DESTRUCTION OF THE HAZON DAVID SYNAGOGUE Posted by Hebron Press Office, March 31, 2004.

At about 4:00 this morning hundreds of police, soldiers and other security forces arrived at the Hazon David Synagogue outside Kiryat Arba. The gates to Kiryat Arba were locked and the road leading to Hebron was closed. At the time there were about 50 Hebron-Kiryat Arba youth at the site. It took only about 15 minutes until all of them had been forcibly evicted from the area. The security forces then emptied the synagogue of its books, Torah scroll and furniture. At about 5:00 AM an army D9 tractor began destroying the tent, which served as a synagogue for the past three years. (article: www.hebron.com/news/neverlosehope.htm) - (pictures before destruction: www.hebron.com/news/hazondavid.htm) (pictures of destruction: www.hebron.com/news/hdavid.htm) Within an hour the synagogue was gone. A short time later, after the gates were opened, furious Kiryat Arba - Hebron residents began rebuilding the synagogue, placing stone upon stone. Security forces attempted to stop the crowd, but failed. A group of men began worshiping morning prayers, and were surrounded by soldiers. However, the prayer service continued. Synagogue director, Rabbi Ya'akov Eichenstein, speaking to the crowd, promised that the synagogue would be rebuilt, bigger and stronger than the original tent. Hebron leader Noam Arnon, addressing remarks to the security forces who participated in eradicating the shul, asked, "what will you tell your children on Passover eve when they ask, Daddy, how could you destroy a synagogue? How will you explain the meaing of the Exodus from Egypt, allowing us to be a free people, when you are expelling Jews from their land?" You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com To Go To Top

BUILD A MONUMENT TO THE INQUISITION Posted by Michael Freund, March 31, 2004.

Today marks the anniversary of one of the most important events in Jewish history in the past one thousand years. It is an episode that forever altered the destiny of the Jewish people, as well as that of European civilization, giving rise to seismic shifts in spheres as varied as cartography, commerce and mysticism. Scholars are still grappling with its consequences, centuries after it occurred, tracing the effects that it had on the fate of empires and the relations among the world's three great monotheistic religions. And yet, for all of the turmoil it created and the far-reaching changes that came in its wake, the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 1492 does not receive the commemoration that it deserves. Jewish history, of course, is awash in tragedy, and if we were to mull over each and every disaster that befell us throughout the millennia, there would be little time left for anything else. But the deportation of the Jews from Spain was so cataclysmic, and its impact throughout the ages so great, that it cannot, and should not, be forgotten. It was over five hundred years ago, on March 31, 1492, that King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella signed the infamous edict, giving the Jews of Castile and Aragon several months to make a dire choice: convert or leave. Most of Spain's Jews chose the latter. American historian Howard Morley Sachar has estimated the number of Spain's Jewish exiles at around 100,000, while Hebrew University's Haim Beinart has put the total at 200,000. Others have spoken of even more. The exiles left for Italy, North Africa, and elsewhere, creating illustrious Sephardic communities in places such as Salonika and the Ottoman Empire, with some even reaching the Land of Israel. They and their descendants left their mark on Jewish law and lore, producing some of the greatest codifiers of Judaism, whose rulings are studied and followed until today. Andres Bernaldez, a priest who lived at the time of the expulsion, wrote of the sorrowful manner in which the Jews were forced to leave. "They went out from the lands of their birth, boys and adults, old men and children, on foot and riding on donkeys and other beasts, and in wagons." "They went by the roads and fields," he wrote, "with much labor and misfortune, some collapsing, others getting up, some dying, others giving birth, and others falling ill... and so they went out of Castile." In the popular imagination, the expulsion from Spain is inevitably intertwined, and often confused, with the Spanish Inquisition, even though the latter began before 1492 and continued long afterwards. The Inquisitors, of course, were hunting down "secret Jews", those who clung to their Jewish faith in private even as they professed Catholicism in public. According to the late historian Cecil Roth, the Inquisition's henchmen murdered over 30,000 "secret Jews". Some were burned alive at the stake in front of cheering crowds, while countless others were condemned for heroically preserving Jewish practices. Their descendants now live throughout the Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking countries, with many still clinging to memories of a distant Jewish past. The events of the expulsion and the Inquisition were seared into the Jewish people's national consciousness, and yet they receive hardly any notice today. To a certain extent, that is hardly surprising, given the fact that we are living in the aftermath of the Holocaust. It is, perhaps, only natural that previous calamities, from the Crusades to the Chmielnicki massacres, would be overshadowed as a result. And yet, that in no way excuses us from our responsibility to recall the sufferings of our ancestors, and to pass the lessons on to future generations. Israel should build a national monument to the victims of the Inquisition and the Expulsion, one that would memorialize the agony they endured while celebrating their contributions to Jewish culture and tradition. The courage displayed by many of them in clinging to their faith, even under the most difficult and trying of circumstances, is a lesson that young people in this country would surely benefit from learning. It would also serve as an important reminder of the magnitude of the Sephardic contribution to Judaism, both past and present, providing young Israelis with a glimpse of the golden age of Spanish and Portuguese Jewry. And what better way to underline the importance of having a Jewish state, a place of refuge for Jews all over, than to recall the events of 1492? It was precisely because there was no State of Israel back then that the persecution of the Jews could be carried out so effortlessly. At a time of rising anti-Semitism abroad, and political turmoil at home, it might seem incongruous to be focusing on the events of so long ago. But much of our current predicament is the result of the fact that we have for too long ignored, or chosen to overlook, what history has to teach us. Erecting a monument to the victims of 1492, then, would be an act of historical justice not only towards Spain and Portugal's once-thriving Jews, but, ultimately, to ourselves as well. The writer serves as Director of Amishav, a Jerusalem-based group which reaches out and assists "lost Jews" seeking to return to the Jewish people To Go To Top

CONFESSIONS OF AN ANTI-SEMITE Posted by Marion D.S. Dreyfus, March 31, 2004.

Just struck me that wow - after a decade or so of embarrassed women feeling sheepish that someone famous told women it would be easier to get hit by a terrorist than to get married over 40, it is suddenly very clear that with all the despicable stuff going on in the world courtesy these slime, it is now easier to get married after the cutoff than to get hit by the sh**heels who plague us all day and night. Take that, Gloria. This article was written by Amotz Asa-El and appeared in the Jerusalem Post, March 25, 2004. There was a time when the Jews, while greedy, manipulative, conniving, and stiff necked as ever, at least understood what we wanted from them. Yes, when we fingered them for rejecting our faith, they argued, and when we charged them with killing our savior they denied, but when--to make ourselves better understood--we drew our swords, they mumbled Shema, submitted their necks, and departed from this world to the next. When it came to what mattered--they did as they were told. Thus, when we slaughtered them by the thousands, whether as Crusaders, Cossacks, pogromchicks or Nazis, all the Jews did was pray, cry, and die. Otherwise--they did as they were told. And when we expelled them from places where they had lived for centuries, they might have done their usual numbers--... lobbying, begging, bribing--but at the end... they did as they were told, hastily collecting what belongings they could before moving on with their ringing coins and wretched lives until they would find yet another set of fools who would put up with their usury, blood sucking, and well poisoning. And why would they do otherwise? After all, that was also how they reacted when we enlisted that mother of all Jewish values--law--as a major weapon in our war against the Jews. When the newly Christian Roman Empire actually etched in stone the Jews' inferiority and discrimination... the Jews didn't even lobby, beg, or bribe; instead, they shrugged, said something like shoyn, humbly accepted their role as living proof of another religion's victory over theirs; and did as they were told? [T]here was a time when all this went without saying. Did Germany's Jews ever think of protesting the Nuremberg Laws, not to mention resort to violence as they were being squarely told what was and wasn't legal for them to do? Of course not. They did as they were told. Set against this backdrop, it is truly mind boggling that we, of all good people in the last 2,000 years, have to be the ones born into an era when the Jews suddenly refuse to accept their fate and be blamed, besieged, attacked, and generally do as they are told. How dare they not listen, even when told expressly that their killing of a fine man whose only crime was to kill Jewish kids, mothers, and geriatrics like himself--is "unlawful?" Clearly, the Jews we face are different. What crosses their minds when they ignore pontifications, reprimands, and instructions like those unleashed at them this week by?everyone, from the UN's secretary-general to Her Majesty's foreign secretary? Do they perhaps recall at such a moment how Britain helped trap the Jews in wartime Europe? Clearly, this era's Jews are different. In this era, if you produce a feature film about their betrayal of Jesus,?if you just whisper something against the Jews, a chorus of Abe Foxman types hollers at you from a plethora of Jewish-controlled media. And when you take the Jews to court for daring to raise a wall between them and the bullets everyone knows they deserve, they have the audacity to play melodramatic tricks aimed at stealing the judges' show. At first, when I saw the trial in the Hague I recalled how in 1348, when our ancestors were burying the Black Plague's victims, they put the Jews on trial for having carried out their rabbis' orders to poison our wells. Though the pope of the time protested that accusation, he was fortunately ignored and it did its thing: the mobs blamed, attacked, and slaughtered the Jews. The Jews, for their part, did as they were told. Wait a second: the plague! that's it! They tell us the Madrid Massacre was but the first of many, that terror will soon plague the entire world, that who knows how many more thousands it will kill in train stations, subways, malls, stadiums, airports, skyscrapers, and airplanes, that it will debilitate international traffic, trade, and sports, and that - just as in the 14th century - people will be at a loss to find the causes and cures for their misery. This is it. As they flee terror's knives, bullets and bombs in confusion, panic and despair, we'll pit the masses against the Jews, blaming it all on them, their ancestors, their faith, and their race. This--the people will buy. And once they do, even these stubborn, tricky, arrogant, arms-bearing New Jews, will finally do as they are told. Marion D. S. Dreyfus is a journalist, currently living in Wuchan, China, where she teaches at the University and does a radio talk show. To Go To Top

SAUDI ARABIA AND IRAN DECLARE ECONOMIC WAR ON BUSH ADMINISTRATION Posted by Leo Rennert, March 31, 2004.

What are we to make of OPEC's decision today to go ahead with a 1-million-barrel cut in daily crude production? Oil "experts" are guessing that it may not have much of an impact on motorists in the U.S. because some OPEC members are bound to cheat. But whatever the economic ripple effects of this OPEC move, politically and psychologically it aims a direct hit at the Bush White House. As a starter, take into account that oil prices already are at record peaks and moving higher. If OPEC were interested in stabilizing the oil market (its usual rationale when prices are low) or doing Bush a favor, it would open the spigots to attenuate or roll back price rises that are giving Bush's reelection campaign increasing heartburn. Saudi Arabia and Iran (the two OPEC behemoths) know very well the likely political fallout in the U.S. of their decision to constrict supplies. It's their way of sending a check to the Kerry campaign, which sniffs a big political dividend from skyrocketing gas prices. Since Bush has certified Iran as a member of the axis of evil and is a bit less chummy with the Saudis than previous presidents, they in turn apparently have made a political calculation that "regime change" in Washington is in their interest. So it matters less what OPEC's move will do to oil markets and prices; what matters more is the political intent behind OPEC's decision. They know that Bush's war on terrorism, support of Israel and push for democratic reforms throughout the Middle East threaten their authoritarian hold on power. So since he's not doing them any favors, why should they? Far better to deal themselves in as players in November's election. To Go To Top

ESTABLISHING A EUROPEAN COALITION FOR ISRAEL (ECI) TO COMBAT ANTI-SEMITISM AND SUPPORT ISRAEL Posted by Unity Coalition For Israel, March 31, 2004.

Brussels - Christian organizations are preparing to meet the challenge of increased anti-Semitism abroad. Clarence Wagner spoke as liaison from the newly-formed European Coalition for Israel (ECI) to the U.S-based Unity Coalition for Israel. He stated, "It should not be up to the Jewish communities to defend themselves against the recent rise of anti-Semitism in Europe. After centuries of atrocities against the Jews in Europe, Christians should know better." After the recent wave of anti-Semitic violence and anti-Israel propaganda in Europe, leading Christian organizations have decided to coordinate their efforts on a European level. The new Christian initiative to support Israel was launched in Brussels in mid-march and is called ECI - European Coalition for Israel. Behind the new Coalition are the main Christian pro-Israel organizations with activities in Europe, among them Bridges for Peace, Christians for Israel, Christian Friends of Israel and International Christian Embassy Jerusalem. The new European Coalition will partner with the long-established National Unity Coalition for Israel, that combines these leading organizations with more than 200 other pro-Israel Christian and Jewish groups in the United States. Esther Levens, president and founder of the 13-year-old American based Unity Coalition, praised "this new Christian undertaking in Europe" and extended a warm welcome to "ECI, our new European counterpart in supporting Israel and defending Jews against reemerging Muslim inspired hatred. We look forward to continuing to work with all of the organizations involved and with Clarence Wagner, International Director of Bridges for Peace, who will now serve as coordinator between our two coalitions." "The time has come to work together," says the chairman of the new Coalition, Reverend Willem Glashouwer from Christians for Israel International. Last week the Coalition had its official launch in Brussels in connection with a conference organized together with the European Parliament and the European Jewish Congress. The initiative has been well received in Israel and in Jewish communities across Europe. Member of Knesset, Yuri Shtern, (National Union Party) believes "the new coalition could help change the political atmosphere in Europe." He came all the way from Jerusalem to be part of the official launch in Brussels where he was one of the main speakers. Shtern is the co-chairman of the newly formed Knesset Christian Allies Caucus with the same aim of working with Christian groups around the world, including Europe. As the Israeli Caucus started their work, they believed that they would first have to find all the right partner organizations; but to their su! ! rprise the Christians in Europe had already organized. Some would call this purely coincidence, but those who are people of faith would believe something else, says Caucus Director, Josh Reinstein, in Jerusalem. During the two-day conference in Brussels, the participants had the opportunity to watch video clips from the state-controlled Palestinian TV where incitement and hate speech against Jews flourish like never before. After the atrocities of the Holocaust became known to the greater public people seemed shocked as they assured that "they had no idea what had been going on behind their backs." Today we have no excuse. We have read our newspapers and we have seen the video clips where we are again hearing the all too familiar calls to "kill the Jews." This is not a time to keep silent but to speak out, says Glashouwer, making reference to the fact that last week marked the Feast of Purim commemorating the life of Queen Esther as she was called to take a stand with the Jewish people. The new Coalition will primarily work with informing the decision makers in Brussels about the complex realities of the conflict in the Middle East and the situation for the Jewish communities in Europe. A monthly newsletter has been sent out to all members of European Parliament since May of last year. After the newly elected Parliament is in place (elections to the European Parliament are held in June ), the Coalition plans to open up an office and have a full time representative in Brussels. When they do not listen to us anymore, your voice can still be heard, says Deputy Head of Mission Alon Roth-Shir from the Israeli Mission to the European Communities. The new coalition will work together with like-minded groups across Europe, but emphasises that the initiative is genuinely Christian. "No one ever asked us for any favour. We simply do this because we feel we have a moral and spiritual obligation to speak up when we see history repeating itself," says Tomas Sandell, Director of the Coalition. "We don't consider this a political initiative. We are neither rightwing nor leftwing but simply trying to be true to our Bible where we are called to bless the Jewish people and inform others to do the same. There should be no place for anti-Semitism in Europe." "For too long, the Church has remained silent. For too long the Jewish community has had to fight its battles alone. It is time Christian individuals and congregations speak up for the people who gave us the Bible," said Clarence Wagner, International Chairman of Bridges for Peace and Coalition board member. "The Christians of Europe are a sleeping giant who need to be awakened and rise up as a combined positive force for spiritual and moral change in Europe. That includes Europe's stand for Israel and the Jewish people and against anti-Semitism." The National Unity Coalition for Israel was founded in 1991. We are 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

A NEW LOW FOR U.N. COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Posted by Leo Rennert, March 31, 2004.

This was Ambassador Yaakov Levy's statement On the Question of a Special Sitting concerning Ahmed Yassin, 60th Session of the Commission on Human Rights, March 23, 2004. Mr. Chairperson, distinguished delegates, If you vote to hold this special sitting, it will be the first time in the history of the United Nations that a session is dedicated to lauding, supporting, glorifying a major leader of a terrorist organization. A new low, the worst ever. Every man and woman of conscience, any objective follower of this debate will cringe in horror, recoil in disgust that a UN body devoted to upholding human rights would, in effect, support the terrible wrongs the Hamas, under sheik Yassin, has committed. When Maria Tagilchev, a 14 year old from Netanya, was assassinated by the orders of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the head of the Hamas, in the Dolphinarium bombing in Tel Aviv, 1 June 2001, together with 20 other young people, this Commission did not dedicate a special sitting to debate, resolve or denounce the slaughter of 21 innocent Israeli children. When Perla Hermele, a 79 year old woman from Sweden, was murdered together with 29 other innocent civilians and 140 were wounded while celebrating the religious Passover, seder feast, at the Park Hotel in Netanya on 27 March 2002, on the direct orders of Ahmed Yassin, the OIC did not move for a special sitting. When 11-year-old Galila Bugala was murdered, along with 18 other Israelis, while riding a bus in Jerusalem on 18 June 2002, again on the orders of Ahmed Yassin, the Arab League did not consider it worthy of a special sitting. When 30-year-old Maurice Tubul was blown to pieces along with 9 others in a double suicide bombing at the Ashdod port on 14 March 2004, no one called for a special sitting. When the former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Sergio Vieira de Mello, was assassinated, along with 17 others, by suicide bombers in Baghdad on 19 August 2003, member delegates in this hall did not clamour for a special sitting. When more than 140 people were killed during in sectarian attacks in Iraq on 2 March 2004, A'shura, the holiest day on the Shia calendar, no Arab delegation raised its voice and called for a special sitting of the Commission. The bias and distorted standards manifested in this Commission year after year, and in an increasing manner since the beginning of it deliberations last Friday, once again express themselves in a request for the third consecutive special sitting or session on human rights related to Israel since October 2000. Even though in this time span we have witnessed ghastly acts of brutal terrorism and indiscriminate attacks in which hundreds and thousands of innocents, not necessarily in our region, were slaughtered by terrorists, at no time did the OIC lobby for a special sitting. Distinguished delegates, I ask you to ponder the reason why is a special sitting demanded only in the case when some parties here, most of which are renowned for human rights violations, who can command a majority, constantly desire to place Israel in the dock under one pretext or another? Ahmed Yassin founded the Hamas and led this terrorist radical organization, a central element in the fabric of global terrorism, whose primary defined goal and ideological credo call for a violent Jihad for the liberation of Palestine and the establishment of an Islamic Palestine "from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River" through violence, i.e. the elimination of the State of Israel. Yesterday, a Palestinian observer misquoted me as saying that the Palestinian goal was the destruction of Israel. I said nothing of the sort. Others did - like Ahmed Yassin. But why go outside this hall for evidence or take my word for it? Trust your own eyes. Just take a look at the heading on which the Palestinian observer's statement is printed and at the map of "Palestine". The map takes up all the land between Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea. There is no place for Israel on a map distributed in this very hall. Yassin, this leading perpetrator of terrorist activity maintains a complex organizational, financial, and operational infrastructure as well as a military apparatus deployed not just in Gaza but throughout the world, supported financially and otherwise by two governments present in this hall, Iran and Syria. Ahmed Yassin personally approved dozens of major suicide bombings within the context of his personal responsibility for Hamas strategies-wholesale suicide terrorism in which hundreds of Israelis were killed, thousands injured. When Hamas, under the leadership of Ahmed Yassin recruited and trained women and young children, armed with suicide belts to be detonated either through their own will or through remote control, this body did not demand a special sitting to condemn the abuse of women and young children by their own people, nor the virulent incitement to hatred and death by Hamas leaders during sermons in mosques, and in children's schools and summer-camps. When Yassin and other leaders of the Hamas sent other children - other children, not their own children of course, and not members of their family - to commit suicide bombings, I didn't see a clamour in this hall to hold a special sitting. Hamas and Yassin produced and launched, sometimes on a daily basis, Kassam rockets against Israeli villages and towns. Nobody condemned them and asked for a special sitting. So Mr. Chairperson, distinguished delegates, When a prominent practitioner of international terrorism like Yassin, a chilling example of a cynical manipulator of the lives of his followers under the guise of a so-called "spiritual leader" distorts lofty religious principles in order to recruit suicide bombers including women and children to embark on so-called "holy war" missions and murder as many Israelis as possible, why is this the only occasion for asking for a special sitting? Distinguished delegates, I strongly urge you to vote against the holding of such a biased special sitting that only serves as another occasion for distorted standards, wild accusations, and inflammatory speech. Do not lend your voice and hand to further reducing and degradation of the credibility of this Commission and the UN as a whole. Thank you. To Go To Top

BETRAYAL IN EGYPT Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 31, 2004.

We are informed by DEBKAfile that, last month the U.S. delivered a packet of documents to Egypt which the U.S. army had seized in Iraq. These documents expose Saddam's deep penetration of Egypt's military by Egyptian traitors at the highest levels. (See (1) below.) This startling information can only be compared to Soviet penetration of West Germany and NATO, exposing all or most of American planning to defend Europe. This is more than damaging to Egypt, given that it also penetrates American communications and technology transferred over the years to Egypt. Keep in mind that the U.S. has furnished Egypt with America's most advanced weapons which would include frequency codes and methods which could defeat U.S. systems all over the globe. I have never believed in or trusted Egypt, no matter what the agreement she signed. I know that Egypt has been gifted $60 Billion in virtually free American military equipment. I have always opined the U.S. State Department looked to Egypt to replace the Shah of Iran and to protect U.S. interests in Saudi Arabia. Meaning that one day they would invade Saudi Arabia, take over the Saudi oil fields - supposedly in America's best interests. That was assuming that Egypt would not swing over to radical Islamic influence which it seems to be doing. The DEBKAfile report (attached) speaks of high ranking Egyptian generals and diplomats on Saddam's payroll. Extend that to mean that whatever Saddam knew, the Russians knew and perhaps the Chinese, North Koreans as well as well as the terrorist organizations he supported. Media people were also on his payroll which means that, not only the Egyptians but the French, Germans, English and even American journalists who would carry the Saddam propaganda line. (This starts to explain the Leftist Media tilt which will be a scandal of a separate nature when their names start to trickle out.) We are told that one Mrs. Abu Zayad handed to the Iraqis the Egyptian Ministry's secret computer codes which could then be downloaded by Iraqi Intel. That would include whatever Egypt knew about America's plans to invade Iraq. America ran war games called "Operation Bright Star" with the Egyptian military annually. Operation Bright Star (which opened the book on U.S. tactics, weapons and codes) was transferred to Saddam and onward to all the terrorist organizations. The attached DEBKAfile report is revealing but it, of course, only touches on the documents, the first set of which was transferred to Egypt - with more on the way. The documents speak of "trusted" Egyptian generals, diplomats, engineers sent to America where the secret doors were virtually opened to them by the State Department and the U.S. military. This also has grave implications for Israel, given that U.S. sources would have been informed about Israel's capabilities (plus or minus) and that information would have been leaked to Saddam. From Saddam it could have easily gone over to the Russians, Iran, Syria, and all the many terrorist groups who Saddam funded, armed, informed and lead. The Arab world is no place where a secret lasts too long. Egypt has been virtually stripped of her secrets and, unfortunately, many of those secrets were American in origin. Suddenly, we see all sorts of those secrets hemorrhaging out into the world. We find Iran is building nuclear weapons, denials notwithstanding. North Korea admits it is building nuclear weapons. Pakistan has admitted that their chief scientist proliferated nuclear technology to Libya, North Korea, Iran and probably to Egypt, Syria and elsewhere. Libya is discovered, based on Kadaffi's own admission that it had all three WMD (Weapons of Mass Death) including NBC (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical) warfare projects in development and no one seemed to know - not even the Israelis. We find the U.N. with its Chairman, Kofi Anan, mired in a scandal during the years of oil for food amounting to Billions upon Billions of dollars in kickbacks, involving the U.N. staff, Saddam, Russia, France, etc. - all cheating, all embezzling, all crooked. Only now is the Media even beginning to give it the attention this horrific scandal deserves. Is this the time when, as in Noah's era, G-d decides that all mankind is too corrupt to live? The penetration of Egypt by Saddam is a breaking story of huge import, given today's arsenals. Given today's Media where lady news anchors knees and thighs seem aimed for centerfold notoriety, I hope they start getting serious about critical news reportage. In any case, there is more to follow (as I think) through the ripple affect of Egypt's hemorrhaging American secrets. If Egypt turns out to be a wide conduit of American secrets, imagine what Saudi Arabia has passed on to the terrorists it has funded. Is William Safire the last of the world's news breakers? Let's hear it from CNN, FOX NEWS, NBC, ABC, BBC, NEW YORK TIMES, WASHINGTON POST, WASHINGTON TIMES, CHICAGO TRIBUNE, et al. They have the funds to set investigative journalism back on its feet, so gents and ladies, let's get at it. ### "Clearing the Decks for Jimmy FROM DEBKA-Net-Weekly 150 Updated by DEBKAfile March 26, 2004, 3:55 PM (http://www.debka.com/doc/weekly.php}. The process of selecting Gemal Jimmy Mubarak to succeed his 76-year old father as Egyptian president is nearly over, notwithstanding Mubarak Sr.'s denials. A book just out in Cairo, "Gemal Mubarak - Revival of National Liberalism," performs an excellent PR job on the incoming president. The book, clearly written to order by Gahad Awda, a member of the ruling party's central committee, introduces young Mubarak's political agenda and his vision for the future of his country. Much less glossy reading matter was handed to President Hosni Mubarak earlier this month. It was put in his hands, gift-wrapped as a special package, ahead of his trip to Washington next month. On May 19, revealed its contents: a large stack of Iraqi intelligence documents that US forces seized in Baghdad and which expose the deep penetration of the Mubarak regime achieved by the deposed Iraqi ruler Saddam Hussein. After opening his gift, Mubarak called an emergency session in the presidential palace of his key advisers, intelligence chiefs led by General Omar Suleiman and top military and police commanders. The documents spelled out in detail how Farhan Hassan, Iraq's deputy ambassador to the Arab League in Cairo, turned his office into a center of espionage and recruiting post for Iraqi agents in Egypt, the United States and the Gulf. At the end of the meeting, according to DEBKA-Net-Weekly's intelligence sources, Mubarak ordered his security forces to start rounding up all the Egyptians listed in the documents as agents of Hassan's Iraqi network. Some 120 people were picked in the first wave. The package also contained Hassan's reports to Baghdad. Under the codename "Number 3" attested to his ranking in the Iraqi hierarchy, he filed directly to Saddam Hussein. Number 3 described in detail how he bought the loyalty of "several prominent Egyptian journalists", among them popular columnist Sayid Nasser, who were willing to publish articles shooting Saddam's propaganda line. One report outlined Hassan's steps for the recruitment of Shuwaike Abu Zayad, the wife of one of Egypt's top diplomats. She passed to Number 3 all the Egyptian foreign ministry's top-secret cables and documents. As expectations of a US invasion of Iraq mounted in 2002, Mrs. Abu Zayad handed the Iraqis the ministry's secret computer codes. Iraqi intelligence then tapped in from Baghdad and downloaded document after document, including the secrets of US-Egyptian military cooperation and transcripts of conversations between Mubarak and the past and present US defense secretaries, William Cohen and Donald Rumsfeld. The Iraqis also read all the secret reports and documents pertaining to the annual US-Egyptian "Bright Star" military maneuvers. Number 3 was particular fond of boasting to Saddam that he had recruited about 20 Egyptian generals who had been transferred to the reserves and farmed out to administrative jobs in Egypt's military industries. They positively gushed with information on their former units and new jobs. Hassan also enlisted engineers, industrialists and doctors, some of them personal physicians to Egypt's senior military officers and political leaders. Saddam placed extremely high value on information on the health of top Egyptians. Number 3 performed many more services for his master in Baghdad. They included: 1. Thwarting special operations mounted by the Iraqi opposition in Washington and London. In the US capital, according to one of the documents, Hassan recruited Najib Salhi, an Iraqi general and former commander of Iraq's 4th Division who defected to the United States. The general's people collected information in Washington on the activities of Iraqi opposition figures, including Mohammed Chalabi, now a senior member of the Iraqi Governing Council. 2. Using Iraq's Arab League office in Cairo to recruit agents from Eastern Europe. The documents are chock full of the names of Russian and Czech diplomats who served Iraqi intelligence. Number 3 was able to pass along to Baghdad volumes of secret cables and military reports that Moscow sent to or received from its embassies in the Middle East and Gulf. 3. Running a large number of import-export companies registered in Cairo. They were used as fronts for information, goods and money sought by Iraq. 4. Overseeing operations at the Qatar-based al-Jazeera, the biggest and most influential Arab satellite television in the world. Hassan got first look at intelligence gathered by the station and paid its staffers to tout the Iraqi line. This operation was a great success. Hassan's people managed to enlist the services of Faisal al-Qassam, one of the station's best-known broadcasters. Qassam, a Syrian, edits and moderates al Jazeera's popular daily phone-in show, "Counterpoint". Only a few of the dozens of callers who telephone from across the Arab world to discuss current events get on the air. But before every show, Number 3 or one of his minions decided with Qassam on the issue to be discussed and handed him a list of viewers who would call in with the questions they would ask. Those viewers were, of course, Iraqi intelligence agents from across the Arab world who read out the questions dictated from Baghdad. The Egyptian regime therefore has its hands full rolling up Hassan's pro-Saddam network. It is waiting for a second stack of secret Iraqi files to come in from Washington. The president will then be able to finish a thorough clearing-out in time to hand a sparkling clean administration over to his successor. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel, Gamla (http://gamla.org.il/english) and the Freeman Center for Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm) To Go To Top

GOLDEN CALVES Posted by David Wilder, March 31, 2004.

Last night, after a full night at the Hazon David Synagogue, I was unsure as to whether I should spend another night there. We knew it was only a matter of time until the troops showed up to evict us and obliterate the synagogue, but the exact time and date were still a question mark. I decided to sleep at home. At 4:30 in the morning the phone started ringing and I knew the time had come. Quickly dressing, I made my way downstairs to drive to the site, five minutes away. I met my neighbor, who is also an ambulance driver. Knowing the necessity for emergency medical crews and ambulances at such events, his presence was a necessity. I decided to accompany him, rather than drive myself. However, the road between Hebron and Kiryat Arba had been closed, with the synagogue site being blocked off by an army jeep, parked horizontally in the middle of the street. They wouldn't even let the ambulance through. So, I walked a couple of minutes to the site and arrived just in time to witness the huge army D9 bulldozer start to demolish the tent which housed the synagogue. The fifty or so youth spending the night at the synagogue had been expelled easily at about four o'clock, being forcibly and violently removed. They were taken to Kiryat Arba (across the street - maybe 50 meters away) and locked in. In other words, the gates to Kiryat Arba were closed and locked. The contents of the synagogue, the books, Torah Scroll and furniture, were removed. Then the D9 began its ugly work. And it didn't take too long. Within a few minutes the synagogue was plowed into the ground. A while later, when the gates to Kiryat Arba were opened, and others from Hebron were able to reach the site, everyone immediately started "rebuilding" the synagogue. Rocks which had formed the foundation of the structure were gathered and piled one on top of the other, the beginnings of a low wall, encompassing the area of the synagogue. This was too much for the security forces, which again went to work, attempting to finish what they had started. The goal: destroy the wall! The site was declared a "closed military zone" and all people were ordered to leave, or else? Of course, no one left. Everyone sat down where they were, and a group of men began early morning prayers. The security forces, police, and border police tried to move people out, without success. And then, off and on, for a good part of the day, violence would erupt when the police decided that enough was enough - the "rebuilding" had gone too far. As of this writing, at about 4:00 in the afternoon, the atmosphere has somewhat relaxed. The police know that they are not going to be able to evict everyone - people will just keep coming back, while the Hebron-Kiryat Arba residents know that they will not be able to totally restore the synagogue today, immediately. So, for the time being, everyone is sitting around, waiting to see what the "other side" plans to do. This is one of the sickest situations I have ever witnessed since coming to Israel some 30 years ago. If, in any other country in the world, a government decision brought about the violent annihilation of a synagogue, newspaper headlines would scream "Anti-Semitism" and "Racism." International Jewish organizations would demand immediate restoration and harsh measures to be brought against the perpetrators. Only in the State of Israel, under Ariel Sharon, can a synagogue, built in memory of two Jews murdered by terrorists in the midst of a war, be "justifiably" wiped off the face of the earth, having been declared an "illegal outpost." It is unfathomable. Despite the horror of today's actions, it is incumbent upon us to realize what is actually happening. Only hours ago the IDF Chief of Staff announced that other "illegal outposts" would be uprooted. The army is ready to "carry out what it's required to do." What does this mean? Understand - this does not just refer to "outposts," be they "legal" or "illegal." Ariel Sharon intends to implement such actions throughout all of Gaza and most of Judea and Samaria. He intends to give the orders and expects the army and other security forces to "carry out what it's required to do." To evict people from their homes. To bulldoze entire communities into the ground. To abandon Eretz Yisrael to our enemies - our blood- thirsty next-door neighbors whose only desire is the destruction of the state of Israel. Soldiers are supposed to obey orders. That's what "soldiering" is all about. This morning I saw different kinds of soldiers. I saw officers who were very unhappy with what they had been commanded to do, but had no alternative to carrying out their orders. Then, there were others, who showed little emotion, one way or the other. But there were those who were happy - they smiled, laughed, and enjoyed their evil deed - evicting men, women and children from their synagogue, a place of worship, and their land. They could joke about it, they could make fun of the women, weeping, trying to explain why they could not abandon the synagogue. "Don't you have a synagogue in your neighborhood," one of the women cried out to the soldiers who were dragging her away. These are the ones that really bother me. It is written, that while Moses was still on Mt. Sinai, after having received the Ten Commandments, the Jews far below began worshiping a golden calf. G-d ordered Moses to leave the mount and deal with the people. As Moses reached the bottom of Mt Sinai, he became furious. Not so much due to the fact that the people had built a golden calf and were using it for idol worship. Rather, because there were those who were joyously singing and dancing around the calf. To commit such a crime, that is one thing, but to be happy about it - that is unthinkable. Some commentators explain that this is the reason why Moses threw down and broke the first tablets of the law, because of the merriment expressed by some of the people. Such it is here too. The legitimacy of this morning's actions might be debated. It is a complicated political issue, to which there are different opinions. But to be happy about it? That is, in my opinion, equivalent to dancing around the golden calf. But in this case, there may be many more than one calf. There may be many golden calves. And if there are those who enjoy forcibly evicting people from their homes, we are in a very sad state. I hope and pray that the golden calves will be quickly melted down, and that all people will recognize the right of the Jewish people to their land - to Eretz Yisrael - to ALL of Eretz Yisrael. Then we will all have reason to be joyous - singing and dancing together, not around a golden calf, but in honor of our golden G-d-given land. With blessings from Hebron. David Wilder is spokesman for the Jewish Community of Hebron (http://www.hebron.org.il). To subscribe to the Hebron list, simply email: hebron_today-subscribe@hebron.org.il You can donate to the Jewish Community of Hebron on the internet: http://www.hebron.org.il/contrib.htm or to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB 105, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il or directly to the The Hebron Fund 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230 hebronfund@aol.com 718-677-6886 To Go To Top

PRESIDENT BUSH PROMOTES TOLERANCE OR WEAKNESS? Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 31, 2004.

The smoke had not yet cleared from the World Trade Center, when Pres. Bush flattered the Islamic Center in Washington, "Islam is a religion of peace." That is one of his themes. He "stresses the sanctity of Muslim lives and property and the innocence of the Muslim masses." He celebrates an Islamic holiday in the White House and quotes from the Qur'an. For another Muslim holiday, he sent greeting cards asserting that Islam promotes "justice, compassion, and personal responsibility." The networks work towards the same end, having kept off the air films of the P.A. Arabs celebrating the World Trade Center bombing spontaneously. On TV, academics implore us to see ourselves as "others" do (David Warren, Commentary, 4/2004, p.21). Corrections: (1) Religion of peace? The founder of Islam led the faithful in a series of wars; mosques all over the Arab world preach holy war; and Arafat's Arabs celebrated US casualties. (2) "Innocence of the Muslim masses?" Polls and demonstrations indicated that most Muslims were pleased with the bombing. (3) Compassion? Not for the victims of suicide bombing that the mosques call for. (4) Personal responsibility? Perhaps the religion does, but the Arabs are fatalistic, and avoid the shame of being wrong by blaming all their problems on others. (5) See ourselves as other do? The Muslims see the US as a society to destroy or seize. Pres. Bush has no business serving as a proselytizer for Islam. He lowers our guard against Islamism. All he should have done is warn Americans not to take out their anger for the World Trade Center attacks and other Arab terrorism on any Arab they see; they must not take the law into their own hands. He should have studied the subject, not misstated it. Hamas perpetrated 38 of the 51 murderers of Americans in Israel and Territories, since Oslo. The P.A. harbors the murderers, names streets after them, and calls them heroes and martyrs. When Israel liquidated the head of Hamas, that, the P.A. condemned! Conclusion: the P.A. considers Hamas as allies (Morton Klein of ZOA, NY Sun, 3/25, letter). Though the alliance has been proved before, it cannot logically be induced from these facts. The P.A. feels it has to express solidarity as against outsiders. It probably also feels it must not oppose Hamas when Hamas has popular support. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

WINNIE MANDELA ON THE KILLING OF SHEIKH YASSIN Posted by Israel Ben-Ami, March 31, 2004.

'Apartheid Israel can be defeated', says Winnie Madikizela-Mandela Mail Guardian, Johannesburg, South Africa, March 26, 2004. Apartheid Israel can be defeated, just as apartheid in South Africa was defeated," Winnie Madikizela-Mandela, former president of the African National Congress Women's League, said on Thursday. Madikizela-Mandela was addressing a meeting arranged by the Palestine Solidarity organisation in Lenasia, Johannesburg, to protest the recent assassination by the Israeli state of the leader of Hamas, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. She described the killing of Yassin -- who inspired a campaign of suicide bombings in Israel -- as a "cowardly act that took the life of a brave hero". Madikizela-Mandela said the United States government's response to the killing was "wishy washy," and she criticised the US for not describing Israel as a terrorist state. The Palestinian ambassador to South Africa, Salman Eiherfi, greeted the crowd with a shout of "Viva, Palestine, viva!" Eiherfi said: "They kill our sons, but they will never kill the spirit of our people. Although they have killed Yassin other Yassins have been born." He said the security wall being built by Israel was aimed at "killing the spirit of the Palestinian people, and hope for an independent Palestinian state." He said the first prime minister of Israel, David Ben Gurion, once described Ariel Sharon, the current prime minister who ordered the assassination of Yassin, as "thirsty for blood". Among the posters that were displayed read: "Ariel Sharon is a mass murderer", "Zionism equals to nazism", "Apartheid Israel has weapons of mass destruction", "What's wrong with the single state solution?" and "Expel Israel from South Africa". Palestine Solidarity chairperson Naazim Adam said the organisation strongly condemned the killing of Yassin. He urged the South African government to show more support for the Palestinians. He said many South African Muslims expected the government to understand the plight of the Palestinians because there were many similarities between apartheid and the Israeli occupation of the Gaza Strip and West Bank. He said Sharon had turned the Middle East issue into a religious one, but that it was about land. Ebrahim Fakude of Palestine Solidarity described Yassin as a humble man, who internationalised the struggle of the Palestine people. He told the crowd that those who belonged to Hamas did not need to be ashamed as the movement was not terrorist. "We need to be careful not to label Muslims organisations as terrorist because the United States has declared them terrorists." Palestine Solidarity will hold a vigil at the US consulate in Killarney, Johannesburg from noon to 11pm on Friday. - Sapa To Go To Top

THERE IS NEVER AN EXCUSE FOR TERRORISM Posted by Dafna Yee, March 31, 2004.

This is an excerpt from an article written by Patrick Chisholm that appeared in the Christian Science Monitor (www.csmonitor.com/2004/0323/p25s01-coop.html) and Front Page Magazine (FrontPageMag.com), March 24, 2004. It is entitled "An Anti-Semitic Left Hook". One finds pockets of anti-Semitism at anti-globalization rallies, and plenty of it at pro-Palestinian rallies... Palestinian hatred of Israelis, I suspect, is based on more than just land disputes and the policies of Israel. Much of it likely derives from envy. Jews as a whole are among the most able, hard-working, and intelligent people ever to inhabit the earth. Wherever they go they succeed. They turned Israel into an economic powerhouse for its size, and "made the desert bloom." Success breeds envy. Envy breeds hatred. Terrorism is the end result. (Christian Science Monitor) Frankly, this article is perpetrating stereotypes about Jews and "reasons" for anti-Semitism while appearing to be against that very thing. I'm sure the writer thought that he was being very pro-Jewish when he wrote this but that only points out how insidious this line of argument is. (However, let me make it clear that I am not accusing the writer of being an anti-Semite.) The fact is that the terror tactics that are being used against Israelis have nothing to do with either Jewish ethnic qualities (which don't really exist anyway!) or about Israel policies and land disputes. This "stereotype theory" has always been a useful excuse for propaganda but, regardless of whether you are using good or bad qualities, it is still untrue. This concept is also a dangerous argument because if you can believe that all, or even most, Jews share good qualities because of their ethnicity then you can believe with equal fervor that they all share the stereotypical bad ones -- greed, lying, vulgarity ... you name it. It is not an accident that the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" pamphlet has been used so successfully in the Arab countries in their hate campaign along with the "Blood Libel"; they are using the bad stereotypes to specify the targets for terror. But, that doesn't make the bad stereotypes the cause of terror, either. In addition, if the writer's analysis of the cause of terror had merit, why didn't he (or anyone else) try to find ethnic qualities or use poverty/failure as a reason to explain the terror used to kill Spaniards in the train explosion two weeks ago? Or apply the same reasoning to the train explosion in Japan last December if what happened was really the expression of envy leading to hatred leading to terror? People are using terror tactics against the Israelis (and now others as well) because the world has demonstrated very clearly that such tactics bring political dividends! Period! Also, the writer, like so many other people, in attempting to understand the motives of the terrorists, is condoning their use of terror, albeit unwittingly. There is NEVER a reasonable excuse for the use of terror. When you explain and find plausible reasons for terror, you help to perpetrate its use. The use of terror by Arabs (and now copycat groups) is directly related to the Muslim culture's goal of "conquest for Allah by any means at all" and the fact that their mentality has never left the 14th century when the Ottoman Empire was expanding. Modern democracy and concepts of international law are simply words; they have no reality in the feudal theocracies that exist in the Arab countries of the Middle East. The Arabs use anti-Semitic stereotypes (both their own and others -- Hitler's regime has supplied much of them) to gain supporters and to excuse their terror tactics because that has proved successful for aggressors over the centuries, but their hatred of Israel is not due to anything that the Israelis have done or not done. The Arabs want to destroy Israel because they can't rule it as a Muslim country. Very dog-in-the-mangerish ... They didn't want the land but they don't want the Jews to have it even if only the Jews made any good use of it. Use of terror tactics in their attempts to destroy Israel is the first step in their plan for world domination and Christians the world over would be wise not to dismiss it as merely the result of Jew-envy. The Arabs used terror originally because it fit their philosophy and they have escalated its use because they weren't stopped. The only ties that terror has to anti-Semitism in any form is that the world excuses (and too often supports) the use of terror against Jews. (Remember the FBI didn't even classify the explosion at LAX as a terror, just as a "possible hate or work crime" nor did they name the perpetrator a terrorist for nine months)! The same is true for other countries' "investigations" into barbaric acts that cause universal outrage when perpetrated against anyone other than Jews. Much of the money that is supposed to go for "peace" helps to finance terror because people are duped into believing the lie that the Arabs are acting this way because they are "oppressed by the wicked Jews". (In a similar way, many people who were against Fascist Spain supported Communist organizations whose propaganda line also talked about "globalization" and "human rights" to cover up their true political aims.) If terror was the end result of poverty and envy, then why does this explanation only get used in the case when Jews are being targeted? When the Blacks were rioting in the '60s, they did not blow themselves up along with as many White people as possible. (They also did not use their children as human bombs.) Where were the revolts of Black slaves against their White masters if poverty and envy caused people to adopt terror tactics? In South Africa, the most common crime during apartheid was arson and it was always used by the Whites against the Blacks, not the other way around. So, where did "envy and poverty" come in? The Irish have been fighting each other and the British for centuries and neither side ever deliberately targeted innocent civilians. There is not a single instance in history, other than this terror directed against Israel/Jews, where "envy" (or "humiliation") caused this cult atmosphere of hatred to the extent where the perpetrators taught their children that the greatest goal is to be a "martyr" by killing themselves and as many Jews as possible. And there is certainly no instance where so many people accept so many excuses for barbarism. Poverty and oppression do not cause people to revolt (though they are the most common excuse) and they are definitely not the reason that people adopt terror tactics. They are the explanations used by educated, often wealthy people who do not fight themselves, to convince people to fight for a "cause". Ironically, if poverty were the reason for terror, then the Arabs who live in Israel would have less reason for using terror than any others because their standard of living was the highest in the Middle East prior to the Oslo debacle! Claiming that terror comes from envy of the Jews because of their innate "superiority" is just another way of using stererotypes to blame the victim for being victimized. And that is always wrong, no matter how nicely it is phrased. Dafna Yee is director of JWD - Jewish Watch Dog - http://jwd-jewishwatchdog.home.comcast.net To Go To Top

NO SUBSTITUTE FOR STRATEGY Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, March 31, 2004.

