HOME Featured Stories March 2012 Blog-Eds List Background Information News On the Web
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers

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

Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, March 31, 2012.

"Being creative is not just a destination, it's the journey we take on the road to discovering who we really are."
- Tedric A. Garrison


One suggestion I offer students to build their picture-taking skills is to start a collection. Find something that interests you and snap a few frames whenever you encounter it. This provides not only motivation, but also creative inspiration. As one's library of images grows, there is a natural tendency to seek new and different ways to expand the collection.

As part of my nature photography portfolio, I collect wildflowers, yet most of my shots never emerge from digital oblivion. Assembled into this montage, however, they merge into a diverse bouquet of color and form that represents the spring season in Israel.

Wishing all of Am Yisrael a chag kasher v'sameach. Happy Passover.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 31, 2012.


Israel offers to negotiate with the Palestinian Authority (P.A.), but the P.A. refuses to negotiate or makes negotiations conditional on Israel giving away the store. So which side does most of the world blame? It blames Israel, the side that expresses a desire for peace, not the Arab side that praises terrorists who attack Israel. From all quarters come demands that Israel negotiate with the P.A. and none that the P.A. negotiate with Israel.

The purported assumption behind demands for negotiations is that a new agreement between those two parties would be kept by both sides and peace would ensue. In actuality, the previous agreements set from 1993 on have never been kept by the Arab side. Since the P.A. has gotten away with violations for 18 years, what is the basis for expecting anything better from such dishonorable people in a new agreement?

The same situation occurred with N. Korea and Iran over nuclear weapons development and with Nazi Germany and the USSR over non-aggression. Totalitarian movements, including jihad, do not keep agreements.

Proponents of negotiation seemed to have learned nothing from history and experience, if they even know that history. They seem blithely unaware that Islam honors deception of non-Muslims in advancing jihad. Perhaps they are aware, but ignore such facts out of anti-Zionist bias.

Honoring of agreements are a valid indicator of insincerity; violations are a valid predictor of further conflict. One example of such violations is denial of Jewish rights at Jewish holy sites. In Article 52 in the 1995 Interim Agreement guarantees Jews full access to such sites as Joseph's Tomb. The P.A., however, restricts Jewish visitors to about once a month, when the Arabs aren't burning down the Tomb (fact from IMRA, 2/14/12).

When parties to a conflict, indeed, the instigators of conflict, are totalitarian, negotiation is not something that can't hurt. It hurts. It gives concessions to mortal enemies. It gives such enemies time to develop nuclear weapons, as have N. Korea and Iran. The notion that negotiations always work is disproved by experience. It fails to take into account the evil of the enemy.

It saddens me that my leaders keep getting made suckers of by the likes of Kim, Arafat, Abbas, Hitler, and Stalin. It is sadder when the folly becomes a principle of people who call themselves liberal. In this they are not liberal. They are enablers of evil.


The power plant in Gaza is shut down for at least half the day. The Palestinian Authority (P.A.) Energy Authority blames the "Israeli Occupation."

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights fears a "humanitarian crisis" is looming. It blames the P.A.. You see, Gaza is not importing from Egypt as much fuel for the plant as formerly. The P.A. is not giving it sufficient funds. The P.A. claims that the EU donations for fuel do not suffice (IMRA, 2/14/12).

The Arabs blame Israel for problems the Arabs make for themselves. Westerners constantly hear Arab accusations against Israel. When will Westerners stop getting taken in by those slanders? The West Europeans still seem to see everything from the Arab propaganda point of view.

In the Wall St. Journal of 3/31/12, however, France's President Sarkozy reportedly is barring Radical Islamist preachers from France. Now if only the French will connect the dots between the jihad they are beginning to react against and the jihad they indirectly are encouraging against Israel!

Although Israel tries to help rather than hinder the P.A. economy, even those the P.A. strives to hurt Israel including in its economy, the P.A. cannot support itself. It overspends on bureaucracy and war. It depends on foreign donations to make ends meet. What sense does it make to Insist that the P.A. be given sovereignty, when the P.A. begs for money to waste?

To be fair, the U.S. does not make ends meet either. It depends on foreign purchase of U.S. bonds and on Federal Reserve magical printing presses of credits so it can spend more than it earns in taxes.

Incidentally, there is no Israeli occupation of Gaza. Gaza runs itself, except for a military embargo due to its war against Israel. Since Gaza has no independent status, there is nothing there to occupy. People should stop calling Israel an occupier of Gaza. Such nomenclature exists solely to defame Israel.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 31, 2012.

I am a confused American citizen. Am I living in a free republic that follows its constitution or am I living in a lawless country?

In 1995 a law was put in place in the US to move the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, Israel, or else. It is the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, which is a public law that was passed, almost unanimously, by the 104th Congress, on October 23, 1995. Till now, no US president has yet to obey this Law.

Talking about dishonesty... this last week in March 2012, the State Department, speaking to us though the mouth of its spokesperson Victoria Nuland, makes it crystal clear that it refuses to recognize Jerusalem as the Capital of the state of Israel. It goes even further to the extent that the US administration refuses to put Israel, as the birth place, in the passport of an American citizen born in Jerusalem.

How undemocratic can it get when three Presidents ignored OUR representatives and our country's law?!

Friends, almost sixty four years have passed since Israel was declared the sovereign nation state of the Jewish people. Until 1967, the Jerusalem city Israel built side by side to the old city that was stolen from her for nineteen years, was not recognized as its capital. Now, after 1967, the confusion remains and appears to be growing; Jerusalem is still a runner up to be Israel's capital, not the finalist.

It is up to us, the people, to demand that the United Stated, unwaveringly, recognizes Jerusalem as the State of Israel's capital city.

For heaven's sake, the US government recognizes Teheran, Tripoli, Damascus and Pyongyang; even Ramallah receives more recognition than Jerusalem.

What is going on? Where is the respect the United States should show its truest ally, Israel?

We no longer can allow the American administration's breathtaking insults and disrespect for Israel's sovereignty to go on un answered.

It is Israel that decides where foreign embassies can open their offices. If South Sudan can open an embassy in Jerusalem, so can the United States; so can all countries that have an embassy or consulate representation in Israel. Like all capitals in the world time for Israel to have a embassy row avenue in Jerusalem.

Where is our voice to demand of our representatives to implement the law that they, themselves, passed?

Where is the official demand of the government of Israel that every country sets up its embassy in Jerusalem and nowhere else will be approved?

I am outraged. Are you?

Obama's State Department will not say that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSBh6C5eZgc& feature=player_embedded

We say, Jerusalem is the eternal capital of Jewish people only and the city is not ownerless; apart from Israel no one has the right to decide about Jerusalem's fate.

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, March 31, 2012.

First, an update for little Zakkai from his parents:

"After an agonizing few days (on top of the 6 agonizing weeks since this nightmare started), we have made a decision to have Zakkai undergo surgery at Children's Hospital Boston. The surgery is scheduled for this coming Wednesday, April 4. We will be heading to Boston on Tuesday, April 3, since he has to undergo pre-op testing in order to be cleared for surgery.

"Given this week's MRI images, the top priority is to clear his spinal canal from tumor (to prevent paralysis) because that is where the tumor is rearing its ugly head. As of this writing, it is unclear whether the surgeons plan to also remove the tumor that's in the chest cavity, since that piece does not appear to have grown (pending confirmation from the NIH). We are anxiously awaiting their recommendation due to the different implications either way. In the end, we feel very confident that we are in great hands."

Rephael Zakkai Avraham ben Yakira Avigael


It's a very ugly handwriting we see on the wall in France. Since the attack at the Toulouse school, anti-Semitic incidents in France have increased, not diminished. Anti-Semites apparently see the attack as "inspiration," or legitimization.

One 12-year old boy near the school where the murders occurred was attacked and lightly injured. His attackers called him "dirty Jew." The school itself has received a spate of anti-Semitic messages via e-mail and phone calls.

I sat at the Shabbat dinner table last night with a well-known academic expert on European anti-Semitism. Perhaps, I said, France was waking up a bit — after all President Sarkozy has now refused to allow certain radical imams into the country. He scoffed, saying this action was purely political, and that it would take something in the nature of an atomic bomb to wake them up to a situation they really don't want to deal with seriously.


The handwriting on the wall with regard to the US president's position vis-a-vis Israel seems pretty ugly as well. He made his much-publicized statement in his AIPAC speech that Israel has a right to defend itself. Since then, he and his administration have been doing everything possible to make sure it's difficult for Israel to act in self-defense.

The latest in a series of leaks from the US is about access that Israel has allegedly acquired to airbases in Azerbaijan, at Iran's northern border.

The story —
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/03/28/ israel_s_secret_staging_ground broke in a piece by Mark Perry in Foreign Policy Magazine that cites unnamed senior US diplomats and military intelligence officials.

There is speculation is that Israel would not launch an attack from these bases but use them for recovery/refueling. Nonetheless, the US is uneasy about anything that makes an Israeli attack on Iran more logistically feasible.

See "Analysis: US thwarting Israeli strike on Iran":
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340, L-4209836,00.html.

And "Did US just torpedo Israeli deal for a base in Azerbaijan?":
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2012/0329/ Attacking-Iran-Did-US-just-torpedo-Israeli-deal-for-a- base-in-Azerbaijan


Azerbaijan, of course, denies everything. As does the Obama administration.

John Bolton, former US Ambassador to the UN, however, has made the news with furious charges against Obama:

"I think the Obama administration has long believed that an Israeli attack was worse than an Iranian nuclear weapon. The president says that containment and deterrence of Iran is not his policy, and I think today that's true. But it's his plan B, it's his backup plan when his current efforts at sanctions fail, diplomacy fails, and Iran gets nuclear weapons.

"And I think the pressure the administration has put on Israel has been just merciless behind the scenes.

"So the Obama administration has torqued it up a notch, and now they're going to reveal very sensitive, very important information..."
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/294856/israeli- azerbaijan-deal-leaked-bolton-blames-obama-patrick-brennan


Speaking of US policy, please see this video of a press conference by State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland with regard to Jerusalem as part of Israel:

Quite simply she maintains that Jerusalem is a "final status issue," and would take no position on recognizing that Jerusalem — even western Jerusalem — is Israel's capital.

This flap had its beginning earlier last week with a State Department press release that read: "Acting Under Secretary Kathleen Stephens Travels to Algeria, Qatar, Jordan, Jerusalem, and Israel." As if Jerusalem were not part of Israel. When objections were registered, it was changed to a more ambiguous: "Acting Under Secretary Kathleen Stephens Travels to Algiers, Doha, Amman, Jerusalem, and Tel Aviv," thereby skirting the issue.


For the record: It's written into US law that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. There is legislation on the books calling on the president to move the US embassy to Jerusalem, a call that is premised on the fact that Jerusalem is recognized as Israel's capital. (No US president has ever opted to do so, however; there is a clause in the legislation allowing for presidential discretion on the matter with regard to conduct of foreign affairs.)

Caroline Glick, (http://www.carolineglick.com/), in her latest piece, "The State Department's Jerusalem Syndrome," addresses this issue. She reports that the US consulate building in Jerusalem has been moved from its old locale in eastern Jerusalem to the western Jerusalem neighborhood of Arnona, on the plot of land that had been designated for the embassy.

This, she says, is an "unvarnished act of aggression against Israel and Congress."


A fizzle. The "March to Jerusalem" yesterday that was envisioned as promoting a major risk at our borders. The interesting fact was that various governments declined to permit movement of crowds to Israel's borders. The Lebanese army, for example, kept people who were participating at a rally north of the Litani River, and even Hamas acted to keep people back. Seems to me this says something about Israeli deterrence and reluctance to start up at a time of turmoil, as in Syria.

There was unrest and some violence — tire-burning, rock throwing, etc. — most significantly in Kalandya, often a flashpoint, in Samaria north of Jerusalem. And there were some Arab injuries, but nothing major that I've heard about. Non-lethal techniques were utilized in crowd-control.

(Credit: usatoday)


Couldn't have happened to a nicer person: Tzipi Livni has decisively lost the primary race in the Kadima party to Shaul Mofaz, one-time IDF Chief of Staff.

Shaul Mofaz (Credit: Jewish Journal)

While I am not terribly enamored of Mofaz, who is now officially head of the opposition, Livni so thoroughly irked and irritated me that I was delighted to see her go. She's the one who touted Resolution 1701 in Lebanon — which, ludicrously, gave UN forces authority for keeping Hezbollah away from our border — as a great diplomatic victory, and who once explained that we must give away half of our country so the world will be happy with us. She is retiring from politics, thank Heaven.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, March 31, 2012.

This was written by Carolyn Glick and it is archived at
http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2012/03/ the-state-departments-jerusale.php

Caroline B. Glick is the senior Middle East fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C., and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post.

She is phenomenal, and one of my favorite authors, writers, columnist.


I went to the US Consulate this week to take care of certain family business. It was a thoroughly unpleasant experience. I think it is ironic that two days after my extremely unpleasant experience at the consulate, State Department Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland refused to say what the capital of Israel is. It was ironic because anyone who visits the consulate knows that the US's position on Jerusalem is in perfect alignment with that of Israel's worst enemies.

Last time I went to the consulate was in 2007. At that time the building was located in the middle of an Arab neighborhood in eastern Jerusalem. It was unpleasant. In fact it was fairly frightening. Once inside the building I couldn't shake the feeling that the Americans had gone out of their way to make Israeli-American Jews feel uncomfortable and vaguely threatened.

But then, I was able to console myself with the thought that the US has been upfront about its rejection of Israel's right to assert its sovereignty over eastern Jerusalem. By treating Jews as foreigners in their capital city and behaving as though it belongs to the Arabs by among other things hiring only Arabs as local employees, the US officials on site were simply implementing a known US policy. True, I deeply oppose the policy, but no one was asking me, and no one was hiding anything from me.

The new consulate is much different, and much worse. The State Department opened its new consulate in Jerusalem in October 2010. It is located in the Jewish neighborhood of Arnona. It was built on the plot that Israel allocated for the US Embassy after Congress passed Jerusalem Embassy Act in 1995 requiring the US government to move its embassy to Jerusalem. I read that construction began in 2004. I haven't been able to find out whether when construction began it was to build the embassy or a new consulate so I don't know yet whether the Bush administration thought it was building an embassy that the Obama administration turned into a consulate or if the Bush administration thought it was building a consulate that the Obama administration completed.

Whatever the case, the fact that the building that was supposed to be an expression of US recognition of Israel's capital in Jerusalem is being used as the consulate is an unvarnished act of aggression against Israel and Congress.

If I am not mistaken, the US Consulate General in Jerusalem is the only US consulate in the world that is not subordinate to the embassy in the country where it is located. When it was located in a hostile Arab neighborhood in eastern Jerusalem, the fact that it was not subordinate to the US Embassy in Tel Aviv was upsetting. But it was also easily justified in light of US policy of not recognizing Israeli sovereignty in eastern, southern and northern Jerusalem.

But Arnona is in western Jerusalem. It is a Jewish neighborhood that even the most radical Israeli leftists don't envision transferring to the Palestinians in any peace deal. Putting the consulate in Arnona — and on the site reserved for the embassy no less — is the clearest expression of American rejection of all Israeli sovereign rights to Jerusalem imaginable. And the fact that it is located in the heart of a Jewish neighborhood is far from the only problem with the building.

Israelis who live in Jerusalem and need US consular services are required to go to the consulate in Jerusalem. You can't just go to Tel Aviv to avoid the unpleasantness. This again is due to the fact that the US does not recognize ANY Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem. From the State Department's perspective, people who live in Jerusalem — even in Arnona and Rehavia and Ein Kerem etc. — live in a DIFFERENT COUNTRY from people who live in Tel Aviv and Netanya. We can no more receive services from the embassy in Tel Aviv than we can receive services from the embassy in Amman.

I will be writing more about the US's adversarial treatment of Israel as embodied in its treatment of Jerusalem in next week's Jerusalem Post column. But suffice it to say here that Victoria Nuland's statement to AP reporter Matt Lee, (posted below in case you missed it), is a true depiction of America's policy on Jerusalem — and though it, on Israel.

It would be useful for someone to get Mitt Romney on record discussing his position on Jerusalem. Assuming that he says — like every other Republican presidential candidate — that he supports transferring the US embassy to Jerusalem, he should further be asked to explain how, if he is elected president, he will force the State Department to change its policies towards Israel and respect US law by treating Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

UPDATE from Yisrael Medad:

The following is an email I received from Yisrael Medad from the Begin Center. He writes an excellent blog

Yisrael follows the US Consulate in Jerusalem far more closely than I and here is what he was to say:

I am old enough to recall pre-1967 when the Consulate in "West Jerusalem" was where it always was for some 150 years — at Agron Street. The library was great. And by the way, the building you mention is the offices of the consular section. Political, economic and other matters are still at Agron, where the Consul-General lives.

But to the politics: A rather disturbing pattern of behavior has emerged from the US Consulate-General in Jerusalem over the past years that would point to a need for Congressional review and oversight.

Except for matters of passports, visas and birth registration, all other activities whether social, educational, scientific, sports, etc. are blatantly discriminatory in that no Jewish American citizen, who lives in the area supervised by the Consulate, can benefit from or take part in. They are intended for Arabs solely.

Jews resident in the area of Judea and Samaria face a policy of exclusion and that, we maintain, would seem to be unconstitutional and illegal. In the same geographical area under the jurisdiction of the Consulate there exist two separate and not equal populations: Jewish and Arab, whether Muslim or Christian.

Is what they are doing legal by American law? Is it in the spirit of the democratic foundations of American democracy? Can the Consulate adopt exclusionist policies that separate between peoples based on race in the same geographic area? Can it create the "state of the West Bank"?

There are almost 350,000 Jewish residents in the communities located in the territory for which the C-G is responsible (the almost 300,000 Jews in the newer Jerusalem neighborhoods and within the Old City is another matter). Almost 15,000 are American citizens. They do not benefit from any of these cultural, social or funding outreach activities and other programs and monies. Jews don't count, other than deserving consular needs like birth registration, visas, etc.

I think it would be a helpful for the House Foreign Relations Committee to hold hearings on the manner in which the US Consulate in Jerusalem is run. Jewish US citizen residents of Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria should be brought in to give testimony.

Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il Go to to see more of his graphic art at

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul Rotenberg, March 31, 2012.


This was sent by a retired Coca Cola executive. It came from one of his engineer buddies who retired from Haliburton. If you are tired of the gas prices going up AND they will continue to rise this summer, take time to read this please.

Phillip Hollsworth offered this good idea. This makes MUCH MORE SENSE than the "don't buy gas on a certain day" campaign that was going around last April or May! It's worth your consideration. Join the resistance!!!!

I hear we are going to hit close to $ 1.50 a litre by this summer and it might go higher!! Want gasoline prices to come down?

We need to take some intelligent, united action. The oil companies just laughed at that because they knew we wouldn't continue to "hurt" ourselves by refusing to buy gas ...

It was more of an inconvenience to us than it was a problem for them. BUT, whoever thought of this idea, has come up with a plan that can Really work. Please read on and join with us!

By now you're probably thinking gasoline priced at about $.99 is super cheap. Me too! It is currently $1.28 at SUNOCO and ESSO for regular unleaded in Hamilton and Ottawa and climbing every week.

Now that the oil companies and the OPEC nations have conditioned us to think that the cost of a gallon of gas is CHEAP at $.87 to .99, we need to take aggressive action to teach them that BUYERS control the marketplace..not sellers.

With the price of gasoline going up more each day, we consumers need to take action.

The only way we are going to see the price of gas come down is if we hit someone in the pocketbook by not purchasing their gas! And, we can do that WITHOUT hurting ourselves.

How? Since we all rely on our cars, we can't just stop buying gas.

But we CAN have an impact on gas prices if we all act together to force a price war.

Here's the idea: For the rest of this year, DON'T purchase ANY gasoline from the two biggest companies (which now are one), SUNOCO(PETRO CANADA) and ESSO.

If they are not selling any gas, they will be inclined to reduce their prices. If they reduce their prices, the other companies will have to follow suit.

But to have an impact, we need to reach literally millions of SUNOCO(PETRO CANADA) and ESSO gas buyers. It's really simple to do! Now, don't wimp out on me at this point...keep reading and I'll explain how simple it is to reach millions of people!!

I am sending this note to 30 people. If each of us send it to at least ten more (30 x 10 = 300) ... and those 300 send it to at least ten more (300 x 10 = 3,000)... and so on, by the time the message reaches the sixth group of people, we will have reached over THREE MILLION consumers .

If those three million get excited and pass this on to ten friends each, then 30 million people will have been contacted!

If it goes one level further, you guessed it..... THREE HUNDRED MILLION PEOPLE!!!

Again, all you have to do is send this to 10 people. That's all!

How long would all that take? If each of us sends this e-mail out to ten more people within one day of receipt, all 300 MILLION people could conceivably be contacted within the next 8 days!

Acting together we can make a difference.

If this makes sense to you, please pass this message on. I suggest that we not buy from SUNOCO(PETRO CANADA)/ESSO UNTIL THEY LOWER THEIR PRICES TO THE $.99 RANGE AND KEEP THEM DOWN. THIS CAN REALLY WORK.


(why wait till then, get into the habit by starting now)

Paul Rotenberg lives in Toronto, Canada. Contact him at pdr@rogers.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Giulio Meotti, March 31, 2012.

Muslim, Western states fund modern-day blood libels against the Jewish state


The global atmosphere has been poisoned by an ocean of oily, bloody money that feeds those who incite anti-Jewish riots, promote divestments from Israel and spread blood libels under the guise of "objective journalism."

Some academic careers are funded by those who believe Jews have no right to exist. Saudi Arabia spent one hundred billion dollars to spread Wahhabism in the West, the most anti-Semitic version of Islam (the Soviet Union during the Cold War invested much less for its propaganda.)

Currently there are 17 federally funded centers on American campuses devoted to Middle Eastern studies: All of these support pro-Islamist and anti-Israel ideas. Stephen Schwartz, director of the Center for Islamic Pluralism, just summarized these in a report for the Middle East Forum. Georgetown, the oldest Catholic university in the US, received 40 million dollars from the Saudis.

Also on the list of Riyadh's "beneficiaries" is Harvard, the jewel of the Ivy League, with about 30 million dollars. Meanwhile, some 20 million dollars were donated to the Middle East Studies Center at the University of Arkansas; 5 million dollars to the Center for Middle East Studies at Berkeley; 11 million to Cornell University, and the list goes on.

The Arabs are also exporting hatred in Europe. St. Andrews University, the cradle of British royal nobility, got hundred of thousands of pounds from Damascus to fund a center for "Syrian studies" there. The London School of Economics, one of the world's best known universities, on Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the son of the former Libyan dictator, who then donated half a million pounds to the school.

European money

Elsewhere, Oxford has a research center funded by Iran, while at Cambridge the funds come from Saudi Arabia, Oman and Iran. Eight universities, including Oxford and Cambridge, have accepted more than 233.5 million pounds sterling from Muslim sources since 1995.

The NGOs involved in delegitimization of Jews are funded not only by these Arab states. NGOs get money from Europe to legally and politically put the State of Israel on trial: Addameer ($207,000 from Sweden); Al Haq ($426,000 from Holland, $88,000 from the economically-struggling Ireland and $156,000 from Norway); this list also goes on, and on.

