories. "Necessity," he said, means that force is only employed for accomplishing the mission, and "Distinction" means that every measure is taken so that innocents will not be harmed, and "Proportionality" means that collateral damage is only used in proportion to the threat.

    Also addressing the session was Malcolm Hoenlein, the Executive Vice Chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations who said, "We have begun a three week period of mourning for the Jewish people as we remember the destruction of our Holy Temple and other calamities that befell us throughout history." He asked his biblically well-versed audience: "If I would ask you to provide the names of those spies who returned from the land of Israel with a negative report, would you remember their names? The answer is no because those who stand with Israel are remembered for posterity and those who decry Israel are forgotten."

    On the international campaign to abrogate the biblical and religious heritage of the Jewish people in the land of Israel, Mr. Hoenlein said, "Those who would dismiss our past also risk our future. For example, there are those who question Judaism's undeniable ties with Rachel's Tomb and thus would like to transform it into a mosque. There are those who say that our Temples never existed. Our bible tells us that Abraham purchased the city of Hevron, in broad daylight, in full view of all, because he knew that in the future its ownership would be challenged. Today there are regular archeological discoveries which serve as concrete proof of the fact that when you open your bibles, the land of Israel comes to life. We must ask ourselves: why did G-d give this generation the privilege of uncovering this Jewish connection. What does it mean for us in the future?"

    Mr. Hoenlein concluded by telling the members of CUFI that when they stand for Israel, they stand for America and will be thanked by their grandchildren for doing so.

    Contact Fern Sidman by email at ariellaH@aol.com. This article appeared today in Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews).

    To Go To Top

    Posted by MS Kramer, July 21, 2011.

    In the Middle East, Britain was the country that took the most advantage of the decline of the Ottoman Empire. During WWI, Britain and France were actively negotiating how to split up the vast Arab holdings that the Turks were too weak to retain. Britain was far more cagey than France and ended up with many more "prizes" after the war. In this article, I'll describe the little known events which led to the Arab-Israeli conflict over the country we know as Israel.

    The Jews have a 4,000 year history in the Levant, a general name for the coastal lands and islands of the far eastern part of the Mediterranean, from the north-eastern part of the Sinai Peninsula, northwards through modern Israel, Lebanon and Syria, and westwards along the modern Turkish coast. Though expelled twice in their history from the Land of Israel, by the Babylonians in 586 BCE and by the Romans in 70 CE, Jews were always present in waxing or waning numbers.

    With the general rise in nationalistic feelings in the Western world during the 19th century, the term Zionism came to represent Jewish longings for their own country in their homeland. A series of "Aliyahs" began towards the end of the century to the Ottoman-ruled "region of Jerusalem" in the "Territory of Greater Syria." By the start of the British Mandate for Palestine (the name given to the area by the Roman emperor Hadrian, revived by the British) in 1923, Jews numbered about 135,000 out of the total population of approximately 800,000, which was comprised of Jews, Balkans, Greeks, Syrians, Latins, Egyptians, Turks, Armenians, Italians, Persians, Kurds, Germans, Afghans, Circassians, Bosnians, Sudanese, Samaritans, Algerians, and Tartars, among others. The region was a neglected, poor backwater of the crumbling Ottoman Empire.

    On Nov. 2, 1917, the British issued the Balfour Declaration, which stated their wish for, and their best endeavors to facilitate, the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people. The purpose of the declaration was two-fold: to encourage the Russian Jews to agitate for post-revolutionary Russia to fight in WWI on Britain's side; and to encourage American Jews to persuade America to get off the fence and join Britain in the war effort. Jews around the world rejoiced at the British call for a Jewish homeland.

    However, the British had also made promises to Arabs. In the early stages of the war, T.E. Lawrence, popularly known as Lawrence of Arabia, promised Al-Hussein bin Ali, the Sharif of Mecca and King of Hijaz, a large Arab state if he turned on his Ottoman allies and helped the British in the war effort. This was confirmed by the British High Commissioner in Egypt, Sir Henry McMahon: "We declare once more that His Majesty's Government would welcome the resumption of the Khalifate (Caliphate: Islamic civil-religious rule) by an Arab of true race. With regard to the questions of limits and boundaries, it would appear to be premature to consume our time in discussing such details in the heat of war ... ." (August 15, 1915).

    The territory in question included the greater Jerusalem region, the same territory later promised to the Jews. The Sharif was the leader of the Hashemi clan. The Hashemites claim direct descent from Muhammed "through his daughter Fatima and her husband Ali bin Abi Talib, who was also the Prophet's paternal first cousin and the fourth caliph of Islam. The direct descendants of the eldest son, Hassan, are known as 'Sharifs' (nobles) .... The royal family of Jordan, the Hashemites, is descended through the Sharifian branch of lineage."

    The official Hashemite website,
    http://www.kinghussein.gov.jo/hash_intro.html notes that the ancestors of King Abdullah, the current Jordanian monarch, ruled the holy city of Mecca from 1201 CE until 1925 CE, although they recognized the sovereignty of the Ottoman sultan in 1517. King Abdullah is the head of the Hashemite family which, "in addition to being directly descended from the Prophet, also represents over one thousand years of rule in the area, and almost two thousand years of recorded presence in the holy city of Mecca."

    Promises of the same territory to two parties soon led to trouble. The Arab riots against the Jews began in earnest in 1921, causing Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill to endorse removing the territory on the east bank of the Jordan River, called Transjordan, from Palestine and barring it from Jewish settlement. The rationale was that the Balfour Declaration did not contemplate that all of Palestine should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded "in Palestine." The formula for the Mandate document underwent several transformations during this time. The Churchill White Paper of 1922 reiterated the right of the Jews to a Homeland in Palestine excepting Transjordan. The British Mandate for Palestine was confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on July 24, 1922 and came into effect on September 26,1923, incorporating the language of the Balfour Declaration.

    The result was that 78% of Palestine had become Transjordan, under Hashemite rule. 22% was left for the Jews to create their "Homeland", provided it didn't "prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing occupants" who also lived there. The conflict between Jews and other inhabitants in the Mandate was thus "baked in the cake" by the British, who fomented similar problems between Indians and Pakistanis.

    BONUS: In a short but excellent new video, Israel's Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Danny Ayalon explains the historical facts relating to the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Watch it and pass it on to your friends!

    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." Contact him at mskramer@bezeqint.net and visit www.encounteringisrael.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Raymond Ibrahim, July 21, 2011.

    Muslim "child-marriage" — euphemism for pedophilia — is making headlines again, at least in Arabic media: Dr. Salih bin Fawzan, a prominent cleric and member of Saudi Arabia's highest religious council, just issued a fatwa asserting that there is no minimum age for marriage, and that girls can be married "even if they are in the cradle."

    Appearing in Saudi papers on July 13, the fatwa complains that "Uninformed interference with Sharia rulings by the press and journalists is on the increase, posing dire consequences to society, including their interference with the question of marriage to small girls who have not reached maturity, and their demand that a minimum age be set for girls to marry."

    Fawzan insists that nowhere does Sharia set an age limit for marrying girls: like countless Muslim scholars before him, he relies on Koran 65:4, which discusses marriage to females who have not yet begun menstruating (i.e., are prepubescent) and the fact that Muhammad, Islam's role model, married Aisha when she was 6-years-old, "consummating" the marriage — or, in modern parlance, raping her — when she was 9.

    The point of the Saudi fatwa, however, is not that girls as young as 9 can have sex, based on Muhammad's example, but rather that there is no age limit whatsoever; the only question open to consideration is whether the girl is physically capable of handling her husband/rapist. Fawzan documents this point by quoting Ibn Batal's authoritative exegesis of Sahih Bukhari:

    The ulema [Islam's interpreters] have agreed that it is permissible for fathers to marry off their small daughters, even if they are in the cradle. But it is not permissible for their husbands to have sex with them unless they are capable of being placed beneath and bearing the weight of the men. And their capability in this regard varies based on their nature and capacity. Aisha was 6 when she married the prophet, but he had sex with her when she was 9 [i.e., when she was deemed capable].

    Fawzan concludes his fatwa with a warning: "It behooves those who call for setting a minimum age for marriage to fear Allah and not contradict his Sharia, or try to legislate things Allah did not permit. For laws are Allah's province; and legislation is his excusive right, to be shared by none other. And among these are the rules governing marriage."

    Fawzan, of course, is not the first to insist on the legitimacy of pedophilia in Islam. Even the former grand mufti of Saudi Arabia supported "child-marriage," since "the Koran and Sunna document it."

    Nor is this just some theoretic, theological point; the lives of many young girls are being destroyed because of this ruling. Recall, for instance, the 13-year-old girl who died while her much older husband was copulating with her (it was later revealed that, due to her reluctance, he was tying her up and "raping" her — as if there is another way to describe sex with children); or the 12-year-old who died giving birth to a stillborn; or the 10-year-old who made headlines by hiding out from her 80-year-old "husband."

    Then there are the countless anonymous girls who do nothing to warrant any media attention — such as die — and have learned to live with their elderly husbands pawing at them, like, no doubt, the girl who married Islam's most popular cleric, Yusuf Qaradawi, when she was 14.

    What do we make of the fact that it is always Islam's religious, authoritative voices — not aberrant voices, not "terrorists," "extremists," or any other euphemism coined for the occasion — that are constantly demonstrating Sharia's savageries? Weeks before this fatwa, a female politician and activist in Kuwait called for institutionalizing sex-slavery (recommending that Muslims buy and sell female Russian captives from the Chechnya war); a popular Egyptian preacher not only said the same thing, but added that the solution to Islam's poverty is to go on jihad and plunder the lives and possessions of infidels.

    Sounds odd? Perhaps; but it is perfectly consistent. After all, distilled and in the eyes of the non-believer, Sharia law is nothing less than a legal system built atop the words and deeds of a 7th century Arab, whose behavior — from pedophilia and sex-slavery to war mongering and plundering — was very much that of a 7th century Arab. Having enticed or enslaved his contemporaries into following him, his teachings continue to entice and enslave their descendants; and, now as then, it is always the innocent who suffer.

    Contact Raymond Ibrahim at list@pundicity.com. This is archived at
    http://www.raymondibrahim.com/9956/ new-saudi-fatwa-defends-pedophilia-as-marriage

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Barry Rubin, July 21, 2011.

    Here's how revolutions — at least ultimately undemocratic ones — work. During the initial phase, when protests are against the old regime, they are cheered as symbols of freedom. Once the old regime has been overthrown, however, protests against government policies immediately become actions by counterrevolutionary subversives that should be suppressed.

    The scene switches to...the great Egyptian democratic revolution.

    The official Muslim Brotherhood website, Ikhwan Online, has now accused former Mubarak government saboteurs and "their Zionist allies" of trying to destabilize Egypt by infiltrating ongoing protests in Tahrir Square. That opens the door, of course, to a future Egyptian government banning demonstrations on the grounds that they are being fomented by counterrevolutionary reactionary Zionist American imperialist running dogs.

    When the Brotherhood gets into details, the absurdity of their charges is clear. But remember that in a place like Egypt, people believe this kind of thing. And in a place like the contemporary West, the mass media don't report this kind of thing and don't explain to their readers the dominance of this kind of "irrational" world view.

    According to the Brotherhood, three knife-carrying infiltrators were caught trying to stir trouble. How did one know they were Israeli agents? I'm not making this up: they had Star of David tattoos! Even the Egyptian newspaper reporting this (a sign of progress?) pointed out that "tattoos are forbidden under Jewish law." A reporter was also supposedly captured carrying bombs and tear gas marked with the Star of David trying to incite attacks on the Ministry of Interior. Presumably all Israeli secret agents carry bombs and tear gas so marked so they don't get them mixed up with other bombs and tear gas.

    But again remember that hundreds of thousands of people in the Arabic-speaking world believe stuff like this.

    According to the Muslim Brotherhood's military expert:

    "The Western countries, including the United States and Israel, want to derail the revolution because Arab revolutions limit Western influence in the region, thwart attempts to control the Middle East and deplete its resources."

    But wait! Isn't the Obama Administration 100 percent in favor of the Egyptian revolution, in fact not having made a single criticism of it?

    Yes, and President Jimmy Carter kept praising the Iranian revolution of 1979, too, and yet within months the American embassy was stormed, seized, and everyone there was taken hostage

    And up until a few days ago President Barack Obama and his colleagues kept praising Syria yet after a couple of minor criticisms the American embassy was stormed and trashed.

    Is it true, as the famous line in the film "Cool Hand Luke" put it, that what we have here is a failure to communicate?

    Let's summarize:

    — The Muslim Brotherhood and many Egyptians (especially Islamists, the radical left and radical nationalists) are ideologically fixated on the idea that America and the West (not to mention Israel) are diabolical and fanatical enemies that can never be trusted and will never change.

    — These forces also know that hatred of the West, America, and Israel are their most effective tools in mobilizing popular support and delegitimizing enemies. They will never give up such useful tools.

    — They also know that no matter how much America and the West support the revolution now, they will not support their efforts to radicalize and Islamize Egypt. Once these policies kick in, there will be a conflict because they want a conflict.

    — By the same token, America and the West will always prefer moderate politicians to triumph. In other words, even if they don't know it yet, the U.S. and European governments are indeed "enemies" of the radicals. Thus, the hostages were seized in Tehran in 1979 largely as a result of a high-ranking U.S. official trying to show support by meeting with the Iranian foreign minister. The Carter Administration saw this action as being friendly; the radicals perceived it as an attempt to split and moderate their regime. The Obama Administration doesn't understand this lesson.

    These are some of the reasons why Islamists generally — and Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hizballah, and the Muslim Brotherhoods specifically — will always be anti-Western and anti-American no matter what the Obama Administration does or says.

    That's a lesson Americans have been given since the American revolutionary Tom Paine went to France to support what he saw as a democratic movement there and almost ended up being guillotined. This time it would be preferable if the United States and the West could keep their heads.

    PS: When even Slate notices the growing power of Islamism in Egypt it shows how far things have moved since January. But the article follows the new MSM line: the Salafists are a threat while the Muslim Brotherhood is centrist. That's like saying in the 1930s that the (Stalinist) Communist Party is now moderate but watch out for those Trotskyists! LOL

    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

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Hands Fiasco, July 21, 2011.

    This was written by Scott Farwell and it appeared in Jewish World Review.


    DALLAS — Dr. Isador Lieberman, a world-renowned spinal surgeon, is the kind of guy whose work life is scheduled to the minute.

    So, when a man appeared unannounced in his office 11 years ago with vague questions and a hard-to-decipher accent, Lieberman's response was frosty.

    "Can't you see I'm busy?" he said to his secretary. "Does he have an appointment? Who is he? What does he want?"

    She shrugged and offered thinly, "He's pretty persistent."

    "OK," he relented, "bring him in."

    The decision changed the trajectory of Lieberman's life.

    Next month, he will lead a small team of Texans into the foothills of Mount Elgon, a towering, dormant volcano in eastern Uganda. He will carry a dirt-proof, waterproof, insect-proof acrylic cylinder containing the most sacred document in Judaism: a Torah scroll.

    How did a 51-year-old Jewish physician from Plano, Texas, end up delivering an ancient Hebrew text to a remote village in Uganda?

    The story begins in the early 1900s with an elephant hunter named Semei Kakungulu.

    Protestant missionaries and European colonialists swarmed across Africa, importing Christianity while exporting the continent's natural resources.

    Kakungulu, a charismatic and opportunistic leader of the Baganda tribe, learned to read the Bible in Swahili and to understand the language and ambitions of the British, eventually helping them conquer vast swaths of his homeland.

    Some called him a traitor; others called him Uganda's first king.

    But as Kakungulu's power grew, he became disillusioned with the moral and political agenda of the white men. Around 1917, he retreated to the jungles encircling Mount Elgon and began meditating on the Old Testament.

    He claimed a conversion to Judaism, wrote a 90-page manual of rules and prayers and planted a Jewish community called the Abayudaya, which flourished even after Kakungulu died of tetanus in 1928.

    Ugandan leader Idi Amin outlawed Judaism soon after he seized power in 1971, and later proclaimed that Adolf Hitler "was right to burn 6 million Jews."

    The Abayudaya fractured in the face of persecution, but some tribesmen continued to worship in private, honoring the Sabbath on Saturdays and circumcising their sons.

    Religious freedom was eventually restored in Uganda, and today about 1,500 of the Abayudaya remain in a scattering of villages on what was once Kakungulu's estate.

    They exist in relative obscurity, unknown to many Jews — including Lieberman, until he came upon a collection of clay huts imprinted with menorahs and Stars of David last year.

    Lieberman, who runs a spinal surgery mission in Uganda, celebrated a Friday evening religious service last year with about 200 Jews in a small village called Putti.

    "In typical fashion, it was a culture shock to us North Americans, as privileged as we are," he said. "I saw how they lived, and their grass hut, which was their synagogue."

    Villagers danced and sang, blending African rhythm with traditional Jewish rituals.

    Lieberman's spirits soared, until religious leaders opened a small wooden box, the Aron Kodesh, which in Hebrew means "Holy Ark."

    "I saw this little paper Torah scroll, maybe 12 inches high, one of those things you buy in some Judaica shop for kids to draw on with crayons," he said. "I was just troubled by that."

    The Torah consists of the first five books of the Hebrew Bible and is the foundation for the Old Testament. It is used in religious services for ritual readings and teaching.

    Lieberman listened as community members described their struggle to live as Orthodox Jews and their desire to undergo conversion and be recognized by rabbinical authorities in Israel.

    The Abayudaya are not accepted as Jewish by all Jews. Under Orthodox law, a person who was not born into the faith must undergo conversion.

    "I don't know what came over me, but I said, 'I'm going to work on getting you a Sefer Torah,'" Lieberman said. "I had no idea what it would take to get one, the logistics involved, the resources needed.

    "And that just triggered this incredible chain of events."

    A turning point in the story, Lieberman said, was the afternoon 11 years ago when the man showed up unannounced in his office.

    His name was Mark Kayanja. He had traveled from Uganda to learn spine surgery.

    Lieberman was skeptical.

    "Mark, do you have a license?"


    "Do you have any support?"


    Kayanja interrupted. He said he'd do anything, including work for free.

    "I started him off in our research lab," Lieberman said. "Within six months, I realized I was dealing with — this is no stretch — one of the smartest human beings I've ever had the privilege of being associated with."

    Kayanja, today a spinal surgeon in Cleveland, was the first graduate of an orthopedic program in Uganda to train abroad.

    Lieberman was his mentor at the Lerner Research Institute's Cleveland Clinic, but in some ways, he learned more than he taught.

    "He was always asking me about Uganda, what the conditions are like, what is the state of spine surgery there, what could be done to improve it," Kayanja said.

    "I told him a lot of the patients have conditions that are treatable, especially the children."

    Lieberman said Kayanja began a relentless campaign.

    "He pestered me for four years, 'Let's go to Uganda. We need to work in Uganda,'" Lieberman remembered, laughing. "I was like, 'OK, Mark. May 2005, we'll go to Uganda. Now get back to work.'"

    In April 2005, Kayanja appeared in Lieberman's office again with airline tickets and a list of patients.

    "At that point, I realized I did promise," Lieberman said. "We did go to Uganda. I was hooked, and we've been going back ever since."

    In six years, Lieberman, Kayanja and other physicians have operated on more than 200 patients through the Uganda Spine Surgery Mission, which is operated under the auspices of a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit, Health Volunteers Overseas.

    Their work focuses on treating spinal injuries, correcting children's congenital deformities and training local doctors.

    After a few years volunteering in Uganda, Lieberman began hearing rumors about Jews living in remote villages in the shadow of an ancient volcano.

    Last year, he set out to find them.

    It took about six hours to drive from Uganda's capital of Kampala to Mbale, a city of about 80,000 near the country's eastern border with Kenya.

    From there, Lieberman's group followed red-clay motorcycle trails into the jungle. It was nearly dark by the time they arrived in Putti, a village of about 200 subsistence farmers who live in mud huts without electricity or running water.

    Tribal leaders seemed thrilled at the prospect of having a legitimate parchment scroll.

    "When you're looking at a village that's struggling to survive, a Torah doesn't seem like the first thing they need," said Lieberman.

    "From a religious standpoint, sure, but when you look at Maslow's hierarchy of needs, there's no Torah scroll on there."

    After he returned to his home in Dallas, Lieberman said, he received emails nearly every day from the religious leader in Putti, Rabbi Enosh Keki Mainah. He either walked or caught a ride to the nearest Internet cafe about seven miles away from his home.

    "He was like, 'We're so thankful that you promised to bring us a Torah. We can't wait until next year to see our new Sefer Torah,'" Lieberman said. "And I'm thinking to myself, 'Oh, my God, what have I gotten myself into?'"

    His anxiety grew as he started making calls.

    Lieberman learned that Torah scrolls can cost $25,000 or more and often require expensive repairs. To withstand the climate in rural Uganda, the parchment document would need a special protective case.

    In December, he scheduled a meeting at a Starbucks in Plano with Rabbi Nasanya Zakon, director of the Dallas Area Torah Association, and Rabbi Avraham Bloomenstiel, an expert in the rare art of writing and repairing Torah scrolls.

    "That place was empty," Lieberman said. "And we're sitting there, drinking tea with Christmas music in the background, planning how to get a Torah scroll into Uganda. And I'm thinking, 'This is not real. You couldn't write a sitcom like this.'"

    Months later, Bloomenstiel — who was admitted to Harvard University at 16 and later received a master's degree in music from the Peabody Institute at Johns Hopkins University — found five stolen Torahs in a police evidence locker in Brooklyn. They had gone unclaimed for more than a decade and were available for purchase.

    With the help of donors, Lieberman bought one of the ancient texts for $12,000 — a scroll created in Poland about the time his father was a prisoner at Nazi death camps in Buchenwald, Germany, and Auschwitz, Poland. He survived and ultimately immigrated to Canada.

    "I must admit that I was a less-than-enthusiastic religious Jew until my father passed away in 2001," Lieberman said. "Some things have happened the last few years that are just not explainable to me. I feel like there's something guiding all of us."

    Bloomenstiel said it's hard not to see divine intervention in the story of the Torah scroll and how it has intersected with lives on three continents.

    "Here we have a story that starts with a leader of the Baganda tribe who is living in the jungle and develops a connection with Judaism," he said.

    "Then Izzy contacts me to get a Torah scroll that was written pre-World War II, somehow survived being stolen, ends up in an evidence locker in Brooklyn and now has found its way to a synagogue in the mountains of Uganda."

    The journey may also challenge some people's religious reference points.

    "Judaism is always thought of as an ethnicity, but it's not — it's a community of the soul," Bloomenstiel said.

    "This story has the potential to remind the greater community that you have to step outside of this very narrow European view of what it means to be Jewish."

    Contact HandsFiasco by email at handsfiasco@webtv.net

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, July 21, 2011.

    The World Alamanac of Islamism is a new site by The American Foreign Policy Council, devoted to mapping out the various Islamist movements around the world. They have a section on Europe, with details on different countries.

    From their main Europe page

    Buoyed by steady immigration from the Middle East and North Africa, as well as negative native demographics among continental states, the Muslim communities in Europe are becoming larger, more complex and more vocal. Within these communities, the past year saw Islamism continue to grow in strength as a political phenomenon.

    The dominant mode of Islamist activism in Europe remains to operated within the parameters of existing political systems. Some groups, such as the Union of the Islamic Communities and Organizations of Italy, confine themselves to expanding the participation of Muslims in national politics, while others, like the Muslim Association of Britain, work to promote Islamist political thought, as well as the message and appeal of foreign Islamist groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood. Only a small minority — exemplified by England's al-Muhajiroon, among other fringe elements — has advocated violence against, and the overthrow of, European governments. Those elements are closely monitored and proscribed by the authorities in question.

    Perhaps as a result of Islamism's mostly-political expression in Europe, local governments generally have been slow to address or confront the phenomenon, and the national debate on the topic remains relatively unsophisticated in places such as Italy and Spain. Further east, in the Balkans, the relative corruption and/or weakness of the Kosovar, Macedonian and Albanian governments similarly has allowed Islamist groups and more extreme interpretations of the Muslim religion to proliferate and gather strength.

    Elsewhere on the Continent, however, signs of pushback against the encroachment of Islamist forces and values are increasingly visible. In France, after years of laissez faire attitudes toward the growth of political Islam, certain segments of the body politic are now demonstrating newfound emphasis on national identity and secularism as a reaction to Islamist influence. Denmark also has seen growing awareness of — and a hardening of attitudes toward — Islamist groups and individuals since the 2005 controversy surrounding publications of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad by the newspaper Jyllands-Posten. Likewise, in The Netherlands, there is growing attention to the "values gap" between the country's indigenous population and its small, mostly immigrant, Muslim minority. Since the 2004 murder of controversial filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, there has also been a noticeable hardening of response to instances of Islamic radicalism throughout Denmark.

    Beyond the general sphere of lawful Islamist activity in Europe, however, is the more ominous (albeit informal) one embodied by radical jihadist elements. Today, both Sunni and Shi'a terrorist groups, among them Lebanon's Hezbollah militia and the Palestinian Hamas movement, boast a sizeable presence on the Continent (particularly in Germany and the United Kingdom). By and large, however, these organizations appear to prefer to use Europe as an area for staging, fundraising and recruitment, rather than seeing it as a target for operations.

    Although European governments to date have been slow to address the political aspects of Islamism, there is considerable activism in the sphere of counterterrorism. A number of high-profile terrorist attacks in the past decade — for example, the March 11, 2004 Madrid train attacks and the subsequent July 7, 2005 London train bombing — resulted in a major focus on counterterrorism throughout the Eurozone. As a result, in recent years, authorities in multiple Europe countries have successfully apprehended and dismantled Islamist terrorist cells operating on their soil or against targets within their borders. Many of these groups and individuals have been connected to global terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda. Some, however, have proven to be "home grown" or autonomous in nature.

    This, in turn, has led to growing recognition of an alarming phenomenon associated with Islamism in Europe: the rise of spontaneous Islamist terrorism by individual radicals. During the mid-2000s, the U.S.-led war in Iraq served as a major catalyst for this tendency among European Muslims, a sizeable number of whom traveled abroad to seek training for the purpose of fighting the Coalition in Iraq or targeting it in Europe and elsewhere. More recently, while the relative abatement of hostilities in Iraq has lessened its appeal as a destination for European jihadists, the ongoing conflict in Afghanistan remains a call to arms for the small minority of radicalized European Muslims who decide to take up arms against the West.

    Gabrielle Goldwater is a Member of "Funding for Peace Coalition" [FPC] (http://eufunding.org.uk)
    http://eufunding.org.uk/FPC2004Report.pdf She lives in Switzerland. Contact her at gabriellegoldwater@gmail.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Isi Leibler, July 21, 2011.

    Rupert Murdoch, the man who single-handedly created the most powerful media conglomerate in the world, is currently experiencing a nightmare. Not only is his empire under siege but his competitors are literally baying for his blood, inciting the public and indulging in an unprecedented campaign to demonize him. They are also denying the presumption of innocence before being tried. Moreover, there is enormous hypocrisy from other newspapers who have been engaged in similar transgressions being at the forefront of calling for the dismantling of Murdoch's media holdings.

    That being said, the behavior of the senior management and journalists employed by News of the World was utterly unconscionable and represents a disgrace to all canons of journalism. Those involved deserve to be punished with the utmost severity.

    Despite the proliferating media feeding frenzy, which journalist Melanie Phillips describes as a Robespierrian moment comparable to the death of Princess Diana, there is, as of now, no proof that Murdoch was even aware of the events taking place. True, even in a major conglomerate like the Murdoch media conglomerate, lapses of this nature should have been prevented and even if Murdoch is personally exonerated, it will impact adversely on him and his senior management. However, he has expressed contrition, apologized for what took place and, in fact, closed down the newspaper involved — a daily tabloid, with the largest circulation in the U.K.

    While the News of the World was unquestionably a scurrilous broadsheet, one must not overlook that the Murdoch media empire also includes some of the finest daily newspapers in the world such as the Wall Street Journal, the London Times and the Australian. The hysteria and hatred directed against Murdoch personally is transparent, primarily motivated by politics. He is repeatedly being accused of distorting the news. Yet, when it comes to media prejudice, it is noteworthy that the BBC, by far the largest and most powerful media outlet in the world, renowned for its bias and selective reporting, has never been subject to anything remotely compared to the witch hunt facing Murdoch. Yet the BBC is at the forefront of the campaign personally attacking him.

    Over the years, Murdoch has emerged as a bastion against post modernism. In a world dominated by moral equivalency, he has promoted the values of Western civilization. One could even argue that it is primarily due to him that the delusional far left failed to take virtual control of the British media.

    For Israel, a major erosion of the Murdoch media would have highly adverse repercussions. In an era in which the liberal global media has increasingly turned against Israel, most of the Murdoch outlets maintain a fair and evenhanded approach.

    Murdoch, whom I met personally on a number of occasions, is himself unquestionably a genuine friend of Israel. In fact, he has frequently been falsely described as Jewish by hostile Muslims and other extremists.

    While always sympathetic to Israel as the plucky underdog, the turning point in his relationship was 1982, when Ariel Sharon hosted him with a group of editors on a helicopter tour where he witnessed "the vulnerability of the country" in terms of defensible borders. His friendship towards Israel was publicly displayed when he was honored in 2009 by the American Jewish Committee and more recently in 2010 by the ADL. At the AJC meeting he stated: "In the West, we are used to thinking that Israel cannot survive without the help of Europe and the United States. I say to you: maybe we should start wondering whether we in Europe and the United States can survive if we allow the terrorists to succeed in Israel... In the end, the Israeli people are fighting the same enemy we are: cold-blooded killers who reject peace... who reject freedom... and who rule by the suicide vest, the car bomb and the human shield".

    If Murdoch is found to have been aware of the transgressions, his reputation will be destroyed and he will face major punitive sanctions. But as of now, while his enemies continue baying for his blood, most Israelis will be hoping that despite the criminal nature of the News of the World scandal, Rupert Murdoch and his senior management will be exonerated of direct malfeasance and his media holdings will remain substantially intact.

    Contact Isi Leibler by email at ileibler@netvision.net.il and visit his website at
    http://wordfromjerusalem.com/ This column was originally published in Yisrael Hayom

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Paul Lademain, July 21, 2011.


    See "Philippine MPs visit Spratlys despite China warning" at
    http://www.energy-daily.com/reports/Philippine_ MPs_visit_Spratlys_despite_China_warning_999.html

    But NOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooo, Jews just gotta worry, analyze, fear-monger, sweat, tremble, placate, beg, beg, beg and bow, haggle, argue, and then, in the end, when they've exhausted themselves and emptied their brains, they let their enemies decide Israel's rights and powers. Just like the old and uncertain ghetto Jews once did for to placate the risable fascistas while the rest of them abandoned their homelands and fled.

    But now the Jews of Israel have nowhere to flee. So they had better tap into the moxie of a Filipino and seize what has always belonged to the Jewish Homeland (now called "Israel") and annex Judea and Samaria and the Golan Heights! And yes, even re-absorb Gaza. With no apologies. But with fierce declarations of righteousness and honesty. And the seditious Jews who don't like this entirely proper exercise of power should be reminded that they are free to flee elsewhere. (Maybe Greta Duisenberg will let them camp on her grounds.)

    Who the hell cares how to get an arab to luvva Jew? It's a sad thing to see, but it's clear enough that American Jews and their crazee-leftist-hanger's-on will stubbornly cling to their fantasies about getting muslims to luvva Jew. (Recall how successful were they with Hitler, Eichmann, and Goebbels?) Jews, of all people, should remember what follows love. Answer: Boredom. Exploitation. And a familiarity that breeds contempt.

    So the Jewish nation had best hurry-up learn how to exercise power for the Nation of Israel instead of allowing this nation's politicians to exercise power first and foremost for themselves.

    Viva to the Patriots of Israel from the SC4Z.

    Paul Lademain is a Secular Christian for Zion (SC4Z). Contact him by email at lademain@verizon.net

    To Go To Top

    Posted by HandsFiasco, July 20, 2011.

    This was written by Simon Plosker, managing editor for NGO Monitor, an online project of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). It appeared on the Honest Reporting Website and it is archived at
    http://honestreporting.com/media-fans- flames-of-mossad-kiwi-conspiracy/.


    What is it that compels mainstream media outlets to buy into conspiracy theories surrounding the all-powerful hidden hand of the Mossad? Despite the fact that the latest piece of conspiracy journalism from New Zealand has already been investigated and found to be bogus, many media outlets just couldn't help themselves but to report on a piece of non-news.

    Even when Israel is squeaky clean of any accusations hurled at it, the media is still intent on reporting those allegations and the investigations into them rather than the less newsworthy end result. Despite the fact that Israel has been cleared of any wrongdoing, the media has placed the attention on the investigation after the verdict has been delivered.

    According to The Guardian:

    New Zealand intelligence services launched an investigation into a possible Israeli spy operation in Christchurch after suspicious activity was observed in the immediate aftermath of the February earthquake, the New Zealand prime minister, John Key, has confirmed.

    But Key insisted the investigation had been completed with no evidence found of wrongdoing.

    So what's the story here? It says much about the obsessive and demonizing behavior towards Israel that so many media outlets decided to publish outlandish claims concerning the Mossad, focused upon an investigation rather than the disproved results.

    As for the story itself, it follows a long line of conspiracy theories ranging from the hateful accusations of Mossad involvement in the 9/11 atrocities to the downright absurd Mossad sharks, vultures and any number of highly trained animals serving Israel's nefarious aims.

    According to New Zealand's Southland Times, the response of the Israeli government was suspicious following the Christchurch earthquake and the deaths and evacuations of Israeli citizens. Despite the paper making the original allegations, at least the Southland Times updated the story under the headline: "Investigation cleared Israelis of spy claims: PM". Contrast this with some of the other sensationalist headlines which deliberately leave the story open to interpretation:

    • Israeli spy claims over Christchurch earthquake — The Guardian
    • Mossad spy ring 'unearthed because of Christchurch earthquake' — Daily Telegraph
    • Report: NZ quake exposes possible Israeli spy ring — MSNBC
    • NZ quake may have revealed Israeli spy ring — CBS News
    • Israeli spy killed in Christchurch quake: reports — ABC News
    • Report: Israeli killed in NZ quake was suspected spy — USA Today

    Contrast these with the more accurate and updated headlines from other media:

    • Israeli victim of NZ earthquake not a spy, says PM — Associated Press
    • Israelis cleared of spying claims — Canberra Times

    Former JPost Executive Editor Amir Mizroch takes apart the Southland Times's ridiculous allegations:

    "The response of the Israeli government to the three deaths appears extraordinary. In the hours after the 6.3 quake struck:

    "Prime Minister John Key fielded the first of four calls that day from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu." [Maybe Netanyahu wanted to help New Zealand and needed a back-and-forth to figure out exactly what the country needed from Israel; and maybe he was trying to convince Key to let the Israeli search and rescue teams at the site to work to get the Israeli's body after local police at the scene kicked them out; and maybe Netanyahu was worried about the three Israelis who were known to be missing.]

    "Israel's Ambassador in the South Pacific, Shemi Tzur, who is based in Australia, booked flights to Christchurch, where he visited the morgue." [How terrible of him; how suspicious of him, to want to fly out as soon as is humanly possible to take care of logistics for flying the men home, of being in touch with the families, of being a good Ambassador; oh, and it is considered a duty in Jewish law to sit with the bodies of Jews until they are brought for final burial.]

    "Israel's civil defence chief left Israel for Christchurch." [Yes, to help the New Zealanders. Israel has the most advanced, skilled and respected civil defense outfit in the world. Way to look a gift horse in the mouth.]

    "A complete Israeli urban search and rescue squad was assembled and flown to Christchurch, arriving about the same time as ..." [This is what Israeli insurance companies do when Israelis are trapped, missing, or need urgent assistance abroad: they fly in and try help. They don't always wait for the government to approve a mission.]

    "Three people who had smashed their way out of a van crushed by a concrete pillar in the central city, leaving a fourth person dead in the vehicle, arrived back in Israel." [Yes because what they should have done is picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, put it all down to a bit of bad luck, and continued travelling and exploring the beautiful countryside.]

    Yes, the response of the Israeli government was 'extraordinary' — extraordinary in its compassion for the dead and for the bereaved families, for the religious needs of the victims [it is considered a duty in Jewish law to sit with the bodies of Jews until they are brought for final burial]. Hey Southland Times, Israelis care for their own. We care about foreigners too, which is why our government offered to help, and why we sent our Civil Defense Chief to your earthquake zone — to help.

    The Southland Times also alleged that the Israeli earthquake victim was found with as many as five passports on his person. Yet The Guardian reports:

    Key said he had been advised that reports of Israeli citizens carrying multiple passports were ill-founded and he was satisfied with police assurances that there had been no unauthorised access to the police computer system.

    "The investigations that have been undertaken have been thorough and have found no evidence of a link between the group and Israeli intelligence." ...

    Key said the man was found with a European passport. His companions handed over a second passport, his Israeli one, when they left the country.

    Even if the Israeli had five passports on him, this is easily explainable. As a nation of many immigrants, large numbers of Israelis have dual nationality and therefore at least two passports. And perhaps the victim may have been keeping the group's passports together in one place during their travels.

    It may very well be that some of the media outlets that have published the story using ambiguous headlines will update them as the hours pass and fresh wire service feeds are checked. Nonetheless what we have seen is a classic example of how a story concerning Israel, later proven to be untrue, spreads throughout the global media in a 'feeding frenzy' causing yet more damage to Israel's image.

    As the Scientific American reports:

    After people realize the facts have been fudged, they do their best to set the record straight: judges tell juries to forget misleading testimony; newspapers publish errata. But even explicit warnings to ignore misinformation cannot erase the damage done, according to a new study from the University of Western Australia. ...

    This result shows that "even if you understand, remember and believe the retractions, this misinformation will still affect your inferences," says Western Australia psychologist Ullrich Ecker, an author of the study.

    No doubt this conspiracy will stick around on the Internet no thanks in small part to the many journalists who cannot resist a good conspiracy story involving Israel.

    Contact HandsFiasco by email at handsfiasco@webtv.net

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Hillel Levin, July 20, 2011.

    We need your help!

    We have just launched the Torah Letter Unity Project, a project designed to unite Jews of all types, in all places of the world.

    Jewish Unity — Be A Part Of It. visit:

    In order for it to be a success — we need your help and the help of people like you — people that want to bring about Jewish Unity & see the rebuilding of the Beit Hamikdash, speedily in our days.

    Jewish Unity — Be A Part Of It, see:

    What can you do?

    1. Join the program by clicking here.

    2. Pass this unique initiative onto as many people as you can. Send to your contacts via email or via a facebook post. In order for this project to be a success, we need the participation of Jews everywhere, so help spread the word!

    It has been 1941 years since the destruction of our Holy Temple. Our sages teach that only Jewish Unity can rebuild it.

    Hillel Levin
    Shiloh, home of the Mishkan for 369 yrs.
    Connecting with my brothers and sisters!
    Israel Chesed Opportunities

    Contact Hillel Levin by email at hillel.leib@gmail.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Ari Bussel, July 20, 2011.

    Something exciting is happening lately, it seems Israel is actually fighting back.

    Syrian President Assad keeps butchering the opposition, while the world stands silent. Iran tests missile launches from underground facilities, and it is "discovered" by the free world Iranian missiles are able to carry nuclear warheads and reach Israel and the United States. In Egypt's Tahrir Square, the "Arab Youth" realizes little has changed, and Libya's Gaddafi is still ruling strong.

    Agence France Presse reports bloody clashes between protesters and anti-riot police in Cairo's Tahrir Square "as frustration mounts with Egypt's military rulers over the pace of reform."

    "Witnesses said the overnight disturbances, which left around 50 people injured, were some of the most violent in months in the square, which was the focal point of protests that forced veteran president Hosni Mubarak from power in February.

    "The clashes 'have no reason behind them except to destabilize Egypt's security and stability in accordance with a carefully thought out and organized scheme,' the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces said in a statement."

    Six months of the Arab Spring is turning into a disaster, the fruits of this labor of love soon to dry or rot. If anything, Saudis determination against the USA and its fear of Iran's spreading influence has been molded into action. Any future course of action by the USA will be met by fierce resistance-turned action by the Saudis. They, of all, learned the lesson the USA is not to be trusted.

    Western activists (peace, humanitarian and pursuers of novel causes) seem to have lost their focus. A tremendous thing has happened during the first half of 2011, but they are fixated solely on the plight of the Gazans. The rise of the springing youth is but a distraction for them, noise to be ignored. The real issue is the imaginary plight of the Gazans, the so-called blockade, siege, Ghettoization and thirsting of the Gazans by Israel.

    Gaza, the one place that is under democratically elected government (albeit defined a terrorist organization by the misguided and misinformed West), has no shortage of supplies and enjoys a constant stream of funding. It has turned into a cause-celebre and became the sole focus of attention by those activists. They are oblivious to everything else and have gathered to leave on another Flotilla of Terror and Lies.

    Save Gaza "our way" is their motto. If we die on the way, so be it. All means justify the end, and the end is designed to hurt Israel so badly it will end its so-called "Occupation" over Arab holy land along the western shores of the Mediterranean. For those who have difficulties understanding, a rough translation is: "throw the Jews to the sea (once and for all; it is long overdue)!"

    It seems they had some technical difficulties in a port in Greece, which they immediately blamed on the Israeli Mossad. Several countries, including Cyprus, will not allow them to leave their ports. Insurance carriers have excluded coverage. But the group of activists is determined to sail against all odds. They, alone against the military might of the Zionists and the colonialist's far-reaching tentacles of poison, can save Gaza from starvation.

    Oh, the cafes and markets of Gaza, all overflowing with commodities, picture perfect for the Zionist propaganda. Access? There is no need even to resort to tunnels, simply pass from Egypt. But these "truths" are conveniently ignored. We insist on arriving by sea!

    A lesson both learned and often implemented by Israel is that defending oneself, one cannot win. To win, one must go on the attack. So why is it that Israel is constantly on the defensive with regard to others who ignore her and international laws?

    Syria buses "refugees" to the border with Israel and pays them to walk onto the border into Israel. [There is a very special bonus paid if a person is killed.]

    "Activists" are boarding flotillas designed to breach a naval blockade.

    More of these "activists" are planning to fly into Israel to exercise their "right of return" to the pre-1948 borders. [Make no mistake, the existence of a country called "free and independent Palestine" does not resolve the Jewish state from accepting millions of refugees to its midst.]

    And Israel? Activists on behalf of Israel have been preparing. There are websites and presentations floating on the Internet, explaining, providing proof, facts and figures. All in all, it is quite useless, for no one is listening. Talk is cheap and easily ignored.

    One NGO (non-government organization), for instance, under a "hot topics" dispatch titled "Gaza Flotilla 2" lists general resources from half a dozen other NGOs, reports from two Israeli think tanks, and more than a dozen references from the media, including Reuters, Jerusalem Post, Washington Times, New York Daily News, The Australian, NY Times, Irish Independent, CNN and others. Well, not all are Zionist propaganda machines, although it is generally believed that the Jews rule the media.

    I am reminded of a nightmare where I am surrounded with road signs. There are so many of them that I do not know where to focus, which to read first. I finally give up in frustration, ignoring them altogether.

    Israeli bureaucracy is busy too in tabletop exercises. For some odd reason, everything needs to be public information, disseminated globally. So let us be entertained, for the following looks like a page from a very badly written science fiction book:

    Public Diplomacy and Diaspora Affairs Ministry Holds Successful Exercise Ahead of Gaza Flotilla

    (Communicated by the Public Diplomacy and Diaspora Affairs Ministry Spokesman)

    The Public Diplomacy and Diaspora Affairs Ministry Tuesday, 28.6.11, held a successful readiness exercise ahead of the Gaza flotilla. In the course of the exercise, Ministry employees summoned Public Diplomacy and Diaspora Affairs Minister Yuli Edelstein to a special situation room that has been established ahead of the flotilla. The situation room is designed to disseminate public diplomacy on the Internet via messages, photos, video clips and additional materials, with emphasis on Diaspora communities, as well as Jewish organizations and friends of Israel around the world, that are seeking to assist public diplomacy activities in their languages and local environments. Participating in the exercise were professional elements from the Ministry, along with representatives from the Prime Minister's Office, the Foreign Ministry, the IDF Spokesperson, the Government Press Office, the Jewish Agency and public diplomacy organizations.

    The simulation:

    The exercise was based on a scenario in which approximately 500 activists on approximately ten ships reached Israel's territorial waters at 10:00. Despite having been warned by the IDF, the ships continued on their way. At 10:30, the Israel Navy began approaching the ships. Stun grenades were thrown at the IDF soldiers, as well as one live grenade that caused a number of casualties to our forces. At 11:00, the order was given for IDF units to physically seize control of the ships on which there was resistance. Our forces were attacked with live — and other — weapons and were obliged to neutralize the assailants. The results, by 11:45, were ten IDF soldiers wounded (one critically, four severely and the rest lightly). Among the flotilla participants, there were two dead and 14 wounded, including two severely.

    As the events were taking place, the media — with emphasis on the Internet, Facebook and Twitter — were flooded with mendacious reports (by private users, Hamas and others among Israel's enemies). The situation room, in coordination with the IDF Spokesperson and the National Information Directorate, began to disseminate credible messages to Jewish communities and friends of Israel around the world. Those in the situation room responsible for new media began to update messages on the social networks, Facebook and Twitter.


    Minister Edelstein said that, "Given the provocation by the flotilla, which is entirely designed to attack Israel's image around the world, we established a special situation room that will ensure coordination between Government officials, Diaspora Jewish communities and friends of Israel around the world. We are here to expose the true face of the terrorist organizations and the inciters to hatred that have organized the flotillas and which disseminate messages and photos in real time over the Internet. I am certain that alongside us will stand significant force multipliers in the form of thousands of activists from Jewish communities around the world."

    Israel's main problem is looking at her past failures and congratulating herself on improved performance. Her enemies, though, did not sleep during the time it took Israel to recover, and they surely have more surprises in store. Israel rather than leading proactively is trailing behind and engages in reactive postures.

    Imagine, a Minister was distracted from his very busy schedule to attend a simulation of some sort. Why should the world know that, and why would anyone care? Is it not the Very-Important-Minister's job? Quite frankly, if this is the first time he has been involved in such a simulation, maybe something is very wrong in his ministry? The last flotilla, whose echoes are still heard today, was 13 months ago.

    I am immediately reminded of Pac man, a game so many play to pass time. The "eating head" advances and is supposed to eat everything that comes in its wake. Similarly Israel is attacked, to the point where she is overwhelmed by everything thrown at her. She needs to digest and swallow them all, at an ever increasing rate. Except that life is not a game, and Israel will choke to death unless she goes on the attack.

    What Israel needs to do is simple. Relying on the action of foreign governments may work once, even twice, but it is subject to their good will and interests at that particular moment.

    Israel should warn anyone breaking the law they will be court-martialed and sentenced to long prison terms without possibility of parole, early discharge on good behavior or one's own recognizance or blackmail by the international community or terrorist organizations. Or warn that any vessel approaching the area under Naval Blockade will be fired upon without further warnings (as numerous such warnings have already been issued).

    Israel needs to make her position known and then execute. Neither will work without the other.

    It will not take long for the world to understand that the era of games has come to an end.

    Complaints anyone? Syria, Libya and Iran should be consulted (although Libya has been temporarily suspended from the UN Human Rights Council until the West can execute Gaddafi). Each of these sovereign nations, leaders by example, is very successful at doing what it wants, with complete disregard to human life or decency, while the world stands silent.

    Israel never misses an opportunity to fall into a trap: Prime Minister Netanyahu instructed the responsible authorities to formulate a special procedure regarding foreign journalists that participate in the flotilla and arrive in contravention of the Entry into Israel Law.

    When the matter was brought to his attention, the Prime Minister directed that the regular policy against infiltrators and those who enter Israel illegally not be implemented. It has also been agreed that members of the Israeli and international media will be attached to Israel Navy vessels in order to create transparency and credible coverage of the events. Credible coverage? That would be incredible.

    Déjà vu, just repeat past occurrences. A year ago there were embedded journalists and the subsequent rift was who was responsible for not releasing tapes within minutes but rather hours of the start of the operation (the IDF or the MFA). Since when do modern-day journalists behave in an objective manner? Are they now to serve as official observers on behalf of Israel?

    For Israel to win the war, she must fight back. Not by feeding NGOs and playing tabletop exercises for the public's enjoyment. Israel must make her enemies understand she is serious and will do everything to protect herself, her people and her sovereignty. They want to break the blockade or cross the border or even show up at her international airport and claim a "right of return," they will be made to pay a price.

    A price so dear, in fact, that no one will dare follow suit.

    If anything, we should look to Russia as the trendsetter in these matters of defense.

    Contact Ari Bussel and Norma Zager at busselari@gmail.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by JCPA, July 20, 2011.

    This was written by Lt. Col. (ret.) Michael Segall and it is Vol. 11 No. 9, 20July 2011 of Jerusalem Issue Brief. Segall is an expert on strategic issues with a focus on Iran, terrorism, and the Middle East, is a senior analyst at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.

    The complete article is at
    http://jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp? DRIT=1&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=442& PID=0&IID=7945&TTL=How_Iran_Is_Helping_Assad _Suppress_Syria%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%9C Arab_Spring%E2%80%9D


    Since the beginning of the protest wave against Bashar Assad's regime in Syria, Iran has backed Damascus and assisted it in both the security and propaganda aspects of its violent repression of the protests. Tehran charges that Syria is the victim of an attempt by the West, led by the U.S., to overthrow the Assad regime, under cover of the "Arab Spring."

    At the same time, Iran sees the "Arab Spring" or, as it calls it, the "Islamic awakening" as a golden opportunity to export Ayatollah Khomeini's Islamic Revolution to the changing Arab world.

    Yet with the turmoil in Syria, Iran now finds itself confronting a real possibility of losing one of its most important allies. The fall of the Assad regime would likely undermine the resistance camp and break the continuity of the "Shiite crescent" stretching from Iran through Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.

    Reports have emerged about elements of the Iranian IRGC's Al-Quds Force (responsible for subversion and special operations outside of Iran), advisers from Iran's domestic Law Enforcement Services, as well as Hizbullah men working throughout Syria to help Assad repress the popular protests. Iran also apparently provided Syria with advanced eavesdropping equipment which enables the identification of activists who converse by phone or use social networks on the Internet.

    Damascus occupies a pivotal point between the old Middle Eastern order and the new order that Iran is seeking to shape in keeping with its worldview. Syria's special status in opposing a Pax Americana (a minority position among the Arab states) and having good relations with the two past superpowers of the Middle East — (Ottoman) Turkey and (Persian) Iran — is what gives it a key role in the region and perhaps explains (in part) the West's reluctance to take a clear position, instead preferring a wait-and-see attitude toward the ongoing violent repression in Syria.

    The departure of Assad, the last of the brave Arab leaders who defy the West, and coming on the heels of Saddam Hussein's downfall, would likely herald the end of the era of Arab nationalism and facilitate the formation of a new Arab and/or Islamic identity. In the shadow of the growing assertiveness of (Shiite) Iran and (Sunni) Turkey, both of which seek a great-power role, the Arab world finds itself divided and lacking any guiding paradigm as the old order falls apart.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Daily Alert, July 20, 2011.

    This was written by Anshel Pfeffer and it appeared in Haaretz
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/ idf-learnt-from-last-year-s-mistakes-when-dealing- with-latest-gaza-flotilla-1.374070.

    Israel's handling of the 2011 Gaza flotilla was almost the direct opposite of the way it dealt with the previous flotilla, in terms of diplomatic, judicial, intelligence, and operational resources.


    What was originally meant to be a huge flotilla of 20 ships carrying thousands of pro-Palestinian activists to Gaza, had over the past two months slowly dwindled away until the grandiose plans ended Tuesday with a single 16-passenger yacht. The Israel Defense Forces preparations, which initially began with dozens of navy ships and helicopters, and hundreds of IDF soldiers who trained for weeks in case of complications, also ended Tuesday with just one team of elite marines and a handful of speedboats that quickly intercepted the yacht and settled the matter. Published 17:31 19.07.11 Latest update 17:31 19.07.11 IDF learnt from last year's mistakes when dealing with latest Gaza flotilla Israel's handling of the 2011 Gaza flotilla was almost the direct opposite of the way it dealt with the previous flotilla, in terms of diplomatic, judicial, intelligence, and operational resources.

    What was originally meant to be a huge flotilla of 20 ships carrying thousands of pro-Palestinian activists to Gaza, had over the past two months slowly dwindled away until the grandiose plans ended Tuesday with a single 16-passenger yacht.

    The Israel Defense Forces preparations, which initially began with dozens of navy ships and helicopters, and hundreds of IDF soldiers who trained for weeks in case of complications, also ended Tuesday with just one team of elite marines and a handful of speedboats that quickly intercepted the yacht and settled the matter.

    Israel's handling of the 2011 Gaza flotilla was almost the direct opposite of the way it dealt with the previous flotilla 13 months ago, in terms of diplomatic, judicial, intelligence, and operational resources. Miraculously, the Turkish organization IHH, who had dispatched the most violent activists on the previous Gaza flotilla, announced last month that they intended to stay on dry land, and that the Mavi Marmara would not cross the Mediterranean Sea once more.

    From the moment the Mavi Marmara was out of the picture, the new flotilla began to lose steam. Pro-Palestinian organizations found it hard to purchase ships, and even after purchasing them, found it very difficult to secure insurance and the rest of the necessary permits needed to sail. Moreover, some of the ships that did make it to the ports of departure in Greece encountered various mysterious technical and bureaucratic problems, which repeatedly delayed their departure. In all, some 300 international activists gave up their summer vacation to participate in the flotilla and ended up sitting in a Greek port day after day, watching .

    The lethal blow to the flotilla was when two ships tried to depart for Gaza, defying Greek government orders, and were stopped by the coast guard. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu knew exactly what he was doing when he chose to personally thank Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou in a speech several days later.

    The activists slowly scattered and teams from the media dissipated even before, until the only ones left were the fantastic 10-16 activists, three crew members and three journalists — all on one small yacht.

    When they set sail on Saturday and declared the Alexandria port as their destination, no one seemed to care anymore. The end of the saga was predictable. After all, Israeli intelligence knew exactly who was onboard the yacht, and that none of the passengers would react violently.

    The Israel Navy was in action, but by then was regarding it a near routine operation. The most complicated tasks were actually performed by the electronic warfare team and by the IDF Spokesperson's unit.

    For once, the IDF was not only controlling the battlefield but the media as well. The moment the Israel Navy contacted the yacht on Tuesday morning, the IDF activated a full electronic takeover, stopping both the activists and the Al Jazeera crew frompublishing a single image, video, or even Tweet.

    Simultaneously, the IDF Spokesperson supplied media outlets with real-time updates on every stage of the negotiations between the navy and the French yacht, released the IDF chief's orders to intercept the vessel, and, after 10 minutes, put out a statement on the IDF interception, which had been carried out quickly and smoothly. Pictures and videos taken by IDF ships were also immediately circulated.

    Currently, the interception seems like a knock-out victory by the political echelon and defense establishment over the pro-Palestinian activists. It is just a shame that Israel's massive failures in handling last year's flotilla, which dealt a near fatal blow to its ties with Turkey, and resulted in the deaths of Turkish activists, were needed in order to facilitate such a clean operation this time around.

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

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Jim Kouri, July 20, 2011.

    A relatively unknown Islamic terrorist group in Nigeria is seeking an alliance with al-Qaeda and they're believed to be responsible for a series of bomb attacks in that African country, according to an intelligence source who spoke with the Law Enforcement Examiner.

    Boko Haram (translated: "Western or non-Islamic education is a sin") is a controversial Nigerian Islamist group that seeks the imposition of Shariah law in the northern states of Nigeria. The group's official name is Jama'atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda'awati wal-Jihad, which in Arabic means "People Committed to the Propagation of the Prophet's Teachings and Jihad".

    A radical Islamist terrorist organization, Bokom Haram in the Nigerian capital of Borno were reportedly retaliating for a military crackdown on the group's headquarters. The battle between the Nigerian soldiers and the Bokom Haram has displaced thousands of villagers fleeing the violence.

    According to the intelligence source, Boko Haram was formed by Muslim cleric in 2002 in Nigeria. While claiming to be a peace loving religious group, in the Summer of 2009 the radical Islamist organization launched a rebellion in the hope they would establish Sharia law and an Islamic state the northern part of Nigeria.

    In the aftermath of Boko Haram's battle with the military in July 2009, over 800 were left dead, and hundreds more were wounded.

    After the battle, Boko Haram's founder and leader Mohammed Yusuf and several ranking members including Yusuf's father were killed while in police custody.