This was written by Daniel Doron, president of The Israel Center for Social and Economic Progress, an independent pro-market policy think tank (www.icsep.org.il). Despite its brilliant tactical victories, Israel has never truly won a war against the Arabs. In fact, Israel has habitually snatched diplomatic defeats out of the jaws of military victory. In part this was due to the lack of an overall strategy, as none of Israel's leaders defined goals for war or the means to achieve them, or to consistently pursue them. A similar fate may befall our present war against terrorism. Despite some great tactical achievements, Israel is not winning this war because it is failing - yet again - to articulate a winning strategy. Israel, with its powerful fighting forces, finds itself at the mercy of even relatively small groups such as Hizbullah, allowing them to seize the initiative and to dictate the terms of engagement. Even against Palestinian terrorism, Israel acts mostly in a haphazard manner, and from a defensive position. The lack of a determined and cohesive military strategy that would seriously damage terrorist organizations by eliminating most of their leadership in one fell swoop (rather than in dribs and drabs - as in the case of Ahmed Yassin and others - inviting continual condemnations and reaction) is hardly surprising. Lack of concerted action, acting only in response to near catastrophes is the typical modus operandi of all Israeli governments in all spheres of their activity. More than in most countries, most of the energies of Israeli politicians are devoted to jostling for power and for the considerable spoils offered by an extremely centralized, government-controlled economy. Little energy remains for what is supposed to be the business of government - the provision of security and other public good. In the case of the military, the problem is confounded not only by the innate difficulties of all huge bureaucratic organizations to quickly adapt to changing circumstances but also by a no-win ethos. Like other institutions, the IDF was subjected to a high degree of politicization stemming back to its Hagana days. Many army leaders, like many in the elite generally, are left of center. They have embraced the utopian assumptions of the peace camp. Many Israeli generals are convinced that terrorism cannot be vanquished by force. They do not bother to explain, to themselves or to others, what is the justification for the enormous outlays Israel spends on its military if it cannot solve military problems, or how their ideological position squares with the many instances where terrorist groups - from the 11th-century Assassins to the armed bands of the 1936-9 Great Arab Revolt - were totally vanquished by military force alone. ISRAEL'S FAILURE to curb terrorism is what makes an exhausted Israeli public grasp at any straw offered by its confused leadership, which believes that a defensive tactic, a wall, is a solution to terrorism. Walls have been and will continue to be breached. So while a wall may significantly reduce the number of terrorist incidents, it cannot prevent - as its supporters readily admit - all terrorist attacks. Worse, it cannot ensure against mega-attacks causing enormous damage and many casualties.Thus strategically, the security fence has very limited usefulness. More disturbingly, it may come at great cost and some unforeseeable consequences, and it might actually reduce Israel's ability to fight terrorism effectively. For the wall to function, it must not only be expensively constructed with sophisticated monitoring devices, but it must also be maintained, even defended, by mobile quick-response units - again, a costly proposition. Perhaps instead of investing heavily in a wall, it would be cheaper and more effective to construct a light fence and invest the savings in more mobile response units, probably achieving better results. A temporary fence would also reduce the objections raised against the wall that can be seen as a precursor of a permanent border. Walls have a tendency to produce a Maginot Line mentality. The Bar-Lev Line was first conceived as a series of outposts meant to serve as trip wires along the Suez Canal, alerting mobile units to repel an Egyptian crossing. Heavy Egyptian shelling forced the Israelis to turn them into heavily fortified strongholds whose protection required the creation of a line and a defensive strategy, which soon overshadowed the concept of mobile defense. This was an important factor in the disastrous beginning of the Yom Kippur War. But the greatest drawback is that the wall punishes the innocent along with the guilty. This is counterproductive. The wall will exacerbate the miserable conditions upon which terrorist organizations thrive. It will assign the Palestinian Arab population to the mercy of a corrupt irredentist leadership that has already proven its ability to transform the desperation it creates into terrorist acts against Israel. Extolling unilateral withdrawal and the separation wall, the writer A. B. Yehoshua explained, "From the moment we withdraw, I don't want to know their names. I do not want any personal relations with them I am not going to perpetrate war crimes for their own sake, but I will use all my force against them (if they attack us)." Apparently even this great liberal does not understand that you cannot lock terrorism behind a wall, threaten brutal responses, and expect quiet. Peace will only come when a new Palestinian leadership, emerging from a civil society, will replace the criminal Palestinian Authority and its terrorist leadership imposed by Oslo. Only then will the Palestinians be able to make some concessions for peace the way Israel is ready to do. Meanwhile, Israel's failure to systematically eliminate terrorism by destroying its organizations and its leadership is, paradoxically, a major obstacle to peace. It causes unnecessary massive loss of life and suffering, not only for Israelis but for the Palestinian Arabs too. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org To Go To Top

CNN'S WHITEWASH OF HATE INDOCTRINATION Posted by CAMERA, March 30, 2004.

When Hussam Abdo, a young Palestinian teenager, was caught at an Israeli checkpoint with a suicide belt hidden under his sweater, the efforts of Israeli soldiers to help him safely cut off the belt were broadcast around the world, thanks to the chance presence of an AP cameraman. The New York Times published on its front page a five photo sequence taken from the video, and many other papers gave the story and photos similar prominence. CNN also covered the breaking story, and a few days later returned to the incident with a "spotlight" report ( http://tinyurl.com/2fgr5 ) on Palestinian "children as weapons of war," (Mar. 27, 2004), seeking to understand, as anchor Carol Lin put it, "... what convinces these children that they should strap a belt of explosives to themselves and risk their lives for whatever cause." (After clicking on the link, scroll down most of the way through the transcript to find the segment.) Unfortunately, the segment, reported by CNN's Cairo Bureau Chief, Ben Wedeman, succeeded only in obscuring the issue by never once mentioning the sustained campaign of hatred and incitement against Jews and Israelis that has been a staple of Palestinian newspapers, television, radio, mosques, summer camps and classrooms. Instead of exploring for viewers the horrifically effective Palestinian brainwashing campaign that has convinced so many Palestinians to kill and be killed, CNN in effect blamed Israel for the suicide bombings. Wedeman accomplished this by interviewing only one "expert" on the subject, Palestinian psychiatrist Eyad Sarraj, who has made a specialty of claiming that Palestinian suicide bombers had been "traumatized" by Israeli occupation. According to Sarraj, who never mentions Palestinian hate indoctrination, the primary reason that children are drawn into suicide bombings is that: "... some of the children are so defiant of their own family because the father figure as a symbol of power, has been destroyed over the last few years, because he could not protect his children. " This, of course, makes it seem that Palestinian parents oppose suicide bombings, and that the bombers defy their parents. But the opposite is often true. For example, the mother of one teenage terrorist was recorded on film personally urging her son to "wage Jihad and come back only as a martyr." (MEMRI, Special Dispatch No. 673, Mar. 4, 2004 http://tinyurl.com/33xo3 ) With his mother's encouragement ringing in his ears, Mohammed Farhat attacked a Jewish seminary, killing five young students before he received his desired "martyrdom" at the hands of Israeli soldiers. His mother later stated in an interview that she "always longed to be the mother of a shahid (martyr) ... let all my sons be shahids." And, as The New York Times reported in covering the Abdo story, this is not an unusual sentiment: "Many Palestinian parents have praised their sons and daughters for carrying out suicide attacks, hailing them as heroes and martyrs." ( Mar. 25, 2004) In addition, Sarraj and CNN also ignore the fact that the prime "father figure" in Palestinian society, Yasir Arafat, extols "shahids," and that the Palestinian media and schools that he directly controls places such terrorists on a pedestal, as the ones "closest to Allah." In an interview on Palestinian television, for example, Arafat glorified child martyrs: "... this child who is grasping the stone, facing the tank, is it not the greatest message to the world when that hero becomes a shahid? We are proud of them ..." (PATV, Jan. 15, 2002 cited in Ask for Death, Palestinian Media Watch http://tinyurl.com/2ne3n ) Rather than examining why and how the Palestinian Authority has succeeded in brainwashing parents and kids to hate Jews and Israelis, and to revel in a cult of death, CNN instead fed its viewers Palestinian propaganda, such as Carol Lin's claim that "There is a backlash going on now ... the family of this ... boy are coming out and telling the terrorists to let our children alone." Well, not quite. The boy's mother actually said that he was slightly too young; had those who sent him just waited a few years, everything would have been OK: "Mrs. Abdo, in a view echoed by many others, made clear that she opposed only those suicide attacks carried out by under age bombers. 'Maybe if he is 20, then perhaps I could understand,' she said of her own son. 'At that age, they know what they are doing, they are fighting for their homeland.' " (New York Times, Mar. 26, 2004) CNN does no one any favors by covering up the hate campaign that has so permeated and debased Palestinian society. By making excuses for Palestinian terrorism, CNN only prolongs the suffering of both Palestinians and Israelis. The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) monitors the news media for fairness in reporting news about Israel. Their website address is http://www.camera.org To Go To Top

HOPE VERSUS DESPAIR Posted by Judy Lash Balint, March 30, 2004.

According to Israeli journalist Doron Rosenblum, Israel has plunged "into the depths of despair, bereavement and failure." We have, according to the Haaretz writer, deteriorated "willingly and with full awareness, down the slopes of the sewage (sic) of history." Further, he states, Israel is now "one of the most hated, most isolated and most miserable places to be on the planet." (Haaretz Magazine, March 26, 2004) Another prominent Israeli, Labor MK Avram Burg, decided to air his pique in the London Sunday Telegraph (March 28, 2004) in an op ed entitled The Zionist Dream is Doomed. Here, Burg, a former speaker of the Knesset, reiterates a theme he sounded first, last September in the International Herald Tribune. In his London piece, Burg writes: "The countdown to the end of Israeli society has begun." Incredibly, this member of Israel's elite goes on to justify homicide bombers by explaining to the Brits that, "They [Arabs] consign themselves to Allah in our places of recreation, because their own lives are torture. They spill their own blood in our restaurants, because they have children and parents at home who are hungry and humiliated." Burg's late father, Yosef -- a long-serving Israeli Cabinet minister -- was my mother's teacher in Leipzig during the 1930s. Life for Jews there was indeed "torture," and our parents were "hungry and humiliated." No Jew resorted to blowing themselves up in restaurants or night clubs, did they Avram? The sheer ignorance and wilfull self delusion displayed by this member of our ruling elite is daunting. Even a cursory examination of some of the more notable bombers illustrates the fallacy of his claims. At least eight suicide bombers of the past three years were students at Al- Najah university in Nablus. Izzadin Masri, the 23-year-old who murdered 15 people at Jerusalem's Sbarro restaurant in 2002 was the son of a prosperous restaurant owner. Ayat Akhras, 18, a straight-A student, months away from graduation and then marriage killed two Israelis outside a supermarket in Kiryat Yovel. The two terrorists from upper middle class British backgrounds who killed three people at the Mike's Place disco on Tel Aviv's beachfront, had never even stepped foot in Israel before -- how could they have felt Israeli "oppression?" As Rohan Gunaratna, a terrorism specialist at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland categorically states: "You hear people say that these are all desperate people, or poor people whose families need the money. This is nonsense." "These are rational people, not necessarily uneducated or impoverished," adds retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Todd Stewart, director of the Program for International and Homeland Security at Ohio State University in Columbus. "These operatives, typically men in their early 20s, came from diverse social, economic and work backgrounds. They have at least as much education as the general population where they grew up, and usually more. They are seldom fatherless, friendless, jobless or hopeless." Why does Burg have such trouble accepting the fact that the murderers are motivated by hatred, not humiliation? How have we arrived at the point where some leaders of Israeli society have bought into the propaganda of the enemy? It's a complex cocktail of pyschological and emotional factors on both the individual and national level. Still there's at least one group of Israelis who are actively fighting the culture of despair disseminated by the Burg and Rosenblum crowd. Some long-time immigrants from English-speaking countries are expressing optimism and even gratitude for being in the country. Caroline Glick, an American immigrant and columnist for The Jerusalem Post who served in the Israeli Army during her early years in the country, told a packed and attentive Jerusalem audience recently that there is cause for optimism about the future. Citing positive changes in the region -- from the overthrow and capture of Saddam Hussein to the US's new attitude toward Syria -- an upswing in the local Israeli economy and a history of astonishing achievement building a country in 55 years, Glick's prognosis was diamterically opposed to that of her Israeli journalist colleague. Barbara Scher, another veteran American immigrant and CEO of the Docustar Company, organized an upbeat event in Raanana, just north of Tel Aviv last week Celebrating Life in Israel. Along with the music and food, several immigrants rose to explain why they came and why they are still here. Miserable Rosenblum and despairing Burg should have been there. Judy Lash Balint is author of "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" (Gefen), which is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com To Go To Top

ALLAH IS NOT GOD Posted by Jan Willem van der Hoeven, March 30, 2004.

Now we have the proof, and we should be thankful for Dr. Rantisi, Hamas new leader's clarity: that Allah - many times wrongly translated as 'God' - is not the God of the Bible, nor the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Allah is another deity, one who drinks blood as water, who loves jihad and terror, and promises virgins in his so-called paradise to those who kill Jews - the more the better. This Allah has nothing, nothing to do with the God of the Bible. And no matter how many times the muezzins shout out that Allah hu ahbar - 'our Allah is greater' - the God of Israel remains infinitely greater and is the only true and living God and Creator, a God of love to be worshiped as the Creator of us all. So Dr. Rantisi's declaration that Allah (not God!) has declared war on President Bush and Prime Minister Sharon, and thus on the U.S. and on Israel, is strangely revealing. Every intelligent believer already knows that this evil bloodthirsty 'god' has, like Amalek, a war for generations against the only true God and His chosen and elected people. What's new? But let no one, and I repeat - no one - from henceforth translate Allah into God. It's pure nonsense. Allah is the god of terrorists; Hizb'allah, the party of this god. So, if Allah were the same as the only true God, then He would be fighting His own people, the Jews who, in accordance with His eternal promise, He has brought back to His own land as He promised again and again in His word to do. Allah, if he was the only true God, is making war against a President who begins his day with prayer and the reading of the Bible, and who believes in and loves God. How ridiculous can one be? So now President Bush and the whole enlightened and believing western world knows. Allah and his jihad-centered and terrorist-championing religion has declared war on Israel and the U.S. In this fallen and decadent world, these nations are the last strongholds of the Judeo-Christian values inspired by the only true and living God. And these are the strongholds that need to be terrorized into submission to the teaching of ISLAM by the will of this bloodthirsty deity, Allah! When Christians earnestly prayed in England and elsewhere to be delivered during the second world war from the terrible scourge of Nazism - God used the U.S. led Allied forces to bring victory on the Continent over this beastly power. So too, now, we as believers need to earnestly pray that God will again deliver us from this equally dangerous power, and cause leaders to arise, especially in the West, who like Churchill and Roosevelt, will vanquish this Evil Force! May the true God - the God of Israel - have mercy upon us! Jan Willem van der Hoeven id director of the International Christian Zionist Center in Jerusalem. To Go To Top

PLEADING FOR MY LAND Posted by Communaute-Juive-France, March 30, 2004.

Herbet Pagani was a French/Italian poet and singer who was very popular in the 70's. He was communist and Jewish. He eventually became an enthusiastic Zionist and wrote the text below. He read this on November 11th, 1975 on the French radio station Europe 1, after the UN passed a resolution equating Zionism to Racism. I feel this text is as strong as it was in 1975 - Israel's right to exist is still denied and the same liberal left that abandoned Israel in the 70's is doing the same today. - appoline06@yahoo.fr Last Night, I was in the subway when I heard two ladies say: "Did you see these Jews with their stories at the U.N.? What jerks! " It's true. We are jerks. For centuries we have been the world's jerks. It's in our nature, what can you do? Abraham with his single God, Moses with his 10 Commandments, Jesus with his second cheek always available for a second slap, then Freud, Marx, Einstein, all were intruders, revolutionaries, enemies of the Order. Why? Because no order, whatever the century, could satisfy them - since they were always excluded. To call everything in question, to see further, changing the world to change their destiny, such was the destiny of my Ancestors. This is why the defenders of all established orders hate them. *  The anti-Semite of the right blames the Jews for having executed the Bolshevik revolution. It's true: there were many of them, in 1917. *  The anti-Semite of the left blames the Jews for owning Manhattan. It's true: there are many Jewish capitalists. The reason is simple: religion, culture, and the revolutionary ideal on the one hand, stocks and banks on the other, are the only transportable values, the only possible country for those that do not have a country. And now that there is a country, Anti-Semitism reappears from its ashes... - Sorry! From OUR ashes - and it's called anti-Zionism! It used to be applied only to individuals; it is now applied to a country. Israel is a ghetto - Jerusalem is Warsaw... The Nazis who besiege us speak Arabic! And if their crescent is sometimes disguised in a sickle, that's simply for better trapping the liberal leftists of the world. I, who am a Jew of the left, I don't care about a certain left that wants to free all men of the world at the expense of some of them - because I am precisely one of these! I support class struggle, but I also support the right to be different. If the left wants to count me among its members, it cannot exclude my problem. And my problem is that since the Roman deportations of the 1st century after Jesus-Christ, everywhere we went we were expelled, dishonoured, banished, tracked, denounced, crushed, burned and converted by force! Why? Because our religion - i.e. our culture was dangerous. Some examples: *  Judaism was the first to create the Shabbat, the day of God, i.e. the day of weekly mandatory rest. You imagine the joy of the Pharoes, always late in building the next pyramid. *  Judaism prohibits slavery. You can imagine the sympathy of the Romans, the most significant wholesalers of free labour of the Antiquity. * It is said in the Bible: "The earth does not belong to man, but to God." From this sentence a law is created, the automatic handing- over of real-estate every 49 years. You imagine the effect of such a law on the Popes of the Middle Ages and the builders of empires during the Renaissance. It was imperative that the people do not learn the truth. They started by banishing the Bible, then were the libels: walls of defamation that became walls of stone that were called ghettos. Then it was the Inquisition, the flames and later the yellow stars. Auschwitz is only an industrial example of genocide, but there were thousands of hand-made genocides. It would take me three days only to name all the pogroms of Spain, Russia, Poland and North Africa. By continuing to flee and to move, the Jew went everywhere. One extrapolates: he ends up being from nowhere. We are among the people like the welfare child. I don't want to be adopted any more. I don't want for my life to depend on my owners' mood any more. I don't want to be a "citizen-renter" any more. I have enough of knocking at History's doors and waiting until I'm told: "Enter". I enter and I yell! I am at home on earth and on earth I have my land: she was promised to me, she will be mine! What is Zionism? It's reduced to a simple sentence: "Next year in Jerusalem." No, it's not a slogan of the Club Med. It's written in the Bible, the book that has sold more copies and has been misunderstood more than any other book in the world. And this prayer became a roar, a roar that is over 2000 years old, and the fathers of Columbus, Kafka, Proust, Chagall, Marx, Einstein, and even Mr. Kissinger, repeated this sentence, this roar, at least once a year, on Passover. Then, is Zionism equal to Racism? Don't make me laugh! Is "Soft France, dear country of my childhood" ("Douce France, cher pays de mon enfance") a racist anthem? Zionism is the name of a struggle for freedom! In the world, everybody has its Jews. The French have theirs: they are the Breton, Occitans, Corsicans, and the immigrant workers. The Italians have Sicilians; the Americans have their Blacks; the Spaniards their Basques. We, we are EVERYBODY'S Jews. To those that tell me: "And the Palestinians?", I answer: "I am a 2000 year-old Palestinian. I am the oldest oppressed man in the world." I will negotiate with them, but I will not yield my place to them. There's enough space there for two people and two nations. The borders are to be determined together. But the existence of one country cannot in any case exclude the existence of the other. And the political options of a government never called into question the existence of a nation, whatever the nation. Then why Israel? When Israel is out of danger, I will choose among Jews and my Arab neighbours, those who are my brothers by ideas. Today, I must be united with all of my people, even those whom I hate, in the name of this insurmountable enemy: RACISM. Descartes was wrong: "I think, therefore I am" doesn't mean anything. We have been thinking for 5000 years, and we still don't exist! I defend myself, therefore I am! This was distributed by the Jewish Community of France (Communaute-Juive-France-owner@yahoogroupes.fr). Their website address is http://fr.groups.yahoo.com/group/Communaute-Juive-France/ To Go To Top

NEVER LOSE HOPE Posted by David Wilder, March 30, 2004.

A few days ago, journalist David Bedin put out a press release that says as follows: "According to reliable sources, Sharon is preparing to announce in Washington his willingness to remain in three 'settlement blocks' only: Gush Etzion, the Ariel block, and Ma'ale Adumim. The significance of this is that Israel will abandon the rest of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, including the southern Hebron hills communities and Hebron." Yesterday Sharon declared that if his disengagement proposal should not pass a cabinet vote, he would reshuffle his government, forming an alternative government within one day. Today's Ma'ariv daily newspaper headline heralded, "Arbel (Prosecutor) leak torpedoed national unity government: PM reached agreement with Labor on a national unity government but talks were frozen when Arbel recommended indicting Sharon." The story (http://www.maarivinternational.com) revealed that Sharon offered Labor six ministerial posts, including the foreign ministry, (for Shimon Peres). Tonight, at the Likud convention, Sharon proposed a public referendum to determine the fate of his "disengagement plan," with the participants being 200,000 Likud members in Israel. In the meantime, preparations for the April 14 Bush-Sharon meeting in Washington continue. This week three top American diplomats, Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs William Burns, Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, and Eliot Abrams, a senior director of National Security Council who is responsible for Middle East affairs, are scheduled to arrive in Israel for top-level meetings concerning Sharon's proposals and continued "progress" of the "roadmap." Ariel Sharon is preparing them a hearty welcome. How better a way to greet them than by handing them the ruins of a destroyed "illegal outpost" on a silver platter. That is precisely what Sharon is planning on doing. On the outskirts of Kiryat Arba, just outside the west gate, which leads down into the city of Hebron, is a 20 square meter tent. This tent was pitched almost three years ago, following the murder of two men, David Cohen and Hezi Mualem. Cohen was killed while sitting in his car, next to the Kiryat Arba gate. That evening, the Kiryat Arba town council held a spontaneous demonstration not far from the site of the murder. Terrorists opened fire on the group, killing Mualem and injuring another man. Thus the name, Hazon David (which literally means "David's vision") - Hazon for Hezi Mualem and David for David Cohen. Since its inception the tent has served as a synagogue, a place of worship, and a place of Torah study. Classes are frequently conducted for youth and adults, in Hebrew and Russian. The tent is small, and bothers no one. Well, almost no one. No one, except the Americans and Ariel Sharon. Hazon David was declared to be "an illegal outpost" and orders were issued for its destruction. Over the past few months, numerous appeals to Israeli courts delayed execution of the decree. Recently Deputy Defense Minister Ze'ev Baum visited the site. Worshipers and others penned letters to various government ministers, including Defense minister Shaul Mufaz and the Prime Minister. Seemingly to no avail. Last week Supreme Court judge Moshe Heshin rejected a request for a second Supreme Court hearing before an extended panel. That ruling paved the way for implementation of Sharon's orders: Destroy the synagogue! Last night, following a farewell party for the Nahal Brigade officers and soldiers, who have served in Hebron for the past seven months, word leaked out that tonight's the night - the forces are on their way to demolish the tent synagogue. Emergency calls went out to Kiryat Arba-Hebron residents, and within a short time hundreds of people, adults and youth, were swarming towards Hazon David. There, they met some of the same officers they had only minutes before honored and thanked, at the farewell gathering. The long night-the long wait, began. Officers and soldiers, police and other security forces came and left. But the civilians didn't budge. "We are staying," they announced. "We will not abandon our synagogue, we will not abandon our city, we will not abandon our land." "And be well aware, even if you should succeed in knocking down this tent which has served us for the past three years, we will pitch it again, and next time it will be bigger and stronger. You will not defeat us!" Senior officers at the site were surprised. They obviously weren't prepared for such massive resistance, expecting to be able to tear down the tent without any effort. As a result of the hundreds of demonstrators, they backed down, and the eviction was postponed. For how long, we still don't know. People spent the entire night at the synagogue, and after a couple of hours sleep, returned to the site in the late morning. Rumors of impending expulsion brought hundreds out again, in the early afternoon. Most people will probably spend the night there tonight, and for as long as necessary, until Sharon announces an end to the madness. This is the beginning of the price Ariel Sharon is willing to pay. The question is, for what. According to most sources, George W. Bush opposes the unilateral disengagement from Gaza and several Samaria communities. Most probably Ariel Sharon is hoping that continued implementation of left-wing policies will delay his indictment for accepting bribes and other alleged crimes he is accused of. However, this will not help him. The decision to press charges against him, now in the hands of the new Israeli attorney general, is only weeks away. Ariel Sharon, the politician, will then be an item of the past. Hebron-Kiryat Arba residents are determined to stick it out, as long as it takes, to prevent destruction of the memorial synagogue, in memory of David Cohen and Hezi Mualem. Destruction of the site will be a victory for terror and the very opposite of "David's vision" the victory of Zionism, the triumph of good over evil. And should the worst come to pass, we will not give up. The synagogue will be rebuilt, an eternal remembrance to two brave men who were cut down there by Arab terrorists. We will never lose hope. With blessings from Hebron for a happy Passover. David Wilder is spokesman for the Jewish Community of Hebron (http://www.hebron.org.il). To subscribe to the Hebron list, simply email: hebron_today-subscribe@hebron.org.il You can donate to the Jewish Community of Hebron on the internet: http://www.hebron.org.il/contrib.htm or to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB 105, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il or directly to the The Hebron Fund 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230 hebronfund@aol.com 718-677-6886 To Go To Top

AZA, AZA, LET-US STAY Posted by Evelyn Hayes, March 30, 2004.

Written as I watched the youth of Aza arrive at PM's residence in Jerusalem, having marched from Aza, joined by ten thousand. Aza, Aza, in Judah's domain, a Jewish settled coastal plain where King Solomon reigned, Aza, Aza, attacked by Macedonians, palestinified by Romans, Imperialized by Hadrian, Napoleon, the British the Husseinis, The Egyptians including Egyptian Arafat al-Husseini. Aza, Aza, recaptured by Yochanan, rebuilt. Aza, Aza, largest Jewish community before Muslim invasion. Aza, Aza, largest producer of geraniums, tomatoes, cucumbers, pansies, mums, Azas tzaddiks enriched Jewish hearts and minds: Kol Ribbon Olem; Heshed L'Abraham. Aza, Aza, the palestinians were just passing through. We still sing your songs, Kol Ribbon Olem. We still study your midos, Heshed l'Abraham We still keep abandoned Yamit within a Magen David shaped house of prayer that marks the place- Jewish! Jewish Aza has survived swords and artillery; Jewish Azans have survived passing armies. Terrorist rockets miss their mark. Will Aza survive Jews who deny themselves and that there were Jews in Aza before there were Romans in Rome, Mohammed in Medina. Napoleon in France, Britain unilaterally dividing Balfour's Mandate for the Jews into another Arab state? Will Sharon unilaterally destroy what has survived because he has destroyed himself? Will the self-destruction destroy the Jewish state, the democratic state, morality, kindness, the Jews again? Aza, Aza, Eretz HaChodesh blessed with sunshine, sea breeze, a new fertility, an earnest utility where peace is in the plowshares, greenhouses, the barefoot smiling children. No more palestinians, invaders, Egyptians, Romans, war. A promised land restored and restoring. Lettuce, spinach, eggplants, onions, mushrooms. Aza. Aza, Jewish children at their play; Farmers at their work. Balmy sea. A southern boundary. Bedouins in their tents bent on staying safe in Aza, Israel. Let pan-jihad go away. The Azan Jews choose plowshares and would war no more. Spear the Gazan terrorists who war by tunnel, rocketing land, air and sea. Aza. Aza. So full of Jewish history; So replete with Jewish morality. In Aza, they know not a fear. Yet, the fearful liberal Jew would sacrifice their fate to fiends, disregarding that friendship with those who hate them has been deadly in Haifa and Tel Aviv, Afula and Rishon L'Tzion. . If you've been to Jewish Aza, you would know that there are cities, shopping centers, pizza shops, Alpha Romeros parked beside the IDF transports, a promising future that has survived the age old wraths of rampaging hordes. Without Aza, the jihad tunnels will reach Yad Mordechai, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Beersheva, Tel Aviv. Spear the warlords. Spare Jewish Aza. It would be against the wisdom of Solomon and the best interests of Israel to chase Jews away again. It would unbounty beauty and feed the beast. Let our people stay. Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, TWINS, us, because their hearts were softened for more." and just released sequel, "The Twelfth Plague, GENERATIONS, because the lion wears stripes." To Go To Top

DIVERTING THE BLAME FOR 9/11 Posted by Onkar Ghate, March 30, 2004.

The squabbling and finger-pointing surrounding the 9/11 commission only serve to obscure the fundamental lesson of that horrific day. Whatever errors or incompetence on the part of a particular individual or intelligence agency, what made September 11 possible was a failure of policy. Our government, whether controlled by Democrat or Republican, had for decades conducted an accommodating, range-of-the-moment, unprincipled foreign policy. September 11 was not the first time America was attacked by Islamic fundamentalists engaged in "holy war" against us. In 1979 theocratic Iran--which has spearheaded the "Islamic Revolution"--stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran and held 54 Americans hostage for over a year. In 1983 the Syrian- and Iranian-backed group Hezbollah bombed a U.S. marine barracks in Lebanon, killing 241 servicemen while they slept; the explosives came from Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement. In 1998 al-Qaeda blew up the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 individuals. In 2000 al-Qaeda bombed the USS Cole in Yemen, killing 17 sailors. So we already knew that al-Qaeda was actively engaged in attacking Americans. We even had evidence that agents connected to al-Qaeda had been responsible for the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. And we knew in 1996 that bin Laden had made an overt declaration of war against the "Satan" America. But how did America react? Did our government adopt a principled approach and identify the fact that we were faced with a deadly threat from an ideological foe? Did we launch systematic counterattacks to wipe out such enemy organizations as al-Qaeda, Hezbollah and Fatah? Did we seek to eliminate enemy states like Iran? No--our responses were short-sighted and self-contradictory. To cite only a few of depressingly many examples: we initially expelled Iranian diplomats--but later sought an appeasing rapprochement with that ayatollah-led government. We intermittently cut off trade with Iran--but secretly negotiated weapons-for-hostages deals. When Israel had the courage to enter Lebanon in 1982 to destroy the PLO, we refused to uncompromisingly support our ally and instead brokered the killers' release. And with respect to al-Qaeda, we dropped a perfunctory bomb or two on one of its suspected camps, while our compliant diplomats waited for al-Qaeda's terrorist attacks to fade from the headlines. At home we treated our attackers as if they were isolated criminals rather than soldiers engaged in battle against us. In 1941 we did not attempt to indict the Japanese pilots who bombed Pearl Harbor--we declared war on the source. Yet we spent millions trying to indict specific terrorists--while we ignored their masters. Despite emphatic pronouncements from Islamic leaders about a "jihad" against America, our political leaders failed to grasp the ideology that seeks our destruction. This left them unable to target that enemy's armed combatants--in Palestine, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia--and the governments that assist them. Is it any wonder then that, although our intelligence agencies prevented many planned attacks, they could not prevent them all? Tragically, little has changed since September 11. Our government's actions remain hopelessly unprincipled. Despite the Bush administration's rhetoric about ending states that sponsor terrorism, President Bush has left the most dangerous of these--Iran--untouched, while his officials periodically seek "rapprochement" and work with Iranian officials to foster "religious values" at U.N. conferences. The attack on Iraq, though capable of justification, was hardly a priority in our war against militant Islam. And because the war was waged with no view to the long term, Iraq is in danger of slipping into the hands of Shiite clerics and other militant Islamic leaders--and thus of becoming even more of a threat than it was. Moreover, when Bush does strike at a militant Islamic regime, he does so only haltingly. He stresses that the conflict is not ideological and, morally unsure of his right to protect American lives by force, cowers before any sign of world disapproval over civilian casualties. The result was that he reined in the military forces in Afghanistan and allowed numerous Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters to escape. Elsewhere in the Mideast, Bush continues to play by a double standard. His administration scolds Israel for killing its own bin Laden, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, while Bush pretends that the Palestinians and Islamic militants attacking Israel--and who have attacked Americans in the past and will no doubt try again in the future--are, somehow, different from al-Qaeda and deserving of a "peace" plan. And now, both Republicans and Democrats wage a domestic war, senselessly and desperately trying to find a fall guy for September 11. Thus, too unprincipled to identify the enemy and wage all-out war, but not yet completely blind to their own ineffectualness, leaders from both parties resignedly admit that we're in for a "long war" and that there will be more terrorists attacks on U.S. soil. The lesson to learn from September 11 is this. We must root out the amoral, pragmatic expediency that dominates our government's foreign policy and replace it with the principles of self-interest. Onkar Ghate, Ph.D. in philosophy, is a senior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute (www.aynrand.org) in Irvine, Calif. The Institute promotes the philosophy of Ayn Rand, author of "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead." Send comments to reaction@aynrand.org To Go To Top

THOMAS FRIEDMAN AND THE SIN OF HUMILIATION Posted by Naomi Ragen, March 30, 2004.

I wish I'd written the piece below, but I didn't. But it is certainly time someone pierced the incredibly bloated and undeserved reputation of this journalist who is respected despite his having been proved totally wrong in almost everything he's written and predicted. This was written by Samuel Z. Anvil. Thomas Friedman, one of the resident always-politically-correct pundits at the New York Times, has been chanting the mantra of "terrorism is a result of our humiliation of the Islamic world" for so long that it's become yet another of those liberal "truths" that are so convincing only until you actually think about them. The gist of Friedman's chant is this: we Westerners have been beating the Moslems at everything for these last centuries, and now we've left them to wallow in their utterly failed backward poverty-stricken dictatorships, seething in humiliation - is it any wonder they're crashing airliners into skyscrapers and blowing themselves (and us!) up in buses and trains? Wouldn't you do the same? Poor fellows. It's all our fault, you see, according to the sage from 42nd Street. We've embarrassed them by not being losers like they are, and now we're getting what we deserve. Well, there are two subtle points about humiliation that Thomas has missed. First, failure doesn't have to lead to humiliation. Take Thomas himself as an example. For years he's been analyzing the Middle East and the world situation, as respected liberal columnists tend to do, and he hasn't gotten anything right, ever. Remember that Saudi peace plan he more or less invented and waved around the world in 2001, assuring everybody that here, finally, his good friend Prince whatever-his-name-is had finally come to terms with the Jews' right to breathe the same air as everybody else? Do you remember too what happened next, on the very day of the Arab summit that was supposed to adopt that wonderful made-in-Manhattan peace plan? The Passover Seder Massacre, that's what happened. Some peace plan. And all of Tom's deep incisive commentary and analysis about the quagmire of Iraq, and the fighting spirit of the Taliban? And all of his reasoned, learned advice about how to wean North Korea and Iran from their nuclear toys? All nonsense, every column, every word. Events proved him wrong about everything, every time. And yet, despite being a total failure as an analyst, Thomas isn't feeling the least bit humiliated. No, he's still pounding away at his word processor, still going to cocktail parties and proudly pontificating to the wide-eyed cute little wannabe journalists and the oh-so sophisticated "cycle of violence" groupies. And second, did Thomas ever notice that the word "humiliation" is closely related to the world "humility?" That's what humiliation really means, the humiliated party humbly figures out that maybe he's not God's gift to humanity after all. Maybe he's just a pathetic little screw-up who should get his act together and start behaving like a human being. By that meaning, Moslems aren't humiliated at all. What they are is mad. Mad that their societies are still spinning their wheels in the third world mud. Mad that young men have nothing to look forward to except emigration. Mad that young women have nothing to look forward to but a life somewhere between a camel's and a donkey's. Mad that everybody else knows the truth. If there was any shred of humiliation among them, they would have the humility to admit that their societies' problems are of their own making and that they alone, Moslems, had better get cracking to fix what they themselves have screwed up. But they're not being at all humble. Instead, they're waving their swords over their heads, straight out of an Indiana Jones movie, pounding their chests like King Kong, making all sorts of awful noises and wild threats, demanding martyrdom for us all. And their cheerleaders, Thomas Friedman and his friends at CNN and BBC and Reuters, are dancing on the sidelines and waving the "Noble Savage" flag, urging them on and finding excuses for every atrocity they commit. Well, I for one have faith that one day they're going to run out of oil, and then there will be no more money to buy expensive cars and cheap journalists. Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and columnist, who has lived in Jerusalem since 1971. Her website address is http://www.NaomiRagen.com To Go To Top

JEWS WHO FLED ARAB LANDS NOW PRESS THEIR CAUSE Posted by CAMERA, March 29, 2004.

"In its zeal and need to address the plight of Palestinians, the world allowed the plight of the Jewish refugees to fall by the wayside," Stanley A. Urman of Justice for Jews from Arab Countries recently explained. "Jews who fled Arab lands now press their cause; Refugees' advocates link issue to Palestinians' claims on Israel" by San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer Jack Epstein, highlights the much overlooked plight of Jewish refugees from Arab lands. Regina Bublil Waldman, a Libya-born Jew, still recalls the minute details of the day 37 years ago when her homeland turned against her. The ordeal began in June of 1967, after the then-19-year-old translator for a British engineering firm in Tripoli received a phone call at work from her frantic mother. "Don't come home. There's a mob outside the house," Waldman's mother told her. "Find a place to hide." Waldman, who now lives in San Rafael, is a Mizrahi Jew, one of nearly 856, 000 Jews who fled Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia and Yemen in an exodus that began after the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948 and ended about 1970. Today, only an estimated 5,000 Jews remain in Arab lands, most of them in Morocco. In recent months, independent Jewish groups have begun a concerted effort on behalf of these "forgotten refugees," who they say were ignored by the global community after being absorbed by other countries -- mostly Israel -- while Palestinian refugees captured worldwide sympathy for living in squalid camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and the Gaza Strip. According to the United Nations, 726,000 Palestinians were forced out or voluntarily left the new state of Israel. "In its zeal and need to address the plight of Palestinians, the world allowed the plight of the Jewish refugees to fall by the wayside," said Stanley A. Urman, executive director of Justice for Jews from Arab Countries, a New York-based coalition of 27 Jewish organizations. The campaign for justice for the Mizrahi Jews has strong support in Congress. On Monday, Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., is scheduled to introduce a resolution that would instruct U.S. envoys to raise the Jewish refugee issue every time the Palestinian refugee issue is raised as "an integral part of any comprehensive peace." "The senator believes it's important to move forward in the peace negotiations by considering all refugees, whether Christian, Jewish or Palestinian," said Robert Traynham, Santorum's communications director. Last year, House Resolution 311 called on the international community to recognize Jewish refugees who "fled Arab countries because they faced a campaign of ethnic cleansing and were forced to leave behind land, private homes, personal effects, businesses, community assets and thousands of years of their Jewish heritage and history." The World Organization of Jews from Arab Countries, a group affiliated with Urman's coalition, estimates the value of the confiscated property at more than $100 billion. The attacks against Waldman's family -- her father's warehouse, where he sold equipment to oil companies, was torched -- and on Libya's estimated 3,750 to 6,000 Jews began soon after the opening salvo of what is known as the Six Day War in Israel and "the setback" in the Arab world. Synagogues, homes and businesses were looted and burned, and more than 100 Jews were killed. Waldman hid out for a month at her employer's home while her father maneuvered to get the family out of Libya -- tricky business for people without passports. Most Libyan Jews had been denied citizenship even though many could trace their descendants back to the third century B.C. A month later, the entire Jewish community -- including Waldman, her parents, grandparents, an uncle and a brother -- was expelled by King Idris I. After a harrowing ride to the Tripoli airport -- her British boss rescued the family when the bus driver tried to burn the vehicle -- the family flew to Italy, where most still live today. "We lost all our property," said Waldman, a longtime Bay Area human rights activist and member of Jews Indigenous to the Middle East and North Africa (JIMENA), a San Francisco group that sends speakers throughout the United States to speak about the plight of Jews from Arab countries. "My father fell into a deep depression from not being the family breadwinner in Italy. He became suicidal." Both Waldman and Urman insist that the campaign for Jewish refugees is not about diminishing Palestinians' claim for redress, but about raising awareness that Arab governments drove them out of their homelands. Jews were stripped of their citizenship in Egypt, Iraq, Algeria and Libya; detained or arrested in Algeria, Yemen, Syria, Libya, Iraq and Egypt; deprived of employment by government decrees in Egypt, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Algeria, and had their property confiscated in all of the Arab lands except Morocco, according to Justice for Jews from Arab Countries. Anti-Jewish riots were widespread. Emily Gottreich, vice chair of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at UC Berkeley, considers the 1967 war between Israel and its Arab neighbors the "turning point" in sparking anti-Jewish sentiment, not the creation of Israel 19 years previously. "There was so much emotion at that time in the Arab world," she said. "That's when things became very untenable for Jews in the Middle East." Gottreich also argues that hostility toward Jews was a product of the community's close relationships to the region's then-colonial powers. "It's not an Arab-Jewish thing as much as what happened after the settling of the dust once the European powers left," she said. "In Algeria, for example, most Jews left en masse when the French pulled out." But Yitzhak Santis, director of Middle East Affairs of the San Francisco-based Jewish Community Relations Council, disagrees. He says there is proof of premeditated collusion among Arab governments to force Jews out of their countries once Israel was created. "We found minutes of a meeting of the political committee of the Arab League in 1948 where they discussed what to do with their Jewish populations if Israel was formed," Santis said. But like most historical events in the Middle East, there are divergent interpretations. "There is no evidence that there was a master plan on the part of Arab governments to expel Jews. There are no archives. Arab governments were all tyrannies that were closed," said Asad Abukalil, a Lebanon-born professor of political science at California State University at Stanislaus. "Hostility (against Jews) varied from state to state. In Morocco they could stay. In Iraq, they were stripped of their citizenship en masse. In Lebanon, where I grew up, there was no government program against Jews." While the debate rages, advocates for Jewish refugees are trying to push the issue on the agenda of a final Mideast peace agreement "as a matter of law and equity," said Urman, a former Canadian reporter. Some Palestinian activists find this troubling. "There should be no linkage of one refugee problem with another," said Jess Khanem, a member of the executive committee of the Palestinian Right to Return Coalition and president of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee in San Francisco. "It's not a Palestinian problem or issue. If any person feels wrongfully displaced, that needs to be addressed with their home country." Meanwhile, most Middle East observers agree that the fall of Saddam Hussein in Iraq and the recent transformation of Libya's Moammar Khadafy have boosted the cause of Jews from Arab countries. The U.S. occupation of Iraq led to an interim constitution this month that calls for the Iraqi government to make restitution to those who lost citizenship and property for "political, racial or sectarian reasons." Khadafy, who wants to restore diplomatic relations with the United States, sent emissaries to Vienna in January to discuss with Israeli officials the possibility of visits by Jews of Libyan descent, according to the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth. Al-Siyasa, a Kuwaiti daily, reported that Khadafy is also considering compensation for Libyan Jews whose properties were confiscated. "After years of stonewalling, to have two Muslim countries say it is right to compensate is a tremendous change," said Urman. In Iraq, the estimated 135,000-member Jewish community was once one of the largest in the Arab world. But after the creation of Israel in 1948, government edicts removed Jews from public service, and barred them from entering universities, traveling abroad or buying and selling property. Such harsh laws caused more than 100,000 Jews to emigrate to Israel in 1951 in an airlift known as Operation Ezra and Nehemiah. That same year, the Iraqi parliament passed the Deprivation of Stateless Jews of Their Property Law aimed at Jews who had renounced their citizenship, a pre-condition for emigration. A series of bombings of Jewish institutions and more laws that limited their freedom persuaded the remaining 6,000 Iraqi Jews to leave in the early 1950s. As a result, an estimated 300,000 Iraqi Jews and their descendants now live in Israel and 40,000 elsewhere. One is Emeryville attorney Semha Alwaya, who left Baghdad with her parents in 1951 when she was just 6 months old. She is a member of a prominent Iraqi family -- her great-uncle was the finance minister, and her grandfather served as director of Bedouin affairs under the British mandate (1917 to 1932). After leaving Iraq, her family lived in transit camps in Israel for two years before moving to Iran for 12 years, where Alwaya's father sold insurance and her younger brother Albert was born. The family later settled in Israel. "We lost our home and our bank accounts and were sent out with just 20 dinars and the clothes on our back," said Alwaya, who is also a JIMENA member. Alwaya, who has taught Arabic at UC Berkeley and Stanford, says she has no plan to reclaim her family home in Iraq. "We are not interested in economics, but justice -- you can't put a price on that," she said. However, Iraqi Jews who do want to reclaim their properties may have a difficult time. In July, Ayatollah Kadim al-Haeri, a Shiite cleric who lives in Iran, issued a fatwa demanding death for Jews who buy property in Iraq. In Baghdad and Fallujah, reporters have seen signs that warn Iraqis not to "stab your fellow Iraqis in the heart" by selling land to "al Yahud" - "the Jews." "Credible or not, there has been a lot of press in the Arab world of Iraqi Jews returning on American tanks to buy up property," said Abukalil. "If they are seen as an appendage of the American occupation, it will hurt their cause." Perhaps that explains the language in the interim constitution that requires the Iraqi government to "restore residents to their homes and property, or, where this is unfeasible, provide just compensation (for) the injustice caused by the previous regime's practice." Jewish groups hope the wording isn't a device for limiting restitution to abuses committed only under Saddam Hussein. In Baghdad, Ibrahim Jaffari, one of nine rotating presidents of the 25-member Iraqi Governing Council, tried to assuage those fears: "Religion does not matter in the new Iraq. Iraq now allows all people of Iraqi origin to return, be they Muslims, Jews or Christians." Hamid al-Kifaey, a spokesman for the Governing Council, insisted that future Iraqi governments will not amend the constitution to discriminate against Jews once U.S. occupation ends. "Whether or not (U.S. administrator of Iraq Paul) Bremer goes, this law will stand," he said. "We'll give them (Jews) their rights." Meanwhile, Waldman and Alwaya are waiting for other Arab governments to acknowledge that they too were human rights violators. "The Japanese apologized for the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Germans apologized for World War II, and Pope John Paul II apologized for Catholics who attacked Jews for murdering Jesus," said Alwaya. "It's time for Arab countries to acknowledge that Jews in the Middle East were kicked out of their homelands." Chronicle Foreign Service correspondent Borzou Daragahi contributed to this report from Baghdad. E-mail Jack Epstein at jepstein@sfchronicle.com. Jewish population in Arab countries* 1948-2001 1948 856,000 1958 475,050 1968 72,600 1976 32,190 2001 7,800 *Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia and Yemen Source: American Sephardi Federation Chronicle Graphic The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) monitors the news media for fairness in reporting news about Israel. To Go To Top

OPERATION: JERUSALEM Posted by Mike Evans, March 29, 2004.