The stereotype that connects Jews and money goes back to early Christianity, where the story of Jesus confronting the money changers became a symbol for the nefarious role of Jews in greedy financial pursuits. Demagogues like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad also accused Jews of controlling the world's finances. Shakespeare's Shylock and his pound of flesh have caused shudders in many generations of Jews.

Now, by financing anti-Semitism and working as the money laundering mechanism of Islamist hatred, Muslim and Western states are helping to create new blood libels worldwide.

Editor's Addendum:

A reader wrote:

21. Something Wrong

Reprint from Israel Matzav 3/11 Foreign Arab Donations to some universities. Fair Use Not responsible for claims or accuracy of this information.

American University (The) $500,000
Boston University $1,500,237
Columbia University $500,000
Cornell University $10,900,000
George Washington University $11,953,519
Georgetown University $16,232,667
Harvard University $11,871,563
Howard University $250,000
MIT $10,000,000
Michigan State University $926,740
Rice University $2,750,000
Texas A&M University $1,498,671
Tufts University $1,000,000
University of Arkansas $18,312,524

Total $88,195,921
Joe Sombrero, USA (03.29.12)

Giulio Meotti, a journalist with Il Foglio, is the author of the book A New Shoah: The Untold Story of Israel's Victims of Terrorism

To Go To Top

Posted by Arnie Barnie, March 30, 2012.

Is this for real...???

Date: Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 9:37 AM
Subject: HR1388 PASSED

This is unbelievable!

Another example of how we make things "fairer" in this country. Hope you enjoy your money going touch worthy causes!


You just spent $20,000,000 to move members/supporters of Hamas, a terrorist organization, to the United States ; housing, food, transportation, the whole enchilada.


Whether you are an Obama fan, or not, EVERYONE IN THE U.S. Needs to know.

H.R. 1388 was passed, behind our backs. You may want to read about it.

It wasn't mentioned on the news. Just went by on the ticker tape at the bottom of the CNN screen.

Obama funds $20M in tax payer dollars to immigrate Hamas Refugees to the USA. This is the news that did not, and will not, make the headlines.

By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20.3 million in "migration assistance" to the Palestinian refugees and "conflict victims" in Gaza.

The "presidential determination" (meaning not Congress) which allows hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States, was signed and appears in the Federal Register.

Few on Capitol Hill, or in the media, took note that the order provides a free ticket replete with housing, transportation, and food allowances to individuals who have displayed their overwhelming support to the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas).

Now we learn that he is allowing thousands of Palestinian refuges to move to, and live in, the US at American taxpayer expense.

These important, and insightful, issues are being "lost" in the blinding bailouts and "stimulation" packages.

Doubtful? To verify this for yourself:


Friends, WE are losing this country at a rapid pace.

Contact ArnyBarnie by email at ArnyBarnie@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Bill Narvey, March 30, 2012.


A coalition of community Jewish organizations urgently calls on all friends of Israel to make their voices heard. The UJA-Federation and Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC) have granted permission to extremist anti-Israel organizations to march in the Celebrate Israel Parade on June 3rd in New York. These groups encourage Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel, seeking to delegitimize and economically weaken the Jewish State.

We call on all supporters of Israel to contact the UJA-Federation and JCRC and ask them to reverse their misguided decision.


  • Last year, the New Israel Fund (NIF) was allowed to march in the parade. Other groups marched with the New Israel Fund, displaying their individual banners, including B'Tselem, Partners for Progressive Israel and Rabbis for Human Rights.

  • This year, New Israel fund is slated to march again, and we expect B'Tselem and the other groups will once again join NIF, displaying their banners.

  • New Israel Fund finances numerous Israeli NGOs (non-governmental organizations), some of which promote Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel.

  • For instance, five grantees of the New Israel fund (Machsom Watch, Coalition of Women for Peace, Women Against Violence, Social TV, and Mossawa) signed a letter to the Norwegian Government Pension Fund, urging it to divest from Israel.

  • Partners for Progressive Israel (also known as Meretz USA) prominently displays on its website, under the heading "boycott these Settlement products sold in the US, "a list of Israeli products that it wants Jews to boycott. These products include Ahava cosmetics, SodaStream products, and wine from nine Israeli vineyards.

  • The chair of B'Tselem's board, Oren Yiftachel, has publicly called for "effective sanctions" against Israel. B'Tselem is a major grantee of the New Israel Fund.

  • B'Tselem produced the Video that was shown at the infamous "Israel Apartheid 2012" events held at Universities and Colleges worldwide.

  • Despite New Israel Funds stated opposition to Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS), their continued funding of these groups shows their actions are not in line with their statements.


We urge everyone to raise your voices and call the UJA-Federation and the Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC). Urge them to stop these groups from marching in the Israel Day Parade and hijacking a pro-Israel event for their anti-Israel purposes. While the JCRC runs the Parade, the UJA-Federation has effective control over the JCRC, as they appoint Board members as a right and contribute the major portion of JCRC funding.

Richard Allen, a member of the Committee for a Pro-Israel Parade and founder of JCCWatch.org stated: "It is not surprising that the UJA-Federation is pushing these bash Israel groups to march in the June 3, 2012 Israel Parade. Published reports show that the UJA-Federation's Chief Executive Officer, John Ruskay, worked with Noam Chomsky in one of the first political bash Israel groups; CONAME (Committee On New Alternatives in The Middle East). The reports stated the group CONAME specialized in attacking Israel. John Ruskay also gave over 1 million ($1,000,000) of UJA-Federation Jewish Charity Dollars to the political George Soros funded group, Jewish Funds for Justice. The community must make its voice heard by calling and writing The UJA-Federation and demand that Jewish community charity funds not be used for these divisive purposes."


Tell John Ruskay and Jerry Levin of the UJA Federation of New York:

NOT ONE DIME to Legitimize the De-Legitimizers of Israel!

STOP groups that work to Delegitimize Israel from Hijacking the Israel Parade!

Call and write the Board of the UJA- Federation of New York.
Tell the UJA Federation you do NOT want your Jewish Charity Dollars Going to Support John Ruskay's Political Agenda. Call: 212 980 1000.
Email the UJA-Federation CEO John Ruskay: ruskayJ@ujafedny.org
Email the UJA-Federation Board: President Jerry W. Levin: jwlevin@jwlevinpartners.com
Email the Jewish Community Relations Council board: Rabbi Michael Miller, millerm@jcrcny.org or call 212 983 4084.

Committee for a Pro-Israel Parade (Committee in formation)

Richard Allen Founder of JCCWatch.org
Rabbi Steven Axelman Whitestone Hebrew Centre
Helen Freedman Executive Director, Americans for a Safe Israel
Beth Gilinsky Executive Director, National Conference on Jewish Affairs
Eli E. Hertz Founder "Myths and Facts"
Rabbi Eluzer (Eli) Kowalsky Pro-Israel Activist
Lori Lowenthal Marcus President, Z Street
Rabbi Allen Schwartz Congregation Ohab Zedek

Contact William Narvey at wpnarvey@shaw.ca

To Go To Top

Posted by Joan Swirsky, March 30, 2012.

This is by Debbie Schlussel.


Barack Obama and Janet Napolitano just gave thousands of Syrian Muslims — all of them either sympathizers with Hezbollah or the Muslim Brotherhood — permission to stay in the United States forever. Yup, even illegal alien Syrian Muslims. He granted all of them TPS — Temporary Protected Status, so they cannot be deported or even arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for being here illegally. Behind the successful effort to get Obama to approve this absurd golden ticket to extremist Syrians to remain in our midst, is the pro-HAMAS/Hezbollah ADC (American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee) and Dr. Yahya Basha.

Basha, a Syrian multi-millionaire immigrant and extremist Muslim, is a HAMASCAIR activist who previously headed the American Muslim Council, which was shut down for HAMAS fundraising, martyr funding, and because Basha's hand-picked executive director was paying homicide bombers and plotting assassinations of the Saudi King on behalf of Qaddafi. Basha recently settled a lawsuit after firing a lawyer he hired because he discovered she was Jewish and married (two no-nos for women under Islam). Basha's "Basha Diagnostics" business is a major advertiser in Detroit media and has influenced TV and radio stations to pander to Muslims if they want to continue to receive his dollars. He was cited by the FDA for his shoddy mammograms and faulty equipment. Yup, we need more Syrians in the mold of Yahya Basha in our midst. Oh, and he's not even a Democrat. His offices are regularly used by the dhimmis in Michigan's Oakland County Republican Party and will probably be Romney's campaign headquarters for the November election for the county.

Remember all the Haitian aliens in the U.S., to whom Barack Obama and Janet Napolitano granted TPS after the Haitian earthquake? Most of them are still here, many of them trying to get green cards and citizenship. And a good number of those are succeeding. Remember all the Libyan aliens to whom Obama and Napolitano gave TPS, last year? Well, guess what? They, too, are still here, trying to get green cards and citizenship. And a good number of them are succeeding, too. Muammar Qaddafi is long gone. And, yet, they are still here, despite the fact that we don't really know much about them and their activities in Libya before they came here (and have no way of finding out). Many of them are extremists who sympathize with the Al-Qaeda Muslims who've since taken over Libya. Others were Qaddafi sympathizers, not much better.

And, now, we must add to this the Syrian Shi'ite supporters of Assad and Hezbollah and the Syrian Sunni supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood, HAMAS, and Al-Qaeda in our midst. Yup, they get to stay here, likely forever. We simply never end up sending back anyone to whom we grant TPS, no matter how much of a national security risk they pose. And all of these Syrians are able to apply for asylum and remain in the U.S., per Obama policy, until they finish gaming the system — a process that can take years and even over a decade.

The Syrians in our midst — many of them here illegally — will now be untouchable by ICE (which isn't arresting illegal aliens, anyway) for at least 18 months on the books. But, as we know, in each case in which the U.S. has granted TPS for 18 months, the aliens got to stay forever. Look for that to happen with the Syrians.

And to add insult to injury: these people, as with the Libyans and others who were granted TPS by Obama, will be able to work without restrictions in the U.S. — taking jobs from U.S. citizens. 'Cuz, hey, they need to make money. And who cares about Americans who need to make money? Not Obama. That's for sure.

Just what we need: more Muslims who support Islamic terrorist groups and come from the country that proudly served as the host for all of those groups, as well as Nazi war criminals and Munich Olympic Massacre terrorists.

And more of them taking jobs from out-of-work Americans.

All hail the Arab Spring! All hail it's American headquarters: the Department of Homeland Security.

Contact Robert Hand at borntolose3@att.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Sommer, March 30, 2012.

This was written by David A. Patten, and it appeared in Newsmax (http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/bolton-israel-iran-obama/ 2012/03/29/id/434288?s=al&promo_code=E8D2-1).


John Bolton
"Clearly, this is an administration-orchestrated leak"

Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton blasted the Obama administration Wednesday afternoon for putting "just merciless" behind-the-scenes pressure on the Israeli government in order to persuade Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu not to launch an attack on Iran.

Bolton added that reported intelligence leaks by the administration could hurt Israel's chances of successful knocking out Iran's nuclear facilities.

Bolton's comments on Fox News followed revelations Wednesday that the Israeli government has made arrangements with the government of Azerbaijan to use its airbases, which it would presumably employ to help it attack Iran.

Landing jets in Azerbaijan would make an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear infrastructure much more effective, military experts say. It would greatly reduce the flight time, and refueling requirements, for Israel's F-16 and F-15 jets.

Foreign Policy broke the news of the alleged Israel-Azerbaijan connection. It attributed the report to a "senior administration official." Another U.S. intelligence source said the administration is "not happy" about Israel's efforts to strengthen its ties with Azerbaijan in order to defend itself.

Bolton sees the administration's leak of sensitive information as part of a larger problem.

"I think the Obama administration has long believed that an Israeli attack was worse than an Iranian nuclear weapon," Bolton told Fox. "The president says that containment and deterrence of Iran is not his policy, and I think today that's true. But it's his plan B, it's his backup plan when his current efforts at sanctions fail, diplomacy fails, and Iran gets nuclear weapons.

"And I think the pressure the administration has put on Israel has been just merciless behind the scenes," he adds.

So far, Bolton says, Israeli officials show no intention of backing down from what they see as the existential threat of a nuclear-capable Iran. But the Azerbaijan leak indicates the administration is upping the ante.

"So the Obama administration has torqued it up a notch, and now they're going to reveal very sensitive, very important information that will allow Iran to defeat an Israeli attack," said the former UN ambassador. "I think that's what's going on."

Last month, Israel inked a $1.6 billion arms deal for drones and an anti-aircraft missile defense system with Azerbaijan. Many foreign policy experts, however, remain highly skeptical that Azerbaijan would help Israel attack its powerful Persian neighbor to the south.

Bolton is the author of the Newsmax Magazine April cover story "Showdown: Iran's Plan for a Second Holocaust Must Be Stopped." He suggested he has no independent knowledge of whether Israeli has struck a bargain to use Azerbaijan's airfields.

Bolton added that the leak could impair Israel's ability to defend itself.

"Releasing this information, so that the Iranians now know about it, takes away a potentially very powerful mode of attack that hitherto the Israelis have been able to keep secret," he said.

Contact Barbara Sommer at lsommer_1_98@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Robert Hand, March 30, 2012.

This was written by Melanie Phillips and it is archived on her website:
http://melaniephillips.com/. Contact her by email at melanie@melaniephillips.com.

Phillips is author of "The World Turned Upside Down", now available in paperback (Encounter Books, New York, December 2011, ISBN: 978-1-59403-574-6).


Readers of the Jerusalem Post have doubtless been bemused by a rumbling controversy over whether or not the Anglo-Jewish leadership comprises what Isi Leibler derided as "trembling Israelites".

Leibler suggested that both the Board of Deputies and the Jewish Leadership Council were in denial over the UK's dramatic upsurge in anti-Israel feeling. In particular, they understated the threat of Muslim antisemitism and jihadism, and continuously issued statements warning of the dangers of Islamophobia which paled beside the violence and threats levelled against Jews.

Leibler was accused of misrepresenting the situation. What happened to Brooke Goldstein, however, suggests he is nearer to the truth. Leeds JSoc invited Goldstein, a US lawyer who fights Islamic extremism and defends Israel, to deliver a talk at about the stifling of free speech on the Middle East.

The JSoc then abruptly cancelled her talk — on the grounds that it would jeopardise community relations and endanger the welfare of Leeds students.

Why was Goldstein considered a menace? Apparently because she is a supporter of the Dutch politician Geert Wilders, had linked to an article about him on a website called Gates of Vienna, and a member of her staff had blogged about a film entitled The Third Jihad.

Such reasoning shows how deeply political correctness has warped the judgment of these students. Wilders has been demonised because he stands resolutely against the Islamist aim of conquering the west — and because he thinks the Koran incites hatred and violence against Jews and "infidels". Does Leeds JSoc not think this incitement endangers Jewish students?

Gates of Vienna is an anti-Islamist site that has provided a platform for some ultra-nationalists. Goldstein says her organisation merely linked to one article. This tars her as a dangerous extremist? As for The Third Jihad, I know this is an important film — narrated by a Muslim — which charts the nature and extent of Islamist aggression and the inroads this has been allowed to make in the west. Yet this film has been smeared by the usual combination of Islamists and their western apologists.

I have a particular interest in this smear because I, too, am interviewed in this film. I, too, could thus be pilloried as an "anti-Muslim extremist" — and I'm afraid to say there are members of the UK Jewish community who already do that.

This derives from the confusion among much of the leadership, which seems to believe that to identify the threat from Islamic religious extremism is "Islamophobic". Indeed, a number of communal worthies wrote to the JC attacking it for "criticising and embarrassing" Leeds JSoc instead of "supporting" and "thanking" it.

Thanking it for what? For its "resolve" in repudiating the principle of free speech on campus? For "improving Jewish student life" by smearing those who fight Islamic religious fascism, thus effectively whitewashing the virulent Jew-hatred pouring out of the Muslim world? For "acting in the best interests of their members" by turning on a lawyer who would help them defend themselves against anti-Jewish attacks?

The fact that this morally bankrupt act by Leeds JSoc has been supported by UJS and so many in Jewish leadership suggests that these leaders don't understand who are the true friends of the Jews.

"Trembling Israelites" isn't the half of it. These Anglos are not so much "trembling" as leading the surrender to the enemies of the Jews — and thus indirectly encouraging them to redouble their attacks. British Jews should indeed be trembling at being thus abandoned by those who speak in their name.

Contact Robert Hand at borntolose3@att.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 29, 2012.

On my tenth trip to Israel, just concluded, residents of the Territories again demonstrated to me that the layout of the land confirms their interpretation of recent controversies between Muslims and Jews there and in Jerusalem. They may be mistaken in minor respects, but overall they make sense.

We passed by Jerusalem's new light rail system. The government had proposed four stops in an Arab-populated area. Arab residents there rejected the proposal. Their reason was not any deficiency in the transportation plan. They said that acceptance would seem to endorse the government of Israel as a Jewish state.

That reaction indicates a greater Arab disaffection with Israel than is believed by most Israelis.

Despite the objection, Israel installed the four stops. Arabs did patronize the trains. One of them stabbed an Israeli soldier near the heart, and then ran off the coach. Now some Jews are afraid to ride the trains through Arab areas.

Why did the government insist on putting stops into the Arab area that Arabs asked it not to? I don't know. I think that the government wants to show how nice it is to them and that it is not apartheid. Whom does that concession impress? Not the Arabs, one of whom used the opportunity to put the soldier into critical condition. Not the usual critics of Israel, who really don't care about the Arabs, oppressed by their own dictators, nor do they care about Israeli decency toward the Arabs. Those critics continue criticizing Israel on false grounds. Their criticism of Israel on human rights grounds is phony.

If government appeasement of the Arabs does not impress anybody, why do it? Why not change the policy? I think the answer is that Israeli leaders, whether called right wing, left wing, or the new euphemism, "left of center," do not try to resolve the Arab-Israel conflict on their own and in the Jewish interest. They have been waiting for decades for genuine Arab negotiations. They think that territory and Israeli good will gestures can solve the problem. Unfortunately, the problem is not land but Islamic imperialism too fanatical for peace regardless of Israel's size and borders.

We passed French Hill, once a fine area of Jerusalem, according to my hosts. Only Jews lived there, before. Since Israel is not an apartheid state, Arabs can move in. The first few paid a premium. More Arabs came in. Now Jews cannot sell residences except at a steep loss.

We drove to the Issawiya area of Jerusalem, populated by Arabs. Some houses there were funded by Saudi Arabia, in order to block Jews from building houses. I saw many fine, new apartment buildings, contradicting the notion that all Arabs in Israel are poor. On the other hand, half of those dwellings are empty, because there isn't the demand for them. They serve a strategic political purpose, not an economic one.

Next we saw the situation of Maale Adumim, a notably beautiful city of about 40,000 Jews in the Territories near Jerusalem. I stood where building construction had stopped and land was undeveloped from there to the municipal border and the horizon.

Why had no more construction been undertaken, when Jews' demand for housing is great? Indeed, many Israelis cannot afford housing in Jerusalem and in most other parts of Israel. The Territories offer the solution, for there land is cheap, air is clean, views are sweeping, and commutation to work, when secure, is short.

Much land in the Territories is vacant. The government could have annexed much of it. Such annexation would prevent the rise of an Islamist state there like the terrorist regime in Gaza. That would go far to solve the conflict. The popularly supposed "two-state solution" is an oxymoron. Palestinian Authority leaders have explained that after getting a state, they would press to absorb the Jewish state into the Arab one. Note the fate of minorities in the flaming Middle East!

Why no more construction in vacant stretches of Maale Adiumim? PM Netanyahu denies that he imposes a building freeze in the Territories. The answer was given by developers. They propose three towers, although usually smaller buildings are erected in the Territories. Space for these towers would be made by tearing down existing small buildings on the proposed site. The developers explain that they would thereby fulfill much of the demand for housing there, unmet because PM Netanyahu secretly has imposed a building freeze. Certainly building permits are not approved in undeveloped sections of the town.

The building freeze is for Jews only. Thus while Arabs may build, including without permits, Jews may not. That is not a right wing policy, although PM Netanyahu is called a right-winger on the Arab-Israel conflict. Netanyahu continues the appeasement of Arabs and the police brutality against Jews done by Prime Ministers Rabin, Sharon, and Olmert.

This discrimination is not objected to by leftists who complain about alleged discrimination against Arabs. Logically, then, these leftists do not object to discrimination, they simply favor the Arabs against the Jews. They are not the democrats and humanitarians they purport to be.

We stood near the police station surrounded by empty hills within the city. The police station was placed there by the government, to forestall Arab squatters, who would steal the land and build illegal houses. Usually the government does not forestall Arab land theft. Usually the "hilltop youth" do.

When Arabs steal land and build illegally, the leftists do not object. They do not object to tens of thousands of illegal Arab houses in Israel as well as in the Territories. What a massive crime in a subversive attempt to deprive the Jewish people of their homeland! Leftists do object to a handful of ostensibly illegal houses of Jews. So much for their sincerity on that issue!

To prevent Arab theft of the Jewish municipalities' land, done deliberately to restrict Jewish development of the Jewish homeland, some youth set up outposts atop vacant hills. These youth live in poor dwellings under harsh conditions and subject to police brutality. Police are notably brutal to "settlers" and seldom to Arabs. Although the Jewish youth are vilified for what they do, they are defending the Jewish people's survival there. The vilification is asserted in the name of equal enforcement of the law, but the same law is not enforced against the Arabs. More leftist hypocrisy!

Upon my arrival in Israel, Arabs fired 300 rockets at the country, without incurring UN condemnation for war crimes. The UN prefers condemning Israel on false grounds, to condemning Hamas and other Arab terrorist organizations on genuine grounds. Further hypocrisy.

Also at that time, the settlement of (or is it an outpost) Migron was in the news. The U.S. media, the International Herald Tribune, and Haaretz denounced the community. They reported that Peace Now sued in behalf of Arabs who claimed to own the land. The Supreme Court sided with the Arabs. It ordered the Jewish residents tossed out. The government counter-proposed building a new community for the people of Migron, and then they would move out.

The government proposal was denounced as not complying with the Court's ruthless decision. But the Court was not complying with usual practice, which is to compensate owners rather than be expelled. According to my hosts, lawyers for the defendants claim that the alleged owners' documents were distributed to them by the government of Jordan years after Jordan had ceased ruling that area. In other words, the documents were grants by a government that had no jurisdiction.

I do not know whether the lawyers are correct. As I generally point out, the newspapers often do not present facts that would justify their conclusions and omit facts that would rebut their conclusions. Newspaper reports should explain how it comes to pass that Arabs, in their society emphasizing depriving Jews of land, do not know they own some land on which Jews built, not until Peace Now corrals them into being plaintiffs.

Failing to present the facts, what justifies the Left's indignation against the Jews of Migron? The Left's excuse is that land ownership was determined by the court. There are courts and there are courts. Israeli courts are ideological, usually but not always ruling in favor of Arabs without evidence and without a legal case. Such courts do not deserve credibility.