    Since January 2010, surviving terrorist group members have bombed targets and conducted guerilla warfare — or hit-and-run — operations. In one attack a police stationhouse was bombed last month. The group claimed responsibility for the bombing attack on the police force headquarters in Abuja that occurred the previous day. Officials believed that the attack was the first suicide bombing in Nigeria's history and that it specifically targeted Police Inspector-General Hafiz Ringim, according to the LEE source.

    In another bombing, Boko Haram attacked a church — the All Christian Fellowship Church — in north Nigeria.

    The Law Enforcement Examiner's intelligence source claims that Boko Haram members had received training in Somalia.

    Other reports have suggested the same thing, saying Boko Haram already has links to international terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda, and has the potential to link with Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb which operates in nearby regions, according to the Wall Street Journal.

    Jim Kouri, CPP, is Fifth Vice-President of the National Association of Chiefs of Police (copmagazine@aol.com).

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, July 20, 2011.

    Rowboats in Gan Yehoshua in Tel-Aviv

    "Photography is truth." — Jean-Luc Godard
    The camera is one of the greatest liars of our time." — John Gunther


    In my humble opinion, photographs can reveal deep truths and they can mislead, even deceive. And sometimes they can do both at the same time. Allow me to explain: A few years back, I visited Gan Yehoshua, the largest public park in Tel Aviv, during Passover, when it was teeming with visitors. My children were eager for a paddle around the small pond that is one of the park's main attractions, but a 90-minute wait scuttled that plan. As we stood amid a throng of hot and annoyed parents and children and plotted an alternative activity, I caught sight of these boats, rocking softly in the pond's gentle wave action.

    It took me only a few seconds to corral these three boats within the frame. My eye was drawn to the bright colors and repetitive pattern formed by the portion of the side panels visible from where I stood. The reflections on the water add a nice touch and help fill the dead space in the lower right corner. But wait a minute, this calm and quiet photo says nothing about the undulating energy just a few meters away. It's an abstraction of peace from a scene of chaos and tension. And yet, in that moment, when the stress of the holiday crowd reached its peak in our disappointment, I could gaze upon this scene and inhale a breath of truth.

    Technical Data: Nikon D70, 70-300 zoom at 70mm, f13 @ 1/640th sec., ISO 400.

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

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Norma Zager, July19, 2011.

    "And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests, sons of Levi, carrying the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and unto all the elders of Israel." Deuteronomy 31:9

    I'm going out on a limb here. There is a great deal of chatter about giving Jerusalem to the Palestinians to appease the world. Everyone has an opinion, one way or another, and most are political, some ideological, many religious.

    Netanyahu and sensible people agree returning to the old borders would mean certain destruction for Israel. Why? Indefensible, they say. They are right I believe. But not for the reasons you may think.

    There seems to be one point though that I have failed to hear mentioned by anyone at all. Thus I shall take it upon myself to be the one who actually proposes the theory aloud.

    It will be a bit far out there to some, but I believe worth a mention all the same, so by virtue of poetic license I thus proceed.

    There has been a consistent search for the Ark of the Covenant since the destruction of Solomon's Temple by King Nebuchadnezzar. The Ark, that has been one of the most popular focuses of religious mysticism of all time with the exception of the Holy Grail, possesses quite a history.

    The Ark of the Covenant isn't a myth. It is an actual Jewish relic that was ordered by God with specific instructions for its structure and materials.

    Only when the Jewish people lost their faith did the Ark fail to protect them in battle. When taken from Shiloh to a battle against the Philistines, the Israelites lost. 30,000 died and the Ark of the Covenant was taken by the Philistines. 98 year old Eli who judged the Israelites for 40 years fell back when he heard the news and broke his neck.

    It was said that "honor was exiled from Israel for the Ark of the Covenant was taken." (Samuel I 4:22) For the seven months the Ark of the Covenant was held by the Philistines, it brought destruction and death to them wherever it was placed. City after city fell to the plague until they returned it to the Israelites.

    As long as the Jewish people carried the Ark and worshipped God alone of all the gods, with all their heart, they were invincible. Miracles are attributed to its presence. The parting of the Jordan River to allow the Jews to enter Israel, the fall of Jericho and numerous other victories ascribed to its powers.

    Why this fascination with an ancient relic?

    Why is it necessary to even mention something that may be a myth? A fairy tale that little Jewish children heard at bedtime to lull them into sleep.

    Indiana Jones wasn't the first to search for the Ark of the Covenant. There has been, and still is, a constant collection of archeologists and religious historians who remain fixated on discovering the whereabouts of this famous Jewish religious object. Why? What difference can it make now?

    Obviously the Ark's powers are gone and no longer serve any purpose to the Jewish people. Or have they?

    Most agree that if the Ark is in the hands of anyone but those who are allowed into its presence, or if it is misused in any way, only destruction can ensue. Stories of its deadly flames are described throughout in great detail.

    The Ark was a cruel taskmaster and dealt harshly with those who attempted to misuse its powers.

    So if it's in the hands of Israel's enemies today, how does that affect the Jewish people? How does that influence Israel? What possible difference could it make?

    There are numerous accounts of where it was hidden.

    One theory claims King Josiah dug a hole under the Temple Mount and placed it inside.

    One says Solomon hid it in a cave near the Dead Sea.

    Some say it is in a church in Ethiopia.

    It seems there have been more sightings of the Ark than of Elvis. So is it just a legend? Only a great story that captivates generations fascinated with mysticism and myth? Or an argument for religious scholars to chew on into eternity? I am not so certain it is any of those things.

    I believe the Ark is still far more powerful than one imagines. Far more important to the Jewish people than they accept, and may even be the answer to why Israel cannot possibly give away any of Jerusalem without facing certain destruction.

    If one believes that God gave Moses the Ten Commandments for humanity, and it seems the world has accepted this event without much controversy, then he must also accept that God ordered the Ark built as the vessel that carried the laws.

    The entire purpose of the Ten Commandments was for men to learn to live correctly on earth. Without law there is chaos. God knows this. Man knows this. No rational human being can doubt the veracity of this statement.

    Thus the laws came in a holy vessel, the Ark.

    God's word would, after all, require a sacred place in which to reside. The Lord himself specified rigid guidelines for its construction. The Bible says the Ark possessed God's voice, His holy presence among us here on earth.

    The responsibility for the laws and their container was given to the Jewish people.

    And as the saying goes, "To those whom much is given, much is expected in return."

    God gave the Jewish people a great deal. We were the lawgivers; our people excel in creating medicine, science and advancements for the betterment of mankind.

    Jews are resented and maligned for these achievements and not in any way appreciated, but they have never asked for any gratitude nor should we expect it.

    It is what the Lord intended for us.

    The Ark — God's work — is our responsibility. What price would the Jewish people pay were they to allow it to be removed from their grasp?

    I think we may have already seen the penalty on numerous occasions.

    Even the most liberal anti-Zionist Jews among us are stopped mid sentence when asked, "If Israel had been a powerful country in 1938 would six million Jews have died?"

    Most have to admit, probably not.

    What happened when the Jewish people recovered Israel?

    The war against the Arab world in 1967 was a miracle and there is no way Israel should have won that war. Yet it did, handily. Was it sheer military might? Or divine intervention?

    Depends on how religious one is I suppose.

    If it was a miracle, then it would give credence to the theory the Ark is under the Temple Mount and its return would signal the restoration of power to the Jewish people.

    Israel's enemies launch hundreds of rockets monthly yet few hit their mark. Why? Shouldn't the law of averages apply? Strange. Maybe some unknown force protects Israel.

    Perhaps giving away the Temple Mount would be giving Samson another haircut. But is it the Ark itself that holds the key to the Jewish people's connection with God? Or is it merely the symbolic earthly presence that

    reminds us of our commitment and obligation to follow God's instructions and tenets faithfully as a people?

    Would the loss of the Ark truly be the loss of the divine connection once shared by a people and their Lord? With so many Jewish people turning their backs on Jerusalem and Israel perhaps that connection is already broken. The question the Jewish people must ask themselves is whether the Ark can be restored. And does the true restoration lie in their return to faith.

    Turning away from God's presence has proven to have dire consequences throughout time for our people.

    Can the Jewish people afford to gamble with Iran busily creating bombs to destroy Israel and the Judeo-Christian world?

    I believe the Ark is still a force to be reckoned with. The Jewish people must take a long hard look at what they would be giving away in any land deal.

    If we believed once that the Ark made us an invincible army, why should we as a people stop believing now? Now, when it is most important to the future of not just Israel, but the entire world.

    Perhaps this is just another responsibility God has given to the Jewish people. The Ark is the representation of God's good will toward the Jewish people and their bond with Him.

    Protect the Ark and allow it to exert its power. As long as Israel possesses the Ark, the world is safe and all God's enemies will be destroyed.

    Relinquish control over the Temple Mount, and we may once again lose the Ark and God's faith in our bond.

    I am unwilling to take such a risk. Are you?

    Contact Ari Bussel and Norma Zager at busselari@gmail.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Lori Lowenthal Marcus, July 19, 2011.

    Do you want the American Task Force for Palestine preparing our college students and faculty for the upcoming (and continuing) existential onslaught against Israel?

    Well, most of you are contributing to exactly that. There is an entity called the Israel on Campus Coalition which is comprised of many of the largest, well-established pro-Israel/Jewish American organizations. For a list, with links, of the member organizations please click here.

    And guess who the ICC is inviting to speak to "student group leaders, faculty members, and other student services professionals" about the grave dangers for Israel of Durban III and the potential UN's UDI? The executive director of the American Task Force on Palestine! That's right, Hussein Ibish's group. For those not familiar with Ibish, he recently upbraided Netanyahu for daring to bring a new condition to the peace process: that the Arab Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish State. But that might suggest there will be no "right of return" or Jerusalem might not be the capitol of Palestine, both of which are deeply troubling to Ibish and his followers.

    Well, ATFP is entitled to teach what it wants to its followers, but why would we want that viewpoint to be one brought at our expense to our students and faculty? If you don't think this is a good idea, click on the links to the ICC member organizations and let them know.

    Also, please share this with others and ask them to do the same.

    Lori Lowenthal Marcus is a lawyer and President of the Zionist Organization of America, Greater Philadelphia District. Contact her by email at orilowenthalmarcus@gmail.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Dr. History, July 19, 2011.
    This article summarizes UNESCO's misojudaic campaign to deny a Jewish historic link to the Land of Israel. U.S. taxpayers continue to fund this "educational, social and cultural" (sic) organization. That is lunacy. Please read and forward to all.

    This was written by Giulio Meotti and it appeared today in Ynet
    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/ 0,7340,L-4097506,00.html. Giulio Meotti, a journalist with Il Foglio, is the author of the book "A New Shoah: The Untold Story of Israel's Victims of Terrorism."


    The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) adopted a decision calling on Israel to immediately cease all archaeological works in the Old City of Jerusalem. In particular, UNESCO, one of the UN's most prominent and influential agencies, attacked the renovation of the Mughrabi Bridge that links the Western Wall plaza and Temple Mount.

    The decision, initiated and promoted by Arab states, was adopted by consensus of the Western members of the commission. Indeed, the vote is the latest anti-Jewish initiative launched by the UN office meant to promote culture, education and science around the world. In fact, UNESCO's robber barons are sanctifying the current global campaign aimed liquidating the legitimacy of the Israeli regime.

    In 2009, UNESCO designated Jerusalem as "capital of Arab culture," working with Palestinian Authority officials and key Arab figures to protest against what they described as "the Israeli occupation of Holy Jerusalem." Other cities granted the title over the years were Algiers, Damascus, Cairo, Tunis, Amman, Beirut and Khartoum.

    The Arabs find it difficult to convincingly portray Israel as usurper of the land as long as the world believes there is a huge connection between the people of the Bible and the land of the Bible. UNESCO is denying this connection by depicting Jewish history in the Middle East as no more than an insignificant, brief sojourn by arrogant colonizers.

    UNESCO appears to deny that the Jewish people has laid its roots in Israel more than 4,000 years ago, or that 1,000 years before Christ, King David made Jerusalem the Jewish city par excellence, never entirely abandoned even in times of deadly persecution.

    The City of David in Jerusalem, a major target of UNESCO's anti-Jewish fury, is now the hottest open archaeological site in the world, with biblical artifacts, ancient burial spots and royal seals. There, UNESCO is using archeology to bash Israel and treats Israeli archeologists as nationalistic martinets.

    In recent years, UNESCO increased its collaboration with ISESCO, the cultural body of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. According to ISESCO's propaganda, the Biblical story and the Jewish temples are only fiction, Jewish monuments are Islamic treasures stolen by the Zionists, and Israeli archeological works are criminal acts against Muslims.

    UNESCO's ideology portrays the Jews as no more than invading colonizers, while the Muslims who invaded the country and ravaged it in the Seventh Century are, by some inexplicable leap, the descendants of the so called "indigenous Canaanites."

    In 2010, UNESCO decided that Rachel's Tomb and Hebron's Cave of the Patriarchs are "Muslim mosques." Western countries didn't raise any protest. UNESCO never mentioned that in addition to the famous Tomb of the biblical Patriarchs, Hebron contains also the tomb of the first judge (Otniel Ben Kenaz), the tomb of generals and confidants to Saul and David and the tombs of Ruth and Jesse, David's great-grandmother and father. There is also no word by UNESCO about the fact that Rachel's tomb is unanimously revered as the burial site of one of the Bible's great women, the wife of Jacob, the Jewish blessed mother.

    During the Second Intifada, UNESCO condemned Israel for "the destruction and damage caused to the cultural heritage in the Palestinian territories" as "a crime against the common cultural heritage of humanity." However, UNESCO remained silent when a Palestinian mob destroyed Joseph's tomb, a major Jewish religious shrine, and built a mosque on the site.

    Upon the outbreak of the Second Intifada, Palestinian terrorists also attacked Rachel's tomb, and for 41 days Jews were prevented from visiting the compound. UNESCO never condemned it. Recently, dozens of graves at the Mount of Olives cemetery in Jerusalem were vandalized, the latest in a series of attacks on Judaism's oldest cemetery, where Jews have been buried since biblical times. Again, UNESCO remained silent.

    UNESCO also "boasts" a long list of decisions to boycott and isolate the Jewish State. On November 7, 1974, UNESCO voted "to withhold assistance from Israel in the fields of education, science and culture because of Israel's persistent alteration of the historic features of Jerusalem." On November 20, 1974 UNESCO voted also to exclude Israel from its European regional group. This anti-Jewish ostracism was not abandoned until 1978, after the United States withheld $40 million in payments from the organization in protest.

    UNESCO's war on Israel and the West continued and was so blatant that in 1984 the US, UK and others Western countries left the organization. In 1989 UNESCO made the claim that "Israel's occupation of Jerusalem" was destroying the holy city by "acts of interference, destruction and transformation" (then-mayor of Jerusalem, Teddy Kollek, expressed "deep disgust at UNESCO's attitude.")

    In 1990, UNESCO attacked what it described as the "irreversible" changes to Jerusalem's architectural heritage resulting from Israeli "occupation." UNESCO's apparatchiks decried the "lost loveliness" of the city. In 1993, then-UNESCO director-general Frederico Mayor boycotted an international conference on science in Jerusalem, despite Israel's history of scintillating enlightenment, like the highest production of scientific publications and museums per capita in the world.

    In 1996, UNESCO organized a symposium on Jerusalem at the body's Paris headquarters. But no Jewish or Israeli groups were invited. When in 1998 a UNESCO delegation visited Jerusalem, it refused to meet with Israeli officials. In the past, UNESCO also has called for "financial sanctions against Israel" and passed hundreds of resolutions criticizing Israel's activities in Judea and Samaria.

    In 2001, UNESCO promoted the "Cairo Declaration Document for Jerusalem Antiquities Preservation," which falsely accused Israel of destroying Islamic antiquities on the Temple Mount and in Jerusalem's Old City in an attempt to divert attention from Palestinian crimes against archeology and history. When the United Nations celebrated its 50th anniversary, UNESCO refused to mention the Shoah in its World War II resolution, intentionally ignoring Israel's request to include a reference to the destruction of European Jewry.

    On a final note, a recent UNESCO report on science, Jewish physician and theologian Maimonides is classified as a Muslim named "Moussa ben Maimoun." So the Rambam — for Rabbi Moshe Ben Maimon — has been forced to "convert" to Islam by the UN's revisionist historians.

    During the Middle Ages, the French Inquisition confiscated and burned Maimonides's books. From the elegant Parisian boulevards, UNESCO's inquisitors are now following the same dreadful solution of rendering history and the Holy Land "Judenrein."

    Contact Dr. History at drhistory@cox.net

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Ted Roberts, July 19, 2011.

    He should have stopped on the third day of creation after he had designed and then fabricated the first Fig tree. I'm talking about the Creator. As we say on Passover — Dayenu — It is sufficient. Well, maybe another day of work to pleasure the world with the watermelon — another glorious creation. Beautiful, nutritional, symmetrical, voluptuous — a blessing for mankind. If only he had stopped there. No wolves, hyenas, diphtheria, bacilli, sour apple trees, or man. Watermelon, the perfect edible creation. You could eat it, wash with it, drink it. No, you couldn't use it as a weapon — no limbs — no trunk. You couldn't even throw it. Yes, He should have stopped with the watermelon.

    But no, He was seething with ideas to decorate His brave, new world. So, He had to populate it with people. A mistake as He discovered a few aeons later. But correctable, as He demonstrated with the flood — messy, however. Trees and plants strewn all over the earth's meadows and fields — not to mention corpses of man and animal. I'll say it again. He should have stopped with watermelon, or maybe fig trees. Who needs those statuesque oaks, and pines and sycamores. I'll take the humble fig tree everytime.

    Crumpled roofs and heart attacks due to raking, would be unheard of since the Fig tree is really a modest bush, not a tree. Takes up very little space and in a gale, would never dent your car, dent your roof, or fall on you or a visiting friend. (I once had an oak tree mash my mailman who was bringing me my social security check!!! I've always had a fondness for figs. Truly, an equal opportunity fruit. One of the few fruits you can't buy in the grocery; equally unavailable to rich and poor. Why? Because their fragility prohibits shipping. Beyond the reach of money. Besides, all the common fruits, a dozen exotic varieties of the Creator's imagination papayas, mangoes, kiwis, — can be yours if you've got a few bucks — but not figs. Grow your own or do without. Or you can cultivate a friend who'll grow them for you. That's why my friends hate me in December but love me in mid July. "Gee, Teddy, we don't get to see enough of you — me and Helen will drop by Wednesday." Yeah, with a sack, I'm thinking, and your three kids who can empty a bush in five minutes.

    The secret to my seasonal popularity is my three Fig trees. My friends are from New York City. Never had a fig in their life — which is as painful as never having a meat blince or a fresh-baked biscuit — till they visited one summer. We were showing off the back yard and one of their undisciplined kids plucked a fig. "Wow, that's great. What is it?"

    "Oh, just a wild fruit — probably poisonous," I replied. Mama gasped. But this larcenous kid grabbed another. And another. And another. After we revived Mama, I told her they were harmless unless you ate six or seven. She had a few, too. The goodness of this rare (and sometimes "poisonous") fruit was a known fact thousands of years ago — even in Bible days. And every man shall have his own Fig tree, says the book. I paraphrase, but that's the general idea. If you've been blistering your feet on sand dunes for forty years, guess what the Master of the universe dangles as an incentive before your eyes? No, not a cup of hot tea, but grapes and figs — a) to quench your thirst, and b) to fill your shrunken stomach. The height of peace and prosperity. Your own Fig tree! And I've got three of them.

    As I say, the hero of our story is the modest, little tree. No big Magnolia blossoms for her; attracting pollination with vulgar advertising. "Hey, look at me, smell my perfume. Come on over. Let's pollinate." The Fig blossom is so small, that we humans can't even see it. And she's choosy. She doesn't welcome common backyard insect visitors like honey bees. He or she needs a special kind of wasp to fertilize the flower and make a fig. There's nothing common about the Fig tree. And if you ever lose all your clothes in a game of strip poker — run for a Fig tree. It worked for Adam and Eve. Remember?

    Ted Roberts' essays appear in the Jewish press, web sites, and magazines. He is author of The Scribbler On The Roof, a book of short stories and commentary. Visit his websites at
    http://www.wonderwordworks.com and

    To Go To Top

    Posted by UCI, July 18, 2011.

    This comes from PipeLineNews.org (PLN) and was written by PLN Staffers. It is archived at


    San Francisco, CA — In a previous article we highlighted the Obama Administration's effort to free [or seriously reduce the long prison sentence of] this terrorist Muslim Brotherhood operative. [Note his first name has been variously spelled in official documents as, Abdur Rahman, Abdurahman, Abdulrahman and Aldurahman. We have settled on the convention of using Abdurahman, the phonetic spelling used on Alamoudi's checks during this period of time — see below.]

    Alamoudi is a convicted al-Qaeda linked terrorist, who raised nearly $1 million in a plot to assassinate the then Crown Prince Abdullah, now King of Saudi Arabia. Identified in government documents as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood [see, U.S. vs. Holy Land Foundation, List of Unindicted Co-conspirators and/or Joint Venturers, Attachment A, page 8 heading, "The following are individuals/entities who are and/or were members of the US Muslim Brotherhood] Alamoudi led what has been termed "...one of the most successful Brotherhood influence operations...in America in the 1990s..." [source, Shariah, The Threat To America, pg. 138]

    The details of Alamoudi's influence peddling provide a glimpse into exactly what comprises the Muslim Brotherhood's cultural jihad against the West.

    1. Alamoudi worked with both Democrat and Republican administrations [Clinton and George W. Bush] as well as power brokers associated with both administrations.

    2. According to the bio appearing on the Charlie Rose Show website "...he was involved with the selection of Muslim chaplains for the U.S. military (through the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council, which he co-founded in 1991), and acted as a consultant to The Pentagon for over a decade...." About that role, NBC News reported on 10/22/03, ABDURAHMAN ALAMOUDI is a prominent American Muslim leader, welcomed by presidents and founder of the Muslim chaplain program for the U.S. military. Now he's in jail, caught heading to Syria with $340,000 in cash, money prosecutors believe came from Libya." [see, Head of Muslim Chaplain Program headed to Syria with cash, posted at

    3. Yet while "making nice" with American political forces, and gaining direct access to the WH, Alamoudi was blatant in his support of the terrorist group Hamas and Iran's proxy army, Hezbollah.

      "At a rally in front of the White House on Oct. 28, 2000, Alamoudi told the audience that reports he was a supporter of Hamas were accurate. "Anybody support this Hamas here? Anybody's [sic] is a supporter of Hamas here? Anybody's [sic] is a supporter of Hamas here? Hear that Bill Clinton? We are all supporters of Hamas! Allah akbar [God is great]! I wish to add here I am also a supporter of Hezbollah!" [source, Kenneth Timmerman, Islamists' Front Man, Front Page Magazine,

      YouTube of the Rally.

    4. Alamoudi established a special relationship with GOP heavyweight Grover Norquist. He donated $20,000 to establish the Islamic Free Market Institute [with Norquist named its Chairman of the Board] which was used as another arrow in the Islamists' quiver, allowing even greater access to decision makers.

      Image of checks (source: Paul Sperry archives)

      Norquist still seems to be agitating on behalf of Islamist interests, as the Center for Security Policy's Frank Gaffney observes regarding his opposition to an initiative called Shariah Law And American State Courts [ALAC], which seeks to legislatively block the use of foreign legal concepts [primarily Islamic law, Shari'a] from being folded into the corpus of American legal jurisprudence.

      "Last Wednesday, Norquist arranged for three speakers — self-described Jews or Christians — to promote the Muslim Brotherhood line that free practice of religion, including that of non-Muslims, would be denied were ALAC to be adopted. Nothing could be farther from the truth, as the legislation itself makes clear [see, www.publicpolicyalliance.com] But it is instructive that the GOP influence operation Alamoudi spawned continues to serve his intended purpose: dividing and suborning conservatives in the best tradition of the stealth jihad at which he and his Brothers have long excelled." [see, Frank Gaffney Jr., Freeing Al-Qaeda,
      http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/ p18769.xml]

      So with this kind of record what could possibly motivate Holder's DOJ to have Alamoudi released?

      In his plea agreement, Alamoudi was bound to cooperate with "any and all investigations..." but at the same time the deal contained language stipulating a potential shortening of his sentence for providing important new information regarding terrorism.

      As [former Federal Prosecutor] Andy McCarthy presciently observed in 2004, "Whether Alamoudi will actually serve the 23 years is questionable. His plea agreement contemplates cooperation with the government. If he provides truthful information or testimony that helps the government further investigations — particularly terrorism cases — he could become eligible for a significant reduction. Time will tell..." [see, Andy McCarthy, Alamoudi, National Review,
      http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/ 87680/alamoudi-andrew-c-mccarthy]

      We have reason to believe that there was no cooperation by Alamoudi with the Feds through the late 2000s, so the question remains as to what key information such a dedicated Islamic terrorist would possibly provide at this late date, that would force his release from prison and thus [since he remains an American citizen] place him right back on the front lines of the Muslim Brotherhood's stealth jihad?

      What do we have here?

      Alamoudi undergoing an unbelievably radical change of heart? Are we going to be asked to believe that he no longer supports Hamas, or Hezbollah; that he's turned against the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaeda and the myriad of groups totally committed to Islamic supremacy and the establishment of a world-wide caliphate by any means?

      That seems doubtful, much more believably, this is pure political groveling by Team Obama. Given the administration's now public courting of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood what would serve that cause better than the release of one of its previous go-to guys in America?

      So what if the blowback means releasing an admitted terrorist upon an unsuspecting public?

      UCI — The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) — is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel."

      "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!"

      To Go To Top

    Posted by UCI, July 18, 2011.

    This was written by Becky Yeh and it appeared today in One News Now.


    An expert on terrorism says Islamic radicals may be trying an unusual tactic to avoid detection: pretending to be homosexuals.

    According to the terror handbook discovered in a Sunday Mirror investigation, Islamic extremists in Britain are told to lie about their sexuality if they are approached by a woman who may be a spy. The handbook notes that many women linger around hotels in the United Kingdom to attract men. So to avoid detection, an extremist should tell the women he has a girlfriend or is a homosexual.

    "Any tactic is acceptable in fighting jihad; there really aren't any moral standards," notes Jihad Watch director Robert Spencer. "It's really sort of the same kind of gesture, the same kind of notion that we see in the attendance of strip clubs of the 9/11 hijackers, which may have been designed to put anybody who may have been tracking them off the scent and make them think, 'Well, they're not pious believers; they're not going to be trying to mount this kind of an attack.'"

    Class Notes from the Security and Intelligence Course is a 64-page manual that details ways to prevent the discovery of terrorists plotting attacks in Britain. The guide was created by the Taliban and came after MI5, the British security service, announced it was recruiting female spies. And Spencer says terrorists are constantly thinking of creative ways to avoid detection.

    "I've been amazed over the years, seeing the cutting-edge technology that they employ for sending messages online and some very sophisticated encryptions that have enabled them to get things fast," the terrorism expert shares. The manual also encourages terrorists to not keep company with their neighbors and to wear sunglasses to make themselves harder to identify.

    UCI — The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) — is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel."

    "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!"

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Victor Sharpe, July 18, 2011.

    If by a disaster, Barack Hussein Obama is re-elected for a second term as President of the United States, all gloves will most likely be off when it comes to his plans for Israel. The spotlight thus turns upon how America's Jewish population will vote.

    A recent poll conducted by John McLaughlin and Pat Caddell showed that 43% of all American Jews will support and/or vote for Obama in the 2012 general election. Yet 43% is a considerable and significant drop from the 78% who voted for Obama in 2008.

    It is received wisdom that Jewish voters are tied by some familial umbilical cord to the Democrat party based upon how their parents, grandparents and great grandparents voted. But the Jewish vote in Florida has now shrunk, according to this poll, to a mere 34% for Obama. And yet more significant, many younger Jewish voters are heading for the Republicans and becoming conservative.

    Times are a changing and the GOP contains far more pro-Israel Representatives and Senators than the Democrat party. The Dems have lurched perilously to the Left and it is within the Left and Far-Left that the most egregious anti-Israel sentiments are now to be found. President Obama is the glaring example.

    The man-child is the poster boy for the progressives, socialists and all who deride the Constitution. As Commander-in-Chief he can wreak much havoc.

    But in a second term all constraints would be gone, he would be free to unleash his scorn upon America as it exists today, and be sorely tempted to withhold America's veto from an Arab-Muslim engineered UN resolution against the Jewish state. So maybe that mystical umbilical cord, which tied Jewish voters to the Democrats and which the leaders of the Dems always relied upon, will at long last wither away.

    But there is the black vote, which is practically a given for Obama, whatever financial and social mess he creates. Two superb black politicians, Allan West and Herman Cain, would make outstanding Republican presidential challengers to Obama. Herman Cain has already thrown his hat into the ring. But it remains a conundrum as to how much support either of these patriotic and conservative men would receive from their fellow blacks.

    And there is no doubt going to be a major attempt by Obama to win over the Hispanic vote, perhaps by giving amnesty to the 20 million or more Hispanic illegal aliens in the country. Then, of course, there is the Democrat base and the so-called "progressives" who will vote lockstep for Obama. So we can expect a close election.

    With so many vested interests involved it will be up to the independents and, perhaps, the Jewish vote this time that will hold the key to the occupant of the White House in 2012.

    If Obama wins a second term, the express train taking us to an overwhelming central government on the European model will clatter ever faster even as its couplings leave the tracks.

    With so many failed European states providing ample warning to the United States, nevertheless the leftwing ideologues within an old/new Obama Administration will take the train at full speed into financial ruin and oblivion.

    If this is not tragic enough for a once great America, the Obama regime's foreign policy will be an even worse catastrophe than it is now. And our allies, what is left of them, will be ill served: None more so than the Jewish state.

    In a second term, President Obama will cast his baleful glare upon the reunited city of Jerusalem and will do all in his considerable power to divide it against itself once again. This was its fate during those heartbreaking 19 years from 1948 until 1967 when Jordan illegally occupied the eastern half of the city, along with the Jewish biblical and ancestral heartland of Judea and Samaria — erroneously called by its Jordanian Arab name; the West Bank.

    So would the same world that cheered on the tearing down of the Berlin Wall; an ugly wall that had divided a city, now equally cheer on the building of an equally ugly wall to divide Jerusalem? If so, it will be a very sick world indeed.

    Just read the book Obama allegedly wrote, "Dreams from My Father." In it he spelled out his personal commitment for all of his dealings with Israel and her Muslim-Arab enemies: "I will stand with them (Muslims) should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."

    Obama has already stated that he wants to push Israel back to the 1949 Armistice lines (which he calls the 1967 border) that existed before the June, 1967 Six Day War Israel was forced to fight against genocidal Arab-Muslim aggression. That line was never a border; it was merely where the opposing armies halted.

    Imagine a nation whose neighbors are so endemically hostile that they call ceaselessly for genocide against it. Then imagine that at its most populous region that nation is only nine miles wide. Yes, nine miles wide.

    That nation was Israel prior to June 5, 1967. That is where the 1949 armistice lines were, and that is the suicidal border Obama plans to push Israel back into: Lines that Israeli statesman, Abba Eban, once described as the "Auschwitz lines," and with good reason.

    I fear that far too many Jewish voters will be suckered yet again by President Obama who, during the next 18 months before the election, will keep his anti-Israel powder dry and pretend that he is the best friend Israel ever had in the White House. And if they believe that, they will, alas, believe anything this man says.

    It is that mystical umbilical cord to the Democrat party that still deceives so many Jewish voters. Up until now, they seem to shrug off Obama's close, very close, friendships with the likes of Rashid Khalidi, the "Rev" Jeremiah Wright, and "Minister" Farrakhan who have spewed, and continue to spew, anti-American, anti-Jewish, and anti-Israel toxic filth.

    Do they not remember the despicable manner in which Barack Hussein Obama treated Prime Minister Netanyahu in his first visit to the Obama White House? And have they forgotten how he once labeled the Jewish state as "occupiers?" Here was the same Obama describing the Jewish people living in their biblical and ancestral homeland as "occupiers."

    I am reminded of Israeli Knesset member, Yaakov Katz, who wrote the following advice to American Jewish voters: "Even if the Republicans put up a soda-pop can to run against Obama, it would be the better and wiser choice to give your votes to the "soda-pop can."

    Victor Sharpe is a freelance writer and author of Volumes One & Two of Politicide: The attempted murder of the Jewish state. This article was published in Renew America and is archived at
    http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/ sharpe/110718

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 18, 2011.

    As we sludge through the muddle that passes for news these days, I think we have the latitude to look at matters a bit more broadly, and to perhaps catch up on some material.

    For some time we've been subjected to the popular wisdom that maintains that Israel lost the Second Lebanon War of 2006 because Hezbollah was not taken out completely — Israel having stopped too soon for political reasons. We've been consistently told that this terrorist organization, which is now part of the Lebanese government, has come back stronger than it was before the war.

    But now we have a different, more assuring, take: This week, Yediot Ahronot reported (in Hebrew, with translation by Daily Alert) that:

    "Maj.-Gen. Gadi Eizenkot, who just completed five years as commander of the IDF's Northern Command, said in an interview that since the Second Lebanon War in 2006: 'Hezbollah has doubled its rocket capacity, but I think the improvements we've made — in terms of range of targets, firepower, and maneuverability — are greater in the long run. Today we are in a much better position opposite them. Our intelligence picture of the organization has greatly improved. Our target bank has also improved and Hezbollah understands this.'" (emphasis added)


    I don't agree with everything Yossi Melman, writing in Haaretz says on this same subject. He claims, for example, that "international forces" (i.e., UNIFIL) created a barrier to Hezbollah after the war, while I see UNIFIL as little more than a bad joke.

    But he makes one point worthy of note: A major consequence of the war was exposure of the connection between Hezbollah and Iran. "It was Jordan's King Abdullah who coined the term 'Shi'ite Crescent' to stress Iran's expansion into Lebanon via Iraq and Syria."


    Thanassis Cambanis, writing in National Interest, expresses the opinion that Syria's Assad will take Hezbollah down with him. Assad, who is today deeply in trouble in his own country, has armed and supported Hezbollah.

    "... a tottering Assad regime could severely curtail Hezbollah's military room for maneuver...if Hezbollah continues to ally itself with Assad, rather than Syria's popular will, it begins to look like a movement that prefers Arab tyrants to the Arab Spring.

    "...the Arab political renaissance underway...could produce movements well positioned to steal Hezbollah's anti-Israel thunder with a resistance program free from the party's sectarian, militant baggage."
    http://nationalinterest.org/ commentary/assad-takes-hezbollah- down-him-5601


    So, while an unstable Syrian regime has been pouring weapons into Lebanon at an unprecedented rate, the fact is that matters are so unstable that it's impossible to predict how it will all play out. Crystal balls have suddenly gotten very cloudy.


    Equally significant for its implications is the article "Egypt's Military Holds onto Power" by Daniel Pipes in National Review Online:

    "It's been my contention since the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak in February that (1) this was a military coup d'état against the prospect of Mubarak's son taking power and (2) the military brass intend to hold on to power. On the latter point, I wrote in April: 'The soldiers have become far too accustomed to power and the good life to give up these perks. They will do whatever it takes...to keep power.'" Pipes cites a July 16 article in the New York Times by David Kirkpatrick that "explains just how the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces plans to keep its power — by pre-empting the constitution..."

    What Kirkpatrick describes is military control over the drafting of the constitution, so that the role of the armed forces in the government is spelled out and the defense budget is potentially shielded from public scrutiny.

    "Proposals under consideration would give the military a broad mandate to intercede in Egyptian politics to protect national unity or the secular character of the state...."

    If this report is accurate, we can breathe a deep sigh of relief. For "the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist group considered Egypt's best-organized and most formidable political force...was poised to win a major role in the new Parliament" (and would have had a major hand in the shaping of the new constitution).

    But — as the military is set to retain considerable control — the projected situation also seems a death-knoll for the "Arab Spring" in Egypt, with scant opportunity for the advancement of genuine liberal democracy. (This possibility was little more than wishful thinking, in any event, given the political composition of Egypt.)

    As Pipes puts it, "It's business as usual."
    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/272055/ egypts-military-holds-power-daniel-pipes

    Quite frankly, as the Brotherhood would likely have had the upper hand, "business as usual" — with control in the hands of a military that seeks stability — is the best we can hope for.

    So, let's hope...


    Please see Khaled Abu Toameh's piece, "Why The Palestinians Do Not Want Fayyad," in Hudson-NY. It's an eye-opener. If you don't already have second thoughts about what the nature of a Palestinian state would be, you will after reading this:

    "In Palestinian society, it is much more important if one graduates from an Israeli prison than from a university in Texas. This is the reason that the two Palestinian governments, both Hamas and Fatah, are dominated by graduates of Israeli prisons who hold senior positions.

    "...Many Palestinians are...opposed to Fayyad because, they say, he was never part of the 'revolution.' They see him as an 'outsider' who was imposed on President Abbas by the Americans and Europeans.

    "Fayyad's main problem, however, is that he did not participate in any violent attacks on Israel. Nor did he send his sons to take part in the intifada against Israel.

    "The longer the time one serves in an Israeli prison, the higher his or her rank is in the Palestinian security forces. This has been true ever since the establishment of the Palestinian Authority in 1994. And this is how people like Mohammed Dahlan and Jibril Rajoub became commanders of the Palestinians' Preventative Security Force. (emphasis added)

    "In the West Bank, most of the senior officials running the ministries have either spent time in Israeli prisons or taken an active part in anti-Israel violence.

    "Because of this policy, many educated Palestinians who have never been to an Israeli prison are forced to search for jobs in the US, Europe and the Arab world.

    "There is no shortage of well-educated Palestinians who could contribute enormously to the establishment of proper institutions and good government. Yet they have almost no role in the 'uniform culture,' where many Palestinians continue to admire those who were part of the 'revolution' more than university graduates and former World Bank officials such as Fayyad."


    A subject of major importance to which I — occupied by other issues — have given scant attention is the radicalization on US campuses. We have seen an alarming stifling of free speech and in some cases threats to Jewish students.

    The link below is for a video that is not new. But it's superb and merits attention. This is the "Palestinian Wall of Lies" from the David Horowitz Freedom Center:


    One news item:

    I had written about the fact that Israel and Turkey were attempting a diplomatic reconciliation, which has not been going well.

    Turkey's original demand was that Israel apologize for the Mavi Marmara incident and pay compensation to the families of those "activists" killed in their violent confrontation with IDF soldiers. Israel had refused to apologize but had been willing to consider payment to families as long as it was structured so that it did not imply further obligation or leave individual soldiers liable for legal action — already too much in my book.

    Now Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has added a new demand in the course of a speech to the Turkish parliament: Israel must lift the Gaza blockade. Obviously, this demand — which is not even a bi-lateral Turkish-Israeli issues — will not be honored. There was speculation in Jerusalem that this was a sign that Turkey wasn't even serious about resolving the Israeli-Turkish conflict.

    However... according to YNet, the two sides have discussed, but not yet agreed upon, a formula for apology that "would not be for the whole military action, but rather for isolated 'operational mishaps.'"

    Forgive me, but that could make one barf.

    For the record, Foreign Minister Lieberman is opposed to any apology.


    I end, then, by recommending a piece by Professor Efraim Inbar, "Let's Get Tough with Turkey":

    "Within the framework of the new Turkish foreign policy, good relations with Israel are a burden. Indeed, Israel-bashing has become a tool with which to overcome the historic suspicions of Arabs and Shiites toward the Sunni Turks. As such, Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan hardly lets a week pass without disparaging or criticizing Israel or the Jews, which undoubtedly fits well with the anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic sentiments prevalent in the Muslim world.

    "Therefore, an unjustified Israeli apology will not repair the relations, as Turkey is no longer interested in a strategic partnership with Israel. Moreover, such an apology will be used to humiliate the Jewish State and to strengthen the position of the Turkish premier as a champion against Israel. Israel's reluctance to enter in a duel of words with Erdogan is construed as weakness and only invites additional diatribes.

    "The new Turkish leadership is taking advantage of the weakness displayed by the Obama administration in its rejection of American regional preferences ...Furthermore, the tensions between Jerusalem and Washington lead the Turks to believe that they can get away with a strong anti-Israeli posture..."
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/ Articles/Article.aspx/10406

    Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner18@gmail.com and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Barbara Sommer, July 17, 2011.

    Abraham H. Miller is an emeritus professor of political science, University of Cincinnati, and a former counter terrorism consultant to the National Institute of Justice. He lives in Walnut Creek.

    This article appeared July 16, 2011 in the Contra Costa Times
    http://www.contracostatimes.com/ opinion/ci_18484628


    IT LOOKS as if a modicum of sanity, for once, will prevail in the Middle East. There will be no propaganda flotilla this year. There will be no Western leftists cynically manipulating Muslims who want to become martyrs. There will be no opportunity to open a breach in the naval blockade of Gaza so that Hamas terrorists can accelerate their murder of Israelis.

    Greece and Turkey have said no to the flotilla. The U.N. investigation into last year's flotilla found that Israel's blockade is legal, and that there was no reason for Israeli naval soldiers to continue to shoot paint balls at erstwhile martyrs, on the Mavi Maramara, who attacked the soldiers with knives and iron bars.

    Turkey was duly criticized for its incomplete and inadequate investigation into the events on the Mavi Maramara that led to self-proclaimed Jihadist martyrs fulfilling their aspirations.

    The U.N. report concluded that Turkey should never have let the flotilla sail. It seems, this year, Turkey is listening.

    So too are Dutch progressives. Both Dutch activists and journalists disembarked from the Dutch-Italian boat when they learned that Abou Amin Rashed, Dutch activists with strong ties to the terrorist organization Hamas, was intimately involved in the project. And if that were not sufficient inducement to leave, there was the involvement of Rob Groenhuizen, a "fighting Communist," who had been a member of the infamous German terrorist group, The Red Army Faction (aka Hitler's Children, the Baader Meinhof Gang).

    Groenhuizen had received terrorist training in Yemen from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

    There are some peace activists who take the word "peace" seriously. In contrast, many of our local "peace activists" wrap themselves in the cloth of peace while knowing full well that Hamas is at war with Israel and cracking the blockade will arm a group of terrorists who have shown themselves, by word and deed, to use every opportunity to murder Israeli civilians.

    These "peace activists" had no problem joining forces with murderers, as long as the people murdered are Jews.

    The flotilla is about Western activists looking to stage political theater in an effort to undermine Israel's right to defend her citizens. There are no shortages in Gaza. Its markets are abundantly supplied with goods. Its opulent restaurants continue to cater to those who have turned the Middle East crisis into a well-remunerated livelihood. And this year, with the Rafa Crossing completely open, arguing that there is a crisis in Gaza is an even greater act of deception.

    Last year's flotilla aid, which was unloaded in Israel, was never accepted by Hamas, and the supplies, said to be so vital, continue to rot in Israeli warehouses.

    There are today Syrian refugees in southern Turkey who are badly in need of aid. There are Libyan refugees in Tunisia who are existing at the margins of survival. There are people in Syria and Libya who are being shot in the streets. Yet there are no flotillas for these refugees. There are no planned "fly-ins" to Damascus or Tripoli to announce the concern of the so called, "human rights community."

    As I write, "fly-ins" are already taking place in Israel.

    Why? Because were these cynical manipulators of political theater to fly-in to some Arab country where there really are human-rights violations, they'd be putting life and limb on the line. These countries would not hesitate to imprison, torture, or even kill the activists.

    The activists courageously fly into Israel because they know that Israel is a country that operates under the constraint of the rule of law, and leftist attorneys will be waiting in abundance for the activists to make sure that their rights are protected.

    Is not the cynicism obvious? A fly-in to protest, on behalf of human rights, in a country that operates under the rule of law and nothing, not even the echo of an outcry, against those countries that are inured even to the idea of human rights.

    Clearly, the motivation of these activists is neither peace nor human rights. It is simply the destruction of the Jewish state.

    Contact Barbara Sommer at lsommer_1_98@yahoo.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Barbara Sommer, July 17, 2011.

    Elyakim Haetzni replies to IMRA on annexation of Judea and Samaria
    Dr. Aaron Lerner 17 July 2011

    Elyakim Haetzni is an Israeli lawyer, activist and former politician who served as a member of the Knesset for Tehiya from 1990 until 1992

    Dear Elyakim Haetzni,

    I see that you are participating in the upcoming conference "Regaining the initiative — Applying Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria"

    As you can see from the article below, PA PM Salam Fayyad accepts this initiative — as long as those residing in Judea and Samaria can become Israeli citizens with the right to vote.

    I was hoping that you could explain in short note that I could share with IMRA readers if your support for annexation of Judea and Samaria is:

    (1) Limited to annexation of areas where there are Jewish communities.

    (2) If annexation covers the entire area of Judea and Samaria, do you support granting Israeli citizenship — including the right to vote — to those residing in the annexed areas.


    Best regards,


    Dear Aaron,

    First of all, I would wait to see, whether Ramallah goes beyond a mere declaration by the UN. For instance — changing their letterhead to "State of P.", solemnly declaring to have become a State, signing a foreign treaty, etc.

    Only when the provocation becomes a flagrant breach, which perforce terminates Oslo, Israel could and should annex Area C' which is 60% of the whole area. The rest would legally revert into the jurisdiction of the Military Government, which by Oslo was withdrawn, not dismantled.

    The M. G. would treat Ramallah as the Autonomy which it essentially is, but if Ramallah would resort to force, or otherwise create unbearable situations for us (like inviting in a foreign army) then — again reacting to clear provocation — we should eliminate Ramallah in one swift military blow and employ the M.G. to build a new autonomy from scratch. WE should also make efforts to involve Jordan in some sort of "frisch — Misch".

    All the Best

    Contact Barbara Sommer at lsommer_1_98@yahoo.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Nurit Greenger, July 17, 2011.

    There are times in history when people stood up and made the difference, good, or bad. The world is at this tipping point, 'for better or for worse', as the wedded couple vows to each other, with a twinkle of unlimited love in their eye.

    Nowadays, the world is fast turning back to dark and miserable pages in history. Today, we see atrocities committed by man against man everywhere.

    Today, we face evil again, the evil of Islam.

    It is time to look back at ancient and not so old history,

    It is time to reopen the archives, not ignore them,

    It is time to clean up the dust from thousands of horrific pictures which document the unforgivable atrocities of the last World War, WWII, as they are likely to happen again.

    It is time to speak up; speak up loud.

    It is time to walk on the path of history, in the path of the last march of the Jews to their death. Because this type march is taking place in Africa and in the Middle East and the confused world is silent, or incapable of acting right.

    It is time to tell the world, and repeat it, again and again, about repulsive crimes against the Jewish people the Moslems want to repeat. And when they finish with the Saturday people, the Jews, they will start with the Sunday people, the Christians. And as reality attests, the Moslems already begun this process; they got rid of the Jews and the Christians in their midst, in their lands.

    The problem in the world today is not Israel or the Jews, rather it is Islam that is scapegoating the Jews as the world has done just that for two millenniums.

    But the Jewish people are eternal and the most ancient people on earth. All those who attempted to slash the Jewish people were the ones who were slashed from the paged of history. They have vanished while the Jewish people stand and thrive!

    One reason is that Jews have the ability not to forget and to tell the story of their existence, a story of dark clouds, suffering and agony, but also of resilience, determination, perseverance, optimism and above all, the zest for freedom.

    The power of the Jewish people and the state of Israel is to fight every day for every Jewish soul all over the world.

    The world is in a déjà vu mode!

    In Europe, for centuries, Jews were hunted and killed. In the 1200's Jews were expelled from England, in the 1400's they were expelled from Spain. Once they thrived in a country and built a strong community they were told to leave, they were expelled. During WWII Hitler attempted to exterminate the entire European Jewry and he was almost successful.

    Finally, in 1948, when the modern state of Israel was born, Jews were permitted to return back to their ancestral Homeland, a safe place that belongs to them.

    But now, in the 21st century, Jews are being scapegoated and persecuted again; in Venezuela, under the auspices of the military police, Jews are no longer safe and so is in many other countries. In the Netherland, the Former European Union Commissioner Dutch politician, Frits Bolkenstein, said that Jews have no future in the Netherlands because young Moslems, of Moroccan origin, are anti-Semites; he recommended that the Jews emigrate to the US or Israel. Thus, he insinuated that the Netherlands should become Judenrein-Judenfrei-cleaned and free of Jews.

    Europe is infested with anti-Semites again.

    Those who still chose to have their heads in the sand and think there is no problem, must remember the famous saying attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller: "First they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist, then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me."

    It always starts with the Jews but it does not end there...

    Only when we remember the past we can fulfill the mission of present time and prevail in the future. Therefore, if one believes in human dignity, that people were born equal, and that one should do his or her utmost to prevent another Holocaust, another unfathomable atrocity, the nations of the world need to stand up.

    Stand up with Israel and the Jews against evil. It is the responsibility of the nations of the world to prevent this kind of horror again, a responsibility to prevent a future Hitlers and Ahmadinejads from destroying other people and other nations.

    Silence is not an option again. Because the world should listen, learn and act to make sure that this crime will never happen again, neither to the Jewish people, nor to any other nation.

    Wake up and get involved to do whatever possible to fight against the evil of our time.

    Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, July 17, 2011.
    This comes from JoshuaPundit and is archived at
    http://joshuapundit.blogspot.com/2011/07/ caroline-glick-on-israeli-sovereignty.html. The article includes a video of Caroline Glick making the June 20, 2011 speech on why Israel must have sovreignty over Samaria and Judea.

    On June 20th of this year, columnist Caroline Glick spoke at an event called "Israeli Sovereignty Over Judea and Samaria" in Israel (h/t Carl, and kudos to Paris David Blumenthal for the footage).

    What she had to say about strategic considerations, history, Jewish empowerment and the past failures of the Israeli Left in dealing with this situation are all spot on and worth listening to, and there's nothing here I seriously disagree with. But there's an important question I feel she glosses over.

    In 1967, Israel was attacked by Jordan and as a consequence, Israel recaptured the areas of Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria (AKA the West Bank) that Jordan had illegally occupied in 1948 and ethnically cleansed the Jews out of.

    At that point, the Israel Labor government could justifiably have repatriated the Arabs living there back to the country they held their citizenship in, which was Jordan and annexed the area, as they did with theGolan Heights and East Jerusalem. Such things usually happen after a war when territory changes hands.

    This would have been particularly appropriate after the Arab League's Khartoum Declaration, which responded to an Israeli attempt at diplomacy with 'no peace, no negotiation, no recognition.'

    Instead the Israeli government essentially sat on the matter,leaving the situation to fester for 44 years.

    At this point, I have to wonder how Ms. Glick plans to deal with the Arabs living in the region, who have been propagandized and trained to hate Jews and Israel for two generations.

    This is not the phony 'demographics bomb' myth, which I've already disproved elsewhere. The problem is not maintaining a Jewish majority in the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean, but of trying to absorb and deal with what's at least predominantly a hostile, violent and incompatible element.

    What that's going to mean, in real terms, is a partition of Judea and Samaria of some kind that may or may not have anything to do with the pre 1967 lines or anything else Mahmoud Abbas and Fatah want. Or it may mean another war, followed by the repatriation of non-Israeli Arabs across the Jordan.

    Stay tuned.

    Gabrielle Goldwater is a Member of "Funding for Peace Coalition" [FPC] (http://eufunding.org.uk)
    http://eufunding.org.uk/FPC2004Report.pdf She lives in Switzerland. Contact her at gabriellegoldwater@gmail.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Diana Muir Appelbaum, July 17, 2011.

    This was written by Diana Muir Appelbaum. an American author and historian. She is at work on a book tentatively entitled Nationhood: The Foundation of Democracy. This article is archived at


    What made Greece, long a pro-Arab country with a history of anti-Semitism and a notoriously soft line on terrorism, stop political activists from sailing a flotilla to Gaza? What led Greece to rush fire-fighting helicopters to the Mt. Carmel fire? Why do many observers expect to see more Greek-Israeli cooperation not only in defense and diplomacy, but also in culture, tourism, business, and development of solar and water-saving technology?

    Part of the answer is that Greece would like to become less dependent on Arab oil by buying natural gas from Israel, and it is the obvious partner for a pipeline to bring Israeli natural gas to profitable European markets.

    But the surprise is how much deeper the friendship could become, as a look at Greece's history and culture reveals a number of striking parallels with Israel.

    Like Israel, modern Greece was created by romantic nationalists able first to imagine, and then to achieve, independence because of the crumbling of the Ottoman Empire. Both countries were populated by victims of vicious and sometimes genocidal ethnic cleansings.

    When Greece achieved independence in 1828, it was a tiny statelet with borders that ended just north of Athens. The overwhelming majority of ethnic Greeks lived outside the Greek state, and historic Mt. Olympus and Constantinople, with hundreds of thousands of Greek residents, were outside its borders.

    Among the many promises made by the British government during World War I — when the Ottomans fought alongside Germany — were the establishment of a Jewish homeland (the Balfour Declaration), and a promise that the ethnically Greek areas of coastal Anatolia (also then outside the Greek state) would be given to Greece. With the Ottoman Empire crumbling, the 1919 Paris Peace Conference authorized Greece to move into Smyrna. Unwisely, the Greek army pressed past the Greek-populated areas into the interior of Anatolia, where the Turkish army decimated it.

    Massacres and ethnic cleansings of Anatolian Greeks had begun in 1914 but accelerated in 1919, and are remembered for their scale, brutality, and genocidal intent. The outcome of the Armenian massacres was even worse, since when the two campaigns began, Greek Christians had an independent state to flee to as the Armenians did not. But in both cases, no one intervened. Instead, the world sent Ernest Hemingway to file moving reports about the ranks of starving Greek refugees trudging toward the border and safety.

    Only after the ethnic cleansing of the Armenians and the 1,400,000 Greek Christians of Anatolia was largely complete did the great powers meet in the Swiss city of Lausanne, where they worked out partial compensation for the Greek victims. The remaining Christians in Turkey were obliged to move to Greece, and the 300,000 Muslims in Greece (except for those of Thrace) were required to depart for Turkey, with their homes converted to housing for Greek refugees. A Greek Christian community was allowed to remain in Istanbul in 1923, but it was driven out during the Cyprus crises.

    One result was that well over a quarter of the population of the Greek state, which numbered a mere four-and-a-half million people, was suddenly made up of refugees. Only in the Jewish state have refugees comprised a larger proportion of the population.

    Even after this enormous ethnic cleansing, large Greek communities remained in the Soviet Union, Egypt, French Syria, Lebanon, and elsewhere. The Greek law of return was designed to provide citizenship for ethnic Greeks who might need it. They have needed it often — in large events, like the Nasser-era policies that forced a substantial Greek community out of Egypt, and small but dramatic ones, like the 1993 Greek Army operation that rescued ethnic Greeks from war-torn Abkhazia.

    The challenges of integrating these recurring waves of refugees have been enormous. As in Israel, they arrived stripped of their property to a country with little demand for their skills, speaking mutually unintelligible variants of Greek or entirely foreign languages.

    Greece has never been perfect; it has been violent and, despite decades of European Union-funded prosperity, has not figured out how to build an economy. And yet it has offered something valuable to its citizens. Whether they are the descendants of refugees driven from their distant homes or of peasants exploited by arrogant overlords, all Greeks are now members of a national community. As citizens, they have a voice in their own government and the right to national self-determination and self-defense.

    If Greeks often seem unreasonably prickly or stiff-necked to EU officials, their Balkan neighbors, or Turkey, it is because the memory of not having had these rights is so vivid. But the lives of nations are not static. The Muslim citizens of eastern Thrace no longer live as peasant farmers. The young move to Thessalonica and Athens where they join a growing community of illegal immigrant workers from poor countries including Egypt, Pakistan, and Albania. Some Muslim Albanians agitate for the right of return that Greece law gives to ethnically Greek Christians. They descend from the large community of ethnic Albanians expelled by Greek partisans late in World War II following their widespread collaboration with Italian and German occupation forces.

    These developments raise the question of what it means to be Greek, a particularly challenging issue because until recently, Greek ethnicity, membership in the Greek Orthodox Church, and the right to Greek nationality have meant more or less the same thing.

    Most Greeks continue to regard Greek culture, history, language, and Christianity as inseparable from Greek nationality, even if they personally enter a church only to attend weddings and funerals. The memory of centuries of Ottoman rule during which Greek culture and literature declined, the repair of the roof on a church was technically illegal, and even those Greeks with great wealth and privileges had no rights makes nationhood precious.

    This, then, is the deep commonality that prime ministers Papandreou and Netanyahu have discovered and set out to cultivate: the idea that in a large and diverse world, the right to exist of two small, distinctive nation states, one Greek and one Jewish, is eminently worth defending.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Ivor Silverman, July 17, 2011.

    This comes from Raymond.


    Once again, the real news in France is conveniently not being reported as it should. To give you an idea of what's going on in that country where there are now between 5 and 6 million Muslims and about 600,000 Jews, here is an E-mail that came from a Jew living in France .