Twenty-five years ago, President Jimmy Carter smiled for the cameras as he proclaimed to the entire Middle East that peace had come. The Muslim world was well-aware that Mr. Carter's goals were much more ambitious than peace between Israel and Egypt. The date was March 26th. Just four days later on the 30th, an ayatollah by the name of Khomeini united 90 percent of the population of Iran - the Shiites - and birthed an Islamic state. Khomeini made his announcement on April 1 - April Fools' Day. He called it, "The first day of God's government." With Mr. Carter's support, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat addressed the European Common Market in Luxemburg, which had issued declarations to the effect that the PLO should be recognized in the negotiations with Israel, and the Palestinians right to self-determination was as valid as Israel's right to exist. From Luxemburg, Sadat moved to France, which agreed - in principal - to sell Egypt its first nuclear power reactor. Instead of Sadat realizing his goal of establishing a democratic nation in Egypt, he incurred the wrath of Khomeini-type Islamic fanatics, the Muslim Brotherhood. They were responsible for Sadat's assassination. To this day, the majority of the secular media report that an agreement between Mr. Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin (thanks to President Jimmy Carter) was the basis for agreeing to a Palestinian state, the recognition of the PLO, and relinquishing Judea and Samaria. In a private meeting shortly after the Camp David Accords were signed, I asked Prime Minister Begin to speak to these media-promoted misconceptions. He responded, "We were in the Cabinet Room, and President Carter asked me a question. In that question, he made a statement that was very negative. He said that the settlements were illegal. I had prepared a counter-question I wanted to pose to him. It was a 'prepared improvisation'." Mr. Begin continued, "I asked our Israeli Embassy in Washington to prepare a list of American cities that were named after cities in the Bible, i.e., Bethlehem, Hebron, Shiloh, Bethel. I showed President Carter my very long list. The American people love the Bible, and I asked him if he could imagine the governor of Pennsylvania proclaiming that anyone could live in the city of Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, except Jews. President Carter agreed that if a man did such a thing, he would be guilty of racism. Why? Because Bethlehem, Pennsylvania is in the U.S., and the U.S. is a free country. So, I pointed out that I was the governor of a state in which the original Bethlehem, Jericho and Shiloh were located." "'Do you expect me," Mr. Begin asked, "to say that everyone could live in those cities except Jews?' Of course, he didn't; it would be absurd. Jews must have the right to settle in these places as much as anyone else. We have a right to Judea and Samaria, and we will live there. That does not mean we want to evict even one Arab from his village or town. Without Jewish settlements in those hills, the PLO could easily hide in them, and descend into the plain to kill our people, wherever they like. The Arabs have 21 states, why should they have 22, and the Jews have none?" Prime Minister Begin related, "President Carter told me he was opposed to a Palestinian state, but some European countries are so thirsty for oil and petro-dollars, they would rather surrender. It would not be the first time they surrendered to pressure. It happened in the '30's, and brought disaster to the world. Do we want to repeat that disaster? A Palestinian state is a moral danger to Israel, and a great peril to the free world. We never agreed to a Palestinian state at Camp David. We agreed to autonomy as a way to solve the problem of the Palestinian Arabs. Under no circumstances did we agree that the PLO could ever participate in the peace process or reside in Judea and Samaria. It is out of the question! If it happened, peace would be murdered, and there would be permanent bloodshed." Mr. Begin said, "When I came to Camp David, Jimmy Carter told me the government of the United States does not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. I had to answer, 'Whether you do or don't, Jerusalem is still the capital of Israel.' On the 17th of March at Camp David, I wrote a letter to President Carter stating this fact: Since 1967, Jerusalem is one city, indivisible, the capital of Israel. I told him that if Jerusalem was not our capital, where is it?" On April 1, 1980, the Egyptian Peoples' Assembly (their parliament) issued a statement determining that "East Jerusalem was sovereign Arab territory, and that it was an integral part of the West Bank, which had been occupied by armed forces." All the steps that had been taken by Israel since the Six-day War were proclaimed "illegal, null and void, and non-binding." The Egyptian parliament called for an establishment of Jerusalem as the seat of the Palestinian autonomous authority. The fact is, no country in the world could fail to react in the strongest terms to such provocative interventions in its affairs. Israel was compelled to rise to the challenge, and to act to protect and clarify its rights. This is the reason for the Knesset's basic law of Jerusalem, which originated as a private members' bill submitted to the House for the first time on May 14, 1980. This was in the wake of, and as its reaction to, the anti-Jerusalem campaign that had been mounted in the preceding months. While Mr. Carter's passionate commitment to the Middle East peace process helped to surmount some roadblocks, he was liable for numerous problems. The lack of experience in the Carter White House created an air of hostility between Mr. Carter and Mr. Begin that resulted in a strained relationship, and could have resulted in complete failure. President Carter's inexperience in dealing with the demands of the PLO allowed him to think, erroneously, that he could be a major player in resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict. His naivete led him to speak openly of a Palestinian "homeland", and to press on this issue throughout the negotiations between Sadat and Begin. Sadly, Mr. Carter failed to understand Prime Minister Begin. He tried, rather simplistically, to compare his U.S. civil rights experiences with those of the Middle East Arab-Israeli struggles. Carter stressed what he defined as, "the deprivation of Palestinian rights, which was contrary to the basic moral and ethical principles of both our countries." Mr. Carter carried the comparison even further by viewing the key to peace as a form of civil rights for the Palestinians. This included, "the right to assembly and to debate the issues that affected their lives..." Based on Jimmy Carter's deep religious conviction, Prime Minister Begin assumed he would immediately comprehend the vulnerability of Israel, and the moral justice of her responses. Mr. Begin was convinced that Mr. Carter should be focused not on the Palestinian question, but rather on the suffering of the Jewish people in Israel. Palestinian self-determination under the leadership of the PLO and Yasser Arafat, in Mr. Begin's view, was equivalent to opening the door for the destruction of Israel's sovereignty, and the annihilation of the Jewish people. Mr. Begin tried time and again to explain to Mr. Carter that the Arab-Israeli conflict could never be compared to the U.S. civil rights movement, and the attempt to create comparisons was deceptive and morally wrong. Michael D. Evans is the founder of America's largest Christian coalition praying for the peace of Jerusalem, the www.JerusalemPrayerTeam.org. He is the author of the New York Times bestseller "Beyond Iraq: The Next Move." To Go To Top

GIVE THE WAR ON TERRORISM A CHANCE Posted by Morris J. Amitay, March 29, 2004.

The completely justified surgical strike which took the miserable life of a self-proclaimed terrorist leader raises fundamental questions about how to conduct the "war on terrorism". If Israel and the United States are indeed at war, what should be the rules? If the widespread European condemnation of Israel's action is an indication of how its leaders view the threat of Islamic extremism, they had better start teaching the Koran in their own school systems. The official U.S. reaction which found Yassin's sudden demise "deeply troubling" was mitigated by our veto of yet another completely one-sided UN resolution. But can we really have it both ways? Why wouldn't the U.S. welcome the elimination of someone it listed in August 2003 as one of six Specially Designated Global Terrorists? One has to wonder if our own intelligence (and accuracy) was as precise as our Israeli friends, and resulted in sending Osama bin Laden to paradise, whether our government would also find it "deeply troubling?" But hypocrisy and a double standard applied to Israel aside, the question remains how serious is the United States in defeating this new kind of enemy. If the death of a terrorist mastermind, (a.k.a. a "spiritual leader") could cause such angst, imagine how much worse it would have been for Israel if it had leveled the Gaza soccer stadium where thousands gathered to mourn Yassin and shout demands for Israel's destruction. The number of casualties (all able-bodied males, incidentally) would have represented only a small fraction of the civilian lives taken in Dresden, much less Hiroshima, during World War II. Alas, however, the world has become a kinder and gentler place, even for Islamic terrorists. In the "good old days" of WWII, the Cold War and Vietnam, our foes could be identified as representing a sovereign power within defined boundaries. Today, our deadly adversaries are more amorphous, and defined more by ideology then geography. And while they are assisted in varying degrees by two nations, Iran and Saudi Arabia, these regimes operate on the assumption we will continue to play their diplomatic games. But being in a new ball game does not necessarily mean that we have to abandon all of the older rules. We must not only do much better in understanding the true nature of the threat, but act more forcefully to neutralize it. This means setting aside exaggerated concerns about international legality, forsaking criminal prosecutions as a deterrent, and acknowledging that we are, indeed, engaged in a fundamental clash of civilizations. The Islamic jihadists are fond of proclaiming - you ("the West") love life - but we love death. This is certainly demonstrated by their increasing use of suicide operations against the infidels, or non-believers. Their ultimate goal, of course, is the conversion of the entire world to their own extremist brand of Islam. And while they make no bones about it, too many gullible westerners repeat the mantra of Islam as a religion of peace. Unfortunately, not all Muslims adhere to this. In the Palestinian-controlled territories a whole generation of schoolchildren are taught to embrace death as shahids - martyrs. And this is not only within Yassin's Hamas, but also practiced by Arafat's so-called "Al-Aqsa Brigades". Reacting to criticism over the use of children suicide bombers, its leader humanely proclaimed "we don't use children under the age of 17". And displaying her deep maternal instincts, the mother of the diminutive 16-year old would-be suicide bomber apprehended at a roadblock, was quoted as stating "If he was over 18? I might even encourage him to do it." What compassion! It has been said that "for every human problem there is a solution which is neat, simple - and wrong". But in dealing with the phenomenon of the suicide bombers, their trainers, inciters, and funders, the desirability of a simple solution should be evident. On September 20th 2001, President Bush, addressing a joint session of the U.S. Congress, stated that the war on terror "will not end until every terrorist group - has been found, stopped and defeated". While not necessarily being enamored with the smell of cordite, the only sure way to "stop" and "defeat" terrorists who seek martyrdom is to grant them their wish as quickly as possible. If we are indeed in the midst of a war you don't "do nuance". And you don't have the time to be overly concerned about eliminating the "root causes". Attributing the terrorists' acts to poverty, humiliation and frustration only serves as a means of ignoring the real source - the preaching of blind hatred and death in the name of religion. Ahmed al-Rantisi, the new head of Hamas, put it succinctly "God declared war against America, Bush and Sharon." Israel faces Jew-hatred and the U.S. faces hatred of our values and civilization. We do not have the time to redeem a generation whose "hearts and minds" have already been poisoned. In this regard one recalls President Lyndon Johnson's solution on how to win over your enemies. "If you've got them by the ____s (i.e. two particularly sensitive parts), their hearts and minds are sure to follow." What also follows from the Johnson dictum is that we are in a situation where the application of deadly force to terrorists is one answer, and the threat of armed force against nations aiding and abetting these terrorists is the other. At this juncture we must not hesitate to give war a chance. Our peace terms should be unconditional surrender. You simply cannot negotiate meaningfully with those who want you dead. You cannot pursue a "peace process" with those who want you to disappear. Unless both we and our Israeli friends are willing to face up to this harsh reality and act accordingly, the future we all face will be bleak indeed. Morrie Amitay is a former Executive Director of AIPAC and founder of the pro-Israel Washington PAC (www.washingtonpac.com). To Go To Top

FORD FOUNDATION'S GRANTEE - MIFTAH.ORG - PROMOTES INTIFADA Posted by Lise Rubin, March 29, 2004.

These are some recent grants given to Miftah by the Ford Foundation. Miftah: The Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy - For public debates, media-related activities, and workshops and to enhance the information dissemination capacity of its Web site. EAST JERUSALEM Peace and Social Justice Human Rights International Cooperation, $200,000 - 2002. Miftah: The Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy - Support for developing effective media response and articulating Palestinian views on the crisis situation, including online press briefings and opinion pieces. EAST JERUSALEM Peace and Social Justice Governance and Civil Society, $100,000 - 2001. Miftah: The Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy - SUPPORT FOR CONVENING WORKSHOPS, PUBLISHING BRIEFING MATERIALS, AND DEVELOPING THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY UNIT TO ENHANCE THE INSTITUTE'S OUTREACH PROGRAM. EAST JERUSALEM Peace and Social Justice Governance and Civil Society Governance, $250,000 - 2000. This was a statement made by Miftah, March 27, 2004: "Enough Assassination, Enough of the Occupation, Stop the Bloodshed" by Palestinians from political, intellectual and social institutions (www.miftah.org/Display.cfm?DocId=3387&CategoryId=2). We, the undersigned, Palestinians from various political, intellectual and social institutions, united in our endurance and struggle for freedom, emphatically condemn and denounce Israel's blatant aggression on our people. The cold-blooded murder of Sheikh Ahmad Yassin and his faithful companions by Sharon and his right-wing extremist government two days ago epitomizes Israel's criminal and insidious behavior. While we assert our people's rights, guaranteed by all international covenants, to defend themselves by all means available and despite the enormity of our pain at this horrific tragedy and its impact, we nevertheless call upon our people throughout Palestine, guided by the imperatives of national interest and the removal of the initiative from the hands of the criminal occupation gang, to repress their rage and rise once again in a widespread, popular and peaceful Intifada, based on clear objectives and forthright discourse, with the fate of our people steered by the masses. Such an Intifada would be conducted by our valiant people as a proactive approach to deny Sharon the pretext to continue escalating his aggression on our people and holy sites and would prevent him from finalizing his "security" plot. We call for this unified Intifada as a step towards the resurrection of constructive and disciplined popular action, with clear objectives as well as a binding program and political return. We reaffirm our commitment to our just and legal demands and to our people's inalienable rights. We call for uniting ranks on grounds of national unity and a unified leadership that can effectively resist the occupation. Ibrahim al-Hafi, Ibrahim Musalam, Ahmad Jubara (Abu al-Sukkar), Ahmad Haless (Abu Maher), Ahmad Fares, As'ad Odeh, Amin Maqboul, Buthayna Duqmaq, Jad Ishaq, Jamal Dar'awi, Jamal Zaqout, Jamil Rushdi, Jihad Abu Zuneid, George Hazboun, Hassan Dweik, Hanan Ashrawi, Hakam Taleb Thiab, Haidar Awadallah, Khader Ayesh, Khalil al-Ateeri, Dimitri Dilyani, Rihab al-Isawi, Radwan al-Sameri, Riyad al-Malki, Zahirah Kamal, Ziad Hamouri, Suri Nuseibeh, Said Zidani, Salman Jadallah, Sameer Shihadah, Siham Thabet, Suhail Salim Abdel Fatah Salman, Shaher Sa'd, Shafiq Zeidieh, Shukri al-Radaydeh, Salah Hikmat al-Masri, Abbas Zaki, Aballah Hijazi, Abdallah al-Kiwani, Abdallah al-Atiri, Abdel Fatah Hamayel, Abdel Qader Faisal al-Huseini, Arafat al-Hidmi, Azzam al-Ahmad, Izat al-Rasini, Ikrama Tabet, Imad Abu Kishk, Imad Awad, Ali Hasasneh, Anan Atiri, Ghazi Hananiah, Ghassan al-Harami, Ghassan Hananiah, Fathi Salim Yassin Abu Zeid, Fadel Tahboub, Fahed Abu al-Haj, Cairo Arafat, Lusi Nuseibeh, Lily Feidy, Muhammd al-Rimawi, Muhammad al-Sha'bi, Mahmoud al-Aloul, Mahmoud al-labadi, Nasser Yunis, Nayef Sweitat, Nur Eldin Ibrahim Shehadeh, Hashem Abu Lafi, Yasser Abed Rabbo, Yusef Harb, Yusef Aref. IMRA (Independent Media Review Analysis) notes that "the 'peaceful Intifada' that the signers wish to return to means mob attacks with firebombs and rocks. IMRA's website address is http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=20235 To Go To Top

CERTIFIABLY ANTI-SEMITISM FREE Posted by Lori Lowenthal Marcus, March 29, 2004.

You've seen notices on food packages certifying a product "100% fat free." Perhaps you have also noticed another kind of certification. This one, issued by Jews, labels an act or entity "anti-Semitism free." This certification assures the world that something other Jews claim is anti-Semitic is not. The attacked action is pronounced "certifiably" anti-Semitism free. This pronouncement also implies claims to the contrary are driven by super-sensitivity and lack of proportionality. Here's how it works. Jews are trotted out to the public by organizations needing to rebut claims of anti-Semitism. The documented claims are erased by the rebuttal issued by a Jew. The organization then brandishes its anti-Semitism free certification, and the Jewish certifier becomes ever more valuable to the organization. The individual Jew or Jewish group issuing the certification is assuredly entitled to his or her or its opinion. The problem arises when that opinion is raised as a shield to thwart off legitimate claims of anti-Semitism directed towards the larger entity. Do the Jewish certifiers realize how much their value as a spokesperson is enhanced by their religion? And do those hearing the certifications realize the labels stick unless other authorities peel them off? The Philadelphia Free Library, a municipally funded institution, recently housed in its enormous lobby an editorial cartoon exhibit attacking the "US Patriot Act." The exhibit was cleverly promoted as "US Patriot Art." Most of the cartoons in the exhibit predictably depicted President Bush and his pals eviscerating the Bill of Rights and all good things American - but one cartoon stood out. In this cartoon, a grinning Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon says to President Bush: "You don't know how much we rejoice when we fire a missile on Palestine and children die." Put aside its viciousness and total baselessness, what does this cartoon have to do with the US Patriot Act? Sharon is the only foreign leader portrayed in any of the exhibit cartoons. When asked why the Free Library chose to exhibit such a cartoon, the question was referred to a board member, Herman Mattleman. No surprise here, Mattleman is a Jewish lawyer. Mattleman agreed the cartoon was offensive, agreed that Sharon was the only foreign leader depicted in the exhibit, admitted that the cartoon had nothing to do with the Patriot Act, and admitted that it was displayed in the Free Library lobby, where schoolchildren and other patrons gather for extended periods. But his bottom line was, "who cares?" Mattleman was sneeringly unimpressed. He said, "Jews shouldn't waste their time on minor offenses." In other words, unless the trains are rattling down the tracks, it's a waste to sound the alarm. So, a vicious and patently false portrayal of the Israeli Prime Minister is not worth more than an annoyed snort. And behind that snort hides the Jewishly-christened squeaky clean players who made the grotesque decision to house the cartoon in its lobby. On to an example on a national level. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency recently exposed the Ford Foundation as the source of multimillions of dollars provided to non-governmental organizations that launched the foulest attacks on Israel and Jewry in recent history. Those NGOs relentlessly excoriated Israel as an apartheid, genocidal, colonialist monster during the 2001 United Nations World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa. Shortly after the exposes ran in the JTA, the Ford Foundation awarded a grant of $20 million to the New Israel Fund (sounds good, sounds Jewish), thereby building on what Ford called "the Ford Foundation's long term commitment to funding in Israel." The New Israel Fund Board Chair Peter Edelman announced that the grant would "ensure continuity for Ford's long-standing commitment in [Israel]." About those many millions of dollars lavished on the Durban hate-festers screaming for the destruction of the Israel apartheid state? Nary a word. Maybe the New Israel Fund thought it was chosen because Ford just realized virtually none of the hundreds of millions of Foundation dollars pumped into the Middle East over the past several years had gone to Jewish or Israeli ventures. On an international level, close your eyes and conjure up those touching pictures of Adam Shapiro, holed up in the Mukata with his buddy the long-suffering Yasser Arafat. On video and in pictures shown around the world, Shapiro cuddled up with what Israel claims is a thieving, murdering, corrupt and heartless bastard. But the microphone and the cameras were placed in front of Adam, and his anti-Semitism-free certification bestowed upon Arafat the Imperial Margarine Crown of innocence and virtue. No surprise that the International Solidarity Movement placed front and center that Brooklyn-born boychick with the name of unmistakable origins. Mattleman, the New Israel Fund and Shapiro are entitled to their views and public positions. But why is it that Jews who support Israel are so loathe to publicly air their views? Why are we ashamed to stand up for ourselves, when so many of our own have no problem hoisting the microphone and wielding it against us? Anti-Semitism free or shame-free: It's our choice. Lori Lowenthal Marcus is President, Zionist Organization of America, Greater Philadelphia District, (Eastern PA, Southern NJ, Del.) To Go To Top

AN URGENT APPEAL TO SAVE OUR MOMMY'S LIFE Posted by Joel Silverberg, March 29, 2004.

Our mother is in desperate need of new lungs. She is 42 years old. We are five children, ages four through fourteen. She is being kept alive on a respirator in an intensive care unit. Her doctors tell us that she can not live without an immediate transplant. That would leave us without a mother! Do you know anyone with an irreversible injury or illness, whose lungs still function? If you do, please reach us through our friends at 1-800-SAVE -A -LIFE , 1- 800- 728-3254. E-mail: SaveMyMommysLife@aol.com Please Say Tehillim For: Naava bas Fruma Leah To Go To Top

WHY DID ISRAEL KILL YASSIN NOW? Posted by , March , 2004.

A vote of no-confidence was coming up. Opposition to PM Sharon's withdrawal scheme was strong. Many Israelis think it no coincidence that he chose this time to assassinate Yassin. Upon hearing of the assassination, Sharon's opponents thought it important to show solidarity with him in fighting terrorism. Sharon won the vote. Of course, the liquidation of Yassin does not compensate for the proposed liquidation of Zionism in Gaza and part of Judea-Samaria. It was just a cover for Sharon's long-range surrender to terrorism by means of withdrawals (Voice of Judea, 3/2). Many Israelis feel this way. They have some logic on their side. Ariel Sharon seems to operate as cynically as they fear. They may be right, but they don't know. Don't know, don't insist. There is a kind of simple-mindedness to alleging that coincidences are deliberate. On 3/24, the same kind of an allegation was answered on NPR by former US counter-terrorism chief Richard Clark. The Bush Administration had accused him of coming out with a book accusing Pres. Bush of having ignored the Al Qaeda threat, just when Sen. Kerry is running against Bush and has a friend of Clark's high on Kerry' s staff. The Administration supposes that Clark wants a job with a Kerry Administration. Don't know, don't assert. Clark points out that he finished drafting the book some time ago. He then let the White House review it for security breaches. That review took three months. If the review had been expedited, the book would have been published before Kerry became the apparent nominee. Clark asserts that he would refuse an offer from Kerry. Sometimes coincidences are coincidences. Terrorists take advantage of such coincidences to claim that certain terrorist acts, actually planned months or weeks earlier, were arranged in vengeance for some Israeli action of a few days earlier. The media accepts the terrorists' claim. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

THE MAN WITH THE COFFEE CUP Posted by Reuven A. Kossover, March 29, 2004.

In this country, you deal with people and you never really know who it is you deal with. In the Geula neighbourhood of Jerusalem, on Mea Shearim Street just a couple of meters from Kikar Shabbat [Sabbath Square], there sits a man with a coffee cup. He sits on a low stool with a long black coat and a kippa [yarmulka] on his head -- on cold days he covers his head with a thick hood. He has a thick beard and thin hair on his head. His eyes are always alert, but he is never intrusive in his attempts to obtain agorot and shekels from passers-by. He spends a good part of the day sitting on his stool on Mea Shearim Street gently shaking a coffee cup with small coins in it. In a city like St. Paul in the U.S., a cop with a snarl for a face would tell this man: "Move on, buddy!" Every bum, beggar and drunk is "buddy" to the cops in that city. But in Jerusalem, where it is a mitzvah (both a commandment and a good deed) to give charity to the needy, this almost never happens. So the man sits undisturbed on his stool on Mea Shearim Street. But he doesn't spend the entire day sitting on his stool. In the mornings, he attends Shacharit (dawn) prayers. And around 3:00 or 4:00 p.m. in the afternoon, every day from Sunday to Thursday, he leaves his stool and walks to an alleyway, turns left and turns left again into a bagel shop. "Aaron!" he roars in a booming voice as he sits down at a table in the bagel shop. Soon enough another bearded man with grey hair and a New York accent appears, grousing "what do you want this time?" The two banter back and forth in the near empty restaurant, feigning a hostility that neither of them feels or means. The man with the coffee cup does not hustle Aaron for money or for a bagel. Eventually, after enough banter back and forth, he asks Aaron how business has been that day and how can he help him. Aaron opens up the cash register and looks at the fellow with the coffee cup. "How are you doing on five shekel pieces?" "Eh, I'll see". He unzips the outer portion of his black bag and pulls out a bunch of five shekel coins and starts counting. When he has reached sixteen he stops "Do you have four twenties?" Aaron pulls out the twenties and walks over to the table with them. "You're lucky," he says. "By this time of the day, I'm usually out of twenties altogether. "You mean you're lucky", counters the man with the coffee cup. "I'm here to give you five shekel coins. Here I do a public service and I get no gratitude at all. What about one shekel coins?" "How many do you have?" asks Aaron. "Do you have a fifty shekel bill?" asks the man with the coffee cup. Aaron nods. "Go ahead, count it up, before someone comes in and I have to give it out in change". The man with the coffee cup counts up the fifty one-shekel coins. "Nu?" he says loudly. Aaron produces the fifty shekel note. "What about my half shekel coins and ten agorot pieces?" asks the man with the coffee cup with mock impatience. "I should have to walk around with small change all day? At my age, I'll get a hernia!" "Listen, don't start with me. Count 'em up already! You think I have all day for this nonsense?" Aaron says, checking what he has in the register. After all is said and done, the man with the coffee cup sells 180 shekels worth of small change to the bagel shop, pocketing paper money in the process. "So, what will it be today?" asks Aaron after all the money has been exchanged. "Give me some tea", says the man with the coffee cup. After he zips up the outer section of his bag, he looks at Aaron. "Did you know that the Herut (Freedom) Party used some of my material?" "Really", answers Aaron. His face glazes over just a bit. Politics is not Aaron's favorite subject. But the man with the coffee cup exploits the opening aggressively. He opens up the main section of his bag and pulls out some neatly typed sheets. Then he starts to read in Hebrew the party positions of the Herut Party, explaining as he goes along how he wants to stick it to the National Religious Party and the Agud?, two larger parties which compete for the same voters in Israeli politics. Aaron brings him his tea and sits down with him, looking over the typed Hebrew. "Not bad", he says after a few minutes. Looking over at a tall dark-skinned man sipping coffee a table away, he asks, "Yehuda, what do you think?" Yehuda, whose brother manages the Jerusalem campaign of the National Union Party, yet another party competing for the very same voters, just shrugs. "It sounds okay. But what is Herut going to do with only one seat in the Knesset?" The man with the coffee cup looks up at Yehuda angrily. "If all the people who say they like Herut vote Herut, there'll be more than one seat in the Knesset". Yehuda just shrugs again. "Good luck with the piece. Why don't you consider writing for a living?" The man with the coffee cup finishes up his tea. "I don't think so. That would mean work. Aaron, thank you. It was a pleasure doing business with you". He puts his papers back in his bag and zips it up. "Nu, I've got to get going. I have to make it to Mincha (afternoon prayers) and get back to schnorring (begging)". He gets up, picks up his bag and goes out into the street. I follow him down the alley and look up at the sky. Dark clouds rush in from the north, driven by a strong wind. The man with the coffee cup stops near his stool and puts his hand out for money. I drop a shekel into it and hurry on to the bus stop. I want to catch the bus before it rains. Shavua Tov (Happy New Week), Chodesh Tov (Happy New Month) and Chag Sameach (Happy Passover) from Liberated Yerushaliyim, This was distributed by the Root and Branch Information Services (www.rb.org.il). To Go To Top

A MAJOR VICTORY FOR FREE SPEECH IN ISRAEL Posted by Steven Plaut, March 29, 2004.

Israel's Hebrew University of Jerusalem has long been a bastion for leftist anti-Zionism, tenured treason, support for mutiny and insubordination by Israeli soldiers, support for "New History" (meaning Israel-bashing pseudo-history), and leftist extremism. Among the radical leftists at the Hebrew University, arguably the most extremist of all may be Moshe Zimmerman. Zimmerman is a Professor of German History and may be best known for his pronunciations that the children of Israeli Jewish settlers are "Hitlerjugend" (The Jerusalem Post April 30, 1995) and for repeatedly comparing Israeli soldiers and settlers to Nazis (http://israelvisit.co.il/cgi-bin/friendly.pl?url=Jan-17-03!gevalt5). When Benjamin Netanyahu ran for re-election on the campaign slogan, "A strong leader for a strong people," Zimmerman wrote in the Jerusalem Post that Israeli political candidates who use terms such as "strong leader" or "strong people" are employing language reminiscent of the Nazis (http://www.netaxs.com/home/q/afsi/OUTPOST/99MAR/mar12.htm). During Operation Defensive Wall, Zimmerman made the headlines when he decided to grant exemptions from exams and assignments to all students in jail for refusing to follow orders or serve in the military, but all students called up to serve in the reserves, to serve their country, would enjoy no such special consideration. He has been repeatedly accused of using his classroom as a bully pulpit to coerce his students to accept his extremist anti-Israel views (see below, from http://www.haaretzdaily.com) and is now even being investigated for this by the Ministry of Education, which funds most of the budgets for all Israeli universities. Zimmerman is so extreme that he sometimes shocks even the other ordinary leftist anti-Zionists on Israeli campuses with his radicalism. One of the more amusing distractions of recent months was the SLAPP suit Zimmerman filed against Haaretz and one of its writers. SLAPP refers to Strategic Lawsuit against Public Participation and a SLAPP suit is a frivolous anti-democratic libel suit designed to harass one's critics for purposes of denying them free speech and silencing them. The very same Zimmerman filed a frivolous SLAPP suit against Anat Peri, a writer at Haaretz (and an ex-PHD student of Zimmerman's) and against Haaretz itself for writing there that Zimmerman regularly compares Israel to Nazi Germany at the same time that the German government has been financing his own research. Zimmerman decided to pull a Neve Gordon and tried to suppress his critic by filing a SLAPP suit. It is part of the current wave of SLAPP suits in Israel by leftist extremists trying to use the courts to suppress free speech for non-leftists. A few days ago Zimmerman lost his SLAPP suit and was ordered to pay a cool 75,000 shekels in court expenses. The judge went out of her way to express her disgust at Zimmerman's hubris and arrogance in the courtroom. She expressed astonishment that a professor, who is also a public figure who writes controversial things in the media, should attempt to silence his own critics using such a "libel" suit. Zimmerman himself was protected in the past from people trying to sue HIM for libel, on grounds of free speech, yet here he was trying to conscript the courts as bludgeons to silence his own critics, noted the judge. The judge also accepted as reasonable the assertion that Zimmerman was granted German government funding thanks to his own political opinions (Haaretz Mar 28). As you know, I am the target of a very similar harassment SLAPP suit by Ben Gurion extremist political science lecturer Neve Gordon. The similarities between the two trials are astounding. Like Zimmerman, Gordon publicly endorses mutiny and insubordination by Israeli soldiers who refuse to do service as long as Israel is not following the policies advocated by the country's most extremist leftists. Like Zimmerman, Gordon has enjoyed funding for his anti-Israel "research" from sources wishing to assist him in promoting his own political agenda. In Gordon's case, the source was the Kroc Institute, a "center" so radical that it also finances (according to the NY Sun) the activities of a Moslem French anti-Semite with ties to al-Qaida, and which financed a "research paper" by Gordon and a friend of his that "proved" that Israel is a terrorist state. Like Zimmerman, Gordon is trying to use the court as a bludgeon to silence his critic (me), because I dared criticize some of his political columns - and especially his columns prasing Holocaust Denier Norman Finkelstein and which compared Finkelstein ethically to the Prohpets in the Bible - and also because I publicly criticized the fact that Gordon entered Ramallah illegally in the middle of Operation Defensive Wall to show his solidarity with Arafat - exactly at the same time that Arafat was hiding the two murderers of an Israeli cabinet minister as well as other wanted terrorists in the same offices where Gordon affectionately clasped arms in solidarity with Arafat. Gordon is determined to try the same failed harassment tactic as Zimmerman and now has yet another legal precedent working against him. As you will see in the article below which singles out Zimmerman and also Ben Gurion University, the Minister of Education is starting to pressure Israeli universities to take action when faculty members engage in treason, use their classrooms to force their extremist views on their students, and otherwise use their positions for the purpose of battling against their own country. You will notice from the article how prominently Ben Gurion University figures in such activities. Please contact the Minister and encourage her to take serious action in this matter: Education, Culture & Sport: Limor Livnat, Tel 02-560-2330, Fax 02-560-2246, Email sar@education.gov.il Then please read the two important items below. After reading these, if you would like to express your opinion about the radicalization and extremist anti-Israel activities so common at Ben Gurion University, I suggest you make your opinions known to Officials at Ben Gurion University: Professor Avishay Braverman President, Ben-Gurion University Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Beer--Sheva 84105, Israel Fax: 972-8-647-2937 avishay@bgumail.bgu.ac.il Professor Jimmy Weinblatt Rector, Ben-Gurion University Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Beer--Sheva 84105, Israel Tel. 972-7-6461105 Fax: 972-7-6472945 weinb@bgumail.bgu.ac.il Professor Avishai Henik Dean of Social Sciences henik@bgumail.bgu.ac.il 972-8-6472945 Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, P.O.B. 653 Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Be'er-Sheva 84105, Israel. and also American Associates of Ben Gurion University: 1430 Broadway 8th Floor New York, NY 10018 phone 212-687-7721 fax 212-302-6443 email info@aabgu.org Lis Gaines President Vivien K. Marion Executive Vice President If you have already told them what you think of leftist extremism at Ben Gurion University, why not tell them again? 2. Haaretz is suddenly alarmed at "threats" to free speech: "Clipping the (lunatic) fringes of academic freedom" by Dalia Shehori, in Haaretz. A member of the Hebrew University's Law Faculty believes the dangers facing academic freedom are more serious today than ever before, 'due to the addition of trying events that are continuing longer than they ever have in the past.' Last March, a Hebrew University of Jerusalem professor lodged a complaint against his colleague, Prof. Moshe Zimmerman for venturing a remark in the classroom in support of Israel Defense Force soldiers who refuse to serve in the territories. A demand for disciplinary action against Zimmerman was reviewed - even after it was established that the complaint was factually unfounded - and that it would not have warranted censure even if true. At Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, lecturers demonstrated against conferring an honorary doctorate on Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Others protested when Yossi Beilin was invited to lecture on campus. In recent months, Education Minister Limor Livnat has complained to University of Haifa Rector Prof. Aharon Ben-Ze'ev about political statements Prof. Avraham Oz from the theater department made in class. Livnat has also complained to Ben-Gurion University President Prof. Avishai Braverman over comments in an article published by the head of the university's Institute for Social Research, Prof. Lev Grinberg (Grinberg writes sometimes in Tikkun -- SP) and Livnat protested to the Hebrew University's President, Prof. Menachem Magidor about Zimmerman's statement. Responding to reports of Zimmerman's remarks, and also to a petition signed by some 40 Hebrew University lecturers (the document was later signed by 250 university teaching staff members) which expressed support for "students who refuse to serve in the conquered territories," Livnat knocked on the door of government attorney general Elyakim Rubinstein. She asked for his opinion as to how she should "act against lecturers from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, since their activities encourage infraction of the law, and perhaps also sedition." Livnat's turn to Rubinstein set the stage for a Knesset Education and Culture Committee hearing on academic freedom sponsored by Zahava Gal-On, MK (Meretz). To her chagrin, Gal-On found that at the end of this meeting she was in a minority - most Knesset committee members supported Livnat's approach on the issue. It's worth mentioning that the Education and Culture Committee asked Prof. Magidor to submit as evidence the petition that dozens of Hebrew University staff members had signed. The Hebrew University President refused to cooperate with this request, even though he personally opposes refusal to serve in the territories. "I don't supervise what faculty members say and what they disseminate," Magidor told Ha'aretz. He insists that just as such matters are not for University administrators to monitor and censor, the Knesset Committee has no business dealing with it. Nonplussed, Livnat pushed on. She informed the Knesset Committee that she intends to turn to the University of Haifa Rector about another political statement made by Prof. Vered Krauss, during a lecture on statistics. Do the events outlined here pose a threat to academic freedom in Israel? According to Prof. Mordechai Kremnitzer, a member of the Hebrew University's Law Faculty, dangers facing academic freedom are more serious today than ever before. "This is due to the addition of trying events that are continuing longer than they ever have in the past. The events of the times have created an atmosphere of impatience toward ideas that are not part of the consensus. Worthy political leaders should have made a major effort to stem this wave [of intolerance], and send a message of openness and tolerance toward unorthodox opinions. I think that the leadership is doing the exact opposite." Prof. Shlomo Avineri, an expert on political thought from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, agrees that the mix of war-like events and grave social polarization creates circumstances that endanger academic freedom. "Without making any comparison, McCarthyism came to the fore in the U.S. at the peak of the Cold War." Avineri calls attention to efforts made in America after September 11, 2001 to curb the scope of academic freedom, at least with respect to the expression of criticism toward U.S. policy. Current circumstances in Israel, Avineri reflects, "enjoin great responsibility and restraint on the part of members of the academic community, and also considerable restraint on the part of state authorities." It appears the attorney general concurs. In a written response to Livnat, Rubinstein wrote that Zimmerman's statement and the petition "are an irresponsible outrage. However, demands involving criminal prosecution in a sphere outside of the IDF, in the public realm, have to be forwarded with extreme caution." The State Prosecutor's Office has "discussed the possibility of initiating criminal steps with respect to calls for refusal to serve; but in the end it was decided not to proceed with [these steps], not at this time," Rubinstein wrote. He added that when legal authorities consider taking action against the expression of opinions, "considerable weight is given to the crucial centrality of the principle of freedom of speech." Rubinstein notified Livnat that complaints about concrete statements made by lecturers will continue to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. In Avineri's view, "anyone who calls on soldiers to refuse to serve in the territories undoubtedly puts himself under fire; in moral terms, his action is an abomination." Nonetheless, the prestigious Hebrew University political scientist, says "I don't think that it's the business of the Education Minister to intervene" in Zimmerman's case. Surely, Livnat can state her view on any matter in cabinet meetings, Avineri says, "but as Education Minister, she lacks status and authority to deal with the enforcement of the universities' laws." Kremnitzer regrets that "instead of standing up for freedom of speech, which is currently endangered by a general public atmosphere of intolerance, [Livnat] is acting in the opposite direction, operating as a quasi-policewoman by monitoring statements made by academics. My expectation is that the Education Minister should uphold academic freedom rather than acting to curb it, and to intimidate the academic community." Kremnitzer points out that the petition did not include an explicit, illegal endorsement of refusal to serve. The letter, he says, was formulated in a "careful manner which approaches the legal limit, without transgressing it." He too opposes refusal to serve in the territories, but believes that public discussion of the subject is important. Prof. Magidor, who also chairs the committee of Israeli universities, says that whenever provocative statements are made nowadays on campus or in an academic context, "an atmosphere of hysteria" develops. He stresses that all the nation's universities, certainly the Hebrew University, "uphold the principle that any view which is not tantamount to incitement, and does not endorse violence or any reprehensible act, can be articulated." The root of the problem is apparently the lack of clarity inherent in the concept "academic freedom." Everyone agrees that freedom of expression, a staple element of civil liberties, applies to each citizen so long as he or she does not break the law and academic freedom is subsumed within this principle of free expression. But, beyond these basic precepts, there remain a number of questions. The answers to them are far from obvious. Does the principle of academic freedom apply to political statements made by university lecturers? If the answer to this question is "yes," does the principle also protect the expression of a lecturer's personal opinion in class? If the answer here is "no," what rules of conduct apply to an academic who teaches political science, history, sociology, philosophy or other subjects in which handling of current events is sometimes unavoidable? Testifying to the Knesset Education and Culture Committee, Livnat offered the following definition of academic freedom - the right is not unlimited, and it does not protect "any reprehensible" comment, and matters which do not pertain to research and professional treatment of a particular academic discipline. The Knesset Committee's majority decided that Livnat's appeal to the attorney general was "legitimate, and did not represent infringement of academic freedom." Livnat's definition and the Committee's decision are supported by Dr. Ron Breiman, chairman of the Professors for a Strong Israel (PSI) group who took part in the Knesset panel's meeting PSI has about 500 members, most of them academics from fields of sciences and medicine. Dr. Breiman, from Tel Aviv University, acknowledges that there is less occasion and prompting for a lecturer in the sciences to express a political opinion in class. Breiman views refusal to serve as an illegal form of "desertion." Encouragement of refusal to serve is also illegal, he believes. Such infractions are not protected by the rule of academic freedom, the PSI chairman maintains; they are subject to rule of law norms which govern freedom of speech. Anyone who advocates "desertion" should face criminal prosecution. Academic freedom, Breiman explains, has limits. A lecturer has no right to express his or her own opinion in class, he says, since such statements pressure students, since they are afraid to express a contrary view, wary that doing so might hurt their grades, or chances of advancement. He also believes that discussion of the extreme right in a class must also be balanced by treatment of the extreme left; otherwise, a lecture is tendentious, and illegitimate. Should the idea of the transfer of Arabs come up in a class, Breiman says (he himself opposes transfer), the transfer of Jews should be opposed in a manner analogous to the condemnation of the transfer of Arabs. Breiman says that it's hard to precisely demarcate the borders of the rule of academic freedom. Statements made by academics must be plausible and prudent; it is best, Breiman says, to leave these standards of prudence and good taste to the discretion of the lecturer. Prof. Zimmerman violated these standards, Breiman believes, but he does not argue that Zimmerman should face trial. The best course of action is for the academic community as a whole to prohibit such wrongful statements of personal opinion. Kremnitzer upholds a different conception of the essence of academic freedom. It is clear, he says, that academic freedom does not protect racist comments or remarks which can humiliate and flagrantly insult persons, and statements that incite violence have no place in academia. But racist or inciting expressions are banned by law. The specific meaning of academic freedom as part of the principle of free speech is that "persons from the academic community are allowed in in academic institutions to pursue thoughts to the fullest extent. That is the ethos of academic freedom." Academics are expected to examine consensus ideas critically, and not to accept them passively. An academic's vocation is to be critical and skeptical. In order to protect this role, "the rule of academic freedom has to be protected to the fullest extent permissible," Kremnitzer concludes. The principle of academic freedom is anchored in the law. Section 15 of the higher education law maintains that "a recognized [academic] institution is free to administer its academic matters under its budgetary framework as it sees fit." Yet a review of specific university regulations which hold sway at the Hebrew University, Tel Aviv University, the University of Haifa, Ben-Gurion University and Bar-Ilan University indicates that the concept of academic freedom is not detailed. It appears that this absence of a definition is no academic. Kremnitzer explains that academic freedom is a complex concept, and "I am not sure that any specific formulation can describe it in a full, satisfactory fashion. So it's best to leave this as a matter of the general ethos." Avineri says that were attempts made to define academic freedom, each university would define the idea differently, and not standard, accepted formula would be reached. However, Avineri adds, this fact is not problematic. "The state enables universities to function economically, and it does not intervene in terms of the contents of what is taught in them; on the other hand, it upholds academic freedom in the sense that it allows academic to enforce its own limits." He adds: "The academic community and its members must relate to academic freedom as a cornerstone to be protected." The basic question remains: what is a lecturer allowed to say in class? Prof. Zimmerman represents the extreme approach. As a historian, he says: "History ends in the present. Thus, all these subjects, including refusal to serve or Israeli behavior in the conquered territories, or problems with Israel's political regime, are just as pertinent as any other historical topic." Avineri, in contrast, does not believe that "it is the role of a university lecturer to express his political view in class." A professor should "be cautious, and not digress toward current events, so as not to transform university study into a derivative model of a current events talk show." As to Zimmerman's contention that history ends in the present, Avineri replies: "That is the position of someone who wants to transform the universities from responsible research institutions into schools for political activity. That would be the end of the universities as we know them." Kremnitzer rejects the contention that a lecturer's expression of his or her personal view imposes pressure on students. For the same lecturer can write an article in a newspaper, and his or her views are known in public in any case. Students, Kremnitzer says, are not children, and a lecturer's views have no special influence upon them. He thinks it is acceptable if Prof. Zimmerman makes a comparative reference to current events during a lecture on the history of Germany - such current event comparisons are legitimate so long as students have the right to express contrasting views. Such current event references "make learning more challenging and real," says Kremnitzer. In any case, academics tend to prefer persons who disagree with their own views rather than ones who blindly agree with what they say. "It just isn't interesting when somebody duplicates [my views]," he says. "I'm looking for someone who will argue with me." Prof. Moshe Zimmerman teaches a course for first years students at the Hebrew University entitled "Introduction to the late modern period." Some 200 students were enrolled in the course this year. These included a group of 40 students who are officers from the IDF's Tactical Command Academy. In March, half an hour before the first class of the second semester, Zimmerman was notified that this group would not make it to the lecture since its members were deployed at roadblocks. Zimmerman related to this development at the start of his lecture. A review conducted by the Hebrew University in response to a complaint lodged about the incident established that Zimmerman said the following: "There is a group of students which cannot come today due to the excuse that its members are guarding at checkpoints, and the like. Such an excuse is not acceptable to me. Were they to be missing because they were serving in jail due to a refusal to serve in the territories, that would be satisfactory to me." Prof. Menahem Kahana, from the Hebrew University's Talmud Department, lodged the complaint against Zimmerman, based on a report of the incident in the Makor Rishon newspaper. Kahana noted that the report suggested that Zimmerman would discriminate against students who were absent from the university due to reserve service, and that he would give preferential treatment to those who refused to serve. Kahana withdrew his complaint after the University's review established what Zimmerman actually said - had he been aware of the precise contents of the remarks, he would not have lodged the complaint, even if Zimmerman's statement was unworthy, the Talmud scholar explains. In parallel, the head of the Tactical Command College, Colonel Danny Davidi, along with Brigadier General Yaakov Zigdon from the IDF's Command and Staff College, sent a harsh letter to the Hebrew University's Rector, Prof. Haim Rabinowitch. "The statements made by the professor are more damaging and dangerous than the sale of weapons and ammunition to the Palestinians," the letter declared. Zimmerman's comments, the two IDF officers objected, would furnish an unlimited supply of propaganda ammunition to the Palestinians. The letter's authors claimed that Zimmerman used a history lecture as a platform for his own views, and imposed his opinion about the officers on the class. The officers' anger continues to simmer. Recently they worked out an agreement with the Hebrew University's Dean of Humanities, Prof. Gabriel Motzkin by which the introduction to modern history course will be given to officers from the Tactical Command college in summer school, by a different lecturer. The IDF Spokesman and the Hebrew University Spokesman deny that this agreement constitutes a dictate imposed by the army, and that the university surrendered to IDF pressure. Both spokesmen present a number of specific, professional arguments to support the change in arrangements for the course. Prof. Kremnitzer says: "Had Zimmerman announced that `I will give bonus points to persons who refuse to serve,' I would say that his remark is unacceptable, and that it ought to be denounced. But if someone says, as a personal opinion, `the refuser is closer to my heart than one who serves,' I don't regard it an unacceptable remark." Kremnitzer also responded to the harsh language in the officers' castigation of Zimmerman: "The comparison drawn between Zimmerman's comments and the sale of guns to the enemy is insidious. To put him in the category of persons who commit clear acts of treason ... is the way of the witch hunt." WITCH HUNT: Officers said Prof. Zimmerman's support for refuseniks was "more dangerous than selling weapons to the enemy." (Rafi Kutz, Kol Ha'ir) 3. Subject: Maariv Takes on a Ben Gurion University anti-Israel Extremist, Oren Yiftahel. "Enemies of the 'Zionist enterprise': A response to Prof. Oren Yiftahel" by Ben Dror Yemini in Maariv. (www.maarivintl.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=article&articleID=5276) A week ago I was subject to a hail of invective by Prof. Oren Yiftahel, after critiquing Yiftahel's political commentary, in the guise of academic analysis. I could answer Yiftahel line by line, and point out that despite the fact that we are talking about a senior member of Israeli academia, he suffers, I fear, from serious difficulties with reading comprehension. After all, I have published my views - in favor of a return to the '67 borders, against the settler enterprise, against the occupation and all its miseries, countless times. And if despite all that, I am still one who "spreads the neo-conservative right wing party line", then any further response on my part would be superfluous. Such that I will not waste time settling scores with Yiftahel, I will just get right to the point. Yiftahel fumes principally over the fact that I dare to criticize "important great thinkers" on the basis of their "attitude towards Zionism". Well, actually he's right, but let me be precise: I blame a group of several dozen of members of academia who spread lies and libels against Israel, while indirectly encouraging anti-Semitism. I blame this group of disregarding, even purposefully, the basic facts which contradict the demonic narrative that they try to lay on Israel. Most of the members of this group are ecstatic fans of the saint Edward Said, now deceased. Said is the father of the paradigm that blames the west and Zionism for all of the misfortunes and maladies of the Arab world. How so? The Arab world vacillates between two different approaches. In one approach: the oft-repeated chorus of how the Zionists are to blame, the west is to blame. In the other, arising from the reformist's camp, which says hating the west is simply self-deception, and that the key to change is to be found in the processes of democratization and secularization of the greater Arab nations. Said is the crown prince of the first approach. Despite paying lip service to criticism of Arab rulers, his greatest project is to place the blame on the west, and on Zionism. Said succeeded. The reformist camp, who despises this self-deception, has been left in the minority. The Arab world is now paying a terrible price for Said's success: Two reports issued over the past few years by Arab intellectuals indicate that social gaps are widening, and that a culture of oppression reigns. And enough already of always hearing about how it is because of Bush and the Americans and Zionism. In countries where there is no American influence, such as Sudan and Syria for example, oppression is far greater than anywhere else. Said's ignorant adherents disseminate their rabbi's bible wherever they can. For example, they circulate to the world the libel that "the Zionist enterprise" (Yiftahel's terminology) is the root of all evil. Al Qaida then claps its hands. Not that there are no injustices committed against the Palestinians, and not that there is no room for criticism of Israel. But they ignore, almost completely, the historical Arab refusal to accept any sort of arrangement, starting from the time of the British Mandate, continuing on to the offer of dividing up the territories between Jews and Arabs, and on to the famous "three No's" of Khartoum, and of course - rejecting Clinton's exaggerated offer, which would enable the end of the occupation and the rise of a Palestinian state. They ignore the fact that Arafat does not want a Palestinian state, nor does he want an end to the occupation. He wants the destruction of Israel. On the Saturday that Yiftahel published his diatribe against me, a program was broadcast on the official Palestinian Authority television channel asserting that Jews are the descendants of apes and pigs. And here's another official statement: Arafat's closest advisors have clearly said that as far as they are concerned, "the right of return for Palestinians is the key element to successfully bringing about the annihilation of Israel." But just as in the rest of the Arab world, there is a pragmatic element in the Palestinian camp. 135,000 people have already signed the Ayalon-Nusseibeh document, which includes renouncing the demand for the right of return. That's one of the realistic keys to a final arrangement. Rather than encouraging them, Yiftahel and his ilk publish articles against the "Zionist enterprise", and support, in one way or another, the Palestinian right of return. Some of them, like Said, and like the extreme right wing among us, support the idea of one big country here, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. Some of them do pay lip service to the desired solution of two states, but only under certain conditions. According to Yiftahel, a Palestinian state will be free of all Jews, but the other state, must under no circumstances be a state with a Jewish national identity, rather it should be a state for all of its citizens. The hypocrisy of Yiftahel and his group reaches astounding new levels: The Palestinians will have the right of return, but the Jewish right of return will have to be nullified. So how exactly should a pragmatic Palestinian feel, one who wants to sign the Ayalon-Nusseibeh document, which subjects him not only to incitement against him from his own people, but also to Yiftahel's theses as well, who recommends the annihilation of the  Zionist enterprise?  This is how Yiftahel and his group ruin any chances of an agreement. This is how Yiftahel and his group encourage the insane demands of the Palestinians. This is how they help preserve the occupation. People like Yiftahel have good intentions. They want a better world. But that doesn't release them from their responsibilities. They aren't willing to let facts confuse them, they are blind to them. And so that is how a dangerous coalition is born: made up of the Hamas, Arafat, the extreme right and the extreme left. It's a coalition of delayers of the only realistic solution that is both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian: A democratic Jewish state alongside a Palestinian one. And one more thing: according to the "forces of progress", America and the "Zionist enterprise" are the root of all evils. In the Ayatollah version they are referred to as "the Great Satan" (America), and "the Small Satan" (Israel). But despite all this, contrary to Yiftahel's claims, I never tried to shut these people's mouths up. I?m not so certain that history will be as forgiving of them. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. To Go To Top

IN SUPPORT OF GUSH KATIF Posted by Dror Vanunu, March 29, 2004.