When Israeli courts sometimes rule in favor of Jewish property owners, the Left and the media express no indignation against Arab squatters who defy court orders and threaten violence if moved off the grounds. Is the Left's attitude that Arabs have rights to property they don't own and Jews do not have rights to property they do own? The Left's attitude is a bit of Apartheid, isn't it?

Israeli police deny Jews' right to those houses and to worship on the Temple Mount for what they call security reasons. That is, the Arabs would riot. So Israel and people's rights are governed by Arab extortion against the supposedly Jewish state.

While the government and media boast that Israel is a government of laws, and while the Establishment demands that alleged and disputed transgressions by a few Jews be punished, the government does not generally enforce the law against Arabs. In evaluating this partiality, remember that the Muslims are trying to take over the country. Muslim tactics are to execute Arabs who sell land to Jews, to steal land, to spend foreign donations on buildings that block Jews from building, and to call Jews' construction improper. Muslims could not get away with that if the media were fair and if the government did not appease the Muslims.

While PM Netanyahu declares that Israel allows freedom of worship, Jews are denied equal rights with Muslims on the Temple Mount. Christians and recognizable Jews are allowed an hour on the Mount; Muslims get unlimited time and easy passage to it. Jews recognized as religious are escorted off the Mount. They may be arrested and assaulted if they open a religious text or move their lips. WAQF police interpret lip movement as prayer even if they unable to tell what is being whispered. When Israel bans Jewish prayer as insulting to Muslims, one wonders why they call it a Jewish state. (Why do Israeli police so often assault Jews when, or instead of arresting them, whether for cause or for ideology?)

As I have reported before, Muslims illegally build mosques on the Mount. Their digging undermines its man-made foundation, but their propaganda continually accuses Israel of trying to undermine Al Aqsa mosque there. As if Israel has the remotest interest in aggressive activities and in antagonizing Muslims! To the contrary, Israel keeps bending over backwards to show it is "nice" to the Arabs. The excavation illegally trashes ancient Jewish artifacts of archeological and ideological significance. Israel's government ignores Jewish complaints as well as Jews' rights.

Another controversial subject about the Territories is roads. The existence of separate roads for Jews leads to accusations of Apartheid. The accusations are ignorant or cynically defamatory. My guides showed me one of the areas involved.

In that area, Arabs often attacked Jews driving on the one road originally available. Terrorists shot at cars with Israeli license plates, threw rocks at them capable of smashing windshields and causing crashes, or blocked the roads and ran to lynch Jews who couldn't escape. Incidentally, Israeli Arabs have cars with Israeli license plates, and sometimes those cars get attacked, too, because Israel is not Apartheid and has the same license plates for all its citizens, whether Arab or Jewish. Israeli troops stationed nearby were not always swift to respond to calls for help.

Israelis often were unable to use those roads, where their lives were endangered. They had to drive long distances to get around the more dangerous areas. Media attention has been riveted to claims about Arab inconvenience, and none to Jewish inconvenience and risk of being murdered.

One answer was for Israeli drivers to pack weapons, though defending themselves in Israel is subject to prosecution.

How did the government attempt to free its drivers from Islamic terrorism? Rather than remove the Arabs, whose villages deliberately harbor terrorists, the government built an alternative road open for cars having Israeli license plates. Note: the distinction between the Arab population and terrorists is small, because the Arab society as a whole and the Palestinian Authority in particular favor jihad against Israel. Their main objections to acts of jihad are over which acts are expedient and when.

The false accusation of discrimination is expressed indignantly, but why no indignation over the terrorism against innocent Jews? Nor is that the end of the story.

Usurping more land, Arabs built on hills overlooking the new road for Israelis. The government let them. From their new proximity to the special roads, terrorists again attacked Israeli cars. Money spent, solution elusive for lack of government enforcement of the law. If the government enforced the law, it would be criticized by most of the world. For what I think are historical and neurotic reasons, the government does not enforce the law. The more the government boasts of being a government of law, the more neurotic its hypocrisy appears.

My guides informed me that there is an Army base which trains police how to throw Jews out of their homes. You know, based on "illegal" housing. But many of the places called illegal were encouraged and subsidized and approved for building by the government. Then the government failed to give final approval for political reasons. The media then condemns the residents for moral turpitude, instead of condemning the government for denying final approval for political reasons. It's the government that has moral turpitude. I think Israeli governments have too much power and discretion.

The Arabs and the Left have conspired to defame Jews in the Territories. Arabs have been found to have damaged their own olive trees (or sometimes to have pruned them so they look damaged) and blamed Jews for it. Then they demand compensation from the government.

Leftists have led Arabs onto Jews' fields, to destroy crops. But the Left claims that Jews destroy Arabs' crops. There may have been some retaliation, but generally the Arabs are trying to drive Jews off the land. I have reported arrests of Jews who defend their property and lives from Arab marauders.

A new campaign against the reputation of "settlers" has opened. Somebody has been vandalizing mosques and other property of Arabs. Buildings are marked in Hebrew, "price-tag." "Price-tag" is supposed to mean that for every expulsion of Jews from houses called illegal, the Arabs will pay a price.

So far as I know, nobody has been caught in the act. It is not known who really committed these crimes. Not bothered by lack of evidence, the media nevertheless assume that the culprits are Jewish residents. The media hastens to denounce "settlers." Territorial Jewish councils hasten to denounce the crimes and the culprits. Their defense is that the media should not generalize, only a few people would be involved. The mass should not be blamed for crimes by the few.

My hosts suspect that Jewish residents are not involved. They suspect that Israeli secret police commit these crimes so that settlers get defamed and the government can more easily deny them rights and expel them. In the government's view, that would facilitate a new agreement with the Arabs to yield land to them.

This suspicion is not paranoid. The Rabin regime employed agents provocateurs to attack or threaten Arabs, in the name of the Right. Although this ruse was exposed, it worked. The Left utilized a provocateur's frauds to defame the Right. The government took no action against the practice and against those who ordered it. For all we know, the secret service still engage in it. Those who keep praising the vibrancy of Israeli democracy should take out a little time for investigating and eradicating such anti-democratic practices.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Jerry Sobel, March 29, 2012.

Whether in war, to an accident, or to crime, the loss of a child is a pain no parent quite ever gets over. Such is the case with the death of Trayvon Martin. Whether George Zimmerman is guilty of a crime or whether he was justified in using deadly force is at this moment uncertain. Either way it will bring no comfort to the Martin family.

What is certain is the gathering cloud of demagogues stirring up racial tensions in the country for their own personal aggrandizement in the hope rekindling relevance long ago lost.

Equally disturbing is the president of the United States, Barack Obama, offering comments on this unfortunate incident prior to local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies examining the evidence of this case. By doing so, he's added wood to the fire and aided those that would like nothing better than to rekindle racial hatred in our country as they've done so many times before.

I'd like to thank reader, contributor, and friend, Jerry Honigman for sending me his well researched and completely accurate article on the racial and anti-Semitic hucksters which like an infected boil are once again oozing out onto the American scene.

As you will see in Honigman's article, out of an infamous group of racial bigots, one man stands out amongst the rest. If you're thinking the Rev. Jessee (Hymie Town) Jackson, you're close but wrong. As great a race baiter and extortionist as he's been, he doesn't come near in malfeasance to his bombastic cohort and successor, Al Sharpton.

For those too young to remember who and what Sharpton is all about, Honigman's article is an absolute must....Jerrold L. Sobel

This below is called "The REAL Al Sharpton: Incitement of the 1991 Crown Heights Pogrom"
Mar 27, 2012 05:32 am
Jeff Dunetz
The Lid website
(http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2012/03/real-al-sharpton- incitement-of-1991.html?utm_source=The+Lid+List&utm_medium=email&utm_ campaign=0875062f23-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN)


Al Sharpton is a user. He exploits tragedy to get headlines for himself. It's what he is doing in the Trayvon Martin Case — — it's what he has done his entire career. Though this story has been told before, I thought it appropriate to reexamine some the exploitative handiwork of this Reverend who has long forgotten the golden rule, a purveyor of hatred who is given a place of honor as a civil rights leader by the mainstream media and by the President of the United States.

Twenty-one years ago a tragic car accident in Crown Heights Brooklyn escalated into a pogrom against the Jewish people, thanks in part to this faux-preacher.

The media gives this pogrom a politically correct description, violence between the area's Blacks and Jews. They ignore the fact that the violence was not two-sided. The Crown Heights riot was an attack on the Jews by the neighborhood's Caribbean community.

Black Antisemitism in the Summer of 1991

Jews were a key part of the civil rights movement in the 1960s, when the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. made his famous march to Selma Alabama, he walked hand in hand with many Jews including Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel. Along with the Jews was a contingent of Torahs to emphasize that the quest for Civil Rights was a holy mission for the Jewish people.

In spite of the strong Jewish participation in the civil rights movement the transformation from the peaceful marches to Black power movement introduced considerable friction into African American-Jewish relations, especially within the "Black Muslim" movement.

During the 1970s and 1980s African-Americans stopped looking at Jews as their allies but as their oppressors. The Jews were seen as having the political power that the African-Americans desired. Black leaders such as Louis Farrakhan, and Jesse Jackson went public with antiSemitic comments.

Adding to the hatred were the leaders of the South African anti-Apartheid movement who traveled throughout the United States as conquering heroes, and spreading Jew — hatred. For example, in 1984 Desmond Tutu publicly complained about American Jews having "an arrogance — the arrogance of power because Jews are a powerful lobby in this land and all kinds of people woo their support.

Understandably Jewish/Black relations were already rocky as NY City entered the summer of 1991.

On July 20, 1991, Leonard Jeffries of City College who had a history of anti-Semitic slurs presented a two-hour long speech claiming "rich Jews" financed the slave trade, Jews control the film industry (together with Italian mafia), and use that control to paint a brutal stereotype of blacks. Jeffries also attacked Diane Ravitch, (Assistant Secretary of Education) calling her a "sophisticated Texas Jew," "a debonair racist" and "Miss Daisy."

Jeffries' speech received enormous negative press during the first weeks of August especially from the leaders of the Jewish community who wanted Jeffries fired for the bigotry.

With each new criticism of the professor, leaders in the African-American community rushed to Jeffries' defense. NYC's two black newspapers as well as black radio station WLIB; joined activists such Al Sharpton, Colin Moore, C. Vernon Mason, Sonny Carson, and Lenora Fulani to showcase their approval of Jeffries's "scholarship" and to denounce the people who criticized Jeffries Antisemitism as race baiters.

Serial race-baiter Al Sharpton is credited with saying, "If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house" as a response the Crown Heights riot. That is a fallacy; he made that threatening comment to the Jewish community about the growing Jeffries controversy on August 18th the day before the riots began. Clearly something bad was coming.

Jeffries was fired because of his bigoted speech and pressure from the Jewish community (he was later reinstated and won a court case surrounding his firing) leading to further resentment of the Jews from a Black community already being barraged with anti-Jewish incitement from the African-American media.

Crown Heights Ignites

On Monday 8/19/91 a station wagon driven by Yosef Lifsh, hit another car and bounced onto the sidewalk at 8:21 p.m. The station wagon was part of a 3-car motorcade carrying the Lubavitcher Rebbe Menachem Schneerson. The Rebbe was in a different car.

The station wagon struck two black children, 7-year-old cousins Gavin and Angela Cato who were on the sidewalk. Lifsh immediately got out of his car and tried to help the children gathering crowd started to attack him.

Within minutes, an ambulance from the Hasidic-run ambulance service, and two from the city's Emergency Medical Service arrived. Also the gathering crowd became unruly. The police who showed up radioed for backup reporting the station wagon's driver and passengers were being assaulted. Police officer Nona Capace ordered the Hasidic ambulance to remove the battered Yosef Lifsh, and his passenger from the scene.

The injured children went by separate city ambulances to Kings County Hospital. Gavin Cato was pronounced dead; his cousin survived.

A rumor began to spread that the Hasidic ambulance crew had ignored the dying black child in favor of treating the Jewish men. Ignoring the commandment about bearing false witness, Sharpton used this falsehoodto incite the crowd. Other rumors sprang up Lifsh was intoxicated (breath alcohol test administered by the police proved his sobriety). More falsehoods circulated; Lifsh did not have a valid driver's license; he went through a red light; the police prevented people including Gavin Cato's father, from assisting in the rescue.

Charles Price, an area resident who had come to the scene of the accident, incited the masses with claims that, "The Jews get everything they want. They're killing our children." Price later pled guilty for inciting the crowd to murder Yankel Rosenbaum.

Ignited by the falsehoods, resentment exploded into violence. Groups of young black men threw rocks, bottles and debris at police, residents and homes.

According to the New York Times, more than 250 neighborhood residents went on a rampage that first night, mostly black teenagers, many of whom were shouting "Jews! Jews! Jews!"

Three hours after the tragic crash, 29-year-old Australian Jewish scholar Yankel Rosenbaum was attacked by a gang of Black teens. He was stabbed four times. Cops quickly arrested Lemrick Nelson, who was identified by Rosenbaum as his attacker. Rosenbaum's wounds were not fatal he was expected to recover; Mayor Dinkins visited Rosenbaum at the hospital. Yankel died at 2:30am Tuesday because the hospital staff missed one of his knife wounds.

Yankel Rosenbaum

The next evening, according to the sworn testimony of Efraim Lipkind, a former Hasidic resident of Crown Heights, Sharpton started agitating the crowd.

"Then we had a famous man, Al Sharpton, who came down, and he said Tuesday night, kill the Jews, two times. I heard him, and he started to lead a charge across the street to Utica."

With each passing hour the violence worsened, Jewish leaders began to desperately complain about the lack of protection to the authorities. They said, the rioters were being allowed to rampage unchecked, too little force was being brought to bear, and too few arrests were being made. Area Jews felt the police were under orders by the City's first black mayor to hold back, that the police were not allowed to fight against the Black rioters, who continued to grow bolder in their antiSemitic attack as they sensed the appeasement.

The fact is New York City Mayor David Dinkins responded to the riot immediately by deploying 2,000 police officers and making a personal visit to the troubled neighborhood under a hail of rocks and epithets hurled at him by fellow blacks.

Dinkins has spoken of his own mishandling of the riots. Admitting he "screwed up Crown Heights"

"I regret not saying to the police brass sooner whatever you guys are doing is not working" it was then they altered their behavior and they were able to contained the ravaging young blacks who were attacking Jews ... I will forever be accused of holding back the police and permitted blacks to attack Jews, however that did not happen it is just inaccurate"

In all, the street violence against the Crown Heights Jews lasted three days/four nights starting with the evening of the accident. On Thursday evening, cops finally restored order, although sporadic violence against Jews continued for weeks after the riot was contained.

Yankel Rosenbaum wasn't the only person murdered by the rioters. On September 5th, Italian-American, Anthony Graziosi, was dragged out of his car, brutally beaten and stabbed to death because his full beard and dark clothing caused him to be mistaken for a Hasidic Jew.

During the funeral of Gavin Cato on August 26th, Al Sharpton gave an antiSemitic eulogy, which fueled the fires of hatred.

"The world will tell us he was killed by accident. Yes, it was a social accident. ... It's an accident to allow an apartheid ambulance service in the middle of Crown Heights. ... Talk about how Oppenheimer in South Africa sends diamonds straight to Tel Aviv and deals with the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights. The issue is not antiSemitism; the issue is apartheid. ... All we want to say is what Jesus said: If you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for it. No compromise, no meetings, no kaffe klatsch, no skinnin' and grinnin'. Pay for your deeds."

Regarding the Mayor's call for peace Sharpton pontificated: "They don't want peace, they want quiet."

Sharpton and the lawyer representing the Cato family counseled them not to cooperate with authorities in the investigation and demanded a special prosecutor be named.

Sharpton was asked about the violence, he justified it, "We must not reprimand our children for outrage, when it is the outrage that was put in them by an oppressive system," he said.

The first Sabbath after the Funeral Sharpton tried unsuccessfully to kick up tensions again by marching 400 protesters in front of the Lubavitch of Crown Heights shouting "No Justice, No Peace."

Sharpton and his gang

Sharpton called for the arrest of Lifsh, the driver of the station wagon. Even though more than twenty similarly accidental vehicular deaths had occurred in Brooklyn since 1989 without a single arrest several involving local Hasidim run down by blacks. The agitator's pressure led Charles Hynes, the Brooklyn district attorney, into convening a grand jury.

When the investigation of the accident did not produce a criminal indictment against Yosef Lifsh, Al Sharpton encouraged the Cato family to seek big-bucks damages in a civil suit against Lifsh (who had since fled to Israel for his own safety). Sharpton announced that he would personally serve papers on Yosef Lifsh in Israel. He bought tickets and hopped an El-Al flight on the weekend of Yom Kippur. At Ben Gurion Airport, a woman spotted Sharpton hailing a cab and yelled to him, "Go to hell! "I am in hell already," shot back. "I am in Israel."

The Aftermath

Sharpton abandoned the Caribbean people of Crown Heights as soon as the antiSemitic violence had died down. His entire participation in the violence may have been a calculated effort to usurp Jesse Jackson as the leading spokesman for African-Americans. Jackson may have had his "Hymie-town" but Sharpton's incitement against those Jews who he perceived as having the political power that African Americans deserved, went much further than simply words like Jackson.

Sadly had Sharpton not exploited the death of Gavin Cato for his own "resume", what was by all accounts, a disorganized group of ruffians on the first night of the riot, might well have dissipated the morning after the accident.

The media portrayed the Crown Heights riot as two-sided promoting the myth that both blacks and Jews were equal in their violence. The violence was a one-sided rampage waged by some of the neighborhood's 180,000 strong black majority against a Jewish minority of 20,000.

Maybe the media continues to sugarcoat the riot because it was unprecedented in American history. For liberals it's impossible to perceive blacks as purveyors of bigotry they are forever in the role of victims of hate.

Farrakhan and Sharpton

The Crown Heights riot occurred just five months after the infamous Rodney King beating, a disgusting act of police brutality against the African American King which was video-taped and repeated on TV ad nauseum.

After the King case, who could believe that blacks in America could ever take over the role of racists, but that is what happened in Crown Heights. Even today the deaths of Gavin Cato and Yankel Rosenbaum are viewed as some sort of a" tit for tat." This is a misrepresentation of the facts. Cato's death was the result of a horrible accident; on the other hand, Rosenbaum was deliberately stabbed four times by an angry mob. Anthony Graziosi's death has been forgotten perhaps because his death would break some cynical equality of fatality.

Mayor Dinkins

Many in the Jewish community felt Mayor Dinkins was complacent in the violence, holding back the police from protecting the Jewish community, but there has never been evidence offered proving that charge.

A more likely explanation for the lack of protection offered to the Hasidic community is a perfect storm of incompetence. An incompetent Police Commissioner Lee Brown was being managed by an incompetent Mayor.

Nevertheless the pogrom dealt a death blow to Dinkins' mayoral career. Ironically it was the fact that Jews had voted for him in overwhelming numbers that him a narrow victory over Rudy Giuliani in 1989. Those same Jews switched sides, giving Giuliani the win against Dinkins in 1993.

To this day, the media refuses to acknowledge that African-Americans can be racists just as much as Caucasians and Antisemitism is still ignored by the media. News networks invite antiSemitic representatives of CAIR or former CIA agent Michael Scheuer to participate on their programs as experts, but these same "experts" contend that American Jews run the media and the Government. Huffington Post regularly allows Media Matters' MJ Rosenberg on their front page where he too uses antiSemitic stereotypes.

As for Al Sharpton, he went on to lead a second pogrom, this time against a Jewish-owned business in Harlem. I suppose it was his experience in leading two antiSemitic pogroms that gave Sharpton the expertise he needed to be an adviser to the first "post-racial "President, Barack Obama and the latest evening anchor for MSNBC. It has certainly gave him the inspiration to exploit other tragedies such as the Trayvon Martin case in Florida.

Sharpton's rise to respectability proves how little has been learned from the Crown Heights antiJewish violence which took place twenty years ago.

Contact Jerry Sobel by email at jerrysobel@israeliadvocate.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Laura, March 29, 2012.

This was written by Adam Kredo and it appeared in the Washington Free Beacon


The Obama administration is waging a highly-coordinated media campaign to thwart a potential Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, according to one of Israel's top defense reporters. In a new report, Ron Ben-Yishai, one of Israel's most respected defense voices, writes that the Obama administration is exploiting American and British media outlets to pressure the Israelis and complicate efforts to deal with the Iranian threat.

Ben-Yishai writes:

Indeed, in recent weeks the Administration shifted from persuasion efforts vis-à-vis decision-makers and Israel's public opinion to a practical, targeted assassination of potential Israeli operations in Iran. This "surgical strike" is undertaken via reports in the American and British media, but the campaign's aims are fully operational: To make it more difficult for Israeli decision-makers to order the IDF to carry out a strike, and what's even graver, to erode the IDF's capacity to launch such strike with minimal casualties.

The first and most important American objective is to eliminate potential operational options available to the IDF and the State of Israel. I have no intention of detailing or even hinting to the options which the US government aims to eliminate by exposing them in the media. A large part of the reports stem from false information or disinformation, and there is no reason to reveal to the Iranians what's real and what isn't. However, it is blatantly clear that reports in the past week alone have caused Israel substantive diplomatic damage, and possibly even military and operational damage.

Another Administration objective is to convince the Israeli public that an Iran strike (including a US attack) will not achieve even the minimum required to justify it; that is, a delay of at least 3-5 years in Iran's nuclear program. A lengthy postponement would of course justify the suffering on Israel's home front, while a six-month delay — as argued by a US Congress report — does not justify the risks.

Contact Laura at LEL817@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Ginsberg, March 29, 2012.

This was written by Melanie Lidman and it appeared the Jerusalem Post. Melanie Lidman is the Jerusalem Metro reporter for The Jerusalem Post. As the only Jerusalem reporter, her beat encompasses municipality affairs, police, crime, politics, riots, violence, religious issues, culture, education, and just about everything within the municipal borders of Jerusalem. She also spent eight days in Cairo during the January 25 revolution, using some creative ways to report on how the "Arab Spring" of revolutions is affecting Israel


Tension from two-month-old rumors about mass Jewish demonstrations to overtake the Temple Mount has continued to ripple across Jerusalem. This has led to an increase in violence and stone throwing attacks, Arab and Jewish residents of east Jerusalem said on Tuesday.

When a flyer was circulated two months ago publicizing a mass march by right-wing Jews to overtake the Temple Mount, it immediately touched off large riots in Jerusalem and Jordan.

One of the places dealing with the aftershocks of the rumors is Beit Hoshin, a heavily-guarded Jewish enclave perched at the top of the Mount of Olives. An enormous Israeli flag flutters prominently over the apartment complex.

Seven Jewish families have lived there since 2006, supported by the Ir David Foundation.

Residents said in the past month and a half, they have dealt with a new wave of violence from neighborhood youth, including stone throwing and vandalism of their cars on an almost nightly basis. Private security guards at the complex said that the current cycle of violence was the worst in over a year.

Vandalized car outside Beit Hoshin (Courtesy of Naama Cohen)

On Tuesday, National Union MKs Arye Eldad and Michael Ben-Ari paid an unannounced visit to Beit Hoshin express their support for the residents.