    Please read! "Will the world say nothing — again — as it did in Hitler's time?" He writes: "I AM A JEW — therefore I am forwarding this to everyone on all my e-mail lists. I will not sit back and do nothing. Nowhere have the flames of anti-Semitism burned more furiously than in France. In Lyon, a car was rammed into a synagogue and set on fire. In Montpellier, the Jewish religious center was firebombed; so were synagogues in Strasbourgand Marseilles ; so was a Jewish school in Creteil — all recently.. A Jewish sports club in Toulouse was attacked with Molotov cocktails and on the statue of Alfred Dreyfus, in Paris, the words 'Dirty Jew' were painted. In Bondy, 15 men beat up members of a Jewish football team with sticks and metal bars. The bus that takes Jewish children to school in Aubervilliers has been attacked three times in the last 14 months.

    According to the Police, metropolitan Paris has seen 10 to 12 anti-Jewish incidents PER DAY in the past 30 days. Walls in Jewish neighborhoods have been defaced with slogans proclaiming 'Jews to the gas chambers' and 'Death to the Jews.' A gunman opened fire on a kosher butcher's shop (and, of course, the butcher) in Toulouse, France .. A Jewish couple in their 20's were beaten up by five men in Villeurbanne, France (the woman was pregnant) A Jewish school was broken into and vandalized in Sarcelles, France. This was just in the past week."

    "So I call on you, whether you are a fellow Jew, a friend, or merely a person with the capacity and desire to distinguish decency from depravity, to do — at least — these three simple things:

    First, care enough to stay informed. Don't ever let yourself become deluded into thinking that this is not your fight. I remind you of what Pastor Neimoller said in World War II : ' First they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me.'

    Second, boycott France and French products. Only the Arab countries are more toxically anti-Semitic and, unlike them, France exports more than just oil and hatred. So boycott their wines and their perfumes. Boycott their clothes and their foodstuffs. Boycott their movies. Definitely boycott their shores. If we are resolved we can exert amazing pressure and, whatever else we may know about the French, we most certainly know that they are like a cobweb in a hurricane in the face of well-directed pressure.

    Third, send this along to your family, your friends, and your co-workers. Think of all of the people of good conscience that you know and let them know that you — and the people that you care — about need their help.

    The number one bestselling book in France is....' September 11 : The Frightening Fraud' which argues that no plane ever hit the Pentagon !

    Please Pass This On, Let's not let history repeat itself, thank-you for your time and consideration.

    Contact Ivor Silverman by email at ivorsilverman@hotmail.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Barbara Taverna, July 17, 2011.

    This was written by Jose Maria Aznar, Spain's ex-PM and appeared in Ynet News
    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/ 0,7340,L-4096005,00.html no peace possible when one side is committed to the other side's destruction


    The unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state, and its international recognition, would be a huge mistake. A peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians is essential, but it can only be achieved through honest negotiations — not by any party imposing a unilateral decision.

    Over the past two years, the Palestinian Authority has refused to sit at the negotiating table with the Israeli government, hiding behind the excuse of Israeli construction work on a few West Bank settlements. At the same time, however, it has been negotiating the creation of a national unity government with Hamas, a terrorist group whose stated aim is the elimination of Israel.

    A Palestinian "government" of a unilaterally established, self-declared "Palestinian state," in which Hamas is a member of the governing coalition, will make negotiations, much less a peace agreement, impossible: no negotiation is possible, and no agreement is possible, when one side is committed to the other's destruction.

    US President Barack H. Obama has recently advocated a return to talks based on the pre-1967 lines with mutual land-swaps. But even those lines, as originally delineated in the 1949 Armistice Agreements, were subject to negotiations in accordance with UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, which both sides agreed at the time would be the basis for a future peace agreement. Any future border, according to these resolutions, must be the outcome of a negotiated agreement.

    The unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood is also a clumsily concealed de-legitimization device. Serious Palestinians know very well that they do not meet the internal and external requirements to become a viable state, much less to become a new UN member-state with all its attendant obligations. Their objective is different: the unilateral declaration is, in reality, simply another tactic in a broader strategy of embarrassing and then de-legitimizing the State of Israel.

    There is no historical, institutional or legal basis on which to recognize a Palestinian state today, except as a kind of "virtual state," which exists in some fashion in the imaginations of various parties but which has no tether to reality. In the West Bank, Palestinians crucially depend on Israeli cooperation to function. Other more modern aspects of statehood, such as respect for human rights, freedom and a functioning democracy — all of which are required of other countries seeking recognition — are sadly lacking in the Palestinian case.

    Indeed, this rush to a unilateral declaration of statehood, including the intra-Palestinian negotiations with Hamas, is impeding the deeper formation of civil society in the West Bank, which has made progress in recent years and which is essential to any enduring peace.

    Blackmail will lead to disaster

    A declaration of Palestinian statehood by the United Nations General Assembly will be an act of political manoeuvring that will only make it even more difficult to find a solution. Unilateral action will have unforeseeable consequences, so the only true way forward is through a bilateral agreement.

    This is not the time for destructive gestures: it is time to encourage everyone to sit down and negotiate, face to face, with no pre-conditions other than mutual and unequivocal recognition.

    There cannot be two states, living in peace side by side, unless Palestinians accept that Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people and the Israelis accept that the Palestinian State will be the state for the Palestinian people. Absent that basis, no genuine progress will be made.

    The government in Jerusalem has said on numerous occasions that it is ready to talk. Now is the moment of truth for the Palestinians. They must choose negotiation, with all that negotiating entails, including concessions by both parties.

    The alternative is for the representatives of the Palestinian people to continue demonizing their only possible negotiating partner, while expecting the international community to tilt the scales in their own favour. But blackmail will lead to disaster. Negotiations must be conducted in good faith and not as a means of exerting various forms of international pressure.

    It is time for the international community, starting with the UN, to say that the time for game-playing and wishful thinking is past. Serious negotiations can only be conducted by Israelis and Palestinians themselves, no matter how much help or goodwill is provided from the outside. A unilaterally declared Palestinian State, which is not the product of bilateral negotiations, is a demand that Israel accept the unacceptable.

    Diplomacy demands, above all, negotiation and agreement, not unilateral demands imposed with contempt.

    We all have a sincere desire to see a Palestinian state alongside the State of Israel, living in a lasting and stable peace. We therefore call on all leaders of the European Union and the Western world to reject unequivocally the current position of the Palestinian Authority. We urge the Palestinians to see that the only way they can have their own State is through an agreement with the Israelis. No other options should be supported by the international community.

    Only sincere dialogue and the unconditional recognition of each side by the other can be the basis for renewed negotiations. Only sincere dialogue and the unconditional recognition of each side by the other can set the foundations of a viable Palestinian state in the near future.

    Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Barbara Ginsberg, July 17, 2011.

    Beyond Words
    Selected Writings of Rabbi Meir Kahane,
    Volume 5

    Dear World was published under a pseudonym name, because of the Israeli and world media ban on Rabbi Kahane whether verbal or written.

    "Dear World" was first printed in the Jewish Press on January 8, 1988. Then Rabbi Kahane sent it to various newspapers in the U.S. (opposed to his policies) under a pseudonym, Meyer Ben Abraham.

    Among the newspapers it appeared in were the Miami Herald, on January 17, one of the more viciously anti-Israeli papers around; the B'nai B'rith Messenger on March 4th, the Los Angeles Press-Telegram on January 29th, the Canadian Jewish News on February 18 and Ha'am (UCLA) May, 1988.

    According to "Outlook": Canada's Progressive Jewish Magazine, June/July 1988, it was read aloud from the Miami Herald at Beth Sholom synagogue in Toronto.

    In April 2002, it was widely circulated by e-mail lists on the internet, signed Anonymous.

    B'nai B'rith Messenger published a letter to the editor on March 25, 1988 from Cantor Michael Loring, Fresno, that says, "I, and others were very moved--some even to tears by the Open Letter to the World by Anonymous in the March 4 edition...It is possible to help our brethren in Israel to remain alive in a sovereign Jewish state and not feel guilty about doing so. Incidentally, the tone of the "open letter" is reminiscent of a "toned down" Rabbi Kahane. Is he the author, or are you sworn to secrecy?"

    B'nai B'rith Messenger, acknowledged his authorship in their April 15, 1988 issue, on their front page:

    "A Note to Our Readers. In the March 4 edition of the Messinger, we published a piece entitled "A Letter to the World." That letter came to us from two separate sources. In both cases, the letter was signed "Anonymous". Efforts on our part to locate the actual author were unsuccessful, but we decided to publish it anyway because we felt that it was timely and important. Since its publication, Rabbi Meir Kahane has written us to say that he is the author of that letter. We hope this sets the record straight."

    Ha'am carried an apology for not publishing it under the Rabbi's name in Oct, 1988.

    The above information appears in "Beyond Words" and research by Libby Kahane.

    Now for this classic article written by Rabbi Meir Kahane:


    Dear World,

    It appears that you are hard to please. I understand that you are upset over us, here in Israel. Indeed, it appears that you are quite upset, even angry. (Outraged?) Indeed, every few years you seem to become upset by us. Today, it is the "brutal repression of the Palestinians"; yesterday it was Lebanon; before that it was the bombing of the nuclear reactor in Baghdad and the Yom Kippur War and the Sinai campaign. It appears that Jews who triumph and who, therefore, live, upset you most extraordinarily.

    Of course, dear world, long before there was an Israel, we — the Jewish people — upset you.

    We upset a German people who elected Hitler and upset an Austrian people who cheered his entry into Vienna and we upset a whole slew of Slavic nations — Poles, Slovaks, Lithuanians, Ukrainians, Russians, Hungarians and Romanians. And we go back a long, long way in the history of world "upset." We upset the Cossacks of Chmielnicki who massacred tens of thousands of us in 1648-49; we upset the Crusaders who, on their way to liberate the Holy Land, were so upset at Jews that they slaughtered untold numbers of us. For centuries, we upset a Roman Catholic Church that did its best to define our relationship through inquisitions. And we upset the arch-enemy of the church, Martin Luther, who, in his call to burn the synagogues and the Jews within them, showed an admirable Christian ecumenical spirit.

    And it is because we became so upset over upsetting you, dear world, that we decided to leave you — in a manner of speaking — and establish a Jewish state. The reasoning was that living in close contact with you, as resident-strangers in the various countries that comprise you, we upset you, irritate you and disturb you. What better notion, then, than to leave you and thus love you — and have you love us? And so, we decided to come home — home to the same homeland we were driven out 1,900 years earlier by a Roman world that, apparently, we also upset.

    Alas, dear world, it appears that you are hard to please. Having left you and your pogroms and inquisitions and crusades and holocausts, having taken our leave of the general world to live alone in our own little state — we continue to upset you. You are upset that we repress the poor Palestinians. You are deeply angered over the fact that we do not give up the lands of 1967, which are clearly the obstacle to peace in the Middle East. Moscow is upset and Washington is upset. The "radical" Arabs are upset and the gentle Egyptian moderates are upset. Europe is upset, as is Asia and, of course, Africa and Down Under and up there.

    Well, dear world, consider the reaction of a normal Jew from Israel.

    In 1920 and 1921 and 1929, there were no territories of 1967 to impede peace between Jews and Arabs. Indeed, there was no Jewish state to upset anybody. Nevertheless, the same oppressed and repressed Palestinians slaughtered tens of Jews in Jerusalem, Jaffa, Safed and Hebron. Indeed, 67 Jews were slaughtered one day in Hebron — in 1929.

    Dear world, why did the Arabs — the Palestinians — massacre 67 Jews in one day in 1929? Could it have been their anger over Israeli aggression in 1967? And why were 510 Jewish men, women and children slaughtered in Arab riots between 1936-39? Was it because Arabs were upset over 1967? And when you, world, proposed a UN Partition Plan in 1947 that would have created a "Palestinian state" alongside a tiny Israel and the Arabs cried "no" and went to war and killed 6,000 Jews — was that upset stomach caused by the aggression of 1967? And, by the way, dear world, why did we not hear your cry of "upset" then?

    The poor Palestinians who today kill Jews with explosives and firebombs and stones are part of the same people who — when they had all the territories they now demand be given to them for their state -attempted to drive the Jewish state into the sea. The same twisted faces, the same hate, the same cry of "Itbach-al-Yahud" — "Slaughter the Jew!" — that we hear and see today, where seen and heard then. The same people, the same dream — destroy Israel. What they failed to do yesterday, they dream of today, but we should not "repress" them...

    Dear world, you stood by during the Holocaust and you stood by in 1948 as seven states launched a war that the Arab League proudly compared to the Mongol massacres. You stood by in 1967 as Nasser, wildly cheered by wild mobs in every Arab capital, vowed to drive the Jews into the sea. And you would stand by tomorrow if Israel were facing extinction.

    And since we know that the Arabs-Palestinians daily dream of that extinction, we will do everything possible to remain alive in our own land. If that bothers you, dear world, well — think of how many times in the past you bothered us.

    In any event, dear world, if you are bothered by us, here is one Jew in Israel who could not care less.

    January 8, 1988

    If you are interested in buying Rabbi Meir Kahane writings in a new 7-volume collection, write to Levi Chazan at: Levi1@hotmail.com For people outside of Israel "Beyond Words" in soft cover is in the printing process and will shortly be sold at Amazon.com.

    If you did not receive this article personally and would like to, contact me at: BarbaraAndChaim@gmail.com

    To view previoulsy sent Rabbi Kahane articles go to:

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Yoram Ettinger, July 16, 2011.

    In order to comprehend US foreign policy in general, and US special ties with Israel in particular, one needs to be familiar with US domestic policy and with the US state of mind.

    For instance, since 1776, the US has never been governed by a Europe-style Left. The number of self-identified conservatives is twice as high as those who consider themselves to be liberal. Following the 1994 Congressional Democratic defeat, President Clinton turned toward the center/right, which paved the road to his 1996 reelection and the 1998 Congressional Democratic gains, in spite of the Lewinski Affair. In contrast, President Obama's decline in the polls, accentuated by the 2010 Democratic devastating defeat, resulted from his left-leaning image.

    The American state of mind is not represented by the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, New York, Los Angeles or Hollywood, but by Middle America's Flyovers, who reside in medium and small town America between the East and the West coasts. These Flyovers have benefited from a tailwind, triggered by the substantial migration, during recent decades, from the North East to the South West.

    In contrast to Europe — and just like in Israel — the US features a critical political mass of people who cherish moral American Exceptionalism, patriotism, tradition, religion, family values, small government, low taxes, individualism, defiance of odds and the right to bear arms, who are anti-establishment, pro-military, anti-terror, anti-UN, scorn Europe and are suspicious of Moslem and Arab regimes.

    The US is the most religious Western democracy: 90% of Americans believe in God; 85% wish to preserve "In God We Trust" and "One Nation Under God"; 50% say grace regularly; 45% frequent church on Sunday; 15 million copies of the Holy Bible — which is available in most hotel rooms — are sold annually. The number of religious TV stations has grown from nine in 1974 to almost 300 in 2011; the House of Representatives starts deliberations with a prayer; presidents and other top leaders conclude speeches with "God bless America." The American ethos also includes the three Gs: God, Guns and Guts.

    The US is the only country in which 80% of the people define their core values as Judea-Christian. The Ten Commandments — which are displayed in public buildings throughout the USA — are recognized as a key component of America's moral foundation. Statutes of Moses are featured in the House of Representatives and in the US Supreme Court. Leviticus 25:10 is inscribed on the Liberty Bell; Jewish terms are manifested — in Hebrew — on the official seals of Yale and Columbia universities and Dartmouth College; the Star of David is visible — above the eagle — in the official US seal and the US map includes thousands of locations bearing Biblical names.

    Therefore, most Americans do not consider the Jewish State a typical foreign policy issue, but also a domestic issue, closely related to America's core values. The current stormy "Arab Winter", along with US frustration with NATO conduct in the battle against Islamic terrorism, spotlights Israel as America's only stable, credible, capable, democratic and unconditional ally in the Middle East, and probably in the world. Israel has been America's battle-proven and cost-effective laboratory for military systems, generating for the US defense industries thousands of modifications and upgrades, worth mega billion dollars and expanding the US employment, exports and research and development bases. Israel has shared with the US its experience in battling Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs), car bombs and suicide bombers, which has spared American lives in Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen.

    Israel has been the outpost of Western democracies in an uncertain, unpredictable, violent region which is vital to critical economic and security Western interests. In 1970, Israel's posture of deterrence repelled Syria's invasion of Jordan, which threatened Saudi Arabia and other oil producing Gulf states and in 2011, Israel constitutes — according to the late General Alexander Haig — America's largest aircraft carrier, which does not require a single American on board, cannot be sunk and saves the American taxpayer some $20BN annually. The special affinity toward the Jewish State has prevailed since the arrival in 1620 of William Bradford's "Mayflower," which departed from "the modern day Egypt — Britain — crossed "the modern day Red Sea" — the Atlantic Ocean — and arrived in "the modern day Promised Land" — America. The enduring solid support of enhanced US-Israel ties has been uniquely bottom-to-top-driven, nourished by popular sentiments, sometimes in defiance of temporary tenants in the White House. According to a May 26, 2011 CNN poll, 67%:16% support Israel over the Palestinian Authority. According to a February 2011 Gallup poll, 68% consider Israel an ally of the US. According to a February 2011 Rasmussen Report poll, most Americans oppose foreign aid to Arab countries but support foreign aid to Israel. And, according to an April 2010 Quinnipiac poll, 66%:19% would like President Obama to improve his attitude toward Israel. In fact, most legislators on Capitol Hill — who constitute a co-determining, equal in power branch of government — do not share Obama's attitude toward Israel. They have been a bastion of support of the Jewish State.

    US-Israel relations have been based on a unique infrastructure of shared values, joint interests and mutual threats. The foundation of shared values — which highlights the cradle of Jewish history — has moderated periodical tensions/crises between the leaders of both countries, preventing a long term rift. Israeli Prime Ministers leveraged this unique infrastructure during 1948-1992, highlighting the historical Jewish deed to the Land of Israel, fending off occasional pressures by American Presidents, while systematically enhancing US-Israel strategic cooperation.

    Will Israeli leaders realize in 2011 that steadfastness over the cradle of Jewish history, Judea and Samaria — simultaneously with the demonstration of Israel's unique contribution to US national security — is consistent with the state of mind of most American constituents and most American legislators? Will they realize that standing by the cradle of Jewish history may result in the loss of short-term popularity, but in the significant gain of long-term respect, which is essential for the enhancement of strategic relations?

    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

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Truth Provider, July 16, 2011.

    Dear Friends,

    Here is the real root and cause of the Israeli "Palestinian" conflict: Not territories but recognition.

    It seems that PM Netanyahu has completely internalized it. Now the rest of the world needs to do the same. The only way to peace is RECOGNITION.

    This is called "Israeli Leaders Need to Stop Covering Up Palestinian Intransigence." It was written by Evelyn Gordon and it appeared in Commentary Magazine
    (http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/07/15/ israeli-leaders-covering-up-palestinian-intransigence/).


    Earlier, I cited a new poll showing two-thirds of Palestinians reject any two-state solution that entails recognizing Israel as the Jewish homeland, while the same majority sees a two-state solution as a mere stepping-stone toward Israel's eradication. It also showed 72 percent deny Jewish history in Jerusalem, 53 percent support educating schoolchildren to hate Jews, and 73 percent support the Hamas charter's call for killing Jews behind every "rock and tree."

    But perhaps even scarier than the poll itself was the delusional response of Israeli leaders when briefed on it by pollster Stanley Greenberg and Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi of The Israel Project, which commissioned it. According to the Jerusalem Post, Israeli leaders said "they were encouraged by Palestinian support for talks." Indeed, 65 percent of respondents preferred talks to violence as a tactic for achieving their goals. But what good is that if there's nothing to talk about — which there isn't as long as Palestinians deny the Jewish state's right to exist?

    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sounded much more sensible in an interview with author Etgar Keret last month: He said forthrightly the conflict is "not about territory," but about the Jewish state's right to exist, and will therefore remain unsolvable until Palestinians recognize "Israel as a Jewish state." Keret then asked what, if so, could be done to further peace:

    Netanyahu told me right away that the practical plan for advancing the peace process is to reiterate this at every opportunity.

    "You have to see the effect it has on people," he said, smiling. "You say it and they just remain slack-jawed."

    Just that day, he said, during a conversation with local politicians, he saw it happening before his eyes. Another writer at the table pointed out that we've said it more than once and it hasn't convinced most countries. Netanyahu nodded and said the Palestinians have been spreading their lies for more than 40 years, and lies that have become so deeply entrenched cannot be uprooted quickly.

    Netanyahu is dead right: The only way to make progress is for Israel to keep explaining the conflict's real cause until the world finally internalizes it and begins addressing it. For Palestinians will never accept a Jewish state unless convinced it's necessary, and the only way to so convince them is for the world to make clear that it won't support Palestinian statehood absent such acceptance.

    For that reason, Netanyahu was also right when he told Bulgaria's foreign minister a few days later peace would come faster if Europe stopped treating Palestinians "like a spoiled child" and instead began to "tell the Palestinians the truth" about the concessions they will need to make for any agreement — like recognizing Israel as a Jewish state and dropping their demand to resettle Palestinian refugees in Israel — instead of only spelling out the concessions it wants Israel to make. For again, as long as the international community refuses to say otherwise, Palestinian will keep thinking they can secure Israel's retreat from the territories without having to give up their quest for its destruction.

    The problem is even Netanyahu himself rarely follows his own advice. Instead, he and other Israelis leaders endlessly declare the Palestinians really want peace, and thereby allow the world to maintain this fiction. Indeed, had Israel not actively assisted the Palestinians in spreading this lie, it never would have "become so deeply entrenched."

    Nobody will defend Israel's interests if Israel's own leaders don't. Thus, until they start telling the truth, consistently and unanimously, the world will keep upholding the convenient fiction that peace is achievable if only Israel would concede a little bit more. And peace itself will remain an unattainable dream.

    Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il. Visit his website at www.truthprovider.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Steve Kramer and Howard Epstein, July 16, 2011.

    Michal and I had a remarkable experience attending a performance of the the opera "Aida" at the foot of Masada by the Dead Sea. Despite a temporary glitch with the sound system, we enjoyed the ambiance, the crowd, our hotel, and the amazing venue for the opera. Our only regret was we missed an address by Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister, Danny Ayalon, from Avigdor Lieberman's Yisrael Beitanu party. However, our friend, Howard Epstein, attended the speech and sent me his impressions, which are the basis for this article.

    "Danny" opened by observing that there are two phenomena in the world today: Integration and Disintegration. Integration may be seen in the ongoing globalization trend, accelerated by the information and communications revolution, world trade and outsourcing. Disintegration, however, which appears to have combusted quite spontaneously with the so-called "Arab Spring", in reality first appeared in 1989 with the crumbling of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent breakup of the Soviet Empire. The geopolitical term "Balkanization" describes much the same phenomenon.

    The phenomenon of integration has also brought danger in its wake. The growth of the EU and its currency, the euro, has resulted in the fall of the Greek, Irish, and Portuguese economies (and maybe Spain and Italy next). The entire Western hemisphere may be victims of the fallout.

    In the meantime, Israel's economy is roaring ahead with historically low levels of unemployment, high levels of growth, and massive military sales (fourth highest globally) despite its problematic neighborhood, which forces Israel to forego complacency in its foreign policy. Furthermore, every day brings fresh news of huge reserves of natural gas and oil, which, if fulfilled, would only enhance Israel's highly diversified, export-led economy, an economy totally different than other Middle Eastern energy-rich countries. Confirming Israel's highly-rated economic and fiscal status, it recently joined the OECD, an international economic organization of 34 of the world's wealthiest countries, founded in 1961 to stimulate economic progress and world trade.

    Minister Ayalon explained that the "Arab Spring" is undoubtedly the direct result — not of the existence in the region of Israel — but of the Arab democracy deficit and massive unemployment, especially of young Arabs. To say that there are insufficient jobs in the Arab world is like saying "it's warm today" during August in Dubai.

    The Arabs need to create 51 million jobs in the next 20 years! (World Bank data show that real GDP per capita in the Arab countries grew by less than 0.5 per cent annually, a mere 6.4 per cent over the entire 24 year period from 1980 to 2004.) So far they have tackled the emerging problem of youth unemployment by giving fiscal hand-outs. Eventually, even the Gulf states will find there is not enough cash to placate the angry mobs. Until now, Israel was each repressive regime's excuse for continuing martial law, a state of war and a complete absence of commercial dynamism. After all, if one is always expecting, let alone fomenting, the next war with Israel, how can the people be allowed to live otherwise than on a war footing?

    So, Israel was the Arab states' excuse for their inertia. But the "Arab Spring" has made it plain that the people aren't buying that excuse any more. All of the insurgent Arab states share one identifiable deep-seated root cause, the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916: British and French colonial diplomats dismembered the 400-year-old Ottoman Empire ignoring the tribal conglomeration of each newly delineated country. (This was before the end of WWI and the founding of the League of Nations.) All of their creations have multiple families, clans and tribes that were, and remain, the hallmark of Arab life. In the aftermath of Sykes-Picot, Arabs and other nationalities were cruelly divided and placed under regal and/or military dictatorships. Lately, the autocracies that bound these peoples together as artificial nations have been disintegrating. (Egypt alone is somewhat homogeneous, albeit having large Beduin and Coptic Christian minorities.)

    While integration, e.g. globalization and the Internet, Facebook and Twitter evolves, disintegration is the watchword now. Disintegration is the process that started in Berlin in 1989: the breakup of the USSR and Yugoslavia, wars in the Balkans, Scotland and Wales gaining some political separation from England, Belgium on the way to partition between the Flemish and the Walloons. It is now manifesting itself in the fragmentation of the Arab world. For example, in Sudan and in Yemen. The potential disintegration of Syria could spur more minorities in the Muslim world to seek their autonomy.

    There is something vital here to note about Israel. For years, and especially now, Israel has been told to hurry to "make peace" because "time is not on Israel's side." Now we see the fallacy of that argument. With the terrorist organization Hamas in control of Gaza, not having an agreement with the Palestinians isn't the disaster for Israel that was always predicted. Not having given the Golan Heights up to Syria doesn't appear to have worked contrary to our interests. Not having relinquished control of the Jordan River Valley hasn't been a bad outcome when even Jordan's Hashemite king feels insecure in his palaces in Amman and Aqaba.

    Minister Ayalon explained that Israel has already given up plenty. Since 1995, the Palestinians have had autonomy in their cities on the West Bank. These were subsequently used as bases for terrorist attacks against Israel, resulting in the construction of a barrier separating them from Israel (in contrast to the Berlin wall, which walled Berliners inside East Berlin). Israel unilaterally vacated southern Lebanon in 2000, which allowed Hezbollah to fill the vacuum from where they have provoked one war (2006) and may start another. Further, Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza in 2005, leaving it to the Palestinian Authority, who promptly lost control of it to Hamas, the more violent and aggressive of the two. Hamas too has already provoked one war (2008/9) with Israel and may start another. The split between Hamas and Fatah, meanwhile, amply illustrates the disintegration phenomenon, despite the feeble and ineffectual attempts at reconciliation.

    At a time when Israel is being urged to take bold steps, ("risks for peace"), Ayalon cautioned that one should step back and ask: in what era are we? If Israel makes peace with Entity A (e.g. Syria) today, what guarantee is there that it will not disintegrate into entities A1 (Sunni Syria), A2 (Alawite Syria) and A3 (Kurdish Syria) tomorrow? How can there be a "two-state solution" with the Palestinians, when there are two Palestinian autonomies already, the Palestinian Authority and Gaza? Might not "bold" steps turn out to be reckless ones when the partner for peace, assuming one can be located, is on the point of disintegration?

    Summing up, Minister Ayalon noted that while the Arabs waited in various states of patience and impatience these last 63 years for the destruction of Israel, an end they have not been coy to express as their divine purpose, the Israeli Jewish population has risen more than ten-fold, to 6,700,00. Israel has grown from a near-bankrupt, socialist state to a free-market, hi-tech economic and military powerhouse in two-thirds of a century. Israel, with its ingathering of the Jewish people from all over the world, is a more homogeneous society than any of those around it with the exception of Egypt. Israel boasts a true democracy with separation of powers, a fiercely independent press and freedom for all its citizens, including Arabs, a unique occurance in this neighborhood. Furthermore, Israel is in little danger of disintegrating.

    Contact Steve Kramer at mskramer@bezeqint.net and visit www.encounteringisrael.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Arnie Barnie, July 15, 2011.

    Muslim banner at site of location in Jerusalem (Via Dolorosa) — the path Jesus took ....

    This sign was posted right next to the spot where Jesus fell while carrying the cross. It's a verse from the Quran about Jesus and Allah that most Christians probably haven't heard before.


    Contact ArnyBarnie by email at ArnyBarnie@aol.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Laura, July 15, 2011.

    This was written by Andrew G. Bostom and it appeared in American Thinker
    (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/ 07/only_73_of_palestinians_want_jews_ annihilated_as_per_islams_canonical_ hadith.html at July 15, 2011 — 04:26:56 PM CDT


    Data have just been released from a survey completed this week which confirm the implacable, murderous irredentism of Israel's Palestinian Muslim "peace partners."

    American pollster Stanley Greenberg performed what is described as an "intensive, face-to-face survey in Arabic of 1,010 Palestinian adults in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip."

    Here are the salient, pathognomonic findings:

    First, a mere 73% of the Palestinians surveyed agree with the annihilationist dictates of this canonical hadith (the words and deeds of Islam's prophet Muhammad which have a weight often equal to the Koran), quoted in the Hamas Covenant.

    As characterized in the hadith, Muslim eschatology — end of times theology — highlights the Jews' supreme hostility to Islam. Jews are described as adherents of the Dajjâl — the Muslim equivalent of the Anti-Christ — or according to another tradition, the Dajjâl is himself Jewish. At his appearance, other traditions maintain that the Dajjâl will be accompanied by 70,000 Jews from Isfahan, or Jerusalem, wrapped in their robes, and armed with polished sabers, their heads covered with a sort of veil. When the Dajjâl is defeated, his Jewish companions will be slaughtered — everything will deliver them up except for the so-called gharkad tree, as per the canonical hadith (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6985) included in the 1988 Hamas Covenant (in article 7). The hadith — which 3/4 of those surveyed agree should be acted upon — is cited in the Covenant as a sacralized, obligatory call for a Muslim genocide of the Jews:

    ...the Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to realize the promise of Allah, no matter how long it takes. The Prophet, Allah's prayer and peace be upon him, says: "The hour of judgment shall not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them, so that the Jews hide behind trees and stones, and each tree and stone will say: 'Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him,' except for the Gharqad tree, for it is the tree of the Jews." (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6985)

    Second, 80% agreed with the quoted sentiments expressed article 15 of the Hamas Covenant (subtitled, "Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine is a Personal Duty") which elucidates classical jihadist theory — including jihad martyrdom (i.e., homicide bombing) operations — as well as its practical modern application to the destruction of Israel by jihad, and the need to recruit the entire global Muslim community, or "umma" in this quintessential Islamic cause:

    The day the enemies conquer some part of the Muslim land, jihad becomes a personal duty of every Muslim. In the face of the Jewish occupation of Palestine, it is necessary to raise the banner of jihad. This requires the propagation of Islamic consciousness among the masses, locally [in Palestine], in the Arab world and in the Islamic world. It is necessary to instill the spirit of jihad in the nation, engage the enemies and join the ranks of the jihad fighters. The indoctrination campaign must involve ulama, educators, teachers and information and media experts, as well as all intellectuals, especially the young people and the sheikhs of Islamic movements...

    It is necessary to establish in the minds of all the Muslim generations that the Palestinian issue is a religious issue, and that it must be dealt with as such, for [Palestine] contains Islamic holy places, [namely] the Al-Aqsa mosque, which is inseparably connected, for as long as heaven and earth shall endure, to the holy mosque of Mecca through the Prophet's nocturnal journey [from the mosque of Mecca to the Al-Aqsa mosque] and through his ascension to heaven thence. "Being stationed on the frontier for the sake of Allah for one day is better than this [entire] world and everything in it; and the place taken up in paradise by the [horseman's] whip of any one of you [jihad fighters] is better than this [entire] world and everything in it. Every evening [operation] and morning [operation] performed by Muslims for the sake of Allah is better than this [entire] world and everything in it." (Recorded in the Hadith collections of Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi and Ibn Maja). "By the name of Him who holds Muhammad's soul in His hand, I wish to launch an attack for the sake of Allah and be killed and attack again and be killed and attack again and be killed." (Recorded in the Hadith collections of Bukhari and Muslim)

    Third, 72% backed denying the thousands of years of Jewish history in Jerusalem.

    Fourth, 62% supported kidnapping IDF soldiers and holding them hostage

    Fifth, 53% were in favor or teaching songs about hating Jews in Palestinian schools.

    Even the findings which delusive "peace processors" obsess over contained no silver linings. When respondents were queried about President Barack Obama's statement that "there should be two states: Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people and Israel as the homeland for the Jewish people,", only 34% said they accepted that idea, while 61% rejected it. And 66% admitted that the Palestinians' real goal should be to start with a two-state solution but then move to it all being one Palestinian state, i.e., destroy Israel as a Jewish State.

    Contact Laura at LEL817@yahoo.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Gail Winston, July 15, 2011.

    This was written by Caroline B. Glick and it appeared in Jerusalem Post


    No doubt millions of Arabs are upset about freedom deficit in Arab lands. But the fact is that economics has played a decisive role.  

    It was seven months ago that Mohammed Bouazizi, a vegetable peddler in Tunisia, set himself and the Arab world on fire. The 26-year-old staged his suicidal protest on the steps of the local city hall after a municipal inspector took away his unlicensed vegetable cart, thus denying him the ability to feed his family of eight.

    Most depictions of the Arab revolutions that followed his act have cast them as struggles for freedom and good government. These depictions miss the main cause of these political upheavals. No doubt millions of Arabs are upset about the freedom deficit in Arab lands. But the fact is that economics has played a decisive role in all of them.

    In Bouazizi's case, his self-immolation was provoked by financial desperation. And if current trends continue, the revolutionary ferment we have seen so far is only the tip of the iceberg.

    Moreover, the political whirlwind will not be contained in the Middle East.

    Most of the news coming out about Egypt today emanates from Cairo's Tahrir Square. There the protesters continue to demand ousted president Hosni Mubarak's head on a platter alongside the skulls of his sons, business associates, advisors and everyone else who prospered under his rule. While the supposedly liberal democratic protesters' swift descent into bloodlust is no doubt worth noting, the main reason these protesters continue to gain so much international attention is because they are easy to find. A reporter looking for a story's failsafe option is to mosey on over to the square and put a microphone into the crowd.

    But while easily accessible, the action at Tahrir Square is not Egypt's most important story. The most important, strategically consequential story is that Egypt is rapidly going broke. By the end of the year, the military dictatorship will likely not only default on Egypt's loans. Field Marshal Tantawi and his deputies will almost certainly be unable to feed the Egyptian people.

    Some raw statistics are in order here. Among Egypt's population of 80 million, some 32 million are illiterate. They engage in subsistence farming that is too inefficient to support them. Egypt needs to import half of its food.

    As David Goldman, (aka Spengler), reported in Asia Times Online, in May the International Monetary Fund warned of the impending economic collapse of non-oil exporting Arab countries saying, "In the current baseline scenario the external financing needs of the region's oil importers is projected to exceed $160 billion during 2011-13." Goldman noted, "That's almost three years' worth of Egypt's total annual imports as of 2010."

    Since Mubarak was overthrown in February, Egypt's foreign currency reserves have plummeted from $36b. to $25b.-28b. Last month, Tantawi rejected an IMF loan offer of $3b., claiming he would not accept any conditions on the loans. Instead he accepted $4b. in loans from Saudi Arabia and another $2.34b. from the Gulf states.

    And still, Egypt's foreign currency reserves are being washed away. As Goldman explained, the problem is capital flight. Due in no small part to the protesters in Tahrir Square calling for the arrest of all those who did business with the former regime, Egypt's wealthy and foreign investors are taking their money out of the country.

    At the Arab Banking Summit in Rome last month, Jordan's Finance Minister Mohammed Abu Hammour warned, "There is capital flight and $500 million a week is leaving the Arab world."

    According to Goldman, "Although Hammour did not mention countries in his talk... most of the capital flight is coming from Egypt, and at an annual rate roughly equal to Egypt's remaining reserves."

    What this means is that in a few short months, Egypt will be unable to pay for its imports. And consequently, it will be unable to feed its people.

    EGYPT IS far from alone. Take Syria. There, too, capital is fleeing the country as the government rushes to quell the mass anti-regime protests.

    Just as Egyptian and Tunisian protesters hoped that a new regime would bring them more freedom, so the mass protests sweeping Syria are in part due to politics. But like in Egypt and Tunisia, Syria's economic woes are dictating much of what is happening on the ground and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

    Last month, Syrian President Bashar Assad gave a speech warning of "weakness or collapse of the Syrian economy." As a report last month by Reuters explained, the immediate impact of Assad's speech was capital flight and the devaluation of the Syrian pound by 8 percent.

    For the past decade, Assad has been trying to liberalize the Syrian economy. He enacted some free market reforms, opened a stock exchange and attempted to draw foreign investment to the country. While largely unsuccessful in alleviating Syria's massive poverty, these reforms did enable the country a modest growth rate of around 2.5% per year.

    In response to the mass protests threatening his regime, Assad has effectively ended his experiment with the free market. He fired his government minister in charge of the economic reforms and put all the projects on hold. Instead, according to a report this week in Syria Today, the government has steeply increased public sector wages and offered 100,000 temporary workers full-time contracts. The Syrian government also announced a 25% cut in the price of diesel fuel, at a cost to the government of $527m. per year.

    Boasting foreign currency reserves of $18b., the Syrian regime announced it would be using these reserves to pay for the increased governmental outlays. But as Reuters reported, the government has been forced to spend $70m.-$80m. a week to buck up the local currency. So between protecting the Syrian pound and paying for political loyalty, the Assad regime is quickly drying up Syria's treasury.

    In the event the regime is overthrown, a successor regime will face the sure prospect of economic collapse, much as the Egyptian regime does.

    And in the event that Assad remains in power, he will continue to reap the economic whirlwind of what he has sown in the form of political instability and violence.

    What this means is that we can expect continued political turmoil in both countries as they are consumed by debt and tens of millions of people face the prospect of starvation. This political turmoil can be expected to give rise to dangerous if unknowable military developments.

    Poor Arab nations such as Egypt and Syria are far from the only ones facing economic disaster.

    The $3b. loan the IMF offered Egypt may be among the last loans of that magnitude the IMF is able to offer because quite simply, European lenders are themselves staring into the economic abyss.

    Greece's debt crisis is not a local problem. It now appears increasingly likely that the EU is going to have to accept Greece defaulting on at least part of its debt. And the ramifications of Greek default on the European and US banking systems are largely unknowable. This is the case because as Megan McArdle at The Atlantic wrote this week, the amount of Greek debt held by European and US banks is difficult to assess.

    WORSE STILL, the banking crisis will only intensify in the wake of a Greek default. Debt pressure on Italy, Ireland, Spain and Portugal, which are all also on the brink of defaulting on their debts, will grow. Italy is Europe's fourth largest economy. Its debt is about the size of Germany's.

    If Italy goes into default, the implications for the European and US banking systems — and for their economies generally — will be devastating.

    The current debt-ceiling negotiations between US President Barack Obama and the Republican congressional leadership have made it apparent that Obama is ideologically committed to increasing government spending and taxes in the face of a weak economy. If Obama is reelected next year, the dire implications of four more years of his economic policies for the US and global economies cannot be overstated.

    Due to the economic policies implemented by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu since his first tenure as prime minister in 1996-99, in the face of this economic disaster, Israel is likely to find itself in the unlikely position of standing along China and India as among the only stable, growing economies in the world. Israel's banking sector is largely unexposed to European debt. Israel's gross external debt is 44% of GDP. This compares well not only to European debt levels of well over 100% of GDP but to the US debt level, which stands at 98% of GDP.

    Assuming the government does not bend to populist pressure and take economically hazardous steps like reducing the work week to four days, Israel's economy is likely to remain one of the country's most valuable strategic assets. Just as economic prosperity allowed Israel to absorb the cost of the Second Lebanon War with barely a hiccup, so continued economic growth will play a key role in protecting it from the economically induced political upheavals likely to ensue throughout much of the Arab world and Europe.

    Aside from remaining economically responsible, as Israel approaches the coming storms it is important for it to act with utmost caution politically. It must adopt policies that provide it with the most maneuver room and the greatest deterrent force.

    First and foremost, this means that it is imperative that Israel not commit itself to any agreements with any Arab regime. In 1977, the Camp David Agreement with then-Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, in which Israel surrendered the strategically invaluable Sinai for a peace treaty, seemed like a reasonable gamble.

    In 2011, a similar agreement with Assad or with the Palestinian Authority, (whose budget is largely financed from international aid), would be the height of strategic insanity.

    Beyond that, with the rising double specter of Egyptian economic collapse and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood to power, Israel must prepare for the prospect of war with Egypt. Recently it was reported that IDF Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz has opted to spread over several years Israel's military preparations for a return to hostilities with Egypt. Gantz's decision reportedly is due to his desire to avoid provoking Egypt with a rapid expansion of the IDF's order of battle.

    Gantz's caution is understandable. But it is unacceptable. Given the escalating threats emanating from Egypt — not the least of which is the expanding security vacuum in Sinai — Israel must prepare for war now.

    So, too, with the US's weak economy, Obama's Muslim Brotherhood-friendly foreign policy, and Europe's history of responding to economic hardship with xenophobia, Israel's need to develop the means of militarily defending itself from a cascade of emerging threats becomes all the more apparent.

    The economic storms may pass by Israel. But the political tempests they unleash will reach us.

    To emerge safely from what is coming, Israel needs to hunker down and prepare for the worst.

    Contact Gail Winston at winston@winstonglobal.org

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Laura, July 15, 2011.

    This was written by Elliott Abrams and is archived at


    Negotiations between Israel and the PLO have been stalled for many reasons, but a central issue is the Palestinian refusal to acknowledge Israel as a "Jewish state."

    The whole idea behind the partition of the Palestine Mandate in 1947 was, in the words of U.N. General Assembly resolution 181, the creation of an "Arab state" and a "Jewish state." The Arab rejection of Israel as a Jewish state is in fact at the heart of the Middle East conflict. It is based on the widespread refusal to accept Israel as a permanent presence in the region, but is usually couched in more acceptable terminology — indeed, the language of "rights." As one news story put it, "Palestinian negotiators have recognized Israel's right to exist, but not as a Jewish state, which officials say would prejudice the right of return for refugees and violate the rights of Israel's non-Jewish residents."

    In other words, the argument is that if Israel is a "Jewish state" it will certainly, unavoidably, necessarily discriminate against non-Jews. The problem with this debating point is that those who use it apply it only to Israel; no one ever voices any concern about states based on Islam and discriminating in favor of Muslims.

    There are actually four states whose very name contains a religious reference: the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania. But beyond those, in every Muslim-majority country the constitution asserts a special role for Islam. The Jordanian constitution says "Islam is the religion of the State" and of course "No person shall ascend the Throne unless he is a Moslem...of Moslem parents." No converts! But Jordan has a Christian minority that is five to eight percent of the population (Eastern Orthodox, Circassian, Melkite, and other sects).

    Egypt is about ten or even fifteen percent Christian (Copts), but its current provisional constitution states that "Islam is the religion of the state....Principles of Islamic law (Shari'a) are the principal source of legislation." Moreover, this is unlikely to change: presidential candidate Mohammad ElBaradei, viewed as a Westernized moderate, recently released his version of a new Egyptian constitution that similarly holds "Islam shall be the religion of the state....Sharia shall be the main source of legislation."

    The constitution of Malaysia states that "Islam is the religion of the Federation," even though the country is only about sixty percent Muslim. It is roughly twenty percent Buddhist, ten percent Christian, and six percent Hindu, among other religions.

    There are many similar examples. The religion of the state is Islam in Oman, Qatar, and Kuwait (where there are estimates that fifteen percent of the population is non-Muslim) — and one could lengthen the list. In Afghanistan, the constitution holds that "The sacred religion of Islam is the religion of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan" and "No law shall contravene the tenets and provisions of the holy religion of Islam in Afghanistan." The president must be a Muslim. The Saudis go one further, refusing even to have a constitution: "The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a sovereign Arab Islamic state with Islam as its religion; God's Book and the Sunnah of His Prophet, God's prayers and peace be upon him, are its constitution...."

    It is worth adding that Muslim states are not alone in their religious ties. The constitution of Denmark, for example, states that "The Evangelical Lutheran Church shall be the Established Church of Denmark, and, as such, it shall be supported by the State," and unsurprisingly "The King shall be a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church." Same for Norway: "The Evangelical-Lutheran religion shall remain the official religion of the State" and "The King shall at all times profess the Evangelical-Lutheran religion." And of course, the Queen of England is "Defender of the Faith," and the faith is Anglican Christianity.

    So what? So the usual arguments against the acknowledgement of Israel as a Jewish state are hypocritical and specious. Every Arab state is far more Islamic than the "Jewish state" of Israel is Jewish; to take one example, Israel imposes no religious test for the offices of president or prime minister. Moreover, the treatment of religious minorities is far better than in the Muslim states, as the flat ban on building even a single church in Saudi Arabia and the repeated violence against Christians in Egypt and Pakistan remind us. If some secular professor maintains that all states should be devoid of religious identity, fair enough; that is a principled argument. But when Arab political leaders say they will never acknowledge Israel as a Jewish state, that isn't an argument at all. It is a reminder of their continuing refusal to make peace with the Jewish state and with the very idea that the Jews can have a state in what they view as the Dar al-Islam.

    Contact Laura at LEL817@yahoo.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Arutz Sheva, July 15, 2011.

    Bolton: PA Statehood Bid Means "Next to Nothing"

    This below was written by Gavriel Queenann and it appeared in Arutz-Sheva.


    Former United States envoy to the United Nations John Bolted said the PA statehood bid at the UN in September means "next to nothing" without a peace agreement with Israel, The Associated Press reported Friday.

    Bolton, who served as President George W. Bush's envoy to the UN, said the General Assembly is certain to support the PA bid due to the 'automatic majority' the Arab League and its factional allies can call to arms but added it will be meaningless without approval in the Security Council, where it faces a US veto.

    Visiting Israel on Friday, Bolton said Israel and the U.S. should "not to take it so seriously."

    "You don't want to invest authority and legitimacy in something that doesn't have authority and legitimacy," Bolton said. The significance of the move, "as a practical matter, is next to nothing," he said.

    Despite US opposition and the specter of a US veto in the security council, the PA plans to seek UN recognition in September after two years of recalcitrant refusal to attend peace talks without preconditions that would prejudice the outcome.

    The initiative was officially endorsed Thursday by the Arab League, who announced they would submit the PA bid to the world body.

    The US and Israel say a Mideast peace deal and PA statehood should come about only through the bilateral framework of the Oslo Accords, which are what allow the PA to exist in the first place.

    Israel's leaders have initiated a diplomatic full-court press to create a "moral minority" of key states to dampen media gains the PA hopes to gain from staging the bid in spite of a prospective US veto.

    Bolton is in Israel along with other members of the Friends of Israel Initiative, a group founded last year by former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Ashraf Ramelah, July 15, 2011.

    Bishop Musa, Coptic Bishop of Youth in Egypt, stated in a recent interview with Egyptian magazine Rosa le-Youssef (June 15, issue #1827), that Copts in Egypt are in no need of protection from anywhere outside of Egypt because Copts are protected "through Allah and their Muslim brothers," — "brothers" I believe refers to a tiny percentage of Muslims in Egypt who are liberal and secular, believe in freedom of speech and freedom of religion, and willing to live peacefully among Copts. In addition, Bishop Musa mysteriously stated that "he has information that unveils attempts by the Israeli Secret Service to spy on the Egyptian church as part of its spying in Egypt." Along with this, rumor has it that Coptic Pope Shenouda is now planning to meet with Muslim Brotherhood leaders, the religious fundamentalists who have formed a new political party and seek to limit freedom by installing Sharia law.

    Equally perplexing is Bishop Musa's statement regarding ongoing requests made in recent months by Copts outside the country urging international protection for the Copts within Egypt. There are varying opinions about how this would actually materialize, but in any case the Bishop is apparently against assistance in any form. The Bishop boldly cautions Copts and sympathizers in the Diaspora who divulge the brutality of Copts inside Egypt and speak up for foreign intervention on their behalf. He deems them perpetrators — a term normally reserved for Muslim aggression.

    As a former member of the Coptic Orthodox church in Cairo, I respect Bishop Musa's authority in his position as leader of the Coptic youth. However when His Eminence departs from church matters and assumes political leadership, he crosses a line which impacts the dignity of Christians and damages the stability of the Coptic people. Because the fragile position of the Copts within Egyptian society is further agitated by naive political stances of the church fathers, church leaders must remain strictly within the boundaries of the church.

    The Bishop's comments accusing the Israeli Secret Service of spying on the Egyptian church are very troubling. Where is his evidence to substantiate this, and why would the Jews do so? Maybe he also thinks Israelis collaborated with Muslim thugs to bomb the Saints Church of Alexandria or forbid the completion of Al-Omrania Church, or perhaps the Jews singlehandedly carried out these atrocities against the Copts. How absurd! What we know for certain is that there has never been a single Copt killed or attacked by an Israeli in Egypt nor any record of Coptic girls kidnapped by Jews and forced to convert to Judaism.

    The Coptic Orthodox church of Egypt, beginning in 68 AD from the teachings of Saint Mark, stood firmly in defense of their faith for 1,900 years incurring tremendous sacrifice. The Coptic calendar is known as the Martyr Calendar for its testimonial to the enormous numbers of persecuted Copts throughout Egypt's history. In considering the strength and longevity of the Orthodox church, the Bishop is correct when he says that Copts are protected by God.

    Modern history illustrates Coptic oppression by a corrupted legal system that allowed Muslim hatred against Christians to perpetuate, and in most recent post-revolutionary days we see an unleashed wrath against Copts in the destruction of church and private property. Coptic clergy are primary victims of brutality.

    The position of church leadership should be to teach Biblical scripture in order to empower followers to establish a collective political will based upon these teachings. It has been a mistake not to urge the Coptic people to engage in political activity and fight for their own political voice. The role of church hierarchy is to keep strictly within the faith mission in order to grow and mature the seeds of belief already planted within the believer. Had clergy adhered to spiritual matters alone while edifying the church body, the Christian minority would have had secular political leadership in place before the revolution erupted this year.

    Instead, we now have church authorities, who are ill-equipped for civic leadership, unwittingly place the church in a tenuous position and lead it down a very dangerous path. As clergy began offering gratuitous opinions in the public sphere, often contradicting Christian doctrine, it has opened up opportunities for state interference in church matters. This renders the church vulnerable. Rather than remaining silent on issues outside their purview, church leadership engages in a public discourse that lacks honesty and prioritizes politics. By stepping outside the spiritual authority entrusted to them and building a power base through public commentary that deviates from the sacred life of the people, the clergy effectively departs from the religious interests of the church and abandons their divinely-ordained role as protector of the flock.

    For example, in the past the Coptic Orthodox church politicized the decision to prevent divorce in the case of couples who were married in the church. Since the Coptic Orthodox church strictly forbids divorce, a gentleman's agreement was reached between the clergy of both the Orthodox church and the Evangelical church to forbid Orthodox couples seeking divorce to join the Evangelical denomination which does allow divorce. As a result of this decision, many married individuals seeking divorce were forced to embrace Islam in order to be divorced from each other. This ridiculous legal trap set by trusted religious authorities needlessly and irresponsibly ruined the lives of many desperate individuals. Time would indeed reveal that a deteriorated Christian marriage is a mere picnic in the park relative to the loss of individual freedoms under Islam, especially for women.

    Another example from recent history is the issue of visiting the Holy Land of Israel. During the time of Sadat's visit to Israel in 1977 the church decreed that Copts were forbidden to visit Israel until joined by Muslim brothers. This shameful directive hooks Copts to the behavior of Muslim anti-Semites and goes against every teaching of Christianity. Above all, Christians know Old Testament prophecies and the story of the Jewish people as a part of the Holy Bible and an integral part of Christian doctrine and faith.

    What are the motives, if any, behind such politics set in motion by the church? Why does the church continue to compromise its own integrity and weaken itself by siding with Muslim interests? By interfering with Coptic Christian advocates outside Egypt and voices generating awareness for human rights pleading on behalf of Copts, the Egyptian Orthodox church inside Egypt distorts the truth and favors Islam and the Muslim majority. Who in the church gains by this and what is the benefit to Copts? Why would the clergy waste time at the table with the banned and outlawed Muslim Brotherhood?

    In defense of the church, one might point to the enormous pressure under which the Orthodox church functions as a target of hatred and never-ending hostilities, but this fact also begs the question of why in the first place the church shifted from its spiritual role to one of politics, which has led to its current dilemma of needing to have more and more answers to complexities beyond its scope. Church preference should be to adhere to the scripture "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God, what is God's."

    Ashraf Ramelah is an Egyptian Copt educated in Italy and currently residing in the U.S.A.. Contact him at aramelah@voicerofthecopts.org

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Fred Reifenberg, July 14, 2011.

    From the internet


    I am truly perplexed that so many of my friends are against another mosque being built in Sydney.

    I think it should be the goal of every Australian to be tolerant.

    Thus the Mosque should be allowed, in an effort to promote tolerance.

    That is why I also propose that two nightclubs be opened next door to the mosque, thereby promoting tolerance from within the mosque.

    We could call one of the clubs, which would be gay, "The Turban Cowboy ", and the other a topless bar called "You Mecca Me Hot."

    Next door should be a butcher shop that specializes in pork, and adjacent to that an open-pit barbeque pork restaurant, called "Iraq o' Ribs."

    Across the street there could be a lingerie store called "Victoria Keeps Nothing Secret", with sexy mannequins in the window modeling the goods.

    Next door to the lingerie shop there would be room for an adult sex toy shop, "Koranal Knowledge", its name in flashing neon lights, and on the other side a liquor store called "Morehammered."

    All of this would encourage the Muslims to demonstrate the tolerance they demand of us, so the mosque problem would be solved.

    If you agree with promoting tolerance, and you think this is a good plan, please pass it on...

    Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il Go to http://reifyreadying.blogspot.com/ to see some of his graphic art.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, July 14, 2011.

    An entire Jewish infrastructure has sprung up from the Embers which were kept alive for 70 years.

    This article was created from material on the Chabad website and other online sources.


    Russia — The cradle of Chabad: Here Chabad was planted and nurtured; blossomed, flourished and struck its deepest roots. From Liozna and Liadi, from Lubavitch to the furthest reaches of the Pale of Jewish Settlement, Chabad was renowned, revered and cherished.

    Czar Cathrine II ("The Great") established the Pale of Settlement in 1791 as a territory for Russian Jews to live. Created under pressure to rid Moscow of Jewish business competition and "evil" influence on the Russian masses, the Pale of Settlement included the territory of present-day Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine and Belorussia. More than 90% of Russian Jews were forced to live in the poor conditions of the Pale, which made up only 4% of imperial Russia. Still, the Jewish population in Russia grew from 1.6 million in 1820 to 5.6 million in 1910. Even within the Pale, Jews were discriminated against; they paid double taxes, were forbidden to lease land, run taverns or receive higher education.

    A liberalization period in the 1860s, which granted Jews some privileges was reversed under the May Laws of 1882. These laws restricted Jews in the Pale to urban areas, which were often overcrowded and offered limited economic opportunities. In addition thousands of Jews fell victim to devastating pogroms in the 1870s and 1880s. The pogroms, boycotts and other anti-Semitic depredations Jews faced in the Pale led to mass immigration to the United States (two million between 1881 and 1914) as well as a string of other developments, such as the controversial Haskalah movement, which sought to modernize Jewish culture. Zionism also took hold in the Pale. Only after the overthrow of the Czarist regime in 1917 was the Pale of Settlement abolished.

    The Early Years: By the early years of this century, Lubavitch emissaries had reached the furthest corners of the Czarist empire. Sent by Rabbi Sholom Dovber (known as the Rebbe Rashab, 1860-1920, fifth leader of Chabad), they visited and inspired Jews in even the remotest communities. The unlearned descendants of the "Cantonists" — Jewish children torn from their families to spend their lives as soldiers of the Czar, oriental Jews in Bukhara, the mountain Jews of Georgia and Daghestan, all welcomed Chabad emissaries sent to teach them Torah and raise their standards of Jewish practice.

    The First World War plunged Eastern European Jewish communities into chaos, uprooting large populations and disrupting the traditional Torah education system. Then came the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution.