PLEASE SEND THIS MESSAGE ON TO YOUR ADDRESS LIST, JCC'S, SYNAGOGUES, ETC. Dear friends, For over three and a half years the villages of the Katif region have been subjected to an unprecedented terror offensive. More than 11,000 terror attacks have been launched in the region, including unending shooting on the villages and the army bases which defend them, attacks on the travel routes, the planting of bombs, attempts at infiltration and the shooting of thousands of Kassam missiles and mortar shells. Despite the pain and anguish that has been our lot during these years, the firm stand of the people of the Katif region is an outstanding example for the rest of the country.That firm stand of the residents of Gush Katif is now being tested in the face of another ordeal, this time coming from our own government. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's announcement about the disengagement plan, in which the 8000 Jewish residents in the twenty-one communities of Gush Katif (as well as an unspecified number of settlements in Judea and Samaria) will be expelled from their homes which will be turned over to Arab terrorists is a sign of defeatism and shortsightedness of the present leadership. This dangerous plan to give our enemies parts of the Holy Land undermines our right to the land, endangers our state and rewards terror, as we can well see by now. In the face of such weakness we have begun a great campaign, under the banner "UPROOTING SETTLEMENTS - A PRIZE TO TERROR" which will include the bringing of many people to Gush Katif from all over the country, and explaining the Biblical, historical, agricultural, financial, moral and cultural importance of Gush Katif through the distribution of hundreds of thousands of CD?s, flyers and stickers, initiating parlor meetings, and advertising in the press, radio, television, on billboards and more. We are determined to stay in our homes, on the land of our ancestors! We are sure that Sharon's plan will lead to a disaster for the entire country and we intend to prevent it from happening. In order to launch a campaign preventing the implementation of Sharon's transfer plan we need funds that presently are not available to us. Now more than ever we are calling on you to take part in the struggle for the Katif Region and for the unity of Eretz Israel. We ask you to participate in the efforts to prevent this dangerous plan, rather than to be forced later to deal with the dreadful consequence. :A detailed breakdown of the immediate needs for the first phase of the campaign. Production of a film on Gush Katif (with an English version): $36,000 Production and distribution of 150,000 CD-Roms, (30,000 in English): $130,000 Promotional material, stickers, signs for cities and crossroads: $70,000 Promotional material for television: $200,000 Package of radio broadcasts: $35,000 Newspaper advertisements: $55,000 Subsidized buses for the first 500 buses to visit Gush Katif: $72,000 Administration: Most of the work is done by volunteers but we have office and travel expenses, and salary for 2 supervisors: $42,000 Total: $635,000 You can help us by sending a tax deductible contribution, made out to Friends of Gush Katif, to Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI, 1623 Third Ave.,Suite 205, New York, N.Y. Sincerely, Dror Vanunu Dror Vanunu is Director of the Katif Region Development Fund. He can be reached in Israel at 972(67)775662 or write him at gkatif@netvision.net.il To Go To Top

ISLAM PLAYS FOR KEEPS Posted by Rachel Neuwirth, March 29, 2004.

President George W. Bush said: "We will bring freedom to others, and we will prevail." Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld suggested that terrorists are being created faster than we can arrest or kill them. One might wonder if they're fighting different wars. Bush suggests "reprogramming" his enemy; Rumsfeld wants to wipe them out. Daniel Pipes, a scholar specializing in militant Islam puts it correctly: "Ending terrorism requires more than targeting terrorists, their leaders, or their organizations. It requires recognizing and defeating the body of ideas known as militant Islam or Islamism. The war cannot be won until politicians and others focus on this ideology (taught in the madrassas, Islamic schools) rather than [just] on terrorism, which is merely its manifestation." (http://danielpipes.org/article/1624) Bush and Rumsfeld are indeed fighting the same war. Rumsfeld suggests the need to use invasive therapy to root out that enemy; Bush wants to "inoculate" Iraqi society with a healthy dose of preventative medicine: democracy. This two-pronged "war-and-peace" plan will not be easy to pull off. The medicine has had unexpected and unwelcome side-effects. The patient has not responded as we had hoped. One of the problems is that the patient did not request our services. Sure, he feels better now, but he still doesn't trust us. Also, the source of his illness is still there. That source is radical Islam. Specifically, Wahabbi Islam. Wahabbism embraces an inflexible doctrine responsible for sowing intolerance, sedition, violence, hatred and "holy" war in the Muslim world and elsewhere. This doctrine feeds radical Islamism. According to Daniel Pipes, ten to fifteen percent of the world's 1.2 billion Muslims adhere to militant Islam. That 10-15% translates into an "army" of 120-180 million... and some feel that Pipes' figures are an understatement. The West preaches freedom and equality - two notions in very short supply in Arab/Muslim culture - and this is why Islamists see the West as their enemy. Islamists have declared war on America, Israel, Spain and, indeed, the entire West. The West was never their enemy, but now we must recognize that radical Islamic fundamentalists are our enemy. Attempts to coddle them in the hope that they will finally "get it" and cut themselves free of Middle Age barbarism are naive. Instead of waiting for them to "get it", it is time to "give it to them". We must unapologetically take steps to counter the rise of the belligerent and ruthless juggernaut of radical Islamism. No efforts should be spared to "encourage" Arab/Muslim leaders to reduce significantly or totally remove the hostility toward the non-Muslim world expressed overtly in their nations' schoolbooks, in their mosques and in their government-controlled media. Target Israel (The Little Satan): Epicenter of Arab/Muslim Intolerance Some might argue that things are getting better vis-a-vis the Arab-Islamic world and Israel. Egypt and the Kingdom of Jordan have both signed peace treaties with Israel. Maybe other Arab states will follow. Is this a realistic expectation or simplistic naivete? Let's take a look at how these "moderates" relate to the "Great Satan's evil child", Israel. Here are some of the "calls for peace" coming from these sought-after "moderate" Arab voices: Saudi Sermon: "Time for Christians and Jews to convert to Islam." (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia TV1 in Arabic, official television station of the Saudi Government; carried on February 27, 2004 at 0945 GMT a live sermon from the mosque in Mecca) Another Saudi sermon: "Jewish paws"; "defeat the usurper Jews." (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia TV2 in Arabic, official television station of the Saudi Government, on February 6, 2004 at 0950 GMT carried a 22-minute live sermon from the mosque in Medina) Jordanian sermon: "O God, destroy your enemies, the Jewish and crusader enemies of Islam." (Amman, Jordan Television Channel 1 in Arabic, official television station of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on March 5, 2004 at 1002 GMT carried a 17-minute live sermon from Martyr King Abdallah mosque in Amman) Palestinian Authority-supervised sermon: "Palestine [including all of Israel] is an Islamic land that must not be relinquished." (West Bank, Ramallah, Voice of Palestine, official radio station of the Palestinian Authority, on February 6, 2004 at 1000 GMT carried a 24-minute live sermon from Al-Aqsa Mosque) PA-supervised sermon: "Jews, the sons of apes and pigs." (Gaza, Palestine Satellite TV Channel in Arabic, official television station of the Palestinian Authority, carried on March 13, 2004 at 0958 GMT, a live sermon from Zayid Bin-Sultan Mosque in Gaza) Yemeni sermon: "O God, destroy the aggressive Zionists and the tyrant Americans." (Sanaa, Republic of Yemen Television in Arabic, official television station of the Republic of Yemen, on February 6, 2004 at 0926 GMT carried a 21-minute live sermon from the Grand Mosque in Sanaa) Qatar sermon: "aggressor Jews and their wicked Crusader allies." (Doha, Qatar Television Service in Arabic, official television station of the State of Qatar, on 20 February 2004 at 0858 GMT carried a live 60-minute sermon from Umar Bin-Al-Khattab Mosque in Doha) Syrian sermon: "O God, deal with the criminal Zionists and those with them and behind them." (Damascus, Syrian Arab Republic radio in Arabic, official station of the Syrian Government, carried on February 27, 2004 at 1010 GMT, a live sermon from Al-Uthman Mosque in Damascus) So much for waiting for the Arab-Islamic leopard to change its spots. What Israel really needs is for that leopard to change into a totally different animal - one that is not such an aggressive carnivore. Fast-Forward to America: "The Great Satan" The Bush Administration is in "hot pursuit" of Bin Laden and his Al-Qaeda network. America is also trying to create a stable post-Saddam Iraq even as it continues to neutralize both indigenous Arab-Muslim terrorism and terrorism imported from "Greater Arabia." Sadly, yet predictably, America is beginning to feel the utter frustration that Israel has felt for years: full-throttle Arab violence, fueled by an Islamic engine that never quits. There is also some hypocrisy here. While America aggressively fights terrorists, she denies Israel the right to fight her own war against these same savages. This sends a message to the Arab-Islamic terrorists that America's war on terror is not completely sincere, nor is her heart totally in it. For if America were truly committed to "root out terrorists," she would turn the Israel Defense Forces loose on Yasser Arafat and his so-called Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Al-Aqsa Brigades, Hizbullah, Tanzim, PFLP, etc. And if Israel were unable or unwilling to do this, then America would do it for Israel. So why is there a double standard vis-a-vis Israel in the war on terrorism? President Bush should be asking (perhaps demanding) that Prime Minister Sharon launch an all-out attack on the terrorist organizations surrounding Israel. These areas are the breeding grounds that fuel anti-Western sentiment and send jihadists against Israel and against American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. These killers of Jews in Israel are indistinguishable from killers of Americans in Iraq, Afghanistan and downtown New York City. Israel's enemies are America's enemies, and Israel's enemies are also enemies of the shrinking civilized world. Are you listening, Spain? France? Germany? Italy? England? Sweden? One should never dialogue with terrorists. When the bombs went off in Madrid on March 11, the Spanish electorate indeed decided not to dialogue with the Arab-Muslim murderers who perpetrated the act. They simply took the cowardly route of appeasement. The Spanish matador took a goring and the crowd yelled, "Ole!" That same Arab-Islamic bull is on the loose elsewhere. How will others react to setbacks in our war against these savages? Stay tuned. If the Madrid response is any indication, you ain't seen nothing yet. Rachel Neuwirth is a Los Angeles-based analyst on the board of directors of the West Coast Region of the American Jewish Congress and the chairperson of the organization's Middle East committee. To Go To Top

LET MY PEOPLE STAY! Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, March 29, 2004.

Passover is with us again. Only this time we are in the Land of our forefathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and are not slaves in the Land of Egypt. We are in the Promised Land. The Land of Milk and Honey. The Land which the Lord of the Universe Himself promised in the Bible to our ancestors thousands of years ago. We literally have come from the four corners of this earth, back to our Holy Land. A true miracle for all to see, and ponder. A clear proof that life has purpose, meaning and fulfillment. There is an awesome message in this turn of events. Despite Arab and Moslem terror, the Jews have come home, and are here to stay. Despite the vicissitudes, and imponderables, there is a clear message coming out of Israel, whereas, heretofore the message of freedom called out to Egypt to: Let my People Go!, the message for our generation is: Let My People Stay! There may be skeptics, and those who wish to rewrite history, but one thing is crystal clear, the Jews are proof positive that there is an Almighty. Their miraculous survival throughout the ages, and their return from whence they originated almost two thousand years, raises the spirits and provides hope to all of the downtrodden of this earth. For if the Jews can make wastelands in Israel bloom, and make their barren land fertile once again, they have a vital and inspiring message for everyone. Moreover, the sanctification of life, should be the important concept rather than the Moslem emphasis on death and sexual rewards in the hereafter. Furthermore, we must concentrate on the eradication of Arab terror from the Holy Land. Terror is an unacceptable solution for solving societal problems. However, what the world craves desperately is a spiritual center. Jerusalem, and particularly the Temple Mount, fulfills this need. Out of Zion will come forth the law, and the word of G-d from Jerusalem, is no idle phrase. It can and should become our moral guide for a richer and more meaningful life. Above all else, this Passover should mark the beginning of a new era with regard to Israel. Let the Jewish People Stay and flourish in all of the Land of Israel, should become the catchwords for all freedom loving peoples. May it be His Will, that the upcoming Passover, be special for the People of Israel; that their Land be blessed with peace and prosperity; and that Arab terror be finally eradicated from the Holy Land forever. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org To Go To Top

MUSLIM CULTURE HAS CONTRIBUTED LITTLE FOR CENTURIES, SAYS CAREY Posted by Leo Rennert, March 28, 2004.

This was a news item in the Telegraph in England. It is by Jonathan Petre, Religion Correspondent, and is is archived at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main. jhtml?xml=/news/2004/03/26/narch26.xml It was written by Jonathan Petre, their Religious Correspondent. Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, launched a trenchant attack on Islamic culture last night, saying it was ls authoritarian, inflexible and under-achieving. In a speech that will upset sensitive relations between the faiths, he denounced moderate Muslims for failing unequivocally to condemn the "evil" of suicide bombers. Dr Carey acknowledged most Muslims are peaceful people He attacked the "glaring absence" of democracy in Muslim countries, suggested that they had contributed little of major significance to world culture for centuries and criticised the Islamic faith. Dr Carey's comments, in a lecture in Rome, are the most forthright by a senior Church leader. He was speaking on the eve of a seminar of Christian and Muslim scholars in New York, led by his successor as archbishop, Dr Rowan Williams. He acknowledged that most Muslims were peaceful people who should not be demonised. But he said that terrorist acts such as the September 11 attacks on America and the Madrid bombings raised difficult questions. Contrasting western democracy with Islamic societies, he said: "Throughout the Middle East and North Africa we find authoritarian regimes with deeply entrenched leadership, some of which rose to power at the point of a gun and are retained in power by massive investment in security forces. "Whether they are military dictatorships or traditional sovereignties, each ruler seems committed to retaining power and privilege." Dr Carey said he was not convinced by arguments that Islam and democracy were incompatible, citing the example of Turkey. He urged Europeans and Americans to resist claims that Islamic states were morally, spiritually and culturally superior. "Although we owe much to Islam handing on to the West many of the treasures of Greek thought, the beginnings of calculus, Aristotelian thought during the period known in the West as the dark ages, it is sad to relate that no great invention has come for many hundred years from Muslim countries," he said. "This is a puzzle, because Muslim peoples are not bereft of brilliant minds. They have much to contribute to the human family and we look forward to the close co-operation that might make this possible. "Yes, the West has still much to be proud of and we should say so strongly. We should also encourage Muslims living in the West to be proud of it and say so to their brothers and sisters living elsewhere." Dr Carey said that, while Christianity and Judaism had a long history of often painful critical scholarship, Islamic theology was only now being challenged to become more open to examination. "In the case of Islam, Mohammed, acknowledged by all in spite of his religious greatness to be an illiterate man, is said to have received God's word direct, word by word from angels, and scribes recorded them later. "Thus believers are told, because they have come direct from Allah, they are not to be questioned or revised. "In the first few centuries of the Islamic era, Islamic theologians sought to meet the challenge this implied, but during the past 500 years critical scholarship has declined, leading to strong resistance to modernity." Dr Carey said that moderate Muslims must "resist strongly" the taking over of Islam by radical activists "and to express strongly, on behalf of the many millions of their co-religionists, their abhorrence of violence done in the name of Allah". He said: "We look to them to condemn suicide bombers and terrorists who use Islam as a weapon to destabilise and destroy innocent lives. Sadly, apart from a few courageous examples, very few Muslim leaders condemn clearly and unconditionally the evil of suicide bombers who kill innocent people. "We need to hear outright condemnation of theologies that state that suicide bombers are martyrs and enter a martyr's reward." Christians, who shared many values with Muslims, such as respect for the family, must speak out against the persecution they often encountered in Muslim countries. "During my time as archbishop, this was my constant refrain: that the welcome we have given to Muslims in the West, with the accompanying freedom to worship freely and build their mosques, should be reciprocated in Muslim lands," he said. Dr Carey, who initiated several top-level meetings between Christian and Islamic leaders during his time at Lambeth Palace, urged the West to tackle the Palestinian problem and other inequalities in the Muslim world. "It will do us little good if the West simply believes that the answer is to put an end to Osama bin Laden. Rather, we must put an end to conditions, distortions and misinformation that create him and his many emulators." Iqbal Sacranie, the secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said that Dr Carey's comments "saddened" him. "He should be well aware that mainstream Muslim organisations have consistently condemned terrorist acts but their statements are often ignored by the media," he said. "Dr Carey is trampling on a very sensitive area by referring to the Koran and the traditions of the Prophet." To Go To Top

DON'T WORRY AMERICA, HAMAS IS AT WAR WITH ISRAEL TOO Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, March 28, 2004.

Admittedly, Dr. Abdel Aziz Rantisi - the new head of Hamas - has a gripe. Israel has tried twice to kill him, and just after the recent "targeted killing" of his boss, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin by Israel, Israeli officials announced that Rantisi was still on their "hit" list. Of course, when you think about what Rantisi has said in the past, "We will continue with our holy war and resistance until every last criminal Zionist is evicted from this land. By G-D we will not leave one Jew alive in Palestine. We will fight them with all the strength we have. This is our land, not the Jews." You can understand why Israel would want to eliminate the terrorist leader. Immediately after the Israeli missile strike that killed Sheikh Yassin, Rantisi and other Hamas leaders threatened to retaliate against America, blaming it for supporting Israel. But a few days later, Rantisi backed down from the threat, saying Hamas would only be active in the West Bank - Judea and Samaria - the Gaza Strip, and Israel. Now he's decided to enlarge the war. It's not good enough to wipe out Israel; he's after America too. In a recent speech at the Islamic University in Gaza City, Rantisi said he was not surprised that the US had vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution condemning Israel's assassination of Hamas "spiritual leader" Sheikh Yassin. "Bush is an enemy of God, an enemy of Islam, an enemy of Muslims," Rantisi explained. "America has announced a war against Allah, Sharon has announced a war against Allah. Allah announces a war against America, Bush and Sharon," he told the crowd of more than 5,000. The rally was the first public appearance by Rantisi, since the end of a three-day official mourning period for Yassin. Rantisi seems to be following the line developed by his "spiritual leader" Yassin, who in the weeks and months before Israel's assassination of him, had increasingly begun speaking publicly about the "Global Jihad" in Bin Laden and al-Qaeda type terms. Although this wasn't new to Yassin, who back in February 2002 - before the war in Iraq - called on the international Islamic community to combat "American influence" on their countries via "Jihad". "The war of God goes on against them and I see the beginning of victory starting from here in Palestine in the hands of the Izzedin al-Kassam Brigades - Hamas's military wing - and the Hamas movement," Rantisi said. In the past, after a previous attempt on his life, Rantisi threatened that, "Now no one is immune, Hamas will target every man, woman, and child in Israel." As if they weren't already trying to kill everyone, with their indiscriminant suicide bombings? Now he's adding America to his list. Dr. Rantisi also suggested the Arab world is letting down the Palestinians. "I want to tell the Arab leaders, you will be asked by God...about the blood of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin," he said. Rantisi told the Arab states, "The blood of Sheikh Yassin calls on you to close the [Israeli] embassies, the consulates, commercial offices. Boycott them, commercially, diplomatically and culturally and in security [contacts], and stop meeting killers like Sharon," he said. Rantisi said they only looked weak following the weekend postponement of an Arab League summit in a dispute over democratic reform proposals. "The time has come to be strong in facing America and the Zionists," Rantisi demanded. The crowds, mostly dressed in the green colors of Hamas, cheered Rantisi's every word and pledged their support for him. Let's not forget that Dr. Rantisi first came to public attention in December 1992, when then Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin "exiled" 400 Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists to Marj az-Zuhour in Southern Lebanon. The international media at the time, portrayed their daily struggles, trying to drum up sympathy for their plight - combating the grueling cold, stranded with not sufficient food or medical supplies, etc - when in fact, they had gotten hold of cell phones, and made contact with Hezbollah operatives. For almost a year they got continuous Jihadist indoctrination, bomb making lessons, and practice in guerrilla warfare techniques - don't forget the unreported vacations to Beirut - thanks to Hezbollah. Dr. Abdel Aziz Rantisi - then political head of Hamas - gained international prominence at that time, as the group's spokesman. So, no one can doubt Rantisi's "Jihadist credentials". Hezbollah - sponsored by Iran and Syria - has been involved in attacks worldwide against Jewish and Israeli targets. I might add, that they bombed the US Embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983, and have sent many fighters to Iraq, as well. Then you have the more recent case - in October 2003 - of three American security personnel killed in an American diplomatic convoy in Gaza. Anonymous callers to the media at the time claimed that an unknown group - the Popular Resistance Committees - was behind the attack. But, Israeli intelligence sources have discounted the calls and placed the blame on members of Arafat's Fatah. Though the Palestinian Authority officially condemned the attack, the Palestine Satellite TV Channel - an official television station of the Palestinian Authority - carried a weekly live sermon from Sheikh Zaid Bin-Sultan Al Nuhayyan Mosque in Gaza. The imam told his audience, "The world will never enjoy security unless our children enjoy it here in Palestine. We hear statements by the little US President. We hear unfair and tyrannical statements in which he says Israel has the right to defend itself. These statements carry destruction for the United States itself. From here, we warn the American people that this President is dragging them to the abyss." He concluded, "O Lord, take vengeance on the Jews and their supporters. O Lord, take vengeance on the Jews and their allies..." The Palestinian Authority hasn't yet adequately investigated the bombing. And if you thought it was only Hamas who promotes anti-American Jihadist rhetoric, think again. The Palestinian Authority's highly controlled official media persistently incites hatred and violence against America and the West, besides Israel. They tell the Palestinian public, that several of the conflicts around the world - that involve Muslims and Arabs - are part of a war between civilizations, that the western world led by the United States is fighting against the Arab world and Islam. They inflame their people to support terror, because America "runs a dirty war against all that is Arab and Muslim." The Palestinians are repeatedly told they must lead the war against the West. The official PA newspaper al-Hayyat al-Jadida, echoing Bin Laden terminology, insists there exists an "American-European-Russian alliance," pursuing Muslim/Arab subjugation. The Palestinians are at the forefront of the war that will, "shake the earth under the feet of the blood and oil sucking neo-imperialists, the thieves of natural resources, murderers of nations." US President Bush, in this "Global Jihad," is depicted not only as a leader of the "enemy United States," but also as the enemy of all civilization, the "Fuhrer of the globalization era." He's called a greater danger than Hitler, leading the world to destruction. "The new Fuhrer [Bush] will return the world to the Stone Age," while Hitler only left "tens of millions of dead." So there you have it, the true "Axis of Evil": Iran, Syria, "Palestine", Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Arafat, Rantisi and Hamas. With the Palestinian Authority housing several terror gangs, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Arafat's own Fatah sponsored al-Aksa Brigades and Tanzim, the DFLP, the PFLP, and others, "Palestine" has become another Afghanistan. Imagine what full Palestinian independence would mean for the world? But, don't worry America, Hamas is at war with Israel too... Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst and consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations and Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko To Go To Top

POWER, PERVERSION, PASSION AND PALESTINIANISM Posted by Evelyn Hayes, March 28, 2004.

They ask why an adolescent "palestinian" boy can blow himself up and why he didn't. They say he did not accept the perverse semantics that proposes that when you die your passion is satisfied. They say he was too slow, therefore, had time to think, even at a limited capacity and realize he wanted to live. He also gave the world time to stop and think, perhaps something very wrong is going on with palestinianism, as if they didn't have time and reminders again, such as, Twin Buddhas and Twin Towers and Twin Attacks killing innocents worldwide How wrong is palestinianism and who is taking the evil by the horns? Power is the passion of evil. Power killed J.C. This was the power of the Roman invaders. They were the first palestinians. Yes, they named Israel, the land of the Biblical Jews, "Palestine" and they named Jerusalem Aitola Capitolina. They did it to pervert the identity of the Jews, to disassociate them from their holy land. As they infused passion and herd mentality into their subjects, "pan-demon-ianism" was the rule. Perversion is replacing identity. Palestianism associates all Arabs, Muslims, Black Muslim, converts and sympathizers with an agenda against the Jews. Palestinianism would associate all against the Jews for their cause which is against all dhimmis. Palestinianism ignores that it was the Jews who suffered from the Philistines, Goliath, the Babylonians, the Inquisition, the diaspora, the pogroms and the Holocaust. It was the Jew for 2000 years who dreamed of Jerusalem, Palestine, Israel, the Jewish homeland. Rich benefactors throughout time supported Torah learning in the cities of Gaza, Acco, Tiberias, Safed, Hebron, Jerusalem, more. Rich benefactors bought land from the Ottoman Empire and started new self supporting settlements in the Galilee, Judea, Gaza, Jerusalem and enticed Jews to come from behind the walls and use their hands instead of hand-outs. Israel started to bloom and Arabs fled their homelands and warlords to work for the Jews. The power of the warlords was reduced, their extortion money dwindled. The warlords of Egypt and Syria began to invade Israel. According to British Occupation documents, 30,000 Syrians tried to flee back to Syria because they thought they would be punished because they massacred Jews in 1936. Perversion is using lies to excite passionate and prime-evil responses to rally herds for warlords. Arab neighbors killed their Jewish friends and pharmicists when the Temple Mount blood libel spread from the mosques to Musrawa to Hebron and throughout Israel in 1929. Humans became beasts, disembowling their neighbors and their neighbors babies as the mosques blasted hate against the Jews. Mass pogroms in Israel began when a perverted leader used lies to ignite the savage passions of normal men, intellectual as well as illiterate. Few were brave enough and honest enough to stand back. But there were heroes, The heroes who chose not to follow the perversions of Hitler in his power war against the Jews and mankind were not faithful to Aryanism, a semantics of creating a people against individuals and the basics of civilization. How the hordes thirsted for the incinerated Jews' gold teeth and household belongings. How murder and theft and brutality was the other face of the German kind to his own children. How the imported PA walk past Jewish built houses and ancient settlements and have a passion to unselttle more to reap the rewards that the peaceful Jews will throw to them to sedate their passion ignoring the reality that abusers abuse more when their tirades are rewarded. Thank G-d that sanity survived the brutality of the power-monger and his immorality. Thank G-d the Enron Immorality is over. However, the suffering of the victims continues. Further embezzlements by the powermongers are curtailed by a less healthy backlash. The power of pocketing whats not yours doesn't care if hardship and death of others is an outcome. The power of pocketing whats not yours doesn't care if hardship and death of others is an outcome. Once guilty, the guilty pervert on, covering up their evil by inducing passion into the pathways of herds who want what appears to be the rewards of the respectable but in reality is bankruptcy. Who is the scapegoat to keep judge off the war lord? Scapegoating the Jews keeps the media and the judges occupied. How precise was the Aryan army? What castles have the palestinian warlords? Who dares dismantle the perversion of palestinianism? Who dares connect the dots of their Forbes status and their subjects' woes? Who dares confront the passion of the killer who condems his victim, portraying as his own the victims sympathy traits and disqualifying the victim by portraying his immorality as theirs. How many believe that the Egyptian Arafat al-Husseini is a palestinian without association to the mufti who supported Hitler in his genocidal imperialism in World War II? Who supports pan-palestinianism in its suicidal war against the crusaders: Jews, the West, Buddhists, Hindus, black Africans, Christians, Coptics, and anyone else who would hinder their power thrusts? Stop. When the power is in the Creator's hands, all men are equal. When there are supernatural gods controlling the word, man is still not on the pedestal. Stop, when man is warlord, men are their suicide serfs. Who endangers the world? Remember the statues of Hadrian, the blow-ups of Stalin and Hitler, the all- hovering Arafat, Saddam Hussein? The enslaved of the Taliban rejoiced when America intervened. The abused of Saddam Hussein were emancipated when his statue fell. Who will take down the remnants of Arafasician a la Haj al-Husseini who has perverted Arab reality, religion, morality and created a suicide race? Arafascism is Nazism is Roman palestinianism, is imperialism, not to rule but to ruthlessly rob. It is not liberating to be a liberal who sees the side of the warlord with a face of the victim, who cries for the heartless and heartwrenching and not the heartbroken. Perverted power-lords have substituted normalcy with lusting passion in the hearts and heads of their subjects with a Mein Kampf semantics. The Diapora Jew, with only 14 million survivors controls the world? How do they control Saudi Arabia when they were dispossessed from Medina after they accepted Mohammed's Big Lie 1400 years ago and are not welcome at all? How do they control Europe when they are a remnant of aged survivors? How do they control the media when it's Arab oil money that buys into all corporations and gets plusses when they minus? Power has perverted the senses of free men too passionate to use their minds and microfilm, too political to be individuals, too socialistic to be sociable, too liberal to be accepting of freedom for Jews in Judea. Palestinianism has been imperialism since the Goliath (not a Jew) was against the Jews, since Hellenism would disorder the world for its own select order, since Rome invaded Israel and called it Palestine, since Hitler worked with the mufti to solve the Jewish problem that included Britain, France, Spain, Italy, Hungary, Rumania, Poland, Russia, Africa, since jihad is spreading across the globe and revolutioninzing peace into slavery. President Franklin Roosevelt said, "There is nothing to fear but fear itself." I believe it is fearful to accept the fierce and be passive, appeasing, self-denying and accepting evil as morally equivalent. The greatest thing to fear is power, perverion, passion and pan-palestinianism. Let's substitute the Durban hatefest with a unity of individuals for truth, justice and freedom for all, even the endangered species of just 14 million Jews who walked away from slavery with the help of the Holy One Blessed Be He. Let's not forget the Bible of the Jews because it is truly the master guide to disempower evil, to rectify perversion, to control passion, to end all tyranny, imperialism, slavery. Big Lies make truth little. The truth is the palestinian boy was man enough to say no. Saying no to power, perversion, passion and palestinianism is saying yes to truth and life. Am Yisrael Chai. Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, TWINS, because their hearts are softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, GENERATIONS, because the lion wears stripes." To Go To Top

ALABAMA SUPPORTS ISRAEL Posted by Mordechai Ben Menachem, March 28, 2004.

This is a news item from today's Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com) Alabama State Representative Jim Carns (Republican from Birmingham) sponsored the following joint resolution (House and Senate of Alabama) expressing solidarity with Israel in its fight against terrorism. Rep. Carns has thus followed in the footsteps of the 1943 joint resolution, adopted by both chambers in Alabama, in support of the establishment of a Jewish State. Local pro-Israel activists note that Jim and Judy Carns have been committed to the enhancement of Alabama-Israel ties in the areas of commerce and industry. The resolution states, in part: "WHEREAS, Palestinian organizations are engaging in an organized, systematic, and deliberate campaign of terror aimed at inflicting as many casualties as possible on the Israeli population, including through the use of homicide terrorist attacks; and "WHEREAS, Israel has lost nearly 700 innocent lives, which as a percentage of population is commensurate with America losing over 30,000 lives in the terrorist attacks on New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington on September 11, 2001; and "WHEREAS, the continued terrorism and incitement committed, supported, and coordinated by official arms of the Palestinian Authority are a direct violation of [prior commitments]... "[The] State of Alabama: (1) Stands in solidarity with Israel as it takes necessary steps to provide security to its people by dismantling the terrorist infrastructure in the Palestinian areas. (2) Remains committed to Israel's right to self-defense and supports additional United States assistance to help Israel defend itself. (3) Condemns Palestinian homicide bombings. (4) Condemns the ongoing support and coordination of terror by Yasser Arafat and other members of the Palestinian leadership. (5) Demands that the Palestinian Authority at last fulfill its commitment to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure in the Palestinian areas, including any such infrastructure associated with PLO and Palestinian Authority entities tied directly to Yasser Arafat. (6) Is gravely concerned that Arafat's actions are not those of a viable partner for peace. (7) Urges all Arab states to declare their unqualified opposition to all forms of terrorism, particularly homicide bombing. (8) Commends the President for his leadership in addressing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, particularly the efforts of the administration to engage countries throughout the region to condemn and prevent terrorism and to prevent a widening of the conflict. (9) Urges all parties in the region to pursue vigorously efforts to establish a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace in the Middle East. (10) Declares that it will work as an elected body to promote tourism, economic trade, and cultural exchange with the State of Israel, keeping relations healthy now and into the future for the benefit of the State of Alabama and Israel." To Go To Top

RABIN'S FORGOTTEN PROGRAM: NO PALESTINIAN STATE, NO SETTLEMENT FREEZE, GUSH KATIF AS MODEL Posted by IsrAlert, March 28, 2004.

These are excerpts from Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin speech: Ratification of the Israel-Palestinian Interim Agreement The Knesset, October 5, 1995 (www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/1990_1999/1995/10/ PM%20Rabin%20in%20Knesset- %20Ratification%20of%20Interim%20Agree). * No Palestinian State: "We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority." * No return to '67 borders: "The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines." * Control of Jordan Valley: "The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term." * Gush Katif as model: "The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif." * All settlements remain intact dring interim period: "I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth." * (During interim period) "The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands." Read PM Rabin's complete presentation to the Knesset at: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/1990_1999/1995/10/PM% 20Rabin%20in%20Knesset- %20Ratification%20of%20Interim%20Agree IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

HAMAS PLOTS KNOCKOUT BLOW WITH 800 SUICIDE BOMBERS Posted by Ken Heller, March 28, 2004.

This is a DEBKAfile Special Report. This wouldn't have been able to be achieved had Israel "taken out" all the mourners at Yassin's "funeral" with helicopter gunships! No sooner had the tens of thousands of mourners dispersed after the ceremonies and demonstrations of strength marking the death of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin last Tuesday, March 22, in an Israeli missile attack, when a thousand Hamas top and middle-ranking activists dived underground. This is reported by DEBKAfile's counter-terror sources. Since then, known Hamas operatives have maintained perfect telephone silence, their relatives are in the dark about their whereabouts and contacts are maintained only through trusted couriers. This situation presented the Hamas command center in Damascus with the problem of communicating urgent instructions to the men on the ground in the Gaza Strip - urgent for two reasons: 1. Although Adel Aziz Rantisi made a show of bending the knee to Khaled Mashaal, head of the Hamas Damascus command center, Mashaal knows he must assert his authority without delay and set the pace of coming in events in the Gaza Strip before the local leadership grabs the initiative. 2. Hamas, Hizballah and al Qaeda agents maintain day-to-day exchanges based on a delicately balanced intelligence and logistical give and take. Mashaal and company will not allow anyone in the Hamas Gaza command to upset the balance of this relationship. A way therefore had to be found for Hamas, Damascus, to impose its will on Hamas, Gaza. The method finally hit on was to take to the airwaves. Friday, March 26, therefore, the Hamas liaison man in Lebanon, Osama Hamdan, who managed the Mishaal-Rantisi compromise, was interviewed on Hizballah Radio Nur. On the assumption that the Gaza contingent in hiding were listening in case of coded messages, Hamdan addressed the Hamas "military" wing, the Izz el-Deen al-Qasseem Brigades, directly - not in code but in plain language. DEBKAfile monitored his statement, as follows: "The lone suicide martyr method has scored great achievements, but now, as we stand at the threshold of a decisive stage, we must resort to a tactic that brings us the desired results. Ideally, we would round up 70,000 to 80,000 martyrs and have them blow themselves up simultaneously in the enemy's urban centers and so finally vanquish him. But that is not realistic. One tenth or even one hundredth part of that number should suffice to inflict a shock on a strategic scale. I therefore tell you not to hurry to exact revenge. We have to be sure our assault is concerted and perfectly orchestrated. Don't waste resources and manpower on small operations. No one is pushing you. Take all the time you need and then pick a date and hour that are most advantageous to our project." Hamdan's words freely translated are a directive from Damascus HQ to Muhammed Deif, commander of the Izz el-Deen al-Qassam, to muster an army of several hundred suicide killers to reach the hubs of Israeli cities and blow themselves up at the same moment. The Damascus Hamas command reckons that, even if not all the massacres come off, Israel will not be able to withstand a shock and casualties of the magnitude projected This escalation fits in well with the intelligence gathered by Americans and Israelis on the spreading base of anti-Israeli terror from the double suicide attack carried out in Ashdod shortly before the assassination of Sheikh Yassin which caused the deaths of 10 Israeli port workers. Their experts conclude the attack was the work of Hizballah aided and abetted by al Qaeda. A senior US intelligence official is quoted as saying: "The soldiers were members of Hamas. But the overall planning, the way the ship's container was prepared, the weapons used and the level of advance intelligence invested in the attack all bear the marks of the two Islamic terrorist groups. We can expect many more combined terrorist assaults of this kind in the future." The Ashdod attack posed a grave challenge to the Sharon government's security and counter-terror policies. Last December, before handing over a large number of prisoners in an uneven swap deal with Hizballah, Israel issued a sharp public warning to the Lebanese Shiite terrorist group against further aggression. Less than three months later, the Hizballah, not satisfied with the Ashdod operation, battered IDF for nearly three hours last Sunday, March 21, its missiles and mortars hitting road junctions on the Golan and coming close to the town of Kiryat Shmoneh inside the Green Line. Israel's response, confined to an air-artillery raid on Hizballah firing positions, bespoke diluted deterrence, a signal certainly picked up by Hizballah and al Qaeda as well as the Hamas and its fellow Palestinian terrorist organizations. Many Israelis, including some at decision-making levels, prefer not to see the international terrorist coalition functioning in Palestinian-controlled territory - and even among Israeli Arabs in the form of Al Qaeda sleeper cells. The phenomenon is not even new. Al Qaeda shoe bomber Richard Reid who failed to blow up an American airliner on December 22, 2001, learned how to pack explosives in his shoes while visiting Hamas activist Nabil Aqal at his home in the Jebaliya refugee camp of the Gaza Strip. This fact was not brought out in the US court that sentenced him to life imprisonment. Israel too kept quiet about this connection, mainly so as not to embarrass Mohammed Dahlan, then head of the Palestinian Gaza Strip preventive security apparatus, who could not have avoided knowing about the al Qaeda visitor. He was not the last, the two British Muslim bombers, Assif Muhammad Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif, who bombed Mike's Place on the Tel Aviv promenade on April 30, 2003, also spent time with Hamas hosts in the Gaza Strip prior to their hit. Their real assignment was to bomb the US embassy a few doors away from the bar but they found it too well protected. American, British and Israeli security forces have conspired to keep this quiet. But, unlike the Israelis, who bury their heads in the sand, the British heeded the Tel Aviv attack as a danger signal warning them that al Qaeda had planted cells in Briton s large Muslim population. Since the Madrid train attacks, London's top security and police officials have reiterated that an al Qaeda strike in the British capital is inevitable. To Go To Top

MUSLIM SHEIKH SHARES ANTI-TERRORIST VIEWS Posted by Root and Branch Association, March 28, 2004.

This article was written by Ms Arlene Fine of the Cleveland Jewish News and appeared March 10, 2004. It is archived at http://www.clevelandjewishnews.com/articles/ 2004/03/10/features/profile/muslim0305.txt "It is well-known that members of the Saudi royal family are funding worldwide terrorism, but because of fear of economic reprisals, the United States and its allies look the other way", says the Italian-born sheikh, Professor Abdul Hadi Palazzi. In an hour long address at the Mandel Jewish Community Center recently, Palazzi touched on the Oslo Accords, Islam, the Middle East and the current Arab-Israeli conflict. The sheikh's talk was sponsored by the Alvin, Lottie & Rachel Gray Center for Jewish Life and Learning, The American Jewish Committee, Zionist Organization of America, Betar and Cleveland Hillel. Palazzi, who is an imam and secretary-general of the Italian Muslim Association, has long been outspoken in his criticism of Muslim political extremists including the P.L.O., Yasir Arafat and the Al Aqsa Brigade. For the past few years, he has been a keynote speaker at interfaith dialogues and conferences around the world. Tracing the current conflict between the Arabs and Israelis to events that occurred right after World War I, Palazzi says, with the fall of the Ottoman Empire, there were no Islamic states. The British allowed the Wahabi, a strict fundamentalist Muslim sect which profoundly influenced the Taliban of Afghanistan, to set up a kingdom that later became Saudi Arabia. Members of the Saudi royal family were part of the Wahabi and over the years "systematically exported their views of Islam in a convincing and often lethal manner". Many Saudi leaders were also members of the Wahabi-influenced Muslim Brotherhood, which was "behind most of the terror in the world", says Palazzi. "They found a kindred spirit with Yasir Arafat and a dangerous partnership was established". According to Palazzi, the Muslim Brotherhood has had a worldwide influence far in excess of their small numbers owing to their financial clout. Beginning in the mid-'60s, the Brotherhood made a concerted effort to fund all the Islamic mosques in the U.S., says Palazzi. "By controlling 99% of these Islamic religious centers they claim to represent millions of Muslims, which is not true. Meanwhile, this clever arrangement allows them to fund terror through religious means and charities. A representative for an Islamic charity could very easily be a Hamas member". The Brotherhood's current method of promoting anti-Israel sentiment is to flood their schools and mosques with classic European anti-semitic literature, explains the sheikh. This includes the Russian forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Nazi-fascist literature, and books by revisionist authors like Roger Garaudy or David Irving. Palazzi says he is not alone in his feelings. "There are many good Muslims who value life on earth and the sanctity of their families. Israel should make every effort to support the growth of a pro-Israel movement among these Muslims". Sadly, says Palazzi, the Muslims who live in Israel and want to be considered Israelis were emotionally and morally defeated by the Oslo Accords. "They felt that Israel was selling them out to Arafat. They need to be supported and encouraged to speak out in defense of Israel without fear of being assassinated by the P.L.O. or Hamas". But the damaging effects of Oslo still reverberate, says Palazzi. "Oslo signaled to many of us that Israel was ready to accept peace at any price, and make incredible concessions to ruthless criminals". Calling the U.S.-sponsored road map to peace a very bad move, Palazzi believes the more you give in to terrorists' demands, the more they will ask. "The Palestinians will never be happy until they have the whole state of Israel under their rule". Further, he adds, a Palestinian state "will not be a democracy, but rather a haven for terrorist rule; and that defies all logic". Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi is resident Professor of Middle East Studies at the Research Institute for Anthropological Sciences in Rome, Italy as well as a commentator on the Middle East for Italy's public television station. He has written numerous articles on Muslim-Jewish relations and has denounced the P.L.O., Yasir Arafat and Hamas as perverting authentic, traditional Islam. To Go To Top

FIND THE DIFFERENCES: PA and Hamas Ideology Converge Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, March 28, 2004.

The Western world sees Hamas as a terrorist organization seeking Israel's destruction, but treats the Palestinian Authority (PA) as a peace partner, either actual or potential, for Israel. The fact that Israel continues to seek contact with PA leaders heightens the clear distinction made between the PA and Hamas. But the distance between Hamas and the PA has been shrinking for years. And the way the PA has responded to the killing of Yassin shows just how close the two groups actually are. The PA has gone far beyond its expected level of condemnation of the killing, and has eulogized Yassin as a leader representing all the Palestinian Authority. PA Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei, for example, told PA TV that just as "Yassin united the Palestinians in his life he united them again in his death." Yasser Arafat's official daily, Al Hayat Al Jadida, published a cartoon of a wheelchair shaped as a map of what the PA calls "Palestine" (which erases all of Israel) thereby stating graphically that Yassin and "Palestine" are one and the same. In an unprecedented move, PA television ceased all regular programming for days, and except for brief news reports broadcast only slides of the Koran sung to mournful tunes. In the Arab world, this Koran broadcasting is usually reserved for the deaths of heads of state, as was done on Syrian TV after the death of Hafez Assad. That PA TV treated Yassin in this fashion demonstrates his elevated stature among PA leadership and PA society. Anyone listening to PA leaders' pronouncements in Arabic over the years has recognized that there never was a meaningful ideological divide between the PA and Hamas. It is well understood, for example, that Hamas believes Islam demands Israel's destruction. As the Hamas charter states, "Palestine is an Islamic Wakf the liberation of Palestine is an individual duty binding on all Muslims everywhere." Less noted is that PA religious leaders have repeatedly made identical rulings. Even when the Oslo Accord appeared to be in its heyday, Yousuf Abu Sneinah, preacher of Al-Aksa Mosque, issued this ruling on PA TV: "The land of Palestine is a Wakf for all The liberation of Palestine is an obligation for the entire Islamic nation " (April 30, 1999). The perception is that a difference between Hamas and the PA is that the latter, at least in principle, had given up using violence to reach its political goals. Yet it was Arafat who said in 1999, literally anticipating the current terror war: "The agreements won't liberate the land. Every centimeter needs struggle, and the land needs blood" (Al Hayat Al Jadida, January 25, 1999). When Hamas started using suicide terrorists to kill Israelis in 1996, the PA condemned the killings in English. But in Arabic, PA leaders made it clear that there was no difference in attitude, only a division of labor. Muhammad Dahlan, then head of Preventive Security in Gaza, said that the presence of Hamas "is important and essential in the cooperation in the building." Hani Alhasan, a member of the Fatah Central Committee, explained the role of Hamas: "Unity is in the nature of construction, and it is incumbent upon us to divide the work among the builders." (Al Ayyam, August 31, 1997). As long ago as 1997, after the bombing at Tel Aviv's Apropos cafe, a member of the PA Legislative Council expressed his condolences to the family of the suicide bomber during a session of the Legislature, and "his words were interrupted by the applause of the members of the [PA Legislative] Council" (Al Hayat Al Jadida March 27, 1997). It should be stressed that all this cooperation was openly expressed in PA society long before the current terror war began in October 2000. After starting the terror war, the PA completely erased any differences between the "builders" by creating its own suicide terror unit, the "Aksa Martyrs Brigade," which has committed numerous suicide terror attacks identical to those of Hamas. IF THERE is any difference today between Hamas and the PA, it's in their attitudes toward temporary agreements with Israel. While the Hamas charter states, "There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by jihad," the PA has argued that temporary agreements can be used to gain strategic territory from which to fight more easily for Israel's destruction. Then PA minister Abdel Aziz Shahin explained this just months before the PA started the terror war: "The Oslo agreements [were] a foothold and not a permanent settlement, since war and struggle on the land is more efficient than a struggle from a distant land... The Palestinian people will continue the revolution until they achieve the goals of the '65 revolution..." that is, the destruction of Israel (Al-Ayyam, May 30 2000). Faisal Husseini called the Oslo Accords a "Trojan Horse... the Oslo agreement, or any other agreement, is just a temporary procedure... according to the higher strategy [Palestine is] 'from the river to the sea.'" (Al-Arabi Egypt, June 24, 2001). Today, the Palestinian Authority and Hamas both embrace the use of terror to fight Israel. The only meaningful difference between them is the acceptance or rejection of political process as a vehicle to destroy Israel. Itamar Marcus is director of PMW -Palestinian Media Watch - (http://www.pmw.org.il). Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. This article appeared as a Op-Ed piece in the Jerusalem Post today. To subscribe to PMW's reports, send an empty e-mail to reports-subscribe@pmw.org.il To Go To Top

WHY ARE JEWS LENDING LEGITIMACY TO DANGEROUS MUSLIM GROUPS? WILL WE NEVER LEARN? Posted by IsrAlert, March 27, 2004.