"We want to know why the police presence here is zero," said Eldad as he stood on the roof of the building, which affords a panorama of the Old City and the Temple Mount.

Eldad said that while the vandalism had not yet endangered human life, the situation was deteriorating. "Everyone will wake up if heaven forbid there's a tragedy here," he said.

"The guard car here looks like the beat up [army] trucks at Sha'ar Hagai from the War of Independence," said Eldad, referring to the burned husks of supply trucks that were destroyed in attempts to bring supplies to Jerusalem in 1948 and now serve as memorials along Highway 1.

"These are parts of Jerusalem, but police and Israeli citizens don't come here," said Ben-Ari.

"I don't see the Israel police working so that Jerusalem will be united."

"You can't just defend yourself, you need to attack the threats as well," he added.

Shmuel Na'eh, who lives on Beit Hoshin's ground floor, was online looking to buy a secondhand car when Eldad and Ben-Ari knocked on his door. While driving through the neighborhood of A-Tur over a month ago, youth had thrown broken pieces of sidewalk at his car and smashed the windshield. A few weeks later, someone lobbed a Molotov cocktail into his parked car, burning it completely.

Na'eh said cars belonging to every resident had been attacked several times in the past month.

According to witnesses, locals walk up to the cars, pick up a rock, smash the windshield and continue on their way. The National Union MKs warned that not controlling the vandalism at this level could lead to more serious violence.

Shmuel's wife, Esther Na'eh, said relations with the neighbors had been quiet until recently. She added that aside from a few undercover police in the evening, the residents rarely saw police patrolling their complex.

Mahmoud Abu El Hawa, who owns a convenience store and lives next to Beit Hoshin, said that the vandalism had gotten worse across east Jerusalem in the past two months, after the Temple Mount rumors. He boarded up the windows of his convenience store with plastic sheeting because vandals broke them on several occasions, thinking they belonged to the Jewish apartments. "We don't want them here but we have to live with them," he said of the Jewish residents.

El Hawa's brother Muhammad, who sold the building to a Palestinian businessman in the early 2000s, was murdered after the building changed hands to the Ir David Foundation.

The revenge killing is common for Arabs who are suspected of selling property in east Jerusalem to Jews.

But El Hawa said that the vandalism of cars was partly nationalistically motivated, and partly connected to a general neighborhood dispute over a few precious parking spots in the crowded neighborhood.

Two months ago, Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch announced the creation of a new police station on the Mount of Olives, which would focus on preventing grave desecration and stone throwing against Jewish worshippers trying to access graves in the 3,000-year-old Jewish cemetery. The Na'ehs said they hoped the new police station would limit vandalism in their neighborhood as well. El Hawa said police already patrolled the area frequently and many of the neighborhood children had been arrested several times for vandalism, though they claim they were not involved While the station was initially planned to open mid-February, police said on Tuesday there is no firm date and it could be a number of months before the station is opened.

Jerusalem police deputy spokeswoman Shlomit Bajshi said no increase in violence has been reported. "There is the same amount of stone throwing, but there are arrests and operations there on a permanent basis."

Bajshi also denied claims by Beit Hoshin residents that police ignore their neighborhood.

"Even without complaints filed with the police, we have regular operations there," she said.

Eldad and Ben-Ari told the Na'ehs they would try to hold a special discussion about the security situation on the Mount of Olives in the coming weeks.

Contact Barbara Ginsberg at barbaraandchaim@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Rabbi David Bar-Hayim, March 29, 2012.

Olives (Flash90)

Rashi almost certainly never saw an olive. The same goes for other medieval authorities in Ashk'naz (Germany-Northern France). This little-known but indisputable fact should matter to you. It has everything to do with the following question: Is Halakhic Judaism rational and rooted in reality, or is it a hypothetical construct unconducive to engaging the real world?

It is a simple matter to ascertain, or describe to another, the volume of an average olive, a 'k'zayit'...provided you have olives. But what if you have never seen an olive? How would you understand the concept? How would you describe it to someone unfamiliar with olives?

This was the reality in Ashk'naz in the Middle Ages, and there is no mystery as to why. The olive tree is native to the Mediterranean basin, from Israel in the East to Spain in the west; it does not naturally grow elsewhere. In Roman times, due to the trade routes which crisscrossed the Empire, olives may have made their way to Germany and beyond. The collapse of Rome, however, led to a breakdown of law and order, and therefore trade.

Medieval Ashk'nazim were unfamiliar with olives, a fact confirmed by R. Eliezer b. Yoel's (d. circa 1225) discussion of the minimal amount required for a b'rakha aharona: "Wherever a k'zayith is required, one needs a sizeable amount of food, because we are unfamiliar with the size of an olive..." (Ra'avya, B'rakhoth 107).

Some Ashk'nazi authorities concluded that an olive was half the volume of an egg, while others demonstrated, based on Talmudic sources, that it must be less than one third of an egg. How much less they could not say. The truth, of course, is different, as was clearly perceived by one 14th century authority who actually made it to Eretz Yisrael. Responding to the proposition that a person could swallow three k'zaytim at once (which is quite impossible if one assumes a k'zayit to be half of an egg in volume) he wrote: "As for me, the matter is plain, for I saw olives in Eretz Yisrael and Yerushalayim, and even six were not equal to an egg." S'pharadi authorities, on the other hand, had no such difficulties. One wrote that an olive is "much less" than a quarter of an egg (Rashba), while another mentions in passing that a dried fig is equal to "several olives" (Rittba). The last three statements, made by sages who saw olives, are entirely accurate.

In present day Halakhic practice, predicated on opinions rooted in the aforementioned lack of knowledge and experience, a k'zayit is often said to be 30 cc, while others say 60 cc. These figures bear no relation to the real world olives of Eretz Yisrael which average 3-5 cc. It is claimed by some that once upon a time olives were much larger. This claim is false. Olives and olive trees have not changed, as evidenced by the fact that there are over 70 olive trees in Israel ranging between 1,700-2000 years old, and 7 are approximately 3000 years old. These trees continue to produce fruit identical to the olives of younger trees. Halakhic responsa from the G'onic period echo these facts, stating plainly that olives do not change. Some would have you believe that there are two kinds of olives: real olives and 'Halakhic' olives. In their view, Halakha need not reflect reality; it exists in an alternate reality of its own. This is a tragedy because it paints Judaism as divorced from reality and irrelevant to a rational person. This is a lie because Torah was intended by Hashem as our handbook for operating in the real world.

The ultimate purpose of Judaism was announced by the Creator before He transmitted the Torah to His people: "And you shall be for My purpose a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Exodus 19:6). The nation of Israel is the priest connecting God and mankind. "I, God, have summoned you for a righteous purpose.... and have assigned you for my covenant with humanity, a light for the nations" (Isaiah 42:6).

The Jewish people, in order to succeed, have to live and lead in the real world. To deal with the challenges facing us as a nation we must think, act and believe rationally. A rational person does not believe in olives 2o times the size of the olives we see with our own eyes. To deal with reality, we have to get real.

We are described as being created in the image of Hashem because we can think and reason. To convince ourselves that Halakha can be based on irrational claims is an insult to our God-given intelligence. Not to mention that it places Judaism squarely in the realm of fairy tales. What kind of message does that send to our children?

Nothing could be more pernicious than the notion that truth and Torah do not mix. The same goes for the idea that Halakhic opinions rooted in Exile-induced misconceptions are sacrosanct and immutable. A philosophy that turns aberration into truth, the Torah of Galuth into the real McCoy, is intolerable. The clear implication is that Judaism, as a system, is broken and beyond repair.

Rabbi David Bar-Hayim is the head of Machon Shilo, a centre of Jewish learning in Jerusalem dedicated to the exposition and dissemination of Torat Eretz Yisrael. The teachings of Rabbi Bar-Hayim may be found at www.machonshilo.org. Machon Shilo, headed by HaRav David Bar-Hayim aims to bridge the current halakhic and hashkafic reality with the geulah for which am yisrael has been yearning. HaRav Bar-Hayim's teachings may be found at WWW.MACHONSHILO.ORG

The article is archived in the Jewish Press and is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Freund, March 29, 2012.

In recent weeks, the heart of Israel's capital has become an increasingly dangerous place for Jews. Residents and visitors alike have been subjected to a series of ominous attacks by local Arabs, which include vandalism, stone-throwing and the torching of vehicles and other property.

Even more worrisome is the fact that many of the offenses have been committed in broad daylight, signaling that the perpetrators are not all that concerned about the possible reaction of local law enforcement.

The escalating audacity of these assaults poses a direct threat to Israel's sovereignty and the rule of law, and urgent steps must be taken to crack down on Arab violence in Jerusalem before it spins entirely out of control.

One of the most serious incidents took place last month, on February 13, when two civilian employees of the Defense Ministry were nearly lynched by a mob of Arab youths near Mount Scopus in Jerusalem. The Israelis reportedly got stuck in a traffic jam, when their car was suddenly surrounded by Arabs and pummeled with stones. The driver was hit in the head by a large rock that slammed through the windshield, and was badly wounded.

The two barely escaped with their lives. This episode did not happen in Gaza or Tulkarm, but in Jerusalem. The attackers were never caught, and it appears little was done to apprehend them.

So it was perhaps only a matter of time before another such incident took place. And this past Monday, that is precisely what happened. An Israeli driving through Jerusalem's Wadi Joz neighborhood was abruptly attacked by dozens of Arabs who showered his car with stones and concrete blocks. He, too, was wounded when his windshield was shattered, and medics had to evacuate him to Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital.

Afterwards, police spokesman Mickey Rosenfeld offered some astonishing advice to Israeli drivers. Speaking with Arutz Sheva, he said that motorists should check with security personnel before entering "sensitive neighborhoods" to determine whether they are safe. In other words, we can no longer assume that all of Jerusalem, our capital city, is necessarily secure enough for Jews to navigate.

This is an astounding admission of failure on the part of the police. It means they have all but lost control over the streets of various Jerusalem neighborhoods and can no longer guarantee the safety of citizens who wish to utilize them. A further sign of the police's ineffectuality came in the form of an ad published last week by activist Arieh King of the Israel Land Fund calling for volunteers to help him carry out the court-ordered removal of illegal Palestinian squatters from a home in Jerusalem.

A Jerusalem magistrate's court recently found that the Palestinians had been dwelling illegally in the structure for the past decade even though it was owned by a British Jew.

The judge ordered them evacuated by March 1 and instructed the Palestinians to pay NIS 125,000 in damages.

Incredibly, the police chose to defy the court's ruling and called off the evacuation, reportedly because of concerns that it was scheduled to take place the day before a planned meeting between Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama in Washington.

After King received a new date of March 30 for the Palestinians' removal, he submitted repeated requests to the police to ensure they would oversee it. After the police did not bother to respond, King took the unusual step of placing the ad, suggesting that if the police won't do their job, then he may have no choice but to do it for them. It is hard to blame King for his frustration. After all, the job of the police is to enforce the law, not obstruct it.

Worse yet, they have failed to stem the violence targeting Jews, which has become so commonplace that it hardly even generates headlines anymore. On Sunday, for example, Arabs hurled a firebomb at an Israeli home in Jerusalem's Ma'aleh Zeitim neighborhood. The incident was barely mentioned by most media outlets.

This situation has become intolerable. A street war is being waged in Jerusalem, one in which local Arabs are attempting to frighten Jews out of various neighborhoods.

Israel cannot and must not allow this lawlessness and impunity to prevail. Steps must be taken to ensure that all of Jerusalem is safe for Jews.

To begin with, the police must significantly increase their presence throughout the eastern part of the city, boosting patrols and responding quickly to any outbreaks of violence. Stone-throwing youths should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Rocks are a dangerous weapon. They can maim, wound and kill, and those who hurl them at others should be treated accordingly.

Two months ago, Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch announced that a new police station would be opened on the Mount of Olives to crack down on Arab vandalism against the Jewish cemetery there as well as to provide increased protection to Jewish visitors. The station was supposed to have opened last month, but it has yet to do so. Inaugurating it now would send a strong message that the police are serious about imposing order.

Arab violence against Jews in east Jerusalem is in danger of spinning out of control. It must be stopped now, before it turns lethal.

Michael Freund is the founder and chairman of Shavei Israel (www.shavei.org), which assists Anousim in Spain, Portugal and South America to return to the Jewish people. He served as an adviser to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in his first term in office. This appeared today in The Jerusalem Post

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, March 28, 2012.

1. Israel's encephalo-phobic Left has a brand new cause. It is all upset because some soccer hooligans in Jerusalem ran into a nearby mall after a soccer match and were screaming antiArab slogans there, including "Death to Arabs." The Left is upset at this new manifestation of Jewish racism and is holding protest rallies.

Hmmm. Well, let us first point out that the same leftists so upset by these outbursts of soccer hooliganism have never had much to say about Arab racism. Arabs do not just chant "Death to Jews," they also murder Jews and cheer on those who murder Jews. Never a whisper of a protest from any leftists.

Secondly, Israel has seen a mass of incidents in recent weeks in which Arab street thugs assault and beat and try to murder randomly passing Jews. These include the attempted lynch of two out-of-uniform soldiers in Haifa, and several incidents in Jerusalem. (See
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4209530,00.html and this:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/154266) Arabs throwing rocks at Jews have become so common that the media do not bother reporting it. Not a single word about any of that from these holier than everyone Leftist rally participants.

As far as I know, those Jerusalem soccer hooligans merely screamed offensive slogans but never assaulted anyone. Screaming racist statements against Arabs and against Jews has become common at Israeli soccer matches, and is less political than simple beer-drenched rowdiness. Soccer hooliganism is not exactly rare in the civilized world and — if anything — its dimensions in Israel are smaller than in the UK and the rest of the EU. No, of course I do not approve of the hooliganism, and have in the past proposed that soccer hooliganism be dealt with by passing a law that, after all such hooliganism, all news reports about soccer games and all stadium commentary by MC's must be in Latin for 6 months. Soccer hooligans themselves should be sentenced to 18 months of Talmud study.


2. Speaking of the selective discoveries of "racism" by the Left: I really liked this:
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/03/29/chasing-the- great-white-whale-of-american-racism/

"Chasing the Great White Whale of American Racism"
Posted By Ann Coulter On March 29, 2012

Even after the Duke lacrosse case, Texaco executives allegedly using the N-word in private meetings — which turned out to be "St. Nicholas" — the Tawana Brawley case, not to mention virtual hailstorms of racist graffiti and nooses materializing on college campuses, all of which invariably end up having been put there by the alleged victims, the Non-Fox Media (NFM) didn't even pause before conjuring a racist plot in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin in Florida last month. Like Captain Ahab searching for the Great White Whale, the NFM is constantly on the hunt for proof of America as "Mississippi Burning." Over St. Patrick's Day weekend, the month after Martin was killed, gangs in Chicago shot 10 people dead, including a 6-year-old girl, Aliyah Shell, who was sitting with her mother on their front porch. One imagines MSNBC hosts heaving a sigh of relief that little Aliyah was not shot by a white man, and was thus spared the horror of being a victim of racism.

As it happens, Trayvon Martin wasn't shot by a white man either, but by George Zimmerman, a mixed-race Hispanic who lives in a diverse (47 percent white) gated community and tutors black kids. But Hispanic is close enough for the NFM. They're chasing the Great White Whale of racist America and don't have time to check to see if the whale is actually a guppy.

Since the cat leapt out of the bag on Zimmerman being Hispanic, the media have begun calling him a "white Hispanic." Not being a race-obsessed liberal, I don't particularly care, but it's indisputable that Zimmerman is brown. I saw his face carved on the side of a Mayan temple in the Yucatan. Using his mother's maiden name, he would be admitted to the University of Michigan law school on a full scholarship.

Apart from that, pretty much all that is known with certainty is that Zimmerman called the police to report a suspicious character in his neighborhood, and shortly thereafter he shot and killed Martin. On the basis of little else, the media conjured a Hollywood script: A "white" man was "stalking" a little black kid — who could be Obama's son! — confronted him, beat him senseless as the small black child screamed for help, and finally shot the kid dead, "just because he was black."Two weeks of nonstop hysteria later, it turns out that every part of that gripping plot is based on nothing that could be called a reasonable assumption, much less a fact.

The NFM's theory of the case might be true, just as it might be true that the loud bang I just heard outside my door is Godzilla returning to terrorize Manhattan. I, like the NFM, have no facts supporting my theory. (Although mine is more credible because Al Sharpton is not involved and none of my facts are provably false, such as the NFM's claim about Zimmerman being "white.") First of all, there's no reason to believe Zimmerman followed Martin after the police told him not to, which is the linchpin of much excited reporting.

Zimmerman told the police, his friends and his lawyer that he walked back to his car after hanging up with the police and was waylaid by Martin. No witnesses have told the press otherwise. We don't know if — as the NFM has baldly asserted — it was Martin yelling "Help!" during the struggle. Before the case became a nationwide sensation, the lead detective told the Orlando (Fla.) Sentinel that the police had played all the 911 calls for Martin's father, and he said the voice crying "Help!" was not his son's. (The father has subsequently retracted that.)

Before the shooting was even a twinkle in the eye of MSNBC, an eyewitness gave a detailed account to the local media, indicating that it was Martin who was on top of Zimmerman, pummeling him, as Zimmerman screamed "Help!"

The police report says Zimmerman's nose was bleeding and his back covered in grass stains when they arrived at the scene. His lawyer and friends say he was treated for a broken nose the next day. There's no sense in arguing in public about such facts. The medical records exist or they do not.

Of course, the information contradicting the media's fantasy comes to us only in the form of witness statements and police reports appearing in the press, not as evidence in a formal criminal investigation. It's hard to tell where the NFM's suppositions are coming from inasmuch as they simply report their version as hard fact. But all their evidence seems to come only from Martin's family and girlfriend. Can we start trying all criminal defendants based exclusively on the testimony of the victim's friends and relatives?

Among the reasons to be suspicious of the media as impartial judges of the evidence is that they keep showing us snapshots from Martin's childhood, rather than any recent photos.

Without doing research, the average person would think Martin was a slight 12-year-old whippersnapper at the time of the shooting, rather than a strapping 6-foot, 160-pound 17-year-old. Indeed, he was 3 inches taller than Zimmerman, according to the police report.

Why aren't they showing us Zimmerman's baby pictures? (And why didn't we get to see baby pictures of the Duke lacrosse players? I bet they were adorable.)

CNN ceaselessly reported the allegation that Zimmerman could be heard in the background of one 911 call using an archaic racial epithet. Before playing the tape, correspondent Gary Tuchman first announced what the slur was supposed to be ("f*****g coon").

There's nothing like suggesting the answer in advance to improve reliability! Police should try that in lineups.

Then the same network that couldn't find the Jeremiah Wright tapes for sale in a church lobby brought in "one of the best audio experts in the business" to enhance the tape — take the bass away here, add volume there — and played the 1.6-second loop again and again, just in case you were not suggestible enough the first time.

Still, all that can be heard on the enhanced tape is "cha-chu, cha-chu, cha-chu."

But Tuchman wrapped up this demonstration by saying, "You know, it sounds like this allegation could be accurate, but I wouldn't swear to it in court. That's what it sounds like to me."

To the small percentage of CNN's audience with triple-digit IQs, it was comedy gold. The only thing missing was Tipper Gore playing the audio backward to reveal satanic lyrics.

(Incidentally, the Nexis transcript of the indecipherable "cha-chu" sound reads: "ZIMMERMAN: F*****g coons, f*****g coons. F*****g coons. F*****g coons. F*****g coons." Except it doesn't use asterisks.) All this may give you an inkling of why we rely on the criminal justice system to determine guilt in criminal cases and not the fervid imaginations of the race-obsessed media.


3. One of the goofiest sides of the Radical Left concerns the obsessive political exhibitionism of radical leftists with regard to the female genital parts. This manifests itself in the now ubiquitous set of performances of the feminist "drama" called (excuse my French) "The Vagina Monologues." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vagina_Monologues. Check out the part of that page about the case of Robert Swope!

This abomination is performed like clockwork or regular as douching on college campuses, and it is hard to get away from it in other places as well. It is also the cornerstone of the so-called

"V-Day" movement and its activities. I will give you a hint — the "V" does not stand for Oy Vey. For details, see
http://www.vday.org/home. Most of us got over our urge to display and discuss our genitalia around the same time that we learned to ride a tricycle. But not these people.

Well, at one of the universities in Europe where I frequent, the local feminists will be staging the "Monologues" and as part of the promotion, they have announced that they will be offering people free Vagina-shaped cupcakes.

Being a helpful sort, I distributed a mass campus inquiry as to whether the feminists organizing the event will be asking people to exhibit their progressive identification with the Third World by performing female circumcisions on the cupcakes.

This might be a good time to re-post this:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Blogs/Message.aspx/2274 From 2007:

"Yuli Tamir Goes A-Snipping"

Can the procedure be performed from the neck up?

Hold on to your-er-hats! Before pouncing upon me for posting a tasteless spoof, let me forewarn you that this is NOT a spoof. It is for real, and any nausea you feel should be directed against the actual cause, not your humble messenger.

Nevertheless you can check it all out for yourself. It is there in black and white. Never mind that the Israeli mainstream media have hidden the story for the past 11 years, trying to protect the rep of the Labor Party's daffiest leader.

Israel's Minister of Education, Yael "Yuli" Tamir, has campaigned publicly for the common form of female mutilation in the Third World known as "Clitoridectomy." It means what you think it means. "Yuli," back in 1996 when she launched her campaign, was a Professor at Tel Aviv University and had just joined Labor. Previously she had been Shulamit Aloni's sidekick in the "RATZ" party. She was in the news the past few weeks for proposing that Arab students in Israel learn from textbooks that portray Israel's very existence and creation as a "Naqba" or catastrophe.

The "Boston Review" is a left-leaning political and literary quarterly in Boston, the sort "anarchists" read. In its summer 1996 issue it ran Tamir's own article entitled, "Hands Off Clitoridectomy." Its theme was that all those Westerners expressing revulsion at the practice of slicing up female genitalia in certain parts of the world are themselves evil insensitive chauvistic philistine racists. Westerners should stop criticizing and allow the Third World to carry on with its enlightened multicultural clitorectomies. She rants thus in the article:

'In discussions about multiculturalism, clitoridectomy is now the trump card, taking over the role once played by cannibalism, slavery, lynchings, or the Indian tradition of Sati: "Is this the kind of tradition you would like to protect?" liberals ask embarrassed multiculturalists, who immediately qualify their cultural pluralism. Clitoridectomy defines the boundary between us and them, between cultures we can tolerate and those we must condemn....

'Furthermore, it seems clear that Western conceptions of female beauty encourage women to undergo a wide range of painful, medically unnecessary, and potentially damaging processes-extreme diets, depilation, face lifts, fat pumping, silicone implants. Of course, adult women do these things to their own bodies, and, it is said, their decisions are freely made. But would our gut reaction to female circumcision be very different if it were performed on consenting adults? It is not unlikely that girls at the age of 13 or 14, who are considered in traditional societies as adults mature enough to wed and bear children, would "consent" to the mutilation of their bodies if they were convinced that marriage and children were contingent on so doing. Many women who followed the tradition of Sati seemed to do it as a matter of choice....