    The Revolution and the Stalin Era: The Revolution opened a frightening new era. Religious education of the young was banned, practice of Judaism was systematically obliterated, and observant Jews — particularly chassidim — were persecuted, arrested, exiled, tortured and shot. To circumcise a child required enormous courage; observing Shabbat and kashrut (the keeping of the kosher laws) became virtually impossible for the Jewish masses — who had been largely Torah-observant before the Revolution.

    "Schneersohns Don't Run..:" Most Jewish leaders took advantage of any opportunity to leave the country. But the destiny of Chabad was inextricably bound up with Russian Jewry. The Previous Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn (1880-1950), son of the Rebbe Rashab, once told a Czarist police officer: "The Schneersohns don't run away!" True to his word, he stepped into the gap as the only Jewish leader to remain active in the Soviet Union.

    The Foundation: Throwing himself into the task at hand, the Previous Rebbe proceeded to build a widespread network of underground institutions — through the length and breadth of that vast land. Any vestiges of Jewish religious life in the Soviet Union today trace back directly to those foundations.

    On a dark night in Moscow, in the winter of 1924, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn, the sixth Rebbe of Lubavitch, made a covenant with a group of young men. They vowed to fight to the end to preserve their religion for the Jews of the Soviet Union, even if it meant losing their lives.

    Under the Rebbe's leadership, an organized underground of hundreds of Cheder (Hebrew) elementary schools, Yeshivas and Mikvahs (ritual baths — one of the essence of orthodox Jewry) sprung up, from St. Petersburg in the west to Tashkent in the east, these dedicated men and women managed to keep the spark of Yiddishkeit (Judaism) alive in hundreds of towns and cities across the land.

    The communists persecuted, chased and harassed the Rebbe and his operatives. Often within days, a new Mikvah would be filled with cement. A report would arrive of a teacher sent to the firing squad, his young students sent to Siberia. Through the years of communism, hundreds of Chassidic activists were executed. Thousands more were arrested and sent to Siberia for years of hard labor.

    In 1927, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak himself was arrested and sentenced to capital punishment. Through the intervention of the Governments of United States, Germany, and Latvia and petitions signed by hundreds of thousands of Jews across the Soviet Union, the sentence was commuted. The Rebbe was banished from Russia.

    New Start: In 1950, his son-in-law, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, of righteous memory, at 48 years old, became the Rebbe (The titular head of the Chabad movement). Under his guidance, the struggle intensified. Not a day would go by when the Rebbe would not struggle for the Jews of Russia. The Rebbe toiled endlessly for their physical and their spiritual well being. He sent couples, posing as tourists, as clandestine Shluchim (emissaries) bringing strength and determination to his Russian underground.

    The couples would memorize hundreds of names and addresses. Russian border guards were left scratching their heads by Chassidic couples who would travel to Russia for a two-week stay, laden down with Kosher salami and Jewish books and films. The humanitarian aid was used to feed Jews in cities and shtetls across the land.

    Perhaps more than anything else, the message the Shluchim brought the Jews of Russia was that someone on the other side of the curtain remembered and cared. Someone would not sleep and would not rest, until they would be freed from their bondage.

    In 1989, the shackles began to break open with the fall of communism and Perestroyka. Immediately, the Rebbe began to dispatch Shluchim to bring Judaism above-ground.

    With restriction on religion being officially released, the ashes, glowing for seventy years, finally burst into flame. The warmth of Judaism began to glow for the millions of Jewish men, women and children across Russia who didn't even know the meaning of the word "Jew." Schools, shuls, mikvas and community centers began to spring up. Once again, children were laughing in the hallways of Jewish schools. An entire Jewish infrastructure has sprung up from the Embers which were kept alive for 70 years.

    Jerome S. Kaufman is National Secretary of the Zionist Organization of America and hosts the Israel Commentary website (http://www.israel-commentary.org). This article is archived at http://israel-commentary.org/?p=960

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Family Security Matters, July 14, 2011.

    This was written by Michael Ledeen, the Freedom Scholar at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He is also a contributing editor at Pajamas Media and at National Review Online.


    The al-Azraa ("Virgin") church in Imbaba, Cairo, set on fire by Islamists on May 7th.

    You're having a tough time in what our president likes to call The Muslim World, I know that. Even in Egypt, where you're 12 or 13% of the population, and where you've been living since long before the creation of Islam. Your churches are being torched, your faithful are being killed, your people are headed for exile.

    I care a lot about the Copts. Barbara and I — two American Jews — were introduced by a Coptic fashion designer in Rome, a beautiful woman named Isis. She performed a miracle for us; she thought we'd get along well...and we sure have. So my support for you is not just political. It's personal as well. Romantic, even.

    You're asking for the support of the West against your killers and oppressors. You want American help, and you would like Jewish help too, although not too publicly, lest your killers cite it as additional justification for their acts. We'll try to help. But we'd be in a stronger position if you'd fought on our side when the same gang of thugs threw us out of Arab lands. But you didn't. Not you Copts, not your hundreds of millions of Christian brothers and sisters. You know the famous Bonhoeffer quote, don't you? It's all too appropriate for you today:

    First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.

    So there you are. Bonhoeffer joined the failed conspiracy against Hitler, and was executed. His terrible confession can be echoed by a sea of new victims, all guilty of an awful sin of omission, the sin of remaining silent while others are being murdered or brutalized. That sin, as you and your brethren know all too well today, has terrible consequences, that go far beyond feelings of guilt and expressions of remorse. It costs even more lives.

    We hear echoes of Bonhoeffer in the words of Maziar Bahari, a one-time Newsweek contributor in Tehran, when he was thrown into the ghastly prisons of the Iranian tyrants:

    I thought I had done everything I could to avoid the suffering that Maryam, and my father before her, went through as political prisoners, and yet the authorities came for me shortly after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's controversial reelection in 2009....I had taken every precaution to stay below the radar. But my time had come, and they tortured me for 118 days before I was released because of a global campaign spearheaded by my wife...

    Bahari lived to write his prison memoirs, even as his employer, Newsweek magazine, often pumped out all manner of anti-American disinformation, as the infamous libel according to which American soldiers threw a Koran down a toilet.

    Notice why Bahari's life was spared: "a global campaign spearheaded by my wife." She, at least, fought back, and she found others willing to fight alongside her. That's the way it works. It's easier to find allies when they can see you're on the battlefield. It's a lot harder if you're just making the "moral case" and begging to be saved.

    There is every reason to believe that your — our — current fight will end well, because our enemies are hollow bullies who aren't very brave and have mastered the art of declaring victory while retreating. Remember Moshe Dayan's line shortly after the 6-Day War, when someone asked him to compare the victorious Israeli armies with the great armed forces of the past, including Caesar and Alexander? "Nobody knows," he dryly remarked, "we only fight Arabs."

    It's politically incorrect to say such things, current sensibilities (according to which all cultures are entitled to the same quantum of respect) being what they are, and the same goes for what I'm about to say. But we're in a war, and it behooves us to see the battlefield as clearly as possible. So hold on tight:

    — The "Arab Street" doesn't exist, and the Arab world — especially those parts of it that are calling for our decimation — is largely a collection of failed states. It's hard to see how your country, Egypt, can survive, for example. Just listen to Spengler.

    — It's not just Arabs clamoring for our blood; other Muslims are playing the same deadly game. The Persians are pounding their chests and inveighing against the Great Satan (America) and his lesser demons (Israel, Christians, Jews, Bahai'i, et. al.). But when somebody gives them a push, they run for the safety of Great Mother Persia. Just look at what happened in Bahrain: the Saudis (hardly a military superpower) sent some troops to defend her neighbor against an Iranian-inspired insurrection. The Iranians promised blood in the streets. And then they ran away.

    — The Iranians don't send their own men to fight; they send Arabs to die for them (a great example of "leading from behind," by the way). They only show "courage" when it comes to slaughtering their own democratic protesters, and that's the phony courage of the bully. The regime is a collection of losers, men who have wrecked their country, who were defeated — alongside their al-Qaeda proxies — in Iraq, and who have masterfully provoked a remarkable unity of condemnation from a normally squabbling "international community."

    — Nobody really likes them. Those who say they do are either frightened of being blown up or climbing on what they perceive to be the chariot of the winners.

    — Finally, despite their once-impressive cultural heritage, the Muslims have a unique capacity for screwing up their attacks on us. A lot of Americans and Europeans are alive today because of the blessed incompetence of would-be terrorists. These are people who set THEIR OWN UNDERWEAR on fire, who can't get a car bomb to explode in Times Square, no matter how much training they get in Iran or Pakistan.

    So we can win this thing, and the really good news is that we don't have to take up arms to do it. Our greatest weapon is your greatest dream: freedom. Your freedom is linked to the freedom of the Syrians and the Iranians. If those regimes come down, their successors are not likely to pursue jihad against infidels like us; indeed the Iranian opposition has said just that. With Assad, Khomeini, and Ahmadinejad off the board, the terror armies will shrivel up. Their training camps will be gone, along with their primary source of lethal weapons, not to mention their money. Quo vadis, Hezballah? What are you going to do, Hamas and Islamic Jihad? Where will you go now, all you bin Ladens?

    We can win a war by political means. We did it at the same time the maniacs took power in Iran, the fateful year of 1979. Just ask Comrade Gorbachev, whose mighty Soviet Empire expired without so much as a cannon fired in either anger or despair.

    So when you talk to those cautious men and women in Congress and the executive branch, say to them that we must win the war in order for you to survive, that it's a big war, not just a matter of Copts in Egypt, that the United States can bring down the terror masters in Damascus and Tehran (yes, and in Islamabad too, but that will get a lot easier after the downfall of the Syrian and Iranian tyrants) far more easily than it brought down the Soviet Empire, and that you will engage in this war, you will not just pray for victory. You'll fight for it.

    Good luck. To all of us.

    UPDATE: I am pretty well convinced that the "first they came for the Communists" quotation came from Niemoller, not Bonhoffer. Like so many bons mots, it is maddeningly difficult to pin down, because in all likelihood it was something Niemoller said — not wrote — after the war, on a visit to Dachau in 1946. Later on, it took on a more elegant poetic form, but both the actual words and the author are still in some dispute. Its relevance to the current unpleasantness is manifest, whoever said it or wrote it. Many thanks to many readers who took the time to write; I've had several enjoyable conversations with scholars as a result of the commenters' prodding.

    Contact Family Security Matters (FSM) at info@ familysecuritymatters.org

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Barbara Taverna, July 14, 2011.

    This was written by Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director of IMRA, Independent Media Review and Analysis, an Israel-based news organization which provides an extensive digest of media, polls and significant interviews and events relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict. Its website address is http://www.imra.org.il Write him at imra@netvision.net.il

    This article is archived at


    Does a Jew from Boston, Buenos Aires or Bombay have the right to step off the plane at Ben Gurion Airport and become an Israeli citizen simply because he is a Jew?

    He does today, under the Law of Return.

    When PA leader Mahmoud Abbas categorically refuses to accept Israel as a "Jewish state" within the framework of a final status agreement, what he is really saying is that he wants to ultimately force Israel to repeal the Law of Return.


    It isn't that our national anthem, Hatikvah, has a reference to a "Jewish soul".

    And it isn't that our country closes down for Jewish holidays or that our day off is Saturday.

    It even isn't that we have various national ceremonies that include Jewish prayers.

    Mahmoud Abbas rejects the right of all Jews from the Diaspora to become citizens of Israel.

    And this is absolutely not a philosophical discussion.

    Mahmoud Abbas, and the rest of the "moderate" Fatah — along with other Palestinian leadership — have every intention to lobby at every possible forum to have Israel condemned for the "racist" Law of Return. Their goal is to ultimately create a situation in which Israel will feel it has no choice but to repeal the law.

    Now this won't happen overnight.

    But it's out there.

    And it won't matter if the Palestinians have every last centimeter of the West Bank — including the Old City of Jerusalem.

    The Palestinians still intend to do everything in their power to strip the Jews of the Diaspora of their right to citizenship in Israel.

    The dispute today between Israel and the Palestinians on terming Israel the "Jewish State" is anything but academic.

    It is an issue that world Jewry should embrace.

    Because it is an issue that bears directly on this very essential right that the Jews of the Diaspora have.

    And given how basic and fundamental this right is, one would expect a wall-to-wall response from Diaspora Jewry calling on Mahmoud Abbas and the rest of the Palestinian leadership to back down on this critical issue.

    Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, July 13, 2011.

    Stream in Hidden Falls, Ein Gedi Reserve

    "You can't reproduce nature with a photograph or a painting. You can only honor it."
    — Andy Greaves


    When the mercury rises in the Middle East, our thoughts turn to water, a scarce commodity at any time of the year, but especially in summer. Fortunately, the myth of the desert oasis is not fiction at all. Spring-fed streams, like the one pictured here at Hidden Falls in the Ein Gedi Reserve, run cool and clear 12 months a year, rewarding parched hikers with refreshing relief before their return to the dusty trail.

    The name is a bit of a misnomer, as on more than one occasion I've been joined at this site by several dozen students. Nevertheless, they generally move on quickly, leaving behind an even deeper quiet created by the absence of their chaos. This shot downplays the falls, which are about five meters in height, but still follows basic rules of composition by using a strong foreground element as a jumping off point to finding the main subject. I chose camera settings that allow for a long exposure to give the water a milk-like color as it makes its way to the Dead Sea. Israel indeed flows with milk and honey. You just have to know how to look.

    Technical Data: Nikon D70, 28-105 zoom at 32mm, f16 @ 1.6 sec., ISO 200.

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

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Michael Freund, July 13, 2011.

    On a small island off the coast of Spain, a tragedy that began more than six centuries ago may finally be coming to an end.

    For the first time since their Jewish ancestors were compelled to convert to Catholicism in the 14th and 15th centuries, the Chuetas of Palma de Mallorca have been formally recognized as Jews by a leading Israeli rabbinical authority, Rabbi Nissim Karelitz of Bnei Brak.

    This is a momentous development, one that opens the door to thousands of Chuetas to return to their roots and rejoin the Jewish people.

    Just who are these people? No one knows with certainty when the first Jews arrived in Mallorca, but the Jewish presence there is said to date back to as early as the fifth century CE.

    At the turn of the 14th century, the Jews' situation began to deteriorate sharply. In 1305, anti-Jewish rioting erupted, and the island's first blood libel occurred in 1309, when several Jews were falsely accused of murdering a Catholic child.

    The turning point, however, came in 1391, when anti-Jewish pogroms swept across Spain.

    On August 2 of that year, the rioting and violence reached Mallorca, where hundreds of Jews were massacred, while others were forcibly converted. In 1435, the remaining Jews were either murdered or dragged to the baptismal font, and Mallorca's Jewish community was destroyed.

    Nonetheless, the native Mallorcans never accepted the converts, and began referring to them as Chuetas, the Catalan word for "pig." Many continued to practice Judaism in secret, risking their lives to remain faithful to the ways of their forefathers.

    Subsequently the Inquisition became particularly active in the area, ruthlessly hunting down those suspected of secret Judaism. In 1691, some 300 years after the forcible conversions, 37 Chuetas were put to death by the Inquisition in Palma for the "sin" of "relapsing" to Judaism.

    From the start, the Chuetas faced hostility from their Catholic neighbors, who never truly accepted them as Christians and refused to marry them — a phenomenon that continued well into the modern era.

    Indeed, it was not until the French captured Mallorca in the early 19th century that the Inquisition was formally abolished in the area, though even that did not spell the end of anti-Chueta discrimination.

    Writers such as the Frenchwoman George Sand in the 19th century and Englishman Robert Graves in the 20th wrote about the Chuetas with much sympathy, lamenting the hatred to which they continued to be subjected by their fellow Mallorcans.

    Ironically enough, that hatred only served to reinforce their sense of Jewish identity.

    LEGAL RESTRICTIONS against them were ended only in 1931, when the Spanish Republic was incorporated, and it is only in the past 40 to 50 years that "intermarriages" between Chuetas and Mallorcan Catholics have begun to take place.

    As a result, for generations, the Chuetas have been living between worlds, with Catholic Mallorcans viewing them as Jews, and Jews considering them Catholic.

    An estimated 15,000-20,000 Chuetas still live in Mallorca, and in recent years a growing number have begun to express an interest in reclaiming their Jewish roots.

    Now, thanks to Karelitz's halachic ruling, their dream may soon become reality.

    In his written opinion, Karelitz stated that "since it has become clear that it is accepted among them [i.e., the Chuetas] that throughout the generations most of them married among themselves, then all those related to the former generations are Jews, from our brethren the children of Israel, the nation of God."

    Karelitz further wrote that efforts should be made to draw the Chuetas closer to their Jewish heritage, and that they should be encouraged to embrace a life of Torah and observance of the mitzvot.

    This decision carries enormous weight, as Karelitz heads one of the most important haredi rabbinical courts in Bnei Brak. He is considered one of Israel's foremost arbiters of Jewish law, and is the nephew of the famed Hazon Ish, one of the greatest rabbis of the 20th century.

    Earlier this week, I traveled to Mallorca to share the news of Karelitz's decision with the Chuetas and to encourage them on their journey back to the Jewish people.

    On Sunday night, in a packed room, I told the Chuetas of the decision, which prompted an immediate, sustained applause along with tears of joy.

    Many said they never thought such a decision would be reached in their lifetimes.

    A young Chueta in her early 20s approached me afterward, her eyes still red from crying. She told me of her experiences in high school, just a few years ago, when she was humiliated because of her identity.

    "I always knew that I was a Jew, and I always felt this in my heart," she told me. "But now, thanks to the rabbi's decision, it is official, and we are getting recognition from the people of Israel. I can't believe it!" I believe the Jewish people have a historical responsibility to reach out to the Chuetas and facilitate their return. We owe it to them — and to ourselves — to help those among them who wish to rejoin the Jewish people.

    Over the centuries, the Inquisition invested a great deal of effort and energy in seeking to tear the Chuetas away from us. Our task now is to show the same determination in welcoming them home.

    Michael Freund is the founder and chairman of Shavei Israel (www.shavei.org), which assists Anousim in Spain, Portugal and South America to return to the Jewish people. He served as an adviser to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in his first term in office. The Jerusalem Post http://www.michaelfreund.org/9927/mallorca-chuetas

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Barry Shaw, July 12, 2011.

    Over a cold drink in the Netanya sun, a London contact of mine asked me an interesting question while we were discussing the future of Israel. "So, where is the next great Aliyah to Israel going to come from?" Without hesitation I responded, "The Anusim. The secret Jews."

    I am no expert on this subject. I staggered across this amazing and hidden drama of Jewish history by accident. While browsing through the shelves of a Barnes & Noble bookstore during a vacation stopover in Florida, I picked up a tantalisingly entitled book. It was called "Jewish Pirates of the Caribbean."

    I thought it would be a light chuckle of an easy holiday read while we fittingly sailed through the Caribbean on a cruise to Panama. It was written by Ed Kritzler, and it turned out to be an amazing read. It had little to do with swashbuckling antics, a la Johnny Depp. Instead, it was a profound study of Spanish Jews who were hounded by a cruel and dogmatic Catholic Church that tortured, expelled and burnt Jews to death in public exhibitions of massacre if they failed to convert to the Christian faith

    This persecution chased them across four continents. The death toll was enormous. Jews who could not escape adopted an overt Christianity, while many risked death by overtly maintaining Jewish rituals at home. A large number ensured their heritage by marrying people of the faith who also outwardly appeared to be members of the Catholic faith. I assumed that these Jews were long lost to Christianity until fate brought me back to this intriguing topic.

    I helped a client to find a new home in Netanya. Gloria Mound had made the move from Gan Yavne in the south of Israel to be close to the Netanya Academic College who had contracted to receive her 40 year old archives on the Anusim, the forgotten Jews of Spain and Portugal.

    She, and her husband had spent decades investigating, researching and recording the history of this people. They came across many who admitted, in deepest confidence, that they were Jewish but did not want this info to become public. They lived in a society to this day as secret Jews and felt concerned should this knowledge be known to their neighbours, friends, and the general society in which they lived and worked, which was exclusively and outwardly Christian as it has been for centuries. Buried underground, they were hesitant to announce their core faith. Even today, they are the closet Jews.

    But there are signs of an awakening. The Jerusalem Post of July 12, 2011 had an article "Chuetas of Majorca recognized as Jewish." The article displayed a member of the newly announced Jewish community in Palma de Majorca dancing with a Torah at the Shavei Israel's seminary for Bnei Anusim. In may of this year there had been a memorial service in Palma, commemorating the execution of 37 Chueta Jews for practicing Judaism in secret. They, including Rabbi Raffi Valla, who was the secret rabbi of the Anusim, were burned alive.

    The grave injustice done to the Jews has been blotted out of Spanish history. This shameful chapter has been kept secret from Spaniards but, increasingly Spanish authorities are being asked to open their archives so that researchers can study official records that had not been seen for centuries. DNA tests done on Portugal reveal that as many as six million Portuguese have some degree of Jewish blood in their veins. Secret Jews inhabit the Caribbean, Central and South America. Slowly, inevitably, people are becoming curious in discovering their roots. They volunteer their names and details to researchers who examine family trees, name and location associations, in order to establish a more detailed record of the Anusim. Israel is witnessing the early signs of a return to open Judaism. This is increasingly linked with a desire to start a new life, with their new pride in their identity, in Israel.

    There are a number of organisations who have outreach programs to these secret Jews. They include the Shavei Israel organisation, and the

    International Institute for Secret Jews (Anusim) Studies which includes the Casa Shalom Library, at the Netanya Academic College.

    I am proposing setting up a special Facebook group for Anusim. This group will have information published in English and Spanish. Anyone interested in helping with this research, or have information, should contact me and I will pass you over to the right person. We are

    aware that many people may be curious as to their roots, yet not ready to make any public disclosure. Concerns for confidentiality will be strictly observed.

    Many people who are involved with this yet to be fully discovered section of Judaism, feel like I do. That these people, when the awakening becomes public and larger in numbers, will become the next huge wave of Aliyah to Israel, which is the only place they can truly enjoy the freedom to openly celebrate and appreciate their faith.

    Barry Shaw made aliyah from Manchester, England, He writes the "View from Here" columns from Israel. To sign up to receive his emails, contact him at theviewfromisrael@gmail.com.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 12, 2011.

    For some time now I've been observing a slow move to the right — to a nationalist position that defends our legitimate rights — within the Israeli populace and within the Knesset. A bill that passed in the Knesset last night, after vigorous and lengthy debate, is evidence that this is so:

    The "Boycott Bill" passed with 47 in favor and 38 opposed. This in spite of the fact that Ehud Barak's Independence party chose not to participate and that many members of Shas were attending a wedding. National Union, which is not part of the coalition, voted with it.

    Prime Minister Netanyahu did not participate in the vote (and declined to say why), but did not move to block the bill. Knesset speak Ruby Rivlin (Likud) supported it by bringing it into the plenum.

    The hero of the day is Coalition Chair Ze'ev Elkin (Likud), who sponsored and actively promoted the bill.


    The new law permits citizens of Israel to bring civil suits against persons and organizations that call for boycotts against Israel, Israeli institutions or regions under Israeli control. It also prevents the government from doing business with companies that initiate or comply with boycotts.

    "This bill defends the State of Israel," said Elkins. "We have no right to ask our allies to do the same, if an Israeli citizen can do as he wishes.

    "The law says that if you harm me [with a boycott], I have the right to ask for damages, and if you boycott the State of Israel, don't ask for benefits."


    The bill was actually weakened when the clause that would have made boycotts a criminal offense was removed.

    As it stands, it should — in my opinion — have been such a no-brainer (duhh!) as to have passed close to unanimously. Not unanimously, of course, as the Arab and far-left parties would not support this. But why did Barak's party, which is part of the coalition, refuse to support it? "because of fundamental problems the bill has in relation to freedom of speech."

    Freedom of speech? A boycott? Said MK Yohanan Plesner (Kadima), "I will fight for my political rival's right to express his opinion with a boycott." Give me a break! Plesner maintained that this bill may be unconstitutional.

    MK Yariv Levin (Likud) responded that Plesner was seeking a way to "sabotage the legislative process and sabotage the will of the majority." He pointed out, with regard to the charge that the bill may be unconstitutional, that Israel doesn't have a constitution. (There are Basic Laws.) The question of it being "unconstitutional" would be brought to the courts — and would thus be an attempt to use the courts to subvert a Knesset vote.


    Bulletin: We knew it was coming, but it certainly didn't take long: The very leftist Gush Shalom has just filed a petition with the High Court regarding this law.

    Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein will defend it. Apparently before the bill was brought before the Knesset, the Ministry of Justice made adjustments in its wording to help ensure its legality. I will not belabor the finer points here now.

    This will be a long drawn out procedure and represents a most serious issue here in Israel — the possibility of a left-leaning court over-riding legislation passed by a centrist-rightist majority within the Knesset.

    MK Levin, now thoroughly enraged, says, "The High Court has no authority to disqualify laws. This whole procedure is an anti-democratic step initiated by a minority that has failed the true public test — the test of elections."


    Israel is now headed toward a confrontation with Lebanon (Hezbollah) with regard to the maritime border between the two countries.

    Because they are technically at war, a maritime border has never been agreed upon between Israel and Lebanon. A maritime border had been agreed upon between Israel and Cyprus last year, and in 2007 Lebanon concluded an agreement with Cyprus. Now Lebanon has submitted to the UN a line to the south of what Lebanon itself had agreed upon with Cyprus, and that additionally contradicts what Israel and Cyprus had agreed upon.

    Israel is currently moving to submit to the UN a map indicating the demarcation of its northern maritime border with Lebanon. Action is necessary because according to maritime law, if one country makes a claim and it is not countered, that silence is considered acquiescence.

    Israel's goal is to establish a boundary according to international maritime law; Israel's proposed line was drawn up with the help of international legal experts.

    Israel has made it clear that her rights will be defended. Lebanon has made similar declarations.


    What's at stake here, of course, is access to areas that may contain lucrative gas fields. The major finds, the Leviathan and Tamar, are well south of the disputed area, but there may be other fields as yet undiscovered.

    Back in January, Netanyahu anticipated the possibility that Israel's off shore gas fields would become a "strategic objective that Israel's enemies will try to undermine."

    But there is another potential issue as well: Hezbollah needs to maintain an issue that can be used to justify conflict with Israel.

    In a Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs briefing on the issue, Jaques Neria has written:

    "Hezbollah already boasts an amphibious warfare unit trained in underwater sabotage and coastal infiltration. Its ability to target shipping — and possibly offshore oil and gas platforms — was exposed in the war with Israel in 2006..."

    It is almost a certainty that Lebanon would be held responsible for Hezbollah actions, as Hezbollah is part of the government at present.


    For the record, Haaretz came out with a report, which I'm seeing cited elsewhere now, that Obama supported the Lebanese position on maritime borders. Prime Minister Netanyahu, Foreign Minister Lieberman, and Deputy Foreign Minister Ayalon have all explicitly stated that this is not the case.

    This is Caroline Glick's version of matters, in "The Path to the next Lebanon war":

    "...guided by its appeasement ideology, the Obama administration has refused to take sides. It urged Israel to submit its counter-claim to the UN — where it can bully Israel into accepting arbitration of the dispute by the inherently anti-Israel UN.

    "More generally, by refusing to take sides, the US is in fact siding with its enemy Iran and Iran's proxy Hezbollah against its ally Israel.

    "According to media reports, the Obama administration claims that by acting in this manner, it is seeking to prevent a flare-up of hostilities. That is, the administration believes that if it shows Hezbollah its good will by treating Israel's honest claim as equal to Lebanon/Hezbollah/Iran's false claim, it will appease the latter into not waging a war of aggression against the former."
    http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/ Article.aspx?id=228892

    Once again, and ever more, it is essential for our government to stand strong, most especially in the face of Obama's appeasement.


    OK. Let me turn here to the subject of Glenn Beck — conservative American political commentator, and radio host, whose rise to fame came via his Fox News show, cancelled last month. I was present yesterday when Beck addressed the Knesset Immigration, Absorption and Diaspora Affairs Committee, chaired by MK Danny Danon (Likud).

    In many quarters on the right, Beck is considered the best thing to have happened to Israel since falafel. Unquestionably, in a media climate that oozes anti-Israel bias, Beck's whole-hearted — and, he says, unconditional — support for Israel is greatly welcome. He should be treated by us with the utmost in hospitality and cordiality.

    I would suggest, however, that a level-headed approach to what he says is in order, and that adulation is not.

    By way of example: Beck made an allusion yesterday to having been inspired by Ruth in the Bible. And shortly thereafter material came into my in-box with the subject line regarding Beck: "Your God is my God," which were Ruth's words. But Ruth is considered the quintessential convert. When she said it, she meant it literally. Beck, on the other hand, is Mormon, and last I heard he's not converting. Nor am I suggesting he should. What I am suggesting is that enthusiasm for what he says be just slightly tempered.


    Beck delivered a good message yesterday. In brief, he said that in fighting for Israel we must "think out of the box," by simply telling the truth. This is not what the media do — the media tell people what they want to hear, or what they think they're supposed to be saying (or, I will add, what suits their political agenda). We need to stop playing that game.

    What is more, he says, it's possible to move past the traditional media sources today via the Internet — going directly to the people.

    All of this resonates most positively with me, as my readers will understand.


    In the course of speaking, however, he mentioned that when he sees people on the street here, he doesn't notice if they're Israeli or Palestinian. Actually, he doesn't know many Palestinians or Israelis, but it doesn't matter, because people are people and they're the same everywhere. It's the leaders who foment trouble — the Arab leaders who seek to destroy Israel (and he's straight on that score!). But the people, they just want to live their lives, and raise their children.

    And that, my friends, is where he lost me. That's a left wing, politically correct position. And it's a very erroneous one. All people are most assuredly not the same.

    Either Beck said this because he "doesn't get it," as one journalist wrote. Or, as others have suggested, he was simply trying to be "non-political" in his stance. But if this is the case, then he's failing to take his own advice about telling the truth.


    Various members of the Knesset who sit on the Committee had their opportunity to speak. MK Arieh Eldad (National Union) was the only one to take on what Beck said regarding all people being the same. Eldad, who served as a physician and burn specialist before turning to politics, told two stories. I share one, in which he was particularly involved. Many of us have heard it before, but it makes the point beautifully.

    Some years ago, a woman in Gaza was badly burned by her own family for some infraction that compromised the family honor. She was brought to Soroka hospital and there Jewish doctors saved her life — without thought to the fact that she was an Arab. She returned to Gaza, but had to come back to the hospital every so often for follow-up. Having been back and forth several times, she assumed she could move past the security check easily. But she was stopped, and was found to be wearing a belt with explosives. She was intent on going into the hospital and blowing up the very doctors who had saved her life. Why? Her family told her that this is how she could redeem herself and the family honor. She'd be dead, but she'd be "forgiven."

    All people are not the same.


    Beck's other message, which is welcome, is that Israel is not alone.

    By way of proving this, he's coming back to Israel on August 24, leading a mission called "Restoring Courage." The event is scheduled to be held at the Davidson Center — an archeological site at the south wall of the Temple Mount. He's bringing people from the left and from the right who represent a host of countries. Political figures will be coming — including presidential candidates.

    Additionally, there will be 700 remote-viewing centers set up, so people can see what's happening in Jerusalem. People will be encouraged to reach out to each other and join together to watch.


    Well, it looks as if the "peace process," which has been sustained for some time on life support equipment, may be taking its last gasp. The Quartet has met but was unable to come up with a plan to bring the parties back to the table. Are we surprised?

    The members of the Quartet themselves were so at odds as to how to proceed that they could not come up with a statement at the end of their meeting. Needless to say, these differences merely reflect the huge differences between the positions of the PLO and Israel.

    See more:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ us-mideast-mediators-to-discuss-old-new-problems -in-gloomy-israeli-palestinian-peace-process/2011/ 07/11/gIQATshR8H.html


    At long last, an article that tells you what I, having consulted with legal authorities, have been telling you for some time now:

    Writing in Haaretz, Yonaton Touval says:

    "...amid growing confusion over how the international community should respond to the Palestinian bid for United Nations recognition, it is high time to dispel some basic misconceptions about September.
    "...the UN will not vote on recognition of a Palestinian state. The reason is simple: It can't. According to international law, only states can recognize other states. The UN, by contrast, is an international organization and is therefore not mandated to grant official recognition to states."

    Touval explains precisely how confused the situation is, and then advises:

    "The international community should do its utmost to spare the Palestinians an awkward (and potentially explosive) letdown at the UN this September."

    The entire article is well worth a read:
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/ opinion/ignore-the-impossible-go-for-the- probable-1.372065

    Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner18@gmail.com and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

    To Go To Top

    Posted by HandsFiasco, July 12, 2011.

    This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared in Jewish World Review
    (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0711/ glick071211.php3)

    Caroline B. Glick is the senior Middle East Fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post. Her book "The Shackled Warrior: Israel and the Global Jihad," is available at Amazon.com. Visit her website at www.CarolineGlick.com. Contact her by email at caroline@carolineglick.com.


    Five years ago this week, Iran's Lebanese proxy opened war with Israel. The war lasted 34 days, during which Hezbollah launched more than 4,000 missiles against Israel. Now five years later, under US President Barack Obama, America is pushing a policy that drastically escalates the chance that a new war between Israel and Iran's Lebanese army will break out again in the near future.

    Back in 2006, Israel's response to Hezbollah's aggression was swift but incompetent. While Israel scored some blows against the Iranian proxy force, the war ended with Hezbollah still shooting. Israel failed to defeat the terror army. And because Hezbollah survived, it won the war.

    This truth is exposed in all its ugliness by the political and military realities five years on. Today, Hezbollah is not simply in charge of Israel's former security zone in South Lebanon.

    It is in charge of all of Lebanon. The Hezbollah-controlled government controls all aspects of the Lebanese state that it wishes. These include the military, the telecommunications networks, and the international borders, airports and sea ports, among other things.

    Today, Hezbollah has not merely refilled its depleted missile arsenals. It has tripled the size of its missile arsenals. In 2006, IAF strikes in the first 24 hours of the war knocked out all of Hezbollah's long-range missiles. Today, not only have those stocks been replenished, Hezbollah's arsenal includes missiles with ranges covering all of Israel, with larger payloads and many with guidance systems.

    The lessons of the war are easy to see. And the Israeli public, which learned them five years ago, still hasn't forgotten them.

    GENERALLY SPEAKING, the war taught us three lessons. The first lesson is that you can't convince terrorists to lay down their arms simply by walking away. Israel withdrew from its security zone in southern Lebanon in 2000. The withdrawal was a precursor to its withdrawal from Gaza in 2005. In 2006, Israel was attacked from both territories.

    In the lead-up to both withdrawals, Israel's national leadership told the public that the only reason terrorists from these territories were attacking us was that we were there. If we went away, they would stop hating us and we would be safe. We were the problem, not them, so we could solve the problem by giving them what they wanted.

    ALTHOUGH THEN-prime minister Ehud Olmert and then-foreign minister Tzipi Livni continued to push appeasement through their insistence that Israel surrender Judea and Samaria, the war of 2006 showed the public the folly of their plans. And at first opportunity, the public elected the Likud and other right-wing parties — which oppose appeasement — to form the current government.

    The second lesson the public learned is that when a nation goes to war against an enemy that seeks its destruction, it must fight to win. You cannot fight a half-war against an implacable foe. And if you fail to win, you lose.

    This is not how Israel fought the war of 2006. Partially due to pressure from then-secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and partially due to his own strategic incomprehension, Olmert believed it was possible to fight to a draw without losing.

    In the event, there was only one way for Israel to defeat Hezbollah — by regaining control over southern Lebanon.

    Any other conclusion to the war would leave Hezbollah standing. And simply by surviving intact, as Lebanese Druse leader Walid Jumblatt warned at the time, the road would be paved for Hezbollah to take over Lebanon.

    But Olmert — and Livni — wouldn't even consider retaking control of South Lebanon. The option was discarded contemptuously as a delusional recipe for forcing Israel back into the "Lebanese quagmire." The fact that the "Lebanese quagmire" came to Israel after we left Lebanon, and that it will only end when Israel defeats Hezbollah, was completely ignored.

    Olmert's and Livni's reason for rejecting the one strategy that would have brought Israel victory is explained by the third lesson of the war. That lesson is that once a leader is ideologically committed to a policy of appeasement, he is unable to allow rational considerations to permeate his thinking.

    THE OLMERT government was elected in 2006 on the basis of its plan to repeat the Lebanon and Gaza withdrawals in Judea and Samaria. During the war, Olmert told his supporters that victory in Lebanon would enable him to carry out his planned withdrawal from Judea and Samaria. And this was true. But because of the circular logic of appeasement, there was no way that Olmert could fight to win.

    If Israel had retaken control of southern Lebanon, Olmert would have had a chance of convincing the public that unilateral withdrawal was a viable strategy. He would have been able to argue that just as the IDF retook control of southern Lebanon, so it would retake control of Judea and Samaria if the Palestinians used the vacated lands to attack the rest of the country.

    But because he was committed to appeasement, Olmert could not fight to win in Lebanon. The appeasement agenda is predicated on the disavowal of the notion of military victory and the embrace of the mantra, "There is no military solution."

    If victory is an option, then surrender along the lines that Olmert preached in Judea and Samaria is also an option.

    That is, surrender is an option, not an imperative, as he claimed. And

    if victory is an option, then clearly it has much more to recommend it than defeat.

    But with their appeasement agenda reigning supreme — as appeasement agendas always do — instead of fighting to win, Olmert and Livni sued for a cease-fire. That is, they sought a diplomatic solution to a military problem. And since by not losing, Hezbollah won the military contest, it also came out the victor in UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which set the conditions of the cease-fire.

    Resolution 1701 was a massive victory for Hezbollah. The resolution placed the international terror group run by Iran on equal footing with Israel, a sovereign state. The security arrangements in the resolution were an invitation for Hezbollah to rearm. It was pure fantasy to believe that the Hezbollah-dominated Lebanese government would block Hezbollah's rearmament. And it was utter madness to think that European military forces would lift a finger to prevent Hezbollah from reasserting full control over the border with Israel.

    But again, if you accept the circular logic of appeasement — that always puts the burden of proof on the non-aggressor — then you will never learn these, or any other lessons. And as a consequence, appeasers will always and forever foment wars in the name of peace.

    THE ISRAELI public learned these lessons and elected a government that understands them. Perhaps if the American people had elected Senator John McCain to succeed George W. Bush in 2008, the US government would have learned these lessons as well. And then maybe together the Israeli and the US governments might have set about fixing at least some of the damage the war caused them both.

    But in their wisdom, the American people elected Barack Obama to succeed Bush in the White House. And Obama has learned none of the lessons of the last war. Consequently Obama's current policies are increasing the likelihood of another war between Israel and Iran's Lebanese proxy in the near future.

    Far from recognizing the nature of Hezbollah, the Obama administration has tried to wish away its implacability. Last May, Obama's counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan spoke of the administration's plan to cultivate "moderate elements" in the Iranian-run jihadist organization.

    The Obama administration's notion that the US can adopt a nuanced approach to the terror group is put paid by Hezbollah's takeover of the Lebanese government, its growing capabilities in the Western hemisphere, its continued devotion to the cause of Israel's destruction, its participation in the killing of Syrian anti-regime protesters, and Iran's clear control over all aspects of the organization's operations. And yet, by all accounts, the administration refuses to acknowledge that there can be no nuance toward Hezbollah.

    The dangers of Obama's rejection of these basic truths were exposed this week. Sunday the government approved the demarcation of Israel's territorial waters along the border with Lebanon. The borders will be submitted to the UN.

    Israel's move was forced on it by the Obama administration.

    The dispute over the sea border arose after Israel discovered massive quantities of natural gas in its territorial waters in 2009. Acting on orders from Hezbollah and Iran, the Lebanese government immediately claimed erroneously that the waters belonged to Lebanon. Last August, Lebanon submitted its claim to the UN.

    Israel negotiated its maritime borders with Cyprus in 2007. The same year, Cyprus also negotiated its maritime borders with Lebanon. At the time, Lebanon did not claim the areas in which Israel has discovered natural gas deposits or the areas abutting those areas, which are suspected of similarly containing large natural gas deposits. Lebanon's current claim includes Israel's territorial waters abutting the gas fields it discovered in 2009.

    In staking this false claim, as it did with the Shaba Farms on Mount Dov in the Golan Heights in 2000, Lebanon is setting up a casus belli against Israel.

    Under the circumstances, the only rational policy that the US can possibly adopt is to loudly and strenuously back Israel's claim and reject all Lebanese contentions to the contrary.

    Only by completely rejecting Lebanon's claim can the US deny Hezbollah and Iran the ability to use Israel's gas finds in its territorial waters as a justification for war.

    Rather than do this, guided by its appeasement ideology, the Obama administration has refused to take sides. It urged Israel to submit its counter-claim to the UN — where it can bully Israel into accepting arbitration of the dispute by the inherently anti-Israel UN.

    More generally, by refusing to take sides, the US is in fact siding with its enemy Iran and Iran's proxy Hezbollah against its ally Israel. According to media reports, the Obama administration claims that by acting in this manner, it is seeking to prevent a flare-up of hostilities. That is, the administration believes that if it shows Hezbollah its good will by treating Israel's honest claim as equal to Lebanon/Hezbollah/Iran's false claim, it will appease the latter into not waging a war of aggression against the former.

    But again, what the last war taught us is that this sort of behavior is what emboldens aggressors to attack. Obama's even-handedness in the face of a US enemy's aggression against a US ally is placing Israel and Lebanon on a straight path to a new war.

    Contact HandsFiasco by email at handsfiasco@webtv.net

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Yaacov Levi, July 12, 2011.

    This was written by Daniel Greenfield, a columnist and author. He was born in Israel and is currently living in New York City. He comments on political affairs with a special focus on the War on Terror and the rising threat to Western civilization. He maintains a blog at http://sultanknish.blogspot.com.


    Even as Australia was banning the veil, New Zealand was caught in a scandal over the veil after the Saudi consulate complained when two of their masked slaves were refused access to a Kiwi bus.

    But the two bus drivers dodged accusations of Islamophobia by claiming that they instead suffer from Maskphobia. Maskphobia being the fear of people wearing masks.

    While liberal New Zealand newspaper writers are ridiculing it as a dodge, it's actually a far more honest position than condemning every concern about Islam as Islamophobia. Few people are concerned about Islam because it is a five letter word or foreign. They are concerned about it, because it has a habit of murdering their kind of people. The kind who don't attend mosques, wear veils or bow to a desert deity who commanded his followers to subjugate all infidels. The proper term for this concern is Murderphobia.

    Some people riding on a bus are concerned that Muslims will follow their habit of detonating buses in the name of Allah. That the masked and hooded lady is concealing a bomb belt under her portable black tent. This condition is known as Bombphobia.

    When boarding a plane, many worry that a Quran bearer will be flying the friendly skies with them and will attempt to hijack the plane and steer it toward the nearest large building full of non-Muslims. This is known as Boxcutterphobia.

    Some women worry about being sexually assaulted by a member of a religion which says that those of another gender who do not wear the veil are free for the taking. This is called IslamoRapephobia.

    And some parents are concerned about their children being exploited in sex rings by a religion, which cannot be named, yet which consider infidel girls to be fair prey. And whose prophet married and raped a child. This is called IslamoPedoPhobia.

    Many cartoons are concerned that if they depict the Prophet of the Religion of Peace (Pigs Be Upon Him) that they will then have to go into hiding and run for their lives. This is known as CartoonPhobia.

    Blind people are worried that they will be left without transportation by Muslim cabbies who hate their seeing eye dogs, because their religion says that dogs prevent angels from entering a house. This is called StrandedByBigotedIslamoCabbiesPhobia.

    Religious minorities, particularly Jews, are concerned that they are being driven out of the neighborhoods, cities and countries where they used to live by Islamic bigotry. This is a problem that everyone knows does not exist, which is why we are not allowed to talk about it. We are not allowed to talk about it in France, in Sweden or in the Negev. Like the rapes, murders, bombings and Muslim hate crimes — it is something we do not talk about. But it might be called KristallnachtPhobia.

    This entire complex of phobias of course has nothing whatsoever to do with Islam. It just happens to entirely coincidentally involve Muslims. Which is no reflection on Islam, the latter being a wonderful Religion of Peace, which has inspired many people to do great things, like conquering and enslaving entire cultures, forcing women to dress like Klansmen and learning to use flight simulators. And I for one would never presume to suggest otherwise.

    Iislamseatsonplanemage14Islam is a wonderful religion. I'm not just saying that because I have a knife to my throat. It's one of those special religions whose very specialness is hard to express in words, but can be best learned about by visiting the survivors of a bomb attack in the hospitals and helping them feed themselves.

    Islamophobia of course has no place in a modern society. It's as ridiculous as being afraid of land mines or serial killers. But unfortunately there is a constellation of related disorders that coincide with it. Such as Maskohpbobia, Bombophobia and Murderphobia that are in no way a response to anything Islamic, but do coincide with some behaviors that are occasionally spotted around people with veils, beards and holy books that tell them to slay the infidels.

    What can we as a modern society do about this tragic situation? As tolerant people we must endeavor to accommodate these conditions. And as our Muslim neighbors are known to be fantastically tolerant people, as the diverse religious composition of their countries testifies, we are doubtlessly sure that they will eager accommodate these fears with their usual tolerance.

    That will require them to make some slight adjustments to their daily routines. The veil must go. We recognize that this is a deep custom of religious significance and helps remind the Muslim male that his wife is his property, while reassuring him that absolutely no other man has looked at his property during the day, but this irrational fear we have of masks must be accommodated. It is the only tolerant thing to do.

    Also the killing really must stop. We recognize that killing people is often mentioned in the Quran and that Jihad is a vital religious duty for Muslims — and we would never dream of impeding their spiritual journey, even if it's on a plane with bombs in their underwear, but our nervous condition requires that we must ask them to carry out this religious obligation of theirs at home.

    We are not particularly concerned whether they practice their Jihad in Saudi Arabia or Pakistani or whatever other of their countries they like. But due to our condition of Murderphobia, we ask that they not practice it here.

    It is a lot to ask. We know. But we really must insist on being accommodated. And as a tolerant religion, the Islamic community, with its storied heritage and its water clocks, will no doubt be happy to comply.

    Also the taxis for the blind thing. You hate dogs, we hate dogs too. Everyone hates dogs. I have no idea why anyone keeps them around. Certainly the blind don't need them. Mostly they're just lazy. If they really wanted to see, they would. Besides if they're blind, it's probably because Allah punished them for not getting up to prayers on time or walking a step ahead of a Muslim — but still they have this irrational fear of not being able to get around, especially when your wonderful tolerant religion has monopolized so many of the cabs. So be good chaps and help them out.

    Then there's the cartoons. Obviously you have the right to take an ax to anyone who draws squiggly lines that look like jyllandsposten_virgins2 your prophet — even though you don't know what your prophet looked like since no one is allowed to draw him. And none of us would dare interfere with this binding religious duty, just as we wouldn't dream of looking twice at an angry bearded man wearing a heavy vest in warm weather. Still some of our infidel cartoonists have this irrational fear of being murdered. Which naturally has nothing to do with your threats and plans to murder them. But still it would calm their irrational phobia if you wouldn't murder them. Thanks, that's a good Ahmed.

    Finally the rapes. We don't like it. I don't want to be rude here, but we have a custom about these things. Our peculiar custom is that women are human beings with equal rights, who can't just be seized and assaulted because they're not wearing your favored full body headbags. I know this is natural in your culture and being a wholly tolerant person, who actually has an advanced degree in Tolerance, I would never object. But still it might be best if you accommodated our peculiar little culture and refrained from doing that sort of thing.

    I don't know about you, but I for one am glad that we had this little chat. With such dialogue, many misunderstandings can be cleared up. For instance, many Muslims think that we are Islamophobic. Not at all. We are only Bomb, Murder, Rape and many other kinds of Phobic. Also we don't like masks in public, especially when they're worn by people with a history of triggering our Bomb and Murderphobias.

    We appreciate your tolerance. Now please take that damn mask off. Our phobias are acting up again.

    Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Doris Wise Montrose, July 12, 2011.

    This is by Omri Ceren and it appeared on Commentary Magazine
    http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/ 07/11/engaging-hezbollah-or-hezbollah-controlled- leb(anon/) and is archived on the Mere Rhetoric website.

    Omri Ceren is the founder and editor of Mere Rhetoric, a political blog dealing with the geopolitical, cultural, and economic dimensions of the global war between the West and political Islam. He's been published in international outlets such as the Jerusalem Post, and his investigative journalism has been cited by the Associated Press, Reuters, CNN, the BBC, the New York Times, and other outlets. He is a Ph.D. candidate studying rhetoric, argumentation, and media at the University of Southern California's Annenberg School of Communication.


    There are a number of signs the Obama White House is ready to establish something more than a modus vivendi with Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon. From siding with Beirut over Jerusalem regarding maritime resources to providing weapons to the Hezbollah-infiltrated LAF on the thinnest pretexts, the administration seems intent on "biting the bullet," "living in the real world," "negotiating with enemies not friends," or whatever leaden catchphrase we're using this week to justify bringing into the tent fanatics who want to destroy us. That's the White House's prerogative, obviously. Article II Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution has consequences, no matter what Democratic Jews who fixate on domestic issues would like to believe.

    But let's all keep in mind what Hezbollah is, because there was a time when even the echo of something like national honor would have precluded sitting across the table from them or anyone who refused to repudiate them. We owe more than a few Hezbollah leaders death sentences, and we owe the organization itself nothing less than unremitting hostility until we or they lose (as the world's only hyperpower, in theory I like our odds). Instead the White House is actively searching for loopholes to maintain or enhance bilateral relations with Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon. So it's worth reviewing how in 1984 Hezbollah kidnapped CIA Lebanon Station Chief William Buckley as he was leaving his house in the morning. They tortured him continuously for 15 months, occasionally sending videos of him naked and screaming to U.S. bureaus and agencies in Europe, until his body gave out. In the meantime, Hezbollah used the information he provided to dismantle U.S. intelligence assets in the Levant:

    On Monday morning, May 7, 1984, the United States embassy in Athens received a video posted in the city... It showed William Buckley undergoing torture... The camera zoomed in and out of Buckley's nude and damaged body. He held before his genitalia a document marked "MOST SECRET"... Casey later remembered how "... They had done more than ruin his body. His eyes made it clear his mind had been played with. It was horrific, medieval and barbarous"... Buckley showed symptoms of being drugged; his eyes were dull and his lips slack. His gaze was of a person deprived of daylight for some time... Buckley had spent long periods being hooded. Buckley bore chafe marks on his wrists and neck suggesting he had been tethered with a rope or chain. A careful study of every inch of visible skin revealed puncture marks indicating he had been injected at various points.

    The second video arrived 23 days later. This time it was posted to the United States Embassy on Via Veneto in Rome... It revealed Buckley continued to be horrifically treated... Buckley's voice was slurred and his manner noticeably more egocentric as if not only the world beyond the camera, but his immediate surroundings, held increasingly less interest for him... His hands shook and his legs beat a tattoo on the floor as he mumbled pathetic pleas to be exchanged under a guarantee the United States would remove "all of its influences" from Lebanon and would persuade Israel to do the same...

    On Friday, October 26, 1984, 224 days since Buckley was kidnapped, a third video arrived at the CIA. The tape was even more harrowing. Buckley was close to a gibbering wretch. His words were often incoherent; he slobbered and drooled and, most unnerving of all, he would suddenly scream in terror, his eyes rolling helplessly and his body shaking. From time to time he held up documents, which had been in his burn-bag, to the camera. Then he delivered a pathetic defence of his captor's right to self-determination in Lebanon... William Buckley's kidnapping was into its second year by the spring of 1985. The CIA consensus was that he would be blindfolded and chained at the ankles and wrists and kept in a cell little bigger than a coffin.

    In 1988, a few years after Buckley's torture and murder, Hezbollah kidnapped U.S. Marine Colonel Rich Higgins. Higgins, who at the time was serving as a UN military observer, was tortured and eventually murdered. We know as much because two years later Hezbollah released a videotape of his torture-scarred body hung and dangling from the ceiling. Here's how U.S. diplomat Fred Hof described the blood debt to be paid by Hezbollah's current leadership, including Nasrallah, for Higgins:

    A friend of mine — Colonel Rich Higgins — was kidnapped by Hezbollah while he was serving as a UN military observer in Lebanon... he had been tortured and killed months before our efforts to free him finally ended. I am one of a small handful of Americans who knows the exact manner of Rich's death. If I were to describe it to you now — which I will not — I can guarantee that a significant number of people in this room would become physically ill. When my former business partner Rich Armitage described Hezbollah a few years ago as the "A-Team" of international terrorism and suggested that there was a "blood debt" to be paid, he was referring to a leadership cadre that is steeped in blood and brutality.

    And of course, there are the 63 people Hezbollah murdered when they bombed our Beirut embassy in 1982, the 241 Marines they killed in their barracks in 1983, and the 18 serviceman they killed near the Torrejon Air Force Base in 1984. These might all be water under the bridge to the reset-philic neophytes who inhabit the White House, but the Hezbollah leaders who committed these atrocities are very much aware of who is coming to whom asking for talks, and under the shadow of what crimes. Americans should be as well.

    Again, the President has the right to conduct foreign policy in whatever way he thinks will promote American national interests. But citizens have an obligation to ask when we lost hold of the idea that some enemies are actually enemies, and that obsequiously asking for their time is not a sign of foreign policy sophistication. Hezbollah has been murdering and torturing Americans for decades. With the possible exception of al Qaeda, and driven by their state sponsor Iran, there is no terrorist organization more thoroughly committed to undermining American interests globally. What is the White House possibly thinking?

    Doris Wise Montrose is with Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors. Contact her at doris@cjhsla.org.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Paul Lademain, July 12, 2011.

    We are the Secular Christians for Zion. We are appalled by your newspaper's smear campaign against Brigitte Gabriel and your denigration of her brave efforts to sound the alarm about radical Islam. Every decent American who witnessed the horrors of 9/11 knows what radical Islam stands for and learned from this event that radical Islam is a clear and present danger to Western Hemisphere nations in general and the US and Canada specifically.

    We know that certain Jews (not all, but some, such as the NIF-ers) have a knee-jerk reaction to anyone who feigns distress in terms of their religion and that such Jews feel obliged to embrace the the likes of Yasser Arafat who successfully pulled the wool over many a Jew's eye. Notice we said "the likes of" when describing arab terrorists such as this thankfully dead Egyptian terrorist. Arafat, together with Jimmy Carter, undermined the sovereign rights of Israel, used Jews to sully other Jews, and sowed conflict wherever they were allowed to meddle. And meddle and sow hatred they did by spelling much the same kind of lies that your newspaper recently did with respect to Ms. Gabriel.

    No, Mr. Silverman, a jihadist does not ooze with love for Jews like yourself but we have observed how a jihadist will gladly hold his nose in order to fraternize with Jews in order to bend them to his will. There is nothing more sly than the jihadist who approaches a Jew to ask for aid and comfort and nothing more ridiculous than the Jew who rushes to smother the jihadist with his Jewish Wonderfulness.

    Tennessee is a state that appears to be vastly impressed by the billions the arab oil states are willing to pour into its coffers, with leakage all around. But to accept money from the jihadi and Salafist camp is to accept an eventually fatal drink of sugary poison.

    We read the Koran, Mein Kampf, and Nasser's Red Book years ago and these books shaped our loathing of dictatorships such as those holding the reins in such Salafist states as befoul the middle east. Ms. Gabriel knows whereof she speaks when she warns against the radical Muslim. A sheltered Jew in Tennessee has no idea of what this brave woman has had to overcome and so he ought not to use the bully pulpit of his newspaper to serve the Islamic imperialists.

    You should be ashamed of yourself for engaging in such egregious tactics as those you purposed against Ms. Gabriel.

    We are the SC4Z and we support with the brave Patriots of Israel who stand as a boulder on the path of Islamic imperialism.

    Viva Brigitte Gabriel.

    Paul la Demain, SC4Z — Not Right. Not Left. Just 4 Justice 4 Israel. .

    Paul Lademain is a Secular Christian for Zion (SC4Z). Contact him by email at lademain@verizon.net

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Steven Shamrak, July 12, 2011.

    The IDF's Coordinator of Government Activities in Judea and Samaria, Major General Eitan Dangot, revealed last week that more than 60 rockets and mortar shells out of 460 rockets and mortar shells fired in the past year at the northern Negev from the Gaza Strip, were aimed directly at the land crossings from Israel into Gaza.

    He said that Israel has invested over 50 million shekels in renovating and increasing the capacity of the Kerem Shalom crossing, the crossing through which most of the goods enter Gaza. Among the measures taken were increasing the number of trucks that transport goods into the Gaza Strip, renovating the land crossings into Gaza and increasing the range of goods allowed into the Strip and approving extensive projects in Gaza funded by members of the international community.