This article was written by Joel Mowbray. It appeared in Jewish World Review (http://www.jewishworldreview.com). Sometimes, partnering with ostensibly moderate Muslim organizations in holding interfaith events can lead to a lot of trouble and controversy if proper homework isn't done in advance. Just ask two Jewish groups in New Jersey. The UJA Federation of Bergen County and North Hudson and the Jewish Community Relations Council of the Jewish Federation of New Jersey had both signed on to co-sponsor an interfaith brunch scheduled for this Sunday, March 28th, which was organized by the various members of a longstanding interfaith coalition. When a large number of members of the two Jewish groups complained, the interfaith coalition uninvited the American Muslim Union (AMU), which was one of two Muslim co-sponsors and jointly listed along with the Dar-ul-Islah Islamic Center as the event's only two hosts. But appearances can be deceiving. According to officials at both the mosque and AMU, AMU is very still very much a part of the interfaith brunch. Both organizations, in fact, maintain that their respective levels of participation remain exactly the same as before. And the featured speaker, who was selected by the two groups (and has her own set of problems relating to radicalism), has not changed either. Given the histories of people involved with AMU and Dar-ul-Islah Islamic Center, it's not difficult to see why so many in the local Jewish community were concerned. Though the American Muslim Union appears moderate in its official literature - saying it is "dedicated to serving the American Muslim community and its unique needs" - the organization has interlocking leadership with a group that has allegedly raised funds for Hamas and hosted as a guest speaker last year an alleged Hamas member. Four current and former AMU directors and executives have held or currently hold leadership positions with the Islamic Center of Passaic County (ICPC), a mosque located in Paterson, New Jersey. ICPC was founded in 1989 by, among others, Mohamed el-Mezain, who was the Chairman of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLFRD), which the Treasury Department designated a Specially Designated Global Terrorist in December 2001. According to a November 2001 FBI report that served as a basis for Treasury's decision to shut down HLFRD, a "reliable" FBI informant "reported that during a speech at the Islamic Center of Passaic County (ICPC) in November, 1994, Mohammad El-Mezain... admitted that some of the money collected by the ICPC and the HLFRD goes to HAMAS or HAMAS activities in Israel. El-Mezain also defended HAMAS and the activities carried out by HAMAS." Just last February, ICPC hosted a speech by Abdelhaleem Ashqar (http://www.icpc.com/icpcv2/lectures/ lectures.icpc?directory=Friday_Lectures), who is identified by several FBI informants cited in the memo as a prominent Hamas member. Ashqar was jailed for two months last fall for his refusal to testify before a federal grand jury probing Hamas. Although the ties to Hamas are allegations - El-Mezain nor anyone else affiliated with AMU or ICPC has been arrested - AMU has co-sponsored several rallies that any genuinely moderate groups would not associate themselves with. Chief among these rallies is one held in Times Square in April 2002, which called for, among other things, an end to the Israeli "massacres" of Palestinians. The headline of a flyer promoting the event says "Stop Palestinian Genocide" and the poster features an obviously forged photo of a baby lying in a pool of blood in a hospital bed. There may be many legitimate debates among reasonable, moderate people about Israel's treatment of Palestinians, but there are no widespread "massacres," nor is there any "genocide" of Palestinians. It is wildly false to claim either. (See http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0304/amu_flyer.jpg to see the poster.) So when UJA issued a four-paragraph statement, which was read to this columnist over the phone by a UJA official, announcing that AMU was no longer a co-sponsor of the interfaith brunch, many members were relieved and considered the matter closed. What Bergen County's interfaith coalition did, according to UJA's statement, was that it "determined that in the spirit of brotherhood, the faith communities rather than any organization will be the official sponsors of the Brunch." In other words, since AMU couldn't be called a co-sponsor, nobody else could either. To put it another way: Nothing's changed, other than the elimination of the label "co-sponsor." Although a UJA official angrily denied that AMU had ever been involved with the interfaith brunch - this person declared that an invitation listing AMU was a "mistake" - officials from both AMU and Dar-ul-Islah Islamic Center maintain that neither group's role in the event has changed. On the dais, in fact, will be the chairman of AMU's Bergen County chapter, Waheed Khalid, who was the co-founder of Dar-ul-Islah and was, until recently, its president. A UJA official brusquely dismissed this as inconsequential, but it appears that Khalid will be the only Muslim on the dais and will be the one introducing the featured speaker, Dr. Ingrid Mattson, the vice-president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). Several people at the mosque labeled Khalid - it seems correctly - as the event's emcee. UJA's four-paragraph statement noted that it "will not participate in any organization whose members advocate... anti-Semitism in any form" or express a "reluctance to condemn terrorism without qualification," yet Khalid himself has defended Hamas and has called a miniseries based on the virulently anti-Semitic "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" both "interesting" and "news." When asked by the Bergen County Record in May 1998 about Hamas' terrorist attacks, Khalid responded, "They are trying to get the occupiers out of their home." And in November 2002, Khalid made a startling comment to the New Jersey Jewish Standard about Egyptian television's 40-part miniseries based on the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," a book first published by Russia in 1897 that purports to show a Jewish conspiracy for world domination. Apparently without a hint of irony, Khalid told the paper, "I think it is news and it is quite interesting to know what it says." Several officials at UJA acknowledge that they know about Khalid's comments. Yet he remains the sole Muslim on the dais, making him the de facto representative of the Muslim community at the event. But even if neither AMU nor Dar-ul-Islah were participants in the interfaith brunch, the event would still be problematic because of the featured speaker, who was selected by the two Muslim groups. Though Dr. Ingrid Mattson appears moderate, she is insidious precisely because she maintains that facade while steadfastly refusing to criticize radical Islamists, claiming that there is no such thing as Wahhabism and that the term "Islamic terrorism" should not be used in the media. Most shocking of all, though, is how little concern she expressed about suicide bombings in an essay she wrote shortly after 9/11. At a CNN-sponsored "town hall" forum in October 2001, Mattson - with a straight face - claimed that the radical, Saudi-sponsored form of Islam known as Wahhabism was akin to the Protestant movement in Christianity. Wahhabism "really was analogous to the European protestant reformation," she explained. This wasn't an isolated use of the analogy. At a November 2003 roundtable sponsored by the Center for Strategic and International Studies Conference, Mattson said the Wahhabist movement in Islam is "a very old struggle... between the more theologically austere Muslims who like Protestant Christianity believe that there should be no saints there should be no intervention between you and G-d." Mattson takes a similar "see no evil" approach to the idea of Islamic terrorism. Mattson was one of several Muslim "scholars" quoted in a Washington Times article shortly after 9/11 who claimed that the media should not use the term "Islamic terrorism." Mattson took this stance despite the fact, as the Times paraphrased her, that "Islamic terrorists themselves use this term." The reason Mattson is able to pass herself off as a moderate is probably because she clears the low bar set for most Muslims: the ability to explicitly condemn suicide bombings. But she hasn't done so for very long. In a remarkably revealing essay Mattson penned for Beliefnet.com in October 2001, she wrote that, until then, Palestinian suicide bombings "simply did not cross my mind as a priority among the many issues I felt needed to be addressed." She stated it as matter-of-factly and inconsequentially as someone who apologizes for forgetting to pick up the dry cleaning because it "simply did not cross my mind as a priority." There seems little doubt that Mattson's statements would violate UJA's own standard of refusing to participate in an event with someone who expresses a "reluctance to condemn terrorism without qualification." But still she remains the featured speaker of this weekend's interfaith brunch. It's true that no one connected with either the American Muslim Union or the Dar-ul-Islah Islamic Center has been arrested, let alone convicted. And in America, everyone is - and should be - free to hold any belief, no matter how repugnant. But have we set the standard for "moderate" Islam so low that organizations like AMU and Dar-ul-Islah can gain much-needed legitimacy by hosting interfaith events endorsed by Jewish groups? Because whenever AMU or Dar-ul-Islah is attacked in the future for espousing unseemly propaganda - and given their histories, it will happen - they can point to events like this Sunday's interfaith brunch and say, "If Jewish groups are able to accepts us, why can't you?" It's understandable that the two Jewish groups in Bergen County don't want to disrupt an interfaith coalition that's been around since the 1980's, but shouldn't they be more concerned about the cover they're providing to groups that clearly don't deserve it? To Go To Top

SENATORS, JEWISH LEADERS DEDICATE TORAH SCROLL TO VICTIMS Posted by Menachem Kovacs, March 27, 2004.

FYI: Mayer and I participated in last Thursday's OU Advocacy Day in Washington. In the morning OU people from Baltimore's Shomrei Emunah and from around the country were briefed at the Justice Department on pending legislation to better protect Jews in the US and abroad. We then attended a luncheon in the Senate Office Building where we heard speeches by a number of Jewish Senators (Coleman of Minnesota, Lautenberg of New Jersey, Spector of Pennsylvania) who stressed their Jewish identity, roots and commitments and others like Hillary and impressive Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennslvania. Mayer and I both posed questions to the Senators. Mine was on the importance of US efforts to save the Jewish communities in Gush Katif and Mayer's was about the importance of the US Government getting on the same page as Israel in fighting the common enemy. Mayer then proceeded to lobbying Rep. Ben Cardin and he attended the Congressional Sefer Torah dedication described below. We found it very interesting. This article was written by Melissa Radler and was a news item today in the Jerusalem Post Online. When it comes to Israel's war on terrorism, concern over Iranian nuclear capabilities, and support for the Syria Accountability Act, Israel enjoys broad-based, bipartisan support on Capitol Hill, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations said Thursday after meetings with more than 40 senators in Washington. In a series of meetings that culminated in the dedication of a Torah scroll in memory of Jewish victims of Palestinian terrorism and those who perished in the September 11 attacks in the US, senators from dozens of states reiterated their support on issues of concern to Israel and the Jewish community. "The Republicans and Democrats, despite all the political differences and some of the election year innuendo, the fact is they share an agenda," said the Presidents Conference's executive vice chairman, Malcolm Hoenlein. He noted senators on both sides voiced support for the killing of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Israel's right to build the security fence. In a meeting with Senate Republicans, Rick Santorum (R-PA), chairman of the meeting, announced plans to introduce legislation requiring US officials to mention Jewish refugees from Arab lands whenever Palestinian refugees are mentioned in a diplomatic context, while George Voinovich (R-Ohio) said he will propose a bill that would require the State Department to issue a report on anti-Semitism, a Presidents Conference official noted. Senate Democrats, whose meeting was chaired by Hillary Clinton (D-NY), discussed the need to implement the Syrian Accountability Act, exert pressure on the Saudis to shut down charities that support terrorism, and address growing European anti-Semitism. Clinton noted her support for the High-Risk Non-Profit Security Enhancement Act of 2004, a bill providing federal assistance to high-risk non-profits, including those benefiting the Jewish community. The legislation is cosponsored by Senators Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Barbara Mikulski (D-MD). Following the meetings, a ceremony marking the completion of a Torah scroll memorializing American and Israeli victims of terrorism was held in an unprecedented gathering in the Capitol Building. The Torah, the brainchild of four young Brooklynites - Carolyn Roiter, Simon Jacobson, and Esther and Leibel Montal - who raised funds through private donations, includes the names of more than 1,000 Jewish victims of terrorism in Israel embroidered in gold thread on a red velvet cover, and a breastplate dedicated to the victims of the September 11 attacks. "We felt we had to do something, we felt we had to make a statement and not just let these people turn into numbers," said Roiter before the ceremony. "When you see how many names are on this cover, it's overwhelming, but the only way to give each individual the memory each deserves is by memorializing them for eternity," she said. During the ceremony, elected officials were invited to have a letter inscribed in the scroll on their behalf as they watched, and according to Hoenlein, the line was an hour long. In the coming weeks, the scroll will be sent to Jerusalem, where it will be housed permanently at the Western Wall, said Roiter. Rabbi Menachem Kovacs is Director of the Jewish Roots Center of Baltimore, an education and research center on Torah and social science topics. He is Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Montgomery College in Maryland. To Go To Top

TREASON Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, March 27, 2004.

Notice: Anyone who is politically correct and/or suicidal Jews better not read this any further. Hear that Yossi Beilin? Shimon? Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines treason as "...the violation of the allegiance owed to one's sovereign or state; betrayal of one's country" and, specifically in the United States, "...consisting only in levying war against the U.S. or in giving aid and comfort to its enemies." Recently, Arab students attending Hebrew University demonstrated against the visit of Prime Minister Sharon, screaming - among other things - "we are all Ahmed Yassins." This was nothing new. The late Rabbi Meir Kahane reported of such things decades ago and was branded a racist for coming to the subsequent logical conclusions...if truth be told. But why worry about that? Let's pretend that one fifth of Israel's growing Arab population - with a higher birth rate than that of the Jews - are all loyal citizens...Ostriches with heads in the sand. Look, Israel must realize that most of the world will always have a double standard when it comes to Israel. Call it looking through Jew-colored lenses or whatever. So Israel must do what needs to be done and not wait to act, on matters of vital interest in particular, until obtaining the world's approval. I will be named the next pope before that occurs. Arab legislators in the Knesset typically behave as the above-mentioned students do. Let's get something straight here. We're not talking about American students at Kent State protesting the war in Viet Nam. We're talking about Arabs calling for the destruction of the very state in which they live. In any Arab country, anyone engaging in such activity would not long be of this world. Indeed, in any other nation - including America - jail would likely be the minimum fate. It's time for Israel to act in its own crucial interests the way all other nations would act. Those Arabs who display such treachery must be, preferably, expelled from the country. Jail time only costs Israeli taxpayers money that there's much less of in Israel these days due to Arab rejectionist actions and attitudes - on both sides of the Green Line. Arabs could have had their 23rd state long ago if that's all that they wanted. Any fair assessment of the facts would show this. There's no need to rehash all the proposals yet again. The reality is that Arabs want their second state in mandatory "Palestine" (Jordan created in 1922 on 80% of the original territory mandated to Britain on April 25, 1920) to exist in place of - not along side of - Israel. A visit to the PA or Hamas websites, textbooks, etc. quickly confirms this as does a look at the polls which show that even if Israel withdrew to its pre-'67, nine-mile wide, UN-imposed armistice line existence, Arabs would still reject its right to exist. Kick those who articulate and exhibit such behaviors out of the country. And tell the protesting hypocrites that Israel, like all nations, must have its lines in the sand which cannot be crossed in terms of acceptable behavior by those wishing to live within its borders. Gerald A. Honigman is a Florida educator who has done extensive doctoral studies in Middle Eastern Affairs. He has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated many Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in dozens of newspapers, magazines, academic journals and websites all around the world. To Go To Top

WILL WE SAY 'NEVER AGAIN' YET AGAIN? Posted by Mordechai ben-Menachem, March 27, 2004.

This article was written by Nicholas D. Kristof and appeared in the New York Times today. ALONG THE CHAD-SUDAN BORDER - For decades, whenever the topic of genocide has come up, the refrain has been, "Never again." Yet right now, the government of Sudan is engaging in genocide against three large African tribes in its Darfur region here. Some 1,000 people are being killed a week, tribeswomen are being systematically raped, 700,000 people have been driven from their homes, and Sudan's Army is even bombing the survivors. And the world yawns. So what do we tell refugees like Muhammad Yakob Hussein, who lives in the open desert here because his home was burned and his family members killed in Sudan? He now risks being shot whenever he goes to a well to fetch water. Do we advise such refugees that "never again" meant nothing more than that a Fuhrer named Hitler will never again construct death camps in Germany? Interviews with refugees like Mr. Hussein - as well as with aid workers and U.N. officials - leave no doubt that attacks in Darfur are not simply random atrocities. Rather, as a senior U.N. official, Mukesh Kapila, put it, "It is an organized attempt to do away with a group of people." "All I have left is this jalabiya," or cloak, said Mr. Hussein, who claimed to be 70 but looked younger (ages here tend to be vague aspirations, and they usually emerge in multiples of 10). Mr. Hussein said he'd fled three days earlier after an attack in which his three brothers were killed and all his livestock stolen: "Everything is lost. They burned everything." Another man, Khamis Muhammad Issa, a strapping 21-year-old, was left with something more than his clothes - a bullet in the back. He showed me the bulge of the bullet under the skin. The bullet wiggled under my touch. "They came in the night and burned my village," he said. "I was running away and they fired. I fell, and they thought I was dead." In my last column, I called these actions "ethnic cleansing." But let's be blunt: Sudan's behavior also easily meets the definition of genocide in Article 2 of the 1948 convention against genocide. That convention not only authorizes but also obligates the nations ratifying it - including the U.S. - to stand up to genocide. The killings are being orchestrated by the Arab-dominated Sudanese government, partly through the Janjaweed militia, made up of Arab raiders armed by the government. The victims are non-Arabs: blacks in the Zaghawa, Massaliet and Fur tribes. "The Arabs want to get rid of anyone with black skin," Youssef Yakob Abdullah said. In the area of Darfur that he fled, "there are no blacks left," he said. In Darfur, the fighting is not over religion, for the victims as well as the killers are Muslims. It is more ethnic and racial, reflecting some of the ancient tension between herdsmen (the Arabs in Darfur) and farmers (the black Africans, although they herd as well). The Arabs and non-Arabs compete for water and forage, made scarce by environmental degradation and the spread of the desert. In her superb book on the history of genocide, "A Problem from Hell," Samantha Power focuses on the astonishing fact that U.S. leaders always denounce massacres in the abstract or after they are over - but, until Kosovo, never intervened in the 20th century to stop genocide and "rarely even made a point of condemning it as it occurred." The U.S. excuses now are the same ones we used when Armenians were killed in 1915 and Bosnians and Rwandans died in the 1990's: the bloodshed is in a remote area; we have other priorities; standing up for the victims may compromise other foreign policy interests. I'm not arguing that we should invade Sudan. But one of the lessons of history is that very modest efforts can save large numbers of lives. Nothing is so effective in curbing ethnic cleansing as calling attention to it. President Bush could mention Darfur or meet a refugee. The deputy secretary of state could visit the border areas here in Chad. We could raise the issue before the U.N. And the onus is not just on the U.S.: it's shameful that African and Muslim countries don't offer at least a whisper of protest at the slaughter of fellow Africans and Muslims. Are the world's pledges of "never again" really going to ring hollow one more time? To Go To Top

FACE SMASH; BACKLASH Posted by Evelyn Hayes, March 26, 2004.

History keeps repeating itself and nobody gets it. In March 2003, senior Hamas terrorist Ibrahim Makadme was eliminated following a week of terrorist attacks; 15 were incinerated aboard a Haifa Bus; husband, wife and soldier were killed in Kiryat Arba. Dead Chai. There was a feared escalation of the war! In March 2004, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was eliminated There is feared escalation of the war. History keeps repeating itself and nobody gets it, while Richard Clarke blames those who don't get it and not those who ignore it, placing the blame on the victim not the victimizer, the innocent, not the lawless, attacking the attacked and wondering why there wasn't enough effort fighting terrorism. In 1993, Oslo was initiated to make friends with enemies. Gaza and Jericho were to be first "tests". Terrorism failed the test! Haj al-Husseini also failed Sir Herbert Samuels. Thus, pan-palestinianism/"We Are All Herzb'allah" became an international magnet for warlords and their partners in the wealth of spoiling security worldwide. Jihad warlords have made a fortune in stopping humanity and spreading humanicide Jihad friends like Shimon Peres and Kojo Annan have cashed in. Who supported Richard Clarke's book and will it cash in, too? Since 1995, all the handshakes have led to breaks without brake in killing Jews and blaming them, in robbing them of life, cash, human rights and land. Since the Armada, breaking the Jewish stake in Oslo II and trashing the Tomb of Joseph, over 1000 Jews have been eliminated by pre-meditated mass murder and 10,000 injured not including the victims who endure the loss of loved ones. So, as we question, in 2004, and Sharon suggests "More Gaza for More Terrorists, Less Jews", and would unilaterally deny Jews the right of their vote and to remain where Jews were relocated after Yamit, where they have returned, plow and plant, feed the nation, stabilize the GNP, pray, love and where there are separate secluded beaches for men and women. In Oslo II, the solution was Arab self-rule, and the backlash was Arab unruliness to the beats of even killing themselves. In General Sharon's solution, Jewish dissolution follows from face smash, incineration and self-discrimination to backlash. Mr. Sharon, the Jews have suffered enough, only merit respect when they respect themselves. Hitting Israel when it's being attacked is smacking the smacked. No More Juddenrid, even if it would be by Jews. Don't you get it? Each redeployment released evil. Another evacuation of Jews will release double evil and validate the Big Lie. It will reward the attack on Bus #19, Bus #14 and on Ashdod Port. Aren't you worried that Ashdod was Palestine before David killed Goliath? Rewarding a worse Goliath, the suicide warrior who hates Jews more than he loves himself, is suicide, too. Get rid of all the Jihad Goliaths and keep the kingdom of David, the Jewish Estate willed by The L-rd, Blessed Be He. Don't you get it; David is not Goliath and the beast Goliath won't stop jihad unless he is stopped not by appeasement alone but by Jews reclaiming their rights, Bible, Balfour, Beit Hamigdash and beauty. Jews planting in Gaza is beautiful. It's time the Arabs think suicide war is ugly and accept their neighbors. Remember, Gaza was a Jewish city before Tel Aviv. Jewish Gaza survived Hadrian, Mohammed, the French, the British, the Arab/Egyptian wars. Let the Jews not dash themselves out of Gaza because their enemies have not won. Let Lebanon trashed not be Aza Jews self-bashed. Remember most Jews had fled from Lebanon. Let the re-Jewvenation of Gaza support the re-Jewvenation of all Eretz HaChodesh. And let the enemies see Israel's might and depart from their history of hate to accept the light of Torah and civilization. Wake up, Sharon, if you would have kept that second Shabbos after the first your kept for Chaya, orphaned by Sbarro Attack in 2001, so many Jewish lives may have been saved. The Torah is a Book of Life and Love. Let our people stay in Gaza, all Yesha. No more appeasement. It's time to recoup and end the Oslo Wars, not reward warlords and spread the plagues. History keeps repeating itself; As Israel gets it face smashed with lies and hate, stones and blood the backlash is by accepting their lies and being mistaken for Goliath the Philistine. Tell the truth: Arafat al Husseini is an Egyptian of the infamous mufti Husseini clan connected to Saddam Hussein who supported Hitler in the Final Solution against the Jews and world in WWII. Israel has a right to exist in Israel. Jews have rights to Jew-dea. Palestine was a Roman invention re-invented by an Egyptian terrorist imported from exile in Tunisia for another dissolution of Jews again. Let Israel be. Let our people stay. Zachor. Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, TWINS, us, because their hearts were softened for more." and just released sequel, "The Twelfth Plague, GENERATIONS, because the lion wears stripes." To Go To Top

UNACCEPTABLE. UNJUST Posted by Daniel Gordis, March 26, 2004.

A couple of years ago, our office started using a new driver. The previous one, it turns out, couldn't make a living when the tourists abandoned the country, and left for the States. My secretary told me about Shlomo, the new driver, right before I was to get picked up for a drive to a meeting, and I didn't think much of the news. I got in the cab, sat in the back, introduced myself to Shlomo (who appeared to be in his mid-fifties) and told him where I was going. We set out on our way, and as we made our way across the city, I noticed a photograph on the dashboard. A young woman, probably in her twenties. An informal photo, in a Plexiglas frame glued to the dashboard. You don't often see things glued to the dashboards of luxury Mercedes cars, so I was curious. I leaned forward a little, and read the words at the bottom of the frame. "Limor, HYD." Limor -- May God Avenge Her Blood. Now I was even more curious. This was clearly going to be a sensitive subject, but this is Israel, and subtlety has never been a strong suit of this society. So I just asked. "Is that your daughter?" "Limor. She was twenty-seven. And beautiful." "I'm sorry." "She was killed at Moment Cafe." I had no idea what to say. So for a moment, I said nothing, and then he continued. "You know, they keep telling me that it will get easier with time. I'm still waiting." He turned up the volume on the classical music station a bit, maybe to drown out the rest of the world. I don't know. He stared out the windshield, and I stared out the window, certain that anything I said would be absurdly trite. And, of course, I'd only met him a few minutes earlier. Even had I had anything to say, this probably wasn't the time. We still have the same driver. Sometimes it's Shlomo who picks me up, but usually, it's Nir, his son, probably in his mid-twenties, too. Between the two of them, they keep the cab running almost 24 hours a day, or so it seems. Because most of my trips to the airport are late at night, it's Nir I usually see. It's Nir who picks me up from the airport, too. And each time we wind our way back into Jerusalem, he takes the same route to my house. A left at the Wolfson towers, up into the middle of Rechavia, following the narrow roads until the car is alongside Moment Cafe, now rebuilt, opened, better guarded, and full. There are sometimes faster ways to get to Bakk'a, days when the traffic in Rechavia is ridiculous. But he never varies his route. We always go by Moment. He never says anything, and I don't ask. Limor's picture is there, looking out at both of us, almost as if to remind us that we're really not in a hurry. So what if the traffic is a little thicker in Rechavia? The five minute difference isn't that significant, compared with everything he lives with and thinks about each time he looks at his dashboard. It was Nir that I thought of when I first woke up on Monday morning. The radio had gone off at 6:15, and the news was prattling on. Helicopter. Missile. Killed. Sounded like a regular morning newscast. Until I was awake enough to get the name. Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. Strange, but I thought of Nir. Before anyone else. And I wondered if he'd heard yet. I wondered how he'd feel knowing that we got the guy who killed his sister. I wonder if this provides any comfort whatsoever. I doubt it. Certain things we don't have to wonder about. Like whether Yassin deserved to die. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw can lecture us about the killing being "unacceptable, unjust." I don't mind. For when I think about the British, I still think about the shores of Palestine closed to Jewish refugees from the Nazis, desperate and starving human beings being turned away, sometimes forced to return to the Europe from which they'd fled, sometimes sent to worse fates. As a Brit, Straw should, indeed, know a thing or two about "unacceptable, unjust." "Unacceptable," I think, is a mild way of describing Yassin's resume. Yassin was crystal clear. This conflict is not about the territories. It's about the whole thing. There can be no "Zionist" entity in the Middle East, which is a Muslim part of the world. There can be no compromise, no negotiation. The Jews must go. Got to give him credit for clarity. And for persistence. Under Yassin, Hamas was responsible, in the last few years, for 425 bombings, resulting in 377 deaths, and 2076 injured. "Unjust"? The Sbarro Pizza parlor. The Dolphinarium, packed with teenagers. The Moment Cafe. The #37 bus. Cafe Hillel. The #19 bus. Many, many others. And now, the port at Ashdod, a strategic target that ultimately resulted in the cabinet decision to get rid of him and let Hamas know that we've had enough. And that we have no intention of leaving. Very few Israelis that I know are terribly worried about the "justice" of the decision to kill him. If he didn't deserve to die, no one does. And some people do deserve to die. No one I know shed any tears that he's gone. But no one I know went out into the street to fire assault rifles into the air in celebration. Or gave candy to children to mark the joy of the event. That, most of us know, would be "unacceptable." Was killing Yassin smart? That's the only question. The morality of the killing is, to my mind, not an issue. And for the wisdom, who knows? Whether it ultimately weakens Hamas and makes it possible for the Palestinian Authority to take over when we pull out, as Sharon says he plans to, remains to be seen. What we've got in the meantime, is a stalemate of dread. On their side, the Hamas leadership has gone underground. Abdel Aziz Rantisi, Yassin's successor in the Gaza strip, is threatening unprecedented reprisals and ultimate "liberation of the homeland." The IDF, undoubtedly, is now aiming for him. One assumes that Rantisi knows there's not much point in his buying green bananas. But Rantisi's threats have not gone unheeded in Israel's cities. People here believe him. There are security checkpoints virtually everywhere, and now, they're really checking. I had breakfast yesterday at Cafe Hillel, another reminder of Yassin. My secretary, actually, asked me to change the location. "Don't eat there this week," she pleaded. "It's not a good idea." But the point is that we're not leaving. That's exactly why Yassin had to go. So I didn't change the venue and went to Cafe Hillel. The cafe, like Moment, is completely rebuilt, and is usually packed. It can be hard to find a table at breakfast. Not yesterday. There were six of us in the whole restaurant, plus the waitress, and the very alert guard outside the door. On the way to the cafe, walking to the cafe, I looked into the buses making their way down Emek Refa'im. Almost empty. Five or ten people on a bus, in rush hour. When I finally got to the office, a colleague told me that on the way home on Wednesday, he was driving past one of the open air markets of Jerusalem, when an elderly women knocked on the window of his car. She had sacks of food from the market, she showed him, and she lived a few blocks away, too far for her to walk. But she was afraid to get on the bus. Would he drive her home? A couple of days ago, the Editorial Page of HaAretz carried its daily political cartoon, this one of a Domino's Pizza guy (yup, Dominos and Office Depot have made it here) on a motorcycle, delivering a pizza to a family. Only the family is behind sandbags, barely willing to stretch out an arm to take the pizza. That pretty much summed it up. But the cartoon missed one thing -- why we're in this mess. Yes, for the moment, things are a bit edgy, but we've been here before. What Israelis need to remember, and what the rest of the world needs to understand is why Yassin hated us. Simply because we're here. And why we had to get rid of him. Because he had pledged to keep killing us until we left. But we're not leaving. Where would we possibly go? Even if we agreed to go, where would we go? As if Europe wants us back. Or as if it worked out very well last time we were there. Or as if the French have learned very much since 1943. Last Sunday night, Elisheva and I went to a lecture by Aharon Applefeld, one of Israeli's preeminent novelists. Tali and Avi were out, so we left Micha by himself. He was lying on the living room coach, reading some enormous 700+ page book that he was determined to finish, and was fairly oblivious to our imminent departure. We told him that we had our cell phones if he needed us, and he should go to bed by 8:30. He barely looked up, but muttered, "OK." We knew he wouldn't go to bed on time, but we also couldn't exactly complain that a fifth grader wanted to stay up late because he was busy reading a novel. Applefeld told his story. Of an idyllic eight years in a completely assimilated, wealthy, Jewish European home. Of his mother being shot by the Germans. Of him and his father being taken to a slave labor camp. And of his decision to flee the camp, because he knew he wouldn't survive it. And so, at the age of eight and a half, he found himself alone, in the forests of Europe, masquerading as a Christian, struggling to survive. He worked in the home of a prostitute, buying her groceries and cleaning her house, until one of her drunken clients called him a Jew. He fled. He worked for horse thieves, who would have him drop into the stables from the skylight, land in whatever he landed in and then open the door to the stable so they could steal the horses. He told of the nights he slept alone on the forest floor, of the days when he ate the moss off of trees. At the age of ten. And I thought about Micha, exactly that age now. I wondered. If he were alone in the forest tomorrow, would he know to do that? Would he have the presence of mind to work for a prostitute, for horse thieves? Would he figure out that he could eat moss off of trees if he was starving? I doubted it. Which means we can't let that happen to him. In the days since Yassin's death, since the palpable sense of dread has pervaded every nook and cranny of life here, I've thought of Applefeld at ten. Of Micha at ten. And then I thought of Abdallah Quran, the ten year old boy from the Balata refugee camp who was given, apparently unbeknownst to him, a bomb to carry across a checkpoint. A ten year old who tries to make a living for his family after school by transporting packages across the checkpoint, he had no idea who put the bag on his cart. The explosive had a remote control apparatus. Someone who gave him the bomb was going to use a cell phone to set it off. And presumably blow Abdallah to high heaven, too. And people compare the two sides of this conflict? That incident didn't make it to much of the international press. But when Hussam Abdo, the sixteen year old who tried to walk an explosive belt through a checkpoint two days ago, got caught by soldiers, there happened to be a camera crew on hand. And the whole thing was filmed. Turns out, Hussam was given 100 shekel to carry the explosive and blow it up. He was also promised 70 virgins in heaven, he said. The good news, I first thought, was that the Palestinian community was outraged. Tamam Abdo, his mother, said to the press, "It is forbidden to send him to fight. He is young, he is small, he should be in school. Someone pressured him." Finally. But then, I read the rest of the interview. "If he was over 18, I wouldn't feel so angry ... then it is his decision,'' she said. Ah, another beautiful humanist sentiment. Or her neighbor, Sadia Abdel Rahman -- "We have to carry out serious attacks. This is not a children's game. This is an embarrassment." I guess we all get embarrassed by different things. When Israel sent an F-16 in July 2002 to drop a one ton bomb on the home of Salah Shehadeh, then the military chief of Hamas in Gaza, we got him. Israelis were pleased about that. But a one ton bomb is an enormously powerful weapon, and in killing Shehadeh, we killed fourteen other people, including nine children. Israelis were outraged, and mortified. Shehadeh, like Yassin, deserved to die. But Israeli society was in an uproar. Not like that, people said, on the left and on the right. We can't begin to be like them. That's the whole idea of living here; that's an important part of having a country to call our own. If we're not going to be different, even better, what's the point? Eventually, the government apologized. And the IDF changed its policy. So last September 6, when the IDF decided to get Yassin, we sent an F-16 again, but this time, with a quarter-ton bomb. The bomb worked perfectly, and the pilot hit his target. But the building was only damaged, and Yassin was scarcely wounded. And what was the reaction of the typical Israeli? Satisfaction. We'd learned something. We missed, true, but at least we were different. I'm struck by the fact that very little coverage of the killing of Yassin has made any mention of the missed attempt on his life in September. It's because, I think, the reason that we missed reveals a dimension of this conflict that most of the world doesn't want to see. It upends the moral equivalence that the international press broadcasts. It suggests that some people in this conflict still do think about what's "acceptable" and "just." It reminds the world that there's more than one people in this region that has needed to be liberated. We're just days away from Passover. Already the stores are filling with Passover products. Israelis are cleaning. Buying. Inviting. And remembering. Remembering Pesach two years ago, and the bloodbath called the Park Hotel. And remembering that Hamas, and Yassin, did that one, too. Will this Pesach be quieter? Hard to know. One hopes so. Prays, in fact. But no matter what happens, there will be a certain satisfaction, even if a sad one, in knowing that people who blow up our Seder can't do so with impunity. That's the difference between life now and life when Aharon Applefeld foraged for his food in the forest. Appelfeld grew up in the world in which people could shoot his mother and send him to die, and there was no one to fend for him. That's what's changed. That's the bottom line. I can't imagine a decent human being feeling joy at the death of another. Not joy, no. But satisfaction? Yes. Because there has to be a price to pay for the wholesale murder of Jews. There simply must be. Anything else, Mr. Straw needs to understand, is what's truly "unacceptable." Rabbi Gordis writes Dispatches to an email list. You can subscribe to the list at www.danielgordis.org (see the box on the top left of the screen) or at www.topica.com/lists/gordis. You can also subscribe by sending a BLANK email to: gordis-subscribe@topica.com. To Go To Top

ISRAEL GIVES THE APPEARANCE OF LOYALTY TO POLLARD Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 26, 2004.

Jonathan Pollard drafted a bill to lead to his release. The politicians rewrote it so as NOT to help him. The revision would provide a slush fund so they could get credit for efforts seemingly in his behalf but that would not get him released. The bill would substitute public "activities" for effective government action. The Pollards oppose that bill. Mr. Pollard counter-proposes: (1) Formalizing a clear government policy in his behalf as its agent; (2) Formalizing his captivity status; and (3) Then having the Israeli Ambassador visit him, to show that the government's new policy is not mere formality. Israel never has asserted a policy of freeing him, as it does for Azzam Azzam. The government never takes up his case. It doesn't want him free. It has something to hide or US officials to fear. By formalizing his captive status, the government could demand urgently needed medical care and humane conditions. Legal and financial assistance to its agent would be rendered. Israel did give such assistance for that confessed criminal, Tennenbaum, who was not an Israeli agent. It even financially supported not only his legal family but his mistress and their child (IMRA, 3/21). People unfairly criticize the ethics of Israel over its treatment of the Arab enemy, which is too benign for national security. They should be criticizing the ethics of Israel over its mistreatment of loyal citizens, which is too malign for national security. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

REVENGE Posted by Steven Plaut, March 26, 2004.

One of the stranger semantic twists in recent days concern use of the term "revenge" in the media. As in: "The Hamas is now going to "avenge" the fact that Israel recycled the Sheikh Yassin." Such a use of the word "revenge" may be one of the most Orwellian of the distortions by the Anti-Semantites who operate the Western media. Many of them are also anti-Semites by the way. So in order to show you how to express yourself in terms of this Orwellian use of "revenge" we thought we would add some other examples of the politically correct use of the term: 1. Germany is considering taking revenge on Czechoslovakia for the 1939 invasion of its lands. 2. Japan is threatening to take revenge against the United States for Pearl Harbor. 3. France is thinking of taking revenge against Russia for its having allowed Napoleon to invade its territory. 4. Lee Harvey Oswald is thinking of taking revenge against John F. Kennedy, and Sirhan Sirhan against Bobby Kennedy. 5. Saddam Hussein is threatening to take revenge against Kuwait for the 1991 invasion of its territory. 6. George W. Bush is threatening to take revenge against Al Gore for having won the 2000 election and wants a recount. 7. Osama bin Ladan wants revenge against the aggressors who were inside the World Trade Center in 2001 attacking his people. 8. The bulldozer demands revenge against Rachel Corrie. 9. Abu Abbas's people want compensation from Leon Klinghoffer's family or else they want revenge. 10. The hijackers of the plane to Entebbe want Israel to compensate them for the wasted fuel or else they want revenge. 11. Tim Veigh wants Oklahoma City to pay for his fertilizer costs or else he wants revenge against them for the crime against him. You get the idea.... Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. To Go To Top

ARABS RUNNING SCARED Posted by Voice of Judea, March 26, 2004.

1. ARABS RUNNING SCARED According to headlines in today's Maariv, the Israeli assassination of Hamas leader Yassin has Arafat and other terrorist leaders running scared. Maariv claims that U.S. officials refused to guarantee Arafat's safety, after frightened PLO leaders requested of the Americans that they hold Israel back from launching a potential attack against Arafat. Arafat has reportedly taken unprecedented security precautions, after the Yassin assassination. Halad Mishal the Director of the Foreign desk of the Hamas has reaffirmed his organization's commitment not to strike at Jewish targets outside of Israel. Military pundits believe that Mishal is also running scared and wishes to send a message to Israel, that it is in Israel's interest to refrain from liquidating him. Israel was caught off-guard by the lack of Arab response to the assassinations. The Arabs did not even fully observe the 3 day mourning strike. Voice of Judea Commentary: The message is loud and clear. Israel need not refrain from taking necessary action. There is no reason to be scared. The Arabs are very brave when Israel allows them to kill Jews with impunity. Whenever Israel finally decides to fight back, they win decisive victories. If Israel would stop going half way and finish the job, they would restore peace and security to the land. Israel might suffer U.N. or U.S. condemnation. But better to live than to be loved. And Israeli restraint will never buy love anyhow. Israel must show faith in G-d and unleash their full military might to crush the enemy. The terrorists need to live in fear and crawl back into their holes. This could only be achieved by Israel keeping the battle in the backyards of the Hamas and PLO and out of Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Jewish towns. The only way to achieve this is by declaring war on the terrorists and everyone that supports them. It is not enough to kill one terrorist leader. 2. ISRAELI DIPLOMATS LIVE IN FEAR ABROAD Yediot Achronot reports on heightened alerts in Israeli embassies and consulates around the world. Voice of Judea Commentary It is definitely recommended for Jews to consider coming back to Israel. Eventually, the Hamas and Hizbullah will attack at Israel's soft spot, namely Jewish targets abroad. That coupled by existing Jew hatred by white and black haters will make America the same living hell Europe has become for Jews. In Israel, as bad as it gets, Israel will eventually drive the enemy population out. Also, there are a million Jewish policemen, guards and soldiers on hand to protect Jews in Israel. Who will protect the vulnerable Jews abroad. 3. PRESIDENT KAZAV SHOCKED BY ARAB ISRAELI HATRED According to today's Yediot Achronot, President Kazav told a group of Arab Israeli correspondents that he was in shock after viewing Arab Israelis who protested wearing and holding Hamas symbols and flags. Voice of Judea Commentary: We are shocked that the president of Israel is shocked to see Arab Israeli hatred. Good morning Mr. President! Why do Israelis continue to live in a dream world of illusions and delusions? Arab Israelis are caught daily plotting to kill Jews. They are not loyal to the Jews. Why should they be more loyal to the Jews than to their brothers and sisters? Why should they celebrate their defeat and support the Jews, who "stole their land." 4. FIRST PIG ENLISTED TO GEDUD HAIVRI The Gedud HaIvri, a voluntary guard association that deploys volunteer guards in Israeli yishuvim has bought their first pig that is presently being trained in the Negev to bomb-sniff and attack terrorists, according to an article that appeared in Maariv last week. The Gedud HaIvri will be holding a special course to train regular guards to help man observation posts in yishuvim throughout the Pesach break. Yeshiva students and others who are interested in receiving the free training and in volunteering over the Pesach vacation, can call 054 876 749 or from the states 718 874 2057. Visit www.defendIsrael.net The website address of Voice of Judea is http://www.voiceofjudea.com. Subscribe by writing listmaster@voiceofjudea.net To Go To Top

WHAT DID LILLY SHARON MEAN? Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, March 26, 2004.

First, let us congratulate the soldiers of the IDF for the splendid action against Ahmed Yassin, a lethal foe of the Jews. We pray that IDF soldiers will soon receive orders to eliminate another arch-murderer Yasser Arafat, and the band of murderers of Jews he harbors in Ramallah, and other leaders and personnel of terrorist organizations. A serious question remains. If Ariel Sharon sought to protect the Jewish People, why hadn't he eliminated Ahmed Yassin long ago? And why hasn't he added Yasser Arafat and other murderers of Jews to the elimination list. If Ariel Sharon truly desires to break the spirit of the enemy and eliminate, once and for all, the Hamas movement and the other Arab terrorist organizations, he would take these actions: 1. He would eliminate - every day - key individuals in these terrorist organizations. The daily elimination of such commanders and leaders would quickly squash the existing Arab intifada, and smash the Arab will to continue terrorism. 2. He would permanently put the IDF back in the Gaza Strip, clean up the area once and for all and rid it of the terror nests. That means: the elimination of every armed individual and the expulsion of their families, and restore Jewish control over all of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. It has already been proven that the only way to fight terror is when Israel controls the area. The moment that the IDF abandons the field - terror flourishes and develops. Since these steps were not taken by Sharon, and apparently will not be taken, we must ask: What is Ariel Sharon really doing? What is he striving to achieve? We might possibly receive the answer to this question from what Ariel Sharon's late wife, Lilly, of blessed memory, told an unimpeachable source in the Golan many years ago. A woman, G., who knew Lilly well, told me the following: A few years ago, when Rabin was in power, and when the sword of destruction hung over the Golan, Ariel Sharon and his wife came to Neveh Ativ for a solidarity visit. After a talk with the residents, the men went and talked with Sharon. Lilly remained with G. for a talk among women. G. told Lilly that she so greatly wanted Ariel Sharon to be Prime Minister. She even volunteered to act on his behalf and to bring others to act as well. When Lilly Sharon asked her why she so strongly wanted Ariel Sharon to be elected Prime Minister, G. replied that she was certain that he would know how to be a true and proud Jewish leader. Lilly Sharon asked the woman: "Do you know the parable of Jotham?" G. was not familiar with that parable, but Lilly did not attempt to further explain. The parable of Jotham appears in the ninth chapter of the book of Judges. After the death of Gideon, the Israelites enthroned his son Abimelech as their king - the same Abimelech who murdered seventy of his brothers, in order to ensure that only he would rule as king. One brother was not killed by Abimelech. This was Jotham, who managed to hide during the slaughter. When Jotham heard that the Israelites had proclaimed the wicked Abimelech king, he went to the top of Mount Gerizim and related the following parable, in order to warn the Israelites of the terrible mistake that they were making: "Once the trees went to anoint a king over themselves. They said to the olive tree, 'Reign over us.' But the olive tree replied, 'Have I, through whom God and men are honored, stopped yielding my rich oil, that I should go and wave above the trees?' So the trees said to the fig tree, 'You come and reign over us.' But the fig tree replied, 'Have I stopped yielding my sweetness, my delicious fruit, that I should go and wave above the trees?' So the trees said to the vine, 'You come and reign over us.' But the vine replied, 'Have I stopped yielding my new wine, which gladdens God and men, that I should go and wave above the trees?' Then all the trees said to the thornbush, 'You come and reign over us.' And the thornbush said to the trees, 'If you are acting honorably in anointing me king over you, come and take shelter in my shade; but if not, may fire issue from the thorn bush and consume the cedars of Lebanon!'" This is how Jotham ended his parable, warning that the encrowning of Abimelech would bring only fire and trouble. Lilly Sharon is not with us today to explain what she said. One thing, however, is clear. Lilly wanted to caution G. against the idea of Sharon as Prime Minister, just as Jotham had warned the Israelites. Indeed, a thorn bush can cause fires - not only among the enemy, but also among its own people, for all that interests it is its own survival and remaining in power. Yes, the elimination of Yassin is a blow to the Arab enemy. But we cannot deceive ourselves. To the same degree that Sharon delivered a blow to the enemy, Ariel Sharon is also capable - and apparently intends, as well - to unleash a "strange fire" against his own people, and even more forcefully promote the disengagement plan for the destruction of the settlement enterprise in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. It is within our power to stop the "strange fire" of Ariel Sharon. We, the national camp, also possess a fire, the perpetual fire of which we shall read in the Torah portions of the coming weeks. As Dr. Yisrael Eldad writes in Contemplations of the Bible: "The first fire in the Bible is that of the Covenant between the Pieces". This fire, the first that came down from heaven, sanctified the covenant of Abraham's offspring with this land. This is the fire of the great love that rivers shall not wash away, not the River of Egypt, not the Euphrates River, and not the mighty waters of the entire world. This fire shall not be extinguished. It shall not be consumed. An eternal flame, From the Covenant between the Pieces" to the burning bush, from the burning bush to the altar of the kohanim [priests], from the altar of the kohanim to the lips of the prophets, an eternal flame. The same fire. Eldad notes that in all generations foreigners have attempted to extinguish the eternal Jewish flame, but without success. The most dangerous, however, are specifically individuals such as Nadab and Abihu, who come from within our midst, who pretend to be "one of ours," but who hold in their hands a destructive "strange fire". We must be warier of them than of anyone else. Ariel Sharon pretends to be a leader who is "one of ours." He built the settlement enterprise in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. He embodies "security." He eliminated Ahmed Yassin. But he holds in his hands strange fire, the fire of the disengagement plan, the fire of the plan of destruction and expulsion of Jews. We must ensure that our positive fire, the fire of Judaism, the fire of love and loyalty to the people of Israel, the Torah of Israel, and all the Land of Israel, shall extinguish the strange and destructive fire of Ariel Sharon. Who knows, perhaps this is what Lilly Sharon meant by her laconic statement. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org To Go To Top

POLICY PAPER OPPOSING A PALESTINIAN STATE Posted by Unity Coalition For Israel, March 26, 2004.