'But our own culture fosters false beliefs of a similar kind. According to Naomi Wolf's The Beauty Myth, some 75 percent of women aged 18-35 believe that they are fat, whereas only 25 percent are medically overweight.1 Still more heartbreaking is the fact that the majority of the 30,000 women who responded to a Glamour questionnaire preferred losing 10-15 pounds to success in work or in love. So the fostering of such beliefs cannot differentiate their culture from our own and explain our hostility to it....A fulfilling sex life is certainly one good, but there are others. ...

'My purpose, however, is not to justify clitoridectomy, but to expose the roots of the deep hostility to it-to reveal the smug, unjustified self-satisfaction lurking behind the current condemnation of clitoridectomy. Referring to clitoridectomy, and emphasizing the distance of the practice from our own conventions, allows us to condemn them for what they do to their women, support the struggle of their women against their primitive, inhuman culture, and remain silent on the status of women in our society.'

We have a suggestion for the Olmert government. Remove the worst embarrassment in the cabinet by performing a small procedure of SNIP-SNIP!

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

To Go To Top

Posted by John Trudel, March 28, 2012.

This was written by Christopher Chantrill. He blogs and writes "An American Manifesto: Life After Liberalism.at www.usgovernmentspending.com. See also his blogs at http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/ and usgovernmentdebt.us. This article appeared today in
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../ 2012/03/the_science_of_half-baked_ideas.html.


The more we learn about climate science, the more we learn what a shabby, back-of-the-envelope business it is. Dr. Michael Mann, the climate science poster boy who simplified the global climate of the last millennium into a hockey stick, just came out with a book to remind us how anyone who disagrees with him is a shill for dark forces. He's a bully, and in the ClimateGate emails, he bullies even his colleagues.

It's déjà vu all over again, of course. Fifty years ago, another academic published a shabby little paper and then succeeded in bullying everyone into endorsing his view that saturated fat was the cause of heart disease. Gary Taubes describes this researcher's personality in Good Calories, Bad Calories:

Henry Blackburn, the long-time collaborator at [the University of] Minnesota, described him as "frank to the point of bluntness, and critical to the point of sharpness." David Kritchevsky, who studied cholesterol metabolism at the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia and was a competitor, described [him] as "pretty ruthless" and not a likely winner of any "Mr. Congeniality" awards.

This "frank ... critical ... ruthless" academic was Ancel Keys, inventor of the K-ration. He and his wife (an expert in measuring cholesterol) investigated several hundred people in the general population of Naples, Italy in the early 1950s and found that they measured low on cholesterol and had less heart disease than the fat-eating Neapolitan rich. Keys decided pretty quickly that dietary fat was the main cause of heart disease and spent the next couple of decades doing research to confirm his hypothesis.

The political situation back then was eerily familiar to our own time. In the early 1950s, the health establishment had just finished up the greatest public health success story of all time. With sanitation and vaccination, public heath had conquered the great scourges of infectious disease. So what could it do for an encore? It could solve the post-World War II heart-disease scare and apply the same epidemiological tools that had isolated the cause of cholera and typhoid. It was a no-brainer.

Fast-forward to climate science in the 1980s. The environmental establishment had just achieved the great goals of clean air and clean water and had transformed the U.S. metropolitan environment. What could it do for an encore? It could apply the same science, public relations, and regulatory tools used for the environmental success and save the planet from catastrophic global warming!

As we skeptics have seen, the global warming enthusiasts often had more enthusiasm than science. Climate science is a young science, and it doesn't know all that much about the climate. Not yet. The same was true back when heart disease became the number-one killer in the years immediately after World War II. What was killing all those middle-class Americans? Ancel Keys decided that it was the saturated fat in foods, and he couldn't wait for the results of his research-people were dying. So he persuaded the government to fight cholesterol with low-fat diets right away. When the research results came in, they were close to the Folgers taste test: "no difference." But by then, big budgets and reputations were committed to the idea that a high-fat diet causes heart disease, and the government couldn't change its mind.

People with half-baked ideas that are not ready for prime time instinctively grasp that they need the bludgeon of government force. There's a long and tragic history of half-baked ideas linked up to government, from Horace Mann's half-baked idea in the 1830s that government education would reduce crime, Marx's half-baked critique of capitalism, and on to Lysenko and "whole language" reading. It makes sense that Michael Mann's flawed Hockey Stick paper would be boosted at the dawn of climate science by the global-warming alarmists and given an authority it didn't deserve. So also did Ancel Keys' cholesterol theory get established into a huge government war on fat.

You can see how young folk get sucked into this. Young Karl Marx looked out at the world in the 1840s and saw an out-of-control industrial revolution. Something had to be done before the world ended! Same with Ancel Keys, when he had his Aha! moment about cholesterol at a conference on nutrition and disease in Naples in 1951. No doubt the young James Hansen and the young Michael Mann had their Aha! moments as well.

The separation of church and state is an attempt to keep religious enthusiasm at a distance from the temptations of government force. Only now we need a separation of secular church and state. That way we can keep secular-religious ideas on saving the planet at a distance from political power.

Then, when we've made progress on that front, we could try the separation of science and state, and even the separation of economy and state.

We've just got to save the planet from second-rate scientists and their half-baked ideas.

Contact John Trudel at mail@trudelgroup.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, March 28, 2012.

First matters first: I have an update on Zakkai, the baby boy with the tumor along his spine and in his thoracic cavity, that is not positive. When he originally was discovered to have a tumor on his spine that had caused him to stop walking, surgery was done to relieve the pressure on his spine and his improvement was immediate and gratifying. Then came the news that what they had been told was a malignant tumor was in fact benign. His most diligent parents, in seeking consultations from a variety of top-notch sources, were overwhelmed by a vast array of different opinions-everything from leaving it alone for now to different approaches to surgery. But essentially it was all very promising. Until now. They have learned that this tumor, although it is benign, is very aggressively growing. It has returned to the spine and is eating into vertebrae. Surgery is recommended quickly-although they will do some speedily consults first --and they fear for his recovery and for the prospect of his being paralyzed for life. In fact, they fear for his life. And so please, pray for him: Rafael Zakkai Avraham ben Yakira Avigael, and put out the word as broadly as you can.

For those wanting more details, as the parents are able to post:


As to standing tough:

Now, perhaps more than ever, it is important for Israel to stand tall and convey our convictions of what is right. Following the news about Israel breaking ties with the Human Rights Council came this, as described by Israel Hayom:

"Audiences at the annual J Street conference in Washington on Monday were shocked when one of the event's honorees, Deputy Chief of Mission at the Embassy of Israel in Washington, DC, Barukh Binah, stood at the podium and issued a respectful yet scathing criticism of the advocacy group's policies. As he took the podium at the event's gala dinner, Binah received rapturous applause, according to the tweets of several conference-goers. However, as the tone and content of Binah's speech became more apparent, the crowd was stunned into silence."

Stunned silence sounds good. This is the first time that Israel has sent an official delegate to the conference of J Street, which, in spite of its claims, is decidedly "progressive" in its approach and not particularly supportive of Israel. I confess that I was more than a bit unsettled when I read that Ambassador Michael Oren decided to send someone, but, given that scenario, this is as good as it might get.

"'We share your democratic values ... as we continue to face intolerable threats, we sometimes have to make decisions of life and death. We welcome the opinions of our brethren in the Diaspora, especially on issues of Jewish identity and pluralism, but at the end of the day, it is we, the Israelis, who must bear the ultimate burden and may have to pay the ultimate price. And we, dear friends and family, have no margins of error, none whatsoever. (Emphasis added)

"'I understand that you, my friends, are all about future and hope. So are we, the young and most energetic country that we are. But while our view is towards the future, we dare not forget our past. History must not shackle us, but its lessons must guide us,' Binah said. (Emphasis added)

"Taking aim at various voices within the American Jewish community, as well as a growing theme among some American pundits, who think that the current Israeli government is abusing the memory of the Holocaust to point to the threat from Iran, Binah said, 'And please, do not tell me that it is no longer relevant, because it is. It is alive and scorching just like the trail left by an Israeli Air Force F-16, flown over Poland's valleys of death by the granddaughter of the commanders of a ghetto revolt. It is alive in ink on paper as long as a 12-year-old, an eighth generation Israeli born, dedicates her bat mitzvah book to "members of my family whom I never met," though nobody coached her in this direction.'

"Binah went on to issue a thinly veiled dig at the group, saying, 'We need you to stand with us. It is as simple as that, and someone ought to say it. Internal activism is a central part of democratic society, but pressures on the elected government of Israel can present us with a problem, when we need you the most. Friends, I urge you to stand by our side as Americans, as members of your community, as Jews. For the sake of our forefathers and our future, we must keep our brotherhood strong.' (Emphasis added)

"Further admonishing J Street's focus on highlighting Israel's settlement enterprise, Binah said, 'You may be critical of settlements, but if you choose to show the most extreme, it behooves you to present the greater mass of moderates as well. If you show them [politicians J Street brings to Israel] negative aspects of checkpoints, please show as well the catastrophe and grief of terror victims. If you show them Israel's failings, show them also our triumphs such as the aliyah of the Jewish community of Ethiopia. I urge you to strive for balance, so that these lawmakers may become friends of Israel who might be critical, and not critics of Israel who are not friends.'"


We have a particular need for strength because of a widely publicized "event" that we must deal with this Friday: "The Global March on Jerusalem." Organizers of the event have promised there will be no violence, but the IDF is preparing for all eventualities.

The greatest concern is with the border with Lebanon-not Syria, because of internal strife. Nonetheless, troops are being deployed along all borders. The concern is with regard to massive breach of borders.


Then, I will add, there is apparently to be a "Welcome to Palestine Campaign" on April 15-21. This, according to the publicity that actually came to me as an email, calls for 1,500 people (likely an exaggeration) to come into "Palestine" for "peace building" and "to challenge the Israeli siege of the occupied territories."

If this is accurate, it sounds potentially more problematic than the event this week, but at this point I have no additional information.


I would like to return for one moment to the Washington Post editorial on the Toulouse tragedy that I addressed the other day. This is for a take on a different, albeit related, subject. The last part of the editorial read:

"Mr. Merah also claimed he attacked the Jewish school to avenge Palestinian children killed by Israel. This brought the best response of a terrible week, from Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. 'It is time for these criminals to stop marketing their terrorist acts in the name of Palestine and to stop pretending to stand up for the rights of Palestinian children who only ask for a decent life,' Mr. Fayyad said."

This, my friends, is unmitigated nonsense. Political nonsense, of course. And I could not let it pass.

I can well imagine the way PA leaders must have cringed when a thoroughly vilified terrorist was identified with the Palestinian cause; they knew this would not do them any good and that the connection had to be disavowed.

According to Maan, a Palestinian news agency, what Fayyad said was:

"This terrorist crime is condemned in the strongest terms by the Palestinian people and our children... No Palestinian child can accept crimes against innocent people."

But, as Palestinian Media Watch points out, the PA daily teaches Palestinian children to commit crimes against innocent people. According to the official Fatah Facebook page, accessed a week ago, this statement could be found:

"This is Dalal, my eternal love... Dalal is my mysterious young woman, my revolutionary Jihadi inspiration. I loved her but knew only her name, Dalal Mughrabi."

Dalal Mughrabi, who killed 12 children and 25 innocent adults during the Coastal Road Massacre of 1978, remains a Palestinian Arab heroine, venerated within the society in dozens of ways.


Marwan Barghouti, in Israeli prison for multiple life sentences for his part in terrorist killings, remains a very popular figure on the Palestinian Arab street. (Seems to me this adulation of terrorists is one of the truest indicators of who the Palestinian Arabs are.) Now it has made the news that he has advised:

"The launch of large-scale popular resistance at this stage serves the cause of our people.

"Stop marketing the illusion that there is a possibility of ending the occupation and achieving a state through negotiations after this vision has failed miserably."

Should we be surprised? Not at all. Does it make "resistance" more likely. Possibly.

The news release said that this statement was part of a message read to supporters in Ramallah marking the tenth anniversary of his imprisonment. The degree of latitude that Arabs in Israeli prisons have with regard to getting out messages broad-scale always astounds me-but perhaps it should not.


Khaled Abu Toameh says today that Barghouti's message is intended for the PA officials as much as for Israel. His message-calling for a "large-scale resistance," cutting off security and economic ties with Israel, combating financial corruption and renewing effort to achieve recognition of a state at the UN-"is similar to demands made by PA President Mahmoud Abbas's critics and rivals in Hamas."


In light of what has happened in Toulouse, and the debate about Islam that has ensued, this video is exceedingly relevant, even though it appears to be from 2010. It addresses the Islamization of Paris:
http://downloads.cbn.com/cbnnewsplayer/ cbnplayer.swf?aid=17933 (With thanks to Judith N.)


Today's news reports, incredibly, that the father of Mohammed Merah, Mohammed Benalel Merah, in Algeria, intends to sue France for his son's death.

"If I was the father, I would remain quiet in shame," said French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe. Indeed.

While a Sarkozy advisor, Henri Gaiano said, "He is within his rights, but a word comes to my mind: indecency."

This perhaps reveals a great deal.


From the unlikely source of NPR:

"Intelligence and law enforcement officials say analysts and experts who have been tracking al-Qaida for more than a decade have been quietly reassigned. Some are being moved completely out of al-Qaida units. Others are being asked to spend less time watching al-Qaida and more time tracking more traditional foes — like state-sponsored terrorists.

"U.S. officials declined to provide specific numbers or detail which intelligence units have changed priorities, but they did say that a goodly portion of the analysts who have been reassigned from their al-Qaida duties are being asked to focus on one country: Iran.

Now, according to a senior adviser at the consulting group Oxford Analytica, "after years of relatively low-level operations by Iranian-backed terrorists, Teheran appears to be back on the offensive.'

"'There is no way you conduct that number of attacks [as described in the article] without having senior leadership saying this is what we want to do.' And that goes a long way toward explaining why Iran is fast becoming such a priority in the U.S. intelligence community."
http://www.npr.org/2012/03/27/149408570/f or-u-s-analysts-rethinking-the-terror-threat



Meanwhile, at the opening of the International Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul, South Korea, on Monday, President Obama told representatives of 50 nations that:

"I believe there is a window of time to solve this diplomatically, but that window is closing. Iran's leaders must understand that there is no escaping the choice before it. Iran must act with the seriousness and sense of urgency that this moment demands. Iran must meet its obligations.

"Provocations will not be answered with prizes. Those days are over."

Hmm... again. Is the light beginning to dawn for Obama? Too soon to tell, but this will be watched closely.


At that same Summit in Seoul, unaware that he was within range of the microphone, told Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he would have greater flexibility on foreign policy after the election in November.

Obama later attempted to explain that he simply meant that the election prevented him from engaging now in serious negotiations on disarmament. But I'm not buying that. A word to the wise...


A housekeeping matter: While your communication is appreciated, and sometimes of considerable value, I receive far too many messages to always respond personally; please understand this. In fact, I am sent far too many article, links to articles and assorted tidbits to always attend to all of those, either. What I do ask, please, is that you identify any URL you send to me. If you send just the URL itself, with no hint as to what it will lead me to, I am not likely to track it.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Ralph Dobrin, March 28, 2012.

Peace And International Law Have Nothing To Do With It


It's easy to be fooled into thinking that Israel is indeed a pariah state. After all, not since Nazi Germany began seizing neighboring countries for herself in the second half of the nineteen thirties, has any one nation been so widely vilified and condemned as the State of Israel. And maybe all that condemnation is understandable. After all, the general impression that most people around the world get from what they see on their TV screens, is that Israel keeps bombing helpless Arab refugees, causing terrible death and destruction — all this after the Jews had stolen Palestine from the Arabs and chased them out of their own country.

Unfortunately, there is very little credible background appended to the images that people see on their TV screens or read in the newspapers and blog sites. Little is ever mentioned about the Arab intentions and attempts, at the outset, to wipe Israel off the face of the map. Full-scale invasions against Israel and terror attacks aren't considered relevant factors in the ongoing conflict. Neither are Israel's repeated withdrawals in order to facilitate peace in the region. And when any background material is actually presented, it is invariably the slanted Arab narrative that is told — sans the provocations against Israel but with lots of hyberbole and outright lie.

But two facts are indisputable. Firstly, Israel has indeed waged a number of full-scale wars and military campaigns against Arab states and terrorist organizations (deemed liberation organizations by many). Secondly, Israel occupies lands that were once under Arab rule. No doubt about this. Thus the perennial call of most leaders — Arab and non-Arab alike — as well as public figures, political commentators and journalists throughout the world, that Israel must withdraw from all these said lands as quickly as possible. Also, there is a broad consensus that Jewish settlement in any of these areas is totally unacceptable and in fact illegal.

However, when considering all this less-than-favorable focus on Israel, one would expect her detractors and other well-meaning observers to look around at what's happening elsewhere and ask themselves why is Israel constantly singled out for condemnation, when at this very moment there are a dozen dreadful situations of warfare or the imposition of intended deprivation on whole populations in many parts of Africa and Asia, while hundreds of unresolved conflicts between neighboring countries or ethnic differences simmer on all continents of the globe. There are killings numbering in the tens and even hundreds of thousands of non-combatants.

One would also expect all the good folks from Western Europe and in other democracies around the world, who are so intent on pressuring Jews to relinquish Judea and Samaria (a.k.a. West Bank or "the occupied" or "conquered territories"), to question their own record of human rights. For hundreds of years the British, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch and Belgians sent ships to the other sides of the world and appropriated the lands of other nations, in many cases accompanied by terrible acts of cruelty and ruthless mass killings, and in the case of Britain and Spain — whole continents! So it seems like extreme hutzpah for these people to single out Israelis for criticism, especially when Judea and Samaria constitutes the Jews' ancestral homeland, and bearing in mind that Israel's adversaries have launched wars of intended genocide against her!

The hutzpah is more blatant when one considers the general complacency regarding continental-sized countries like China, hungry for ever more territory, annexing placid Tibet. Or Russia, with the largest national land-mass in the world, stretching over almost half of the length of the northern part of the globe, but nevertheless insisting on holding onto lands of many other nations, including in the east — the southern Kurile Islands, formerly belonging to Japan, while on the country's extreme west, it keeps Karelia which it captured from Finland in 1939, as well as Chechniya and a whole array of other ethnic areas.

Who among all those concerned folks around the world, who refuse on principle to buy Jaffa oranges, are doing any demonstrating or boycotting against Russia or refusing to buy any "Made-in-China" products, that are often manufactured under the harshest, most exploitive and inhuman conditions.

We could go on and on about the millions of square kilometers of land that many scores of additional countries on every continent have grabbed from other nations. Indeed, there are very few borders in the world that were not drawn up (and redrawn) as the result of armed conflict at one time or another. At the moment there are over 200 territorial disagreements all over the world. Whether they are dormant or the scenes of armed conflicts, the territories in question are almost always termed by the media and in various international forums as "disputed territories." But Judea and Samaria are called "occupied" or "conquered territories" — which are denigratory, politically loaded terms, expressing a flagrantly double standard with regard to Israel.

Countries have seldom lost any international trade or diplomatic standing by grabbing some neighboring or not-such-neighboring territory — especially when such land-grabbing had no global implications or bearing on power bloc manipulations. In the last generation, apart from international intervention in a few strategic trouble spots, or demonstrations accompanying torch bearers to the recent China Olympics and the boycott of Apartheid-era South Africa, censure, if forthcoming, might be limited to a few debates in the U.N. general assembly or security council. Usually even that is absent.

While the recent, well-attended conference to combat AntiSemitism in London, indicates that many democratic governments are beginning to understand Israel's plight, probably because of suicide bombings and growing Islamic unrest in their own countries, their continuing pressure on Israel to keep making concessions towards its hostile neighbors, expresses the double standard traditionally pinned onto Israel.

It's a unique phenomenon. Israel, one of the smallest nations in the world, sitting on a scrap of ancestral land — 20,000 square kilometers in size, with the sea or a border to a hostile zone never more than about an hour's drive away from any point within it, faces the enmity of the Arabs — actually one of the largest nations on earth, over 600 times larger in land mass and 50 times larger in population than Israel, and backed by yet another billion fellow-Muslims. Probably in all history there has never been such a disproportionate ratio between two conflicting sides. There has never been such an unfair expectation of one of the sides by the rest of humanity, nor such pressure, politically and economically imposed on any one side of a conflict. Even Israel's major friend, the USA, continually limits Israel's scope to defend herself. Seldom in history has any one nation been so thoroughly, unjustifiably and unfairly condemned by a large part of humanity, nor hampered over and over again in its struggle to defend itself militarily.

There are a number of logical reasons for all this. It's Israel's bad luck to find herself in a territorial confrontation with a nation that constitutes over 20 independent states controlling most of the world's known oil reserves, while being backed by over a billion co-religionists, who also happen to share a large portion of the remaining oil reserves. Together, these two enormous groups constitute almost half the states in the world and therefore have tremendous political clout in the United Nations. All this means that any major outbreak of warfare in the Middle East jeopardizes the global supply of oil and can send prices to unmanageable levels. This alone can explain the readiness of many countries to please the Arab and Muslim world, or conversely not to flagrantly oppose it. Is it any wonder that Israel's standing in international affairs will always be shaky? Indeed, one should admire those countries that don't always capitulate to the strident demands of the antiIsrael line-up.

It is important to understand that this is the background to the hype about Israel's conquest of Arab lands and the determined international quest to truncate tiny Israel even more. The legality of Israelis living in Judea and Samaria has nothing to do with moral rightness or wrongness; it has little to do with international law, even though legality is invoked all the time in international debate on Israel. If you have any doubts I suggest you visit the websites of the United Nations Organization, click "U.N. Charter", and find "military occupation", "occupied territories", "international disputes". Also click "Resolutions 181, 242, 339" as well as the "British Mandate of Palestine" and you'll be hard-pressed to find any solid material to incriminate Israel. Also a visit to the official English-language websites of Hamas and Hizbollah will provide you with a candid perspective of their aims, not only against Israel but regarding the fate of the whole world. You will be able to understand very clearly why Israel cannot dare relinquish Judea and Samaria.

It is imperative that all who care about Israel and indeed the future of the world, keep contesting the big lie about "Israeli occupation" or the "conquest" of the "West Bank" or the "Territories." All media outlets and personalities and ordinary people everywhere should be reminded over and over again that the region in question is called Judea and Samaria and that it is the Jews' ancestral home, where Jews have always lived and where they have every right to live today. People should be reminded that seven-eighths of Palestine had already been alotted to the Arabs, and that rather than accept an independent Jewish state in the Jews' ancestral land, they sought to obliterate it — over and over again — thereby actually casting doubt on any legitimacy for yet another Arab state in this region.

Another point that must be acknowledged is that even total withdrawal of any Israeli presence from formerly Arab-held territories does nothing to foster real peace. This has been expressed by the Arabs themselves time and again. Israel has withdrawn from Southern Lebanon, Gaza and parts of Judea and Samaria a few times.Yet the attacks on Israel continue from these areas. And the promises to destroy Israel get ever-more shriller.