    Major General Dangot further noted that Israel even regularly transfers luxuries into the Strip, including LCD screens, luxury cars such as Mercedes and Hyundai jeeps, modern refrigerators and whirlpool bathtubs. He emphasised that these goods enter Gaza daily and are not part of any special one-time deliveries. He added that Israel's policy towards Gaza 's population has led to an improvement in the Gaza Strip and has resulted in an increase in the living standards there.

    He added that evidence indicates an increase of 15% in GDP in the Gaza Strip, and an increase of approximately 11% in GDP per capita. (Could you name a country, through the history of humanity, which would treat its enemy with such consideration but got hate, rocket attacks and suicide bombers in return?)

    'Ugly Nazi' (aka U.N.) Never Miss Opportunity to Criticise Israel

    A new United Nations report that has been distributed to members of the Security Council strongly criticises Israel for using live fire against unarmed demonstrators who in May, tried to breach its border fence with Lebanon. The United Nations has been a frequent battleground for Israel .

    Food for Thought by Steven Shamrak

    Why don't Anti-Israel bigots and self-hating Jews take 'flytilla' to Syria in support of the 'democratic' movement there? Why is the only democracy in the Midle East constantly targeted by international bigotry? Is it because it is the Jewish state, which they want to destroy?

    Flotilla Financed by Terrorists' Funds

    IDF military intelligence has uncovered evidence that shows that flotilla organisers have received significant amounts of funding from groups that support Hamas and other terrorist groups.

    Barack is Eager to Arm the Enemy

    Ehud Barak and Avigdor Lieberman are at odds over whether Israel should renew her defence exports to Turkey which have come to a standstill. Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman is preventing the sale of Israeli military platforms to Turkey, which the Defense Ministry is trying to advance as part of a bid to repair ties between Jerusalem and Ankara. (Turkey is moving toward Islamic statehood and the enemy of Israel. Barak is blind as usual!)

    Residual Effect of 'Democracy'

    Saboteurs again blew up a pipeline carrying gas from Egypt to Israel and Jordan on Monday, forcing a shutdown in the flow of gas.

    Israel is Good Investment

    $400 million worth of bonds had been sold to one of the unnamed largest sovereign funds in Asia. Industry insiders noted that China's sovereign investment fund, CIC, and Singapore 's sovereign investment fund, Temasek, were among the largest sovereign funds in Asia.

    Turkey is not a Friend

    Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan applied the brakes to the process of reconciliation with Israel when he learned on Wednesday, July 6, that the UN inquiry commission into last year's Turkish-led flotilla had ruled Israel's naval blockade on Gaza legal. (Symptomatically, international media again was not interested in promoting the news which has vindicated Israel!)

    Obama's Flip-Flop Policies

    President Barack Obama has offered to leave 10,000 troops in Iraq next year despite his pledge that all US forces would be withdrawn by the end of 2011. (When the President of the most powerful country says one thing and does another, nobody trusts his word — It might be "OK" for election time, but not when you are in office!)

    Reconciliation is a Farce

    Hamas blamed PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas for being "not serious" about implementing the reconciliation agreement between Fatah and Hamas. Hamas' leader in Gaza, Salah Bardawil, said that Abbas and PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad continue to arrest Hamas activists in Judea and Samaria and continue their security cooperation with Israel. (The reconciliation game is played in order to keep the status quo and avoid direct negotiation with Israel.)

    Quote of the Week:

    "The real opponents of Zionism can never be placated by any diplomatic formula: their objection to the Jews is that the Jews exist, and in this particular case, they exist in Palestine ." — Chaim Weizmann, Israel's the first President.

    Visiting Talmud and Byzantine Era Synagogues

    Hundreds of Jews were allowed to visit an ancient synagogue from the Byzantine era on Friday morning. The tour, coordinated with the IDF, took place as part of a program to commemorate young hikers slain by Palestinian Authority terrorists. The more than 200 hikers first visited the ancient synagogue of Samoa and the nearby village of Anin, mentioned in the book of Joshua. They held morning prayer services in the synagogue. They then continued on to a second ancient synagogue, this one located in the village of Susiya, a town dating back to Talmud times that in recent decades has enjoyed renewed Jewish settlement.

    The Biblical Land Titles by Steven Shamrak

    Christianity and Islam insist they have inherited the Jewish tradition and believe in the monotheistic G-d. All three religions include Torah (Old Testament) as the written word of G-d. It is considered a great sin to disobey or falsify the words of the Almighty! I would like to present for your perusal two biblical land titles:

    "Sarah died in Kiriatharba (Hebron)..." "Avraham weighed-out for Ephron the silver that he spoke of in the hearing of the sons of Cheis, four hundred silver shekel, negotiable currency." "This became Avraham's (possession) through a purchase before the eyes of the sons of Cheis..." (Genesis 23:2, 16, 18)

    Abraham made sure the purchase of land at Hebron was recorded as a legal sale, not as a gift.

    "Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, to you have I given it, as I spoke unto Moses. From the wilderness, and this Lebanon, even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and unto the Great Sea (Mediterranean sea) toward the going down of the sun, shall be your border." (Joshua1:3, 4; Re: Deuteronomy 11:24)

    "This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Judah according to their families." "Ashdod, its towns and its villages; Gaza, its towns and its villages; unto the Brook of Egypt, the Great Sea being the border thereof." (Joshua15:20, 47)

    Religious people believe that all that is written in the Torah by G-d is purposeful. Therefore, if you are a Jew, Christian or Muslim you must accept the will of G-d and recognize the right of the Jewish people to live on all the land given to them by G-d. Otherwise, you have been living a life of self-deception or hypocrisy.

    Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement and currently lives in Melbourne, Australia. He publishes internet editorial letters on the Arab-Israeli conflict. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak.e@gmail.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Albert Wendroff, July 11, 2011.

    This speech was given by Ben Brafman recently on Yom Hashoah.



















































    BUT YOU MUST!!!!














    Contact Albert Wendroff by email at wendroff39@yahoo.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, July 11, 2011.

    American news personality Glenn Beck told the Knesset Aliyah and Absorption Committee Monday that the Biblical Esther and Ruth have guided him as he stands up for Israel.

    "Esther knew she had no choice but to come out and speak," he said, referring to Queen Esther's risking her life to save the Persian Jewish community. "I knew I had no choice but to speak the truth. I came here in 2002, looked for the truth, and when I got home, I received my first death threat."

    Speaking of Ruth, a non-Jew who followed her Jewish mother-in-law Naomi from Moab to Israel and then converted, Beck said, "Your people are my people and I will go where you will go. Your G-d is my G-d. I invite the People of Israel to stand with your G-d."

    "We have to believe in common decency, link arms, and G-d will do the rest."

    Beck spoke at the committee hearing at the invitation of committee chairman Danny Danon (Likud) and Shas Knesset Member Nissim Ze'ev. The panel wanted to hear Beck's views on fighting the worldwide campaign trying to make Israel seem illegitimate.

    "The world has changed. People now have power," Beck told the committee. He explained that the Internet has allowed people to be more accessible to the truth, which he said has been censored by mainstream media.

    "The world is being changed by a few guys in the basement writing on the Internet. The truth will set you free. Forget the [mainstream] media," Beck added.

    "Rulers want to control, and that is where there is trouble," Beck told the committee and guests. "I am truly humbled and disturbed by what people say to me on the street... People sincerely thank me for saying the truth. What is disturbing is that if a guy just gets on television or radio and says that [and gets thanked for telling the truth], Israel and Western life is danger."

    Before delivering his message, Beck thanked Dr. Joseph Prager, Dr. Paul Brody and Odeleya Jacobs, three Zionist figures in the United States, for their support.

    He said that the demands of the Palestinian Authority are another excuse for the world to continue a centuries-old campaign of anti-Semitism, which he said is "going through the roof. The United States has an economic problem and the Jews will be blamed."

    The Arab-Israeli conflict is "about the end of West and the destruction of Israel," according to Beck.

    He asked Israelis to join him in Jerusalem on August 24 when he is scheduled to hold a "Restoring Courage" rally, similar to the Restoring Honor rally in Washington last year. The rally next month will be views worldwide on at least 700 remote viewing stations.

    Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu is a writer for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Tezzo, Sergio HaDaR, July 11, 2011.

    This is from Jihad Watch
    http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/uk-over- 22000-girls-at-risk-of-being-taken-abroad-for- female-genital-mutilation.html


    The politically correct article of faith included at the end of this report is that "there are no legitimate cultural or religious reasons." As for its prevalence in the Muslim world, authorities may find false reassurance in the notion that FGM is not spelled out as an obligation in the Qur'an. But Islam is not a sola scriptura faith. The practice of Islam also depends on traditions handed down in ahadith and biographies of Muhammad, and schools of jurisprudence. That, for example, is why Sunnis and Shi'ites can read the same Qur'an and differ on so much.

    With FGM, one finds that the Shafi'i school of Islamic jurisprudence holds FGM to be obligatory, with other schools also failing to condemn it: "Hanbalis hold that circumcision of women is not obligatory but sunna [commendable according to the word or example of Muhammad, but not obligatory], while Hanafis consider it a mere courtesy to the husband." — Umdat al-Salik e4.3.

    Muhammad himself did not condemn it: "A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said to her: Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband." — Sunan Abu Dawud 41.5251

    Therefore, as long as practitioners do not consider their version "severe," or as long as they can imagine a way it could be worse, they have an excuse to continue mutilating girls. It should be clear that, wishful thinking aside, the practice does have something very much to do with Islam. "UK Girls At Risk of Mutilation Abroad," by Jessica Elgot for the Independent, July 4:

    Thousands of British schoolgirls as young as eight face being taken abroad this summer to have their genitals mutilated and stitched up to preserve "purity".

    A campaign by the Metropolitan Police and Foreign Office will suggest that more than 22,000 girls under the age of 15 risk being taken abroad by their family for "cutting", based on data from The International Centre for Reproductive Health.

    Campaigners say the victims are being failed by a lack of awareness from teachers and neighbours.

    Girls may have their outer genitals removed and stitched up to preserve their virginity, with an opening as small as a matchstick head, meaning it can take up to 20 minutes to urinate.

    The World Health Organization recognizes four categories of FGM. What is described in the preceding paragraph is Type III of the four: excision and infibulation. This practice is common in Somalia. In Egypt and other areas, clitoridectomy — the severing or excision of the clitoris — is standard practice, as described in Umdat al-Salik, a Shafi'i jurisprudence manual certified as "reliable" by al-Azhar University in Cairo. As many as 130 million women worldwide have suffered one form or another of FGM.

    Female genital mutilation (FGM) is most common in Muslim areas, from North Africa to the Far East, although Koranic scholars have proclaimed it incompatible with Islam. Engaging or assisting in it carries a prison sentence of up to 14 years in the UK.

    There have been some recent rulings against FGM. Enforcement, and repudiating centuries-old Islamic traditions, is where the greater challenge lies.

    A specialist with the Metropolitan Police, Detective Sergeant Vicky Washington, said: "There are no legitimate cultural or religious reasons for FGM — it's child abuse."

    Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Raymond Ibrahim, July 11, 2011.

    In a world paralyzed by political correctness and warped philosophies, attention is proving to be one of the greatest enemies of Islamist encroachment.

    Consider the difference between pre- and post-September 11: A decade after the 9/11 jihad got the West's attention, many people — perhaps not unlike yourself — have become aware of Islam and its doctrines, especially the "anti-infidel" ones, certainly many more people than before Sept. 11, 2001.

    The result is that today, even nonviolent effronteries like the Ground Zero mosque — called by Newt Gingrich "an Islamist cultural-political offensive designed to undermine and destroy our civilization" — create a stir, though they once would have passed unnoticed.

    Here's another, more personal, anecdote of how attention can backfire on Islamists (complete details here). After Seattle's Everett Community College invited me to come and speak on May 5, one Jaffar ("Jeff") Siddiqui, who has a long history of trying to quash free speech on Islam, began pressuring the college to cancel my talk, including by writing a letter — titled "Don't Invite Bigots!" — to its president.

    Likewise, the director of the radical Council on American-Islamic Relations Washington chapter, Arsalan Bukhari, asserted that "[i]nviting Raymond Ibrahim to give an alternative viewpoint on being Muslim is like inviting the KKK to speak about African American history."

    Then, the day before my talk, this same Bukhari wrote an op-ed in Seattle's Herald arguing that "by inviting a known conspiracy theorist with a history of making unfounded claims about Islam, the college is doing a disservice to the public and risks creating a hostile learning environment for its students." Also the day before the talk CAIR's main headquarters issued a particularly nasty and accusatory press release that culminated as follows:

    By issuing Mr. Ibrahim an invitation, giving him an audience, and in any way providing him a platform, Everett Community College is complicit in inflaming a tinder box of hate and violence against Islam and Muslims, and is abusing its public trust as a federally funded educational institution. Therefore, we urge the College to cease its promotion of bigotry and hate speech by rescinding its invitation to Raymond Ibrahim to speak on campus.

    To CAIR'S chagrin, the college refused to cave in, pointing out that my appearance was "consistent with the belief that students be exposed to a variety of views."

    Now, consider how CAIR caused an otherwise local event to snowball into something detrimental to its cause — simply by complaining about it, that is, drawing attention to it:

    For starters, much media attention followed — attention that would never have been if not for CAIR's howling — including a featured story for MSNBC on whether Islam is a "Terror threat or peaceful religion?" The over 3,000 comments on this report alone reveal that, as "leftist" as MSNBC is, many of its readers are aware of the Islamist agenda; others wonder why CAIR is so scared of free speech.

    Moreover, that CAIR cried wolf yet again — and was ignored — not only embarrassed but publicly belittled CAIR's influence. A community college defying Islamist threats and intimidation must surely shine as an example for other institutions that may actually be interested in promoting diversity of views — institutions that would never have even known that bullies like CAIR could be so easily ignored, if not for all the attention CAIR itself created.

    In short, politically active Islamists must walk a fine line, must choose their fights carefully: if they scream bloody murder to silence free speech — scream "racist," "hater," "Islamophobe" — they risk bringing unwanted attention that backfires on them; yet if they sit back and do nothing, they risk having more and more people speak up and expose them.

    Either way — whether CAIR or its un-stifled opponents make the noise — the result is the same: Americans, wondering why Islam is always in the spotlight, begin inquiring; some become acquainted with reality, and go on to discuss it with friends and family.

    The cycle of slow but steady awareness that first began when 9/11 got the world's attention continues.

    Contact Raymond Ibrahim at list@pundicity.com This article appeared July 8, 2011 in Pajamas Media
    http://www.raymondibrahim.com/9903/ is-simple-attention-the-islamists-greatest-enemy

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Barbara Sommer, July 11, 2011.

    This was posted by Tammi Rossman-Benjamin and appeared in
    http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/ LettertoUCPresidentYudof and in Facebook
    http://apps.facebook.com/causes/posts/801219 Rossman-Benjamin is a Lecturer in Hebrew and Jewish Studies at UC Santa Cruz.


    Action Needed: Please sign both:

    http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/ LettertoUCPresidentYudof

    http://www.causes.com/causes/615378-stop-the- harassment-and-intimidation-of-jewish-students- at-the-university-of-california?m=892208b3

    "What I thought would be an interesting and informative course exploring the two sides of a very complex conflict, turned out to be so outrageously one-sided and anti-Israel as to make a mockery of the educational system. The professor used her lectures, classroom discussions and course readings as a vehicle for her own personal vendetta against the state of Israel, against Zionism, against Israelis and against Jews....Many times when I would confront the professor in class or on the class website, she would argue with me so harshly that I felt personally assaulted by her."

    A Jewish student at UC Santa Cruz wrote these words after taking a class on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. This student was not alone in her feelings. Since 2001, numerous Jewish students on my campus have told me that they felt emotionally and intellectually intimidated and harassed by professors who use their classroom as a bully pulpit for bashing the Jewish State and its supporters.

    Some Jewish students have complained to me about feeling traumatized by departmentally-sponsored events, such as an academic conference on Zionism held at UCSC in 2007. Sponsored and funded by 8 departments, each of the conference's speakers concluded that Zionism was an illegitimate ideology and Israel a racist state, each professed to being an anti-Israel activist, and one speaker even urged members of the audience to join in the movement demanding that businesses and universities divest from Israel.

    Still other Jewish students have reported feeling emotional distress when one or more of the residential colleges, with which each UCSC student affiliates, helped organize virulently anti-Israel events. Students view their College as the core of their university experience and see its participation in the demonization of the Jewish State as a betrayal of a fundamental trust. One Jewish student described her College's sponsorship of a virulently anti-Israel event as "more than hurtful, it's absolutely unsettling."

    Finally, almost all of these students have complained that there is a double standard at UCSC — that no other ethnic group has been subjected by faculty or administrators to such hostile and demonizing criticism. And to make matters worse, when Jewish students sought help from campus administrators about these matters, the administrators refused to acknowledge there was a problem and were insensitive to the students' concerns. For example in January 2009, 90 Jewish students signed a petition to the administrators of Cowell College urging them to remove the College's name from an event the College was sponsoring, which the students felt certain would demonize the Jewish State and its supporters and be discriminatory against them as Jews. The Cowell administrators flatly refused and even asserted that the College "had every right" to put on such an event. Students reported to me that they believed the administration would have responded to them quite differently if they had been African American or Latino.

    As part of a small faculty group on campus, I have participated in efforts to bring these problems to the attention of numerous UCSC administrators and faculty members since 2001. In every instance, the administration and faculty either ignored the problem or denied its existence. So in June 2009, I decided it was time to turn to the federal government. I filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights (OCR), alleging that anti-Israel discourse and behavior in classrooms and at university-sponsored events was tantamount to institutional discrimination against Jewish students, and had resulted in their intellectual and emotional harassment and intimidation. Besides providing extensive documentation of the longstanding and pervasive nature of the problem, I also chronicled the failure of numerous efforts that I and others had made to encourage UCSC faculty and administrators to acknowledge and address the problem. (To download a copy of the complaint:
    http://www.zoa.org/media/user/images/ Benjamin-Complaint-6-25-09.pdf).

    In March 2011, the OCR determined that my complaint had merit and opened a federal investigation.

    Nevertheless, the problem persists. Just last month Jewish students reported being upset by a "Teach-in on Islamophobia," which UCSC faculty members and research groups had helped to organize, co-sponsor, and promote. The speakers at the event, who were well-known for their anti-Israel animus and activism, blamed Israel and the Jews for Islamophobia and used language that demonized the Jewish state and its supporters. A large table set up at the event contained materials advertising and promoting the U.S. Boat to Gaza, one of the boats participating in the "Freedom Flotilla II," whose organizers have ties to terrorist organizations including Hamas. Sitting at the table and handing out a personal letter encouraging students to endorse the U.S. Boat to Gaza was a UCSC administrator responsible for the educational programming at Cowell College, who acknowledged that she was to be a passenger on the boat. This event, which bore official university sponsorship as well as the significant participation of at least one faculty member and one administrator, can not help but contribute to the hostile environment for Jewish students at UCSC.

    Although the problem is severe at UCSC, it is not unique to that campus. Jewish students on several UC campuses have reported feeling intimidated and harassed by faculty who use the classroom and conference hall to promote anti-Israel agendas, and by administrators who dismiss their concerns and hold these students to a discriminatory double standard. Unfortunately, it is almost impossible for students to challenge professors or administrators without risking harm to their academic careers and future.

    The Jewish students at the University of California need your help!

    Please show these students that the Jewish Community cares about them.

    Please help us let UC President Mark Yudof know that the Jewish Community stands strongly united on this issue and will not back down until the necessary steps are taken to protect Jewish students on UC campuses.

    If you haven't already done so, please sign the Amcha Initiative's letter to President Yudof and encourage your family and friends to sign it as well:

    http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/ LettertoUCPresidentYudof

    You can also join our Facebook Cause ("Stop the Harassment and Intimidation of Jewish Students at the University of California") for updates about the letter and to read or report experiences of anti-Semitism on UC campuses or attempts to combat it, and invite others to do the same:

    http://www.causes.com/causes/615378-stop-the- harassment-and-intimidation-of-jewish-students- at-the-university-of-california?m=892208b3

    Thank you!

    Tammi Rossman-Benjamin
    Lecturer, University of California at Santa Cruz

    Contact Barbara Sommer at lsommer_1_98@yahoo.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Laura, July 11, 2011.

    This was written by Steven Emerson and comes from IPT News
    http://www.investigativeproject.org/3031/ hizb-ut-tahrir-islam-has-replaced-communism-as


    A radical Islamist group which claims a presence in nearly 50 countries is so confident it can help establish a global Muslim government — or caliphate — that it distributed a draft constitution during a recent conference outside of Chicago.

    It calls for the death penalty for apostates and for creating a government department dedicated to jihad.

    The latest Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT) gathering drew more than 300 people to a DoubleTree Hotel ballroom June 26.

    HT is an international movement to establish a global Islamic state, or caliphate (Khilafah). Although it is officially committed to nonviolence, HT preaches a virulent brand of hatred for the United States, and for Western democracy in general. Its alumni include such violent Islamists as Khaiid Sheikh Mohammad, mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, and the late Iraqi jihadist Abu Musab Zarqawi. Hizb ut-Tahrir has been described as a "conveyor belt" of terror.

    At the conference, activists portrayed Islam as the only real force in the world standing up to the United States and the West. With Soviet communism gone, the West is now confronted with the threat posed by Islam, said a speaker identified as Reza Imam. He has served as a spokesman for the organization.

    "And they see the return of Islam," he warned. "And this, brothers and sisters, is the shaking [of] the thrones." Islam's foes "see the coming revival of Islam, and they know what that means and they know what it means for their policies," Imam said.

    At the conference, HT activists distributed a brochure detailing how the Muslim state would be governed. The document is "to be studied by Muslims while they are working to establish the Islamic State that will carry the Islamic da'wah (proselytizing) to the world," it says. The document would govern "the Islamic State in the Islamic world" and does not target individual countries.

    The pamphlet, entitled "Khilafah State Structure: Introduction to the Constitution," contains charts illustrating how a caliphate government would function along with a draft constitution.

    "Those that are guilty of apostasy (murtad) from Islam are to be executed according to the rule of apostasy, provided they have themselves renounced Islam," says Article 7. Moreover, "if they are born as non-Muslims, i. e., if they are the sons of apostates, then they are treated as non-Muslims according to their status as being either polytheists (mushriks) or People of the Book."

    The caliphate government would establish an "Internal Affairs Department" which would include a division of "Apostasy."

    Waging jihad would be a top priority for the government. The caliphate cabinet includes a senior-level "Private Secretary" for jihad. The "Military Department" — which appears to be a cabinet-level agency — would be headed by a "Field Marshall," who appoints a "Director of Jihad," his second in command. Included within the Treasury department would be something called a "Department of Jihad."

    The Treasury would be divided into two divisions: one handling revenue, which includes a "War booties Agency," and the other covering expenditures, which includes both a "Dept. of Jihad" and a "Director of Jihad Office" on its organizational chart.

    Articles 51 through 55 of the draft constitution would establish an "Amir (military leader) of Jihad" who would supervise holy war-related activities in government agencies.

    The group believes that this year's revolutions in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Yemen, Syria and other states offer Muslims an opportunity to throw off the shackles of Western colonialism.

    "No longer are the Muslims afraid of these regimes who have oppressed the masses," reads a flyer for the conference that appears on the HT website. "Will the Muslim world rid itself of Western colonial interference? Will these events lead to the application of Islam and the re-establishment of the Khilafah (caliphate) State?"

    Arab rulers are pretending to be legitimate leaders just as Soviet Communist Party leaders used to do, Imam told the conference.

    For the West, the "front line" in the struggle against Islam is ensuring that the "tyrants" in the Muslim world remain in power, Imam said. Speakers cited Syrian dictator Bashar Assad. Libya's Muammar Gaddafi, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, and Pakistan Army Chief of Staff Ashfaq Parvez Kayani as examples of Muslim leaders who must be replaced.

    The Pakistani Army announced last month that it arrested Brigadier Ali Khan and four majors in an investigation of Hizb ut-Tahrir's infiltration of the military there. Khan, assigned to Army General Headquarters in Rawalpindi, is the most senior Pakistani military officer known to have been arrested for alleged involvement with radical groups since 9/11.

    While Hizb ut-Tahrir has struggled to win followers in the United States, its name has come up in connection with several recent terror-related arrests.

    Farooque Ahmed, 34, was arrested last October and charged with plotting to blow up Washington, D.C. metro stops and a D.C. hotel frequented by members of the military. Authorities found Hizb ut-Tahrir literature when they searched Ahmed's suburban Virginia home. In April, he pled guilty to terror-related charges and was sentenced to 23 years in prison.

    Antonio Martinez, a 21-year-old Muslim convert who also goes by the name of Muhammad Hussain, was arrested in December and charged with plotting to blow up an Army recruiting center near Baltimore. He reportedly followed the teachings of Omar Bakri Muhammad, a Muslim Brotherhood member who founded HT in England.

    At Hizb ut-Tahrir America's June 26 conference, speakers attacked President Obama as an enemy of Muslims. "Obama visits the Middle East and our [Muslim] public rulers rush to shake his bloody hands. They send up their armies to dance for him," one speaker said. "They roll out red carpets to welcome the butcher of Iraq."

    Under the caliphate, Muslims would not be forced to live "under what 'Sheikh Obama' or Assad or Erdogan believed" but under the rule of Islam, a speaker identified as Abu Atallah declared.

    Middle Eastern leaders "and their masters in the West" have been "shaken to the core," said Reza Imam, who pointed to statements by former President George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld warning of the dangers posed by the establishment of a caliphate.

    "They see their hard work being undone," he said. "It's like a dreaded, fearful occurrence for them — that Muslims want to unite and live under Islam."

    "It's criminal to them," Imam continued. "And this is why their thrones are shaken. They're terrorized by this — simply that Muslims want to obey Allah."

    HT seeks to re-establish the caliphate that had existed during the Ottoman Empire, abolished by Turkish leader Kemal Ataturk in 1924. Once it is in place, "our problems would disappear and the forces of Satan would be pushed back," Abu Atallah said. Once the caliphate is established, the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem "would be taken back from the Crusaders (Israel)," Atallah said. Asked whether Sunni/Shiite animosity would be an obstacle to establishing a caliphate, another speaker dismissed the intra-Muslim rivalry dating back more than 13 centuries as "something the West has instilled in us."

    Audience members responded enthusiastically to the attacks on the United States and quoted writings from columnist Patrick Buchanan portraying Islam as ascendant and the West in decline, interrupting speakers time and again with shouts of "Takbir" and "Allahu Akbar." The speakers responded by joining the chants themselves.

    Because of today's revolutions in the Arab world, the West "is trembling with fear — as it should be," one speaker said. "Bullets were no match for the ummah's (Muslim nation's) power."

    Contact Laura at LEL817@yahoo.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Dan Friedman, July 10, 2011.

    This was written by Dr. Udi Lebel, a senior political sence lecturer at the Ariel University Center of Samaria. It appeared in www.ynetnews.com and is archived at
    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340, L-4092952,00.html. It is called "In praise of rightist Israel". It is good news, unless you're a "Reform" or a liberal Jew, which are too often one and the same. If you do fit the description, the attached has your spiritual failure and political isolation written all over it. Israel and the Jewish community that gave Obama 80% of its vote, and rallied around Tony Kushner, are parting ways. Israel is leaving them in the dust.

    To give credit where it's due, liberal "intellectuals" like nominal Jews Thomas Friedman and Peter Beinhart must have seen this coming. The only explanation for their petulant attacks against Israel and their hysterical rants exhorting Pharaoh Obama to whip Israel harder is an overwhelming inner rage provoked by a Jewish a nation with the gall to reject their "advice" — and is now clearly better off without it.

    But it's too late for the Jewish Left, as well as their farbissen (bitter, sullen) cohorts running the "organizations" and the rabbis and rabbettes preaching the liberal gospel in their "temples." They placed big bets on bile, egotism and distortions — anything except love of The Land — and came up craps. So in desperation, the spiteful unJews thought to punish Israel by distancing themselves from Zion. But as we see history rapidly unfolding, Zion is growing stronger and "more Jewish" while The Land distances itself from them. df]

    Op-ed: Israelis becoming more Jewish and hawkish, thus boosting our negotiating positions


    A poll showing the strengthening of the "rightist-haredim" bloc was published here last weekend. According to the poll, under any circumstances we shall see the Likud leader elected for prime minister, and he would be able to choose a centrist or rightist coalition without having to contend with a hostile Leftist parliament. These figures are not unique or incidental.

    Several processes are slowly making Israel's Jewish society more conservative. This is not just a result of demography, which is working in favor of the haredim and traditionalist Jews and against the seculars. We are dealing with a plethora of cultural tendencies that have nothing to do with births.

    The Jewish bookshelf is sweeping many groups and is turning into an element that holds ideological, not only cultural, influence on those joining the trend. The "Jewish new age era," a sort of counter-reaction to the "candle era" of the peace children, is lifting geographical boundaries.

    Samaria is suddenly turning into a site that belongs to "every Jew." Workshops and trips there constitute the settlers' "quiet revolution." Even celebrities who "discovered" the synagogue at the heart of Tel Aviv are starting to arrive.

    Meanwhile, the Russian and Ethiopian communities, as well as residents of the periphery, are mostly holding clear hawking views, despairing over the chance to see peace from the Palestinians, and are eager to see us using our power and producing deterrence. Territorial concessions are not perceived as a move that would affect the end of the conflict.

    Message to Palestinians

    Similar phenomena are taking place among some groups within Israel's leftist camp; the moderate Left, known as "activist" in the past, which lives in "border areas." The Gaza-region kibbutzim, which in the past granted the leftist Meretz party many Knesset seats, are showing ongoing support for Lieberman's positions ever since the current government's establishment. No less surprising: Even among these leftists, a majority characterizes the settlement enterprise as Zionism in every way.

    Meanwhile, Meretz and Labor, which produced "Oslo," are turning into niche parties. Kadima, which is led by people formerly associated with the Right, is the only dovish element with aspirations to take power.

    Jewish perception and heritage are penetrating civics studies and the military and national service. The education minister is bringing awareness of Hebron to Tel Aviv. Moreover, members of the religious Zionist community are increasingly active in academia and in the film industry; they produce culture and convey their messages.

    Israelis are becoming more spiritual. And no, this is not the spirituality associated with the flower children. It is the kind of spiritually associated with Rabbi Kook. It comes with love for the land and great belief in the ban on renouncing it.

    These socio-political developments do not only bear domestic effects on Israel's society. This process has strategic implications vis-á-vis the Palestinians. Until now, such trends in the Palestinian theater became a diplomatic consideration for Israelis: If you don't sign a peace deal with the PLO, you'll get Hamas. If you don't secure an agreement with the Fayyad government, you'll have to contend with Islamist radicals.

    Well, we now have a parallel message we can start to convey to the Palestinian leadership: Israeli society is undergoing a process of "reinforcement." — it has become more Jewish, more hawkish and more rightist. If you don't sign an agreement with Israel today, while recognizing it as the Jewish People's state, you will have to deal with the future Israel: One that will only sign a deal with you if you recognize the gravesite of Rachel the Matriarch and mark the death of our holy mother every year.

    Contact Dan Friedman by email at topcopy@mindspring.com.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 10, 2011.

    The efforts by radical "activists," mostly out of Europe, to fly into Ben Gurion and cause a ruckus has been largely a failure.

    At least in part, this is because Israel has not been working alone. Last week Israel provided airlines in key European nations with the names of persons known to be provocateurs, and there was subsequent cooperation in preventing them from boarding planes to Israel.

    This is the information that I have:

    According to the JPost, 200 people were denied permission to board planes to Israel. The "activists" are saying it was roughly double that.

    As of last night, 124 individuals who had made it into Israel's airport were being held for deportation; this morning — after extensive questioning — four of these, two Dutch and two German, were released and permitted into Israel.

    There may yet be trouble with some of those being held, if they refuse to board the planes back to where they came from: The Netherlands, France, Belgium, Spain, Britain, Ireland and the US. (As you'll see below, it's not altogether certain that the provocateurs are in all cases actually from the countries that were their points of departure.)

    Israeli immigration officials will be discussing the situation with the airlines concerned. Those airlines that have cooperated with Israeli requests for assistance include: Air France, Alitalia, Austrian Airlines, Lufthansa, Malev, and Easy Jet.


    Some 50 to 100 persons made it through Israeli passport control and are in PA-controlled areas now. They say they are planning protest events: starting at the Aida refugee camps north of Bethlehem today and ending in Jerusalem on Friday.

    Village Protest (Reuters)

    But as of yesterday, according to a YNet report, there was a protest in the Arab village of Nabi Saleh, near Ramallah, in which some of these "activists" participated. (Picture below shows Nabi Saleh protesters, but I am unable to determine if any of those photographed were "activists" from abroad.)

    Protesters clashed with security forces and threw rocks at IDF soldiers. The protest is against the "occupation," and Israel's refusal to acknowledge the "right of return."


    This Flytilla event has held an added fascination for me because my e-mail was picked up by the PR people for this gambit, so that for several days pro-Flytilla material was flooding my in-box. These messages contained all that might have been expected:

    Plans were being shared, so that I was able to read, for example, that such and such, who couldn't get on a plane in France, was going to go to Belgium and try again. I have seen declarations of intention on the part of those arrested in Ben Gurion airport not to sign Israeli papers that would permit immediate deportation. And ludicrous charges of severe mistreatment of those arrested (while I am aware of how careful Israeli officials are being with regard to proper procedures and the law). Those who were taken into custody in Israel are said to have been "kidnapped;" Israel is referred to as the "apartheid regime," while their people are called "human rights activists."

    Of course there were denials that the visitors had any intentions of causing disruption, as all they wanted to do is visit quietly with Palestinian families. The lie has already been put to this by what happened yesterday at Nabi Saleh, and it's just the beginning of the week.


    See Barry Rubin on the way in which the NYTimes misrepresented the Flytilla:
    http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/2011/07/10/ new-york-times-bites-israel-by-lying-about-the-flytilla/

    After explaining how the Times twisted the story, Rubin wrote:

    "If you don't understand how an organ like the New York Times has gone from being a liberal-oriented but professional and responsible newspaper into a disgraceful propaganda sheet, it is impossible to comprehend what has gone wrong in America."


    Returning to the Flotilla issue — actually, the first Flotilla of a year ago, this May:

    The UN's Palmer Commission — delegated by Ban Ki-Moon to investigate the "Mavi Marmara" incident, in which Turkish members of the terrorist IHH were killed after they attacked IDF soldiers who boarded their ship — has completed its report. However, it will not be published until July 27th, in order to give Israel and Turkey time for reconciliation talks.

    What the Commission — headed by New Zealand Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer — has done is unofficially release its findings to Israel and Turkey. These findings have in turn have been leaked. According to various sources, the Commission has concluded that:

    [] The Gaza Blockade is legal, and that in line with various treaties, Israel has the right to stop vessels even outside its territorial waters if the vessels intended destination is easily ascertained. It apparently upholds the legality and validity of a sea blockade on a territory.

    [] The use of force by Israel on the Mavi Marmara was regrettable but did not merit an apology considering the extenuating factors. That said, excessive force was likely used.

    [] Israel should however in a show of good faith set up a fund to donate to a humanitarian or related charitable cause. This because Israeli actions were 'lawful but disproportionate.'

    [] Turkey is castigated for not stopping the Mavi Marmara, and for its links with the IHH.

    [] The Turkish commission that investigated the matter was not staffed by experts, was biased — heavily influenced by domestic politics.

    [] Palmer himself — an expert in maritime law — apparently endorsed the Israeli Turkel Commission almost in its entirety, calling it "professional, independent and unbiased."


    This represents a huge victory for Israel and demonstrates again that we are not alone within the international community.

    As to those reconciliation talks, I wouldn't hold out much hope. The Turks are demanding an apology from Israel as well as compensation to the families of the nine people killed.

    The Israeli government has said it will not apologize, but would be willing to pay compensation as long as it was structured in a way that did not permit future claims — already too much conciliation in my book, but not sufficient for Turkey.


    Let's end this with some great satire. Caroline Glick's Latma has done it again. This time the Audacity of Dopes band sings "Guns, guns, guns, please don't take Gaza's hobby away."
    http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=Y5CsGViY5JQ&feature=youtu.be

    Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner18@gmail.com and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Barbara Taverna, July 10, 2011.

    This appeared yesterday on Ynet News
    (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/ 0,7340,L-4093281,00.html). Noam Barkan and Matan Tzuri contributed to the report.

    Despite recent calm, study finds third of all Qassam-ridden city's residents suffer from severe anxiety


    Shaked and Maor Harush, 11-year-old twins from Sderot, saw a Qassam rocket explode a few feet away for them, setting a car ablaze. Since then, fear has become an everyday presence in their lives.

    Shaked suffers from the worst of the trauma. She refuses to leave home without her parents. A slamming door makes her jump. Any conversation about the security situation is out of the question when Shaked is around, and her family knows to avoid words like Qassam and Color Red altogether.

    Shaked's young cousin, who lives in the center of the country, was not aware of this little detail. While the two were playing in the yard recently, he yelled out "Color Red, Color Red," sending Shaked running into the house. She locked herself in her room and could not stop crying.

    "Her cousin didn't think of it, he didn't know, but Shaked took it hard," her father said. "She is in bad shape. She suffers from anxiety all the time."

    Shaked is not alone. According to a study conducted by Natal, a trauma center for victims of terror and war, 70% of the kids residing in the town that has been on the receiving end of thousands of rockets in recent years are suffering from at least one symptom of posttraumatic stress. A third of all Sderot's residents suffer from anxiety, and have trouble functioning normally.

    Qassam damage in Sderot in April (Photo: Ze'ev Trachtman)

    'Situation only getting worse'

    Maor Harush is doing better than his sister; he speaks about his anxieties. Shaked never does. She has been in therapy for three years, but it hasn't helped — the situation only seems to be getting worse.

    "We can't laugh about the situation, we can't talk about it," the twins' father said. "Most of the time she's at home, watching television. The television is her connection to the outside world."

    She doesn't visit her friends, her father said, and her school work has slipped; she suffers from attention disorders.

    According to the Natal report, 50% of Sderot's kids relive the trauma, and 41% suffer from over-excitation — they are constantly alert, ready for danger, and every little noise shakes them up. Twenty percent of the kids suffer from all the symptoms of posttraumatic stress, and 12% have severe trouble functioning.

    "They stop playing, stop being interested in their surroundings, detach themselves from their friends and school," explained Professor Marc Gelkopf, who heads the Natal research team. "One of our newest and most interesting findings is that there is a connection between the symptoms that the parents experience and the ones their children experience. It underlines the importance of family therapy."

    Rocket destroys house in Sderot, 2006 (Photo: Amir Cohen)

    The study, which followed 518 adult and 570 kids, showed that one in three residents suffers from the disorder, and that one in seven is having trouble functioning due to anxiety.

    "When we're talking about people suffering from posttraumatic stress, we're talking about people who wake up in the middle of the night because of nightmares," Gelkopf said. "People who are over alert... who are afraid to go far from their fortified rooms or visit places that remind them of the danger."

    Despite the recent calm, Natal has found that nearly 30% of the residents feel threatened. Another 23% take anti-depression or anxiety drugs, or use sleeping pills.

    'I'm not the mother I used to be' Esther Itiel, 56, has been living in Sderot for 30 years. She is another victim of posttraumatic stress.

    "Life in this town was beautiful before the Qassam fire started," she said. "Since then, there hasn't been one night when we could sleep normally. All aspects of life have been disrupted.

    "I managed to survive somehow for years, but when a Qassam fell a few meters near my house, I broke down," she said. "I took my daughters and moved to Givat Shmuel, leaving my husband and three other kids behind in Sderot."

    In the central town of Givat Shmuel, Itiel received therapy from Natal and the municipality, and graudally managed to regain some of her former self. She agreed to return to Sderot after a shelter was built in her house. Back at home, anxiety hit again.

    Qassam damage in Sderot in April 2010 (Photo: Ze'ev Trachtman)

    "Any noise from an ambulance, bus or plane makes me jump and triggers the anxiety," she said. "I can't listen to the news, this whole story about the fly-in made me anxious. I'm not happy, I don't laugh, I don't joke. I'm not the mother I used to be."

    These days, Itiel rarely leaves home. Sleep evades her. She showers only when there is someone else at home with her — and even then, she does it quickly.

    "I'm afraid that it will be like it was during the Qassam fire period," she said. "Then, when the Color Red alarm went off while I was in the shower, I would run to the shelter without clothes on. About a month ago, the alarm went off again. I heard planes flying by and I fainted. They had to take me to the hospital."

    'Road to recovery is long'

    Some 6,400 people who are suffering from posttraumatic stress are treated at the municipal mental health center in Sderot. Some 3,500 kids and 500 teachers and staff members get psychological treatment through the town's school system. The Resilience Center, which provides counseling, treats 400 people each year, most of them children and teenagers — and the waiting list for treatment is growing.

    "Especially during times of calm, people start feeling the tumult on the inside," said Hila Barzilay, who runs the Resilience Center. "(...) We get kids with serious motor function disorders, kids who weren't allowed to play outside in groups for years. Many residents' relationships have suffered. The situation causes critical damage to all aspects of their lives.

    "Parenthood here focuses on survival, not on empowerment," she said. "The teens are the worst off, because they were born into this reality."

    According to Barzilay, the road to recovery is still long. "The residents are resilient, and despite the harsh trauma, most of them function well," she said. "But the state must help the city rehabilitate, and rehabilitation takes time. There are people whose symptoms awaken years later, and no one can predict when they will erupt."

    Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, July 10, 2011.

    This article was written by Orli Azulai and it appeared in Yediot Achronot. It was originally published in Hebrew June 21, 2011. It may be reprinted with full attribution.


    The Pollard family members walked slowly on the grass of the cemetery, carrying the sealed coffin of Morris Pollard to his final resting place. Occasionally they raised their gazes to the gloomy skies that wept tears of rain, with their last hope gradually fading: perhaps the helicopter bringing Jonathan Pollard would appear at the very last moment so that he could say good-bye to his father forever.

    But the helicopter of the American Prison Authority did not appear, and the son of the deceased did not appear at the entrance gate of the cemetery to say the Mourner's Kaddish prayer at his father's grave.

    The mourning over the death of 95-year-old Morris Pollard was strained by a sense of frustration and uncertainty. The American government did not respond, neither positively or negatively, to the request of the Israeli Prime Minister or the appeals of the family members. No one knew if the prisoner would receive a tiny reprieve from prison to accompany his father on his final journey. It would have been his first and only furlough since Pollard was incarcerated 26 years ago. Alas, the government which refused to allow Jonathan to visit his dying father in his final days, did not grant him even this one last act of grace.

    A hundred relatives and friends congregated in the Jewish Orthodox Cemetery in the Mishawaka town in Indiana. They sadly recalled that ten years ago, when the mother Molly (Malka) Pollard was buried adjacent to the plot in which the father was interred, her son was not present: then, too. Jonathan Pollard's requests to say goodbye to his mother on her deathbed and to attend her funeral were turned down.

    When his father started to fail at the end of his life, Jonathan called him from prison. The dying Morris was not able to speak and his son Harvey placed the telephone near his ear so that he could hear Jonathan's parting words blessing his father, wishing him a peaceful easy transition, and requesting of him, "When you see Mom in Heaven, please kiss her for me and tell her that I love her and miss her."

    During the funeral, Pollard the prisoner remained incarcerated in Butner, North Carolina, 1,200 kilometers away. His sister Carol mentioned him in the eulogy she made at the gravesite, "Until his very last day on earth, our father agonized over the fact that he was not able to bring about Jonathan's release." Only a few days before his death, Morris Pollard told his family members that he couldn't sleep at nights, troubled by thoughts about the miscarriage of justice visited upon his son.

    The funeral service was supposed to begin at ten am, but a torrential downpour caused a half-hour delay. Some viewed it as a sign from the Heavens: They hoped it meant that Pollard was on his way from prison and the delay would allow him to arrive on time. But this did not happen. "This is gross insensitivity of the American government," was voiced by many of the participants at the funeral. "They simply ignored our requests. They ignored us and turned their backs on us."

    Morris Pollard was interred next to his wife, Molly (Malka). After she passed away, Morris had his name engraved next to hers on the joint marble tombstone in Hebrew and English. "This is one of the hardest days in Jonathan's life," said one of the relatives. "Not only was he not allowed to come to the gravesite, he was not given the opportunity to even momentarily reunite with his father and close the circle. According to what I heard, Jonathan sat in his room all day where he prayed and meditated, waiting impatiently for his wife to arrive, refusing to talk about the pain."

    Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com and visit their website:

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Paul Rotenberg, July 10, 2011.

    This was written by David Frum and it appeared yesterday in the National Post (Canada).
    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/07/ 09/david-frum-how-israeli-lawyers-stopped- the-second-flotilla/


    Israel has deployed a powerful new strategy against the latest would-be Gaza flotilla activists: Bore them to death.

    For three weeks, the activists aboard the lead flotilla boat, an old freighter renamed the "Tahrir," have languished in port on the Greek island of Crete.

    Greek law is very precise: Before a boat can leave port, its paperwork must be in order.

    Curiously enough, militant terrorist groups such as Hamas — whose front organizations in London organized the flotilla — tend not to be very good at paperwork. By contrast, the Israeli lawyers filing applications in the Greek courts are very good at spotting mistakes. Following Greek law, the Cretan harbor authorities have again and again refused the Tahrir permission to depart.

    On July 3, the flotilla activists lost patience. They disregarded local rules, and steamed out of port without the necessary permissions. A Greek coast guard vessel intercepted the Tahrir and forced it back to port.

    The next day, the activists were brought to court on charges of leaving port without a permit and obstructing the coast guard in the course of its duties. (Two of the activists had descended from the Tahrir in kayaks to interpose themselves between the coast guard vessel and the freighter.)

    A Greek court fined the activists 80 euros each and sentenced them to a month in jail — suspended. No drama. No martyrdom. Just another round of visits to another set of clerks' offices. And of course — more forms to fill out.

    There is something almost exquisite about the justice here. The flotilla has been organized by London-based pro-Hamas front groups. As a terrorist organization, Hamas of course rejects the very idea of a society based on law. What more appropriate fate, then, for supporters of this Hamas project than to be tangled forever in legalities?

    Only one boat of all the flotilla vessels has managed to depart Greece: a Gilligan's Island-style motor yacht with nine activists aboard. Israeli vessels should be able to manage it without difficulty.

    On Thursday, an attempted "flytilla" was defeated when 200 would-be protesters arrived at Paris airport to board flights to Israel. Lufthansa, Malev, Alitalia and other airlines regretfully informed the protesters that their names appeared on a list of persons who would be denied entry to Israel — and who would therefore have to be returned home at the airlines' own expense. The protesters had to do their picketing in Paris instead, denouncing Charles de Gaulle-Roissy as "Israeli occupied territory" — quite a funny idea when you think about it.

    The political context has shifted abruptly against the flotilla organizers: The Hamas role in organizing the flotillas has become harder to ignore — indeed, Hamas has ceased even to deny it.

    Few European governments wish to act as Hamas' powder monkey. Even Turkey — which last year looked the other way as violent men assembled aboard the Mavi Marmara en route to Israel — has redirected its policy. Turkey has accepted the UN report that confirms that Israel acted lawfully in stopping the 2010 flotilla attempt. The two countries are now jointly working to craft a statement that, according to one witty observer, "will sound like an apology in Turkish, but not in Hebrew."

    Public opinion is turning, too. Flotilla organizers allege that Israel is impoverishing Gaza with a blockade that denies the population the necessities of life. Last year, some international media organizations accepted that false claim. But in the year since, there has been increasing reportage of the facts of life in Gaza: the bustling marketplaces, the new hotels and shopping malls. (As a YouTube video comments about one new mall: "Gazans were forced to search desperately for sales and specials.") The escalators in those malls and hotels were imported. From Israel. Some blockade!

    European governments are fighting a war in Libya. They see the Muslim Brotherhood advancing toward power in Egypt. They are confronted by horrifying repression by the Hamas-allied Assad regime in Syria. This cannot seem to anyone like a moment to empower Hamas.

    On the other hand, few European governments wish to take direct action against Hamas. Too dangerous. So Hamas continues to raise money in Europe, to make propaganda, to recruit supporters — and to organize flotillas.

    But it's one thing to organize a flotilla. Another to set sail.

    A classic joke describes the perfect Jewish telegram: "Start worrying now, letter to follow." It's never safe to quit worrying about Israel. But this summer, at least, it looks as if at least some of the usual worries have been offset by some good news — and smart lawyering.

    Paul Rotenberg lives in Toronto, Canada. Contact him at pdr@rogers.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Barbara Ginsberg, July 10, 2011.

    If interested in buying Rabbi Meir Kahane writings in a new 7-volume collection, write to Levi Chazan at: Levi1@hotmail.com For people outside of Israel "Beyond Words" in soft cover is in the printing process and will shortly be sold at Amazon.com.

    If you did not receive this article personally and would like to, contact me at: BarbaraAndChaim@gmail.com

    To view previoulsy sent Rabbi Kahane articles go to:


    As I write these words the Israeli government is in the process of considering exchanging 400 terrorists for four American hostages, perhaps other foreigners — French, German, and other such worthies — and the fig leaf, an Israeli soldier(s) held by the terrorists and other Arab gangsters. Whether they ultimately give in to US pressure and go through with a repeat of the 1985 obscenity when they freed 1, 150 assorted terrorist murderers, the fact remains that there would be no such problem today if Israel would have followed the Jewish decree and carried out the death penalty against every terrorist they captured.

    Why do they not? That is part of a greater problem, a diseased western mind that has gripped Israel and which includes refusal by the governments of Israel to take the obvious step — removal from the state of Arab menace, the fifth column and internal subversion. It is a disease that causes frightened, timid, gentilized Hebrews stricken with the suicidal curse of false and perverted democracy, to hobble and destroy their own security forces and their effectiveness as the one wall of defense against the Arab flood that threatens to sweep over and drown us.

    The newspaper Yediot Aharonot carried what it described as "a monologue with a high-ranking army officer" after the infamous Kahan report that ripped apart the IDF after the massacre of "Palestinians" by Christian Moslems in Beirut. The story itself was headlined: "They Have Turned The Army Into A Punching Bag..."

    The gist of the story was the bitter complaint of the army officer concerning the efforts to impose perverted "morality" on the security forces. Let every Jew — liberal or normal read, weep, and think:

    "I know how many efforts we dedicated (in Lebanon) to keep from harming civilians. I state categorically that the army had tens of casualties, if not more, only because of the order not to harm civilians. In general, during a war, one first softens a target with artillery in order to prevent casualties among your soldiers. Here, they forbade us lest we hit civilians. From the time we entered Lebanon we adhered strictly to orders not to fire on targets where there was a civilian center. We would hand out flyers, warn them by loudspeakers. If not for that, we could have advanced more swiftly to crush the terrorist strongholds and most important, saved ourselves tens of our own casualties."

    "The terrorist knew this and they entered civilian centers. We could do nothing because of the stubborn orders of Raful (Chief of Staff Rafael Eytan) and General Amos Yaron not to fire even when we were positive that terrorists had penetrated a certain area. Where is the red line that determines for a command which is more important — to preserve the lives of his soldiers or to save civilians, part of whom are aiding the terrorists? It appears to me that the Israeli commanders long since crossed this red line in favor of preserving the lives of foreign civilians even at the cost of casualties among our soldiers."

    A poignant and bitter indictment by an army commander — hobbled by civilian politicians, who in turn are the target of leftist propaganda in Israel's sick new media that never let up for a day in their self-hating campaign to force Israel to eat of their own vomit of guilt. They are accessories to murder; they are the direct cause of an insane, almost unbelievable policy of military madness, that has led to the death — the murder — of tens of Jewish soldiers.

    The irony is that Chief of Staff Eytan, roundly condemned by leftists as a brutal "hawk" also collapsed before the Hellenist onslaught and gave "stubborn orders" not to shell terrorist bases in civilian areas lest we, heaven forbid, cause Arab civilian casualties. Far better that our own boys die...

    Too few recall Eytan's statement (Sept. 25, 1982) after the Sabra and Shatila massacre: "We feel the pain of our enemies. Our moral values arouse within us a feeling of responsibility and determination not to ignore the slaughter that happened in our midst. There is no doubt that the tragedy has cast a shadow over our accomplishments because of the obligation that is instilled in our people for the values of human life."

    What an incredible moral position! Had the Chief-of-Staff of the United States army made a similar statement concerning the bombing of German civilians in World War II, no doubt all ethical Jews would have cheered...

    To feel the pain of our enemies, the "Palestinians": who live and dream of the day they will destroy Israel? From whose ranks come forth the PLO? Who support, nurture and give of their children to terrorists who murder us? We feel their pain? Then we are mad.

    And the arch-villain of the Kahane commission, Ariel Sharon, himself wrote the following nonsense in an Op-ed piece in the N.Y. Times (August 14, 1982):

    "No army in the history of modern warfare ever took such pains to prevent civilian casualties as did the Israel Defense Forces. Indeed, most of the losses suffered — some 350 dead and 2,000 wounded (as of the date of the article — MK) — resulted from the rule we imposed on ourselves to avoid harming non-combatants. In Hebrew we call this tohar ha'neshek, the moral conduct of war (literally purity of arms' — MK) We are proud our soldiers followed this Jewish (sic!) doctrine scrupulously, despite the heavy cost we incurred in warming civilians we were coming, in attacking only predetermined PLO positions and in bombing and shelling buildings only when they served as PLO strongholds."

    What sanctimonious fraud and sacrifice of our soldiers. The murder of Israeli soldiers cried out to the heavens and justifies any soldier's refusal to serve in an army whose commanders and leaders do not place his life over those of enemy civilians. The life of one Jewish soldier was worth more than those of all the Arabs — soldiers, terrorists or civilians — in Lebanon and how one longs for the days of normalcy of Word War II when normal gentiles of the Untied States and British Air Forces, knowing that their own people would die unless the Germans back and morale were shattered, bombed German cities — with their civilians — mercilessly. They knew that they were fighting a war. A war against forces which, if they won, would plunge them and the world into a nightmare. The gentiles never invented a madness called "purity of arms." Arms are not pure. Arms are used to kill the enemy — or do not go to war in the first place.

    "When you go to war against your enemies" (Deuteronomy20). What is meant by your enemies? (After all, one does not go to war against his friends!). Said the Holy One, Blessed be He: Go against them as enemies; just as they do not have mercy upon you, have no mercy on them." (Midrash Tanhuma, Shoftim 15).

    Contact Barbara Ginsberg at barbaraandchaim@gmail.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, July 10, 2011.

    This was written by Barak Ravid and it appeared July 7, 2011 in Haaretz.
    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/ u-s-backs-lebanon-on-maritime-border-dispute- with-israel-1.372377


    In the next few days Israel will submit to the United Nations its take on where its maritime economic border with Lebanon should be, as the two countries scramble for gas reserves estimated to be worth billions of dollars.

    Israel's position is due to be approved by the cabinet on Sunday; Jerusalem argues that Lebanon's proposal includes major areas belonging to Israel.

    U.S. backs Lebanon on maritime border dispute with Israel Amid rising tensions over gas reserves, Israel to submit proposal to UN on where maritime economic border with Lebanon should be over next few days; U.S. endorsed Lebanon's proposal submitted to UN in August.

    In the next few days Israel will submit to the United Nations its take on where its maritime economic border with Lebanon should be, as the two countries scramble for gas reserves estimated to be worth billions of dollars.

    Israel's position is due to be approved by the cabinet on Sunday; Jerusalem argues that Lebanon's proposal includes major areas belonging to Israel.

    Last August, Lebanon submitted to the United Nations its version of where the maritime border should be — the exclusive economic zone. In November, it submitted its version of its western border, with Cyprus.

    The Lebanese proposal does not include the large Tamar and Leviathan gas prospects, operated by Delek Energy and U.S. company Noble Energy. But the National Infrastructure Ministry found that the proposal contains reserves with a potential value in the billions of dollars.

    The Lebanese also sent their version to the United States, which conducted an expert review and endorsed the document. A senior Foreign Ministry official told Haaretz that the American diplomat in charge of the issue was Frederic Hof, who was responsible for Syria and Lebanon under the former U.S. special envoy to the Middle East, George Mitchell. Hof has kept the Israel-Lebanon brief despite Mitchell's resignation two months ago.

    In April, Hof began shuttling between Beirut and Jerusalem. A senior administration official told Haaretz that Hof's main goal was to prevent the border from becoming a source of tension between Israel and Lebanon, which could give Hezbollah a pretext for targeting Israeli gas installations.

    Beyond the political and diplomatic interest, the United States has an economic interest in keeping the parties calm, not least because American companies are involved in the search for gas an oil in Israel, Lebanon and Cyprus. Hof told his counterparts in Jerusalem that Israel should cooperate with setting the maritime border to prevent the creation of an "underwater Shaba Farms," referring to a contested area on the Israel-Lebanon border.