The Unity Coalition for Israel has isued a new Position Paper opposing a Palestinian state and the unilateral abandonment of Jewish communities in Gaza/Judea and Samaria. If you agree with our Position Paper opposing unilateral retreat in Gaza, Judea and Samaria leading to a Palestinian state, PLEASE CLICK HERE TO REGISTER YOUR AGREEMENT ON THIS CRITICAL ISSUE. It will be automatically forwarded to President Bush, PM Sharon and their Cabinet Members. You will be helping to send a strong message of US opposition to Israeli retreat in the face of Palestinian terrorism. As the International community continues to be engaged in a global effort against rising terror, our strategic ally, Israel, stands in the midst of this threat. Common sense and morality dictate that we side with the victims of terror. We must not reward the terrorists. We urge the Israeli government and the US Administration to adhere to President Bush's requirement to disarm and completely dismantle the Arab terrorist organizations in the Palestinian territories before any negotiations or territorial concessions take place. Concessions only embolden terrorists to continue their murderous policies and lead, inevitably, to further terrorism. When terrorism succeeds the results can have global consequences, such as the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq as a direct consequence of the Madrid terrorist massacre. On June 24, 2002, President Bush presented clear guidelines establishing pre-conditions to implementation of the "Road Map to Peace". The President said: "I call on the Palestinian people to... * elect new leaders... * build a practicing democracy, based on tolerance and liberty... * [establish] a new constitution which separates the powers of government... * [establish] a system of reliable justice to punish those who prey on the innocent... * [oppose] terrorism... * end incitement to violence in official media, and publicly denounce homicide bombings... * block the shipment of Iranian supplies to ...(Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah), and oppose regimes that promote terror, like Iraq... "Leaders who want to be included in the peace process must show by their deeds an undivided support for peace. And as we move toward a peaceful solution, Arab states will be expected to build closer ties of diplomacy and commerce with Israel, leading to full normalization of relations between Israel and the entire Arab world." "Israel," the President noted, "has a right to a normal life, a right to security" and this is an opportunity "to show who is serious about peace and who is not". As part of America's "war on terror", the U.S. cannot submit to politically motivated murderous attacks, whether they be carried out at the World Trade Center, in Iraq, in Bali or in Israel. Until the Palestinians eradicate radical Islamic terrorism, dismantle their terrorist organizations and comply with all of President Bush's other demands, there must be no discussion of a 23rd Arab state west of the Jordan River. Israel must not succumb to terrorism by retreating from Gaza or Judea and Samaria. We applaud President Bush's latest statement on March 19, 2004, the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq: "The war on terror is not a figure of speech. It is an inescapable calling of our generation. The terrorists are offended not merely by our policies - they are offended by our existence as free nations. No concession will appease their hatred. No accommodation will satisfy their endless demands. Their ultimate ambitions are to control the peoples of the Middle East, and to blackmail the rest of the world with weapons of mass terror. There can be no separate peace with the terrorist enemy. Any sign of weakness or retreat simply validates terrorist violence, and invites more violence for all nations. The only certain way to protect our people is by early, united, and decisive action." We urge the Israelis to take these words of President Bush to heart and stand strong in defense of freedom - against terrorism. Unilateral retreat from the disputed territories, displacing Israeli communities, means abandonment of justice and morality as the basis for democratic government. We urge the Israelis, who have long been in the front lines of the threat from radical Islam, to continue to stand firm against this danger to the entire free world. Only by declaring all-out "war on Palestinian terror" can the infrastructures of Hamas, Hezbollah, the Al-Aksa Martyrs' Brigade, Tanzim 17 and the PLO be defeated. To bestow upon these terrorist organizations the legitimacy of statehood by providing them with a broader base for the total destruction of the nation of Israel is a betrayal of future generations. Not just Israel, but all of Western Civilization, is at stake. The National Unity Coalition for Israel was founded in 1991. We are 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

MR. TENET IN THE DOCK Posted by JINSA, March 25, 2004.

This is JINSA report #400. Richard Clarke, former NSC staffer to President Clinton (and disgruntled former Bush Administration Employee) offered a startling insight in his book: "Time was running out on the Clinton administration. There was going to be one last major national-security initiative and it was going to be a final try to achieve an Israeli-Palestinian agreement. I would like to have tried both, Camp David and blowing up the al Qaeda camps." By Mr. Clarke's logic, Mr. Clinton couldn't walk and chew gum at the same time - he had to choose between military pursuit of the enemy that had blown up a U.S. navy ship in Yemen, killing and wounding scores of American sailors, and the chimera of "Middle East peace." He chose badly, but not surprisingly. Israel-Palestinian "peace" is a periodic obsession of presidents and the Clinton people spent an inordinate amount of time currying favor with Yasser Arafat (the most often received foreign "leader" in the White House. And we'll never forget the sight of Dr. Albright chasing Yasser down the driveway of the U.S. embassy in Paris in high heels). Only after the failure at Camp David and the opening of the PA war against Israel in October 2000 did President Clinton acknowledge that Arafat didn't want peace at all. That may be historically interesting, but why bring it up now? Because NOW is when the Washington illuminati are dissecting who knew what when as regards both September 11, 2001 and the al-Qaeda threats that preceded it, and because Clarke is not the only holdover employee. George Tenet has been CIA Director since 1995, and during a crucial period in the Clinton Administration, was supervising the creation of a PLO army under the terms of the Wye River agreement, and later pursuing the "Tenet Plan" for peace in our time. We complained then that the job was political and the CIA should not arbitrate Israeli-PA differences. We didn't want the CIA training PA "police" at all because it was clear that they were involved in attacks on Israelis. We believed the political guidance the CIA would get would be to avoid finding problems that couldn't be resolved. We said: "The CIA's job is to gather and assess intelligence information. That's all. They are supposed to pass information along to the political authorities that make political policy for the U.S. - DOD, the President, the Congress. But the CIA doesn't even do that limited job all that well - this is the same CIA, after all, that was surprised by the Indian nuclear explosion in May and said of the three-stage North Korean ballistic missile shot over the Japanese mainland in August, "We didn't know they could do a third stage!'" We would now add that the CIA was then and remained - and maybe still remains - unable to coordinate disparate threads of information to make a clear picture of the al-Qaeda threat the U.S. faced right up to September 11th. Mr. Tenet has a great deal to answer for, both in what he did and what he failed to do. The JINSA Reports are published by the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (http://www.jinsa.org). To subscribe, email info@jinsa.org To Go To Top

PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY LIBEL: Israel encourages PA child terror for PR gain Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, March 25, 2004.

The standard policy of the official Palestinian Authority (PA) daily Al Hayat Al Jadida is to twist and distort news stories in order to portray the Palestinians as victims, regardless of the facts. Now, with the world's increased awareness of the role of Palestinian children in suicide terror, the PA has created a libel against Israel that again attempts to turn Palestinians into victims. Today's official daily described as a "lie" Israel's report on yesterday's suicide terror attempt by a 14 year old. The Israeli report, documented on TV and broadcast around the world, shows a young Palestinian boy wearing an explosive belt. Israeli soldiers guide the boy to safely remove the bomb belt. Last week Israeli soldiers stopped a 10 year old who carried a suicide belt planted by Palestinian terrorists without his knowledge. That, too, was called a lie by the PA daily. Most interesting, though, is the reason the Palestinian Authority has given for the Israeli "lie". According to the PA, Israel creates lies about PA child terror in order to encourage other Palestinian children to be involved in terror, which in turn helps Israeli PR. The following is the PA explanation of "Israel's lie" as it appeared in the PA daily: "The occupation, [Israel] in this situation and with this lie, is playing with its own blood, and it is like they are encouraging children to go from stone throwing to use of explosives, and involvement in actions which are beyond them. Israel's focusing accusations about children [in suicide terror] is in fact an open invitation to other children to imitate the accusations, because it is characteristic of children to blindly imitate. The occupation's [Israel's] public relations gain through this false accusation may come back as a boomerang, but it is clear in this case that the occupation is striving to plan public relations lies." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida March 18, 2004] In this way the PA is once again misrepresenting itself as victim instead of perpetrator. Itamar Marcus is director of PMW -Palestinian Media Watch - (http://www.pmw.org.il). Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. To subscribe to PMW's reports, send an empty e-mail to reports-subscribe@pmw.org.il To Go To Top

KILL THE SHEIKH TO SAVE THE PRIME MINISTER Posted by Herb and Mikimia Sunshine, March 25, 2004.

A friend, who regretted voting for Mr. Sharon, sought to save face by seeking letters of support to Sharon for his execution of Sheikh Yassin. Ariel Sharon did not order the execution of the Sheikh in furtherance of victory in the War against Militant Islam. The cowardly lion ordered the execution because: 1. The timing averted the motion of no-confidence against him scheduled for that time. 2. Many Israelis, including my friend, re-found their mistaken belief that the sheep was still a lion. 3. The execution frightened the Arab murderers into thinking (for about an hour) that Israel was fleeing Gaza from strength not weakness. 4. It was an attempt to convince Sharon's American handlers that there would not be chaos in Gaza after the flight of the Jews. 5. It calmed with soothing oil the passions of those who otherwise might have considered active opposition to forcible transfer of Jews from their homes. 6. It threw up chaff, confounding the plans to indict Sharon for bribery and nepotism. The once Great General has not lost his cunning; only his direction. He has outfoxed the enemy, the enemy being the Jews of Israel, some of whom may now believe that surrender is victory. May we be spared from our (mis)leaders. With love of Israel. To Go To Top

AMERICAN BOARD OF RABBIS CALLS FOR THE ELIMINATION OF ALL TERRORIST HEADS Posted by Ken Heller, March 25, 2004.

New York (PRWEB) March 25, 2004 - Citing a Talmudic passage from Avoda Zora 18a, Rabbi Mordechai Friedman reads "Whoever has the ability to rebuke evil and does not rebuke evil will be punished," and takes it to heart. In a dramatic and unanimous vote of the American Board of Rabbis, the New York-based Rabbinic association agreed on a statement urging Israel and the United States to "Eliminate all Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and terrorist leaders immediately, including Sheik Hassan Nasrallah (Hezbollah), Ramadan Salah (Islamic Jihad), Abdel-Aziz al-Rantissi (Hamas) and PLO's master terrorist Yassir Arafat, heads." The strong statement comes on the wake of Israel's killing of Hamas founder, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. In the United Nations Tuesday, the United States rejected a council statement condemning the killing. The statement had been put forward by Algeria, the lone Arab member of the 15-nation Council, at the request of the Palestinians. Abdel-Aziz al-Rantissi, named as Hamas" new chief for the Gaza Strip, vowed that the Hamas terrorists group would take every opportunity to attack Israeli interests, local and abroad. In response, the US State Department issued a worldwide advisory to Americans overseas of increasing threats from terrorist organizations such as Hamas and al-Qaida. "We dare not tolerate the murder of Jewish children, women and men," states Rabbi Friedman. "Since the Holocaust, Jews have not been murdered as these terrorist Islamic factions are doing now." According to the Israeli government, Yassin's Hamas terrorists have carried out 425 attacks in Israel, including 52 suicide bombings, over the last three and a half years, killing 377 Israelis and wounding 2,076. Even US National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, commented "Let's remember that Hamas is a terrorist organization and that Sheik Yassin has himself, personally, we believe, been involved in terrorist planning." Additionally, the American Board of Rabbis endorses "the relocation of all Arab occupiers out of the Jewish biblical territories, and the annexation of all liberated territories given by G-d to the Jewish people back into Israel." In the first book of the Bible, Genesis 15:18, it states "G-d made a covenant with Abram, saying, 'To your descendants I have given this land, from the Egyptian River as far as the great river, the Euphrates.'" "Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and Gaza all fall within these boundaries," declares Rabbi Friedman. Contact: Rabbi Mordechai Friedman (646) 996-4040 American Board of Rabbis 292 5th Avenue - 4th Floor New York, New York 10001 Tel (212) 714-3598 vaadharabbonim@yahoo.com To Go To Top

ISRAEL MUST NOT SURRENDER TO TERROR Posted by Paula Kaufman, March 25, 2004.

This article was written by Arieh Eldad and appeared on the World Net Daily website. It is archived at http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37740 The proposed unilateral Israeli withdrawal of from the Gaza Strip is the newest (and arguably the most promising) victory awaiting the masters of terror. The fundamental tenet of the West's almost 3-year-old War on Terror is moral clarity - the courage of consistency. Such manifest principles shudder in humiliation by the anticipated Israeli pullout from Gaza. Once the sole battlefront in the Terror War, Israel has sorrowfully become only one of the many new war zones of this gruesome conflict. The Jewish state continues to suffer as no other - however, a number of nations have come to experience the horrors of indiscriminate murder, the fear of sudden and unreserved violence and the mourning of fallen innocents. Yet with no true examination, no attempt to look beyond the myth of rhetoric, the West continues to encourage Israeli capitulation to terror. This must end for, if no other reason, than the defense of democracies throughout the world. Sadly, Israel's greatest ally and the victim of one of the most depraved acts of terror, also seeks to have Israel give in to the terrorists in exchange for dreamy, tired and ill-conceived "peace plans" with the radicalized Arab-Islamic enemy. The "Bush Doctrine" defines capitulation to terror as a defeat, that those who aid the terrorists are as responsible and therefore as guilty as the terrorists. With this faultless cognition, moral clarity demands that Israel be forbidden to capitulate to terror. And, with the unanticipated outcome of the Spanish elections and the conceivable loss of a staunch U.S. coalition partner, President Bush stated unequivocally: "Any sign or weakness or retreat is a victory for the terrorists." The partnership of nations who seek to do battle against terror must re-evaluate their automatic, and frankly, illogical, reactions to the Israeli-Arab conflict and understand that in the face of the bombing in Madrid, their future many hinge upon yet another terrorist victory. Gaza In 1967, during the Six-Day War, Israel captured the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt. That war broke out after Egypt had poured large military forces into the Sinai, closed the Tiran Straits to Israeli shipping and concluded a joint plan, with Syria, for an attack on Israel. Twenty-two years later, as part of the 1979 peace treaty with Egypt and following the Camp David talks between Prime Minister Begin and President Sadat under the auspices of President Carter, Israel returned the entire Sinai Peninsula to Egypt. However, Egypt declined to re-assume control of the Gaza Strip, which remained in Israel's possession. After ruling Gaza for 37 years, Israel, in the wake of the 1993 Oslo Accords, handed over most of the area of the Strip to the Palestinian Authority. With all agreements signed, Israel held on to 20 flourishing communities in a small section of Gaza. Until recently, it was Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon who took the position that Israel must continue to maintain and develop these Jewish communities under Israeli rule in perpetuity. More importantly, the prime minister frequently expressed the view that the very existence of these Israeli communities in Gaza was essential to the prevention of a takeover of Gaza by extremist terrorist groups and the resultant creation there of the biggest terrorist base in the world. The Roadmap: Conditions unmet The "Roadmap," based on President Bush's vision requires, first and primarily, the cessation of terror. The plan was never implemented, very simply because the terror not only continued, but increased. The leadership of the Palestinian Authority was fleeting and Yasser Arafat remained the Authority's strongman who, to this day, continues to rule the PA as a terrorist organization. Israel rightfully continued to maintain that, unless and until there is a cessation to terror, the thought of territorial concessions was, in fact, out of the question and that action would be seen as a reward for violence. In all, nearly 1,000 Israelis have been killed in terror attacks over the past three years. Suicide-killers have indiscriminately taken the lives of women and children in the streets of Israeli towns and cities. Against this background of ongoing and ever increasing terror, came an astounding turnabout in the long-standing policy of Israel's prime minister, Ariel Sharon. In what is clearly an act of desperation, Mr. Sharon decided that Israel would unilaterally withdraw from the Gaza Strip, and possibly from areas in Judea and Samaria. The prime minister's proposal has all the signs of a man brought to the brink, frustrated by the outrageous behavior of the Palestinian Authority, its blatant flaunting of all civilized norms, its disregard of any legal agreements and the refusal of the world community to disqualify the PA as an entity with any standing. The prime minister would capitulate to the terrorists through despair and fatigue, uprooting dozens of Jewish communities, transferring their inhabitants in the thousands and redeploying to a new and dangerous line of defense. Such matters should not be left to the tired and depressed. The lesson of Lebanon It was Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of the extremist Lebanese Muslim terror organization Hezbollah, who described Israel as "a spider-web state." A few years ago, when Israel was fighting in Lebanon, Nasrallah believed that if he just kept up Hezbollah's terrorist strikes against the Jewish state, it would eventually break and retreat. This, indeed, is what happened and, in the year 2000, Israel withdrew from Lebanese territory. That retreat, and the hastiness in which it was carried out, represented a tremendous victory for the Hezbollah, and gave living proof of the truth of Nasrallah's theory - the theory of terror. The Palestinian Authority learned that lesson well Ariel Sharon's announcement of his intention to leave Gaza unilaterally in order to improve Israel's position and establish a new line of defense is decisive proof that terror pays. Such a move would indicate that Israel - at one time the very symbol of consistent refusal to surrender to terror and, in this sense, an example and model for the entire free world - was now signaling to all the terrorist organizations that terror pays. Israel, moreover, would become living proof that it is possible to overcome even a country enjoying overwhelming military superiority - if one simply persists in the mass killing of that country's citizens. Should the terrorists' victory in Spain be topped off with the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, the methodology will be set in stone. The threat to the lives of American and British soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan will increase substantially, because Islamic terror will then have incontrovertible proof that all it need do is redouble its efforts and step up the slaughter in order to defeat the Western democracies. Such a victory for the terrorists in Gaza would be the opening signal for a worldwide terrorist offensive of unprecedented proportions. The extremists will take over It may be safely assumed that if the Israel Defense Forces evacuate Gaza, the most extreme terrorist groups will seize control of the area. Hamas, and perhaps Hezbollah as well, will gain sharply in strength, which will be understood in one way only: that they have succeeded in driving the Israelis out. A shot in the arm of this kind for the extremist organizations will, in effect, put an end to any prospect that a moderate Arab regime would ever take hold, carry out reforms, fight terror and realize President Bush's vision and the Roadmap. Moreover, an Israeli surrender to terror, in the form of a unilateral retreat from the Gaza Strip, would deal a severe blow to the courageous American resolve to fight terror everywhere. The United States would be compelled to invest billions of dollars, and possibly send tens of thousands of additional armed forces to the Middle East, to avert defeat in the War on Terror. The bold and noble effort to recreate the Middle East based on a democratic Iraq will forever be damaged. If the U.S. experiment is able to survive the proposed terror victory, countless years will be added to the task, not to mention the added blood and treasure of the already put-upon American people. A new dimension has been added to the strategic alliance between Israel and the United States. In the world of fundamentalist Islam, Israel is called "the small Satan." In Muslim eyes, the small Satan's surrender to terror would surely pave the way for victory over "the great Satan" - the United States. For this reason, if for no other, the United States must to strengthen Israel's resolve and urge its leaders to stand firm against terror. The level heads in Washington must expose the defeatist policy proposed by Prime Minister Sharon as the ill-conceived byproduct of desperation and fatigue. Professor Arieh Eldad, a brigadier-general (Reserves), has served in the past as chief medical officer of the Israel Defense Forces, and is a member of Israel's Knesset. His party, the National Union, is part of the coalition making up the Sharon government. To Go To Top

ASSESSING THE IRAQ WAR Posted by Barry Rubin, March 25, 2004.

Nothing shows the complexity of international affairs' decisions than does the Iraq war. Most analysis tries to "prove" the war was an outstanding success or terrible failure. But what would be a balanced assessment? Any serious look at the issue must begin by understanding that U.S. leaders acted in good faith in accord with what they perceived to be the best interests of the United States. This does not necessarily mean they were right but does mean they are not the imperialist buffoons which are caricatured in much of the Arab world, Europe, and American "intellectual" circles. So what were their motives? - A new assessment. Crises continually flowed from the Middle East. U.S. attempts at appeasement, ignoring, and peace-making had failed. Seeking a new approach, they concluded that the real roadblock were the Arab world's dictatorial regimes using extremist ideologies to retain power. The September 11 events made strong action necessary to prevent it from happening again. - A new assumption. Arguing that Arabs and Muslims were like other people, they thought that challenging the dictatorships while offering democracy, higher living standards, and human/civil rights would appeal to them. They hoped this strategy would cut the roots of anti-Americanism, extremism, and terrorism. This is all classical liberal doctrine. Now, here's an irony which no one has ever noticed. Don't these concepts hold a striking familiarity to those motivating the Oslo agreements?) If the Bush administration had been Democratic and liberal, these ideas would have been hailed as tremendously progressive and beneficial Having this policy, it should be noted, did not necessitate attacking Iraq. That came about because of several Iraq-specific ideas in addition to this general assessment: - A new prescription. Just voicing such policies, they believed, would have little practical effect. Regimes would merely use force and demagoguery to retain power. In Iraq, at least, then, the regime must be removed in order to unleash moderation and democracy. - The threat assessment. As long as Saddam Hussein stayed in power, he would become a bigger danger to everyone, especially by developing Weapons of Mass Destruction. - Timing: The administration mistakenly believed that Saddam was on the verge of getting Weapons of Mass Destruction and getting itself into a position where it would lose credibility if it did not go to war, it argued that immediate action was necessary. - Pessimism about allies: Precisely because the U.S. government doubted the will of its allies, it assumed that sanctions on Iraq would steadily dwindle and Saddam would soon be free to do as he liked. Here is where the Europeans who opposed the war had a big responsibility in making it happen. Thus, the war had multiple causes: to transform the Middle East, reduce the threat to the region and America, and defeat terrorism and anti-Americanism at its roots. What was wrong with this assessment? As I wrote in my study of U.S.-Iran relations twenty-five years ago, the road to Hell is often paved with good intentions. The administration ignored serious problems in its analysis. Briefly: - The level of opposition in America and Europe was so high that this in itself became a factor. - While the Arab world will eventually be ready for democracy, the difficulty and time span for such a development was seriously underestimated. - Equally underestimated was the power of nationalism, Islamism, and ethnic conflict to shape reactions in Iraq and the region. The war's supporters were too quick to adapt the idea that Middle Eastern politicians would be rational actors and the masses would follow their material interests. - Intelligence failures about Weapons of Mass Destruction. - Poor planning after the fighting, especially dismantling the Iraqi army, slowness in sending relief supplies, and constant changes of strategy. So was the war a mistake or a triumph? That question can only be answered for Bush and his colleagues by the U.S. election, and for the situation as a whole in a year or two when Iraq's future course becomes clearer. At present, a very brief summary looks like this: Positive side: radical states intimidated; Saddam gone; Iraqis are freed from horrible repression. Negative side: terrorist forces revitalized by a new cause; violence in Iraq; deep split in U.S.-Europe relations. Either side can argue just these and other points showing the war was good or bad but the result is quite mixed. The ultimate issues that will determine everything remain: - Will Iraq be better off for the war's having happened or will it dissolve into violence and even civil war? - Will Iraq be the kind of state inspiring others to struggle for democracy or one more proof that this road leads to chaos, justifying the status quo in the Arab world? - Will Bush's general approach be vindicated or so totally delegitimized as to lead to new Western policies that repeat all the older mistakes? Professor Barry Rubin is the Director of The Global Research in International Affairs Center (GLORIA) and Editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal (MERIA) and Editor of Turkish Studies. To Go To Top

WE TRIED APPEASEMENT ONCE BEFORE Posted by IsrAlert, March 25, 2004.

This was written by Mark Steyn and appeared March 23, 2004 as an Opinion piece in the Daily Telegraph ( &sSheet=/opinion/2004/03/23/ixopinion.html) A neighbour of mine refuses to let her boy play with "militaristic" toys. So when a friend gave the l'il tyke a plastic sword and shield, mom mulled it over and then took away the former and allowed him to keep the latter. And for a while, on my drive down to town, I'd pass Junior in the yard playing with his shield, mastering the art of cowering more effectively against unseen blows. That's how the "peace" crowd thinks the West should fight terrorism: eschew the sword, but keep the shield if you absolutely have to. Yesterday, The Telegraph reported that two Greenpeace activists had climbed up to Big Ben to protest at the Iraq war. Don't ask me why Greenpeace is opposed to the liberation of Iraq. It's been marvellous for the eco-system: the marshlands of southern Iraq are now being restored after decades of Saddamite devastation. Nevertheless, the Greenpeace guys shinned up St Stephen's Tower, just as a couple of months before that a Mirror reporter blagged his way into a servants' gig at Buckingham Palace just in time for the Bush visit, and a couple of months before that an Osama lookalike gatecrashed Prince William's party. History repeats itself: farce, farce, farce, but sooner or later tragedy is bound to kick in. The inability of the state to secure even the three highest-profile targets in the realm - the Queen, her heir, her Parliament - should remind us that a defensive war against terrorism will ensure terrorism. Tony Blair understands that. Few other European leaders do. For more than a week now, American friends have asked me why 3/11 wasn't 9/11. I think it comes down to those two words you find on Holocaust memorials all over Europe: "Never again." Fine-sounding, but claptrap. The never-again scenario comes round again every year. This very minute in North Korea there are entire families interned in concentration camps. Concentration camps with gas chambers. Think Kim Jong-Il's worried that the civilised world might mean something by those two words? Ha-ha. How did a pledge to the memory of the dead decay into hollow moral preening? When an American Jew stands at the gates of a former concentration camp and sees the inscription "Never again", he assumes it's a commitment never again to tolerate genocide. Alain Finkielkraut, a French thinker, says that those two words to a European mean this: never again the fuhrers and duces who enabled such genocide. "Never again power politics. Never again nationalism. Never again Auschwitz" - a slightly different set of priorities. And over the years a revulsion against any kind of "power politics" has come to trump whatever revulsion post-Auschwitz Europe might feel about mass murder. That's why the EU let hundreds of thousands of Bosnians and Croats die on its borders until the Americans were permitted to step in. That's why the fact that thousands of Iraqis are no longer being murdered by their government is trivial when weighed against the use of Anglo-American military force required to effect their freedom. "Never again" has evolved to mean precisely the kind of passivity that enabled the Holocaust first time round. "Neville again" would be a better slogan. Among all the foolish apologists for the murderers of Madrid, it was the Reverend Mark Beach who happened to catch my eye. Preaching at St Andrew's Church, Rugby, nine days ago, Mr Beach said: "The people of Madrid are reaping the fruits of our intolerance towards those of different races and religions. The war in Iraq was never going to solve the problems of that region but instead inflamed Arab people all over the world to new heights of anger towards the West." God Almighty. The sooner the Potemkin Church of England is sold for scrap the better. Almost every word of Mr Beach's is false; there are mosques in the English Midlands, but no Christian churches in Saudi Arabia. Its official tourism commission lists among prohibited categories of visitor "Jewish persons". It is precisely because the West is so open to different races that Islamist bombers can blend in on Madrid commuter trains, and the Tube and the Paris Metro, in a way that, say, a team of blond, blue-eyed Aryan bombers certainly couldn't in Damascus. The war in Iraq has actually solved quite a few problems in that region, and Arab people all over the world aren't inflamed - the allegedly seething Arab street is as somnolent as ever. In 2002 and 2003, I took a couple of two-legged, mini fact-finding trips - first to western Europe, then on to the Middle East. And both times I was struck by the way the Muslims of Araby were far less inflamed than those in the alienated immigrant ghettoes around Paris and Amsterdam. Life in the West, exposure to the self-loathing platitudes of Anglican clerics, these are the sort of things that seem to inflame Muslims. Many of the wackiest Islamists from Richard Reid to Zacarias Moussaoui to Metin Kaplan are products of the enervated Europe symbolised by the Rev Mark Beach. A century ago, in The Riddle Of The Sands, the first great English spy novel, Erskine Childers has his yachtsman, Davies, try to persuade the Foreign Office wallah Carruthers to take seriously the possibility of German naval marauders in the Fresian Islands: "Follow the parallel of a war on land. People your mountains with a daring and resourceful race, who possess an intimate knowledge of every track and bridlepath, who operate in small bands, travel light, and move rapidly. See what an immense advantage such guerrillas possess over an enemy which clings to beaten tracks, moves in large bodies, slowly, and does not 'know the country'." Davies wants Carruthers to apply the old principles to new forms of warfare. The Islamists are doing that. Their most effective guerrillas aren't in the Hindu Kush, where it is the work of moments to drop a daisycutter on the mighty Pashtun warrior. They're travelling light on the bridle-paths of Europe - the small cells that operate in the nooks and crannies of a free society, while politicians cling to the beaten tracks - old ideas, multicultural pieties and a general hope that things will turn out for the best. That's the drawback of sticking with the "Neville again" routine: appeasement is even less effective when the faraway country of which you know little is your own. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com To Go To Top

HISTORY IS WATCHING Posted by Boris Celser, March 25, 2004.

This was written by Jack Engelhard, author of the novel "Indecent Proposal" and the award-winning memoir "Escape From Mount Moriah". His novel "The Days of the Bitter End" is being prepared for movie production. This article appeared yesterday in Arutz-Sheva and is archived at(http://www.IsraelNN.com/author.php?id=18) They were on the wrong side of history, and today, and forever, their names live in infamy - Hitler, Goebbels, Mengele, Eichmann, and thousands, even millions more like them. You can run, but you can't hide, as per Joe Louis. Everything (to borrow a line from Pirke Avos) is recorded in a Book. Today, your words and deeds are also recorded by the memory of the Internet and television. If you are a believer, then say this: God is watching. If you are something otherwise, then say this: History is watching. Those who support and champion murderers are murderers themselves, and they will be recorded and remembered as such. The Book of History is being written for Kofi Annan, who runs the most (food for oil, anyone?) corrupt organization in the world, otherwise known as the United Nations. Kofi, who never met a Palestinian Arab terrorist he didn't like, was quick to condemn the very lawful and very justified assassination of Yassin, a mass murderer second only to Yasser (yes, sir, that's Kofi's baby) Arafat. History is watching the Human Stain, better known as the European Union, which came quickly out of the gate to bash Israel for Israel's first sign of a pulse. Here's Javier Solana, EU's foreign policy chief: "These types of actions do not contribute to dialogue and peace in the region. The actions of today are bad news for the peace process." Peace process, Mr. Solana? What rock have you been hiding under? Bad news? Sit down one day and I'll tell you bad news, beginning with (the gratefully dead) Yassin's thugs packing a 10-year-old kid, Abdullah Koran, with explosives to carry the world's daily dose of 9/11 into Israel. Canada, of dubious moral weight when it comes to the Jews and thus to Israel, has now spoken up against Israel's action. And here's a country that's been remembered in a book by Canadian authors Irving Abella and Harold Troper titled None Is Too Many. Where did that phrase come from? From a high Canadian official who was responding to this question: How many Jews fleeing Hitler will Canada accept? This was his answer: "None is too many." Previously, Prime Minister MacKenzie King spoke of Hitler as being "sweet" and perhaps "a savior of the world." This, too, is one for the books. As is the U.S. State Department, which is "troubled". But the U.S. State Department has always been so "troubled" by Israel that its "troubles" fill volumes, entire libraries. Perhaps, and this is just a guess, Israel had a right to be "troubled" by the man who invented suicide bombing, the most depraved form of warfare in the history of what we laughingly call Civilization. The Book of History has already recorded France, which handed over 72,000 Jews for Nazi extermination. But here's a new page, written by France's Foreign Minister, Dominique de Villepin: "France condemns the action against Sheik Yassin. Such acts only fuel the cycle of violence." Yes, Dominique, just like the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising was a cycle of violence, and just like a knock on the door by a gendarme was a cycle of violence back in the 1940s. Those tens of thousands rioting in the streets of Gaza City may be Men With No Names to us, but Someone is watching and recording their four-year orgy of bloodshed. (Don't these people have jobs?) History is watching Egypt, whose leader, Hosni Mubarak, has called off "peace efforts" due to Israel's chutzpah in taking out Mr. Killing Field. Those Gaza tunnels that keep feeding Jihad bombs from out of Egypt to the likes of the still-in-business Yasser Arafat and the out-of-business Ahmed Yassin - is that what we mean these days by "peace efforts", Mr. Mubarak? Hanan Ashrawi is already in the books for her support of mass murder, as is her fellow traveler Abdul Rahman, so there isn't much more to add. Their deeds and actions are recorded for posterity alongside Haman's. But TV keeps coming up with new Talking Heads to fill the empty pages of history. Here's one of those new ones, and a young one at that, whose total ignorance is jaw-dropping. She goes by the name Randi Rhodes and here she is on CNN explaining to the world that all of terrorism, here, there, and everywhere, stems from Israel. It's Israel's fault. Young Ms. Rhodes is a talk show host for an up-and-coming "liberal" program. Enough said about Ms. Rhodes and the New Liberals, whose script is bypassing the Book and heading straight for TV movie-of-the-week under the title "Dumb and Dumber Part Two". In the aftermath, virtually all of our commentators had the same thought and the same fear. Will Arafat be next? From the mouth of (Yul Brynner's) Pharaoh: So let it be written, so let it be done. To Go To Top

THE ABUSE OF INNOCENCE Posted by David Frankfurter, March 25, 2004.

The use of children in the Arafat war of terror has reached an all time low. It would seem that a 14 year old, a little "slow" in his thinking and not well accepted by his peers, was so impressed by his teacher's description of the virgins awaiting him in heaven and the NIS 100 (about $US 22) that would be given to his mother, that he agreed to don a suicide belt and attempt to kill some Israelis. Alert soldiers managed to prevent a disaster. The actual arrest was broadcast on Israeli television. It was heart-wrenching to see the boy cut the suicide belt off himself with scissors that the soldiers sent him using a small robot. It was pathetic seeing how afraid he was that he would actually be killed. It was infuriating to think of the callous exploitation. This case comes hot on the heels of an attempt to use an 11 year old, who earned a living as a porter, helping the elderly and infirm carry parcels through a checkpoint, to carry a bomb past the guards. And when he was discovered, the brave terrorists tried to blow him and the surrounding soldiers up from their hiding place, using the cellular telphone they had attached to the bomb. This callous use of children is not new. The idea of using children as 'publicity suicide' can be traced directly to Arafat. When he urges children to "Jihad, Jihad" he holds up the ideal of a young Palestinian Arab poster boy killed while threatening Israeli troops with a sling-shot. Terrorists have been frequently photographed firing from a position surrounded by children. When the Israelis return fire, and children are killed, this helps the Palestinian Arab propaganda machine. Terrorists hide out and put their weapons factories in residential areas. Children have been sent on suicide missions, attempting to infiltrate Israeli settlements, throwing pipe-bombs...the list is as long as it is sad. For a short while there was a respite. During Abu Mazen's short Prime-Ministerial stint, he issued orders to stop using children in this way - and it stopped. Arafat continued the incitement, but in the field the wishes of the Prime Minister were honoured. Abu Mazen had long criticised the use of children in this callous manner. He complained in the Arab press (www.idf.il/english/announcements/2002/june/mazen.stm) - citing 40 cases of children having their arms blown off trying to throw pipe-bombs at Jewish targets - in exchange for $1. Nor is this phenomenon unique to the Palestinian Arabs. Last April, the Telegraph (www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml? xml=/news/2003/04/13/wbomb13.xml) reported of suicide belts being found in a Baghdad classroom. Sadly, human rights organisations are so busy focusing on the one and only world evil - Israel - that these basic abuses of human rights go unnoticed. And when the epithet of 'international law' is bandied around, no-one thinks of the Geneva conventions which protect civilians by demanding that combatants wear uniforms and keep the battle away from children and civilians. In fact, a joint statement by Physicians for Human Rights - Israel and Defence for Children International (Palestinian Section) and the Gaza Community Mental Health Program decried the use of children in the conflict... and then went on to focus on the breach of the child's rights perpetrated by the IDF and Israeli media in publishing details of the child who was used to smuggle bombs through the checkpoint. An interesting set of priorities. Given that nothing to date has shocked the world into forcing the Palestinian Arabs to keep children out of the conflict, wouldn't one expect them to encourage the only thing which seems to have prompted a reaction? I urge you to turn to human rights organisations, and ask them to stop blindly demonizing Israel, and start to focus on the rights of children - both Jewish and Arab - to grow up in an environment free from fear of the next terrorist attack, and free from the hate indoctrination that is prolonging this conflict. David Frankfurter is a writer on the Middle East conflict. He sends "Letters from Israel" emails to subscribers. Contact him at David.Frankfurter@iname.com To Go To Top

JOE MCCAIN ON JEWS Posted by Israel Ben-Ami, March 25, 2004.

The following is an essay written for a Jewish women's organizatiion by Joe McCain, brother of Senator John McCain. Senator John There is a lot of worry popping up in the media just now - "Can Israel Survive?" Don't worry about it. It relates to something that Palestinians, the Arabs, and perhaps most Americans don't realize - the Jews are never going quietly again. Never. And if the world doesn't come to understand that, then millions of Arabs are going to die. It's as simple as that. Throughout the history of the world, the most abused, kicked-around race of people have been the Jews. Not just during the holocaust of World War II, but for thousands of years. They have truly been "The Chosen People" in a terrible and tragic sense. The Bible story of Egypt's enslavement of the Jews is not just a story, it is history, if festooned with theological legend and heroic epics. In 70 A.D. the Romans, which had for a long time tolerated the Jews - even admired them as 'superior' to other vassals - tired of their truculent demands for independence and decided on an early "Solution" to the Jewish problem. Jerusalem was sacked and reduced to near rubble, Jewish resistance was pursued and crushed by the implacable Roman War Machine - see'Masada'. And thus began The Diaspora, the dispersal of Jews throughout the rest of the world. Their homeland destroyed, their culture crushed, they looked desperately for the few niches in a hostile world where they could be safe. That safety was fragile, and often subject to the whims of moody hosts. The words 'pogrom', 'ghetto', and 'anti-Semitism' come from this treatment of the first mono-theistic people. Throughout Europe, changing times meant sometimes tolerance, sometimes even warmth for the Jews, but eventually it meant hostility, then malevolence. There is not a country in Europe or Western Asia that at one time or another has not decided to lash out against the children of Moses, sometimes by whim, sometimes by manipulation. Winston Churchill calls Edward I one of England's very greatest kings. It was under his rule in the late 1200's that Wales and Cornwall were hammered into the British crown, and Scotland and Ireland were invaded and occupied. He was also the first European monarch to set up a really effective administrative bureaucracy, surveyed and censused his kingdom, established laws and political divisions. But he also embraced the Jews. Actually Edward didn't embrace Jews so much as he embraced their money. For the English Jews had acquired wealth - understandable, because this people that could not own land or office, could not join most of the trades and professions, soon found out that money was a very good thing to accumulate. Much harder to take away than land or a store, was a hidden sock of gold and silver coins. Ever resourceful, Edward found a way - he borrowed money from the Jews to finance imperial ambitions in Europe, especially France. The loans were almost certainly not made gladly, but how do you refuse your King? Especially when he is 'Edward the Hammer'. Then, rather than pay back the debt, Edward simply expelled the Jews. Edward was especially inventive - he did this twice. After a time, he invited the Jews back to their English homeland, borrowed more money, then expelled them again. Most people do not know that Spain was one of the early entrants into The Renaissance. People from all over the world came to Spain in the late medieval period. All were welcome - Arabs, Jews, other Europeans. The University of Salamanca was one of the great centers of learning in the world - scholars of all nations, all fields came to Salamanca to share their knowledge and their ideas. But in 1492, Ferdinand and Isabella, having driven the last of Moors from the Spanish Shield, were persuaded by the righteous fundamentalists of the time to announce "The Act of Purification". A series of steps were taken in which all Jews and Arabs and other non-Christians were expelled from the country, or would face the tools and the torches of The Inquisition. From this 'cleansing' come the Sephardic Jews - as opposed to the Ashkenazis of Eastern Europe. In Eastern Europe, the sporadic violence and brutality against Jews are common knowledge. 'Fiddler' without the music and the folksy humor. At times of fury, no accommodation by the Jew was good enough, no profile low enough, no village poor enough or distant enough. From these come the near-steady flow of Jews to the United States. And despite the disdain of the Jews by most 'American' Americans, they came to grab the American Dream with both hands, and contributed everything from new ideas of enterprise in retail and entertainment to becoming some of our finest physicians and lawyers. The modern United States, in spite of itself, IS The United States in part because of its Jewish blood. Then the Nazi Holocaust - the corralling, sorting, orderly eradication of millions of the people of Moses. Not something that other realms in other times didn't try to do, by the way, the Germans were just more organized and had better murder technology. I stood in the center of Dachau for an entire day, about 15 years ago, trying to comprehend how this could have happened. I had gone there on a side trip from Munich, vaguely curious about this Dachau. I soon became engulfed in the enormity of what had occurred there nestled in this middle and working class neighborhood. How could human beings do this to other human beings, hear their cries, their pleas, their terror, their pain, and continue without apparently even wincing? I no longer wonder. At some times, some places, ANY sect of the human race is capable of horrors against their fellow man, whether a member of the Waffen SS, a Serbian sniper, a Turkish policeman in 1920's Armenia, a Mississippi Klansman. Because even in the United States not all was a Rose Garden. For a long time Jews had quotas in our universities and graduate schools. Only so many Jews could be in a medical or law school at one time. Jews were disparaged widely. I remember as a kid Jewish jokes told without a wince - "Why do Jews have such big noses?" Well, now the Jews have a homeland again. A place that is theirs. And that's the point. It doesn't matter how many times the United States and European powers try to rein in Israel, if it comes down to survival of its nation, its people, they will fight like no lioness has ever fought to save her cubs. They will fight with a ferocity, a determination, and a skill, that will astound us. And many will die, mostly their attackers, I believe. If there were a macabre historical betting parlor, my money would be on the Israelis to be standing at the end. As we killed the kamikazes and the Wehrmacht soldaten of World War II, so will the Israelis kill their suicidal attackers, until there are not enough to torment them. The irony goes unnoticed - while we are hammering away to punish those who brought the horrors of last September here, we restrain the Israelis from the same retaliation. Not the same thing, of course - We are We, They are They. While we mourn and seethe at September 11th, we don't notice that Israel has a September 11th sometimes every day. We may not notice, but it doesn't make any difference. And it doesn't make any difference whether you are pro-Israeli or you think Israel is the bully of the Middle East. If it comes to where a new holocaust looms - with or without the concurrence of the United States and Europe - Israel will lash out without pause or restraint at those who would try to annihilate their country. The Jews will not go quietly again. To Go To Top

WHEN IS THE RIGHT  TIME TO KILL TERRORIST LEADERS? Posted by Steven Plaut, March 25, 2004.

The UN Human Rights Commission, which has never condemned the Palestinian nazis for their mass murders and suicide bombing atrocities, including when they mass murder children, has now taken a courageous decision and has condemned Israel for human rights violations because it assassinated the genocidal Sheikh Yassin with the blood of hundres of Israeli civilians on his paws. The usual apologists for terrorists and the anti-Israel mob are bellowing that even if killing the Nazi sheikh was ok, NOW was the wrong time to do so. WHy? Well, every time Israel actually uses its army half-heartedly against the nazis, the Left and the Bash-Israel mob insists that the Arab world was just on the brink of making peace with Israel but that Israel's armed action messed things up. I cannot recall a single case where Israel used armed might where the response was not the same. We were almost there, just on the brink of peace breaking out, but Israeli trigger-happy violence messed things up. Well, here is a nice piece. Its point is that there is NEVER a WRONG time to kill nazi terrorists: It was written by Michael Freund who served as Deputy Director of Communications and Policy Planning in the Prime Minister's Office under former premier Binyamin Netanyahu. It is entitled "The Long Sword of Jewish Justice" and it appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post (http://www.jpost.com). The world was made a whole lot safer this past Monday, when Israeli helicopters eliminated Hamas arch-terrorist Sheikh Ahmed Yassin in a pre-dawn strike in Gaza. The removal of this villain, whose warped ideology brought about the deaths of hundreds of innocents, was a heroic and just act, one that should be celebrated as an important milestone in the global war on terror. Despite his innocent demeanor, Yassin was a monster, an evil man hell-bent on sowing death and destruction. As head of Hamas, he spent the past decade disseminating hate, dispatching suicide bombers and targeting innocent Israeli men, women and children. Don't fall prey to the media's attempts to label him a "spiritual leader". There is nothing spiritual about a mass murderer of Jews and there is nothing holy about someone who sent Palestinian children to detonate themselves as human bombs. Yassin was a menace both to Israel and the West. Under his tutelage, Hamas carried out some 425 terror attacks in just the past three and a half years, killing 377 Israelis and injuring over 2,000 others. He brazenly declared that "all Israeli people are targets" (The Washington Times, June 12, 2003), and insisted that, "All of Israel, Tel Aviv included, is occupied Palestine. So we're not actually targeting civilians" (St. Petersburg Times, August 11, 2001). Yassin rejected Israel's right to exist and repeatedly called for the destruction of the Jewish state. Just three months ago, in a December 2003 interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel, he denied the possibility of co-existence, telling his interviewer that if the Jews insisted on having a country of their own, "They could set up a state in Europe". Less than two years ago, shortly after Palestinian terrorists carried out a bomb attack at the Hebrew University, Yassin told the Italian daily Corriere Della Sera that, "Israel was born in violence and it will die in violence. The Jews have no right to the land of Palestine". Yassin was an equal-opportunity hater, directing his venom not only at Israel, but also at the West. Last year, after the US invasion of Iraq had begun, he repeatedly called on the Iraqi people to carry out suicide attacks against British and American forces. At a March 28, 2003 rally in Gaza, Yassin urged Iraqis to "continue their jihad, and to use all possible means to achieve victory against the British and American enemies". Though they would never admit it, the Palestinians themselves will also benefit from Yassin's demise, if only because he can no longer spread his poisonous and lethal philosophy among them. But despite his horrific record, much of the world was quick to condemn the killing of Yassin, with everyone from UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw to Kofi Annan to the Japanese government coming down hard on Israel for having the nerve to defend itself. But let them say what they wish, because it matters not one whit. The fact is that we can all take pride in this bold demonstration of sovereign Jewish power, in the ability of the State of Israel to hunt down and punish those who would follow in Hitler's footsteps. Israel's critics must finally realize that the era of pogroms is over, that the Jew will no longer cower in fear from his adversaries, or seek protection from others. We have returned to the world stage, we have every right to defend ourselves, and that is what we shall do. The long arm of Jewish justice took care of Sheikh Yassin, and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon deserves nothing but praise for having the courage and the good sense to do so. The elimination of Sheikh Yassin is on par with the capture of Saddam Hussein and the removal of Taliban leader Mullah Omar from power. It marks a turning point in the war on terror, the purging of yet another fanatical chieftain from the world stage. And it also signifies Israel's determination, like that of Washington, to confront its enemies and take the war to their own backyards, if need be. Let the cynics and naysayers grumble all they wish. There is never a "wrong" time to eliminate a killer of Jews, or to strike a forceful blow against terrorist thugs. Whatever the diplomatic or security fallout might be, Israel has done the right thing, at the right time, and to the right person. On Monday morning, shortly after Yassin was killed, his associate Ismail Haniyeh confirmed his death, telling reporters that he had always hoped to die as a "martyr". "This is the moment Sheikh Yassin dreamed about", he said. This is one case, at least, where we can all be grateful that the Hamas leader's dream has finally come true, courtesy of the IDF. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. To Go To Top

EMERGENCY HELP FOR THE ARBEL FAMILY Posted by Moshe Feiglin, March 25, 2004.