While many Israelis and well-meaning friends of Israel might consider partial or full withdrawal from Judea and Samaria expedient for pragmatic, demographic reasons, it has nothing to do with its moral and legal right to these areas. Indeed, if Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria were deemed illegal by international law, then half the countries of the world have built up illegal cities, towns and farming communities in areas that had once been ruled by another ethnic or national entity.

The fact is that few people yearn for peace as much as the Jews. They would be mad not to yearn for peace after all they've been through as a people, and especially in the present ongoing confrontation against such a large part of humanity. But seldom has there been such a just struggle waged by any one people. Seldom has the Big Lie and Selective Omission been used against any nation by its friends and enemies alike, like it is in Israel's case. That is what people all over the world must be told over and over again — until sanity and common decency prevail.

See also www.israelandtruth.org

Contact Ralph Dobrin by email at dan-dob@zahav.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Sergio HaDaR Tezza, March 28, 2012.

This was written by John Griffing and is archived at Page Printed from:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../ 2012/03/what_happened_to_preserve_protect_and_defend.html.


How does a president of the United States whose allegiance is to his country knowingly and in plain sight sabotage his nation's defenses? Until recently, the discussions of severe military cuts remained in the appropriate realm of working groups, and few seriously considered Obama's radical campaign promises to eliminate nuclear weapons from the U.S. arsenal to be of any real validity. After all, many Democrat presidential contenders before Obama had pandered to pacifists and the armies of the naïve swelling the Democratic base in order to get elected. But none of these individuals actually took proactive steps to completely remove America's nuclear triad from the list of strategic options. Our ability to instill fear in the hearts of our enemies, both current and future, was left unquestioned by all previous presidents, minor reductions in stockpiles notwithstanding.

Obama has done what no guardian of America would do: systematically tear down the most vital of America's defenses, all while America's enemies wait with bated breath for the nation that owes trillions in debt to be left standing defenseless. What happens when America lays down its arms? It seems Obama would like to find out. Americans may be the unintended (intended?) victims of a perverse social experiment.

Leaks from high-level defense sources reveal that in addition to commitments under the New START agreement, which brings the total number of deliverable U.S. warheads to 1,000-an unacceptably low number that prevents the U.S. from being able to destroy the 3,000 priority strategic targetsidentified by the DoD-Obama now plans to implement an 80-percent force reduction that will leave America with only 300 deliverable warheads. Such a move is suicidal. Such a low number is wholly insufficient to protect America from the growing list of dangerous and erratic nuclear regimes with global ambitions. Even more crucial to understanding the risk inherent in such a decision is the role of U.S. nuclear weapons stockpiles as a deterrent.

Americans have only been able to live the cushy, carefree existence of the last half-century-now taken for granted by new generations of youngsters who have known only prosperity and for whom Cold War politics are moot-because the U.S. possessed a credible nuclear arsenal capable of devastating any adversary. It is because of, not in spite of, America's nuclear assets that America has survived multiple existential threats.

The danger of nuclear confrontation has increased, not decreased, since the end of the Cold War. The likelihood of nuclear exchange has increased rapidly, mirroring the acquisition of nuclear weapons by small and medium-sized states, with multiple hostile nuclear powers now vying for global influence. Obama is at best gravely naïve if he is pursuing drastic and suicidal cuts to our arsenal at the present time.

Obama has been busy gutting American conventional forces as well.

The Army and the Marines are to be significantly downsized, even as their global commitments expand. Consequently, America can no longersimultaneously fight two major wars in two theaters of deployment, a capability deemed vital by defense insiders to ensuring America's defense against coalitions of aggressor states, and now a plausible scenario owing to the Russian military buildup in the Middle East and the increasingly belligerent actionsof China on every front. Both nations are in a Warsaw-Pact prototype alliance called the Shanghai Cooperation Organization that openly challenges U.S. leadership and engages in maneuvers in which the United States is the target. Iran is also a member of this organization. Eliminating the two-war capability would seem ill-advised. But then, Obama probably knows this.

The Navy thinly escaped Obama's hacksaw. Recent studies commissioned by DoD indicate that the present number of aircraft carrier battle groups is not sufficient to maintain an adequate defensive posture in the Pacific, where U.S.-Taiwanese forces are under constant threat of nuclear exchange with China. Even though the number of carrier groups is already below normal, Obama had wanted to cut another carrier battle group from the fleet. The Navy torpedoed the move, but not without cost. Modernization efforts have been canned, and shipbuilding will be greatly slowed, which will cause the fleet to shrink by approximately 70 ships in the 2020s.

Enter and exit the U.S. Air Force. The Air Force has been forced to lose several hundred planes, even though its present number is already below the threshold admittedly needed to carry out tactical bombing campaigns. In Bosnia, when the Air Force was a few times larger than today, it took 40 percent of active aircraft to execute the campaign. Can anyone seriously argue that the U.S. Air Force, which needed nearly half of its resources to prosecute Bosnia, can actually manage a conflict involving multiple major powers at one time, especially if cuts of the magnitude enacted go unchallenged?

America's president has done more to harm American security than our greatest foes could ever dream of doing, and he has done it with both eyes wide open, willingly, with full knowledge of the implications, which raises the obvious question: what word describes a president who will do this to his own country? The recent Medvedev revelations are a good indicator of Obama's interest in satisfying Russian demands in ways that would be unpopular with the American people.

Obama admittedly seeks the eradication of American superpower status. Even if a case can be made for a reduced U.S. footprint worldwide or for a less interventionist foreign policy, would a loyal American knowingly seek to undermine his or her nation's greatness merely to satisfy some philosophical pretense to equality with "everybody else"?

The time for pretense is over. Obama is no friend of America.

Sergio Tezza can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net.

To Go To Top

Posted by Jewish Policy Center, March 27, 2012.

The Jewish Policy Center is pleased to introduce its readers to members of the JPC Board of Fellows through what we expect to have as an occasional Q&A on subjects of interest. Michael Medved and Richard Baehr answer the first two questions, which discuss U.S. policy options toward the Arab/Muslim World, and U.S. and Israeli options toward Iran.

Michael Medved hosts a nationally syndicated, daily, three hour radio talk show broadcast in more than 200 markets across the country. He is also the author of twelve non-fiction books including the bestsellers Hollywood vs. America and The 10 Big Lies About America, and is a regular contributor to USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, and The Daily Beast.

Richard Baehr is chief political correspondent for American Thinker and President of Richard Baehr & Associates health care management consulting firm. Richard frequently serves as an expert witness in health care litigation cases involving planning and financial matters. He has a longstanding interest in the Middle East and American politics, and he is a frequent speaker and writer on these subjects.

inSIGHT: Is it possible that there is an unbridgeable gap between what we call Western civilization and the Arab/Muslim World? If so, what are the best policy options for the United States going forward?

Michael Medved: No gaps among nations are unbridgeable, but gaps between ideologies can and do count as unbridgeable and irreconcilable. There was no way to split the difference, for instance, between Americanism and Communism. President Reagan proved correct and prophetic (as usual) when he described his vision of the only possible conclusion for the Cold War: "We win. They Lose." That same sort of definitive victory represents the only acceptable outcome for the ongoing war against Islamism: we must win, and they must lose.

But it's important to note that the true battle involves Islamism — Quranic radicalism deployed as a militant political ideology — not Islam in all its forms, such as the mostly benign form practiced in the United States. Just as the West could absorb and assimilate democratic socialists while proceeding to the necessary triumph over Marxism as a totalitarian ideology, so too we can assimilate those Islamic communities that share a core commitment to Western values. Meanwhile, Muslim elements at home and abroad that refuse to embrace our values, or to make clear breaks with militant Islamism, must be confronted and marginalized. There is no more reason to accept radical Islamism as permanent and inevitable than there was to accept Soviet communism as permanent and inevitable — or to assume that China will never shed its totalitarian political system.

We should feel less concerned about winning friends in the Muslim world by moving closer to their assumptions and values, than we should feel determined to move nations, peoples, and governments in our direction. We will accomplish that purpose in the same way we ultimately prevailed over the Evil Empire: demonstrating that our ideas work, while their ideas produce poverty, dysfunction, failure, violence and isolation. In that context, apologies for past American policies represent exactly the wrong strategy — as does any retreat from the essential truth of American exceptionalism.

InSIGHT: President Obama has said U.S. policy toward Iran is based on intelligence information indicating that there is still time for economic sanctions and diplomacy to change the course of Iranian behavior. U.S. intelligence is not alone in that assessment. How confident do you believe the U.S., Israel, and the Western allies should be, considering that Western intelligence — including the CIA — was substantially "off" about the nuclear, chemical, and missile programs of India, Pakistan, North Korea, Libya, and Syria; and the CIA says it has little usable information about what is going on in Syria right now? What is the policy alternative for the United States and Israel?

Richard Baehr: No one in either the Israeli or American government is anxious for a military confrontation with Iran, given the uncertainty of the success of such an attack in delaying or destroying Iran's nuclear capability, and the perhaps greater uncertainty of the nature of an Iranian response to an attack. What is generally accepted in both countries is that American airstrikes would have a far greater likelihood of damaging Iran's program, and that Israel is on a different clock than America in terms of when it would need to launch an attack if it were to do so.

The approach of dangling carrots and sticks — diplomacy and respect, alongside toughening existing sanctions and imposing new ones to strangle Iran economically — with the goal of forcing Iran to negotiate away its nuclear capability, ignores the history of such efforts with North Korea, where the West has been played for decades, much as it has been by Iran. Iran has the second largest oil reserves in the world after Saudi Arabia. Very little of its annual production is consumed in Iran, with the far greater share exported.

The idea, as expressed in the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) reports, that it is unclear whether Iran seeks to produce a nuclear weapon, suggests there is an alternative rationale for its pursuit of nuclear power. Alternative energy? Medical isotopes, a concept Bibi Netanyahu mocked in his talk to AIPAC? The more than decades long pursuit of acquiring enriched uranium, and Iran's aggressive posture in the region and in areas far from the Mideast (e.g. the bombings in Argentina in the 1990s), provide a far more likely explanation — that Iran wants to be the world's tenth country with nuclear weapons, and there is little reason to assume they will give up such an effort when they are so close to success.

If Iran with nuclear weapons is an unacceptable risk to the region and to the civilized world, then after a few more months of playing with the other options that will almost certainly prove unsuccessful, the possibility of a military action will be much higher.

If you have questions you would like to pose to our Fellows, please send them to JPC Senior Director Shoshana Bryen at sbryen@jewishpolicycenter.org for possible future use.

Matthew RJ Brodsky is Director of Policy at the Washington DC-based Jewish Policy Center and Editor, inFocus Quarterly. Visit the website at www.JewishPolicyCenter.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, March 27, 2012.

It was last Thursday that the UN Human Rights Council voted to send a "mission" to investigate the way in which the "settlements" infringe on the human rights of the Palestinian Arabs, prompting a very angry response from Prime Minister Netanyahu. Shades of Goldstone.

Yesterday, Foreign Minister Lieberman, after consulting with top staff in his ministry, decided to severe all ties with the council. For this I say Bravo! as no other response would have been appropriate.

From now on, said a senior diplomatic official sited by the JPost, Israel's ambassador to the UN in Geneva (which is where that HRC sits) will not appear before the council, answer any of its phone calls or cooperate with Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay in any way.

Israel will also bar the settlement "fact finding mission" from entering Israel.

This all sounds right to me.


Israel will not recall its ambassador to Geneva, because there are other UN organizations situated there with which Israel does cooperate fully.

But Israel is considering the proper measures to take against the Palestinian Authority, which initiated this action as part of its unilateral strategy.


Israel will also be calling in the envoys of states on the council (Austria and Belgium, members of the EU, have been identified) that are considered friendly but which voted for the measure, in order to register a protest.

UN Human Rights Council President Laura Dupuy Lasserre-from Uruguay, in a rotating presidency-said that if Israel cuts ties with the council it would be "regrettable," for cooperation would provide Israel with the opportunity to "explain its own policies and actions to the independent commissioners..." Independent my foot. Explaining our policies would only be a constructive endeavor if those receiving the information were objective, and we know with certainty that this would not be the case.

Lasserre's declaration that the council "always valued Israel's participation" is so hypocritical that it can only be considered a crude joke. There is not even a pretense on that council of fairness towards Israel; the bias is so blatant as to be obscene.


I ask you please to take the time to see this short Eye on the UN video clip of the UN Human Rights Council:

Here you will see Syria talking about blood on Israeli hands. Syria. Could it get more ludicrous than this? Then there is the representative of "Palestine" saying that Israel attacked Gaza "for no reason at all."


The Human Rights Council, which is composed of 47 members, including such stalwart defenders of human rights as Cuba, China and Saudi Arabia, is inherently corrupt and anti-Israel. As Prime Minister Netanyahu pointed out the other day, "the council has made 91 decisions, 39 of which dealt with Israel, three with Syria and one with Iran."

Human Rights Watch, located in Geneva, provides-

"Condemns the... recent announcement that it would add al-Haram al Ibrahimi [Cave of the Patriarchs] in Hebron and Bilal Mosque ['Tomb of Rachel'] in Bethlehem and the walls of the old city of Jerusalem to its list of national heritage sites..."

"Demands that Israel, the occupying Power, immediately cease all diggings and excavation works beneath and around Al-Aqsa mosque"... in March 2010, which ignores the rights to the sites mentioned as inherently part of Jewish heritage and makes totally fallacious accusations about Israel digging under the Temple Mount.

It goes on, and on, and on...

What is more, points out UN Watch, "The Council's fixation with Israel is not limited to resolutions. Israel is the only country listed on the Council's permanent agenda. Moreover, Israel is the only country subjected to an investigatory mandate that examines the actions of only one side, presumes those actions to be violations, and which is not subject to regular review." (Emphasis added)


The vote on the resolution regarding a fact-finding mission on the settlements was 36 to 1, with 10 abstentions (including the EU countries of Italy, Spain, Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary and Romania, as well as Norway, Switzerland, Moldova and- I have conflicting information-either Cameroon or Guatemala). The US cast the single opposing vote.


When President Obama, who is an internationalist, decided to promote the US as a member of the UN Human Rights Council in 2009, his argument was that more could be achieved by working from inside the council, where the US would have influence.

One would be hard put to see evidence of that influence when the resolutions of the council are examined. Nonetheless, US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland has just released a statement saying that the UNHRC has "helped spur action on a series of important human rights situations around the world, in part due to vigorous US engagement."

What Nuland ignores, of course, is the excessive focus on Israel within the council, which detracts from time and attention needed for the real human rights crises in the world. One resolution on Iran compared to 39 on Israel? Where was the vigorous US engagement?


Nuland does say that the US condemns the UNHRC's biased approach on Israel, which she said "continues to unnecessarily politicize the Council's human rights agenda." But obviously the US has insufficient leverage within the council to stop even as egregious a charge as that of Israel digging under the Temple Mount. (Or perhaps insufficient motivation to try.) And certainly hasn't been able to change Israel's status as the only country on the council's permanent agenda.

What is more, the US does not deem the UNHCR's biased approach on Israel to be sufficient cause for resigning from the council. Nuland's statement was obviously designed to counter any such suggestion.

The negative US vote on the mission to investigate settlements was purely perfunctory in any event. Nuland made it clear that the US is opposed to the settlements-and, I would venture to say, spent no political capital campaigning again the resolution-but thinks negotiations are more productive than unilateralism.


Yet this latest travesty of justice by the council-a shameful act following the Goldstone Report, which Goldstone himself ultimately distanced himself from-is in the nature of the proverbial straw:

It is time for the US to depart from the council. To remain there is to add legitimacy to shameful proceedings that cannot be considered even remotely fair. While bolstering the council, US membership demeans the US.


Thus do I now appeal to all US citizens who agree with me to campaign for the US to resign from that UN Human Rights Council. Such a resignation would make an important statement and enhance the credibility of the US. Utilize information I have provided in this posting, perhaps including the Eye on the UN video.

Please, contact President Obama:

Fax: 202-456-2461 White House Comment line: 202-456-1111
Email form via: http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

And also your Congressional representatives:

For your Congresspersons:

For your Senators:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/ senators_cfm.cfm


I will examine again, for the record, the right of Israel to the settlements, in a coming posting.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Dr. Alex Grobman, March 27, 2012.

This was


Perhaps the sharpest insights I have ever read on the Middle East were written by a young Robert F.Kennedy, who visited here during Israel's formative years.

'How do you feel about people your age who are not serving in the army?' The question was not unusual. The circumstances were. For the past five years, an incredible group of students from Harvard Law School (HLS) leave the scholarly environs of Cambridge and spend ten days getting to know Israel and its people. Despite basic similarities, these annual visits are light-years away from tours that cater to other groups. Whereas Birthright aims to expose Jewish students to our rich heritage while interacting with Israeli soldiers and Jews from around the world, the HLS visit is a close encounter of another kind.

Sponsored by private donors and the America-Israel Friendship league, the HLS students (from both American and international backgrounds) are among the brightest youth of their generation.

They come to learn, to confront and to challenge everything Israeli society shows them. Nobody here could ever sell them on any idea, position or policy. The concept is simple: each delegation brings men and women who will become — in the not too distant future — leading figures in their chosen fields (and not limited to the legal world, for a law degree is only a first step for many).

Therefore, now is the time to provide them an opportunity to make first-hand observations and judgments regarding our situation.

Perhaps the sharpest insights I have ever read on the Middle East were written by a young Robert F.Kennedy, who visited here during Israel's formative years.

A highlight of these trips has been an annual encounter with IDF combat officers and pilots. This year's visit took place, as Kassams rocketed down over half of Israel, at the Israel Air Force base, which launches 60-70 percent of IAF combat missions. However, despite the fever-pitched activity outside, the relaxed atmosphere inside the briefing room served as a platform to promote mutual understanding of the most potent force in nature: ideas.

In contrast to standard IDF tours, the HLS visits are crafted to include a forum of junior commanders who provide a glimpse into the world in which we operate, under the critical light of penetrating questions from Socratic minds that allow no statements to go unchallenged. The Israeli officers, who under different circumstances might easily be sharing seats with their guests in classrooms overlooking the Charles, provided graphic examples of the dilemmas they face in protecting their families and fellow countrymen from enemies who use our own regard for human life as a weapon against us.

This year's session included dramatic video clips from a surreal chase scene, which began with a terrorist planting a roadside charge, and then quickly hiding in a nextdoor building. The "reality show" continued with IDF forces taking extreme measures to isolate the terrorist from civilians around him, at great risk to our own soldiers.

Rather than rely on air power — and despite the IAF's pinpoint capability — the onscene commanders chose to engage the terrorist on nearly equal terms (rifle versus rifle), in order to minimize the chance of harming "uninvolved" Palestinians.

While the subject matter is compelling on its own merits, the most poignant aspect of the session for me was watching the rapport develop among the participants. This should not be taken for granted for, indeed, it is hard to comprehend how we work.

What other army would develop a precision-guided weapon with a tiny charge whose purpose is to "knock on the roof" of a building in which terrorists have hidden ammunition, thus forcing civilians to flee to safety and clear the way for the IDF to surgically destroy the terrorist cache inside? However, during the hourlong Q&A in which the students peppered the officers with sharp questions, an unspoken understanding grew among the participants.

"S.", an attack helicopter pilot, reflected pure professionalism in describing the painstaking care he takes in hitting sensitive targets, such as a rocket launcher he showed hidden in a school yard. However, it was the beguiling, and almost matterof- fact way in which he outlined his decision-making process that helped others appreciate his mindset.

As stated above, the American visitors, who would later be meeting with a Supreme Court justice, were also interested in hearing how S. felt about other questions facing our society. They wanted to hear his views about issues like the Tal Law, and what he thought of fellow Israelis who chose not to serve, or found ways to avoid sharing the incredible burden he carries with such dedication. S. and the other panelists reflected an incredible maturity in discussing these and other issues. "G.," a kippa-wearing deputy commander, displayed the highest form of religious behavior in his regard for the sanctity of life. His observance was best expressed in his genuine care for protecting his own people 24/7 while avoiding the killing of "the innocent along with the guilty," as Abraham argued in his debate with God over the fate of Sodom.

"Yom Kippur?" he asked with a smile, but without a trace of remorse. "I haven't been to shul — I've been working in the unit the last three out of four years... although of course I always fasted."

It is interesting to note that G. was present at this year's session as the result of the barrage of attacks from Gaza.

He was supposed to be enjoying a well-deserved few days in New York, among the delegation attending the annual Friends of the IDF dinner at the Waldorf-Astoria.

However, far from disappointment, G. reflected a deep appreciation of the opportunity he was given to share his experiences with the Harvard students. The session forced him and each of his colleagues to articulate clearly to a demanding audience every aspect of his intricately developed value system.

Ultimately, it is our adherence to "the rule of law" that most guarantees our future.

Perhaps it is our fate, as recorded in the decisions of former Supreme Court president Aharon Barak, to "fight terror with one hand tied behind our backs." Yet in this difficult calling lies our strength. Last week's exchange will certainly help both groups of exceptional people gain a better understanding of the challenges we will continue to face.

Contact Dr. Alex Grobman by phone at (212) 213-8630 or by email: agrobman@aifl.org. The America-Israel Friendship League's (AIFL) mission is to strengthen the ties between the people of the United States and Israel.

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 27, 2012.

When you watch the entire documentary, The Forsaken Promise, you will learn that Britain was no less evil than Nazi Germany. The Forsaken Promise 11/2 minutes trailer — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVerxQT-77Q. Whereby, the Nazis had come up with their Final Solution Plan for the Jews, along which all Jews must be killed, the British has the humane opportunity and they could have rescued tens of thousands of Jews, or even over a million from the Nazis murdering claw, but they deliberately did not. To the Nazis and the British Jews were a problem and each nation "solved" this problem in its own away. Who was more successful is a matter of opinion. But at the end, Am Yisrael Chai — The nation of Israel is alive and thrives!

http://www.israelforum.com/blog_article.php?aid=4021660 (Tol Score)



With the way it managed the Mandate in Palestine, in Eretz Yisrael, and with its MacDonald White Paper decree, as far as the fate of those European Jews, who, at the end of WWII, made it out alive from the German killing factories, Britain took over from Nazi Germany where it left off at the dawn of its defeat by the Allies, and,

We must admit that after Nazi Germany, [the not so] Great Britain had the most Jewish blood on its hands.

While the Nazi Jew killing machine was churning in full force in Europe, though Britain was fighting Nazi Germany, its policy toward the Jews, already living in Mandate Palestine, their promised homeland in the ancient land of Israel, and those Jews who were trying to get there, was nothing more than full collusion with Nazi Germany.

After the allies defeated Nazi Germany, the Jews who remained alive had nowhere to go. Britain closed its immigration doors on them; so did the United States and all other European countries. The only place the Holocaust survivors could go was Palestine, which was the only place where they really belonged. However, the British Mandate authorities had the doors of Palestine closed for them as well; these fatigued Jews could not find a place where they could finally rest and heal.

Most of the Jews who survived the Holocaust were placed in displacement camps throughout Europe. When they were asked where would they like to go from the displacement camp, 97% said to Palestine; and the question continued, and if Palestine was not an option? Their chilling reply was, the [Nazi] crematorium.