    The Foreign Ministry official said Israel had asked the Americans to relay a warning to Lebanon on the matter. Foreign Ministry officials told Hof that Israel would not allow a provocation on the matter or an attack on Israeli gas installations. They said Israel would consider such an attack an attack on its sovereign territory and would retaliate "strongly" against Lebanon.

    Hof responded by suggesting that Israel submit to the United Nations its own outlook on the border and try to launch a dialogue. Hof asked Israel not to turn the issue into a political spat but to see it as an economic and technical matter that could benefit all parties.

    Israel rejected indirect talks via the United Nations, calling on Lebanon to begin negotiations on all border issues, not just the maritime border. The foreign and infrastructure ministries believe that Lebanon is claiming vast offshore territories that belong to Israel under international law.

    "It's important to provide the UN with the Israeli version of the border as soon as possible, to react to Lebanon's unilateral move," a senior Foreign Ministry official told Haaretz. "Not responding could be interpreted as a tacit agreement. We must act fast to ensure Israel's economic rights in these areas."

    Israel has become even more concerned about the positioning of the border after learning recently that a Norwegian company has begun searching for gas in the area. The search is due to be completed within months, and the Lebanese government hopes to use the findings to license international energy companies to probe areas that could be in Israel's exclusive economic zone.

    Gabrielle Goldwater is a Member of "Funding for Peace Coalition" [FPC] (http://eufunding.org.uk)
    http://eufunding.org.uk/FPC2004Report.pdf She lives in Switzerland. Contact her at gabriellegoldwater@gmail.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, July 10, 2011.

    This was written by Yaakov Katz and it appeared July 8, 2011 in the Jerusalem Post
    http://www.jpost.com/International/ Article.aspx?id=228506

    If approved, the deal would increase the number of Abrams tanks in Egypt from around 1,000 to 1,130; Congress must approve deal.


    The US signaled last week that it plans to continue business as usual when it comes to arms sales to the Egyptian military, despite the recent revolution in Egypt and continued anti-government demonstrations there.

    On Friday, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible sale of 125 M1A1 Abrams tank to Egypt — the first large arms deal since Hosni Mubarak was ousted from power in February — including associated weapons, equipment, parts, training and logistical support at an estimated cost of just over $1.3 billion.

    If approved, the deal would increase the number of Abrams tanks in Egypt from around 1,000 to 1,130.

    According to the notification to Congress, Egypt would receive 125 tanks, parts of which would be produced in Egypt, as well as M256 Armament Systems, M2 .50 caliber machine guns, 7.62mm machine guns, spare parts, maintenance, support equipment, personnel training and other related elements of logistics and program support.

    The Pentagon told Congress — which has 30 days to object to the deal — that the sale of the tanks would "contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a friendly country that has been and continues to be an important force for political stability and economic progress in the Middle East."

    The sale would "provide Egypt with a modern tank fleet, enhancing its capability to meet current and future threats," the Pentagon further stated.

    News of the deal raised eyebrows in Israel, which has carefully watched arms sales to Egypt ever since Cairo began to receive annual military aid of some $1.3b. from the United States following the peace treaty the two neighbors signed in 1979.

    Israel has in the past lobbied Congress against specific arms deals to Egypt. In the past few years, Egypt has purchased 24 F-16 fighter jets, Hellfire missiles, Harpoon antiship missiles, TOW anti-tank missiles, Chinook transport helicopters and Apache attack helicopters.

    Israel is concerned that Egypt might take a radical shift in elections expected to be held in the fall and might once again turn into an enemy state, depending on the identity of the new president and the number of seats the Muslim Brotherhood wins in parliament.

    The IDF has taken a cautious approach to the developments in Egypt, with Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz choosing a long-term plan formulated by the Planning Directorate, under which the army would grow over a number of years and not launch an immediate procurement plan to counter the possible threat evolving in the South.

    Gantz's thinking is based on the assumption that any war with Egypt would not take place any time soon, and that an immediate procurement plan announced by the IDF could be detrimental and increase tension between the countries.

    Gabrielle Goldwater is a Member of "Funding for Peace Coalition" [FPC] (http://eufunding.org.uk)
    http://eufunding.org.uk/FPC2004Report.pdf She lives in Switzerland. Contact her at gabriellegoldwater@gmail.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Fred Reifenberg, July 10, 2011.

    Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il Go to http://reifyreadying.blogspot.com/ to see more of his graphic art.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Nurit Greenger, July 9, 2011.

    We, the people in the Western world, have been at world war for a long time and no one admits it! This war, Islam against the West, is escalating, daily. Our politicians and the media sway the attention from the main core issue, this war, by discussing all but the war in which we are embroiled. We hear discussions about the economy, the royal weddings in Britain and Monaco, about Flotillas and Flytillas-Airtillas attacking Israel and the evil Israel represents. All are important or interesting issues, but where is the admission, we are at war.

    Today, on Fox News, the world had come to a halt; nothing else happed anywhere but the visit to Southern California of the newly wedded British Prince William and his newly crowned Princess Catherine. It is all about where they went, what they have done, how much money people paid to rub shoulders with them, to see them from afar, to play Polo with the Prince, and the prices are astronomical, all for charity. It is important, it make a pleasant story about pretty people. But do we know what took place today in Iraq and Afghanistan? Are we winning these wars there, or we are not?

    Why isn't the public being told the naked truth about the war the United States is fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, or, how badly the USA influence in the world has been diminished? Or, how alone we, Americans, stand as the entire of Europe has lost this war already. And the others, the Chinese and the Russians, are fueling that war, regardless of the obvious consequences they will also face.

    It is a war of the rogue nations of Islam, Islamists, radical Moslems and the like, all in the name of their religion Islam. It is a war carried out by people who are stuck on backwards and heinous ideology, a Fascist ideology full of hatred and barbarism against the democracies in Europe, the Republic USA and any other nation that is non-Moslem. It is a war the West fears; a war that, for unbeknown reasons, the West will not allow itself to win, it must and it can.

    We have been at this World War 3 for a long time, only that no one has the guts to state this clearly and aloud.

    This war is WWIII, Islam against the rest of whoever stands in its way to dominate the entire world, as its inventor Mohamed and the Qur'an instruct the Moslem believer to do. A war against whoever stands up to Islam. It is a slow war; it is as much with conventional weapons but not only. It is inflicted by Moslems using political and media lethal tools readily available to serve them and the worst weapon of all is the inaptness of the non-Moslem governments and the foolishness of the masses in the street Islam is exploiting and subverting in its favor to win its war and to finally dominate the world.

    One of Islam's best weapons to advance its war is the free world's democratic systems and laws they are using and abusing in their favor and against the people living in those free worlds democracies, that Islam see to be its enemy. In wars democracy and niceties do not work; you either win the war or lose it, nothing in between.

    This war began slowly, right after WWII came to an end. It began with the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel, which the Moslem-Arab nations will not accept it has the right to exist. Thus, they aggressively attacked the nascent Jewish state with the hope to annihilate it before it had a moment of liberty to breath. And this war also began with the world's unrestrained, unsustainable and growing, need for Arab-Moslem oil, which trumps all sense of reality. It is Islam's invasion of the West, assisted by its powerful tool, the black oil, it offers, with much control, to supply in order to meet the industrial world's voracious needs for it. And in return, the West, Russia and China and the entire non-Moslem world puts in the hands of the Arab-Moslem black oil owners tyrannical regimes the obnoxious financial power of the shiny America Dollar, European Union Euro, Russian Ruble, Japanese Yen or Chinese Yuan, they then use to fight the Buyers of their oil.

    When, in 1973, Israel had finally won the You Kippur War, one more war the aggressive Arab countries waged against the Jewish State, the non Moslem world should have woken up. It was then, the Arab-Moslems oil producing nations, led by Saudi Arabia, decided to punish the United States for assisting Israel in its dire times. The Arab-Moslem oil producing nations cut their oil production and supply to the West, to its minimum, and with that they proved to the rest of the industrial world how fast they can bring it to paralysis. They have put the world against the wall and brought the world to panic from which it should have woken up, there and then, but it did not. The free world has kept on playing into its enemy's hands, instead of ending its critical dependency on it, as it could and as it should have done.

    Over the years, the Arab Nations conflict with the State of Israel and the world's demand for Arab-Moslem oil have become the two main weapons Islam is using to fight the West. Adding to it is the Moslem immigration to Europe and the USA and their unwillingness to assimilate, rather to dominate, thus turning large parts of Europe into Eurabia and some America cities into Moslem dominated, subjugated by the growing influence of Islamic Sharia law. More so, the tentacles of Islam has reached deep into Western society through organizations such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) that, under that radar, supports terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas or even the Boyz in the moslemhood-theMoslem Brotherhood.

    Just over ten years ago, apart from Israel, that had already battled and is still battling its wars with Islam, none of us, in the Western-free world, knew about jihad or homicide bombing threats. We did not hear the term "Allahu Akbar", or thought a 9/11 carnage could happen. We never knew how much hate the Moslem world has for the West. Our Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison did when they, in the late 18th and early 19th centuries fought the Barbary wars. Those wars were the result of the Barbary Countries Moslem pirates attacking British and other European ships, along the North Coast of Africa, since the 1600s.

    We never saw Moslem women wearing hijabs or burkas in our streets and Moslem Sharia law was not in our daily discussion as it is today and a major worry that its goal is to subvert our Constitution. All this new jargon means that Islam is gaining power everywhere. It is gaining its power by intimidation, making the West cater to them by using our laws against us, expecting us to bend backwards and submit to Islamofascism. This means our submission to Islam is under way.

    Islam is now everywhere, in our government, our court system, the military, the police and on the street and it is only going from strength to strength.

    Islam is a political ideology its mentality is strength through much patience the West does not have. It means doing whatever is needed to win. And they are winning.

    Their goal is to tear and topple the American Constitution and every other free nation's charter, law and constitution.

    Since 1979 the Islamic Republic of Iran is at war with the United States and no one in the American Republic has the courage to face it and play the part. The Iranian radical Moslem regime funds terror all over the world, in which many Americans died and are dying and no one stands to this rouge regime. Iran has deep influence in South America and with its strong collaborating with Venezuela, a country situated a hop from the USA Southern border, it can cause another Cuba like missiles' crisis in the near future. Iran also funds and supplies lethal arsenal to Hezbollah and Hamas that are on a readiness mode to attack Israel at any moment notice.

    And so, through American foolishness, its enemy's leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the current President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, is allowed to enter USA soil and gets the honor to speak in the cesspit United Nation conferences, while the USA is the main funder of this very questionable organization. From the U.N stage this evil man is allowed to call for the annihilation of the Jewish State, Israel, ridicule the United States and support bias policy, anti-Semitism and terror against the world. And what the West does, it allows Iran to go with its threats against the free-non-Moslem world on an almost apologetically mode.

    The West keeps on playing into the hands of Islam as if nothing of what is mentioned above is happening.

    Islam has declared a war on the West many year ago, a war the West refuses to admit to or fire even one effective bullet back.

    What are we to do?

    We have to digress from our freedom of religion laws and values. We have to admit that Islam is not a religion; it is a fanatic, political ideology set out to destroy all that is non-Moslem and dominate the entire world.

    We must have the courage to ban Islam as it is now practiced. This includes that not one more minaret will be erected. More so, the Government must establish laws under which is can closely and overtly monitor all practices existing in the mosques. One subversive practice, as they are taking place today, one statement against the USA, the mosque is to be closed for ever.

    That means that conversion to Islam is also against the law. One wants to convert to Islam, one can do it outside USA borders to never return.

    We are to tell all Moslems, you want to practice Sharia law, you go back to your hellhole countries, not here in the USA. Any court, law enforcement agency or a bureaucrat applying even a gesture of Islamic Sharia law is to be investigated for treason.

    The US ends supplying arms to any Moslem country. One does not need to fuel the Moslems war against us.

    It is now the time to end the EPA establishment and begin drilling everywhere in the free world where there is oil — and there is oil in abundance in many places — thus bring the end of our need for Moslem-Arab oil.

    We need to ban all donations to our learning institutes that has Islam seal attached to it. They are using their influence in our education institutes against us.

    We begin there and we go on, applying other restrictions as needed and as we go along, this with one goal in mind, to stifle and chock to death Islam's influence in the West. Once we have cleansed ourselves of Islam influence from within, we can fight them outside our borders, fight them, not fear them, with one intention in mind to win and bring Islam, as it is now known and practiced, to its keens, to a total non-existence stance.

    Islam was founded in 622 CE, it has 1389 years of redemption to go through to convince any person they are ready for peaceful coexistence with all other non-Moslems.

    I do not like what Islam represents and to keep our world fee and safe, the reader should join me in my sentiments. If not, the next generation born in the free world will no longer be free. It will either be forced to convert to Islam, or be a dhimmi, a non Moslem subject of a state governed in accordance with Sharia Law, or they will be dead.

    Islam is at war with us, the non-Moslems; whether we choose to engage in it or not is a choice we need to make. In a war there is a winner and a loser. If we are not going to win, then we are going to lose. Losing a war is being subjugated to the enemy and that is no fun at all. Ask Germany and Japan how that feels. Ask the Arabs who, thank G-d, have lost all their wars they waged against the Jewish State of Israel. Happy talks about democracy, about a "Palestine", and 'Arab Springtime' will definitely not obscure the fact that there is no middle ground. Either us or them!

    While the world refuses to see the truth, while the world is asleep, Islam is taking over.

    Just like in Israel the Arabs, holding Israeli citizenship have never integrated, so are the Moslems in Europe or the USA have not integrated; they are not for integration, rather they are for domination.

    I have said my word.


    Geert Wilders Muslims will make Europe disintegrate
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v= uEY7UQEzmVs&feature=related

    Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Fazal ur Rehman Afridi, July 9, 2011.

    [*] The ISI is Pakistan's Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence.



    November 26, 2008, the terrorists of Lashkar-e-Taiba, a group sponsored and trained by ISI of Pakistan entered a Synagogue in Mumbai and brutally murdered 6 American Jews including Chabad Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg and his wife Rivkah Holtzberg, in their Chabad House in Mumbai India. Two more rabbis, Rabbi Aryeh Leibish Teitelbau and Rabbi Ben Tzion Kruman and two Jewish woman, Yocheved Orpaz and Norma Shvartzblat Rabinovch were also murdered, leaving some thirteen orphans, of which the oldest is thirteen and the youngest a baby of only two months. The entire Jewish world was in shock over the horrific massacre of these six bold Jews who left the luxury of America to work for a great cause of helping humanity.

    In November, 2009, the relatives of those Jews killed in Mumbai, filled a lawsuit in Brooklyn, accusing ISI of aiding and abetting LeT in killing 166 people, including six American citizens. The court accepted the petition against the ISI chief for the agency's alleged involvement in the Mumbai attacks.

    November 2010, the US Federal Court issued summon to DG ISI Gen. Pasha and senior members of LeT for the alleged involvement in Mumbai carnage.

    As a result the relations between CIA and ISI has become tense.


    First attempt: ISI counterattack to pressure CIA by blocking NATO-Logistics for 11 days in October 2010. The excuse for this blockade was given as Drone attacks which kill innocent Pashtuns and violate the territorial integrity of Pakistan.

    Second attempt: December 13, 2010, Karim Khan a resident of North Waziristan was encouraged by ISI to register an FIR at a Police Station in Islamabad against the CIA country chief Jonathan Banks. Jonathan immediately leave Pakistan to avoid arrest.

    Third attempt: On January 27, 2011, Rymond Davis was arrested on the spot, immediately after killing two Pakistani ISI operatives in Lahore in day light.

    The competent police and independent Judiciary came to the rescue of the two innocent Pakistanis killed by Rymond Davis, an alleged CIA agent. The Establishment-fed Media immediately jumped into the arena to render its moral support to the police and newly independent Judiciary, by further sensationalizing these killings making it the issue of national pride. The so-called GHAIRAT BRIGADE (columnist and anchor persons of TV Channels), fed by the Establishment, make it an issue of life and death for the Pakistani nation. Anti-American sentiments were blown out of proportion. Some politicians sensing the anit-American mood of the Generals in Rawalpindi, also join the mob and start issuing anti-American and pro-establishment statements (I will not call it pro-Pakistan as our politicians have never been patriotic). General Kiyani was dubbed as the new Salahud din Ayyubi of Pakistan, who has embarked on the real crusade against the infidels like America. Impression was created in the media that our Establishment will never compromise on national security and will not release the killer of two Pakistani innocent civilians.


    On March 16, 2011, we were informed that Rymond Davis has been released and immediately shifted to Afghanistan in a special plane. The nation was informed that the dangerous spy and CIA agent has been released on the ground of QISAS & DIAT alter of the SHARIAH LAWS. The bewildered and betrayed media, the frustrated politicians and raped Judiciary was duly informed that the guardians of the Nation (Army) in the great national interest have released the CIA spy in accordance with the Shariah Laws of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (without taking the media, police, politicians and judiciary into confidence).


    The question arises, how can a culprit be released and get out of the country when he is on the Exit-control under orders from Superior courts of Pakistan and the Passport of the him is still in the custody of the Punjab Police? This was a real embarrassment (by Military) for Sharif brothers also who stood like a rock to persistant American pressure. The first Salahud Din Ayyubi of Pakistan, General Zia ul Haq and his religious pundits, the so-called custodians of Islam forgot to use these laws to save the life of a sitting Prime Minister and great leader like Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, who was hanged for the murder of Mahmood Raza Kasuri.


    News reports leaked to our media that Pakistan Army has forced the Americans to stop Drone attacks, reduce CIA personnel and stop further interference in the internal affairs of Pakistan proved wrong as indicated by the following reports:

    1. Thursday, 14 April, 2011, a US official said that the Central Intelligence Agency has no plans to suspend "operations" in Pakistan against terror suspects despite objections from leaders in Islamabad.

    2. "The government of President Asif Ali Zardari allowed the US to increase the number of drone strikes" Wall Street Journal.(April 14, 2011).

    3. On Thursday, March 17, 2011, next day after the release of Rymond Davis, a Drone strike kill 36 innocent Pashun tribesmen in North Waziristan Agency.

    4. America denied the reports that it is going to reduce its personel in Pakistan.

    The difference between USA and Pakistan is that Pakistan sold its daughter (Afia Siddiqui) for a few dollars while USA went to the extreme to protect its citizen (Raymond Davis). Pakistani official pile up mountains of lies and US speak truth or remain silent.


    April 11, 2011, General Ahmad Shuja Pasha, the head of the ISI, visit USA despite the fact that a case has been registered against him in the US Court. How can he visit USA and not being arrested by the Law enforcing agencies under orders from the courts? Is not it strange?


    A smoke-screen of lies and media hype was created to divert the attention of the public from the real issue. The main objective of all this exercise by Pakistani Military was to get diplomatic immunity to ISI Chief in the case registered in the US court. US has reported claimed sovereign immunity for the ISI Chief in the case. The case is hushed up under the carpet for the time being. Shuja Pasha visited US after strong assurance at the highest level from the US government not to be arrested. It is a typical example of how the Pakistani Military sell their mothers and sisters for few dollars. The blood of two innocent Pakistanis was sold to protect the skin a Punjabi Bastard in Uniform. It shows how the Pakistani Public is deceived and betrayed through lies and propaganda. The losers are both JEWS and Pashtuns (both are Sons of Israel), who will not get justice. Pashtuns will continue to suffer the Drone killing spree. As Pashtun, can we compromise on the dead bodies of our brothers, the way these Generals have done? Do the proud Pashtuns deserved to be ruled by the morally bankrupt elite who are ready to sell their mothers and sisters for a few dollars?

    Fazal ur Rehman Afridi is Director of the Khyber Institute for Strategic Studies (K-I-S-S), an authentic voice on recent developments in Pakistan & Afghanistan. He is a journalist and writer; he resides in Paris, France. This article is archived at
    http://balkanisationofpakistan.rsfblog.org/ archive/2011/04/17/spy-wars-of-cia-isi-on-the- dead-bodies-of-jews-pashtuns.html

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Ashraf Ramelah, July 9, 2011.

    On June 7, President Obama appointed Azizah al-Hibri, a Muslim professor and scholar, to the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. Obama has already taken al-Hibri's advice to stand up for Muslims against their American critics. According to Daniel Greenfield's article entitled "The Professor Who Sharia'ed Bill Clinton" (www.FrontPage Mag.com article of June 14), Al-Hibri called on Obama to do so at an ISNA meeting two months before her appointment, and she has spent a good deal of her time promoting Islamic law in the United States advocating that Sharia law is superior to American law.

    This April, preceding his appointment of Al-Hibri, President Obama set in motion the Interfaith and Community Service Challenge, an initiative to foster tolerance in religion on college campuses. He designated Eboo Patel, a Rhodes Scholar heading the Interfaith Youth Core, which is an organization that trains "interfaith fellows." Mr. Patel has been known to delegitimize fears of Islam, and he once said that the polarizing opinions held by Franklin Graham and Amjad Choudry were the same — nothing that a cup of coffee together wouldn't solve (Washington Post, Oct 4, 2010). Patel's Interfaith Youth Core recruits student participants in order to improve inter-religious relations on campus and alleviate potential religious conflict stemming from religious diversity.

    Apparently, Mr. Patel, who was named by Islamica Magazine as one of the ten young Muslim visionaries shaping Islam in America, and who served on the president's religion advisory council, has identified religious divides and discovered real solutions to this pervasive American problem. But shaping Islam in America is what the Interfaith Youth Core is really about.

    According to a recent New York Times article (June 13) by Laurie Goodstein, entitled "An Effort to Foster Tolerance in Religion," the business of interfaith relations has always been in the hands of "elders and clergy members" of the Christian faith who hosted dialogues and drafted documents "that had little impact at the grass roots." But no worries — Mr. Patel has a strategic plan, pro bono consultants, templates and spreadsheets, and a budget of millions. As a Muslim, he believes in religious tolerance, and according to Goodstein, he states that "Muslim radicals and extremists of other religions" are recruiting young people, and therefore religious tolerance (such as his own) should "enlist the youth."

    Students coming together to do good works in the Interfaith and Community Service Challenge will form interfaith activism to become a "norm" on campus like the women's movement in America, according to Mr. Patel. Does his staff intend to offer a tutorial to explain the acute differences between women's rights in America and women's rights in Islamic countries where his faith is law? I doubt it.

    Mr. Patel should also reveal that although his grandmother in Mumbai took in battered women in a generous humanitarian effort characteristic of his Islamic tradition — an event he credits for the rediscovery of his personal spiritual life — his tradition has also codified wife-beating, polygamy (multiple wives), female genital mutilation, woman guardianship, honor killings, and female head and face veiling. These practices flourish today within Islamic communities throughout the world.

    Although clarification is not a stated goal of Mr. Patel, he could nonetheless achieve a bit of it by instructing his interfaith fellows to emphasize that only one religion subscribes to the concept of jihad (holy war against an infidel enemy), thereby making this one religion, Islam, incompatible with the others (more than three thousand). Mr. Patel's responsibility to this program should include an overview of the so-called tolerance and religious freedom throughout the Middle East in OIC nations, where theocratic leaders have chosen not to sign on to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

    Since Mr. Patel, according to the Goodstein article, equates imams to saints, he might check in with reality by introducing the results of a four-year study issued recently by the Center for Security Policy ("Sharia and Violence in American Mosques" by Mordechai Kedar and David Yerushalmi, Middle East Quarterly), which has found mosques across America to be repositories and incubators of hate, violence, and jihad funded by foreign sources — the same sources which influenced the recent shutdown of the anti-Semitic forum (YIISA) at Yale University. Is it any wonder that Mr. Patel finds Hillel, the national Jewish student group, a bit distanced from the MSA (Muslim Student Association) on college campuses?

    Although President Obama has already sent two thousand letters to university heads to promote the Interfaith and Community Service Challenge, he needn't bother Georgetown President John De Gioia, who is already running the Wahhabi-oriented Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding. The Center is endowed with a $20-million grant from Saudi Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal (see Patrick Poole, Pajamas Media, June 15) — but apparently never questioning the Saudi record on human rights.

    Will Mr. Patel and his enlightened team educate campus youth in Arabic-language concepts in the Muslim religion, such as the word taqqiya? While the Christian and Jewish faiths include the commandment "Thou Shalt Not Lie," the doctrine of Islam advocates lying in certain circumstances, and one occasion is to further the cause of Islam. College campus youth interfaith programs would qualify, I'm sure.

    Mr. Patel advances the President's program with the cool slogan "Better Together." He wants to pave the way for such things as Muslim "public school holidays, zoning permits for houses of worship, and religious garb in the workplace" because until this moment, "inter-religious friction was sparking regularly" in the grassroots over these matters. Mr. Patel is correct in pointing out inter-religious friction; open thought and free speech very often spark the MSA to employ oppressive tactics to impede opposing views by Christian and Jewish speakers on campus. But that said, it seems that Patel's slogan predominantly refers to America as better off with Islam in its midst — a debatable issue. By now we have conclusive evidence that the radicalization of Islam in America and across the world is taking place despite the good intentions of moderate Muslims.

    The Interfaith and Community Service Challenge allows our impressionable sons and daughters to conform their thinking to the position that Islam deserves a prominent place in American society. In light of Islam's growing extremism, this is very dangerous. American students will form opinions about Islam through these types of agenda-driven efforts on campuses as well as from Islamic studies departments with their distorted and romanticized views of Islam and its history. What will never be revealed is that the Muslim establishment has no intention of embracing Western democracy. Instead, the establishment will make a convincing feint, all the while using the very freedoms they wish to subvert — beginning with initiatives like the Interfaith and Community Service Challenge.

    Ashraf Ramelah is an Egyptian Copt educated in Italy and currently residing in the U.S.A.. Contact him at aramelah@voicerofthecopts.org

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Eli E. Hertz, July 8, 2011.

    A Palestinian state has good chances of becoming a rogue state — the kind of polity the United States is currently grappling with in Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Iran and elsewhere.

    In 1971 Hebrew University social scientist Professor Yehezkel Dror wrote a short volume entitled Crazy States, solicited by the Rand Corporation. Decades before Mohmar Kaddafi began sending contraband by diplomatic pouch and Pol Pot "invented" the killing fields, Dror envisioned the emergence of polities that 'don't play by the rules' and therefore seem crazy to westerners. At the time he was roundly criticized as an extremist and prophet of doom — his book was labeled a brilliant intellectual exercise but off the mark in terms of reality.

    The volume gained new respect after the 1991 Gulf War. Today no one denies the existence of 'crazy states', or as they are now labeled: rogue states. In a 1999 article devoted to how US foreign policy has addressed the problem of rogue states, Professor Barry Rabin of Bar-Ilan University defined the rogue state as:

    "[a polity] that puts a high priority on subverting other states and sponsoring non-conventional types of violence against them. It does not react predictably to deterrence or other tools of diplomacy and statecraft."

    The definition seems to fit the Palestinian Authority like a glove even in the pre-state 'test' stage prior to gaining full sovereignty.

    Palestinian Arabs using non-conventional types of violence can surely take credit for "inventing" skyjackings, a political vehicle that permitted taking hostages and extorting political concessions for their release. Palestinians initiated attacks on El Al passengers and airliners at international airports and escalated the violence by blowing up civilian airliners in midair — the first, killing 47 passengers and crew aboard a Swissair flight from Zurich to Tel Aviv in February 1970.

    As far as "not reacting predictably to deterrence or other tools of diplomacy," in 1974 Palestinians claimed responsibility for the first-ever Palestinian suicide-bombing, when 18 hostages near the town of Kiryat-Shmona in northern Israel were murdered by a Palestinian terrorist loaded with explosives.

    Today, the battle that Israel wages against terrorism, and one the Western world must also wage, affects the entire free world. A rogue state, said Rabin "requires special treatment and high levels of international pressure in order to prevent it from wrecking public order, setting off wars, and subverting whole areas of the world" ... "an international equivalent of incarceration or commitment to a mental institution, until there is sufficient recovery to permit reentry into the international system."

    Unfortunately, the world community has been ignoring the prospect that a full-blown independent Palestinian state will become just that kind of rogue state and renegade organization the world is grappling with today.

    In light of the Palestinian Arab history of violence and its poor performance coping with limited freedom or autonomy — the equivalent of a 'half-way house' to test their readiness to join the family of nations, and in light of the support (rather than pressure to 'toe the line') that Palestinians enjoy in the international arena, Palestinians independence could very well turn into a genuine nightmare.

    A state with its patterns of despots, coups, assassinations, civil war, corruption, revolutions and lack of respect for human life, freedom and democracy, resembles a Crazy State that will continue to threaten Israel and world security.

    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

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Hands Fiasco, July 8, 2011.

    This was written by Caroline B. Glick and it appeared in Jewish World Review (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0711/ glick070811.php3).

    Caroline B. Glick is the senior Middle East Fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post. Her book "The Shackled Warrior: Israel and the Global Jihad," is available at Amazon.com. Visit her website at www.CarolineGlick.com. Contact her by email at caroline@carolineglick.com.


    Assad's overthrow would start a domino effect, which will benefit the West

    Last Saturday Hizbullah chief Hassan Nasrallah gave Hizbullah-backed Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati the political equivalent of a public thrashing. Last Thursday Mikati gave a speech in which he tried to project an image of a leader of a government that has not abandoned the Western world completely. Mikati gave the impression that his Hizbullah-controlled government is not averse to cooperating with the UN Special tribunal for Lebanon. The Special Tribunal just indicted four Hizbullah operatives for their role in the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri.

    But on Saturday night, Nasrallah gave a speech in which he made clear that he has no intention whatsoever of cooperating with the Special Tribunal and that since he runs the show in Lebanon, Lebanon will not cooperate in any way with the UN judicial body. As an editorial at the NOW Lebanon website run by the anti-Hizbullah March 14 movement wrote, last Saturday night Nasrallah "demolished Mikati's authority and the office from whence it comes, and used it as a rag to mop up what is left of Lebanese dignity."

    The March 14 movement has tried to make the Special Tribunal the litmus test for Mikati's legitimacy demanding that his government either cooperate with the UN Special Tribunal or resign. But the fact is that the March 14 movement is no match for Hizbullah. Its protests are not capable of dislodging the Iranian-controlled jihadist movement from power.

    Just as it always has, the fate of Lebanon today lies in the hands of outside powers. Hizbullah rules the roost in Lebanon because it is backed by Syria and Iran. Unlike the US and France, Iran and Syria are willing to fight for their proxy's control over Lebanon. And so their proxy controls Lebanon. It follows then that assuming the US and France will continue to betray their allies in the March 14 democracy movement, Hizbullah will be removed from power in Lebanon only if its outside sponsors are unseated. And it is this prospect, more than the UN Special Tribunal that is keeping Nasrallah up at nights.


    Last month France's Le Figaro reported that Hizbullah has moved hundreds of long-range Iranian built Zilzal and Fajr 3 and Fajr 4 missiles from its missile depots in Syria to Lebanon's Bekaa Valley. The missile transfer was due to Hizbullah's fear that Syrian President Bashar Assad's regime is on the verge of being toppled.

    And there is good reason for Hizbullah's concern. The breadth and depth of the anti-regime protests in Syria far overshadow the anti-regime protests in Egypt and Tunisia. As Victor Kotsev noted this week in the Asia Times, something like half a million people participated in the anti-regime demonstrations in Hama last Friday. Since according to Syria's 2009 census Hama has just over 700,000 residents, the rate of public participation in the anti-regime protests dwarfs anything seen in any other Arab state since the anti-regime protests began last December.

    According to Tariq Alhomayed, the editor in chief of Asharq Alawsat in English, Assad fired his provincial governor of Hama following Friday's demonstration for not shooting the demonstrators. Assad's move is yet another clear sign that he has no intention of compromising with his opponents. He will sooner destroy his country then let anyone else rule it.

    And this makes sense. A son of the Alawite sect that makes up just 12 percent of Syria's population, Assad has no serious support base in Syrian society outside his family-controlled military. He has repressed every group in his society including much of his own Alawite sect. As Syria expert Gary Gambill noted in Foreign Policy on Thursday, Assad has no post-regime prospects. And so he can entertain no notion of compromise with his people.

    Like Hizbullah, Assad's ability to survive is also going to be determined elsewhere. To date, the US has backed Assad against the Syrian people and Europe has gone along. In contrast, the Iranians and their Hizbullah proxies are actively working to ensure their favored outcome in Syria. In testimony before the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Tuesday IDF Intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Aviv Kochavi repeated his previous claim that Iran and Hizbullah are actively assisting Assad's forces in killing and repressing the Syrian people. Kochavi explained, "The great motivation Iran and Hizbullah have to assist [Assad] comes from their deep worry regarding the implications these events might have, particularly losing control of their cooperation with the Syrians and having such events slide onto their own territories."

    From Iran's perspective, the prospect of a renewal of the Green Movement anti-regime protests is the gravest threat facing the regime today as it reaches the nuclear threshold. As Iran expert Michael Ledeen wrote this week at Pajamas Media, the Iranian regime itself is plagued by internal fissures due to escalating estrangement and rivalry between President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and supreme dictator Ali Khamenei.

    Their infighting can be compared to pirates arguing over the division of their stolen loot as their ship sinks to the bottom of the ocean. Iran's economy is failing. Its inflation rate is around 50 percent. Its people hate the regime. Lacking the ability to win the public over through politics, since the Green Movement protests in 2009 the regime has simply terrorized the Iranian people into submission. Their fear of their people has only grown since the anti-regime protests in the Arab world began last December. And in line with this heightened fear, the regime has tripled its rate of public executions since the start of the year.

    The Iranian regime understands that if Syria falls, it is liable to lose its ability keep its people down. The Alawite-dominated Syrian military is far more loyal to the Assad regime than the Iranian army is to the Iranian regime. And there have already been multiple defections from the Syrian army among the junior officer corps.

    If Assad falls then Hizbullah will lose its logistical supply-line from Iran. Hizbullah will be so busy fending off challenges from no-longer-daunted Lebanese Sunnis empowered by their Syrian brethren, that its operatives will be less available to kill Iranian protesters. Fearing insubordination in the ranks of its military and Revolutionary Guards, in 2009 the regime reportedly brought Hizbullah operatives to Iran to kill anti-regime demonstrators.

    With the US compliant with Assad and maintaining its policy of appeasing the Iranian regime, the only outside government currently making an attempt to influence events in Syria is Turkey. Although it is being careful to couch its anti-Assad policy in the rhetoric of compromise, given Assad's inability to make any deal with his opponents, simply by calling for him to compromise, the Turkish government is making it clear that it seeks Assad's overthrow. Turkey's talk of sending troops into Syria to protect civilians and its willingness to set up refugee camps for the Syrians from border towns fleeing Assad's regime goons, make clear that Ankara is vying to expand its sphere of influence to Damascus in a post-Assad Syria.

    Ankara's plans are all the more apparent when seen in the context of Turkish Prime Minister Recip Erdogan's moves to reinstate Turkey as a regional hegemon along the lines of the Ottoman Empire. To this end, according to a report this week in the Hindu, since Erdogan's Islamist AKP Party formed its first government in 2003, it has been actively cultivating ties with Muslim Brotherhood movements throughout the region. The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood has deep ties to the Turkish government and the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood branch Hamas has been publicly supported by Erdogan's government since 2006. In the event that Turkey plays a significant role in a post-Assad Syria, it can be expected that the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood would fairly rapidly take control of the country.

    Many commentators have argued that Turkey's anti-Assad stance indicates that the recent warming of ties between Teheran and Ankara, (which among other things saw Erdogan siding with Iran against the US at the UN Security Council), is over.

    But things in the Middle East are never cut and dry. While it is true that Turkey and Iran are rival hegemons, it is also true that (they're) also allied hegemons. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Syria and Gaza have close ties to Hizbullah and Iran as well as Turkey. Al Qaeda in Lebanon has close ties to Syria and working relationships with Hizbullah.

    Then again, if Assad is overthrown, and his overthrow reinvigorates the Iranian Green revolution, given the pro-Western orientation of much of Iranian society, it is likely that at a minimum, Iran would drastically scale back its sponsorship of Hizbullah and other terror groups.

    For Israel Assad's overthrow will be clear strategic gain in the short and medium term, even if a post-Assad Syrian government exchanges Syria's Iranian overlords with Turkish overlords. Syria's main threats to Israel stem from Assad's support for Palestinian terrorists and Hizbullah, and from his ballistic missile and nuclear programs. While Turkey would perhaps maintain support for Palestinian terrorists and perhaps for Lebanese terrorists, they do not share Syria's attraction to missiles and nuclear weapons as Iran does. Moreover, they would not have a strong commitment to Hizbullah and so the major threat to Israel in Lebanon would be severely weakened.

    Moreover, if Assad's potential overthrow leads to increased revolutionary activities in Iran, the regime will have less time to devote to its nuclear program and its nuclear installations will become more vulnerable to penetration and sabotage. A successor regime in Iran will likely seek close ties with the West and be willing to pay for those ties by setting aside Iran's nuclear program.

    In the long-term, the reestablishment of a Turkish sphere of influence in the Arab world in Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority and Egypt through the Muslim Brotherhood will be extremely dangerous for Israel. With its jihadist ideology, its powerful conventional military forces, its strong economy and its strategic ties to the US and Europe, Turkey's rise as a regional hegemon would present Israel with a difficult challenge.

    Despite the massive dimensions of the anti-regime protests, it is still impossible to know how the situation there will pan out. This uncertainty is heightened by the US's passivity in the face of the uprising against its worst foe in the Arab world.

    Given the strategic opportunities and dangers the situation in Syria presents to it, Israel cannot be a bystander in the drama unfolding to its north. True, Israel does not have the power the US has to dictate the outcome. But to the extent it is able to influence events, Israel should actively assist the non-Islamist regime opponents in Syria. This includes first and foremost the Syrian Kurds, but also the non-Islamist Sunni business class, the Druse and the Christians who are all participating the anti-regime protests. Israel should also oppose Turkish military intervention in Syria and openly advocate the establishment of a democratic, federal government in Syria to replace Assad's dictatorship.

    It might not work. But if it does, the payoff will be extraordinary.

    Contact HandsFiasco by email at handsfiasco@webtv.net

    To Go To Top

    Posted by IAM, July 8, 2011.

    This was written by Amnon Rubinstein, professor of law at the Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya, a former minister of education and Knesset member, and the recipient of the 2006 Israel Prize in Law (www.amnonrubinstein.org) It appeared July 3, 2011 in the Jerusalem Post and is archived at
    http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/ Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?ID=227750


    Lessons learned over 2,000 years still serve us now

    For more than three months, the Libyan town of Misrata has been under siege, and its citizens are being bombarded by Muammar Gaddafi's well-equipped army and air force. Nobody knows the number of civilian casualties, but over a month ago, the Guardian reported that there were over 1,000 dead and 3,000 wounded.

    Misrata is only a short distance from the Tunisian border, where a popular revolution installed a non-tyrant government. And yet, Tunis does not extend any help to its beleaguered Arab brethren in Misrata, except for accepting the Libyan refugees fleeing the war.

    The fate of Benghazi, located closer to the Egyptian border, could have been much worse: Were it not for a last-minute rescue by the NATO air-force, the people would have been slaughtered en masse when the armed columns of Gaddafi began their avenging march to the city. A few days before that intervention, the Guardian reported the frustration of a local engineer, who waved his clenched fist at the sky and shouted: "Where is [an] aerial counter-blow? Where is the West? They must stop Qaddafi before we all die." He did not address his outcry to neighboring Egypt, which, with its huge army and air force, could have saved the people of Benghazi.

    The only Arab states rendering any help to the Libyan people are Qatar, Jordan and the Emirates, and they confine themselves to aerial humanitarian assistance. Nothing is being done by any Arab organization to save the rebels from annihilation.

    Now, let's imagine a hypothetical scenario in which two Jewish communities face similar dangers, and right across the border, there exist two Jewish states. Can anyone even imagine a situation in which these Jewish states would turn a blind eye to their menaced brethren? Is it at all conceivable that these states would not mobilize their armies to save the lives of the besieged Jews?

    Even without a state of their own, Jews in the Diaspora have always mobilized to help endangered Jewish communities. Indeed, Jewish solidarity — from the Joint to Col. Marcus's volunteers in the War of Independence — has become legendary. But where is the Arab Col. Marcus? Where is the financial assistance from oil-rich governments that could help the people of Misrata?

    If solidarity and loyalty are the hallmark of a people, then the Jews are certainly a people. And yet, anti-Israeli university professors in Israel, who thrive on Jewish donations, deny the existence of such a people. This is the edict of the latest academic fashion, and Prof. Shlomo Sand of Tel Aviv University is its main trendsetter. In his book The Inventionof the Jewish People, Sand claims that the Jews were not expelled from ancient Palestine, that those who remained there were the ancestors of today's Palestinians, that the Ashkenazi Jews are the descendents of the mass conversion of Khazars — a seminomadic Turkic people — to Judaism over 1,000 years ago and, needless to say, have no historical claim over Palestine.

    Naturally the book drew worldwide attention, won an important French prize and was widely covered by the international media. Here was the ultimate attack on Israel: If there is no Jewish people, there should be no Jewish state, and strictly speaking, there should be no Jewish history (although Sand is ready, so it seems, to grant recognition to the Israeli-Jewish community).

    IS THERE any scientific basis to Sand's allegations? And if there is, what are its political ramifications? The answer is twofold: There is no evidence whatsoever for these statements, and even if they are true, they have no significance.

    Let us take his claim that Ashkenazi Jews are descendents of Khazar converts. There is no evidence for this (although it is quite possible that a minority stems from such alleged conversions).

    A wide range of reliable genetic tests have negated this tale, there are no Khazar words in Yiddish, and if we assume that the Ashkenazi community is of Khazar extraction, we must also assume that many of them decided, by acquiring names such as Cohen and Levy, to retroactively serve the Jewish God as holy men in a Jewish Temple destroyed almost 1,000 years before their conversion.

    But let us assume that there was mass conversion and that most or all Ashkenazi Jews are of non-Jewish extraction. Since when are converts not considered Jewish? According to both Halacha and liberal principles, a convert to Judaism is a Jew for every purpose, including his yearning for Zion. According to the book's argument, King David himself, whose grandmother was a convert, is not Jewish and has no claim to Zion.

    The truth is that Sand's compilation of rubbish serves an important purpose. It is a further erosion of the line between academic writing and its parody. Thus, Sand makes fun of all the genetic studies, undertaken by firstrate scientists, that prove two astounding conclusions: Ashkenazi Jews are genetically closer to oriental Jews and oriental non-Jews than to the non-Jewish European host societies, and Jews managed to keep their separate genetic identity throughout this long and eventful time.

    Needless to say, no nation is, or should be, racially pure. Jews did intermarry, and conversions took place. Evelyn Waugh, in a letter to Nancy Mitford, notedices thediversity of ethnicities among Jews when he visited Palestine in the '30s. Herzl was aware of this diversity and remarked that "no people are homogenous racially." Meanwhile, all French children, including African-French, learn in school about "our ancestors, the Gauls"; are they different from the alleged descendants of a convert who prays, "Next year in Jerusalem?"

    What Jews posses that is conspicuously absent among their Arab cousins is solidarity in time of need.

    And it is this Jewish solidarity, among other things, that has enabled Israel and its universities to survive.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Arlene Kushner, July 8, 2011.

    I've decided to devote what time I have before Shabbat to this one subject:

    There's a great deal of concern in the US and here in Israel — and rightly so! — regarding an outreach by the Obama administration to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

    See, first, Robert Spencer, a scholar of Islam and the director of Jihad Watch, on this:

    "The Obama administration is set to begin formal contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood, a group dedicated in its own words to 'eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within, and sabotaging its miserable house.'

    "This news came in a Reuters report...quoting a 'senior U.S. official...' ...Barack Obama has never made a secret of his solicitude for the Muslim Brotherhood. Even though the Brotherhood was still outlawed in Egypt at that time, he made a point of inviting leaders of the group to attend his speech to the Islamic world in Cairo on June 4, 2009.

    "Not only that. Obama included the leader of a Muslim Brotherhood-linked group that had been named an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case among the clerics giving a prayer during his inauguration ceremonies: Ingrid Mattson, then-president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA...

    "[The senior official] may have been mindful of how poorly this would play among those aware of the Brotherhood's pro-Sharia anti-Israel, anti-American agenda, and so he played up the pragmatic, realpolitik aspects of the decision: 'The political landscape in Egypt has changed, and is changing,' he noted. 'It is in our interests to engage with all the parties that are competing for Parliament of the presidency.'

    "The official added that the Obama administration would... 'continue to emphasize the importance of support for democratic principles and a commitment to nonviolence, and respect for minority and women's rights in conversations with all groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood.'

    "Good luck with that. The Muslim Brotherhood...is dedicated to establishing an Islamic state in Egypt and implementing the Islamic law that has no room for democratic principles, uses violence against dissenters and miscreants, and tramples upon minority rights and women's rights. Then there is the movement's inveterate anti-Semitism: not only does the jihad terrorist group Hamas style itself as the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine, but recently the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohamed Badie said: 'Allah has warned us the tricks of the Jews, and their role in igniting the fire of wars... and they labor hard to spread corruption on earth: and Allah does not love the spreaders of corruption.' (emphasis added)

    "The spiritual father of the Muslim Brotherhood, the 84-year-old Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, recently returned to Cairo to be greeted by huge and rapturous crowds after the end of his fifty-year exile from the country. In January 2009, during a Friday sermon broadcast on Al-Jazeera, he prayed that Allah would kill all the Jews..."
    http://frontpagemag.com/2011/07/04/obama- reaches-out-to-the-muslim-brotherhood/


    Next, see Andrew McCarthy incisive comments on this subject:

    "...Reuters reports that the Obama administration has established a policy of formal contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood.

    "The Brotherhood is the world's most important Islamist organization. It is openly, unabashedly committed to the destruction of the United States and the West. In typical Obama fashion, this disastrous decision to engage America's avowed enemies has been couched as the mere continuation of prior policy: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is reported to have confirmed that the U.S. would 'resume' contacts which had 'occurred in recent years.' But make no mistake about it, this is a new policy. (emphasis added)

    "The contacts that have occurred in recent years have been outside of U.S. policy — at the urging of leftists in the State Department, the intelligence community, the commentariat, and, in particular, the Obama White House. They have long campaigned for a policy of 'engagement' with the Muslim Brotherhood (including Hamas, the terrorist organization that is the Brotherhood's Palestinian branch). They've needed to do this campaigning because it was American policy not to deal with the Brotherhood — dealing with the Brothers empowers them, bolstering their status as leaders of mainstream Islam and legitimizing their agenda, which calls for Islamicizing societies, ultimately establishing a global caliphate, destroying Israel, and incrementally expanding sharia throughout the West.(emphasis added)

    "This day has been coming since President Obama's first day in office" (emphasis added)
    http://www.nationalreview.com/ corner/270864/obama-administration- opens-formal-contacts-muslim- brotherhood-andrew-c-mccarthy


    Khaled Abu Toameh, writing for Hudson-NY, has weighed in with regard to the effect of the new Obama policy on moderate Muslims:

    "The United States administration's recent decision to establish contacts with Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood organization is a severe blow to moderate, secular Muslims who are trying to achieve democracy and prosperity in their countries. (emphasis added)

    "...If the Obama administration is going to talk to the Muslim Brotherhood, there is no reason why it should not also launch dialogue with Hamas, the Taliban, Hezbollah, and even al-Qaeda. Engaging Muslim extremists, without demanding that they abandon their dangerous policies and violence, is a huge mistake." (Emphasis added)
    http://www.hudson-ny.org/2243/ obama-undermining-moderate-muslims


    Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I call your attention to the comments of Frank Gaffney, who heads the Center for Security Policy. He refers to what Obama has now done as a tipping point:

    "The Obama administration chose the eve of the holiday marking our Nation's birth to acknowledge publicly behavior in which it has long been stealthily engaged to the United States' extreme detriment: Its officials now admit that they are embracing the Muslim Brotherhood (MB or Ikhwan in Arabic).

    "...Team Obama's official, open legitimation of the Brotherhood marks a dramatic break from the U.S. government's historical refusal to deal formally with the Ikhwan."

    Gaffney then proceeds to provide data — documenting precisely why Obama's embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood "is so ominous." While this material is too extensive to replicate here, I urge you to read it in Gaffney's article.

    "In short," he explains, "the Muslim Brotherhood is deadly serious about waging what it calls 'civilization jihad' against the United States and other freedom-loving nations in order to secure their submission to the Islamic totalitarian political-military-legal doctrine called shariah. The MB's goal in this country is to replace our Constitution with theirs, namely the Koran. And they regard this task as one commanded by none other than Allah..the MB's senior official, Supreme Guide Muhammad Badi, has effectively declared war on the United States. (emphasis added)

    The MB, says Gaffney, will walk away with legitimacy — and again he provides documentation for this.

    "Unfortunately," he continues, "the U.S. government's dangerous outreach to the Ikhwan is not confined to Egypt but is systematically practiced inside the United States, as well. And again, there are examples — hair-raising examples — that demonstrate that this is the case.

    Concludes Gaffney:

    "It seems a safe bet that, as Team Obama legitimates Muslim Brotherhood organizations and groups overseas, it will feel ever less constrained about further empowering their counterparts in the United States. If so, the MB will come to exercise even greater influence over what our government does and does not do about the threat posed by shariah, both abroad and here. (emphasis added)

    "The absolutely predictable effect will be to undermine U.S. interests and allies in the Middle East and further catalyze the Brotherhood's campaign to insinuate shariah in the United States and, ultimately, to supplant the Constitution with Islamic law. Consequently, the Obama administration's efforts to 'engage' the Muslim Brotherhood are not just reckless. They are wholly incompatible with the President's oath to 'preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States' and the similar commitment made by his subordinates. (emphasis added)

    "These officials' now-open embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood constitutes a geo-strategic tipping point, one that must catalyze an urgent national debate on this question: Does such conduct violate their oath of office by endangering the Constitution they have undertaken to uphold?" (emphasis added)
    http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/ p18757.xml

    My question then, is whether some solid percentage of the American people is now ready to take seriously the threat of what Obama is doing. Or will they cluck their tongues, while sitting on their rears, and allow what is taking place to continue.

    I can only write about this from here in Jerusalem. It is in the US that action must proceed.

    You know the routine: share this broadly, post it everywhere, call talk shows, write letters to the editor, contact elected officials, demand answers. Coalescing groups to respond is also a good idea. Be leaders and activists. Follow through with the urgent debate that Gaffney suggests.

    This is in the hands of the American people.

    Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner18@gmail.com and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Barbara Taverna, July 8, 2011.

    This was posted yesterday by Jeff Walton in Front Page Magazine http://frontpagemag.com/2011/07/07/blaming- israel-for-the-middle-easts-christian-exodus/


    Jewish settlers, the Israeli government and "Christian Zionists" are the main cause of Palestinian Christian emigration from the Middle East, not the rise of Islamic extremism, according to the chiefs of two Palestinian Christian groups.

    In protesting letters to Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, Anglican Priest Naim Ateek of Sabeel and Kairos Palestine Coordinator Rifat Odeh Kassis chastised the head of the Anglican Communion for citing increasing Islamic extremism as a key factor in the departure of Christians from the region.

    In a June 14 interview with the BBC Radio, Williams warned that Islamist groups were exploiting the chaos of the "Arab Spring" revolutions to attack Christian minorities. In Bethlehem, the birthplace of Jesus Christ, Christians who had once been in the majority were now a "marginalised minority," Williams told the BBC.

    There has been a Christian exodus from Muslim majority countries throughout the Middle East for the last century. But anti-Israel activists only cite the departure of Palestinian Christians as a tool for blaming Israel.

    "Your inaccurate and erroneous remarks cite Muslim extremism as the greatest threat facing Christians in Palestine, and the primary reason for our emigration," Kassis complained to Williams. "We were hoping that Your Grace would have a different voice than the one in mass media and other right wing political parties, which exploit our sufferings to fuel some islamophobic tendencies and negative images about Islam."

    In his own letter to Williams, the Rev. Ateek explained: "Your words were negatively received by our people; and we have been asked by our friends — locally and internationally — to make a public response."

    Patterned after a group that opposed South Africa's apartheid, the Kairos Palestine group includes the Patriarchs of indigenous Latin and Orthodox churches in the Holy Land, plus a number of other Christian prelates. Like the South African group, Kairos Palestine calls for boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel ostensibly on behalf of oppressed Palestinians. The group does not similarly criticize Fatah or Hamas, except for blanket condemnations of all violence. Sabeel is a Palestinian liberation theology group that sharply criticizes Israel — and by extension, the United States — as imperial forces that oppress an aggrieved indigenous population. It regularly denounces Israel and also likens it to the South African apartheid state, claiming Israeli racism. Sabeel devotes almost all of its energies towards organizing campaigns against Israel and networks with friendly overseas church officials in North America and Europe, counting as supporters former U.S. Episcopal Church Presiding Bishop Edmund Browning.

    In his letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Ateek insisted that Palestinian Christians primarily identify themselves as part of a Palestinian majority, not as part of a Christian minority.

    "You singled out the extremist Islamists as a threat to Christian presence, but neglected to mention two other extremists groups, namely, Jewish extremists represented by the religious and racist settlers on the West Bank that are encouraged directly by the present extreme rightwing Israeli government, and Christian extremists represented by the Western Christian Zionists that support Israel blindly and unconditionally," Ateek wrote. "Jewish and Western Christian Zionists are a greater threat to us than the extremist Islamists."

    Ateek cited a 2006 survey of Christians in Israel and Palestine conducted by Sabeel that indicated that the primary causes for the emigration of Christians from the West Bank were political and economic conditions.

    "Those who are leaving ... because of the bad economic and political situation represent 87.3 percent of the total respondents," the survey claimed, adding that 8 percent of the respondents attributed emigration to religious extremism.

    The Sabeel and Kairos Palestine letters contradict the reports of human rights groups like the Barnabas Fund, which cite kidnapping of Christians in Hamas-governed Gaza and recurring physical threats against Christians as a primary reason for the departures. The anti-persecution advocacy organization also cited violence between Hamas and Fatah in 2007 as fueling Christian emigration.

    "There is no doubt at all that it is a very anxious time for Christian communities," Williams said in his radio interview. "There have been extremist atrocities already, especially in Egypt."

    Identifying what he called a "fairly consistent pattern" over a number of months, the Archbishop noted that although leaders in Egypt's Muslim community condemned the violence, other forces at work, possibly including extremists from outside Egypt, were involved. These "more traditional sites of extremism" included Saudi Arabia and northern Sudan, and the Archbishop did not rule out activity by al-Qaeda.

    Warning that the "level of violence has been extreme," the Anglican Communion leader added that violent extremism had made life unsustainable for Christians in northern Iraq, amounting to ethnic cleansing, and that in Syria, tensions between Christians and Muslims were burgeoning.

    Kassis and Ateek did not address Williams' comments about Syria, Iraq and Egypt.

    According to the Jerusalem Interchurch Center, there are some 200,000 Christians throughout Israel, the West Bank and Gaza (150,000 in Israel, and 50,000 in Palestinian territories, including 10,000 in East Jerusalem). At Israel's creation in 1948, this number was nearer to 350,000. The Christian population inside Israel is believed to be growing, even as it continues to plunge in the territories governed by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.

    According to the World Christian Database and U.S. State Department reports, between 1.1-2.4 percent of the population of Gaza and the West Bank is Christian, while in neighboring Syria the Christian population is 5.4-9.4 percent and in Jordan the number is between three and four percent. Egypt has the largest Christian population in the region, with estimates ranging anywhere from 8 to 16 percent of the country. In the early 20th century, Christians were much higher percentages in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and in most Muslim majority countries of the region. Their ongoing exodus began well before Israel's creation. Christianity's future in the Middle East is grim for reasons having little to do with Israel.

    Archbishop Rowan Williams deserves credit for pointing out an obvious truth that anti-Israel zealots like Sabeel and Kairos Palestine, along with their global network of allies, would understandably like to ignore. Some vulnerable Arab Christians no doubt know this truth but must protest otherwise for their own self-protection. For this reason, Western Christians and other religious liberty advocates should speak loudly when persecuted Christians living under Muslim rule cannot themselves speak candidly.

    Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Porter, July 7, 2011.

    how to turne things around: the main Jewish enemies are leftist self-hating Jews.The Israel's defence must begin as the defence and fight with these traitors. The West would be on Israel's side if not them.

    Contact Porter by email at porter46@list.ru

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Nurit Greenger, July 7, 2011.

    Putting Judea and Samaria under the State of Israel sovereignty means ending the Arab-Israel conflict.

    For a long time I have been saying that to begin to end, the one-sided and very lopsided conflict the Arabs have with Israel, not Israel with the Arabs, the schizophrenic ambiguity policy of one Government of Israel after another must end; they must finally openly admit that the land from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea legally belongs to the Jews, and to the Jews only. With this long overdue admission, the Government of Israel must immediately put Judea and Samaria under Israeli sovereignty and only then the fog will begin to clear, slowly but surely.