Dear Friends, Pesach is rapidly approaching and families are busy cleaning and preparing for the holiday. Although this is a difficult task, MOST families do it with joy and anticipation since a WONDERFUL holiday is headed their way. I emphasize the word "MOST" since SOME families cannot experience this happiness. One of those families lives in the beautiful Israeli town called, Talmon. Their name is Arbel. On January 13th (the 20th of Tevet) - a little over 2 months ago - Ro'ee Arbel was brutally murdered by followers of Yassir Arafat and Sheikh Yassin. He was just 5 minutes from home... Ro'ee was a man of Torah and practice. He graduated a Hesder Yeshiva, was an IDF combat officer and had a B.S. degree in Engineering. Two months before his murder, his lovely wife Hagit (may she live to 120) gave birth to TRIPLETS (2 girls and a boy)! This was in addition to 2 children they already had. The triplets were born prematurely and have been watched carefully by doctors. Recently, the girls went home and thank G-d, Tal and Emunah are doing fine. The boy, named after his father - Chananel Ro'ee - is suffering from a medical problem in his digestive system and is scheduled to undergo a complex surgery very soon. Ro'ee's parents, David and Nechama, live in Kedumim and have been active in the "settlement" movement for 28 years! What a tragedy that BUILDERS of the land had to become BURIERS. Ro'ee was buried close to Talmon in the cemetery of Dolev. Every year, Manhigut Yehudit decides on ONE family to help before Pesach. Unfortunately, there are MANY horrific stories and SCORES of people that need assistance and we hope and pray that Hashem will help each and every one of them. Nevertheless, it has become our "custom" to find ONE family that we can directly impact with some serious assistance. Last year, we helped Livnat Ozeri whose husband, Nati, was brutally murdered on Tu B'Shevat and whose home on "Hilltop 26" was subsequently destroyed by the Sharon-Netanyahu government. This year we would very much like to help Hagit Arbel and her 5 children. Please mail your tax deductible checks ASAP to: Manhigut Yehudit PO Box 241 Cedarhurst, NY 11516-0241 IMPORTANT: Please write "ARBEL" in the check's memo section or on a note in the envelope. We don't want the money mixed up with anything else. Thank you. With love of Israel, Moshe Feiglin Shmuel Sackett Michael Fuah Motti Karpel and the entire Manhigut Yehudit team Moshe Feiglin established Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership), a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Feiglin has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To Go To Top

TERRORISM TO BE FOUGHT OR ENCOURAGED? Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 25, 2004.

The Israeli assassination of Sheikh Yassin has brought out all the phony cliches: "revenge," "moderate" Arabs, "peace process," and "oh but we all oppose terrorism." It is not that the pundits who reiterate these stock phrases are mentally incapable of realizing their falsity, but that these phrases are a convenient to lull the drive for survival in my fellow Jews, many of whom fail to realize their falsity. A country cannot proclaim itself a guardian of civilization while simultaneously appeasing the enemies of civilization. France considers itself the standard-bearer of civilization and the upholder of international political morality. It declares its opposition to terrorism. It also opposes Israeli counter-terrorism. What a contradiction! One cannot logically oppose both terrorism, which is the deliberate attacking of civilians, and simultaneously oppose counter-terrorism, which is the liquidating of terrorists such as Yassin, whose hunting down is a requirement of international law. French officials offer an ostensibly practical reason for opposing that Sheikh's assassination. They claim it hampers the "peace process." The theory of this "peace process" is that peace can be attained by a diplomatic agreement made during a temporary armistice by terrorists, after which, as the Arabs have vowed, the armed struggle would resume. The agreement would be for the Jews to give up their strong claims to Yesha, the heart of the Jewish homeland, and for the Arabs, to be granted their weak claims to Yesha. Since the Arabs claim the whole area, including Israel, a rational and honest person would not consider such diplomacy the end of the conflict but its stimulation. It would stimulate conflict by making the Arab aggressors stronger and the Israeli object of that aggression weaker. Should that be so difficult to understand that almost the whole world cannot fathom its logic? Are we to suppose that that terrorist chieftain and his two hundred thousand mourners are part of a peace process? Are we to suppose that his allies in the PLO and the millions of Palestinian Arabs who endorse his goals are part of a peace process? Who among them stands for peace? That is, which of them recognizes the Jewish people's right to keep their own state and to deny Islamic rule over it? None has ever come forward to make that proposition and lived to repeat it. It is difficult to imagine what France means by a peace process, while the Arabs are making war and conducting diplomatic efforts to deprive Israel of the strategic territory needed to resist this war. Is Israel supposed not to defend itself in this war, while the US defends itself in a similar war? Perhaps the real object of opposition to Israeli counter-terrorism is to appease the Arabs regardless of how many Jews are killed as a result. Alternatively, the real objective is to get Jews killed, their sovereignty destroyed, and their voice that may shame the moral pretensions of Europeans and the US, stilled. "Peace process" is a synonym for antisemitism. In order to pretend that there is a peace process, the West makes believe that there are "moderate" Arab states, by which is meant Arabs who believe in peaceful co-existence. Older readers may remember the Soviet profession of "peaceful co-existence." By that the Soviet aggressors meant to give the impression of being what they called themselves, "peace loving." "Peaceful co-existence" was a code phrase for getting the West to allow itself to be whittled down by diplomacy and revolution. The Soviets taught that trick to the Arabs. Egypt and Jordan are called "moderate" Arab states. Moderate? Egypt allows arms smuggling to Gaza. Both use diplomacy and UN membership to champion the terrorists against Israel. They don't want Israel to last. Their people hate Israel and the Jewish people. Government-controlled media and curriculum and the mosques see to that. Some commentators try to dissuade Israel from liquidating terrorist leaders by suggesting that Israel gets no safer from doing so. They cite Arab statements about taking "revenge." Their logic is that if terrorists get away with genocidal attacks, they may drop that successful method. That is not the way of the world. A corollary is that reducing the numbers of trained and organized terrorists would spur more attacks than those fulltime terrorists have already plotted. One would have thought that fewer trained terrorists and reduced infrastructure support would mean less terrorism. The concept of "revenge" is misrepresented. Every time the Arab aggressors suffer casualties, they threaten revenge. It is possible that some more freelancers might be propelled into attempting probably unsuccessful terrorism, motivated by the publicity that the media gave to the sheikh's execution. We need to hold the media accountable for encouraging radicalism. The impression is bruited that if not for the assassination, Hamas and its allies would not strive to murder Israelis. Nonsense, again! The terrorists constantly plot murder. That is what professional terrorists do. Hamas and Fatah constantly build weapons and attack. Few in the media made that clear. Journalism does not enlighten audiences. There is some sentiment for sparing terrorist leaders such as Yassin, because they are the leaders. The logic of that is that some immunity should be given to a mastermind of terrorism. Does a murderer's rise in a hierarchy of evil deserve a privilege from the victims? In the US, criminal lackeys my gain some immunity if they turn in their masterminds. The greater the font of evil, the less privileged it should be. Since Yassin was both skilled and inspiring in his plotting, he above all was a primary target. Terrorist leaders should have to spend more time hiding than conniving. The way for Israel (and the US) to become safer is to liquidate first all competent terrorist leaders and then liquidate or imprison for life all other terrorists. Israel should have executed Yassin when it had captured him long ago, certainly not released him, and at least have assassinated him a few years ago. There is speculation that Arafat is next. Good idea. It would bring some justice to this world. Let us call Arafat "an obstacle to peace." Hundreds of armed followers of Yassin marched in Gaza. They made a legitimate target. Could Israeli jets have strafed them? Those mourners complained about his death, but he lived by the sword. The Islamists can "dish it out but they can't take it." Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

FIGHTING TERROR: DO'S AND DON'TS FOR A SUPERPOWER Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 25, 2004.

This essay is Chapter III. of Ralph Peters' new book, "When Devils Walk the Earth." It is a must-read. 1. Be feared! 2. Identify the type of terrorists you face, and know your enemy as well as you possibly can. Although tactics may be similar, strategies for dealing with practical vs. apocalyptic terrorists can differ widely. Practical terrorists may have legitimate grievances that deserve consideration, although their methods cannot be tolerated. Apocalyptic terrorists, no matter their rhetoric, seek your destruction and must be killed to the last man. The apt metaphor is cancer: you cannot hope for success if you only cut out part of the tumor. For the apocalyptic terrorist, evading your efforts can easily be turned into a public triumph. Our bloodiest successes will create far fewer terrorists and sympathizers than our failures. 3. Do not be afraid to be powerful. Cold War-era gambits of proportionate response and dialog may have some utility in dealing with practical terrorists, but they are counter-productive in dealing with apocalyptic terrorists. Our great strengths are wealth and raw power. When we fail to bring those strengths to bear, we contribute to our own defeat. For a superpower to think small, which has been our habit across the last decade, at least, is self-defeating folly. Our responses to terrorist acts should make the world gasp! 4. Speak bluntly. Euphemisms are interpreted as weakness by our enemies and mislead the American people. Speak of killing terrorists and destroying their organizations. Timid speech leads to timid actions. Explain when necessary, but do not apologize. Expressions of regret are never seen as a mark of decency by terrorists or their supporters, but only as a sign that our will is faltering. Blame the terrorists as the root cause whenever operations have unintended negative consequences. Never go on the rhetorical defensive. 5. Concentrate on winning the propaganda war where it is winnable. Focus on keeping or enhancing the support from allies and well-disposed clients, but do not waste an inordinate amount of effort trying to win unwinnable hearts and minds. Convince hostile populations through victory. 6. Do not be drawn into a public dialog with terrorists, especially not with apocalyptic terrorists. You cannot win. You legitimize the terrorists by addressing them even through a third medium, and their extravagant claims will resound more successfully on their own home ground than anything you can say. Ignore absurd accusations, and never let the enemy's claims slow or sidetrack you. The terrorist wants you to react, and your best means of unbalancing him and his plan is to ignore his accusations. 7. Avoid planning creep. Within our vast bureaucratic system, too many voices compete for attention and innumerable agendas, often selfish and personal - intrude on any attempt to act decisively. Focus on the basic mission: the destruction of the terrorists with all the moral, intellectual and practical rigor you can bring to bear. All other issues, from future nation building, to alliance consensus, to humanitarian concerns are secondary. 8. Maintain resolve. Especially in the Middle East and Central Asia, experts and diplomats will always present you with a multitude of good reasons for doing nothing, or for doing too little (or for doing exactly the wrong thing). Fight as hard as you can within the system to prevent diplomats from gaining influence over the strategic campaign. Although their intentions are often good, our diplomats and their obsolete strategic views are the terrorist's unwitting allies and diplomats are extremely jealous of military success and military authority in their region (where their expertise is never as deep or subtle as they believe it to be). Beyond the problem with our diplomats, the broader forces of bureaucratic entropy are an internal threat. The counter-terrorist campaign must be not only resolute, but constantly self-rejuvenating in ideas, techniques, military and inter-agency combinations, and sheer energy. Old hands must be stimulated constantly by new ideas. 9. When in doubt, hit harder than you think necessary. Success will be forgiven. Even the best-intentioned failure will not. When military force is used against terrorist networks, it should be used with such power that it stuns even our allies. We must get over our cowardice in means. While small-scale raids and other knife point operations are useful against individual targets, broader operations should be overwhelming. Of course, targeting limitations may inhibit some efforts but whenever possible, maximum force should be used in simultaneous operations at the very beginning of a campaign. Do not hesitate to supplement initial target lists with extensive bombing attacks on nothing if they can increase the initial psychological impact. Demonstrate power whenever you can. Show; don't tell! 10. Whenever legal conditions permit, kill terrorists on the spot (do not give them a chance to surrender, if you can help it). Contrary to academic wisdom, the surest way to make a martyr of a terrorist is to capture, convict and imprison him, leading to endless efforts by sympathizers to stage kidnappings, hijacking and other events intended to liberate the imprisoned terrorist(s). This is war, not law enforcement. 11. Never listen to those who warn that ferocity on our part reduces us to the level of the terrorists. That is the argument of the campus, not of the battlefield, and it insults America's service members and the American people. Historically, we have proven, time after time, that we can do a tough, dirty job for our country without any damage to our nation's moral fabric (Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not interfere with American democracy, values or behavior). 12. Spare and protect innocent civilians whenever possible, but: do not let the prospect of civilian casualties interfere with ultimate mission accomplishment. This is a fight to protect the American people, and we must do so whatever the cost, or the price in American lives may be devastating. In a choice between them, and us the choice is always us. 13. Do not allow the terrorists to hide behind religion. Apocalyptic terrorists cite religion as a justification for attacking us; in turn, we cannot let them hide behind religious holidays, taboos, strictures or even sacred terrain. We must establish a consistent reputation for relentless pursuit and destruction of those who kill our citizens. Until we do this, our hesitation will continue to strengthen our enemy's ranks and his resolve. 14. Do not allow third parties to broker a peace, a truce, or any pause in operations. One of the most difficult challenges in fighting terrorism on a global scale is the drag produced by nervous allies. We must be single-minded. The best thing we can do for our allies in the long-term is to be so resolute and so strong that they value their alliance with us all the more. We must recognize the innate strength of our position and stop allowing regional leaders with counterproductive local agendas to subdue or dilute our efforts. 15. Don't flinch. If an operation goes awry and friendly casualties are unexpectedly high, immediately bolster morale and the military's image by striking back swiftly in a manner that inflicts the maximum possible number of casualties on the enemy and his supporters. Hit back as graphically as possible, to impress upon the local and regional players that you weren't badly hurt or deterred in the least. 16. Do not worry about alienating already-hostile populations. - (Added by EAW: "or anti-war senators aspiring to become president of ourq great nation.") 17. Whenever possible, humiliate your enemy in the eyes of his own people. Do not try to use reasonable arguments against him. Shame him publicly, in any way you can. Create doubt where you cannot excite support. Most apocalyptic terrorists, especially, come from cultures of male vanity. Disgrace them at every opportunity. Done successfully, this both degrades them in the eyes of their followers and supporters, and provokes the terrorist to respond, increasing his vulnerability. 18. If the terrorists hide, strike what they hold dear, using clandestine means and, whenever possible, foreign agents to provoke them to break cover and react. Do not be squeamish. Your enemy is not. Subtlety is not superpower strength but the raw power to do that, which is necessary, is our great advantage. We forget that, while the world may happily chide or accuse us-or complain of our inhumanity-no one can stop us if we maintain our strength of will. Much of the world will complain no matter what we do. Hatred of America is the default position of failed individuals and failing states around the world, in every civilization, and there is nothing we can do to change their minds. We refuse to understand how much of humanity will find excuses for evil, so long as the evil strikes those who are more successful than the apologists themselves. This is as true of American academics, whose eagerness to declare our military efforts a failure is unflagging, or European clerics, who still cannot forgive America's magnanimity at the end of World War II, as it is of unemployed Egyptians or Pakistanis. The psychologically marginalized are at least as dangerous as the physically deprived. 19. Do not allow the terrorists sanctuary in any country, at any time, under any circumstances. Counter-terrorist operations must, above all, be relentless. This does not necessarily mean that military operations will be constantly underway sometimes it will be surveillance efforts, or deception plans, or operations by other agencies. But the overall effort must never pause for breath. We must be faster, more resolute, more resourceful and, ultimately, even more uncompromising than our enemies. 20. Never declare victory. Announce successes and milestones. But never give the terrorists a chance to embarrass you after a public pronouncement that the war is over. 21. Impress upon the minds of terrorists and potential terrorists everywhere, and upon the populations and governments inclined to support them, that American retaliation will be powerful and uncompromising. You will never deter fanatics, but you can frighten those who might support, harbor or attempt to use terrorists for their own ends. Our basic task in the world today is to restore a sense of American power, capabilities and resolve. We must be hard, or we will be struck wherever we are soft. It is folly for charity to precede victory. First win, then unclench your fist. 22. Do everything possible to make terrorists and their active supporters live in terror themselves. Turn the tide psychologically and practically. While this will not deter hard-core apocalyptic terrorists, it will dissipate their energies as they try to defend themselves and fear will deter many less-committed supporters of terror. Do not be distracted by the baggage of the term assassination. This is a war. The enemy, whether a hijacker or a financier, violates the laws of war by his refusal to wear a uniform and by purposely targeting civilians. He is by definition a war criminal. On our soil, he is either a spy or a saboteur, and not entitled to the protections of the U.S. Constitution. Those who abet terrorists must grow afraid to turn out the lights to go to sleep. 23. Never accept the consensus of the Washington intelligentsia, which looks backward to past failures, not forward to future successes. 24. In dealing with Islamic apocalyptic terrorists, remember that their most cherished symbols are fewer and far more vulnerable than are the West's. Ultimately, no potential target can be regarded as off-limits when the United States is threatened with mass casualties. Worry less about offending foreign sensibilities and more about protecting Americans. 25. Do not look for answers in recent history, which is still unclear and subject to personal emotion. Begin with the study of the classical world, specifically Rome, which is the nearest model to the present-day United States. Mild with subject peoples, to whom they brought the rule of ethical law, the Romans in their rise and at their apogee were implacable with their enemies. The utter destruction of Carthage brought centuries of local peace, while the later empire's attempts to appease barbarians consistently failed! To Go To Top

DEAR HONORABLE MINISTER GRAHAM Posted by Edmond Silber, March 24, 2004.

This letter was sent to the Minister of foreigner affairs of Canada by an Israeli, following his statement concerning the elimination by Israel of the notorious terrorist leader and founder of Hamas, the sheik Ahmed Yassine. Dear Honourable Minister Graham, Perhaps if you lived in a country where your children have to worry when they go on busses, visit cafes and go on field trips and you pray that they will not be attacked, you might begin to understand what we live with on a daily basis. Yassin is no different than Bin Laden and everyone would admit that they want him killed. The difference is that we here in Israel are condemned for trying to protect ourselves. I am very, very disappointed that in my native country of Canada, that our right to exist and live in peace is being criticized and denied. I am wondering how you could possibly be against killing a terrorist who has taken the lives of well over 400 people and wounded thousands of others. We are a very civilized country and if for one minute we thought that we could seriously negotiate with a terrorist and our right to exist would be accepted and the horrific bombings would end, I can promise you, we would not have resorted to killing Yessin. However, that is not the case and if you lived with the daily bloodshed that we have lived with for 3 1/2 years, perhaps you too would have the opinion of those of us that live here. We have shown restraint long enough. When G-d forbid, the enemy comes into your home, I ask you Minister Graham would you truly show restraint? Tell me Minister Graham if he had been on your daughter's bus and in your son's bedroom and stood there with an explosive belt watching while your wife sat drinking a cup of coffee, would you still be able to look me in the eye and your wife in the eye and say, I think we should invite him to sit down and talk. I am ashamed to admit that my government does not for one minute understand the ravages of terrorism. Mr. Graham, I am a licensed clinical psychologist practicing here in Israel and previously in Canada. I invite you to sit down with me in my office where I work daily with those who have dealt with your friend Mr Yessin's friendly little games. May you never have to face what these people have faced. May you never know what we face here every day of the year. Until you walk in my shoes, Mr. Graham, you do not have the right to condemn a country for protecting itself in any way it has to. With the tremendous rise in anti-Semitism in Canada, terrorism will also be on your doorstep. It is just a matter of time. I am the author of the feature story in this week's Nova Scotia's Coast paper. I include the link and suggest strongly that you read it - http://www.thecoast.ns.ca/flash_index.html Perhaps you will be able to see that I am a very moderate individual. Perhaps you will also be able to see that you have made a grave mistake. Mr. Graham. There is a time for restraint, but this was not it. Dr. Batya L. Ludman Israel To Go To Top

YASSIN WAS OLD AND PARALYZED BUT NOT INNOCENT Posted by David Ben-Ariel, March 24, 2004.

This was written by Jo-ana D'Balcazar and was on Jewish Indy (http://www.jewishindy.com) yesterday. Was Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, as reported by most news, really a poor, old, and paralyzed victim killed by Israelis? Well, Yassin might have been old and paralyzed, but this does not mean he was innocent, because his brain was functioning just fine, and from his wheelchair was a terrorist mastermind and actively planning and giving orders for suicide bombers to attack. What about the innocent Israeli women and children who die almost daily on buses, Pizza parlors, restaurants and markets, blown up by suicide bombers sent by this "old and paralyzed man"? So, it is okay for terrorists to openly kill innocents everywhere but not to kill the killers? For instance, is it okay for Bin Laden to order the killing of innocent victims but not kill him as the leader of the terrorist group of Al-Qaeda? Nevertheless, Yassin being in a wheelchair since age 12 due to a sporting accident, that did not impede him to found the terrorist group of HAMAS in 1987, this openly pursues the destruction of Israel and the killing of all Jews. Was Israel supposed to stay still and waited for its final extermination? Whose idea was to promise these genocide bombers with 80 virgins? Moreover, whose evil idea was to load those bombs with nails and rat poison? Yassin's? Curiously, Yassin never sent his sons to commit genocide bombings; just as many terrorist leaders neither send their own kids. HAMAS has continually stated, including in its own chapter that their goal is the destruction of Israel and the establishment of an Islamic state in all of what is now known as Palestine. HAMAS struggles "for the liberation of all of Palestine" as a personal religious duty incumbent upon every Muslim. Yet, historically, there has never been a Palestinian state, neither a Palestinian culture nor a Palestinian language. Palestine was a political Roman invention from the 2nd century to eradicate Jewish identity. Nevertheless, Romans continued to refer to Jews as Palestinians, as the term alluded to Philistines, Israel's enemy. Certainly, Arab-Palestinians cry Yassin's death. The reason, mainly, is that although Yassin supported homicide bombings to exterminate Israel, he also provided Arab-Palestinians with basic assistance to ease their suffering, a duty supposedly, to be done with the billions of dollars received by the Palestinian Authority. Now, Yassin, is seen as a shahid, a martyr, as he declared many times, including on July 26, 1998 in Al-Quds, "the day in which I will die as a shahid will be the happiest day of my life." Therefore, it is likely that terrorist attacks may increase temporarily. However, Yassin's death also might eventually weaken HAMAS' leadership and their genocide bombings policy. Hence, it is not time for the International Community to stop cheering the shameful killing by genocide bombers of innocent Israelis, and unite to stop this open genocide by effectively fighting against terrorism and its leaders? The problem with the International Community, mainly Europe, and the inconsistency of U.S. Policy, stems from the fact that though the U.S considers HAMAS as a terrorist group, the EU simply divided HAMAS in two groups, the military and political wing. The EU, just as Syria, purposely calls them just "militants," and recognizes only the military wing as a terrorist group not the political wing, while Israel and the U.S. consider them responsible for many terrorist attacks in Israel as they proudly claim responsibility. Therefore, some of the EU citizens might consider Yassin a poor, old, and paralyzed victim. The question is how they consider the hundreds killed and thousands injured by Yassin's orders? Then, one can argue whether the International Community takes pleasure to see the brutal, vicious and continuing cycle of terrorism against Israelis, just as the Romans in ancient times watched many innocents viciously killed at the Coliseum for their own pleasure. How can the International Community protest when Israel or any other democratic country counterattacks terrorism? This silent attitude has only strengthened terrorist validating their philosophy that "genocide bombings" are their effective policy, since the world, including the UN does not even dare to call homicide bombings as criminal acts and punish them as such. On the contrary, instead of taking a united decision against these despicable acts, it condemns Israel for defending its citizens. Is not enough just to verbally condemn these attacks, or to hold vain diplomatic conferences, but to take effective actions. Will France, UK, Germany, or any other European country tolerate genocide bombings in their countries without retaliating? Truth is that freedom and terrorism can never coexist. It has to either be one or the other. The point is that diplomacy in the Arab world is not interpreted in the same way as in the West. For instance, it is not enough to have the signatures of Israelis and Arab-Palestinians leaders on a paper to think they are actually working towards peace. Do you remember last year infamous "Truce Trio" when Hamas and Islamic Jihad agreed to a three-month temporary cease fire after a long list of demands, while Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, an off-shoot of Al-Fatah, agreed separately to a longer truce? Did this work? No. Just as I wrote in previous articles, it was only a period to rearm and plan new strategies. Violence and genocide bombings continued. Point blank is that Israel now learned its lesson. Last year "temporary peace period," by HAMAS, Islamic Jihad, and Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade was not a benevolent proposal but a suicidal pact. HAMAS demanded Israel to stop all targeted killings of Hamas members and the release of all terrorists from jail. But HAMAS never stopped genocide bombings? No. It was a major blow for the eradication of terrorism and a weakness for Israel's security. Israel fell into the terrorist trap, and under that false peace period it allowed HAMAS time to organize more attacks. Terrorism does not accept peace negotiations, many peace plans might come, and as they come they will disappear just as the Oslo Accords and the defunct Roadmap. Now, Israel is constrained to construct the "Security Fence" against terrorism coming from Judea and Samaria. The problem is that HAMAS not only openly calls for genocide bombings, but also takes public responsibility. Incredibly, some still consider Yassin, HAMAS's leader and founder, as a poor, old and innocent paralyzed man. Something is wrong. Are not Hamas leaders considered terrorists for their open declaration to destroy Israel by any means? Yet, in the past, Mihail Wehbe, Syrian ambassador to the UN, was influential for the passing of some Security Council resolutions that have condemned Israelis actions, as "war crimes, massacres or atrocities." Nevertheless, genocide bombings, the leading cause for Israeli reactions are not labeled as "war crimes, massacres or atrocities." Why not the UN, and the so-called International Community, then refer to Yassin's death as Israel's retaliation towards the terrorist leader who was commanding genocide bombings. If Hamas did not send genocide bombers, Israel would not retaliate. The Western world, including Israel, need to understand how most Arabs see and perceive the final settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Fact is that policies requiring Israel to make more concessions should be avoided until real actions from Arab-Palestinians are taken to stop promoting terrorism and teaching hatred towards Israel. This will include the immediate dismantling of the PA, HAMAS, Islamic Jihad, and all terrorist infrastructures in the disputed lands of Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. Moreover, it is no secret that most Arab-Palestinians envision only one state with no Israel, as seen in their geography school books, where Israel does not exist, neither in HAMAS nor the Palestinian Authority official website. The question is whether the International Community and the Arab-Palestinians expect Israel to stand still and wait to be completely exterminated. Facts speak louder than words. Diplomacy is not always the right tool to settle peace with Arabs-Palestinians since it is not in their historical traditions. On March 22, the UN, gave a terse and strong condemnation of Israel for the attack on the Hamas leader. That is fine. However, we cannot find a single instance when the UN or the EU has ever sent this kind of strong condemnation of any Hamas or Hizbollah's brutal terrorist suicide attack, but only bluff diplomatic talk for public opinion. Fact is that the growing violence and the unleashing of homicide bombings indicate that terrorism is gaining momentum and legitimacy, while the U.S. and the West are losing momentum as effective peace negotiators. So, Yassin, as has proved throughout his acts, cannot be considered a poor man only because he was paralyzed, but as the mastermind leader of a terrorist group, who far from being a spiritual leader calling for peace, called for genocide bombings as a Muslim religious duty. Now, it is your turn to answer. Is it okay for the killers to openly kill innocents everywhere but not to kill the killers and become the untouchables? What do you think? Jo-anna D'Balcazar is an M.A. oolitical analyst in International Relations specializing in the Middle East crisis and the European Union. Send comments to: politics2see@hotmail.com. To Go To Top

PALESTINIAN BOY, 14, CAPTURED WEARING EXPLOSIVES VEST Posted by Leo Rennert, March 24, 2004.

This was written by Margot Dudkevitch and is archived at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ ShowFull&cid=1080108195675 The quick thinking of paratroopers at the Hawara checkpoint near Nablus prevented Husam Abdu, 14, who was wearing a belt of explosives, from blowing himself up on Wednesday. "He was fully aware of what he was to do and told us he received NIS 100 and was instructed to blow himself up near soldiers," battalion commander Lt.-Col. Guy told The Jerusalem Post. "The soldiers' quick action not only saved their lives but those of 200 Palestinian men, women, and children who were at the roadblock." The belt contained eight kilograms of explosives, plus bolts and screws. It was later blown up by sappers. "I wouldn't be surprised if the terrorists attempt to dispatch a pregnant woman wearing explosives next," Guy said. "It is hard to believe how low the terrorists are willing to stoop. They have no morals." "Someone forced him to do this," said Khalil Abdu, the boy's uncle in an interview with Channel 1. "They brainwashed him," he added. Asked whether Husam's actions were a result of incitement and martyrdom ideology taught to Palestinian children at West Bank schools, Khalil said: "No, they don't teach them that it is good to kill Israelis and become Shahids. If my hands fall on those who sent him, I swear to God I will kill them." "Husam is a normal boy. He went to school in the morning and didn't return home." Khalil added. It was the second time in 10 days the Fatah Tanzim in Nablus attempted to turn children into human bombs. On March 15, Abdullah Kuran, 11, was asked to carry several bags through the roadblock and hand them to a woman waiting on the other side for NIS 5. Unaware that one of the bags contained a 10-kilo bomb, he was stopped by soldiers who discovered it during a routine inspection. When Kuran's dispatchers saw he had been stopped, they attempted to detonate the bomb by cellphone, but failed. The following day security forces discovered a 10-kilo bomb hidden in a truckload of merchandise at a roadblock on the other side of Nablus. It had been buried among rolls of cloth, sweets, and other goods. "My soldiers spotted Abdu as he pushed through the line of Palestinians waiting to undergo inspection and began racing toward them," said Guy. "He was four or five meters from them. "Noticing that his shirt was padded, they called out to him to halt. They took cover, aimed their weapons at him, and told him to raise his hands. Then they asked him to lift his shirt and saw the belt of explosives. Seeing the soldiers' weapons, he became frightened and told the soldiers he was scared." Soldiers also moved the Palestinians at the roadblock away. Abdu stood in isolation with his hands raised until sappers dispatched a robot carrying scissors to him and instructed him to cut the shoulder straps holding up the belt and to slip it off. He was then told to strip to insure that no additional explosives were strapped to him. He cut off part of it and struggled with the rest. "I don't how to get this off," he said. "It is sad and tragic," said Guy. "He was fully aware of his actions and wanted to blow up, as he was promised 72 virgins in heaven and NIS 100," Guy said. Abdu, who lives in Nablus, told interrogators he was jeered at by his friends who made fun of him, and decided to take advantage of the offer. "Blowing myself up is the only chance I've got to have sex with 72 virgins in the Garden of Eden," Abdu said his handlers had told him. Security officials have not ruled out the possibility that the same cell is responsible for dispatching both would-be bombers and that Hizbullah instructed it to launch the attacks. Officials noted that terrorist organizations are encountering difficulties in launching attacks from the city and are using children, who they believe will be less likely to be inspected. Guy said that following the capture of Kuran, officials studied ways of enhancing security at roadblocks around the city, taking into account that terrorists might again attempt to use children. Thirty-one suicide bombers have been younger than 18, and more than 40 minors who were actively involved in planning suicide bombings have been arrested. Since May 2001, 22 shootings and bombings were perpetrated by minors. Israeli officials expressed shock at the second use of a young boy as a suicide bomber. "No matter how many times Israel learns of the use of children for suicide bombings, it is shocking on each occasion," said Dore Gold, an adviser to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. "Israelis do not understand how Palestinians are willing to sacrifice their own children in order to kill ours." Physicians for Human Rights also condemned the use of children, calling it "illegal and immoral." Abdu's family said the teenager was not affiliated with any group, but went to rallies and identified with whichever group had carried out the latest attack. They said he acted strangely Tuesday, giving out candy to his family and neighbors and refusing to explain why. He got his hair cut in the style his mother, Tamam, likes and told her he would do anything she wants. "You never are like this," she said "What happened?" "I just want you to be happy with me," he responded. He left his house Wednesday morning saying he was going to school, but never arrived there. Hosni Abdu said he was furious with whomever persuaded his brother to become a suicide bomber. "The ones who sent him are stupid, because the army will give him two slaps and he will tell them who sent him," he said. To Go To Top

ISRAEL, DON'T LISTEN TO THE CHIRPING HYPOCRITES Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, March 24, 2004.

When one listens to the chorus of hypocrites condemning Israel for killing Hamas top terrorist Sheikh Ahmed Yassin; one can fully understand the prophecy of Bilam about the Jewish People (Numbers 23:9), "Lo, it is a people that shall dwell alone, and shall not be counted among the nations." Which can also be rendered from the Hebrew, "It is a unique [in their history] people living apart, that doesn't consider [the opinions] of the nations." After listening to the hypocrisy of the nations lately, who can blame Israel for ignoring their criticism? Let's see, immediately or soon thereof, the Vatican condemned killing Yassin, saying that lasting peace can never be reached by a show of force. Very Christian...Now we know why the Vatican didn't forcefully oppose the Nazis in World War II. The European Union issued a statement condemning Israel's "extra-judicial" assassination of Yassin, and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan condemned Israel's assassination of Sheikh Yassin, as against "International Law". So did the French Foreign Ministry who condemning Israel's violation of International Law said, "Violence is never the answer," in a statement from Paris. I didn't know that Yassin's terrorist behavior was law-abiding and legally protected. UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said Israel was "not entitled going for this kind of unlawful killing." He called Israel's action "unjustified" and "very unlikely to achieve its objectives," a comment echoed by several other leading EU officials who gathered for a meeting of EU foreign ministers, to deal with the problem of terror in the post-Spanish train-bombing era. "I don't believe Israel will benefit from the fact that this morning an 80-year-old [he was 68] in a wheelchair was the target of their assassination," Straw said. Notice Straw nicely sidesteps the issue that Yassin was the head of a terrorist group. Straw spoke to reporters about "Israel's paramount need to defend itself" against terrorists but if it wants to have "the full support of the international community, it needs to do so within the boundaries set by international law." Doesn't International Law give a country the "Right to Self-Defense"? The Danish Foreign Minister Per Stig Moeller said the EU has long opposed "extra-judicial killings." He said that reviving the peace process wouldn't be any "easier when you have killings like that going on in Gaza." Equating Israeli self-defense to Hamas' activities he continued, "Terror and violence is not the way ahead." The German Foreign Minister, Joschka Fischer said he was "deeply concerned" about the possible repercussions of Yassin's assassination. I wish he would have been so concerned about the "repercussions" of 425 terrorist attacks Hamas carried out that killed at least 377 Israelis and wounded 2,076 in the last three and a half years, all of which were overseen by Sheikh Yassin. Poland's Foreign Minister, Wlodzimierz Cimoszewicz - whose country will join the EU on May 1 - said he recognizes Israel's right to defend itself, but that this is not the way to do it. "I understand that Israel defends its own country. However the picture of a wheelchair-bound person who was killed with a rocket is probably not the best way of promoting Israeli security." Again the nations are ignoring the fact that this "wheelchair-bound person" was the leader of a bloody terrorist group. Brazil and Chile jumped at the opportunity to condemn Israel for the assassination of Yassin. So did New Zealand, who called it counterproductive to Middle East peace efforts. Japan condemned Israel's "reckless act" of killing Yassin, saying it "cannot be justified". And finally, Malaysia - home of the infamous Dr. Mahathir - said that Yassin's killing is Israeli "state terrorism" that will "only escalate further the cycle of deadly violence." Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman, Hamid-Reza Asefi, condemned the attack, agreeing with Malaysia, that Israel engaged in "state terrorism." Asefi said the assassination, "would unveil the ugly and unpleasant face of them - the Israelis - before all the world's people." Our Arab "peace partners" Egypt and Jordan didn't miss the chance to condemn us either. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, in reaction to the assassination of Yassin, directed his country's representatives not to take part in activities in Israel, that the Knesset and Foreign Ministry planned, to mark 25 years since the signing of the peace agreement with Egypt. While the Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher equated Israel with a "terror organization". And, Jordanian Prime Minister Faisal Al Fayez said this "is another crime that is added to the crimes committed by Israel against the Palestinian people, and forms a flagrant violation of all charters and norms." "We in the government," Al Fayez was quoted as saying, "condemn this ugly crime and affirm that such behavior would increase the cycle of violence and instability in the region, lead to more bloodshed and undermine the opportunities of achieving just and comprehensive peace that the region's peoples seek to achieve." So much for "peace" with our "partners". The Speaker of Kuwait's National Assembly, Jassem Al-Kharafi said, "the Arab and Islamic people would never forget the principles of struggle that Sheikh Yassin ingrained within the Palestinian ranks." Sheikh Yassin was a true Arab hero. Immediately after the killing, even the White House said it was "deeply troubled" by Israel's assassination of Yassin. But later, in US President George Bush's first public response to the assassination of Yassin, backtracking he said, "Israel has the right to defend herself from terror, and, as she does so, I hope she keeps consequences in mind." Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon justified the "targeted killing" of Sheikh Yassin. Yassin's ideology according to Sharon - speaking to the Likud Party parliamentary caucus - "was killing and murdering Jews, wherever they were, and the destruction of the State of Israel." Putting Yassin's assassination into a global context, Sharon said, "The war against terror has not ended and will continue day after day, everywhere. This is a difficult struggle that all the countries of the enlightened world must participate in. It is the natural right of the Jewish people, like that of all nations in the world that love life, to hunt down those who rise to destroy it." So, when the 15-member United Nations Security Council met to debate the killing of Yassin - Arab ambassadors and the United States failed to agree on a statement criticizing Israel - Israel's UN ambassador Danny Gillerman - whose disgust at the world's hypocrisy was palpable - said in a speech to the council, "Not one resolution, not one presidential statement has been adopted by this Council to specifically denounce the deliberate massacre of our innocent civilians." Gillerman said the council was coming to the defense of "a godfather of terrorism...it is the ultimate hypocrisy." He waved a 187-page dossier in exasperation, outlining the suicide bombings carried out by Hamas since September 2000. "These are not just pieces of paper. These are filled with names of real people, whose lives were cut short and extinguished by Sheikh Yassin and the followers of his murderous ideology," Gillerman said. While the UN Security Council couldn't come to an agreement about criticizing Israel, the United National Human Rights Commission did. Approved by 31 votes in favor, 2 against (United States and Australia) and with 18 abstentions (including most nations of the European Union), a resolution condemning the assassination of Sheikh Yassin was passed. The Organization of the Islamic Conference and Zimbabwe - a group of human rights abusers - presented the draft resolution. In the text, the resolution firmly condemned, "the continuous human rights violations in the occupied Palestinian Territories" and in particular "the assassination of the Sheikh Ahmad Yassin," "in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention." The document, which line after line assumes a level of Israeli violence, that lead western nations to abstain, also criticises "the liquidation and assassination of politicians by the Israeli occupation forces in occupied Palestinian territories." Israel, which is not part of the commission, criticized the special meeting, claiming through its Ambassador Yaakov Levy that for the first time in the history of the UN, a meeting was dedicated to the support and glorification of a leader of a terrorist organization. And, if you thought that Yassin's "targeted killing" was an exclusively Israeli-Palestinian issue, think again. An Islamist website - the al-Ansar forum - published a statement claiming to come from an al-Qaeda-linked group - the Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigade - vowing revenge on the United States and its allies over Israel's assassination of the Hamas leader. "We tell Palestinians that Sheikh Yassin's blood was not spilt in vain and call on all legions of Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades to avenge him by attacking the tyrant of the age, America, and its allies," said the statement. The group, which aligns itself to Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network, claimed responsibility for the recent train bombings in Spain. That recent bombing sent all those condemnatory European Foreign Ministers into a tailspin, rushing to discuss how they can better protect their countries. Yet they deny the "right of self-defense" to Israel. I understand that if the Spanish government would have known who was planning the train attack, but wasn't able to arrest the leaders, they wouldn't have "taken them out" as Israel has been doing in it's "targeted killings" of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and other terrorist leaders? Hypocrites...Hypocrites...Hypocrites... And, on the Pakistani-Indian border, Kashmiri Muslim terrorists belonging to the Lashkar e-Taiba - the Army of the Pure - reacted to the news of Yassin's assassination by threatening to attack Indians. The Lashkar e-Taiba communique explained, "It is known Jews and Hindus are two sides of the same coin." I guess they're referring to Israel's warming relations with India. Lashkar e-Taiba, part of the Markaz Dawa Wal-Irshad, is a Wahabbi organization based in Pakistan. The Indian government claims the Lashkar terrorists are responsible for a series of massacres, including August 1-2, 2000 attacks, in which more than 100 people, mostly unarmed civilians, were murdered. So, Jihadist elements worldwide are looking for excuses to attack their perceived enemies. They are using Israel's killing of Yassin to justify their war against the world. More hypocrisy... The hypocrites have made much - in the past - of how Dr. Baruch Goldstein "gunned down" 29 worshippers in a "mosque" - the Cave of Machpela - in Hebron. And now, many Arabs and Muslims complained that Israel hit Sheikh Yassin, as he was leaving his mosque after morning prayers. Yet not long after the assassination, a rocket from Hamas landed near the N’vei Dekalim Synagogue in Gaza. Although there were no injuries, the synagogue was full of community residents attending their afternoon prayer service. The "Palestinian" hypocrites have no problem trying to kill Jews in synagogue while praying. And what about the recent bombing of a synagogue in Turkey, during the Sabbath prayers, by Muslim terrorists, or, the ongoing Arab attacks against synagogues and Jewish community centers in France? Arab and Muslim hypocrites have no compunction in attacking Jewish houses of worship worldwide; there are too many examples to list. The day after the assassination, a poll - which included Israeli Arabs - conducted by Maariv newspaper and "The New Wave" polling service, found that 61% of Israelis support the killing of Yassin. Also, 43% believe Israel should assassinate the Chairman of the Palestinian Authority, Yasser Arafat. But I think, a description of Gazan streets after news of the assassination hit reveals the true nature of the struggle between Israel and the "Palestinians". Cars drove through the streets blaring calls for revenge over loudspeakers. Some played recordings of Sheikh Yassin saying, "We chose this road, and will end with martyrdom or victory." During the funeral for Yassin, many chanted replies to a question. "What is your movement? Hamas. Who is your leader? Yassin. What is your aim? To be killed." I for one, pray, that they receive their wish as Yassin did, of "martyrdom". Israel hurry up and finish the job... Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst and consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations and Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko To Go To Top

ISLAM PLAYS FOR KEEPS Posted by Rachel Neuwirth, March 24, 2004.