After WWII, Britain was on the verge of economic collapse and in order to survive it conducted an appeasement policy. It appeased the Arab oil producing countries at the expense of the Jews and their homeland.

Britain policy has not changed much today and in fact this type of appeasement policy, overtly or covertly, permeates the entire world; much of the insatiable need for oil the Arab countries, the enemy of Israel, produce, comes at the expense of the state of Israel.

The Israeli Bill Ayers'

William Charles "Bill" Ayers is an American elementary education theorist and a former leader in the movement that opposed US involvement in the Vietnam War. He became known for his 1960s activism, when he co-founded the Weather Underground, a self-described Communist revolution group that conducted a campaign of bombing public buildings during the 1960s and 1970s, in response to U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War.

To many Americans who lived through the Vietnam War era, Bill Ayers represents anarchy and is an American citizen who has a great dislike for the United States governmental intuitions.

For 2000 years Jews yearned to have their homeland back so they can return and dwell, again, in the Judea mountains, where King David shepherd his herd.

And so, despite British despicable policy in its mandate in Palestine, and despite the Arabs' rejection of the establishment of a Jewish state and their aggressive reaction to its declaration, Israel was born. Sadly, it has take Israel fewer years than the United State to develop her own Bill Ayers' [plural]. These Bill Ayers' like Israeli characters do not bomb public buildings but they bomb the image of Israel with their mouths. They are the unJews of the Israeli society among them are Ilan Pappé, Neve Gordon, Amos Oz, Gilad Atzmon, Zahava Gal-On of Meretz, Yariv Oppenheimer of Peace Now, and hundreds of benighted academics, who published a repulsive, sinister anti-Israel essays and the newspaper Ha'aretz, to name a few.

As far as the "Jewish problem" was concerned, Britain that, at the end of WWII took over where Nazi Germany left off, has become a haven for the Bill Ayers' of Israel.

Approximately seven years ago, Shmuel HaLevi, a devout Zionist man, residing in Israel, coined the term 'unJew,' a term that is slowly permeating urban lexicon. The Bill Ayers' of Israel are unJews, who, along with the anti-Israel camp, which consists of the Moslem-Arab nations, and the majority of the European policy makers and their followers, mainly the liberal-progressive camp, make up the triangle of evil. This triangle of evil works, tirelessly, to harm and entrap Israel. This triangle of evil is continuing the work of Nazi Germany and Britain in Palestine.

The unJews and their partners are propelled by their dislike to the state of Israel and even Jew hating ideology and they act upon deliberately concocted misguided information regarding Israel and Jews. The unJews want to destroy the only place that Jews can call their homeland. And if not there, to choose a second best, the crematorium

Some unJews were and are planted in the government of Israel and in Israel's judicial system and they have been consistently shaking the foundation of the Jewish state. In the past sixty-three years these unJews never, ever, had a real "peace plan" for the Jewish State. They have been coordinating with the Islamists to destroy Eretz Yisrael, the Land of Israel, and even its Jewish laws and ethics.

Nowadays, when the Oslo Accords has been revealed to be a sham and could be called a conspiracy against the Jewish Nation, and when the peace accord with Egypt could turn to be a valueless piece of paper that died with the end of Mubarak's rule, and when there is a national acknowledgement that Israel's unilateral disengagement from Gaze was a disastrous mistake, even the political spin doctors' creative labeling could not hide the fact that there was no real peace plan that was thought through and through from A-to-Z.

The Israeli unJew leaders constantly fed the nation with slogans, such as "victims of peace," meaning, the killing of Jews for a delusional peace, or, "painful sacrifices," meaning Jews make sacrifices, in return for nothing more than more terror, more wars, more national pain and agony, more of the same political delusion. But, thus far, Israel got nowhere with its foes, and as it looks, in many aspects, the "peace process" caused a constant regression for the Jewish State. However, as obvious as the facts are, the unJews keep on advocating for the Oslo sham two-state solution.

The ambiguous schizophrenia policy, along which the government of Israel has been acting, left many Israelis in a total confusion. Thus, many tuned to become unJews and began advocating for Israel's enemy and many found refuge in Britain, where the triangle of evil meets.

Only sixty five years ago, when the Nazi machine was finally brought to its knees, the lucky ones, those who managed to survive, one only wonders how, came out of the ashes of Auschwitz and Buchenwald and finally settled in the only place they could call their home, the State of Israel. Yet there are unJews who dare to be part of the triangle of evil and state that the Jews do not make up a nation and Israel has no legal right to be the homeland of the Jewish people. Worse, that Zionism equates Nazism.

The State of Israel is surrounded by an ocean of hateful Arab foes who have an ocean of rockets and missiles, all aiming at her, with one intention only, to destroy the Jewish state to ashes and kill all the Jews.

The time has come to take a stand and a new road that leads in a new direction. The State of Israel needs to clean itself from the unJews and a new captainship needs to rise to navigate the Jewish State of Israel's ship on the right course.

And we must all remember that at the end, what God commanded goes: He will raise a banner for the nations and gather the exiles of Israel; he will assemble the scattered people of Judah from the four quarters of the earth.~ Isaiah 11:12

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Albert Wendroff, March 26, 2012.

This was written by Awr Hawkins, and is archived at
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/03/21/obama- bypasses-congress-gives-1-5-billion-to-muslim-brotherhood


During a trip through Colorado in December of last year, President Obama spoke of his intention to implement his economic policies with or without the approval of Congress. Said Obama, "And where Congress is not willing to act, we're going to go ahead and do it ourselves." It now appears that such a mindset applies not only to economic matters but to the distribution of foreign aid as well — in particular, foreign military aid for the Muslim Brotherhood, who now hold the reigns in Egypt.

Congress has restricted and, in fact, halted military aid to Egypt until and "unless the State Department certifies that Egypt is making progress on basic freedoms and human rights." After all, Christians and other practitioners of non-Islamic religions have had a tough go of it there. And of course, many Egyptian officials harbor such hatred toward the U.S. that one of the candidates for the Egyptian presidency has openly referred to America as the "infidel country" in media interviews.

Nevertheless, the news breaking now is that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will soon announce that President Obama will "resume funding for Egypt's military, despite Congressional restrictions and objections from human rights and democracy advocates."

Even Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT), a man with whom I've never agreed on anything, sees the foolishness of this endeavor: "I believe [sending the aid] would be a mistake. The new [restrictions were] intended to put the United States squarely on the side of the Egyptian people who seek a civilian government that respects fundamental freedoms and the rule of law, and to clearly define the terms of our future relations with the Egyptian military."

Who knows; perhaps the Obama administration can also circumvent Congress and give the Iranians some nuclear materials or give Hamas some advanced weaponry? I know both ideas sound crazy, but they're no crazier than giving $1.5 billion in military aid to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Contact Albert Wendroff by email at wendroff39@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Ted Belman, March 26, 2012.

This was written by Kurt J. Werthmuller, Research Fellow, Hudson Institute Center for Religious Freedom. It appeared in the Huffington Post.


In a February post, I discussed the precarious situation of Syria's religious minorities in light of that country's now year-old uprising. I argued that 1) decisive humanitarian intervention would best position the U.S. and its allies to assist the opposition against the increasingly brutal regime, 2) gain the future cooperation and partnership of those who eventually lead after Assad, and 3) ameliorate the worsening threat against Syria's minorities. I continue to stand by these positions.

However, two months later, direct intervention remains an elusive option, even as the international community appears to be steadily (if slowly) moving toward a consensus regarding the need to clearly demand — but not yet force — an end to the country's violence. Meanwhile, Assad's government, its army, and its paramilitary shabiha squads appear unfazed by this diplomatic shift and continue their repression unabated. The Syrian opposition remains internally divided and spread across the spectrum from peaceful protest to armed resistance, including the mostly-exiled Syrian National Council (SNC), in-country Local Coordination Committees (LCCs), and a myriad of ragtag militias, comprised mainly of army defectors and collectively known as the Free Syrian Army (FSA).

In other words, the uprising perseveres, the regime's repression continues, and the specter of violent, sectarian-fueled chaos still threatens the existence of the communities that form Syria's rich, unique, and diverse socio-religious landscape. It is crucial, then, to lay out a clear and definitive strategy by which the international community can decisively act to assure the survival of these communities within their homeland, alongside the broader debate regarding Syrian intervention.

The following items, then, lay out three key issues related to the nation's religious minorities, and briefly describe potential strategies to address each. None of these options, it should be noted, would necessarily require American "boots on the ground."

1) The greatest threat facing Syria's religious minorities is a breakdown in social order and descent into armed sectarian violence — especially for Alawites, the regime's base of power, and Christians, who have been among its "allies of fear."

This concern represents a very real and dangerous possibility, and so the first priority of the international community in this regard should be prevention. As we know from the sectarian-militia example of Lebanon's 1975-1989 civil war, this sort of violence is impossibly difficult to subdue once it has begun. This is why time is of the essence. The world must not allow the Syrian crisis to "play itself out," as some analysts have suggested: This threat to the country's minorities (many of whom are unarmed) is simply too great, and the consequences too severe, to play this sort of Russian roulette on a national-societal scale.

The second priority is to prepare now, not after-the-fact, for a worst-case scenario in which the country simply falls apart, and the violence escalates into a full-blown civil war with ethno-religious overtones. In that scenario, a likely outcome would be that Sunni rebels, increasingly radicalized by regime repression and funding from unsavory sources, retaliate against Alawites and the regime's fearful Christian allies. In case the crisis plays out this way, the U.S. should closely ally with Turkey, Iraqi Kurdistan, and Syria's Kurds — especially those sympathetic to and/or joined in the opposition — to create a "safe zone" in the north and northeast of the country, to which at-risk communities may flee. We will likely hear more of this concept in the weeks to come, and I strongly encourage policymakers to pay careful attention to the formation and evolution of its related strategies.

This option will necessitate marginalizing the Kurds' more controversial groups — such as the PKK, who of course will not cooperate with Turkey, and vice versa — and it may require limited use of force to maintain and protect the area. I will not presume to know the finer intricacies and logistics involved in such an effort, but I am certain that it is a better option than arming the unpredictable divisions of the FSA or implementing an undesirable, all-out invasion and occupation. And it will provide a short-term strategy to preserve Syria's minority population by preventing their slaughter in the civil war crossfire while lessening their need to permanently flee from the country.

2) The nation's non-Sunni Arab minorities (30 percent of the population) fear that Syria will follow the path of Egypt, Tunisia, and other countries in falling into the hands of Sunni Islamists if the secular Assad regime falls.

There is no question: Syria's Islamist parties will play a role in Syria's future, and chief among them is the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood which comprises, for example, the single largest bloc of the SNC. What, then, to do with this reality? Again, time is of the essence: Apart from segments of the FSA who are already armed, Syria's Islamists have shown some willingness to work in political cooperation with others for a pluralistic future — but this may change if a protracted civil war pushes them in a more radical direction. If the U.S. and its allies cooperate with them now, not dealing with them as "the" head of the opposition but in tandem with a cross-section of opposition members, it will be far better placed to engage with them post-Assad. And if the U.S. and its close allies do not assume this role, others will: The Saudis and the Qataris are already working on establishing their respective roles in support of the opposition.

It is also worth noting that Syria already has the benefit of a more diverse society than, say, Egypt's more consistently religious and overwhelming Sunni majority. Thirty percent of the country is made up of Sunnis, Christians, Alawites, Druzes, and Kurds; its Sunnis, meanwhile, are spread across a spectrum from secular to Islamist and everything in between.

Let us not make the mistake (à la Egypt) of naively assuming a secular, liberal future for Syria in six months' time. But let us also recognize that its unique ethno-religious makeup is likely to at least lessen the Islamists' prospects for complete domination, while still realistically giving a nod to their inevitable role in the country's future.

3) Regardless of the strategic, moral, and/or humanitarian issues at stake in the broader Syrian context, it is clear that many (if not most) members of Syrian's religious minorities continue to support the Assad regime.

I will not presume to speak directly for Syria's religious minorities, and I cannot pretend to more than cognitively understand their perfectly legitimate, deeply-held anxieties. But I can offer the follow truths in well-reasoned confidence. First, there is no turning back to clock to 2010: Assad's regime may yet survive for months or perhaps years, but it will be crippled, isolated, and more repressive than it has ever been. It will have no hesitation in throwing Christian minorities and others "under the bus," if it hasn't already, especially when faced with its survival. Its past, Faustian protections and old alliances are already dead, and there will be no resurrecting them anytime soon.

Second, given this stark reality, Syria's minorities must distant themselves immediately from the regime's brutality, and those among them who can voice their support for the uprising must do so. The risk is too great to remain in alliance with Assad, whether actively or tacitly: when the regime eventually collapses, or if the country simply falls apart, the greatest risk will be for those perceived as "friends of Bashar." Choosing to side from now with Syria's future rather than with its past may mean facing Islamists in parliament — but it will mean surviving to join with others in that struggle.

Syria's religious minorities may have a long-term struggle ahead of them in an uncertain future political landscape, but they are in need of a strategy to ensure that they survive to struggle another day. The international public can do its part to contribute to their survival by highlighting those minority voices that speak up against the regime (see here for one such effort). Meanwhile, U.S. policymakers and the Obama administration must more decisively and proactively move to form a safe zone in Syria even as they work to erode the regime's legitimacy and bolster global condemnation of its atrocities. They must also strongly encourage the Syrian opposition to more boldly and explicitly call the country's minorities to their side, especially Alawites and Christians, while reassuring them that they will do everything in their power to protect them and secure a place for them in Syria's future.

The next "Friends of Syria" meeting will be held in Istanbul on April 1; it will be the perfect opportunity for the U.S. to lead from the front, and to be a true friend to the people of Syria — including their at-risk minorities.

Contact YogiRUs by email at YogiRUs@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 26, 2012.

While Gaza Arabs fired 300 rockets at Israel, Israeli hospitals accepted 14 Arab children from Gaza, Judea, and Samaria for open heart surgery. The service was free.

A letter in the 3/23-29 Jerusalem Post edition expressed hope that one of the parents would persuade Hamas to rescind its pledge to drive the Jews out.

Utterly naïve is that hope. Islam requires jihad. Muslims fanatical enough to heed the call to conquer would not heed parents. Nor can one expect Muslim Arab parents to urge peace upon their leaders. They usually urge concessions by Israel, concessions that would make Israel easier to conquer.

The flaw in the letter-writer's hope is an assumption that Radical Muslims share Western values. Jihadists have different values. They value conquest, extermination, dispossession, conversion, or subjugation. They consider religious honor, as they define it, more important than prosperity. They consider generosity toward them or appeasement of them as cowardice. Jewish efforts to treat them tolerantly confirm the Muslims' sense of superiority. It boosts their war morale. It encourages them to redouble their efforts.

Saving the children's lives seems humanitarian, but may cost Israeli lives. In that case it is not humanitarian but suicidal.

Of course, some day Islam may experience the kind of reformation and civilizing process that the elder Abrahamic faiths did. Acquiring tolerance, Islam would drop jihad, stop murdering dissidents and non-believers, and make peace. Meanwhile, jihad is in a high tide, pouring in on us with gathering strength. It is up to us to resist, not raise false hopes.

Whether dealing with jihad or the economy, Western governments should consider the consequences of proposals before enacting them. When dealing with jihad, Western leaders should study the alien cultures involved before they invest resources and take dangerous risks. Despite numerous failures of approach, Western leaders still seem unacquainted with Islamic cultures and even sympathize with some of their would-be conquerors. No wonder our leaders keep floundering!

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

To Go To Top

Posted by YogiRUs, March 26, 2012.

This was written by Terry Davidson of the QMI Agency. Contact him at terry.davidson@sunmedia.ca.


Eric Brazau holds his copy of A Gift For the Muslim Couple in the front lobby of the Toronto Sun. (Terry Davidson/QMI Agency)

A local bookstore has "sold out" of a controversial marriage guide that advises Muslim men on how to beat their wives.

The 160-page book, published by Idara Impex in New Delhi, India, is written by Hazrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, who's described in the book's foreword as a "prolific writer on almost every topic of Islamic learning."

The store's manager, who didn't give his name, said the book had been sold out for some time, and the store's owner, whom the manager identified as Shamim Ahmad, refused to comment for the story.

It wasn't clear whether the shop has ordered more copies of the book, but it's available at online Islamic bookstores and even through eBay.

In the book's opening pages, it is written that "it might be necessary to restrain her with strength or even to threaten her."

Later, its author advises that "the husband should treat the wife with kindness and love, even if she tends to be stupid and slow sometimes."

Page 45 contains the rights of the husband, which include his wife's inability to leave "his house without his permission," and that his wife must "fulfil his desires" and "not allow herself to be untidy ... but should beautify herself for him ... "

In terms of physical punishment, the book advises that a husband may scold her, "beat by hand or stick," withhold money from her or "pull (her) by the ears," but should "refrain from beating her excessively."

Moderate Muslim voice Tarek Fatah says the shopkeeper should be charged for selling such a book.

"I wouldn't say it's hate, but it is inciting men to hit women," said Fatah, who identified the book's author as a prominent Islamic scholar. "This is new to you, but the Muslim community knows that this is widespread, that a woman can be beaten. Muslim leaders will deny this, but... "

Male dominance over women has been making headlines for some time, with the recent lengthy trial and conviction of the Shafia family.

Mohammad Shafia, 59, his second wife, Tooba Yahya, 42, and their son, Hamed, 21, were each convicted in January on four counts of first-degree murder in what was characterized as an honour killing of four female family members as punishment for disobedience. They were handed life sentences with no chance of parole for 25 years.

Shafia's three daughters and his first wife were found drowned in a car at the bottom of the Rideau Canal in Kingston, Ont., in June 2009.

Eric Brazau says he was flipping through the marriage guide while in the bookstore around a month ago.

Brazau bought it out of curiosity but was taken aback when he found dozens of chapters and passages giving Muslim husbands advice on controlling, restraining, scolding and beating their wives.

"At first, I thought that it is incredible that this kind of thing can be found in Canada," said Brazau. "And then I thought, radical Islam is not coming to Canada, it is already here."

Contact YogiRUs by email at YogiRUs@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Mechel Samberg, March 26, 2012.

This was written by Abdellah Taïa, author of the novel "An Arab Melancholia." This essay was translated by Edward Gauvin from the French. It appeared March 24, 2012 in the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/opinion/sunday/a-boy-to-be-sacrificed.html).


(Chema Moya/European Pressphoto Agency)

IN the Morocco of the 1980s, where homosexuality did not, of course, exist, I was an effeminate little boy, a boy to be sacrificed, a humiliated body who bore upon himself every hypocrisy, everything left unsaid. By the time I was 10, though no one spoke of it, I knew what happened to boys like me in our impoverished society; they were designated victims, to be used, with everyone's blessing, as easy sexual objects by frustrated men. And I knew that no one would save me — not even my parents, who surely loved me. For them too, I was shame, filth. A "zamel."

Like everyone else, they urged me into a terrible, definitive silence, there to die a little more each day.

How is a child who loves his parents, his many siblings, his working-class culture, his religion — Islam — how is he to survive this trauma? To be hurt and harassed because of something others saw in me — something in the way I moved my hands, my inflections. A way of walking, my carriage. An easy intimacy with women, my mother and my many sisters. To be categorized for victimhood like those "emo" boys with long hair and skinny jeans who have recently been turning up dead in the streets of Iraq, their skulls crushed in.

The truth is, I don't know how I survived. All I have left is a taste for silence. And the dream, never to be realized, that someone would save me. Now I am 38 years old, and I can state without fanfare: no one saved me.

I no longer remember the child, the teenager, I was. I know I was effeminate and aware that being so obviously "like that" was wrong. God did not love me. I had strayed from the path. Or so I was made to understand. Not only by my family, but also by the entire neighborhood. And I learned my lesson perfectly. So deep down, I tell myself they won. This is what happened.

I was barely 12, and in my neighborhood they called me "the little girl." Even those I persisted in playing soccer with used that nickname, that insult. Even the teenagers who'd once taken part with me in the same sexual games. I was no kid anymore. My body was changing, stretching out, becoming a man's. But others did not see me as a man. The image of myself they reflected back at me was strange and incomprehensible. Attempts at rape and abuse multiplied.

I knew it wasn't good to be as I was. But what was I going to do? Change? Speak to my mother, my big brother? And tell them what, exactly?

It all came to a head one summer night in 1985. It was too hot. Everyone was trying in vain to fall asleep. I, too, lay awake, on the floor beside my sisters, my mother close by. Suddenly, the familiar voices of drunken men reached us. We all heard them. The whole family. The whole neighborhood. The whole world. These men, whom we all knew quite well, cried out: "Abdellah, little girl, come down. Come down. Wake up and come down. We all want you. Come down, Abdellah. Don't be afraid. We won't hurt you. We just want to have sex with you."

They kept yelling for a long time. My nickname. Their desire. Their crime. They said everything that went unsaid in the too-silent, too-respectful world where I lived. But I was far, then, from any such analysis, from understanding that the problem wasn't me. I was simply afraid. Very afraid. And I hoped my big brother, my hero, would rise and answer them. That he would protect me, at least with words. I didn't want him to fight them — no. All I wanted him to say were these few little words: "Go away! Leave my little brother alone."

But my brother, the absolute monarch of our family, did nothing. Everyone turned their back on me. Everyone killed me that night. I don't know where I found the strength, but I didn't cry. I just squeezed my eyes shut a bit more tightly. And shut, with the same motion, everything else in me. Everything. I was never the same Abdellah Taïa after that night. To save my skin, I killed myself. And that was how I did it.

I began by keeping my head low all the time. I cut all ties with the children in the neighborhood. I altered my behavior. I kept myself in check: no more feminine gestures, no more honeyed voice, no more hanging around women. No more anything. I had to invent a whole new Abdellah. I bent myself to the task with great determination, and with the realization that this world was no longer my world. Sooner or later, I would leave it behind. I would grow up and find freedom somewhere else. But in the meantime I would become hard. Very hard.


TODAY I grow nostalgic for little effeminate Abdellah. He and I share a body, but I no longer remember him. He was innocence. Now I am only intellect. He was naïve. I am clever. He was spontaneous. I am locked in a constant struggle with myself.

In 2006, seven years after I moved to France, and after my second book, "Le rouge du tarbouche" (the red of the fez), came out in Morocco, I, too, came out to the Moroccan press, in Arabic and French. Scandal, and support. Then, faced with my brother's silence and my mother's tears on the telephone, I published in TelQuel, the very brave Moroccan magazine, an open letter called "Homosexuality Explained to My Mother." My mother died the next year.

I don't know where I found the courage to become a writer and use my books to impose my homosexuality on the world of my youth. To do justice to little Abdellah. To never forget the trauma he and every Arab homosexual like him suffered.

Now, over a year after the Arab Spring began, we must again remember homosexuals. Arabs have finally become aware that they have to invent a new, free Arab individual, without the support of their megalomaniacal leaders. Arab homosexuals are also taking part in this revolution, whether they live in Egypt, Iraq or Morocco. They, too, are part of this desperately needed process of political and individual liberation. And the world must support and protect them.

Contact Mechel Samberg at mechelsamberg2@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by MS Kramer, March 26, 2012.