    Khaled Abu Toameh is the most honest Arab-Israeli journalist who does not mince words neither for Israel or the Arab side. On July 4th, 2011 the Jerusalem Post published Mr. Toameh and Herb Keinon's article its header: 'PA says it'll drop UN bid if Israel accepts 67 lines',
    http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/ Article.aspx?id=227891

    In reply to the above statement from the Palestinian Authority (PA), Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the international community is only focused on borders and Jewish settlements, thus, they were inadvertently [I say deliberately] accepting a Arab-"Palestinian" demand for a state, and are not dealing with how to really end the conflict. In other words, with this approach, the conflict can continue, the attacks on Israel can go on BUT the Arab must have ANOTHER state to fight Israel form!

    To end the conflict, Netanyahu said, the issue of Arab refugees and the State of Israel being recognized, by all the Arabs, and especially those calling themselves "Palestinians," as a Jewish state has to be addressed, or else the conflict would not end. I say that even then the conflict may never end.

    And to that end I must add that the Government of Israel is require to have full discussion about two other issues. One is Israel's legal right to the entire land from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, which the Arabs illegally occupied for 19 years. The other, the Government of Israel's duty is to make sure that from here on the Arabs are fully aware that Israel is the Seller of all the terms to end this conflict and the Arabs are not, never were. Israel is the one pulling the ropes.

    The Netanyahu and the rest of the Government of Israel should know that this conflict of interest will continue, indefinitely, unless they go with the annexation.

    Should Israel proceeds to implement the annexation of Judea and Samaria, I expected that the Arabs would reject this action, but could not prevent it. So might the International Community players, who will yell, scream and protest, without success, but this would not prevent the annexation action from occurring. I sincerely believe that, covertly, the rest of the world is very tired of this conflict and would sigh in relief after the annexation takes place, and they will enjoy the finality of the action.

    It is time to admit that most of the Arab-Israelis, who make 20% of Israel's population today, and are holding Israeli citizenship are inadequate citizens. They are not a minority that assimilated. They remained Arabs, not Israelis of Arab roots, they do not identify with the Jewish country's national flag and anthem or its customs and Jewish Holidays and history and they are like a wild weed. They have remained deeply loyal to their Arab creed and there is no doubt that in a heartbeat they will join their brethren in the destruction of Israel.

    The Arabs, whom Israel "gained" with its 1967 victory, will be given a choice, which they will have to make: a) they are to remain living in Israel, under the State Israel law, entitled to full human rights, holding, especially crafted for them, Israeli Identification Card (ID), but having no voting rights. This ID card will be enforced, by law, for twenty years. In those twenty years, a new generation will rise to have learned to accept the Jewish state with gratitude; they will learn to live as equal with Jews — Israel must produce their curriculum — all the lies they lean today are to be taken out of the school text books, anti-Semitism and hate for Jews will never be heard again and they will learn, from birth, to respect, even like, but not hate Jews and all other non-Moslems. They will learn to be productive, not destructive terrorists. With the help if the State of Israel they will learn to be GOOD citizens and in twenty years, the new generation may be able to earn the right to become Israeli citizens and be good ones too. b) Better yet, as many pundits suggested, over the years, these Arabs will be given an incentive, in the form of money, [how about $50,000 per person], but under one condition that they go live in any country that will take them in. It is upon the so righteous international community, claiming to be so interested in ending the conflict, to put pressure on ALL the Arab countries and make them take these Arabs in. These funds will be made available by a collaboration between all those nations that are now funding the bottomless cup of the PA reckless fiscal existence.

    If the proposed choice b) is not acceptable, and the Arabs choose not to accept the financial incentive that will commit them to leaving the land of Israel, once the annexation of Judea and Samaria takes force, legally and lawfully, the Government of Israeli will have the right and duty to enforce the State of Israeli laws. Should any criminal or civil law be broken by an Arab, he or she will stand trial in the State of Israel court of law and should he or she be found guilty, they can be incarcerated or expelled from the country and their Israeli ID Card revoked for good.

    Once Judea and Samara are part and parcel of the State of Israel sovereignty, thereafter, I would give the reaction and cooling off process one year to come and pass. In that year, the so called anger and expected protests, a reaction to the annexation, will cool off and then everyone will settle down and, finally, Israel will have somewhat peace. Somewhat, because I do not believe, the Arabs will ever end their conflict with the state of Israel. It is in their blood to hate Jews and they are anti-Semites from birth. They also deny Israel's right to exist and the peace Egypt and Jordan have signed with Israel is a facade or of political convenience that could be toppled and end in a moment notice, or without notice.

    Until all the Arab countries believe and practice Ecumenism, which means that all men and women are created equal, irrespective of their religion, meaning they end their Islamic supremacy practice, there will never be real end of Arab conflict, neither with Israel or with the rest of the non-Moslem world.

    However, with the annexations and Judea and Samira are finally being, inseparable, part of the Jewish State of Israel, as they should have been years ago, Israel's security will become more manageable and much more under Israel's full control and the Israelis will live in a better frame of peace of mind.

    Israel has no legal obligation to shrink to the 1967-1949 ceasefire lines, rather, to live within its legal boundaries, which is from the River to the Sea.

    Annexation now, means the beginning of the end of the conflict.

    Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Hands Fiasco, July 7, 2011.

    This was written by Simon Plosker and it appeared in Honest Reporting (www.honestreporting.com)


    The UK medical journal, The Lancet, has returned to its annual Israel-bashing issue exploring health conditions in the Palestinian territories.

    Last year, the journal employed active supporters of the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel as supposedly expert commentators on the situation, which earned it a 2010 Dishonest Reporter Award. Lancet editor Richard Horton even posted a snide response aimed at HonestReporting.

    This year, it has, for the most part, toned down the politics in favor of medical analysis. One article, however, shows that the Lancet has not dropped its political campaign against Israel. This standout piece, highlighted by the Palestinian Ma'an News Agency, deals with "Childbirth at checkpoints in the occupied Palestinian territory". As Richard Horton puts it in his overview of the reports: A legal analysis of the evidence of denial of free movement for Palestinian women in labour and the consequences for their children supports the conclusion that Israel's policy "is consistent with the criteria for crimes against humanity."

    While we do not question that the need for IDF checkpoints may very well affect freedom of movement to the detriment of the Palestinian population, we do take serious issue with the highly politicized interpretations of the article's author Halla Shoaibi: The denial of passage to Palestinian women in labour, resulting in increased numbers of childbirths at checkpoints and en route to the hospital, is consistent with the criteria for crimes against humanity in accordance with article 7(1)(k) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court — ie, "other inhuman acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health", and meets with the presence of "widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population". Further research is needed to assess whether and how such a case could be made to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

    We can save Shoaibi the need for further research. The accusation above contends that Israeli forces are causing suffering to pregnant women with intent to do so. This is an absurd and particularly vicious canard that purposely ignores the reasons behind Israeli checkpoints in the first place and promotes a view of Israeli soldiers as being inherently evil.

    Shoaibi fails to mention the well-documented Palestinian abuse of ambulances and medical facilities to transport and harbor terrorists. And what about female Palestinian suicide bombers disguising themselves as pregnant women?

    The Lancet's absurd and unsupportable conclusion that Israel is intentionally trying to harm pregnant Palestinian women is a form of demonization that crosses the line from reasonable criticism, especially from a medical journal. Perhaps it is really The Lancet that is intentionally trying to harm Israel's image in the world arena and the medical profession. At the very least, the credibility of this supposedly respectable journal continues to be harmed by its exploitation of medical research to serve a narrow political goal.

    If you are a certified medical professional, please administer a dose of medicine by sending your considered comments to The Lancet's Ombudsman, Charles Warlow — ombudsman@lancet.com

    Contact Hands Fiasco at handsfiasco@webtv.net

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Ken Jensen and Rachel Ehrenfeld, July 7, 2011.

    This was written by Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan and it appeared the August 2011 issue of Vanity Fair
    (http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2011/ 08/9-11-2011-201108?printable=true). It is adapted from The Eleventh Day by Anthony Summers and Robynn Swan to be published this month by Ballantine Books; 2011 by the authors.


    Was there a foreign government behind the 9/11 attacks? A decade later, Americans still haven't been given the whole story, while a key 28-page section of Congress's Joint Inquiry report remains censored. Gathering years of leaks and leads, in an adaptation from their new book, Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan examine the connections between Saudi Arabia and the hijackers (15 of whom were Saudi), the Bush White House's decision to ignore or bury evidence, and the frustration of lead investigators — including 9/11-commission staffers, counterterrorism officials, and senators on both sides of the aisle.

    TROUBLING LINKS From left: King Abdullah, Prince Naif, Osama bin Laden, Prince Bandar, and Prince Turki — Saudis all, as were 15 of the 19 hijackers of 9/11. Large photograph by Allan Tannenbaum/Polaris; bottom, from left, by Ludovic/REA/Redux, by Li Zhen/Xinhua/Landov, from Getty Images, by Hassan Ammar/AFP/Getty Images, by Hasan Jamali/A.P. Images.

    Was there a foreign government behind the 9/11 attacks? A decade later, Americans still haven't been given the whole story, while a key 28-page section of Congress's Joint Inquiry report remains censored. Gathering years of leaks and leads, in an adaptation from their new book, Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan examine the connections between Saudi Arabia and the hijackers (15 of whom were Saudi), the Bush White House's decision to ignore or bury evidence, and the frustration of lead investigators — including 9/11-commission staffers, counterterrorism officials, and senators on both sides of the aisle.

    For 10 years now, a major question about 9/11 has remained unresolved. It was, as 9/11-commission chairmen Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton recalled, "Had the hijackers received any support from foreign governments?" There was information that pointed to the answer, but the commissioners apparently deemed it too disquieting to share in full with the public.

    The idea that al-Qaeda had not acted alone was there from the start. "The terrorists do not function in a vacuum," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters the week after 9/11. "I know a lot, and what I have said, as clearly as I know how, is that states are supporting these people." Pressed to elaborate, Rumsfeld was silent for a long moment. Then, saying it was a sensitive matter, he changed the subject.

    Three years later, the commission would consider whether any of three foreign countries in particular might have had a role in the attacks. Two were avowed foes of the United States: Iraq and Iran. The third had long been billed as a close friend: Saudi Arabia.

    In its report, the commission stated that it had seen no "evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al-Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States."

    Iran, the commission found, had long had contacts with al-Qaeda and had allowed its operatives — including a number of the future hijackers — to travel freely through its airports. Though there was no evidence that Iran "was aware of the planning for what later became the 9/11 attack," the commissioners called on the government to investigate further.

    This year, in late May, attorneys for bereaved 9/11 family members said there was revealing new testimony from three Iranian defectors. Former senior commission counsel Dietrich Snell was quoted as saying in an affidavit that there was now "convincing evidence the government of Iran provided material support to al-Qaeda in the planning and execution of the 9/11 attack." That evidence, however, has yet to surface.

    As for Saudi Arabia, America's purported friend, you would have thought from the reaction of the Saudi ambassador, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, that the commission had found nothing dubious in his country's role. "The clear statements by this independent, bipartisan commission," he declared, "have debunked the myths that have cast fear and doubt over Saudi Arabia." Yet no finding in the report categorically exonerated Saudi Arabia.

    The commission's decision as to what to say on the subject had been made amid discord and tension. Late one night in 2004, as last-minute changes to the report were being made, investigators who had worked on the Saudi angle received alarming news. Their team leader, Dietrich Snell, was at the office, closeted with executive director Philip Zelikow, making major changes to their material and removing key elements.

    The investigators, Michael Jacobson and Rajesh De, hurried to the office to confront Snell. With lawyerly caution, he said he thought there was insufficient substance to their case against the Saudis. They considered the possibility of resigning, then settled for a compromise. Much of the telling information they had collected would survive in the report, but only in tiny print, hidden in the endnotes.

    The commissioners did say in the body of the report that the long official friendship of the United States and Saudi Arabia could not be unconditional. The relationship had to be about more than oil, had to include — and this in bold type — "a commitment to fight the violent extremists who foment hatred."

    It had been far from clear, and for the longest time, that the Saudis were thus committed. More than seven years before 9/11, the first secretary at the Saudi mission to the United Nations, Mohammed al-Khilewi, had defected to the United States, bringing with him thousands of pages of documents that, he said, showed the regime's corruption, abuse of human rights, and support for terrorism. At the same time, he addressed a letter to then crown prince Abdullah, calling for "a move towards democracy." The Saudi royals, Khilewi said, responded by threatening his life. The U.S. government, for its part, offered him little protection. F.B.I. officials, moreover, declined to accept the documents the defecting diplomat had brought with him.

    In support of his claim that Saudi Arabia supported terrorism, Khilewi spoke of an episode relevant to the first, 1993, attempt to bring down the World Trade Center's Twin Towers. "A Saudi citizen carrying a Saudi diplomatic passport," he said, "gave money to Ramzi Yousef, the mastermind behind the World Trade Center bombing," when the al-Qaeda terrorist was in the Philippines. The Saudi relationship with Yousef, the defector claimed, "is secret and goes through Saudi intelligence."

    The reference to a Saudi citizen having funded Yousef closely fit the part played by Osama bin Laden's brother-in-law Jamal Khalifa. He was active in the Philippines, fronted as a charity organizer at the relevant time, and founded a charity that gave money to Yousef and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the chief al-Qaeda planner of 9/11, during the initial plotting to destroy U.S. airliners.

    When Khalifa returned to Saudi Arabia, in 1995 — following detention in the United States and subsequent acquittal on terrorism charges in Jordan — he was, according to C.I.A. bin Laden chief Michael Scheuer, met by a limousine and a welcome home from "a high-ranking official." A Philippine newspaper would suggest that the official had been Prince Sultan, then a deputy prime minister and minister of defense and aviation, today the heir to the Saudi throne.

    In June 1996, according to published reports, while in Paris for the biennial international weapons bazaar, a group including a Saudi prince and Saudi financiers gathered at the Royal Monceau hotel, near the Saudi Embassy. The subject was bin Laden and what to do about him. After two recent bombings of American targets in Saudi Arabia, one of them just that month, the fear was that the Saudi elite itself would soon be targeted. At the meeting at the Monceau, French intelligence reportedly learned, it was decided that bin Laden was to be kept at bay by payment of huge sums in protection money.

    In sworn statements after 9/11, former Taliban intelligence chief Mohammed Khaksar said that in 1998 Prince Turki, chief of Saudi Arabia's General Intelligence Department (G.I.D.), sealed a deal under which bin Laden agreed not to attack Saudi targets. In return, Saudi Arabia would provide funds and material assistance to the Taliban, not demand bin Laden's extradition, and not bring pressure to close down al-Qaeda training camps. Saudi businesses, meanwhile, would ensure that money also flowed directly to bin Laden.

    Special Relationships

    After 9/11, Prince Turki would deny that any such deal was done with bin Laden. Other Saudi royals, however, may have been involved in payoff arrangements. A former Clinton administration official has claimed — and U.S. intelligence sources concurred — that at least two Saudi princes had been paying, on behalf of the kingdom, what amounted to protection money since 1995. The former official added, "The deal was, they would turn a blind eye to what he was doing elsewhere. 'You don't conduct operations here, and we won't disrupt them elsewhere.'"

    American and British official sources, speaking later with Simon Henderson, Baker Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, named the two princes in question. They were, Henderson told the authors, Prince Naif, the interior minister, and Prince Sultan. The money involved in the alleged payments, according to Henderson's sources, had amounted to "hundreds of millions of dollars." It had been "Saudi official money — not their own."

    Before 9/11, American officials visiting Riyadh usually discovered that it was futile to ask the Saudis for help in fighting terrorism. George Tenet, who became C.I.A. director during Bill Clinton's second term, vividly recalled an audience he was granted by Prince Naif, the crown prince's brother. Naif, who oversaw domestic intelligence, began the exchange with "an interminable soliloquy recounting the history of the U.S.-Saudi 'special' relationship, including how the Saudis would never, ever keep security-related information from their U.S. allies."

    There came a moment when Tenet had had enough. Breaching royal etiquette, he placed his hand on the prince's knee and said, "Your Royal Highness, what do you think it will look like if someday I have to tell the Washington Post that you held out data that might have helped us track down al-Qaeda murderers?" Naif's reaction, Tenet thought, was what looked "like a prolonged state of shock."

    On a flight home from Saudi Arabia in the late 1990s, F.B.I. director Louis Freeh told counterterrorism chief John O'Neill that he thought the Saudi officials they had met during the trip had been helpful. "You've got to be kidding," retorted O'Neill, a New Jersey native who never minced his words. "They didn't give us anything. They were just shining sunshine up your ass."

    Several years later, in two long conversations with Jean-Charles Brisard, author of a study on terrorist financing for a French intelligence agency, O'Neill was still venting his frustration. "All the answers, all the clues that could enable us to dismantle Osama bin Laden's organization," he said, "are in Saudi Arabia." The answers and the clues, however, remained out of reach, in part, O'Neill told Brisard, because U.S. dependence on Saudi oil meant that Saudi Arabia had "much more leverage on us than we have on the kingdom." And, he added, because "high-ranking personalities and families in the Saudi kingdom" had close ties to bin Laden.

    These conversations took place in June and late July of 2001.

    A t his residence outside Washington on the morning of September 11, Prince Bandar rushed out an embassy statement. The kingdom, it read, "condemned the regrettable and inhuman bombings and acts which took place today... Saudi Arabia strongly condemns such acts, which contravene all religious values and human civilized concepts; and extends sincere condolences."

    Behind the political scenery, and on the festering subject of Israel, relations between Riyadh and Washington had recently become unprecedentedly shaky. Crown Prince Abdullah had long fumed about America's apparent complacency over the plight of the Palestinians. That spring he had pointedly declined an invitation to the White House. Three weeks before 9/11, enraged by television footage of an Israeli soldier putting his boot on the head of a Palestinian woman, he had snapped. Bandar, the crown prince's nephew, was told to deliver an uncompromising message to President Bush.

    "I reject this extraordinary, un-American bias whereby the blood of an Israeli child is more expensive and holy than the blood of a Palestinian child. ... A time comes when peoples and nations part. ... Starting today, you go your way and we will go our way. From now on, we will protect our national interests, regardless of where America's interests lie in the region." There was more, much more, and it rocked the Bush administration. The president responded with a placatory letter that seemed to go far toward the Saudi position of endorsing the creation of a viable Palestinian state.

    Then came the shattering events of Tuesday the 11th. In Riyadh within 24 hours — himself now in turn placatory — Abdullah pulled the lever that gave his nation its only real power, the economic sword it could draw or sheathe at will. He ordered that nine million barrels of oil be dispatched to the United States over the next two weeks. The certainty of supply had the effect, it is said, of averting what had otherwise been a possibility at that time — an oil shortage that would have pushed prices through the roof and caused, on top of the economic effects of the 9/11 calamity, a major financial crisis.

    Into the mix, on Wednesday the 12th, came troubling news. In a phone call that night, a C.I.A. official told Ambassador Bandar that 15 of the hijackers had been Saudis. As Bandar recalled it, he felt the world collapsing around him. "That was a disaster," Crown Prince Abdullah's foreign-affairs adviser Adel al-Jubeir has said, "because bin Laden, at that moment, had made in the minds of Americans Saudi Arabia into an enemy."

    Royal and rich Saudis scrambled to get out of the United States and return home. Seventy-five royals and their entourage, ensconced at Caesars Palace hotel and casino in Las Vegas, decamped within hours of the attacks to the Four Seasons. They felt "extremely concerned for their personal safety," they explained to the local F.B.I. field office, and bodyguards apparently deemed the Four Seasons more secure.

    In Washington, Saudis who wished to leave included members of the bin Laden family. One of Osama's brothers, never named publicly, had hastily called the Saudi Embassy wanting to know where he could best go to be safe. He was installed in a room at the Watergate Hotel and told to stay there until advised that transportation was available. Across the country, more than 20 bin Laden family members and staff were getting ready to leave.

    In Lexington, Kentucky, the mecca of Thoroughbred racing in America, Prince Ahmed bin Salman, a nephew of King Fahd's, had been attending the annual yearling sales. After the attacks, Ahmed quickly began to round up members of his family for a return to Saudi Arabia. He ordered his son and a couple of friends, who were in Florida, to charter a plane and get themselves to Lexington to connect with the plane he was taking home. They managed it, one of them told the security man hired for the flight, because "his father or his uncle was good friends with George Bush Sr."

    Late on the night of the 13th, Prince Bandar's assistant called the F.B.I.'s assistant director for counterterrorism, Dale Watson. He needed help, the assistant said, in getting bin Laden "family members" out of the country. Watson said Saudi officials should call the White House or the State Department. The request found its way to counterterrorism coordinator Richard Clarke, who has acknowledged that he gave the go-ahead for the flights. He has said he has "no recollection" of having cleared it with anyone more senior in the administration.

    An F.B.I. memo written two years after the exodus appears to acknowledge that some of the departing Saudis may have had information pertinent to the investigation. Asked on CNN the same year whether he could say unequivocally that no one on the evacuation flights had been involved in 9/11, Saudi Embassy information officer Nail al-Jubeir responded by saying he was sure of only two things, that "there is the existence of God, and then we will die at the end of the world. Everything else, we don't know."

    Saudis in Denial

    In spite of the fact that it had almost immediately become known that 15 of those implicated in the attacks had been Saudis, President George W. Bush did not hold Saudi Arabia's official representative in Washington at arm's length. As early as the evening of September 13, he kept a scheduled appointment to receive Prince Bandar at the White House. The two men had known each other for years. They reportedly greeted each other with a friendly embrace, smoked cigars on the Truman Balcony, and conversed with Vice President Dick Cheney and National-Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.

    There is a photograph of the meeting, which has been published in the past. This year, however, when the authors asked the George W. Bush presidential library for a copy, the library responded in an e-mail that the former president's office was "not inclined to release the image from the balcony at this time."

    It would soon become evident that, far from confronting the Saudis, the Bush administration wanted rapprochement. The president would invite Crown Prince Abdullah to visit the United States, press him to come when he hesitated, and — when he accepted — welcome him to his Texas ranch in early 2002. Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice were there, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell and First Lady Laura Bush.

    It seems that 9/11 barely came up during the discussions. Speaking with the press afterward, the president cut off one reporter when he began to raise the subject.

    Official Saudi Arabia was tortoise-slow in acknowledging even the fact that almost all of the hijackers had been Saudi citizens. Two days after Bandar was given that information, his spokesman said the terrorists had probably used stolen identities.

    "There is no proof or evidence," claimed Sheikh Saleh al-Sheikh, minister of Islamic affairs, "that Saudis carried out these attacks." Prince Sultan doubted whether only bin Laden and his followers were responsible, and hinted that "another power with advanced technical expertise" must have been behind 9/11. As of December 2001, Prince Naif was saying he still did not believe 15 hijackers had been Saudis.

    Not until February 2002 did Naif acknowledge the truth. "The names we have got confirmed [it]," he then conceded. "Their families have been notified. ... I believe they were taken advantage of in the name of religion, and regarding certain issues pertaining to the Arab nation, especially the issue of Palestine."

    Even after that admission, Sultan and Naif were not done. They began pointing to a familiar enemy. "It is enough to see a number of [U.S.] congressmen wearing Jewish yarmulkes," Sultan said, "to explain the allegations against us." In late 2002, Naif blamed the "Zionists," saying, "We put big question marks and ask who committed the events of September 11 and who benefited from them I think [the Zionists] are behind these events."

    As the months passed, leading Saudis would suggest publicly that their nation had been entirely open with the United States on the security front all along — even claim that they had alerted Washington in advance to possible calamity.

    A year after 9/11, Prince Turki expounded at length on the relationship the G.I.D. had had with the C.I.A. From about 1996, he wrote, "at the instruction of the senior Saudi leadership, I shared all the intelligence we had collected on bin Laden and al-Qaeda with the C.I.A. And in 1997 the Saudi minister of defense, Prince Sultan, established a joint intelligence committee with the United States to share information on terrorism in general and on bin Laden (and al-Qaeda) in particular."

    There was a core of truth to this. The G.I.D. and U.S. services had had a long, if uneasy, understanding on sharing intelligence. Other Saudi claims were far more startling.

    Bandar had hinted right after 9/11 that both the U.S. and Saudi intelligence services had known more about the hijackers in advance than they were publicly admitting. In 2007, however, by which time he had risen to become national-security adviser to former crown prince — now king — Abdullah, Bandar produced a bombshell. "Saudi security," he asserted, "had been actively following the movements of most of the terrorists with precision. ... If U.S. security authorities had engaged their Saudi counterparts in a serious and credible manner, in my opinion, we would have avoided what happened."

    Though there was no official U.S. reaction to that claim, Michael Scheuer, the former chief of the C.I.A.'s bin Laden unit, later dismissed it in his book Marching Toward Hell: America and Islam After Iraq as a "fabrication."

    Prince Turki had long since come out with an allegation similar to Bandar's, but far more specific. He said that in late 1999 and early 2000 — just before the first two future 9/11 hijackers reached the United States — his staff had informed the C.I.A. that both men were terrorists. "What we told them," he said, "was these people were on our watch list from previous activities of al-Qaeda, in both the [East Africa] embassy bombings and attempts to smuggle arms into the Kingdom in 1997."

    C.I.A. spokesman Bill Harlow dismissed Turki's claim as being supported by "not a shred of evidence." Harlow said information on the two hijackers-to-be had been passed on only a month after the attacks. What the 9/11 commission thought of Turki's assertion has not been made public. The National Archives told the authors that it was not permissible even to say whether commission files contain a record of an interview with the former head of the G.I.D. Information on the intelligence background to 9/11 apparently remains highly sensitive.

    The Hijackers' Helpers

    Saudi Arabia long remained a black hole for American official investigators probing 9/11. They were not, for example, allowed access to the families of those believed to have carried out the attacks. "We're getting zero cooperation," former C.I.A. counterterrorism chief Vincent Cannistraro said a month after the attacks.

    Within the United States, however, the probe proceeded intensively and over several years. And some of the most significant information gleaned, it turned out, concerned the same two terrorists to whom Prince Turki had alluded. They are said to have been handpicked by Osama bin Laden to be first to enter the United States, and they would eventually be part of the group that seized American Airlines flight 77, the plane used in the strike against the Pentagon.

    They were Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, both Saudis, both experienced jihadis — holy warriors — though still in their mid-20s. They entered the country through Los Angeles International Airport as early as January 15, 2000, with scant knowledge of the English language and zero experience of life in the West. The 9/11-commission report declared it "unlikely" that the pair "would have come to the United States without arranging to receive assistance from one or more individuals informed in advance of their arrival."

    The investigation identified individuals who helped or may have helped Mihdhar and Hazmi following their arrival in California — whether by happenstance or because of foreknowledge.

    An imam named Fahad al-Thumairy, an accredited diplomat appointed by the Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs to liaise with the huge nearby mosque, served at the time at the Saudi consulate in Los Angeles. According to one witness, Thumairy had at the relevant time arranged for two men — whom the witness first identified from photographs as having been the two terrorists — to be given a tour of the area by car.

    A fellow Saudi, a San Diego resident named Omar al-Bayoumi, said by individuals interviewed to have had frequent contact with Thumairy, acknowledged that he met Mihdhar and Hazmi during a visit to Los Angeles on February 1, two weeks after their arrival.

    According to a person interviewed by the F.B.I., Bayoumi said before the trip that he was going to "pick up visitors." What is agreed by all is that he made the journey by car, accompanied by an American Muslim named Caysan bin Don. On the way, bin Don said, Bayoumi mentioned that he was accustomed to going to the consulate to obtain religious materials. They did stop at the consulate, where, according to bin Don, a man in a Western business suit, with a full beard, greeted Bayoumi and took him off to talk in an office. Bayoumi emerged some time later, carrying a box of Korans. He would describe the encounter differently, saying he was "uncertain" with whom he had met and "didn't really know people in [the Saudi ministry of] Islamic Affairs."

    Both men agreed, however, that they proceeded to a restaurant and while there — this is the crucial moment in their story — met and talked with future hijackers Mihdhar and Hazmi, who had just arrived in the country. Bayoumi and bin Don were to tell the F.B.I. the encounter occurred merely by chance.

    Bayoumi urged Mihdhar and Hazmi to come south to San Diego, assisted them in finding accommodations, and stayed in touch. On the day the two terrorists moved into the apartment they first used, next door to Bayoumi's, there were four calls between his phone and that of the local imam, New Mexico-born Anwar Aulaqi — later to be characterized in the congressional report on 9/11 as having served as "spiritual adviser" to Mihdhar and Hazmi.

    Bayoumi's income, which was paid by Ercan, a subsidiary of a contractor for the Saudi Civil Aviation Administration — though, according to a fellow employee, he did no known work — reportedly increased hugely following the future hijackers' arrival. Another Saudi living in San Diego, Osama Basnan, was also of interest to 9/11 investigators probing the money flow.

    A three-page section of Congress's Joint Inquiry report (the product of joint hearings on the 9/11 attacks by the House and Senate intelligence committees), containing more lines withheld than released, tells us only that Basnan was a close associate of Bayoumi in San Diego. According to former U.S. senator Bob Graham, co-chair of the inquiry, and to press reports, regular checks flowed in 2000 from Basnan to Bayoumi's wife. The payments, ostensibly made to help cover medical treatment, had originated with the Saudi Embassy in Washington.

    There are separate reasons to question the activity of Thumairy, Bayoumi, and Basnan. Thumairy, who had a reputation as a fundamentalist, was later refused re-entry into the United States — well after 9/11 — on the ground that he "might be connected with terrorist activity." Bayoumi had first attracted the interest of the F.B.I. years earlier, and the bureau later learned he had "connections to terrorist elements." He left the country two months before the attacks.

    As for Basnan, his name had come up in a counterterrorism inquiry a decade earlier. He had reportedly hosted a party for Omar Abdel Rahman — today notorious as the "Blind Sheikh," serving life for his part in plotting to blow up the World Trade Center and other New York City landmarks in 1993 — when he visited the United States, and had once claimed he did more for Islam than Bayoumi ever did. A partially censored commission document suggests that — after Mihdhar, Hazmi, and fellow future 9/11 terrorists arrived in the United States to learn to fly — a Basnan associate was in e-mail and phone contact with accused key 9/11 conspirator Ramzi Binalshibh. A year after 9/11, Basnan was arrested for visa fraud and deported.

    Available information suggests that two of the trio were employed by or had links to the Saudi regime — Thumairy through his accreditation by the Ministry of Islamic Affairs and Bayoumi through his employment by the company linked to the Saudi Civil Aviation Authority. At least five people told the F.B.I. they considered Bayoumi to be some sort of government agent. The C.I.A., Bob Graham has said, thought Basnan was also an agent. Graham also cited an agency memo that referred to "incontrovertible evidence" of support for the terrorists within the Saudi government.

    Problematic Interviews

    In 2003 and 2004, but only following a high-level request from the White House, 9/11-commission staff were able to make two visits to Saudi Arabia to interview Thumairy, Bayoumi, and Basnan.

    The questioners, a recently released commission memo notes, believed Thumairy "was deceptive during both interviews. ... His answers were either inconsistent or at times in direct conflict with information we have from other sources." Most significantly, he denied knowing Bayoumi, let alone Mihdhar and Hazmi. Shown a photograph of Bayoumi, he did not budge. He knew no one of that name, he said. Then, prompted by a whispered interjection from one of the Saudi officials present, he said he had heard of Bayoumi — but only from 9/11 news coverage.

    At a second interview, told by commission staff that witnesses had spoken of seeing him with Bayoumi, Thumairy said perhaps they had taken someone else for him. Told that telephone records showed numerous calls between his phones and Bayoumi's phones, just before the arrival of Mihdhar and Hazmi in the United States, Thumairy was stumped. Perhaps, he ventured, his phone number had been assigned to somebody else after he had it? Perhaps the calls had been made by someone else using Bayoumi's phone? Everything Thumairy came up with, his questioners noted, was "implausible."

    Bayoumi, interviewed earlier, made a more favorable impression. He stuck to his story about having met Mihdhar and Hazmi by chance. He said that he had rarely seen them after they came to San Diego, that they had been his neighbors for only a few days. Bayoumi said he had then decided he did not want to have much to do with them. Philip Zelikow, who was present during the interview, did not think Bayoumi had been a Saudi agent.

    The commission report, however, was to note that Bayoumi's passport contained a distinguishing mark that may be acquired by "especially devout Muslims" — or be associated with "adherence to al-Qaeda." Investigators had also turned up something else. Bayoumi's salary had been approved by a Saudi official whose son's photograph was later found on a computer disk in Pakistan that also contained photographs of three of the hijackers. The son, Saud al-Rashid, was produced for an interview in Saudi Arabia. He admitted having been in Afghanistan and having "cleansed" his passport of the evidence that he had traveled there. He said, though, that he had known nothing of the 9/11 plot. Commission staff who questioned Rashid thought he had been "deceptive."

    Finally, there was Basnan. The commission's interview with him, Dietrich Snell wrote afterward, established only "the witness' utter lack of credibility on virtually every material subject." His demeanor "engendered a combination of confrontation, evasiveness, and speechmaking ... his repudiation of statements made by him on prior occasions," and the "inherent incredibility of many of his assertions when viewed in light of the totality of the available evidence."

    Two men did not face questioning by commission investigators. One of them, a Saudi religious official named Saleh al-Hussayen, certainly should have, although his name does not appear in the commission report. Hussayen, who was involved in the administration of the holy mosques in Mecca and Medina, had been in the States for some three weeks before 9/11. For four days before the attacks, he had stayed at a hotel in Virginia.

    Then, on September 10, he had made an unexplained move. With his wife, he checked into the Marriott Residence Inn in Herndon, Virginia — the hotel at which 9/11 hijackers Mihdhar and Hazmi were spending their last night alive.

    Commission memos state that F.B.I. agents arrived at Hussayen's room at the Marriott after midnight on the 11th. The Saudi official began "muttering and drooping his head," sweating and drooling. Then he fell out of his chair and appeared to lose consciousness for a few moments. Paramedics summoned to the room were puzzled. Could the patient be "faking"?, they asked the agents. Doctors who examined Hussayen at a local hospital, moreover, found nothing wrong with him. An F.B.I. agent said later that the interview had been cut short because — the agent suggested — Hussayen "feigned a seizure."

    Asked by an F.B.I. agent why they had moved to the Marriott, Hussayen's wife said it was because they had wanted a room with a kitchenette. There was no sign, however, that the kitchenette in the room had been used. Asked whether she thought her husband could have been involved in the 9/11 attacks in any way, she replied, "I don't know." Agents never did obtain an adequate interview with Saleh al-Hussayen. Instead of continuing with his tour of the United States, he flew back to Sau di Arabia — and went on to head the administration of the two holy mosques. It remains unknown whether he had contact with Mihdhar and Hazmi on the eve of 9/11, or whether his presence at the Marriott that night was, as Bayoumi claimed of his meeting with the two terrorists, just a matter of chance.

    As Hussayen left Virginia for home, other F.B.I. agents in the state were interviewing former San Diego-area imam Anwar Aulaqi. He did not deny having had contact with Mihdhar and Hazmi in California and later — with Hazmi — in Virginia. He could not deny that he had transferred from San Diego to the East Coast in a time frame that paralleled theirs. He made nothing of it, however, and U.S. authorities apparently pursued the matter no further.

    Aulaqi had reportedly preached in the precincts of the U.S. Capitol shortly before 9/11. Not long afterward, he lunched at the Pentagon — in an area undamaged by the strike in which his acquaintances Mihdhar and Hazmi had played such a leading role. The reason for the lunch? An outreach effort to ease tensions between Muslim Americans and non-Muslims.

    Though American-born, Aulaqi is the son of a former minister of agriculture in Yemen. He remained on and off in the United States after 9/11, apparently unimpeded, before departing first for Britain and eventually for Yemen. Suspicion that he may have had foreknowledge of the 9/11 plot is fueled by the fact that the phone number of his Virginia mosque turned up among items found in an apartment used by accused conspirator Ramzi Binalshibh, who now languishes in Guantánamo.

    Only seven years later, starting in 2009, did Aulaqi begin to gain world notoriety. His name has been associated with: the multiple shootings by a U.S. Army major at Fort Hood, the almost successful attempt to explode a bomb on an airliner en route to Detroit, the major car-bomb scare in Times Square, and the last-minute discovery of concealed explosives aboard cargo planes destined for the United States. When Aulaqi's name began to feature in the Western press, Yemen's foreign minister cautioned that, pending real evidence, he should be considered not a terrorist but a preacher. President Obama took a different view. By early 2010 he had authorized the C.I.A. and the U.S. military to seek out, capture, or kill the Yemeni — assigning Aulaqi essentially the same status as that assigned at the time to Osama bin Laden. Aulaqi remains, as Zelikow noted when his name finally hit the headlines, "a 9/11 loose end."

    Taken together, the roles and activities of Thumairy, Bayoumi, Basnan, Hussayen, and Aulaqi — and the dubious accounts some of them have given of themselves — heightened suspicion that the perpetrators of 9/11 had support and sponsorship from backers never clearly identified.

    Trouble on the Home Front

    Congress's Joint Inquiry, its co-chair Bob Graham told the authors, had found evidence "that the Saudis were facilitating, assisting, some of the hijackers. And my suspicion is that they were providing some assistance to most if not all of the hijackers. ... It's my opinion that 9/11 could not have occurred but for the existence of an infrastructure of support within the United States. By 'the Saudis,' I mean the Saudi government and individual Saudis who are for some purposes dependent on the government — which includes all of the elite in the country."

    Those involved, in Graham's view, "included the royal family" and "some groups that were close to the royal family." Was it credible that members of the Saudi royal family would knowingly have facilitated the 9/11 operation? "I think," the former senator said, "that they did in fact take actions that were complicit with the hijackers."

    At page 396 of the Joint Inquiry's report, in the final section of the body of the report, a yawning gap appears. All 28 pages of Part Four, entitled "Finding, Discussion and Narrative Regarding Certain Sensitive National Security Matters," have been redacted. The pages are there, but — with the rare exception of an occasional surviving word or fragmentary, meaningless clause — they are entirely blank. The decision to censor that entire section caused a furor in 2003.

    Inquiries established that, while the withholdings were technically the responsibility of the C.I.A., the agency would not have obstructed release of most of the pages. The order that they must remain secret had come from President Bush.

    Bob Graham and his Republican co-chairman, former senator Richard Shelby, felt strongly that the bulk of the withheld material could and should have been made public. So did Representative Nancy Pelosi, the ranking Democrat in the House. Shelby said, "My judgment is that 95 percent of that information should be declassified, become uncensored, so the American people would know."

    Know what? "I can't tell you what's in those pages," the Joint Inquiry's staff director, Eleanor Hill, said. "I can tell you that the chapter deals with information that our committee found in the F.B.I. and C.I.A. files that was very disturbing. It had to do with sources of foreign support for the hijackers." The focus of the material, leaks to the press soon established, had been Saudi Arabia.

    There were, sources said, additional details about Bayoumi, who had helped Mihdhar and Hazmi in California, and about his associate Basnan. The censored portion of the report had stated that Anwar Aulaqi, the San Diego imam, had been a "central figure" in a support network for the future hijackers.

    A U.S. official who had read the censored section told the Los Angeles Times that it described "very direct, very specific links" with Saudi officials, links that "cannot be passed off as rogue, isolated or coincidental." The New York Times journalist Philip Shenon has written that Senator Graham and his investigators became "convinced that a number of sympathetic Saudi officials, possibly within the sprawling Islamic Affairs Ministry, had known that al-Qaeda terrorists were entering the United States beginning in 2000 in preparation for some sort of attack. Graham believed the Saudi officials had directed spies operating in the United States to assist them."

    Most serious of all, Newsweek 's Michael Isikoff reported that the information uncovered by the investigation had drawn "apparent connections between high-level Saudi princes and associates of the hijackers." Absent release of the censored pages, one can only surmise what the connections may have been.

    There may be a clue, however, in the first corroboration — arising from the authors' interview with a former C.I.A. officer — of an allegation relating to the capture in Pakistan, while the Joint Inquiry was at work, of senior bin Laden aide Abu Zubaydah. Many months of interrogation followed, including, from about June or July 2002, no fewer than 83 sessions of waterboarding. Zubaydah was the first al-Qaeda prisoner on whom that controversial "enhanced technique" was used.

    John Kiriakou, then a C.I.A. operative serving in Pakistan, had played a leading part in the operation that led to the capture of Zubaydah — gravely wounded — in late March that year. Back in Washington early that fall, Kiriakou informed the authors, he was told by colleagues that cables on the interrogation reported that Zubaydah had come up with the names of several Saudi princes. He "raised their names in sort of a mocking fashion, [indicating] he had the support of the Saudi government." The C.I.A. followed up by running name traces, Kiriakou said.

    Zubaydah had named three princes, but by late July all three had died — within a week of one another. First to go was Prince Ahmed bin Salman, the leading figure in the international horse-racing community who was mentioned earlier, in our account of Saudis hastening to get out of the United States after 9/11. Ahmed, a nephew of both King Fahd's and Prince Sultan's, died of a heart attack following abdominal surgery at the age of 43, according to the Saudis.

    Prince Sultan bin Faisal bin Turki bin Abdullah al-Saud, also a nephew of King Fahd's and Prince Sultan's, reportedly died in a car accident. A third prince, Fahd bin Turki bin Saud al-Kabir, whose father was a cousin of Fahd's and Sultan's, was said to have died "of thirst."

    Former C.I.A. officer Kiriakou later said his colleagues had told him they believed that what Zubaydah had told them about the princes was true. "We had known for years," he told the authors, "that Saudi royals — I should say elements of the royal family — were funding al-Qaeda."

    In 2003, during the brouhaha about the redacted chapter in the Joint Inquiry report, Crown Prince Abdullah's spokesman, Adel al-Jubeir, made a cryptic comment that has never been further explained. The Saudi regime's own probe, he said, had uncovered "wrongdoing by some." He noted, though, that the royal family had thousands of members, and insisted that the regime itself had no connection to the 9/11 plot.

    More than 40 U.S. senators clamored for the release of the censored section of the report. They included John Kerry, Joe Lieberman, Charles Schumer, Sam Brownback, Olympia Snowe, and Pat Roberts.

    Nothing happened.

    Bob Graham, with his long experience in the field as a member and chair not only of the Joint Inquiry but also of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, has continued to voice his anger over the censorship even in retirement. President Bush, he wrote in his book Intelligence Matters in 2004, had "engaged in a cover-up ... to protect not only the agencies that failed but also America's relationship with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. ... He has done so by misclassifying information on national security data. While the information may be embarrassing or politically damaging, its revelation would not damage national security." Richard Shelby concluded independently that virtually all the censored pages were "being kept secret for reasons other than national security."

    "It was," Graham wrote, "as if the president's loyalty lay more with Saudi Arabia than with America's safety." In Graham's view, Bush's role in suppressing important information about 9/11, along with other transgressions, should have led to his impeachment and removal from office.

    Within weeks of his inauguration, in 2009, Bush's successor, Barack Obama, made a point of receiving relatives of those bereaved on 9/11. The widow of one of those who died at the World Trade Center, Kristen Breitweiser, has said that she brought the new president's attention to the infamous censored section of the Joint Inquiry report. Obama told her, she said afterward, that he was willing to get the suppressed material released. Two years later, the chapter remains classified — and the White House will not say why. "If the 28 pages were to be made public," said one of the officials who was privy to them before President Bush ordered their removal, "I have no question that the entire relationship with Saudi Arabia would change overnight."

    Blame It on Iraq

    The 9/11-commission report certainly blurred the truth about the Saudi role. By the time it was published, in July 2004, more than a year had passed since the invasion of Iraq, a country that — the report said — had nothing to do with 9/11.

    In the 18 months before the invasion, however, the Bush administration had persistently seeded the notion that there was an Iraqi connection to 9/11. While never alleging a direct Iraqi role, President Bush had linked Saddam Hussein's name to that of Osama bin Laden. Vice President Cheney had gone further, suggesting repeatedly that there had been Iraqi involvement in the attacks.

    Polls suggest that the publicity about Iraq's supposed involvement affected the degree to which the U.S. public came to view Iraq as an enemy deserving retribution. Before the invasion, a Pew Research poll found that 57 percent of those polled believed Hussein had helped the 9/11 terrorists. Forty-four percent of respondents to a Knight-Ridder poll had gained the impression that "most" or "some" of the hijackers had been Iraqi. In fact, none were. In the wake of the invasion, a Washington Post poll found that 69 percent of Americans believed it likely that Saddam Hussein had been personally involved in 9/11.

    None of the speculative leads suggesting an Iraqi link to the attacks proved out. "We went back 10 years," said Michael Scheuer, who looked into the matter at the request of director Tenet. "We examined about 20,000 documents, probably something along the lines of 75,000 pages of information, and there was no connection between [al-Qaeda] and Saddam."

    What About Pakistan?

    In the years during which the conflict in Iraq had the world's attention, the real evidence that linked other nations to Osama bin Laden and 9/11 faded from the public consciousness. This was in part the fault of the 9/11 commission, which failed to highlight and fully detail the evidence. It was, ironically, a former deputy homeland-security adviser to President Bush, Richard Falkenrath, who loudly expressed that uncomfortable truth. The commission's report, Falkenrath wrote, had produced only superficial coverage of the fact that al-Qaeda was "led and financed largely by Saudis, with extensive support from Pakistani intelligence."

    Pakistan has a strong Islamic-fundamentalist movement. It was, with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, one of only three nations that recognized the Taliban. Osama bin Laden had operated there as early as 1979, with the blessing of Saudi intelligence, in the first phase of the struggle to oust the Soviets from neighboring Afghanistan. The contacts he made were durable.

    What bin Laden himself had said about Pakistan two years before 9/11 seemed to speak volumes. "Pakistani people have great love for Islam," he observed in 1998 after the late-summer U.S. missile attack on his camps, in which seven Pakistanis were killed. "And they always have offered sacrifices for the cause of religion." Later, in another interview, he explained how he himself had managed to avoid the attack. "We found a sympathetic and generous people in Pakistan ... receive[d] information from our beloved ones and helpers of jihad."

    Pakistan sees Afghanistan as strategically crucial, not least on account of an issue of which many members of the public in the West have minimal knowledge or none at all. Pakistan and India have fought three wars in the past half-century over Kashmir, a large, disputed territory over which each nation has claims and which each partially controls, and where there is also a homegrown insurgency. Having leverage over Afghanistan, given its geographical position, enabled Pakistan to recruit Afghan and Arab volunteers to join the Kashmir insurgency — and tie down a large part of the Indian army.

    The insurgents inserted into Kashmir have been by and large mujahideen, committed to a cause they see as holy. Lieutenant General Hamid Gul, who in 1989 headed the ISI — the Pakistani equivalent of the C.I.A. — himself saw the conflict as jihad. Bin Laden, for his part, made common cause with Gul and, in the years that followed, with like-minded figures in the ISI. Many ISI recruits for the fight in Kashmir were trained in bin Laden camps. He would still be saying, as late as 2000, "Whatever Pakistan does in the matter of Kashmir, we support it."

    So powerful was the ISI in Afghanistan, former U.S. special envoy Peter Tomsen told the 9/11 commission, that the Taliban "actually were the junior partners in an unholy alliance" of ISI, al-Qaeda, and the Taliban. As it grew in influence, the ISI liaised closely with Saudi intelligence, and the Saudis reportedly lined the pockets of senior Pakistani officers with cash. The ISI over the years achieved not only military muscle but massive political influence within Pakistan, so much so that some came to characterize it as "the most influential body in Pakistan," a "shadow government."

    While no hard evidence would emerge that Pakistan had any foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks, two days later Washington issued a blunt warning as it prepared to retaliate against the bin Laden organization and its hosts in Afghanistan. It was then — according to ISI director Mahmoud Ahmed, who was visiting Washington at the time — that U.S. deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage said the U.S. would bomb Pakistan "back to the Stone Age" should it fail to go along with American demands for assistance. (Armitage has denied having used that extreme language.)

    The former C.I.A. station chief in Islamabad Robert Grenier recently confirmed that Pakistani cooperation against al-Qaeda did improve vastly after 9/11. The arrests of three of the best-known top al-Qaeda operatives — Abu Zubaydah, Ramzi Binalshibh, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed — were, it seems, made by Pakistani intelligence agents and police, in some if not all cases working in collaboration with the C.I.A.

    From the time America routed al-Qaeda, however, incoming information indicated that the ISI continued to remain in touch with bin Laden or was aware of his location. ISI officials, Peter Tomsen told the 9/11 commission, were "still visiting [bin Laden] as late as December 2001" — and continued to know his location thereafter. In 2007, Kathleen McFarland, a former senior Defense Department official, spoke of bin Laden's presence in Pakistan as a fact. "I'm convinced," military historian Stephen Tanner told CNN in 2010, "that he is protected by the ISI. I just think it's impossible after all this time to not know where he is."

    Obama had vowed during his campaign for the presidency, "We will kill bin Laden. ... That has to be our biggest national-security priority." In office, he made no such public statements. The hunt for bin Laden, meanwhile, seemed to be getting nowhere — and not to be a high priority. Looking back, though, there was a trickle of fresh information that suggested otherwise.

    General David Petraeus, commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, was asked on Meet the Press in 2010 whether it was now less necessary to capture bin Laden. "I think," he replied, "capturing or killing Osama bin Laden is still a very, very important task for all of those who are engaged in counterterrorism around the world."

    For those who doubted that bin Laden was still alive, late fall 2010 brought two new bin Laden audio messages. There had been intercepts of al-Qaeda communications, U.S. officials told The New York Times, indicating that he still shaped strategy. Then, within weeks, CNN quoted a "senior NATO official" as saying bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, were believed to be hiding not far from each other in northwestern Pakistan, and not "in a cave." The same day, the New York Daily News cited a source with "access to all reporting on bin Laden" as having spoken of two "sightings considered credible" in recent years — even "a grainy photo of bin Laden inside a truck."

    The End of bin Laden

    Then, at 11:35 p.m. on the night of Sunday, May 1, President Obama appeared on television screens across the globe to say: "Tonight I can report to the American people and to the world that the United States has conducted an operation that killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda and a terrorist who's responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women, and children."

    Killed he was, and in Pakistan. It looked to many as though Pakistan had been knowingly harboring him. For the world's most wanted terrorist had been living — by all accounts for years, comfortably housed and well protected — in not just any Pakistani city, but in the pleasant town of Abbottabad, where many serving and retired military officers live, and within shouting distance of the nation's most prestigious military academy, the equivalent of America's West Point. The ISI also has a presence there.

    Officials in Washington were scathingly critical when these facts became public. The Pakistanis, C.I.A. director Leon Panetta reportedly told lawmakers, had been either "involved or incompetent." The president's counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, thought it "inconceivable" that bin Laden had not had a "support system" in Abbottabad. On 60 Minutes, Obama himself speculated "whether there might have been some people inside of government, people outside of government [supporting bin Laden], and that's something we have to investigate, and more importantly the Pakistani government has to investigate."

    Bin Laden had been tracked to Abbottabad, U.S. sources later revealed, thanks to information on his use of couriers to hand-carry messages to his fellow terrorists. Unmentioned were facts about the link between Abbottabad and al-Qaeda that former president Pervez Musharraf had made public in his 2006 memoir. Pakistan's 2005 capture and transfer to U.S. custody of another very senior bin Laden aide — Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's successor, Abu Faraj al-Libbi — Musharraf had written, had been achieved after a prolonged pursuit by Pakistani investigators. In the course of the hunt, according to Musharraf, the investigators discovered that Libbi used no less than three safe houses — all in Abbottabad. Far from being a place where one would not expect to find a top terrorist hiding, it turns out, Abbottabad has a track record for being exactly that.

    A week after the strike against bin Laden, the correspondent for The Guardian in Islamabad reported that a decade ago — after 9/11 — President Bush struck a deal with Musharraf: should bin Laden be located inside Pakistan's borders, the U.S. would be permitted unilaterally to conduct a raid. "There was an agreement," a former senior U.S. official was quoted as saying, "that if we knew where Osama was, we were going to come and get him. The Pakistanis would put up a hue and cry, but they wouldn't stop us." Musharraf has denied that such a deal was made. According to The Guardian, however, an unnamed Pakistani official offered corroboration for the story. "As far as our American friends are concerned," he said, "they have just implemented the agreement."

    We cannot yet know the full background to how the U.S. tracked down bin Laden. We do have a better sense, a decade on, as to whether powerful players in foreign nations had a hand in 9/11.

    Ken Jensen and Rachel Ehrenfeld are at the ACD (American Center for Democracy Economic Warfare Institute. This is EWI Digest Posting No. 13, July 7, 2011

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Ted Belman, July 6, 2011.

    Israel is sitting pretty. Sure she has problems, but her future is bright. Even her present is not too shabby.

    Of immediate concern, is the attempt by the PA to gain recognitions and membership in the UN in the upcoming session in September. To this end the PA has agreed with Hamas to unify, thinking it would strengthen their case at the UN. Not so fast. Actually unification is proving more difficult to achieve then implied, due to irreconcilable differences. These differences have more to do with tactics rather than goals, they both want to destroy the Jewish state, and to their unwillingness to share power. So, at last reading, they have decided to postpone concluding an agreement until after September, if ever.

    The most the PA can expect at the UN is recognition by the General Assembly, of Palestine with the '49 armistice lines as borders. But such recognition will change nothing on the ground and will be meaningless. The US has made it clear that it will veto its admission to membership. Furthermore, Israel has succeeded, diplomatically, in turning the EU around on the matter of recognition. A few months ago, Britain, France and Germany were threatening Israel to accept the armistice lines as the basis for negotiations, failing which they would vote for recognition. Now they are lined up with the US and Israel in urging the PA not to go to the UN for recognition.

    Israel has successfully made the case that such a unilateral move by the PA would be a violation of the Oslo Accords which mandated no unilateral moves and a negotiated settlement. Israel has made it clear that such a move would result in unilateral moves by Israel and the end of the Oslo Accords. This means the end of the PA created pursuant to these accords. The primary unilateral move mooted by Israel is the extension of Israel law to the settlement blocs which would make the blocs sovereign territory of Israel. It would also replace occupation law over these territories. Many in Israel are demanding that Israel not stop there but that she should do the same for all of Area "C" over which she currently has full control pursuant to the Oslo Accords. These lands contain 300,000 Israelis and 10,000 Arabs. Israeli grassroots are now mobilizing a major campaign to increase Israeli support for such a move.

    The last thing the Quartet wants to see, is the end of the peace process because its control over Israel would also end. It prefers to keep Israel shackled to the Oslo Accords while it violates them by demanding Israel concede more that the Accords required. It also violates them by interfering in negotiations.

    Last I heard, Abbas is still determined to go the UN. If he does, he risks alienating the US and the EU and ending the PA and his job.

    The US and the EU have argued that the turmoil in the Middle East makes it all the more imperative that Israel make concessions for peace. But they have never made the case. Israel is not buying it and neither are independent thinkers. In fact Israel believes the opposite is true.

    The US will not allow the US-brokered peace agreement between Israel and Egypt to be abandoned by Egypt. A new poll conducted by Egypt's ruling military regime showed that a 67 percent majority of Egyptians want to maintain their nation's peace treaty with Israel. This contradicted an earlier poll which showed that 54% of Egyptians wanted to scrap the agreement.

    Israel Today commented,

    "There is speculation that the new poll conducted by the Egyptian regime could be rigged. Egypt receives a massive amount of American military aid as a condition of the Camp David Accord. But, the numbers could also show a shift in attitude."

    The US has brought the Muslim Brotherhood in from the cold in the vain hope that it can be managed. Hamas is moving closer to Egypt and away from Syria in the belief that the Assad regime cannot last. This may or may not be problematic for Israel but it is certainly problematic for Jordan who needs Israel more than ever to protect it. In fact Jordan wants Israel to remain in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) because it's in Jordan's best interest that she does. When Jordan pushes the peace process she does so to pacify her citizens and to show Arab solidarity but she doesn't mean it. Palestinian nationalism is a threat to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. She prefers the status quo, thank you very much.

    Syria is on the ropes and is expected to go down for the count. Turkey has been threatening to invade Syria ostensibly to set up a safe zone for refugees but she may remain there and perhaps end up controlling Syria and by extension, Lebanon. The US is coordinating all this with Turkey and Israel. Remember, Syria and Lebanon used to be part of the Ottoman Empire. The US and Saudi Arabia have been trying to separate Syria from Iran for years and this may just be the way to do it.

    At the same time, there are reports that the US is propping up the Assad regime by calling for it to talk with the opposition rather than calling for it to resign. Elliott Abrams is critical with this realpolitik and writes

    "That is bad enough, but realpolitik must then be judged by its logic and its fruits. There are none, except for undermining the moral position of the United States. To repeat what has been written here before, the Assad regime is an enemy of the United States. It has the blood of tens of thousands of Syrians on its hands but also of thousands of Americans, killed in Iraq by jihadis it led into Iraq for that purpose. It is Iran's only Arab ally, and provides Iran with a Mediterranean port, a border with Israel through Hizballah, and an arms trafficking route from Iran to Hizballah. It supports and houses Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups. The fall of the Assad regime would be the greatest blow we can strike against Iran and its terrorist allies today."