This appeared in Arutz-Sheva and is archived at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=3481 President George W. Bush said: "We will bring freedom to others, and we will prevail." Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld suggested that terrorists are being created faster than we can arrest or kill them. One might wonder if they're fighting different wars. Bush suggests "reprogramming" his enemy; Rumsfeld wants to wipe them out. Daniel Pipes, a scholar specializing in militant Islam puts it correctly: "Ending terrorism requires more than targeting terrorists, their leaders, or their organizations. It requires recognizing and defeating the body of ideas known as militant Islam or Islamism. The war cannot be won until politicians and others focus on this ideology (taught in the madrassas, Islamic schools) rather than [just] on terrorism, which is merely its manifestation." (http://danielpipes.org/article/1624) Bush and Rumsfeld are indeed fighting the same war. Rumsfeld suggests the need to use invasive therapy to root out that enemy; Bush wants to "inoculate" Iraqi society with a healthy dose of preventative medicine: democracy. This two-pronged "war-and-peace" plan will not be easy to pull off. The medicine has had unexpected and unwelcome side-effects. The patient has not responded as we had hoped. One of the problems is that the patient did not request our services. Sure, he feels better now, but he still doesn't trust us. Also, the source of his illness is still there. That source is radical Islam. Specifically, Wahabbi Islam. Wahabbism embraces an inflexible doctrine responsible for sowing intolerance, sedition, violence, hatred and "holy" war in the Muslim world and elsewhere. This doctrine feeds radical Islamism. According to Daniel Pipes, ten to fifteen percent of the world's 1.2 billion Muslims adhere to militant Islam. That 10-15% translates into an "army" of 120-180 million... and some feel that Pipes' figures are an understatement. The West preaches freedom and equality - two notions in very short supply in Arab/Muslim culture - and this is why Islamists see the West as their enemy. Islamists have declared war on America, Israel, Spain and, indeed, the entire West. The West was never their enemy, but now we must recognize that radical Islamic fundamentalists are our enemy. Attempts to coddle them in the hope that they will finally "get it" and cut themselves free of Middle Age barbarism are naive. Instead of waiting for them to "get it", it is time to "give it to them". We must unapologetically take steps to counter the rise of the belligerent and ruthless juggernaut of radical Islamism. No efforts should be spared to "encourage" Arab/Muslim leaders to reduce significantly or totally remove the hostility toward the non-Muslim world expressed overtly in their nations' schoolbooks, in their mosques and in their government-controlled media. Target Israel (The Little Satan): Epicenter of Arab/Muslim Intolerance Some might argue that things are getting better vis-a-vis the Arab-Islamic world and Israel. Egypt and the Kingdom of Jordan have both signed peace treaties with Israel. Maybe other Arab states will follow. Is this a realistic expectation or simplistic naivete? Let's take a look at how these "moderates" relate to the "Great Satan's evil child", Israel. Here are some of the "calls for peace" coming from these sought-after "moderate" Arab voices: Saudi Sermon: "Time for Christians and Jews to convert to Islam." (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia TV1 in Arabic, official television station of the Saudi Government; carried on February 27, 2004 at 0945 GMT a live sermon from the mosque in Mecca) Another Saudi sermon: "Jewish paws"; "defeat the usurper Jews." (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia TV2 in Arabic, official television station of the Saudi Government, on February 6, 2004 at 0950 GMT carried a 22-minute live sermon from the mosque in Medina) Jordanian sermon: "O God, destroy your enemies, the Jewish and crusader enemies of Islam." (Amman, Jordan Television Channel 1 in Arabic, official television station of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, on March 5, 2004 at 1002 GMT carried a 17-minute live sermon from Martyr King Abdallah mosque in Amman) Palestinian Authority-supervised sermon: "Palestine [including all of Israel] is an Islamic land that must not be relinquished." (West Bank, Ramallah, Voice of Palestine, official radio station of the Palestinian Authority, on February 6, 2004 at 1000 GMT carried a 24-minute live sermon from Al-Aqsa Mosque) PA-supervised sermon: "Jews, the sons of apes and pigs." (Gaza, Palestine Satellite TV Channel in Arabic, official television station of the Palestinian Authority, carried on March 13, 2004 at 0958 GMT, a live sermon from Zayid Bin-Sultan Mosque in Gaza) Yemeni sermon: "O God, destroy the aggressive Zionists and the tyrant Americans." (Sanaa, Republic of Yemen Television in Arabic, official television station of the Republic of Yemen, on February 6, 2004 at 0926 GMT carried a 21-minute live sermon from the Grand Mosque in Sanaa) Qatar sermon: "aggressor Jews and their wicked Crusader allies." (Doha, Qatar Television Service in Arabic, official television station of the State of Qatar, on 20 February 2004 at 0858 GMT carried a live 60-minute sermon from Umar Bin-Al-Khattab Mosque in Doha) Syrian sermon: "O God, deal with the criminal Zionists and those with them and behind them." (Damascus, Syrian Arab Republic radio in Arabic, official station of the Syrian Government, carried on February 27, 2004 at 1010 GMT, a live sermon from Al-Uthman Mosque in Damascus) So much for waiting for the Arab-Islamic leopard to change its spots. What Israel really needs is for that leopard to change into a totally different animal - one that is not such an aggressive carnivore. Fast-Forward to America: "The Great Satan" The Bush Administration is in "hot pursuit" of Bin Laden and his Al-Qaeda network. America is also trying to create a stable post-Saddam Iraq even as it continues to neutralize both indigenous Arab-Muslim terrorism and terrorism imported from "Greater Arabia." Sadly, yet predictably, America is beginning to feel the utter frustration that Israel has felt for years: full-throttle Arab violence, fueled by an Islamic engine that never quits. There is also some hypocrisy here. While America aggressively fights terrorists, she denies Israel the right to fight her own war against these same savages. This sends a message to the Arab-Islamic terrorists that America's war on terror is not completely sincere, nor is her heart totally in it. For if America were truly committed to "root out terrorists," she would turn the Israel Defense Forces loose on Yasser Arafat and his so-called Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Al-Aqsa Brigades, Hizbullah, Tanzim, PFLP, etc. And if Israel were unable or unwilling to do this, then America would do it for Israel. So why is there a double standard vis-a-vis Israel in the war on terrorism? President Bush should be asking (perhaps demanding) that Prime Minister Sharon launch an all-out attack on the terrorist organizations surrounding Israel. These areas are the breeding grounds that fuel anti-Western sentiment and send jihadists against Israel and against American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. These killers of Jews in Israel are indistinguishable from killers of Americans in Iraq, Afghanistan and downtown New York City. Israel's enemies are America's enemies, and Israel's enemies are also enemies of the shrinking civilized world. Are you listening, Spain? France? Germany? Italy? England? Sweden? One should never dialogue with terrorists. When the bombs went off in Madrid on March 11, the Spanish electorate indeed decided not to dialogue with the Arab-Muslim murderers who perpetrated the act. They simply took the cowardly route of appeasement. The Spanish matador took a goring and the crowd yelled, "Ole!" That same Arab-Islamic bull is on the loose elsewhere. How will others react to setbacks in our war against these savages? Stay tuned. If the Madrid response is any indication, you ain't seen nothing yet. Rachel Neuwirth is a Los Angeles-based analyst on the board of directors of the West Coast Region of the American Jewish Congress and the chairperson of the organization's Middle East committee. To Go To Top

THE ASSASSINATION OF SHEIKH AHMED YASSIN: REPRISE Posted by David Ha'ivri, March 24, 2004.

This article was written by Daniel Pinner and it was distributed by the Jewish Community of France (Communaute-Juive-France-owner@yahoogroupes.fr). Their website address is http://fr.groups.yahoo.com/group/Communaute-Juive-France/ Mi-shenichnas Adar, marbin be-simcha ("when the month of Adar begins, we increase our joy"), say the rabbis. "The death of the wicked is pleasant for them and pleasant for the world", says the Talmud. On the final day of Adar, the assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin gave us all one more reason for rejoicing. - Well, not all of us. The ritual denunciations from Britain, France, the US State Department came in rapid-fire fashion. And, as could only be expected, Shimon Peres condemned the assassination. His opposition was due to his fear of the Arabs, of their reaction, of the world's reaction. Shimon Peres, with the rest of the Israeli left, is already laying the groundwork for blaming Israel - yet again! - for future Arab terrorism. The next terrorist attack that (chas ve-shalom) happens, the Israeli left will blame on this assassination, just as, for years, they blamed every suicide bombing on Baruch Goldstein. Let us define something here: the intifada, terrorism, suicide bombings, murders - these did not start after Baruch Goldstein was murdered. And the next terrorist attack (chas ve-shalom) will not be because of the assassination of Yassin. It will be because terrorism is what Arabs do. The Arab "street" supports terrorists as actively as possible. Yesterday's funeral procession saw over half a million Arabs actively identify with Yassin and the Hamas. No one forced them to attend (as their leftist apologists would have us believe); they went, because that is what they deeply, sincerely believe in. A few Vulcan missiles in the funeral procession would have lowered the number of active terrorists by a considerable amount. It would be hard to argue that there were any "innocent civilians" there: every single one was there because he actively identified with this most vicious terrorist. Yasser Arafat, speaking from the Muqata (governmental building) in Ramallah, condemned the "crime against the Palestinian people". He declined to leave the building, fearing that he might be the next in line. Unlikely - but we can live in hope. But if the IDF really is beginning to assassinate all of its enemies, including even the political leaders - well, maybe now we can understand why Shimon Peres opposed this action? To Go To Top

STOP SAUDI ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALIST SCHOOLS IN US Posted by Jules Hetzner, March 24, 2004.

It is vitally important that you sign the "Stop Saudi Islamic fundamentalist Madrassas in the US" petition to send our representatives in Congress a clear message that Islamic hate education must be stopped in America. WRITE TO JULES HETZNER at w3atn@juno.com FOR A COPY TO SIGN. We the people of the United States of America request that you, our elected officials, put an immediate stop to the Saudi Madrassas in the United States. The Saudi education is based on the teachings of Sheik Muhammad Ibn Abd-al-Wahhab. The cornerstone of education in Saudi Arabia consists of the most pervasive themes in Islam. The book, published by the Saudi Cultural Mission to the U.S., quotes a document published by the Higher Committee for Educational policy which contains 236 principles that explain how students should promote loyalty to Islam by denouncing any system or theory that conflicts with Islamic law. The students are also taught to understand Islam in a correct manner, how to plant and spread Islam throughout the world, and how "to fight spiritually and physically for the sake of Allah", with emphasis on early Islamic glories. HERE'S A SAMPLE FROM 8TH, AND 9TH GRADE BOOKS: Sharh Kitab Eltawhid, 8th grade, published 2001, PG 43, Jews and Christians - Cursed by Allah and Turned into Apes and Pigs- a textbook explains why Jews and Christians were cursed by Allah and turned into apes and pigs. Quoting Surat Al-Maida, verse 60, the lesson explains that Jews and Christians have sinned by accepting polytheism and therefore incurred Allah's wrath. To punish them, Allah has turned them into apes and pigs. Book of Abed, 9th grade, PG 123, A schoolbook for the 9th grade on Hadith introduces a famous narration known by the name, "The Promise of the Stone and the tree." It tells a story about Abu Hurayra, one of the Prophet's companions who quoted the Prophet as saying: "The hour (the day of Judgement) will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and Kill them. A Jew will hide behind a rock or a tree, and the rock or tree will call upon the Muslim: "O Muslim, O slave of Allah! There is a Jew behind me, come and kill him!-except for the gharqad tree, for it is one of the trees of the Jews". The Hadith is accompanied by a number of statements: 1. "It is Allah's wisdom that the struggle between Muslims and Jews shall continue until the Day of Judgment." 2. "The Hadith brings forth the glad tidings about the ultimate victory, with Allah's help, of Muslims over Jews." 3. "The Jews and the Christians are the enemies of the believers. They will not be favorably disposed toward Muslims and it is necessary to be cautious (in dealing with them)." The book offers these questions for class discussion: 1. "Who will be victorious in the day of Judgement?" 2. " With what types of weapons should Muslims arm themselves against the Jews?" 3. "Name four factors leading to the victory of Muslims over their enemies." This is just a small example of what is being taught. We the people of the United States request an immediate stop to Saudi Wahhabi hateful education especially post 911 tragedy where 15 out of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and taught and raised on such education. WRITE TO JULES HETNER AT w3atn@juno.com FOR A COPY OF THE PETITION. PLEASE ASK YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY TO SIGN. It will be presented to our representatives in Congress. To Go To Top

OF WHEELCHAIRS AND TWISTED MINDS Posted by Ellen W. Horowitz, March 24, 2004.

Based on the feedback I received from Jew and Gentile alike to my article, "Responses to Terror", alcohol consumption was up on Monday in reaction to the news that there is one less angel of death in this world. However, there were some rather nasty responses. Below is an example. (Use your imagination and fill in the blanks . Hint: the blank word is one of Hollywood's favorite and starts with a letter that falls between E and G)... Hi Ellen, So you cried from joy when you heard that Ahmmad yaseen had been killed? ______ you and ______ your husband. i hope the palestinians will kill you and your family you ____ing whore. he is an old disabled man. how dare you feel joy by killing an old man. I see why arabs hate you. you are damn blood suckers you damn jews. ---- To be honest, I do get my share of email with liberal sprinklings of the "F" word. That's not what bothers me (bless the inventor of the delete key). It's the disabled old man part that got to me. As always, the media bears an enormous responsibility for portraying the freak sheik as a victim. Note the following headlines from the BBC: Sheikh Yassin: Spiritual Figurehead Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the founder and spiritual leader of Hamas, was a frail quadriplegic who could barely see. His voice was thin and quavering. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/middle_east/2001/ israel_and_the_palestinians/profiles/1695470.stm I received the abusive email, at about the same time that the body of Abu Abbas was on its way to Syria for burial. You remember Abbas? He was the terrorist responsible for shooting and dumping 69-year old wheelchair bound Leon Klinghoffer off a cruise ship off the coast of Egypt in 1985. It seems Abbas was caught in Iraq and died a rather mysterious death in U.S. custody. The body of Abbas was greeted with an entourage of Arabs carrying portraits of the very dead Sheik Yassin. Does anyone else see the wheelchairs of justice spinning here? I've got a distressing picture in my upcoming book of a twisted wheelchair among the devastation in the Park Hotel Passover massacre. We've all seen the aftermath of bombings with the tangled mess of bloodied baby strollers and baby dolls too. How many twisted bodies are coming to terms with their wheelchairs thanks to the Sheikh? Gruesome pictures of the mangled remains of Yassin and his exposed, twisted brains were circulated on the Internet this week. Seems that "what goes around, comes around." Let's put a PC spin on this shall we? Yassin was not disabled, he was physically challenged and rather than rise to the occasion, he sunk to incredible depths of depravity. If the post 9/11 world fears an upsurge in terror because Israel made a decision to defend herself then there is clearly something very wrong with the way in which the wheels of justice and the world is turning. We Jews in Israel are not required to lay down and die for the sins of mankind. On that note, I think it's worth noting that this week "The Passion" was replaced as America's number one box office hit with "Dawn of the Dead". It's a horror flick about a bunch of people holed-up in shopping mall which is plagued with flesh-eating zombies. Western culture's appetite for the hideous knows no bounds and what's appearing on screens across the modern world is indicative of the problem. Long ago, the Western world made oil and consumerism their top priorities. Security concerns, basic morality and America's best ally took the back seat. As a result, the entire "free" world is now, pardon the expression, being f----- by the Arab/Islamic world. This means that a lot of us are virtual slaves and not the free human beings that we thought we were. If European and American interests are being targeted, one can react in two ways. Either a) blame it on Israel and the Jews or b) get your priorities straight. My advice is that we all choose B. The mother of my Italian-American roommate in college also doled out some words of advice as she drove me to the airport when I decided to follow a dream and move to Israel. I would like to pass those words of wisdom onto the current leaders of America and Europe. She said, "You make your bed, you sleep in it." Thanks, Mrs Russillo. Regardless of what the future may bring, I'm so glad that I make my bed here in Israel (as disheveled as it may be). Ellen lives in the Golan Heights, Israel with her husband and six children. She is a painter, columnist for Israelnationalnews,com and co-founder of helpingisrael.com. She can be contacted through her website http://www.artfromzion.com To Go To Top

FEEDING THE CROCODILE Posted by Jock L. Falkson, March 24, 2004.

While Yogi's short article on terrorism was written with the American situation in mind, it's compelling logic applies equally to our own position in Israel. It appeared in Trentino's Magazine (http://www.atrentino.cim) a few days before Israel delivered a well deserved coup de grace to the late and unlamented Yassir Yassin. Having obtained permission to distribute it, here it is for you. "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile - hoping it will eat him last." - Winston Churchill Until the bombings in Madrid on 3/11, I felt reasonably sure that the likelihood of a terror attack in the United States was fairly remote. It seemed reasonable to assume the terrorists believed such an incident would galvanize support for President Bush and in no way improve their circumstances. I am no longer confident in that assessment. The Spanish voters - in "sending a message" to the current government - sent a message that warmed the hearts of terrorists everywhere. Namely that terrorism works. Not just works, but works exceeding well. Not only did it bring a country to its knees, it influenced - no, make that changed - the outcome of a national election. A question often posed in the drug induced rhetoric of the 60's "make love not war" culture was, "Suppose they gave a war and nobody came?" If they can manage to rouse themselves from their LSD flashbacks for a moment; the answer has arrived. That terrorism has grown to the menace it currently is, is the answer to that question. World War III began years before the events of 9/11, and nobody came. Our reluctance to confront it then fostered its growth. The world's divisiveness in confronting it now, insures its survival. Still, in some amazing feat of logic, a majority of Spaniards have concluded the message the terrorists sent to them was their support of the United States in the Iraqi invasion was the reason they were targeted. But, the real and unstated message is - and always has been - oppose us and die. Be certain of one thing, if you live in a country that is not a pure Islamic one, you are on their list. It is only a matter of time. Spain may buy herself a little time through appeasement. But, in the process she has pushed others to the head of the line to feed the crocodile. Every free nation has a responsibility to stand united against terrorism as a method of waging war. There is no cause on God's green earth that can justify it. Spain has failed in her responsibility to her own people and to the world. While world leaders offered their sympathies to Spain in terms of condemnation and outrage, Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso summed it up best. "Terrorism is an absolute evil and before it there can only be one response: absolute determination, without doubts or hesitation." I am fully aware that the terms "absolute" and "evil" are an anathema to the Left; doubt and hesitation a way of life. But, they had better soon come to the realization that this is a fight to the death. Declining the invitation is not an option. The worst result of a terrorist attack is not the immediate loss of life and the grievous injuries to so many, bad they are. The worst result arises out of clinging to the irrational belief that safety may be found in surrender. Jock Falkson is an Israeli writer and translator. He can be reached by email at falkson@barak-online.net. To Go To Top

THE KILLING OF YASSIN - JUSTICE VERSUS PRAGMATISM Posted by Moshe Feiglin, March 24, 2004.

The great controversy surrounding the elimination of this vile person centered around the issue of whether it was worthwhile. Would the execution prevent or intensify the terror? Naturally the Left was opposed to the operation while the Right justified it, but both sides relied on the same criterion - whether it was of value. Although the arguments of the Right are more successful and logical than those of the Left, and even if reality repeatedly demonstrates their correctness, in this controversy the Right is bound to lose because it accepts the basic assumption of the Left as an axiom. The Left does not recognize the concept of justice. There is no such thing as right and wrong. Everything is subjective and the aspiration is only that "despair will be more comfortable". (Chava Alberstein, "Traveling to London"). The spokesmen of the Right who explain that Yassin's death will lead to a reduction of terror are right, but without noticing it they are voluntarily entering the Leftist cage of awareness. The idea that we could impose our existence on the Arabs by force alone, without roots of Jewish justice, was expressed best by Moshe Dayan after the Six Day War: "Sharm a-Sheikh without peace is better than peace without Sharm a-Sheikh". With these words he sowed the seeds of the destruction of Yamit, because basing the policy of the Jewish State on pragmatic considerations only is a two-edge sward. The Yom Kippur War destroyed the myth of Israeli invincibility, and the pragmatism in whose name we held on to Sinai (to force the Arabs to come to terms with us) now led to its being given to Egypt (for that same objective). The killing of Ahmed Yassin was necessary simply because it was just. Since Oslo, Israel has lost its most important weapon - justice. The slogan that in the last decade has led the citizens of Israel to unceasing blood-letting is: "Don't be right - be clever". We have been clever, we have abandoned justice, and we are paying the price every day. Just like nature, morality abhors a vacuum. The Hamas entered the space of justice that we abandoned. Justice is a tremendously powerful weapon, and when the Jews handed it over to "righteous" people such as Yassin and Arafat, the final result was the use of children as living bombs. Suicide bombers who blew themselves up next to a civilian population were unknown before Oslo. This is a crazy kind of motivation that burst out of the irresponsible experiment performed in the laboratory of the Left. These irresponsible Jews did not only seal their own fate, but also that of the Free World. The WTC twin towers would still be standing if the Islam Shuhada had not burst out of the test tubes. Yassin's execution is a breath of fresh air in the wilderness of justice in which we have found ourselves. If the execution is the first sign, and if considerations of justice continue to guide Israel's policy, we can be sure that the terror will be defeated. The person in the right wins, and pays the lowest price in the end. However, we know that this isn't Sharon's intention. The Sharon government will rapidly nullify this moral achievement by a series of concessions that will restore the enemy's confidence that he is in the right. Despite this, a just action has value in itself and deserves commendation. Moshe Feiglin established Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership), a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Feiglin has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To Go To Top

THE LEFT HAS ALWAYS HATED JEWS Posted by Steven Plaut, March 24, 2004.

So let me see if I have this straight. The US is holding hearing this week and the Western media is using this as an occasion to attack the US administration for NOT using military force to kill the arch-terrorist and the "spiritual leader" of the Islamofascist terror organization that had killed many of its civilians, claiming the US had not pursued him with enough determination and deadly force (e.g., http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0304/borowitz.html). And in the very same breath the very same media are attacking Israel because it DID use military force to kill the arch-terrorist and the "spiritual leader" of the Islamoofascist terror organization that had killed many of its civilians, claiming Israel had illegally pursued him and had used excessive deadly force. Is that clear now? This article was written by Patrick Chisholm and appeared in the Christian Science Monitor, March 24, 2004. It is archived at http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=12713 Anti-Semitism traditionally has been associated with the extreme right. Now, it is becoming more common among the extreme left. Leftist president Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe huffed that "Jews in South Africa, working in cahoots with their colleagues here, want our textile and clothing factories to close down." Former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who is no right-winger, lashed out against Jews who "rule the world by proxy." One finds pockets of anti-Semitism at anti-globalization rallies, and plenty of it at pro-Palestinian rallies. And in recent years anti-capitalist campaigners have been networking with radical Islamists and neo-Nazi groups via their websites, according to a draft report by the Technical University of Berlin's Center for Research on Anti-Semitism. (This was the same report commissioned by the European Union, which decided for who-knows-what-reason not to officially release it.) Contrary to what one would think, left- and right-wing extremists are, in major respects, ideological soul mates. Don't be fooled by labels; applying the simplistic terms of "right" and "left" to complex political realities naturally begets confusion. While ultra-rightists are generally thought of as racist and ultra-leftists as nonracist, the latter are by no means immune to such decrepitude. And both camps share these core attitudes: a readiness to buy into conspiracy theories, hatred of the rich, contempt for speculators and financiers, a deep suspicion of large corporate enterprises, and a conviction that the privileged few oppress the masses. These notions manifest themselves in the party platforms of radical groups. Here are excerpts from one such platform (courtesy of Australian writer John J. Ray): We demand that all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished. We demand the nationalization of businesses which have been organized into cartels. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle-class, the immediate communalization of department stores which will be rented cheaply to small businessmen.... We demand a land reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to confiscate from the owners without compensation any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land. And here is a quote from one such leader: "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." Karl Marx? No. Vladimir Lenin? No. Ho Chi Min? No. Adolf Hitler. And the above platform positions were those of his National Socialist party. Note the formal name of that party: the National Socialist German Workers Party. The far left scapegoats rich people for causing the world's ills. But what if you live in a society where most rich people happen to be members of a different religion or skin color? That makes them particularly easy to recognize and identify. In the popular psyche, the wealthy class becomes synonymous with members of that minority group. So if you're an envy-laden, paranoid conspiracy theorist, there's hardly a distinction between scapegoating the rich and scapegoating the minority group. That's how the Nazis viewed the Jews. It's how Stalinist Russia viewed the Jews. It's how Islamic militants view the Jews. And it's how many among today's far left view the Jews. Jews are by no means the only (relatively) affluent minority group that has suffered mass slaughter. The same has been true of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire (present-day Turkey), Tutsis in Rwanda, Tamils in Sri Lanka, ethnic Chinese in Indonesia, and many others. Palestinian hatred of Israelis, I suspect, is based on more than just land disputes and the policies of the state of Israel. Much of it likely derives from envy. Jews as a whole are among the most able, hard-working, and intelligent people ever to inhabit the earth. Wherever they go they succeed. They turned Israel into an economic powerhouse for its size, and "made the desert bloom." Success breeds envy. Envy breeds hatred. Terrorism is the end result. So is an envy-driven economic philosophy best described as hard-left or socialist: Islamic radicals generally advocate government ownership of most sectors of the economy. They detest "middlemen" and the rich. They loathe "foreign exploiters." They're disgusted with materialism and consumerism. And they desire complete economic equality among all citizens (which, in practice, translates into everyone being equally poor). Obviously, a mutual dislike for Israel's policies is not the only thing that binds Islamic radicals and ultra-leftists together. Leftism is generally tolerant of different races and religions. But not always. Extremists are not going to let Jews off the hook just because they happen to be a different religion. When it comes to envy versus tolerance, envy very often wins out. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. To Go To Top

WHY DOESN'T THE PA REFORM? WHY DOESN'T DENNIS ROSS? Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 23, 2004.

Dennis Ross does not hold the P.A. responsible for failing to reform. He blames Israeli "control." He asserts that such control angers the Arabs, thereby inhibiting the P.A. reform movement. He demands that Israel stop intruding on the Arabs' lives. Actually, Israel is out of their lives, in that they rule themselves except for foreign policy. There is no P.A. reform movement. Arab anger largely is from P.A. indoctrination in hatred and violence. This violence leads to Arab aggression, which he equates morally to Israeli self-defense. He ought to have a sufficient sense of justice to realize that aggression is improper and defense is a right. Ross' prescription, Israeli withdrawal, ignores the P.A. refusal to accept the legitimacy of Israel, which it wants to conquer. Although the Road Map requires P.A. anti-terrorism before Israeli withdrawal, Ross would not. After the P.A. has proved that donations to it do not encourage peace, Ross suggests giving more money to that corrupt society. That would throw good money after bad (IMRA, 3/7 from ZOA). It usually makes less sense to repeat a mistake than to originate one. To be fair, there is some partial Israeli control over the P.A., via roadblocks and curfews. Whenever Israel relaxes those measures, however, terrorists take advantage of it. Therefore the fault for such control is the terrorist P.A. regime's, not Israel's. Nobody has yet made the PLO/P.A. reform or meet its anti-terrorism commitments. Under Ross's concept of first Israel withdrawing, then P.A. reforming, the P.A. whose ideology is devoted to terrorist jihad, would have no incentive to reform. (I am arguing against Ross' logic. I do not contend that Israel should withdraw if the Arabs did reform. I think the Arabs should withdraw. Let the Arabs get out of Israeli lives!) Since foreign donations to the P.A. are largely stolen or diverted to war, the suggestion that more be donated to it indicates a misunderstanding of the conflict and an abuse of charitable resources. Mr. Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. To Go To Top

WE MUST SAVE THE THREATENED JEWS OF GAZA Posted by Ken Heller, March 23, 2004.

As you undoubtedly know Prime Minister Ariel Sharon announced that he will be unilaterally withdrawing from Gaza, forcing 8,000 Jews out of their homes, farms, synagogues and schools. There is no logical explanation for this handover to the terrorists, who would use Gaza as a staging ground to attack all of Israel more efficiently..which would result in more Jewish bloodshed. The twenty-one communities that make up Gush Katif have joined together to launch a campaign preventing the implementation of the Sharon transfer plan. They need funds in order to pay for free buses to bring Israelis to Gush Katif, so they can see for themselves the beauty and development of the area. The funds will pay for booklets that will be mailed to every Israeli home, pleading the cause of the Gaza Jews. A film, celebrating the beauty and Jewish life in Gush Katif is being made, to be distributed as widely as possible. You can help by sending a tax deductible contribution, made out to: "Friends of Gush Katif" To: Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205 New York, N.Y. 10128. 1-800-235-3658 The need is urgent. The campaign must be launched immediately. It cannot succeed without the help of Jews who want to be certain that "Never Again" will be the reality. Thank you for your genuine caring and concern ...and support!! Americans For A Safe Israel Ken Heller heads the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans For A Safe Israel To Go To Top

RELIABLY UNRELIABLE Posted by Eric Rozenman, March 23, 2004.

Every three or four weeks The Baltimore Sun publishes an editorial on Arab-Israeli news. Predictable as they are wrong, these editorials virtually always deny if not ignore facts and sacrifice logic to prejudged opinion. "Unanswered questions" (March 22) fits the pattern and also typifies The Sun's single-minded focus on Palestinian grievances. The editorial questions Israeli Prime Minister Sharon's proposed unilateral withdrawal in the Gaza Strip. The Sun appears to be wholly concerned with how the potential withdrawal will affect the Palestinians, and not at all concerned with any potential repercussions for the Israelis. Since the unilateral withdrawal idea is also opposed by a significant number of Israelis, it's instructive that The Sun doesn't ask a single question related to their concerns about potentially rewarding terrorism or allowing weapons smuggling to go unfettered. Confused The Sun refers to "Israel's war with Palestinian militants." Clear thinking would have phrased it the "Palestinian terrorists' war against Israel's existence." The editorial mentions "Israel's occupation of lands intended for a Palestinian state." No lands have been so designated. Israel legally occupies the West Bank and Gaza Strip as a result of self-defense in the 1967 Six-Day and 1973 Yom Kippur wars. The territories are disputed, their status to be resolved in accordance with U.N. Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 - the bases of, among other things, the 1993 Israeli-Palestinian Oslo Accords and last year's U.S. "road map." Sun editorials routinely ignore those parts of the diplomatic record - from the "road map" and Oslo back to Great Britain's League of Nations Mandate for Palestine - that recognize Israel's right to make claims in the territories. The Sun worries about "the Palestinian leadership" and the possibility that unilateral Israeli withdrawal could "further erode any authority Palestinian leaders hold there." The paper asks no questions about the "waiting for Godot" exercise Israel and the United States endured while Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority sabotaged the Oslo process and refused to begin implementing the diplomatic "road map" for peace. Instead of questioning the Palestinians, this editorial follows the Sun's habit of urging U.S. pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. The editorial refers to Arafat's "paltry" security force. Early in the current violence, Arafat oversaw 40,000-plus authorized "police" (organized into numerous paramilitary "security" agencies) and tens of thousands more armed men in illegal militias -- not counting those in Hamas and Islamic Jihad. This gave the PA a high ratio of "police" to civilians. It's not that the forces available to Arafat were paltry, but rather that he used them to continue his shoot-talk-shoot strategy. Hence U.S. consideration of potential unilateral Israeli action. Confusion Compounded The Sun claims Israel's unilateral withdrawal from south Lebanon in 2000 "saved lives on both sides of the border and removed the primary reason for the Islamic military group Hezbollah's attacks." In fact, many Israeli and Palestinian commentators and officials agree that Israel's precipitous evacuation from Lebanon helped inspire Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade to emulate Hezbollah in the current Palestinian terror war. Any Lebanese lives saved have been offset many times by deaths among Israelis and Palestinian Arabs. Hezbollah is not, as The Sun writes, a "militant group" but a terrorist organization, so listed by the U.S. government. An Iranian-backed Syrian proxy, it seeks the destruction of Israel and to prolong Syria's illegal occupation of Lebanon. And even after a full withdrawal by Israel from the security zone in southern Lebanon, Hezbollah still insists that Israel is occupying part of Lebanon (the Shebaa Farms, which was actually part of Syria, not Lebanon) and continues to intermittently kill Israeli soldiers who patrol the border. About this, the editorial asks no questions. The Sun opines that "If the Bush administration supports the Sharon plan, that will radically shift U.S. policy ... which has operated on the premise of a negotiated settlement ...." Israeli and American policy long has operated on the assumption of a negotiated settlement. But -- and here Sun logic fails again -- negotiations require good-faith partners. The Palestinian Arabs have given no signs of being such partners, despite repeated opportunities. The editorial does not ask why, and so avoids the illumination an answer might give. Uninformed Questions The paper asks other already answered questions as well, including: 1) If Israelis leave Gaza and "Hamas and the Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade continue to send suicide bombers" how will Israel respond? Probably with active counter-terrorism, including hot pursuit, as it has in Gaza and the West Bank. 2) "Where would Israel relocate the estimated 7,000 Jewish settlers living in Gaza? Would Sharon bar them from further populating the West Bank settlements? Why should Israelis relocated from Gaza not move to Jewish communities in the disputed West Bank, even to areas that might eventually be part of an Arab state? Does The Sun question the presence of Arab towns in Israel? 3) "Would Israel continue to permit Gaza residents to work in Israel?" Less than two weeks after the terrorist bombings in Ashdod, Israel announced that Arabs from Gaza will be able to return to Israel for work. No doubt, if relative calm returns after the killing of Hamas leader Sheik Ahmed Yassin in Gaza, the crossings will be reopened. Eric Rozenman is Washington Director of CAMERA, an organization that monitors the news media for fairness in reporting news about Israel. To Go To Top

THE ONE, TEN PUNCH Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, March 23, 2004.

So they finally took out the murderous imp...hundreds of buried and thousands of maimed Jews too late. I know... He was a "militant" and not really a terrorist...meaning his victims were Jews not Gentiles. You know what's really sickening about all of this? Most of the world's reporting... Not only of Israel's assassination of Hamas' Yassin, but of its continuous coverage regarding the organization itself. Journalists simply can't be that stupid...which means that they deliberately engage in misleading journalism. Think about how many times you've heard a reporter or read an account about Hamas blowing up Jews on buses, in restaurants, or in teen nightclubs only to hear or read, along with it, that this was done to "end Israeli occupation." Like it's difficult to access the Hamas websites (or for that matter those of the supposedly "moderate" Palestinian Authority's as well with virtually the same messages) to see what they really mean by "occupation." Or to get a copy of its charter calling for Israel's total destruction. And like the media doesn't know that Israel offered to end that occupation years ago, and was told by the Arabs that that was still not enough. No brainers, Dudes...Yet you'd never know this via the media accounts...at least most of them. Now that Israel has taken the first major step, it needs to follow through. Its enemies mean business, and it's time for the Jews to take off the gloves the way any other people would have done hundreds of dead loved ones earlier. There's something to the saying, "actions speak louder than words." Israeli spokesmen need to review that one a bit. There's no need to telegraph your punch on matters like this, regardless of whatever perceived good it will do. Instead of announcing its war on Hamas' leaders and blowing a lot of hot air, what's needed is a dose of the old time Israeli pizzaz. Taking and targeting many of the top brass out almost simultaneously, for example. There's nothing to lose here. If America threatens to cut aid, Israel must take it on the chin. And it must tell its best friend that these are matters of survival. Hamas is dedicated to the obliteration of Israel and the slaughter of Jews. The world's hypocrites and anti-Semites are not the ones to take guidance from in these regards. The time for fighting with one hand tied behind the back should have been over a long time ago. America wasn't afraid to use its B-52s, B-1s, cruise missiles, bunker busters, etc. when it got hit...and America is a huge nation, the most powerful on Earth... not a country that one needs a magnifying glass to find on a map of the world. It was predictable that thousands of Yassin's fellow plotters and disembowelers of Jewish babes and grandmas would take to the street upon his death, warning of hellish revenge. Israel knew this. So why did it blow another chance to do what really needs to be done? Besides the need to cut off the other heads of the snake, Israel must be ready to take out Hamas killers en masse. If hundreds of Jewish civilians can be deliberately and wantonly slaughtered, then what's wrong with payback for the actual and potential murderers? President Bush has warned America's enemies that those who harbor and collaborate with terrorists will share in their fate. Why is this proper for America but not for the tiny nation which has been the most victimized by Arab rejectionist barbarity? Most Arabs have said that they would reject any Israel, regardless of size, borders, etc. The "moderates" have called Oslo, the so-called "peace negotiations," etc. nothing more than "Trojan Horses." At least Hamas has been honest... So, if Israel wants to weaken its deadly enemy, it must consider the numbers game a bit more. A surprise from above must await the next Arab demonstrations...one that will take them out by the hundreds. And the hell with world opinion...those who fire bombed Dresden, annexed entire nations, nuked Japan, etc, when their own lives and interests were on the line. The Israeli response must be exponential. Each time another Jew is slaughtered, the punishment must be increasingly overwhelming. Nice guys definitely finish last in this game...especially when your real and potential enemies vastly outnumber you. Israel gained no acceptance by trying to do this the "right" and "moral" way. While going house-to-house and the like, deliberately putting its sons in greater harms way in going after the rats in their dens, it was accused of massacres and such anyway. It even got taken to court for building a fence designed to protect its kids from Arab butchers. The Geneva Conventions specifically state that combatants cannot use their civilian populations as human shields...something Arabs do all the time. And those Conventions also state that the presence of civilians does not eliminate such areas as legitimate military targets. So Israel must do what it must do...and in high gear, full speed ahead. Arabs must fear Israel once again. They don't now. That's what works in this region...sad, but true. After dishing out a few rounds like this...again, where each Arab assault is followed by using an Israeli version of America's own "Powell Doctrine'' (i.e. unleashing overwhelming force upon the enemy)...then Israel can step back and let the dust settle a bit. And up the ante further as need be. The very cold "peace" Israel now has with Egypt came about only after President Sadat realized that the price of Israel's destruction would be so great that it would result, at most, only in a Pyrrhic victory. The "Palestinian" Arabs--many, if not most, of whom were newcomers themselves into "Palestine" from elsewhere in the region, including Hamas' "patron saint," Sheikh Izzedin al-Qassam, from Aleppo, Syria (as recorded by the League of Nations Permanent Mandates commission, etc.)--have evidently still not learned this lesson. Until they do, Israel, unfortunately, has to become a more effective teacher. Gerald A. Honigman is a Florida educator who has done extensive doctoral studies in Middle Eastern Affairs. He has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated many Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in dozens of newspapers, magazines, academic journals and websites all around the world. To Go To Top

ILLOGICS I: Europe distances itself from America as Jihad Attacks the Crusades Posted by Evelyn Hayes, March 23, 2004.

Acccording to Webster' dictionary, the Crusades were a series of military expeditions by the Christians of Western Europe which includes Great Britain, France, Spain, Germany, Italy, to recover Jerusalem and the Holy Land from the Mohammedans from 1096 through the late 1200s. Europe, distancing itself from America is ignoring the attempted attack with poison on London, the promise of attack on France, the actual attack on the railroads of Spain. Europe is ignoring the fact that they are considered infidels. Furthermore, there was no America at the time of the Crusades. Big Lies have strange believers. Malcolm Hoenlein was explaining the terrorism of Yassin the assassinated and the outrage that a murderer was murdered. However, he is not upset that Israel wants to give away Gaza twice because Hamas is killer and killed. Remember Gaza First was a test of Oslo. It failed. Jewish Aza where Jews returned after the Egytian occupation was never contested. Jihad attacks because each rampage forward gets a freed range, first leaving room for another first to feed the unending thirst of those who once felt that no two religions could live in the same Saudi Arabia and now feel no religions can co-exist in the same world. Funny, the Mohammedan religion that supposedly is based on one G-d ignores the Commandments of that G-d and acts like the savages from whom Abraham walked away. Global Democracy is an oxymoron that the democrats would use to further liberalize themselves. Everyone is a crusader, only the America that came after the crusades, is solely guilty because it was attacked and is fighting back, because in one world order how can Peres be a Jew and John Kerry be a crusader? Watch them stage a "We-In" like Spain when they will never be accepted in the Jihad order. A dhimmi is a dummy when he thinks he's part of the Muslim brotherhood that even slaughters its brothers. In reality Global Democracy is sponsored by a Theocracy that is really a reverse crusades against anyone who isn't into jihad and wants to live as an individual in a free country under one G-d with liberty and justice for all including Jews and Christians, Hindus and Buddhists and individuals. As Israel builds fences and Germany lets its walls down, there is no blockage against the subtle infiltrations of the minds of the intellectuals who are too lazy to think. Without individualism, mind manipulation is the largest corporation. Seems oil is more than expensive; it is a derivitive in the substraction of civilization into prime-evil. Europe has suffered the Aryans and now the Palestinians. Two Big Lies confuse a union of nations that lets a non-nation reverse religion and its Commandments and Greater Morality into warlordism and its demands and horrific depravity. As Europe distances itself from America, the distinction between madmen decreases. As Israel welcomes jihad, redeployment by redeployment even though it's unilateral, Israel is less welcome. No thank you, jihad can grow into a world holocaust if all dhimmis are dummies and think their enemies are their friends or just think befriending their enemies will make them safer. Failing Logics I is a left bank with nothing right. Not passing over the illogistics of Big Lies is failing in the course of life, liberty and love. The punishment for being guilty of not thinking is to reverse Descartes' hypothesis, 'I don't think, therefore, I am not going to be.' Think. Think. Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, TWINS, us, because their hearts were softened for more." and just released sequel, "The Twelfth Plague, GENERATIONS, because the lion wears stripes." To Go To Top

THE FEAR FACTOR Posted by Ian Fletcher, March 23, 2004.

This article was written by Bret Stephens, editor in chief of the Jerusalem Post. It appeared today on the Editorial Page in the Wall Street Journal. JERUSALEM--Are Palestinians weeds? It would seem many people think they are. Following Israel's assassination early yesterday morning of Ahmed Yassin, spiritual leader of Hamas,the gist of international reaction was that the strike would bring new converts to the Islamist cause and incite a fresh wave of terrorist violence against Israel. In other words, Palestinians are weeds: Mowing them down, as it were, only has the effect of making them grow back stronger and faster. There are moments (Monday morning was one of them) when I find myself tempted by the metaphor. As I write, my TV screen is filled with images of Palestinian mourners thronging the streets of Gaza, praising Yassin as a martyr and vowing deadly vengeance. This looks like the reaction of an emboldened people, not a frightened one. So what's the sense, in purely utilitarian terms, of further Israeli attacks? Alternatively, what's the sense of showing any restraint at all? If the weed metaphor is right, either Israel should sue for peace on whatever terms the Palestinians extend or it should resort to extreme measures like population transfer. Anything else just fruitlessly prolongs a cycle of violence. But of course Palestinians aren't weeds. They're human. They think in terms of costs and benefits, they calculate the odds, they respond more or less rationally to incentives and disincentives. And what makes us afraid can also make them afraid. This is a trite observation, but it's one Palestinians would rather have us forget. Over 42 months of conflict, their strategy has been to persuade Israelis that they, the Palestinians, are made of different stuff. Why else the suicide bombers? Not because of their proven capacity to kill civilians in greater numbers than any other weapon currently in the Palestinian arsenal. That's only a second-order effect. The deep logic of suicide bombing lies in the act of suicide itself. People who will readily die for their cause are, by definition, beyond deterrence. By showing that Israel's tanks and fighter jets are just so much scrap metal in the face of the Palestinians' superhuman determination, they aim to disarm Israel itself. How does one respond to such a logic? It helps not to be fooled by it. Again, allow me to make the trite observation that Palestinians love their children too. To date, there has not been a single instance in which a Hamas leader sent one of his own sons or daughters on a suicide mission. I once interviewed a Hamas leader, since deceased, as he bounced his one-year-old girl on his knee. Contrary to myth, this was not a man who was afraid of nothing. Unsparing as he was with the lives of others, he was circumspect when it came to the lives of his own. Indeed, when one looks closely at just who the suicide bombers are (or were), often they turn out to be society's outcasts. Take Reem Salah al-Rahashi, a mother of two, who in January murdered four Israeli soldiers at the Erez checkpoint on the Gaza-Israel border. In a prerecorded video, Rahashi said becoming a shaheed was her lifelong dream. Later it emerged she'd been caught in an extramarital affair, and that her husband and lover had arranged her "martyrdom operation" as an honorable way to settle the matter. It is with such people, not with themselves, that Palestinian leaders attempt to demonstrate their own fearlessness. In the early months of the intifada, this macho pretense was sustained by the Israeli government's tacit decision not to target terrorist ringleaders, for fear such attacks would inspire massive retaliation. Yassin and his closest associates considered themselves immune from Israeli reprisals and operated in the open. What followed was the bloodiest terrorist onslaught in Israeli history, climaxing in a massacre at Netanya in March 2002. After that, Israel invaded the West Bank and began to target terrorist leaders more aggressively. The results, in terms of lives saved, were dramatic. In 2003, the number of Israeli terrorist fatalities declined by more than 50% from the previous year, to 213 from 451. The overall number of attacks also declined, to 3,823 in 2003 from 5,301 in 2002, a drop of 30%. In the spring of 2003, Israel stepped up its campaign of targeted assassinations, including a failed attempt on Yassin's deputy, Abdel Aziz Rantisi. Wise heads said Israel had done nothing except incite the Palestinians to greater violence. Instead, Hamas and other Islamic terrorist groups agreed unilaterally to a cease-fire. In this context, it bears notice that between 2002 and 2003 the number of Palestinian fatalities also declined significantly, from 1,000 to about 700. The reason here is obvious: As the leaders of Palestinian terror groups were picked off and their operations were disrupted, they were unable to carry out the kind of frequent, large-scale attacks that had provoked Israel's large-scale reprisals. Terrorism is a top-down business, not vice versa. Targeted assassinations not only got rid of the most guilty but diminished the risk of open combat between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian foot soldiers. Now a few words about Yassin, the international reaction to his killing, and the likely result for Israel. It may be recalled that Israel released the good sheikh in 1997, after having sentenced him to life in prison, with the promise that he would never again promote terrorism. This was during the Oslo years, when serious people actually thought that such conciliatory gestures served the interests of peace. Today, that is beyond comprehension. At any rate, Yassin didn't keep his promise. Meanwhile, assorted foreign ministers are in full throat against Israel. "All of us understand Israel's need to protect itself--and it is fully entitled to do that - against the terrorism that affects it, within international law," says British Foreign Minister Jack Straw. "But it is not entitled to go in for this kind of unlawful killing." It would be interesting to know exactly what, according to Mr. Straw, Israel is lawfully allowed to do in self-defense. Perhaps it would be as well if the minister also reminded the Palestinian Authority of its obligations, under the Road Map, to "undertake visible efforts... to arrest, disrupt, and restrain individuals and groups conducting and planning attacks on Israelis." But if Mr. Straw and his colleagues do not do so, it is not from an excess of respect for the Palestinians, but rather its lack. They will, after all, be viewing them merely as weeds, not as humans capable of acting in their own best interests. To Go To Top

ISRAEL KILLS HER TORMENTER Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 23, 2004.

Israel kills her tormenter and the world, even some Jews, say: "For Shame!" When President George Bush said: "You are either with us against the terrorists or you are with the terrorists", I'm sure he would include those planning terror attacks and sending young people out to blow themselves and Jews up on the streets of Israel. So, IF Israel doesn't eliminate the terrorists in her midst then she is NOT fighting the Global War against Terror - which President George Bush has rightly declared is necessary. This has become correctly known as "The Bush Doctrine" and Bush may be the first leader to acknowledge that terror is a global problem to be attacked by all. For years an evil old man sent out missions of killers, even children, with bombs in their backpacks or strapped to their bodies to kill and maim Jews in the most horrible ways possible. [Note a brief rap sheet of crimes attributable to Sheikh Yassin at the end of this article.] This old man created Hamas (which means "zeal" in Arabic) long recognized by those who now condemn Israel, as a terrorist organization. It can be expected when men such as Kofi Annan, Hosni Mubarak, Jack Straw, DeVillapin, et al condemn the killing of Yassin as illegal, unjust, against the rule of International Law because they have shown their opinion of Jews for years. These same complainers had ignored the incubation of Terror, mostly in the Middle East, because the Arab nations represented oil and obscene profits. International Law requires and accepts deadly response to terrorists' attacks - except for Israel who must bow to laws of appeasement. Expected too is the comment by the non-Jewish Jew, Shimon Peres, when he said: "Terror can be liquidated by liquidating the reasons for terror, not the leaders." If we use the Peres formula, Israel's existence, according to Peres, is the reason for terrorists and thus it follows that Israel would have to be liquidated in order to appease the terrorists. As for the world leaders who condemn Israel for finally responding after years of vain restraint demanded of her by these same world leaders, well, Hell isn't big enough or hot enough for all of them. All recognized that Muslim Terrorism has been incubating for the last 30 years. The world not only recognized this phenomenon but sold them the weapons to eventually castrate these decadent world leaders. Oh, you didn't know that one of the practices of Muslim Terrorist warfare is to castrate their enemy and stuff their parts into these enemies mouth as a final insult to their manhood? This practice is a psychological act for suspicions of their own manhood. Pride and Shame are two of the pillars of Islam and woe to the enemy who defeats them. They believe that it is their right to win. Whenever one of Yassin's or Arafat's killers managed to kill a few or many Israelis, the world's leaders would issue a pro-forma condemnation of both the killers and Israel's victims equally as if they were the same. They had reams of pre-printed condemnation letters which only needed a signature which was only for a disingenuous comment - as if they really cared. The Europeans told the Israelis not to respond or retaliate for the most heinous bloody terror acts while they were sending millions in Euros to the terrorists. They thought (as decadent Europeans) that they could bribe the mix of terrorists to kill elsewhere and NOT on their soil. Kill Israelis and we will keep paying, only don't kill us good Europeans. See, we hate the Jews as much as you do. Haven't we, as Christians, proven that over the centuries. We are your partners; we are your friends. Just keep on selling us your oil and you can kill as many Jews as you like. Well, Spain got her answer. Who's next? Many Arab leaders and their spokesman are babbling about the start of another Jihad (Islamic Holy War). Since 1948 these leaders and radical Mullahs have issued Fatwas declaring Jihad against the Jews and the Jewish State. The Jihad against the Jews never stopped, notwithstanding speeches by Arafat about continuing the fake "peace process" to trick the gullible West. The majority of Media Pundits take on a somber visage and repeat the babblings of Muslims who foam at the mouth (Arafat really does) in rage because for over 55 years they have not been able to crush the Jewish State of Israel. The War by Islam against the West has been there even before 1948 because these Islamists hate everyone in the non-Muslim world. Jews, Christians - even Muslims of sects different from their own. Even the European bribers are targets for take-over as Muslims move to become a majority in France, the Netherlands, England and wherever else they are allowed a foothold. Does anyone believe that this decadent scum who refuse to face down terror in their own nations would