    Hopefully, the US will come to its senses and follow the Turkey option above set out. In fact, we see the fruits of the US coordinating efforts in the fact that Turkey did not back the current flotilla.

    A week ago Lebanon formed a new government dominated by Hizballah loyalists and pro-Syrian politicians. Thus Lebanon can be counted on to be a strong part of the Iran/Syria axis and Turkey is being rejected due to its restored alliance with the US.

    But Hezbollah is not home free. According to the leading Arab international daily, alsarq alawsat, it is under duress because the majority of Lebanese do not want a sharia state nor do they want Hezbollah to involve them in a devastating war with Israel. To make matters worse four top leaders of Hezbollah have just been indicted for killing Lebanon's beloved PM Rafik Harari. Finally, Hezbollah may be losing her Syrian patron and has begun removing her arms stored in Syria.

    It remains to be seen how the Syrian/Hezbollah relationship develops. Will it strengthen or will it fall apart? Will Turkey, with US support, be passive or aggressive? Time will tell.

    Greece, who previously was totally in the Arab camp, switched sides in the last year. Israel and Greece have been warming relations since Israel's relations with Turkey took a turn for the worse.. Israel plans to export gas to Europe through Greece and Israelis are vacationing in Greece rather than in Turkey. And now Greece has stopped the flotilla from leaving her ports, at least for now.

    Yesterday, the Quartet, in a surprise move, issued a statement in which it supported Israel and discouraged the flotilla.

    "The Quartet recognizes that Israel has legitimate security concerns that must continue to be safeguarded,"

    "Members of the Quartet are committed to working with Israel, Egypt and the international community to prevent the illicit trafficking of arms and ammunition into Gaza and believe efforts to maintain security while enabling movement and access for Palestinian people and goods are critical,"

    Good news, indeed.

    Saudi Arabia recently threatened to acquire nuclear weapons as a needed defense against Iran who will soon be nuclear. It is noteworthy that Israel has had the bomb for four decades but Saudi Arabia saw no need to acquire her own capability 'til now. Israel was not perceived as a threat. Saudi Arabia no longer looks to the US for protection because it is not reliable. In any potential war with Iran, the Saudis see Israel as an ally.

    The Palestinians did not rise up against Israel because they had no reason to. They have more rights and economic well being than Arab citizens of Turkey, Syria, Jordan or Egypt.

    The primary threat to Israel is the possibility that Iran or its proxies will use WMD's, be they chemical, biological or atomic, to bring Israel down even if it means their own destruction; the Samson option if you will. Will Israel pre-empt? Your guess is as good as mine. But one thing is certain. Neither Syria or Lebanon wants war with Israel because it will result in a massive defeat for them and the loss of power by Assad and Hezbollah.

    Even President Obama has been neutered by his campaign for reelection. His so called tough love has been put on hold until his second term which, judging by the polls, may not materialize. A Republican president is much more likely to stand with Israel.

    On the economic front, Israel is coming up roses. Her economy grew

    "by 4.7 percent last year according to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development against an average of 2.8 for its member countries. The OECD forecast for Israel in 2011 is 5.4 percent."

    Canada's Globe and Mail recently reported

    "The London-based World Energy Council says Israel's Shfela Basin, a half-hour drive south of Jerusalem, holds 250 billion barrels of recoverable shale oil, possibly making the energy-vulnerable country (as expressed by The Wall Street Journal) "the world's newest energy giant." With reserves of 260 billion barrels, Saudi Arabia would remain the world's No. 1 oil country — though not, perhaps, for long. Howard Jonas, CEO of U.S.-based IDT Corp., the company that owns the Shfela Basin concession, says there is much more oil under Israel than under Saudi Arabia: Perhaps, he says, twice as much."

    It concluded that Israel should be pumping oil within three to four years. Israel, it reported, "will match Canada in oil exports to the U.S. and thus free its long-time friend from needing to deal with tyrants".

    This week Bloomberg reported,

    "The results for Sara and Myra follow other gas finds off Israel since 2009, including the Tamar and Leviathan discoveries that together hold an estimated 25 trillion cubic feet. The finds are sufficient to meet Israel's domestic needs eventually and enable it to export gas, industry executives and government officials have said."

    In effect, these resources will change the global balance of power.

    Yes, Israel is sitting pretty.

    Ted Belman is a retired lawyer and the Editor of Israpundit. He made aliya from Canada last year and now lives in Jerusalem, Israel. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, July 6, 2011.

    Black Canyon, north of Eilat

    "I hate cameras. They are so much more sure than I am about everything."
    — John Steinbeck


    The following anecdote has nothing to do with this week's photograph. On the other hand, it may be the only thing that matters. Last Thursday I worked an event in downtown Jerusalem. The evening began with a maddening traffic jam that turned a 10-minute ride into an hour of frustration and I arrived late to a job for the first time in my professional career. I then worked seven hours standing on my feet, packed up my car and headed home. As I pulled onto the tunnel road, which connects Jerusalem's Gilo neighborhood with my home in Gush Etzion, I brought my car to a halt in an endless line of traffic. For the second time that day, at 12:24 a.m., a 10-minute drive became a slow and painful crawl home. With one lane closed for construction, traffic moved about a quarter of a mile at a time with seven-to-eight minute standstill delays. At 12:52 a.m., now halfway through the second tunnel, the horns started. Miserable drivers, no doubt similarly exhausted, began blaring their horns in disgust. First one, then another until at least a dozen joined the fray. I turned up the music in my car and closed my eyes. When I opened them again a moment later, I spotted a van that had pulled into the service bay of the tunnel. The slider opened and out jumped a man, than another and another until eight men, charedim in black coats and hats, joined hands and danced in a joyful circle to the midnight din. We always have a choice. Life is short. Live every moment. This week's shot was taken in the desert north of Eilat, on a trail connecting the Black Canyon with Amram's Pillars. Near the end of my hike, I climbed a small rock formation and discovered this window overlooking the section of trail I had just completed, a thrilling conclusion to an afternoon of peace and quiet, no disgruntled drivers, no traffic and no jams.

    Technical Data: Nikon D700, 18-200 zoom at 135mm, f16 @ 1/160 sec., ISO 400.

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

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Errol Phillips, July 6, 2011.

    A nationally recognized computer expert, Mara Zebest, who has served as contributing author and technical editor for more than 100 books on Adobe and Microsoft software says the Obama long-form birth-certificate image released by the White House is a fraudulent document created with Adobe software.

    "The PDF File released by the White House contains evidence of manipulation suggesting that one or more forgers utilized existing Hawaiian birth certificates to assemble fraudulently for Barack Obama a document the president presented to the world as authentic," Mara Zebest told WND.

    I want you to do something for me. I was never a Birther. Not only was I not a Birther ... I cringed when the Issue was branded about in the news because I thought it was a losing issue.

    Yet there is some very disconcerting evidence starting to come about that the Long Form Birth Certificate that was recently published is a fraud ala Dan Rather's fraud about Bush.

    If you are fair ... I would like for you to read this report prepared by this very credentialed and well respected person ... and then I ask you if you can find for me just one well-credentialed person that refutes this report.

    Just one !!!!

    Have the courage to read it through.

    It's at wnd~Obama_LFBC_Report.pdf

    Contact Errol Phillips by email at ep@pinehurst2.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Fred Reifenberg, July 6, 2011.

    Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il Go to http://reifyreadying.blogspot.com/ to see more of his graphic art.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Phyllis Chesler, July 6, 2011.

    There they all stand, guilty as sin, Afghan Taliban terrorists disguised in women's burqas — but exposed when they were captured by the Afghan Border Police. Their photo (or rather photos) were taken by an Afghan photographer somewhere near Jalalabad and have just been seen worldwide.

    One of these charmers was wearing an explosive vest; six had AK-47s. Clearly they were up to no good. One wonders how long they will remain in jail and what they will do when they emerge.

    These photographs conclusively validate the concern that Dr. Daniel Pipes has had about the security risk that burqas represent. For the last six years, Dr. Pipes has been detailing the number of common criminals and Islamist terrorists who have robbed jewelry stories and peeped into women's bathrooms while wearing burqas, or who have blown themselves and others up from under the protective cover of a mere woman's shroud.

    In December, 2009, a suicide bomber dressed in a full veil and abaya gained access to a ceremony attended by Somali government officials in Mogadishu and killed 19 people, including three cabinet ministers. In February, 2010, a female suicide bomber killed 54 Shia pilgrims in Baghdad. She was dressed in an abaya, which police said allowed her to hide an explosive device. In December, 2010 in Pakistan, a woman wearing a burqa threw a grenade and detonated an explosive vest at a U.N. security checkpoint, killing 41 people.

    This is not just happening in Muslim-majority countries or in war zones.

    In August, 2010, a man wearing a burqa robbed a bank in Silver Spring, Maryland. In January, 2011, a man wearing niqab (a face veil) attempted to rob a bank in Philadelphia. Three years earlier, also in Philadelphia, three men dressed as Muslim women stuck up a Bank of America branch. One of the men shot and killed a police officer during their getaway.

    Why are burqas allowed in public? Or rather, why don't we view them as potentially suspicious as opposed to a religious custom which we infidels are obligated to honor and revere?

    For reasons of safety, the West, and for that matter the entire Muslim world, should immediately ban the burqa as a security risk.

    However, I have also gone on record calling for a ban on the burqa, at least in the West, on the grounds that it violates a woman's human rights.

    A burqa wearer may feel that she cannot breathe, that she might slowly be suffocating. She may feel buried alive and may become anxious or claustrophobic. She is trapped in a sensory deprivation isolation chamber. It is a form of permanent torture. Just imagine the consequences of getting used to this as a way of life. But perhaps one never gets used to it. They merely continue to suffer. For example, an unnamed Saudi princess described her experience of the Saudi abaya (to Jean Sasson) as follows:

    When we walked out of the cool souq area into the blazing hot sun, I gasped for breath and sucked furiously through the sheer black fabric. The air tasted stale and dry as it filtered through the thin gauzy cloth. I had purchased the sheerest veil available, yet I felt I was seeing life through a thick screen. How could women see through veils made of a thicker fabric? The sky was no longer blue, the glow of the sun had dimmed; my heart plunged to my stomach when I realized that from that moment, outside my own home I would not experience life as it really is in all its color. The world suddenly seemed a dull place. And dangerous, too! I groped and stumbled along the pitted, cracked sidewalk, fearful of breaking an ankle or leg.

    Qanta Ahmed, a Pakistani-British-American religious Muslim physician worked in Saudi Arabia for a few years. Board certified in four areas, immediately upon arrival, she nevertheless became invisible, demeaned, shrouded, akin to chattel property in the airport where no man and no porter helped her (or other women) with their luggage. She writes:

    The veiling was anathema to me. Even with a deep understanding of Islam, I could not imagine mummification is what an enlightened, merciful God would ever have wished for half of all His creation. These shrouded, gagged silences rise into a shrieking register of muted laments for stillborn freedoms. Such enforced incarceration of womanhood is a form of female infanticide.

    I must repeat, as I always do, that I am not opposed to the hijab (the headscarf). I am only addressing the face-obscuring garments that are cumbersome, dangerous, and exclude a woman from normal social interaction.

    However, I have also gone on record calling for a ban on the burqa, at least in the West, on the grounds that it violates a woman's human rights.

    A burqa wearer may feel that she cannot breathe, that she might slowly be suffocating. She may feel buried alive and may become anxious or claustrophobic. She is trapped in a sensory deprivation isolation chamber. It is a form of permanent torture. Just imagine the consequences of getting used to this as a way of life. But perhaps one never gets used to it. They merely continue to suffer. For example, an unnamed Saudi princess described her experience of the Saudi abaya (to Jean Sasson) as follows:

    When we walked out of the cool souq area into the blazing hot sun, I gasped for breath and sucked furiously through the sheer black fabric. The air tasted stale and dry as it filtered through the thin gauzy cloth. I had purchased the sheerest veil available, yet I felt I was seeing life through a thick screen. How could women see through veils made of a thicker fabric? The sky was no longer blue, the glow of the sun had dimmed; my heart plunged to my stomach when I realized that from that moment, outside my own home I would not experience life as it really is in all its color. The world suddenly seemed a dull place. And dangerous, too! I groped and stumbled along the pitted, cracked sidewalk, fearful of breaking an ankle or leg.

    Qanta Ahmed, a Pakistani-British-American religious Muslim physician worked in Saudi Arabia for a few years. Board certified in four areas, immediately upon arrival, she nevertheless became invisible, demeaned, shrouded, akin to chattel property in the airport where no man and no porter helped her (or other women) with their luggage. She writes:

    The veiling was anathema to me. Even with a deep understanding of Islam, I could not imagine mummification is what an enlightened, merciful God would ever have wished for half of all His creation. These shrouded, gagged silences rise into a shrieking register of muted laments for stillborn freedoms. Such enforced incarceration of womanhood is a form of female infanticide.

    I must repeat, as I always do, that I am not opposed to the hijab (the headscarf). I am only addressing the face-obscuring garments that are cumbersome, dangerous, and exclude a woman from normal social interaction.

    And, as I have said before, wherever burqas, chadris or the extreme Saudi or Iranian versions of female head, face, and body covering exist, you will probably find fundamentalist Islam and potentially infidel-hating, Jew-hating terrorists. Burqas and jihad go hand-in-hand.

    There is another reason to ban the burqa in the West. Muslim girls and women are being beaten and even honor killed for refusing to wear this costume of utter subordination. Many (certainly not all) Muslim girls must toe the line in terms of how they dress or they will be threatened, beaten, acid-attacked, or even honor killed. If their families or roving self-appointed Vice and Virtue squads decide that they are looking too "Western," or dressing in too modern a fashion, they will be punished.

    Young, including educated, Muslim women in the West are increasingly wearing oppressive Muslim garb in a show of resistance to infidel culture. Just yesterday in New York City, I saw, in ninety-degree heat, a casually dressed man followed by a woman in a severe and heavy hijab.

    I have found that Muslim girls and women are at risk in the West when they attempt to assimilate. When they begin to want "Western" things, beginning with casual clothing, makeup, an education, non-Muslim friends, perhaps a non-Muslim boyfriend, perhaps a divorce from an illiterate and violent first cousin — that is when their fundamentalist families view them as "prostitutes" and kill them.

    We in the West must strategize ways to protect those Muslims and ex-Muslims who choose to assimilate and to prosecute those who are violent towards them.

    Dr. Chesler is an Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women's Studies at City University of New York. She is an author and lecturer and co-founder of the still ongoing Association for Women in Psychology (1969). Visit her website at http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/phyllischesler/

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Mordechai Nisan, July 6, 2011.

    Only Israel West of the River
    by Mordechai Nisan
    Publication Date: 2011
    ISBN/EAN13: 1461027268 / 9781461027263
    Page Count: 160
    Language: English

    This book offers a coherent paradigm to contend with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It first clarifies the national Jewish character of Israel, the danger of domestic Arab challenges, and the imperative of Israeli rule throughout the area west of the Jordan River. It secondly considers the Palestinian population in Judea and Samaria, and the complexity of arranging Jewish-Arab accommodation and political stability. The book then argues for the consolidation of a Palestinian entity east of the river in Jordan. This innovative approach to conflict-resolution offers the only reasonable political solution for a problem that is more than one hundred years old. The two-state solution, currently monopolizing political discourse, is a non-starter; our proposal is the only worthy and serious option to consider.

    The author writes:

    Everybody is talking about a Palestinian state and the two-state solution. This has monopolized political discourse for decades, and smothered alternative proposals.

    While teaching Middle East Studies for 35 years at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, I researched and wrote extensively on Israel and the Arab-Israeli conflict, the Palestinian question, minorities in the Middle East, Islam, and U.S. foreign policy.

    My new book "ONLY ISRAEL WEST OF THE RIVER" defends the Jewish national state narrative, rejects the Palestinian state idea, argues in favor of Jerusalem united under Israeli rule, elucidates the Jewish settlement enterprise, while offering a coherent paradigm to contend with the Israeli-Palestinian conflct.

    ONLY ISRAEL WEST OF THE Jordan river is my core proposal to generate new political discourse and conflict-resolution toward a vision of peace. My book cuts through the fog of disinformation on behalf of reality, truth, and justice.

    For a learning experience on the most controversial and potentially explosive political issue of our times, read ONLY ISRAEL WEST OF THE RIVER. Order it at : www.createspace.com/3584834 or on www.Amazon.com or www.barnesandnoble.com. .

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Helen Freedman, July 6, 2011.

    This was written by George Gilder, founder of the Discovery Institute and author of The Israel Test (Richard Vigilante Books, 2009).


    America's enemies understand deeply and intuitively that no U.S. goals or resources in the Middle East are remotely as important as Israel. Why don't we?

    Israel cruised through the recent global slump with scarcely a down quarter and no deficit or stimulus package. It is steadily increasing its global supremacy, behind only the U.S., in an array of leading-edge technologies. It is the global master of microchip design, network algorithms and medical instruments.

    During a period of water crises around the globe, Israel is incontestably the world leader in water recycling and desalinization. During an epoch when all the world's cities, from Seoul to New York, face a threat of terrorist rockets, Israel's newly battle-tested "Iron Dome" provides a unique answer based on original inventions in microchips that radically reduce the weight and cost of the interceptors.

    Israel is also making major advances in longer-range missile defense, robotic warfare, and unmanned aerial vehicles that can stay aloft for days. In the face of a global campaign to boycott its goods, and an ever-ascendant shekel, it raised its exports 19.9% in 2010's fourth quarter and 27.3% in the first quarter of 2011.

    Israelis supply Intel with many of its advanced microprocessors, from the Pentium and Sandbridge, to the Atom and Centrino. Israeli companies endow Cisco with new core router designs and real-time programmable network processors for its next-generation systems. They supply Apple with robust miniaturized solid state memory systems for its iPhones, iPods and iPads, and Microsoft with critical user interface designs for the OS7 product line and the Kinect gaming motion-sensor interface, the fastest rising consumer electronic product in history.

    Vital to the U.S. economy and military capabilities, tiny Israel's unparalleled achievements in industry and intellect have conjured up the familiar anti-Semitic frenzies among all the economically and morally failed societies of the socialist and Islamist Third World, from Iran to Venezuela. They all imagine that by delegitimizing, demoralizing, defeating or even destroying Israel, they could take a major step toward bringing down the entire capitalist West.

    To most sophisticated Westerners, the jihadist focus on Israel seems bizarre and counterproductive. But on the centrality of Israel the jihadists have it right.

    U.S. policy is crippled by a preoccupation with the claimed grievances of the Palestinians and their supposed right to a state of their own in the West Bank and Gaza. But the Palestinian land could not have supported one-tenth as many Palestinians as it does today without the heroic works of reclamation and agricultural development by Jewish settlers beginning in the 1880s, when Arabs in Palestine numbered a few hundred thousand.

    Actions have consequences. When the Palestinian Liberation Organization launched two murderous Intifadas within a little over a decade, responded to withdrawals from southern Lebanon and Gaza by launching thousands of rockets on Israeli towns, spurned every sacrificial offer of "Land for Peace" from Oslo through Camp David, and reversed the huge economic gains fostered in the Palestinian territories between 1967 and 1990, the die was cast.

    It's time to move on.

    For the U.S., moving on means a sober recognition that Israel is not too large but too small. It boasts a booming economy still absorbing overseas investment and a substantial net inflow of immigrants. Yet it is cramped in a space the size of New Jersey, hemmed in by enemies on three sides, with 60,000 Hezbollah and Hamas rockets at the ready, and Iran lurking with nuclear ambitions and genocidal intent over the horizon.

    Clearly, Israel needs every acre it now controls. Still, despite its huge technological advances, its survival continues to rely on peremptory policing of the West Bank, on an ever-advancing shield of antimissile technology, and on the unswerving commitment of the U.S.

    But this is no one-way street. At a time of acute recession, debt overhang, suicidal energy policy and venture capitalists who hope to sustain the U.S. economy and defense with Facebook pages and Twitter feeds, U.S. defense and prosperity increasingly depend on the ever-growing economic and technological power of Israel.

    If we stand together we can deter or defeat any foe. Failure, however, will doom the U.S. and its allies to a long war against ascendant jihadist barbarians, with demographics and nuclear weapons on their side, and no assurance of victory. We need Israel as much as it needs us.

    Helen Freedman is Executive Director of Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI, a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128 (Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717); by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www.afsi.org.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by UCI, July 6, 2011.

    This was written by Caroline Glick. It appeared in the Jerusalem Post and is archived at http://www.uc4i.org/news/?p=6883


    Israel today faces the most daunting and complex threat spectrum it has ever seen.

    On Monday, saboteurs bombed the Egyptian gas pipeline to Israel for the third time since former president Hosni Mubarak was overthrown in February. The move was just another reminder that Israel today faces the most daunting and complex threat spectrum it has ever seen.

    From Egypt to Turkey to Iran to the international Left to the Obama administration, Israel faces a mix of military and political challenges that threaten its very existence on multiple levels. To meet these challenges, it is vital for the government and people of Israel to stand strong, unified and determined. The approaching storm will test our resilience as we have never been tested before.

    Unfortunately, even if the government is competent, and even if the nation stands strong, there is reason to fear that Israel will fail to successfully withstand the dangers gathering against it. Unelected, unrepresentative and irresponsible senior government officials are liable to take actions that undermine the government's ability to protect the country and weaken the public's morale and unity of purpose.

    Over the past week, we received two reminders of how dire the situation is. The first reminder relates to institutional impediments to the government's freedom of action in preventing Iran from fielding a nuclear arsenal.

    Since the beginning of his first term as prime minister 15 years ago, Binyamin Netanyahu has consistently warned that the greatest dangers Israel faces stem from the forces of global jihad generally and the Iranian regime and its nuclear program specifically. After taking office for the second time in 2009, Netanyahu made blocking Iran's rise to nuclear power his top priority. He ordered the heads of the Mossad and the IDF to prepare plans to attack Iran's nuclear installations.

    Last Friday, Haaretz reported that former Mossad chief Meir Dagan and former IDF chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi refused to obey his order. Rather than prepare strike plans, Dagan and Ashkenazi warned that such a strike would foment a regional war. That is, rather than do their jobs, they made excuses for failing to fulfill their duty to obey Israel's elected leadership.

    Not wanting to take them on directly, Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak decided to wait them out. Dagan and Ashkenazi were both set to finish their terms at the beginning of the year, and Netanyahu and Barak figured they could replace them with commanders who would abide by the government's wishes. Specifically, Barak and Netanyahu believed that by replacing Ashkenazi with his deputy Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant, they would have a military leader willing and able to take on the central challenge of preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power.

    Barak announced last August that Galant would replace Ashkenazi as IDF chief in January. Galant's appointment was approved by the government and by the Senior Appointments Commission. But in late January, the government was forced to cancel it. And this week we received new indications that Galant's appointment fell victim to what has been likened to a palace coup. That is, the government was denied its right to choose its military leader by a group of senior officials who deliberately usurped that power from the government.

    In January, we learned that Ashkenazi's close associate Lt.-Col. (ret.) Boaz Harpaz had forged a document that was transferred by Ashkenazi's office to Channel 2. The forgery purported to be a memo written for Galant by the public relations firm owned by Eyal Arad — Kadima's public relations guru. The forged memo detailed a public relations campaign that would discredit Galant's rivals and Ashkenazi, and so pave the way for Galant's appointment as chief of General Staff. Channel 2's broadcast of the memo seriously harmed Galant's public image.

    The police opened an investigation, and Harpaz admitted to forging the document. Despite revelations that Harpaz was in intensive, continuous contact with Ashkenazi's wife Ronit and had a longstanding close friendship with Ashkenazi himself, the Military Advocate-General decided not to investigate Ashkenazi or any other officer about their ties to Harpaz and his forged document.

    Over the weekend, Yediot Aharonot reported that last week Harpaz underwent two lengthy interrogations by State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss. Harpaz is reportedly divulging information about his connections to Ashkenazi.

    Despite Harpaz's own admission that he forged the document, Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein has abstained, to date, from indicting him. Although jarring, Weinstein's actions are not surprising. It was Weinstein who personally overturned Galant's appointment in January.

    Harpaz's defamatory memo wasn't the only thing working against Galant's appointment. A previously unknown environmental group called the Green Movement filed a petition with the Supreme Court calling for the cancellation of Galant's appointment because in the past he had used the state lands around his family homestead in Moshav Amikam without permission. Since his actions were administrative infractions rather than criminal acts, the Senior Appointments Commission concluded that he was fit to serve as chief of staff.

    Weinstein felt differently. Claiming that he had ethical problems with Galant's behavior, Weinstein refused to defend the appointment to the Supreme Court. Weinstein's announcement forced the government to cancel Galant's appointment.

    Ashkenazi's chosen successor,Maj.-Gen. Benny Gantz, whom Barak had previously eliminated from the running, was appointed instead.

    Perhaps due to fear that Gantz might not stand up to Netanyahu and Barak as he and Ashkenazi did, Dagan shocked the country last month by launching an unprecedented public attack against Netanyahu and Barak. His clear aim was to discredit the option of an Israeli military strike against Iran.

    According to Haaretz, Dagan was motivated by his desire to cover up his failure to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Also according to Haaretz, Ashkenazi, together with recently retired IDF intelligence chief Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin, supported Dagan's attacks through off-record briefings.

    It is impossible for the public to know what is going on behind closed doors. We cannot know whether a worthy general's rivals' successful campaign to discredit him has doomed the country to another three years of defeatist, incompetent stewardship of the IDF — and what's worse, to a nuclear-armed Iran. What we do know is that a handful of unelected civil servants took it upon themselves to undermine the government's ability to lead the country.

    The government is not the only target on the runaway clerks' target list. Members of the nationalist camp are also subject to systematic campaigns of criminalization and demoralization.

    This week we were witness to the troubling spectacle of senior rabbis being dragged into police stations for questioning. Their purported crime involves writing blurbs praising a religious book written by another rabbi.

    The book in question is reportedly a highly controversial tome that sets out the religious precepts governing the killing of enemies of Israel in times of war and peace. It was authored by Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira from Yitzhar.

    Several leftist organizations filed a complaint against the book, claiming that it incites murder of non-Jews. Shapira was arrested and brought before the district court for arraignment in leg shackles and handcuffs last year.

    And over the past several days, Rabbis Dov Lior and Ya'acov Yosef have been arrested and questioned by police for the blurbs they authored that were published in the book.

    It is hard to know the basis for the complaint. Generally Israeli law stipulates that there has to be a tangible connection between incendiary words and the likely commission of the crime they incite. No such connection seems to exist in the case of Shapira's book.

    In the wake of Lior's arrest, his students staged raucous, enraged protests against the State Attorney's Office and the Supreme Court. For their part, senior prosecutors announced that no one in Israel is above the law. And this is true enough.

    Unfortunately they do not practice what they preach. In arresting the rabbis, the police were acting in accordance with their instructions from Assistant Attorney-General for Special Projects Shai Nitzan.

    The bulk of Nitzan's duties revolve around applying the law in a discriminatory manner against the Israeli Right.

    Following Yitzhak Rabin's assassination in 1995, then-attorney-general Michael Ben-Yair established Nitzan's position. The position was specifically geared toward criminalizing Israelis who live beyond the 1949 armistice lines.

    Among other things, the assistant attorneygeneral for special projects oversees the operation of an inter-agency group called the Task Force for Law Enforcement against Israelis in Judea and Samaria.

    The task force was officially canceled in 1998 by the government, acting on the advice of then-attorney-general Elyakim Rubenstein. Rubenstein argued that the task force's mission of enforcing specific laws against a specific population group was inherently discriminatory.

    In breach of the government decision, the task force has continued to meet regularly. Nitzan has overseen its activities since he was promoted to his position in 2005.

    In 2009, MK Ze'ev Elkin convened a special Knesset hearing on the activities of Nitzan's task force. According to an Arutz 7 report of the proceedings, he subpoenaed protocols from the meetings and found that its activities were deeply prejudicial and politically motivated. Among other things, the protocols disclosed that the task force members were required to file a minimum monthly quota of five criminal complaints against Israelis in Judea and Samaria suspected of building violations.

    The quota system is doubly prejudicial. First, by making investigations an institutional requirement rather than a function of the suspected commission of specific illegal acts, it is an invitation for frivolous prosecutions and official harassment.

    Second, inside the 1949 armistice lines, the general practice is to treat building violations as administrative rather than criminal offenses. By using a different practice for Israelis living outside the armistice lines, Nitzan and his team members enacted a separate legal regime for a select group of citizens, thus undermining the foundations of the rule of law.

    Elkin's 2009 hearing made no difference. And after Lior's arrest last week, Elkin again demanded its disbanding in accordance with the government decision and the rule of law. And no doubt, the legal fraternity will continue to ignore his calls.

    Through their behavior, the legal fraternity is not merely making a mockery of the rule of law. They are undermining the social fabric of the country.

    As for the government, the senior civil service's erosion of the governing authority of the political leadership has risen to critical levels. As Galant's scuttled appointment and Dagan's and Ashkenazi's behavior regarding Iran's nuclear program make clear, we have reached the point where due to the subversion of senior officials, our elected leaders are denied the ability to perform their primary function of defending the country.

    This state of affairs has simply got to end. The government and the Knesset need to put a stop to it. At the end of the day, the ayatollahs, the sheikhs, the UN and the anarchists are not our greatest challenge. Our leaders and our people can stand up to them. Our greatest challenge is to stand up to unelected officials who have taken it upon themselves to discredit the cause of victory, embrace weakness, and destroy our sense of national purpose.

    UCI — The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) — is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel."

    "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!"

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Pinhas Imbari, July 5 2011.

    What the Palestinians really envisage after September is to exploit a UN endorsement of statehood to legitimize an escalation of the conflict. After having the 1967 lines recognized so as to negate the results of the Six-Day War, they plan to seek recognition of the 1947 partition lines.

    There are signs that the long period of quiet since the Second Intifada is going to end after September or just before it, and that Abbas' Fatah organization is already preparing for the "Third Intifada." Ahmad Abu Ruteima, a Hamas activist in Gaza, describes the objective of the Third Intifada: "The struggle is about the very existence of Israel and not about the 1967 borders. The defense minister, Ehud Barak, confirmed that the [Israeli] army is incapable of confronting a human influx from all directions."

    The post-September scenarios discussed in the upper Fatah echelons involve a return to the struggle. A senior member of the Fatah Revolutionary Council, Hatem Abd al-Qader, noted that in case Israel obstructs the Palestinians' political plans, Abbas will step down, the PA will dissolve itself, and nothing will prevent the Palestinians from returning to the struggle. And even if elections are held, the new president will come from the younger generation, abolish the Oslo agreements, and lead the Palestinians back to the struggle.

    Why does the PLO so adamantly refuse any discussion of swaps between the Palestinian-populated areas in the Israeli Triangle region and the settlement blocs. The PLO, apparently, wants to leave the Palestinian-populated areas in Israel as an anchor for pushing Israel back to the 1947 borders or even further, as the territorial basis for exercising the right of return into Israel.

    In his New York Times article, Abbas was straightforward: "Palestine's admission to the United Nations would pave the way for the internationalization of the conflict as a legal matter, not only a political one. It would also pave the way for us to pursue claims against Israel at the United Nations, human rights treaty bodies and the International Court of Justice."

    Read the full article here.

    Pinhas Inbari is a senior policy analyst at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, which published this article. He is also a veteran Palestinian affairs correspondent who formerly reported for Israel Radio and Al Hamishmar newspaper, and currently reports for several foreign media outlets. He is the author of a number of books on the Palestinians including The Palestinians: Between Terrorism and Statehood.

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Tybee, July 5, 2011.

    This was written by Marshall Frank and it is archived at
    http://www.marshallfrank.com/articles/2011/06/ weiner-fallout-and-the-muslim-connection/


    The fallout from the Anthony Weiner fiasco includes a mystery no one yet has resolved, especially the media which is ignoring it like the plague. Make that: Two mysteries:

    Mystery # 1) How is it that Anthony Weiner, a Jew, married a devout Muslim woman, and vice-versa?

    Mystery #2) How is it that a devout Muslim woman with strong ties to the notorious Muslim Brotherhood is working within a trusted position in the highest levels of the Department of State?

    Here are the facts as we know them:

    1 — Anthony Weiner, a Jewish U.S. Congressman from New York, (now resigned) married Huma Abedin, a practicing Muslim woman, in 2010. Ex-President Bill Clinton officiated.

    2 — Huma Abedin was born in Michigan, but grew up in Saudi Arabia, the daughter of devout Muslim parents. She was later educated in the U.S. and remains a devout, practicing Muslim.

    3 — At age 20, Huma Abedin started working as a White House assistant to then first lady, Hillary Clinton in 1996, and has been by Mrs. Clinton's side ever since. She now holds the position of Aide and Deputy Chief of Staff to Sec. Hillary Clinton in the State Department.

    4 — According to numerous sources, which has not been denied or refuted, the mother of Huma Abedin — a Pakistani — is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood, or, the women's division of the Muslim Brotherhood.

    5. — Huma Abedin's brother is a fellow with the Oxford Centre For Islamic Studies, which is heavily supported by the Muslim Brotherhood.

    6. — Islamic scholars and experts confirm that no Muslim woman — especially devout Muslims and members of the sisterhood — may marry a non-Muslim man, yet a Jew, unless that man has converted to Islam.

    7. — It is well known, especially in intelligence circles including the CIA and the FBI, that the Muslim Brotherhood is the most notorious global, anti-American, jihadist organization in the world, with long range sights set upon establishing an Islamic caliphate in the west. (That means, converting America into an Islamic nation, folks). According to their own documents — authored by the highest levels in the MB — America is destined to be settled as an Islamic nation, and that it will use deceit and infiltration to accomplish this goal from within.


    Readers tend to gloss over this, but it is as important as Mein Kampf was to the burgeoning Nazi movement in 1930s Germany that so many ignored. You've read it before. Here, again, is their language taken from the Muslim Brotherhood manifesto, introduced at the Holy Land Foundation trial:

    "The process of settlement is a "Civilization-Jihadist Process" with all the means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah's religion is made victorious."


    * The Muslim Brotherhood — or its affiliations — has infiltrated the highest levels of our government.

    * Hillary Clinton is either in denial, stupid, naive or complicit in having such a person with ties to the MB working within the highest levels of the State Department. That goes for the president as well.

    * There is certainly more to the story of the Weiner wedding, which we don't know about. If Anthony Weiner, in fact, converted to Islam, it was done surreptitiously because it would have been a death knell to his political career. And, if so, Weiner certainly knew of the Muslim Brotherhood connections of his wife.

    * If the Islamic community has approved of, or ignores the marriage between Jewish born Weiner and Huma Abedin, it can be logically concluded that they — the Islamic community — know something we don't. An Imam from the Islamic Cultural center of New York, Omar Abu-Namous, not only approved of the union, he has encouraged Huma Abedin to stand by her man during the cybersex scandal. Thus, it must be advantageous to the goals of Islamic jihad and the MB to have Huma Abedin inside the bowels of the Department of State with daily access to governmental intelligence. Therefore, her "marriage" to a U.S. congressman, regardless of religion, was openly accepted.

    That, folks, is an example of "Taqiyya" which I've often written about. Taqiyya is the Islamic equivalent to using lies, deceit and concealment in order to advance the cause of spreading Islam. The 9/11 al Qaeda terrorists blended with American society for months prior to the deadly attack, drinking alcohol, carousing with women and eating pork, in order to conceal who they truly were, in order to carry out their mission.

    Their mission was to infiltrate and kill. The mission of the Muslim Brotherhood is to infiltrate and conquer, even if it takes 100 years. In the Muslim Brotherhood planning document, "The Project," it clearly states — among their strategies:

    * Maintain the appearance of moderation

    * Use deception to mask the intended goals of Islamic Action

    We know about these things, the government knows about these things, the highest of officials know, yet they are inexplicably ignored. Forget about the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. We are losing the war right here. And our government is helping.

    Contact Tybee by email at tyshelz@sbcglobal.net

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Barbara Sommer, July 4, 2011.

    This was posted By Soeren Kern, Senior Analyst for Transatlantic Relations at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos/Strategic Studies Group. It appeared on Pajama Media and is archived at
    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/ europeans- are-major-force-behind-second-gaza-flotilla/


    The so-called Freedom Flotilla 2, a convoy of about ten ships hoping to break an Israeli naval blockade of the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, has been off to an inauspicious start. With two vessels disabled due to alleged "sabotage" and other boats held up in a port in Athens by the Greek government, the flotilla will not set sail for at least another few days and may be called off altogether.

    Whatever its fate, the flotilla has considerable public support in Europe, where opposition to Israel often crosses the line into anti-Semitism. Although a handful of Americans, Canadians, and Middle Easterners (as well as a few Aussies and Kiwis) are among the 500 pro-Palestinian activists hoping to sail with the flotilla, the majority of its organizers, supporters and actual participants are from Europe, which has become "ground zero" in the global campaign of boycotts, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) against Israel.

    The Gaza flotilla is, in fact, an integral part of a growing European movement to delegitimize the state of Israel. It is rooted in the program of political warfare to achieve the "complete international isolation of Israel" that was launched at the UN conference against racism in Durban, South Africa in 2001.

    European charities linked to left-wing and pro-Palestinian causes have raised an estimated €10 million ($14.5 million) to fund the flotilla. Many European politicians and members of the European Parliament as well as media outlets have expressed strong support for it in public. The flotilla has been organized from Britain and the main operational hub is in Greece.

    Eight out of the ten vessels comprising the flotilla are European. They include the "Dignity" and the "Louise Michel" from France, the "Saoirse" (Gaelic for freedom) from Ireland, the "Stefano Chiarini" from Italy, the "Guernica" from Spain, the "Juliano" from Sweden, and two Greek cargo ships carrying 3,000 tons of supplies. The two other ships are the "Tahrir" from Canada and "The Audacity of Hope" from the United States.

    The European Freedom Flotilla website has pooled information on flotilla campaigns in the various European countries. Some of these include: Belgium to Gaza, Free Gaza Denmark, Ship to Gaza Greece, Freedom Flotilla Italia, Ship to Gaza Netherlands, Ship to Gaza Norway, Free Gaza Scotland, Ship to Gaza Sweden, and so on.

    Other pan-European groups directly or indirectly involved in the flotilla include the Brussels-based European Coordination of Committees and Associations for Palestine, the London-based Palestinian Return Center, and the Oslo-based European Network to Support Rights of Palestinian Prisoners.

    Britain has hosted much of the organizing apparatus of the flotilla, which is being coordinated out of London by Mohammad Sawalha, a senior Muslim Brotherhood operative closely linked to Hamas and who was granted asylum by Britain in 1990.

    Sawalha — together with Zaher Birawi, another Hamas activist living in Britain — is a director of Britain2Gaza, a coalition of left-wing and Islamist organizations participating in the flotilla that includes groups like: the British Muslim Initiative, the Friends of Al-Aqsa, the Palestinian Forum in Britain, the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, and the Stop the War Coalition. Sawalha is also the vice chairman of the European Campaign to End the Siege on Gaza, a British-based group that coordinates the Miles of Smiles land convoys to Gaza.

    Britain is also home to the Boycott Israeli Goods Campaign, the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (which is working to "build a mass anti-Apartheid movement for Palestine"), Interpal, Freedom for Palestine, A Just Peace for Palestine, Stop Arming Israel, Oxford-Ramallah Friendship Association, Reading-Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Viva Palestina, Medical Aid for Palestinians, the Scottish-Palestine Solidarity Campaign, and many more.

    British Foreign Secretary William Hague says the flotilla is unwise and has advised Britons not to participate in it. But he himself has contributed to the BDS campaign against Israel by his failure to honor a long-standing promise to amend British universal jurisdiction laws in a way that would make it safe for Israeli leaders to visit Britain without the risk of detention on frivolous allegations of war crimes.

    In France, a fundraising campaign called "A French Ship to Gaza" collected more than €600,000 ($865,000) for the Gaza flotilla. The campaign was launched in October 2010 under the combined leadership of French NGOs for Palestine and a "Red-Green Alliance" of leftists and Islamists called the "National Collective for a Just and Lasting Peace between Israelis and Palestinians."

    Nationwide, more than 70 French organizations including political parties and trade unions have been involved in mobilizing activists and raising funds for the flotilla. Some 40 French nationals, including one French MEP, are on board the two French vessels that are participating in the convoy. More than 300 French politicians have signed a petition in support of the campaign.

    Germany is sending more than 20 activists to participate in the flotilla, which is being coordinated by the German Initiative to Break the Gaza Blockade, a coalition of more than a dozen pro-Palestinian organizations, including: the Palestinian Community in Germany, the Palestinian-German Federation for the Right of Return, the German-Palestinian Union, the German Youth for Palestine, the Committee for a Democratic Palestine, and the Palestinian Society for Human Rights, which in May 2011 held the 9th Annual Conference of Palestinians in Europe titled "The Return Generation Knows its Way."

    In Ireland, the flotilla is being coordinated by Irish Ship to Gaza under the direction of Caoimhe Butterly, a pro-Palestinian activist who in April 2002 spent 16 days as a "human shield" in Yasser Arafat's compound in Ramallah. Other pro-Palestinian activist groups in Ireland include: the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign, the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Alliance, and the Derry Friends of Palestine. About 25 Irish nationals were planning on sailing with the "Saoirse," including Irish MEP Paul Murphy of the Socialist Party and United Left Alliance. But the vessel dropped out of the flotilla after being "sabotaged" while docking in Turkey.

    In Norway, which hosts the European Network to Support the Rights of Palestinian Prisoners, some $250,000 was raised to send 20 activists to Gaza. In neighboring Sweden, the campaign Ship to Gaza Sweden has been selling "nautical miles to Gaza" for €100 ($145) each.

    In Spain, the flotilla is being organized by "Rumbo a Gaza" (Course to Gaza). Despite massive unemployment in Spain, the group managed to raise enough funds to send 45 Spanish activists to Gaza on a boat called the "Guernica," which also happens to be the name of a small town in the Basque country that was bombed by Adolf Hitler during the Spanish Civil War.

    In Switzerland, more than 200 NGOs are supporting the flotilla. It is being coordinated by a Geneva-based group called Droit pour Tous (Right for All), which in March 2011 sponsored 'The First International Conference on the Rights of Palestinian Prisoners and Detainees." Three members of the Swiss National Council, the lower house of the Swiss parliament, want to sail with the flotilla.

    If Gaza has become an obsession for many ordinary Europeans, so too for Europe's political class, which rarely misses an opportunity to rebuke Israel for a blockade the latter says is necessary to prevent weapons for reaching Iran-backed Hamas militants.

    Austrian Foreign Minister Michael Spindelegger visited the Gaza Strip in April 2011 and demanded that Israel lift its blockade. British Prime Minister David Cameron said Israel has turned the Gaza Strip into a "prison camp" and at least 14 British parliamentarians have publicly backed the flotilla. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, as well as several members of her government, has insisted that Israel end the blockade and the German Bundestag in July 2010 passed a resolution condemning Israeli policies in Gaza.

    In Ireland, which recently needed a $113 billion bailout to save it from financial collapse, Prime Minister Enda Kenny is closely following the events in Gaza. "I have every sympathy with the people of Gaza," Kenny told the lower house of parliament. Even tiny Luxembourg has something to say about Gaza: In February 2011 Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn visited the territory and demanded that Israel lift the blockade.

    In Spain, the kaffiyeh-wearing Socialist Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, whose often toxic anti-Israel rhetoric has contributed to a notable rise in anti-Semitism in Spain, has called for a "strong, joint EU position" on Gaza and Israel's blockade. Hamas militants recently gave European Union "Foreign Minister" Catherine Ashton an opportunity to do just that when they welcomed her to the Gaza Strip by firing a rocket into southern Israel, killing a man working in the Netiv Ha'assera kibbutz. Rather than condemn Hamas for the killing, the European Union, which takes pride in being the largest contributor of aid to the Palestinians, berated Israel instead.

    A notable exception has been Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou, whose government has prohibited eight boats participating in the flotilla from leaving Greek waters. Previously, Papandreou had described an Israeli commando raid on a similar flotilla in May 2010 as "condemnable and unacceptable."

    The irony of all the Gaza activism in Europe is this: The European single currency is on the verge of collapse. Many European countries are on the brink of bankruptcy. The European social welfare state is crumbling. Millions of Europeans are out of work and many are losing their homes. Europeans are losing the war they started with Libya. Muslim immigration to Europe is out of control. Islamic Sharia law is becoming increasingly common in many parts of the continent. Considering all the problems besetting Europe today, the issue many Europeans care about most is ... the Gaza Strip.

    Contact Barbara Sommer at lsommer_1_98@yahoo.com

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Israel Behind the News, July 4, 2011.

    This was written by Daniel Pipes, president of the Middle East Forum and Taube distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University.

    Thiis is archived at
    http://israelbehindthenews.com/bin/ content.cgi?ID=4428&q=1


    The troubled academic study of the Middle East and Islam by Americans is changing in fundamental ways. I offer some thoughts based on 42 years of personal observation: From Western offence to Islamic offence: Muslim relations with Christians divide into four long periods: from Muhammad's hijra to the First Crusade, 622-1099, during which time Muslims expanded at Christian expense; to the 2nd siege of Vienna, 1099-1683, which saw a mix of Muslim advances (e.g., Anatolia) and retreats (Iberia); to the Arab oil boycott, 1683-1973, with Christians on the offense; and since 1973, with Muslims on the offense. One of many books on the "Arab world." When I entered the Middle East and Islam field in 1969, Americans looked almost exclusively at the Western impact on modern Muslims; today, the Muslim impact on the West features almost as prominently, from American slavery to the problems of Malmö, Sweden. From Arab to Muslim: Books on "The Arabs," "the Arab world," "Arab politics," "Arab nationalism," and "Arab socialism" flew off the press during my student years.

    With time, however, the hollowness of this modern concept of Arabs became evident. I was one of those who argued for Islam as the real defining factor, devoting myself thirty years ago to proving that "Islam profoundly shapes the political attitudes of Muslims." Met with skepticism back then, this understanding has now become so blindingly self-evident that Amazon.com lists no fewer than 3,077 items in English on jihad. The old guard: Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918), author of my assigned reading on the Umayyad Dynasty. From critical to apologetic writing: Little did I know, but by taking up Islamic history when I did meant slipping in before the deluge of revisionism. Back in 1969, scholars respected Islamic civilization while usually (but not always) maintaining a proudly Western outlook. Symbolic of old-fashioned learning, my first Middle East history professor assigned us Julius Wellhausen's study, Das arabische Reich und sein Sturz (in English translation to be sure), published in 1902. Then came the revolution. Martin Kramer ascribes the changes in Middle East studies to the publication of Orientalism by Edward Said in 1978; I see it more resulting from the sharp leftward turn of universities. Whatever the cause, the field descended into revisionist, apologetic, jargon-laden, error-prone Third-Worldism. The old masters dropped out of syllabi. The Hartford Seminary rapidly "turned from being the premier Protestant seminary for missions to the Muslim world into an institution promoting Islamization."

    The academic understanding of jihad epitomizes this transformation: in a single generation, jihad went from being interpreted as aggressive warfare to moral self-improvement. Academics took their biased and shoddy work into government. Academic work has sometimes become a near-parody of itself, with specialists proving such absurdities as: ancient Israeli history is a creation of modern Zionist propaganda, the Islamist movement already failed by 1992, water imperatives drive the Arab-Israeli conflict, and homosexuals do not exist in the Middle East. As maudlin obituaries to Said suggest, many specialists remain in his malign thrall. Martin Kramer subjected Middle East studies to its first sustained critique in 2001. From public indifference to engagement: The Middle East was politically prominent well before 2001 thanks to cold war tensions, oil exports, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the Iranian revolution.

    But American popular interest in the region remained modest until 9/11 and the subsequent Afghan and Iraqi wars. That surge of interest led to a wide awareness about the inadequacy of academic work. With the help of sophisticated critiques like Kramer's, plus organizations like Campus Watch, the public has become actively involved in opposing radical Middle East specialists, for example through activism to deny them tenure. One finds no parallel in other fields. From trendy to retro: Another response to this failure consists of authors — often from outside the academy — harking back to pre-1980 scholarship to understand the region. Ibn Warraq, a pseudonymous ex-Muslim, published a sequence of books on the life of Muhammad, the origins of the Koran, its variants, and meaning, all of them premised on generations-old writings. Andrew Bostom, a medical researcher, anthologized significant portions of pre-1980 scholarship on jihad and antisemitism. Historian Efraim Karsh wrote Islamic Imperialism, which argues that Islam's expansionist tendencies have driven the religion since Muhammad's wars. These old-fashioned books are yet few in number compared to the cascade of revisionism, but they mark a revival of ideas and themes that once appeared moribund. Their appearance, along with public engagement and the emerging presence of promising new scholars, signals that — almost uniquely in the humanities — a sound understanding of the Middle East and Islam may rebound.

    David Bedein is Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency. (http://Israelbehindthenews.com). He is president of Center for Near East Policy Research. Contact him by email at media@actcom.co.il

    To Go To Top

    Posted by Nurit Greenger, July 3, 2011.

    Among many of his brilliant statements and annotations, during Israel's Second War in Lebanon, in 2006, Nobel Laureate Professor Yisrael Aumann of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem said: "Change will only come from within."

    Kabbalah [Kabala], Judaism's mystical school of thought, teaches that unless a Jew — and for that matter any person — comes out of where he or she is bounded, he or she cannot make the changes in his or her life.

    Aumann's words keep resonating because, since the expulsion of all the Jews from the Gaza strip, making this piece of land totally Judenrein-cleansed of all Jews, and the Second War in Lebanon and Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, Israel has not made much of an internal progress. Israel is still chasing and begging its enemy to sit and talk to her about "peace," refusing to admit that this enemy is not ready, in word and deed, to deliver real peace. And the term "two state solution", is still used and too often heard. A term clearly indicating of Israel's readiness to cede a notable chunk of the Land of Israel to its worst enemy, make this land Judenrein — ethnically cleansed of Jews — and allow the enemy to make that land, one other Arab state, which is at war with Israel from the outset and perhaps forever.

    Too many Israelis simply do not understand why they are in Israel and too many Jews, wherever they live, do not understand the meaning of a sovereign, Jewish State, in the Land of Israel. Either Israelis, or Jews, simply do not understand that the Land of Israel is not Europe or America, that Israel is not just a place where people live. In our world, there is only one Jewish state and only one Land of Israel and we must not fight this fact, rather embrace and enhance it.

    The current president of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, ran for the White House on the mantra, "change." That change has cost the American people ample. Their economy went tumbling down, their trust in government is running at zero exhilaration level, and the nation's frustration about the entire state of the union situation is at its highest altitude. Israel, on the other hand, is on an economic ascend. However, on its political stance — internal and foreign — Israel is still rather wobbling.

    The Obama's Administration has been proven to be hostile towards Israel. But, neither America, nor the members of the European Union (EU), the U.N., Iran and its satellites, Lebanon Hezbollah Gaza Hamas and Syria, or Israel's enemies, the proverbial Arabs, who named themselves "Palestinians" pose as great threat to Israel's continued existence as ISRAEL ITSELF.

    The 'CHANGE' Professor Aumann often talks about must indeed come from within the Nation of Israel, from within those who live in the land and all Jews who support the Jewish State. It is a change in attitude, perception and basic understanding of Judaism and the role of Israel and Jews in this upside down world.

    For two thousand years the Jewish People have survived, while empires rose and then crumbled and disappeared. But now, after 63 years of existence, as a modern and sovereign Jewish state, Israelis have become slightly detached. Israel's unbelievable success, unexpected by so many, has made her stray from the true way, the path it should be walking through without a wobble.

    It appears that in order for Jews, who make up the State of Israel population, to follow God's word, 'Thy shall be the Light Unto the Nations," they have to go through darkness and that darkness is 'change' and change is painful.

    By nature Jews are obstinate and do not like and want to change. But we, Jews, have a Covenant with our [Jewish] God and a change is the only path to the desirous light.

    I say the time is short to act. To survive as the Jewish People, as the Jewish Nation and bestow Light Unto the Nations, Israelis and Jews, alike, must stand still and re-evaluate their entire existence and then take the necessary steps. And there is no other way, there is not escape way, there is no other choice. Our habits must change, so do our thinking and our expectations. We must prepare for the worse before we can bring about a brighter future for the Jewish generations to come.

    What does it all mean? The answer is simple, yet translates into difficult and painful actions.

    Let us take the heroic story of Israeli IDF officer Maj. Ro'i Klein z"l (May his soul be remembered and blessed) who volunteered to lead his Golani Brigade Battalion 51 into battle, and was killed in the line of duty on July 26, 2006. While yelling " Shma Yisrael" ("Hear, O' Israel, the Lord is our God, God is One") Ro'i jumped on a hand grenade that was thrown at his soldiers by Hezbollah forces in Bint Jbeil, Lebanon — the Hezbollah stronghold near the country's southern border. With his body, he absorbed the brunt of the explosion and thus saved the lives of his soldiers who stood around him.

    A True Jewish Hero- Roi Klein
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v= HrAtif91gI8&feature=related

    War Hero Maj. Roi Klein's Home is on the Chopping Block

    IDF Major Roi Klein's Home in the Samaria Town of Eli be Torn Down

    Ro'i was a member of the Jewish community of Eli, nestled in the Samaria Hills few hundred feet away from where the Holy Tabernacle once stood for six hundred years. Ro'i sacrificed his life for the entire Nation of Israel. Yet, to the bureaucrats in Israel that did not matter. Ro'i home in Eli was built on state land, thus was fully legal in the eyes of the Israeli authorities. It was only a question of permits and constant change in administrations and bureaucracy that turned matters into an awful upheaval. In a move that did not receive wide enough publicity, the Israeli High Court ruled in favor of the far-left organizations, Peace Now and Yesh Din, and ordered that 11 homes in the Samaria town of Eli be torn down. One of the homes in question belongs to Ro'I, z"l. At the end, the demolishing did not take place but, why does the Government of Israel and judicial system take the side of organizations their entire goal is to subvert Israel and shoot poisonous arrows into the hearts of all Israelis? Haven't they learned that 'All Jews are responsible for one another'? And all this is taking place while there are thousands of, really illegal, Arab construction erected everywhere on the land of Israel to remain untouched.

    Another frustrating example is the kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Schalit. He has been imprisoned in Gaza, in the hands of Hamas, for five years, one thousand eight hundred twenty days, and the clock goes on ticking. Until today, Gilad was not even seen by the International Red Cross and no one knows under what conditions he is incarcerated. In the past, the Israeli army used to drop, from the air, leaflets that stated that if the soldier is not returned, at once, "there will be a price to pay," and they meant it. What happened to that and the action to follow?

    There should be a great and painful price to pay, that will force the enemy to change the way it acts. The price should not be on paper alone. It must be extracted from the enemy, by force. The life of one soldier equals to all our lives. This is not a game, this is our God's command.

    One other example to boot are Jewish organizations. They have drifted from their originality and they hardly represent the interests of the Jewish People, the Jewish State of Israel and world Jewry. So what is it that they are good for?

    Human Rights and Leftist organizations, the Israeli High Court and veteran Jewish organizations have embedded themselves in our society's veins to the point where they almost choke us. If we are successful in dismantling them, we will soon find out the damage they have already caused, mainly dividing the nation.

    Jews and Israelis, hello! Wherever are you? We must wake up and understand what is taking place right in front of our eyes. Though the aspiration for peace is embedded in all of us and even unites us all, at present, we cannot talk about peace. We clearly do not have a partner to sign a peace agreement with us and they will stick to it. We must be ready to defend ourselves and prepare for it now. Salvation and support will not come from Jewish organizations that participated in meetings with President Obama. They are the very same ones who did nothing during WWII. Continuing in the same path they are on, will repeat the same mistakes, mistakes we cannot afford and must never allow.

    Let us look at some Israeli realities. Who makes up the IDF elite units if not the more observant men? And who avoids military service if not the Tel-Avivians and the Leftists? Why does the Israeli flag proudly waves in every classroom at Ariel University, in Samaria, but not on the rooftops of the Israeli universities in Jerusalem, Tel-Aviv and Be'er Sheva? Whom do the anarchist Leftist organizations truly help if not the Arabs, the enemies of Israel? None are truly concerned with the betterment of the Arabs living conditions but in the subversion and destruction of the Jewish State.

    Therefore, why does Israel see it its duty to tear down the home of an Israeli dead hero where his widow and young orphans live with fear of losing their home by demolishing when there are thousands of homes that were built, without permit and code, all over Judea and Samaria by none others than Arab-squatters — Arabs settlers?

    Israel and Israelis, no one but you can and must help yourselves before you want others to help you. How can Jews in the Diaspora fight for Isr