The importance of Jerusalem to Muslims is directly proportional to Jewish (or Christian) connections to the city. That is the unmistakable conclusion the audience gained at the Middle East Forum's recent program at the Menahem Begin Center in Jerusalem. Daniel Pipes opened and closed the lengthy conference with his usual pithy analysis. Pipes, a former academic who founded and is president of the Middle East Forum, describes himself as a foreign policy analyst with a doctorate in 7th and 8th century Islamic history.

Pipes, in his introduction to the talks, noted the secondary importance of Jerusalem to Islam, based on Islamic history and culture. He characterized the 20th-century resurgence in interest towards Jerusalem as a form of "Muslim Zionism," a response to political concerns.

Historically, Muhammed was solicitous to the Jewish tribes living in 7th century Arabia, in an attempt to win them over to his new religion. Failing to gain many Jewish adherents, Muhammed withdrew the accommodations he had extended to them, such as praying towards the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, and elevated Mecca as the center of the new faith. Conquering and converting the Jewish tribes, as well as the pagan ones, became the modus operandi of his militant faith.

Pipes noted that the identification of Jerusalem as the location of the "Furthest mosque," where Muhammed began his "night journey" (Koran: Sura 17/1), as the basis for Islamic veneration of the city. Yet, the Koran never mentions Jerusalem, nor is the specific location of the Furthest mosque indicated. (We were told that in certain translations, such as those in the French language, translators have arbitrarily named Jerusalem as the site of the Furthest mosque.) Pipes informed us that the term Furthest mosque was first mentioned in 621 CE, but only 70 years later did the new rulers of Jerusalem, the Umayyad Caliphate, build a mosque on the Temple Mount and call it the Furthest (Al-Aqsa) mosque. Despite their efforts, after the fall of the Umayyads Jerusalem was again a provincial, out of the way town.

The wars against the Crusaders (11th-13th centuries) rekindled attention in Jerusalem. Consequently, it became the third city of Islam, after Mecca and Medina. Following the defeat of the Crusaders, Jerusalem was again a backwater. The Ottoman Empire controlled the region for 400 years, but Jerusalem remained a small, dusty town. The 20th century brought the British to the former Ottoman-ruled region. The Muslim regained their interest in Jerusalem as they reacted to Jewish initiatives and development under British rule. Jerusalem became an important city again, as the seat of British power in the United Nations Mandate for Palestine.

Pipes reminded us that Jordan controlled Jerusalem for nineteen years, from 1948-1967, but King Hussein deemphasized it in favor of his capital, Amman. Only the Jordanian king visited Jerusalem while it was under Arab rule; no other Arab ruler thought it significant enough to visit.

With the Israeli conquest of 1967, Jerusalem regained its importance in Arab eyes, following the old pattern of reaction in response to the Jewish (or Christian) presence. Jewish attachment to Jerusalem was scorned and delegitimized by the Arabs. Summing up, Pipes reiterated that politics is the motive force in Islamic attachment to Jerusalem. Mecca and Medina remain preeminent in Islam. For Jews, Jerusalem is the only, everlasting Jewish capital.

Moshe Sharon is Professor of Islamic Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. His contention is that Islam's basic attitude is that all of history and geography are Muslim. According to Islam, there were Islamic holy places in Jerusalem BEFORE the Arab conquest in 638 CE. Abraham, Moses, King David, King Solomon, and Jesus were all in Jerusalem and each was a Muslim. Islam is the only true religion. Muhammed was created by Allah before all others. Adam was created from Muhammed's dust. Sharon emphasized that evenhandedness doesn't exist in Islam: there is only one history, one religion, and one geography. Judaism and Christianity, though they are precursors to Islam, are infidel religions.

Sharon informed us that when the Arabs conquered Jerusalem in 638, it was originally named Eliah, after Abraham's daughter, and much later renamed Al Quds, a rough translation of the Hebrew name of the Temple Mount. Sharon reminded the audience that Jerusalem was never a Muslim capital, though they did construct a capital at Ramle, about 20 miles away. In contrast, Jerusalem was the original capital of the Jews, it was the capital for the Crusaders, and in more modern times Jerusalem was the most important city of the British Mandate. Once the modern State of Israel was proclaimed, Jerusalem again became the Jewish capital. But Jerusalem as an Islamic capital? Never.

Another panelist was Yitzhak Reiter, who teaches in the Conflict Studies Program of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and in the Department of Political Science at Ashkelon Academic College. Between 1978 and 1986, Reiter was the Deputy Advisor on Arab Affairs under three Prime Ministers of Israel.

Reiter began by saying that during the last five decades a new ethos about Jerusalem was written by Muslims, Islamizing the city and denying Jewish involvement there. It is a rewriting of history, invented and prefabricated for the political purpose of delegitimizing Jewish roots. It is a narrative that has gained a life of its own in an effort to create an Islamic past in Jerusalem which predates the entrance of the Hebrews into Canaan.

The Muslims claim that the Jebusites, from whom King David captured the city, are the precursors of the Arabs, thereby predating Jewish presence in Jerusalem. The Canaanites, Jebusites, and Amalakites are all purported to have come to Canaan from the Arabian Peninsula. There was no Jewish Temple in Jerusalem and Jews have only a short history here, mostly dating from the Zionist movement of the 19th century. There is constant agitation against Israel for "endangering" Al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock, which results in frequent Muslim attacks on non-Muslems.

As a professor of conflict management, Reiter stated that the Israeli government should not imitate Muslim tactics by belittling the Islamic attachment to Al-Quds. He believes that the only way to resolve the current conflict is to negotiate with the Arabs with this in mind.

I believe that negotiating on that basis is foolhardy. As Professor Sharon is famous for saying, whatever the Muslims propose, we should say, "No!" Why? Because that is their strategy. I see no reason that we should give value to their false construct, putting it on a par with thousands of years of Jewish history in the Land of Israel. It may be that there is no foreseeable resolution of this conflict. Even if this is true, it is not a reason to negotiate away our heritage.

Dr. Mordechai Kedar, an expert on Arabs and Islam who had a career in intelligence before joining Bar Ilan University, pointed out that Islam's goal is to replace Judaism and Christianity, building on their ruined foundations in Jerusalem to delegitimize Israel. Simply put, the Jerusalem conflict is a process for the Muslims to justify Islam. His interview about Jerusalem and Islam, on the Al Jazeera network has had hundreds of thousands of views on Youtube. (Don't miss it!)

Concluding the extensive program, which had several other speakers, Daniel Pipes reiterated that Jerusalem is not central to Islam like it is to Judaism and Christianity, nor is it comparable to Mecca and Medina. The enthusiastic audience agreed with him.

Stephen Kramer is author of "Encountering Israel - Geography, History, Culture." Check it out at www.encounteringisrael.com Contact him by email at mskramer@jhu.edu

To Go To Top

Posted by Dr. Sanford Aranoff, March 26, 2012.

We must understand the disease if we are to heal the patient. The disease of Arab anti-Semitism is not at all like Christian anti-Semitism. Zev Jabotinsky also failed to understand Muslims, when he wrote about the "iron wall". It is not that native people dislike newcomers, as the original Indians disliked the new Americans. The only correct way to understand Muslims is to read their holy writings.

We must understand that every Muslim accepts the Koran literally without the possibility of interpretation. Contrast this with Judaism. When the Hebrew Bible speaks about "eye for an eye", Jews accept the interpretation that this refers to requiring a monetary payment. Furthermore, while there are various branches of Judaism, all Muslims accept the Koran. In addition, there is no reality other than the Koran, implying the rejection of empirical evidence to the contrary.

The only way for Israel to have peace is for Israel to give all of the land of Israel, including Tel Aviv, to Muslim control. Israel must give all weapons to the Muslims, and allow them full control of the government. The Muslims will be generous and permit Jews to live peacefully if they accept second-class citizenship. This is the bottom line. They will not accept any compromise. They will fight to the death for this goal. They will lie to everyone in order to accomplish this goal. Read the clear Arabic in the Muslim holy writings!

The only solution is for Israel to understand this, and to remain in military control. Israel must not make the mistake of giving Gaza to the Muslims, vainly thinking this would bring peace. Israeli soldiers must patrol Arab regions, like Gaza, to prevent the firing of weapons.

What Israel must do is to educate their fellow Jews to this reality, and the American public.

We hear from American leaders that America is a friend of Israel. The fact is that hundreds of thousands of American citizens live in Israel, and so America is legally bound to defend Israel. American citizens do not live in Arab lands, except for a few tourists and embassy officials, which can easily be evacuated.

In Psychology 101, we learn how essential it is to accept reality. Israelis must accept this reality about Islam. Jews who understand this have the moral duty to educate other Jews and Americans. The Arabs do not want their own state. Anyone who says this is in denial of reality and dangerously influences policy.

Dr. Sanford Aranoff is author of "Finite and Infinite Mathematics: Sets, Numbers, Lines, Equations, Probability", "Rational Thinking, Government Policies, Science, and Living". and "Teaching and Helping Students Think and Do Better." Contact him at aranoff@analysis-knowledge.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Stella Paul, March 26, 2012.

It takes more than a murderer's knife to kill the Jewish spirit. One year after five members of the Fogel family were brutally stabbed to death, the residents of their small farming community in the West Bank dedicated a new religious school in their honor.

Itamar, a quiet hilltop town surrounded by hostile Arab villages, has earned a tragic distinction as "the most wounded community." Since its founding in 1984, a series of terror attacks has killed twenty-two people (including nine children) in a town of just 200 families. Yet after each massacre, the people of Itamar rebuild and replant, determined to sink deeper roots into their patch of the ancient Biblical soil of Samaria. Since the Fogel murders, at least twelve new families have moved to Itamar.

On a recent rainy day, I visited Itamar, beginning by paying my respects at the Fogel family home.

A string of Israeli flags flapped in the wind, left over from the ceremony a few days before in which a scribe had finished writing a Torah scroll in the family living room. Gazing at this modest concrete box, I found it impossible to imagine the chaotic scenes that had unfolded on March 11, 2011. On that horrific Sabbath night, two Palestinian cousins from the neighboring town of Awarta had broken in and stabbed to death Rabbi Ehud (Udi) Fogel, 36, his wife Ruti, 35, and their children, Yoav, 11, Elad, four, and Hadas, a three-month-old baby girl who was butchered in her crib.

"Every time the Arabs try to frighten us, we see it as an opportunity to strengthen the community," my guide, Oshri, told me. "What people don't understand is that if we go, Tel Aviv goes." Oshri explained that the topography of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) consists of a vast mountain range, dominating the narrow, low plains of Tel Aviv. If the Palestinian Authority controlled the mountain, they could send missiles into the major population centers of Israel and barrage its economic zones and airport.

Ruti and Udi Fogel understood the importance of holding this land, which is why they chose to relocate here after the Israeli government evicted them from their home in Gush Katif. A bloc of seventeen flourishing agricultural settlements in the Gaza Strip, Gush Katif was dismantled by the Israeli government in August, 2005, and its 8,600 residents forced out, in accordance with Israel's policy of unilateral disengagement from Gaza. Today, in the land where settlers once grew huge harvests of organic vegetables, a hellfire of rockets is now fired at southern Israel. In early March, one million Israelis were forced into bomb shelters and the holiday of Purim was canceled.

Oshri drives me to Mishkan Ehud, "The House of Ehud," a new study center named for Ehud Fogel, rising above the temporary trailers that housed it.

"Ehud was the rabbi of one of the grades in the religious school," Oshri explained. "After the murders, his parents decided to memorialize him by building a new home for the school, which now meets in trailers. The community raised the money and got the building ready in time for the dedication ceremony last week on the first yahrzeit (anniversary) of their deaths."

Inside the building, where workers are putting the finishing touches on the interior, Oshri introduced me to Assaf Kidron, 35, the soft-spoken artist who created the school's new 15-ton holy ark out of local stones.

When I asked him to explain his artistic concept, he closed his eyes, concentrating to precisely state his thoughts, which Oshri translated. "This monument is built entirely from stones exposed thousands of years on the ground in the hilltops of the Holy Land. Above these stones happened the stories of the Bible. Hundreds of students will come here to learn the Bible. The stones will hear their voices and remember, and the stones will share all they felt and the history of what happened here in the heartland of the Holy Land of Israel."

As Assaf talked, I thought of the neighboring town of Awarta, from which the Fogels' murderers came. Tradition claims that Awarta is the burial place of Itamar, the son of the high priest Aaron, for whom the town of Itamar is named.

Living in Itamar demands courage because the encirclement is palpable. Driving out of Itamar, we passed the entrance to Nablus, a major Palestinian city. Oshri translated the sign at the entry point: "Ahead of you lies a Zone A, administered by the Palestinian Authority. It is forbidden for Israelis to enter. You risk your life if you break this law."

I thought ruefully of the conference underway that day at Harvard, a bilious hatefest entitled "Israel/Palestine and the One-State Solution," advocating for the end of the Jewish State for its supposed sin of apartheid. Yet I'd seen no signs anywhere in Israel forbidding entry to Palestinians. In fact, my day had started at Ariel, a major Israeli settlement in the West Bank, where 12,000 students attend Ariel University Center of Samaria, including 3,000 Arabs.

I asked Oshri about "Zone A" and the whole confusing business of who controls what. He explained that the Oslo Accords in 1993 divided the West Bank into Zones A, B and C. While Israel maintains control of all roads, which are classified as Zone C, the Palestinian Authority rules over Zones A and B, operating its own educational, legal, medical and social welfare systems. In a Zone A, such as Nablus, the Palestinian Authority also controls security. More than 95% of the Arab population in the West Bank now lives under Palestinian Authority rule.

Driving through the Arab village of Chawara, I saw more evidence of the Palestinian Authority's autonomy: the main street was decorated with posters commemorating three terrorist "martyrs."

Oshri took me to Havat Gilad, a tiny pioneering outpost whose story is intimately entwined with the town of Itamar. 24 families and 15 single men live on this private land owned by Moshe Zar, whose son Gilad was a founder of Itamar. Gilad Zar served as a chief security officer for the region, dying in a hail of over 40 bullets shot by Palestinian terrorists, leaving a widow and eight children. His father founded the community in his memory.

One of Rachel Shabo's surviving sons helped to build Havat Gilad. A resident of Itamar, Rachel Shabo, 40, was murdered in her home in 2002, along with three of her children. Her surviving family carries on in her honor: her son Asael, who was 10 when his leg was shot off in the attack, is now one of the best disabled swimmers in the world, winning gold medals for Israel.

I joined Ilana and Yehuda Shimon in the trailer they share with their seven children. Over a delicious chicken lunch, Ilana explained that Israeli officials have refused to issue building permits to Havat Gilad, so they can't connect to the water or electrical infrastructure. The Shomron Regional Council regularly brings them tankers of water, and supplies generators, which cost 60,000 shekels a month to fuel.

"Last Tuesday, some Arabs came from a nearby village and completely burned a trailer of someone living here, " Ilana said. "The security dog was burned to death. We don't have a fence and they come in broad daylight when everybody is out working or studying."

Despite the difficulties, Ilana said the community's spirits were good. "We came here six years ago after the settlers were evicted from Gush Katif. We decided to move to a community that needs us. We want to live like the Zionist pioneers. We have to hold this land."

Write to Stella Paul at Stellapundit@aol.com. This article appeared in American Thinker and is archived at
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2012/03/one_year_ after_the_fogel_family_murders_the_community_rebuilds.html

To Go To Top

Posted by Mechel Samberg, March 25, 2012.

This comes from IMRA's Dr. Aaron Lerner.


Japan is spending money in the Jordan Valley with an eye towards creating a situation ... that will deny Israel the strategic security provided by the Jordan Valley.

Compare-Israel Prime Minister Netanyahu on the importance of the Jordan Valley: http://www.haaretz.com/news/netanyahu-israel-will-never-cede-jordan-valley-1.266329

Background: Read Japan's Middle Easy policy here:

* Japan pre-empts: Japan supports a two-state solution and will contribute to Palestinian state-building efforts.-although the Government of Israel has never voted to support Palestinian state and many members of the Government of Israel, as well as an official decision of Israel's ruling party, oppose the Palestinian state notion.

* Japan takes the Arab side: Japan emphasizes that the conflict should be resolved based on the Arab Peace Initiative. Similarly, regarding Jerusalem, Japan stresses that it will not recognize what it calls Israeli "annexation" (sic) of East Jerusalem. Japan expresses deep concern about demolition of Palestinian houses — but not, for example, about Palestinian terrorism, or rampant Palestinian illegal building, in Jerusalem. Japan never expressed concern, deep or otherwise, about demolition of 9000 Jewish houses in Gush Katif.

* Japan discriminates: Palestinians are welcome to build in the West Bank. But building homes, schools and baby clinics for the local Jewish community numbering half a million, including the East portion of Jerusalem, "should be fully frozen".

* Japan equally blames Palestinian terrorism-and Israel's defense: Japan calls on "all parties" to cease "violence and incitement".

* Japan hallucinates: Japan says that if Israel's borders are based on the 1967 lines, Israel will enjoy a "greatly enhanced security environment".

* Japan pities Palestinians but not Israelis: Japan is concerned that the Gaza Strip remains under "severe humanitarian conditions" and laments "the hardships and difficulties faced by the Palestinians". Japan does not express similar concern or lamentation about rocket attacks from the Gaza strip on one-fifth of Israel's population. Japan has provided assistance to Palestinians that exceeds 1.1 billion dollars. Japan does not report providing one single dollar to Israeli victims of Palestinian terrorism or to Israel's heavy expenses for its anti-rocket defense program against Palestinian terror rockets.

How you can help:
Obtain comment from the Japanese embassy in Israel

Feel free to forward this email to the Japanese embassy in Israel and ask the Japanese ambassador to comment.

The email address of the Japanese embassy in Israel is: info@tl.mofa.go.jp.

Please cc Israel's Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon so they will sense your support; email addresses are: aliberman@knesset.gov.il; ehudb@knesset.gov.il; dayalon@knesset.gov.il;

If you wish, bcc us at: us4israel@gmail.com.

Thanks for helping Israel.


1. Write us at us4israel@gmail.com about any aspect of supporting Israel's rights and overcoming anti-Semitism toward Israel and Israelis

West Bank of what?

The term 'West Bank' only came about as result of Jordan's imperialist effort to expand.

Contact Mechel Samberg at mechelsamberg2@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by John Trudel, March 25, 2012.

This article was written by Jytte Klausen, a professor of politics at Brandeis University and author of "The Cartoons That Shook the World" (Yale University Press, 2009). She is founder of the Western Jihadism Project, which tracks and analyzes the development of jihadi networks in the West. This article appeared March 23, 2012 in the Wall Street Journal
http://online.wsj.com/article/ SB10001424052702304636404577299550343286104.html


Mohamed Merah, the Frenchman who assassinated three French paratroopers of North African background and then launched a terrible attack on a Jewish school — murdering a teacher, his two young sons and an 8-year-old girl — claimed to act for al Qaeda. Skeptics have dismissed the claim, saying al Qaeda barely functions anymore. But Merah was no "lone wolf" and did indeed bear the imprint of al Qaeda.

Young and alienated, Merah had served two years in a juvenile prison for robbery. Was he rejected by French society because of his Algerian background? "He snapped," say friends. After prison, he was completely cut off from reality, said his lawyer.

In fact, Merah was practically a prince in French jihadist circles. His mother is married to the father of Sabri Essid, a leading member of the Toulouse radical milieu who was captured in Syria in 2006. Essid and another Frenchman were running an al Qaeda safe house in Syria for fighters going to Iraq. In a 2009 trial that came to be known in the press as "Brothers for Iraq," they and six others were convicted in France of conspiracy for terrorist purposes. Essid was sentenced in 2009 to five years imprisonment.

Family contacts could have been instrumental in setting up Merah's jihadist contacts and facilitating his travels to South Asia. Le Monde reports that the Pakistani Taliban and the Uzbek Islamic Movement trained Merah to become a killer. In 2010, he was captured in Afghanistan (reportedly by Afghan forces) and handed over to the French government, yet French media report that he was able to return to Northwest Pakistan in 2011.

The French police have confirmed that Merah was under periodic surveillance in recent months. That he slipped through and was able to carry out his attacks will become a source of criticism and self-recrimination on the part of the generally efficient French police. It certainly suggests that he had help from a network.

In executing his attacks, Merah did everything by the jihadist textbook. He made sure he would die a martyr's death that would be witnessed on television screens around the world. He murdered with a video camera strapped to his body, making him star and director of his own epic. He told journalists his videos would soon be uploaded. In the attack at the Jewish school Monday morning, Merah held a little girl by her hair while he paused to reload his gun. He then shot her. In a recording found in his apartment he tells another victim, a soldier: "You kill my brothers, I kill you." This is theater.

The Internet was his friend. "I have changed my life ... on video," said one of his last tweets (in French) during the siege. His account ID featured a black knight on a horse holding high the flag of jihad.

He signed that last tweet "Mohamed Merah-Forsane Alizza." Forsane Alizza, or "Knights of Glory," is a France-based jihadist media organization that was banned in January by French authorities after they discovered members preparing to train in armed combat. The ban made little difference, as content was uploaded to new sites. A website using the Forsane Alizza alias is still active — and registered with a domain name registrar and Web hosting company based in the state of Washington.

Two hours before the police arrived at his apartment, Merah was calling a French TV station. He appears to have had the media on speed-dial and was an active user not only of Twitter but of Facebook and YouTube. (Authorities took down his online outlets one-by-one on Wednesday.)

Merah's shootings in Toulouse again shatter the illusion that counterterrorism can be 100% successful. Jihadist terrorism exploits our freedoms and opportunities in a global campaign linking foreign insurgencies and extremist activism in the West. Highly scripted and planned with the assistance of accomplices in and outside of France, Merah did not act in isolation.

Contact John Trudel at mail@trudelgroup.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Roger Bodle, March 25, 2012.

The antisemitic bi**h who dared utter her vile disgusting lies whilst in Israel, should have been declared persona non grata by the Israeli government and kicked out of Israel. The British nowadays cannot wait to concoct up something insulting and hostile against Israel to show their anti-Judaism and their envy for the successes in science, economy and technology and high moral standard of the State of Israel.

She should better remember her compatriots' callousness and cruelty when, to score a first victory against the Argentinians in the 1982 Falklands War, their government didn't hesitate to order the sinking of the old Argentinian ship General Belgrano although it was outside the 370 Km. self-declared Exclusion Zone around the Falklands, causing the death of 1,000 young cadets. The ship was not on a war mission and was not sailing toward the islands.

British double standards and self-righteousness are well known particularly against Israel, because they are still sore since they were defeated in 1948 by the Jewish Haganah and Irgun Defense Forces and forced to give up the Mandate of Palestine by the United Nations. The British have the memory of elephants and never forget and forgive after being humiliated and defeated.

The article below, "Lieberman Demands Ashton Retract Toulouse-Gaza Comparison," by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu appeared March 20, 2012 in Arutz-7


Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Tuesday that European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton should retract her comparison of the Toulouse murders with deaths in Gaza.

Ashton responded to the cold-blooded murder of a rabbi and three Jewish children in Toulouse by saying, "When we think of what happened in Toulouse today, when we remember what happened in Norway a year ago, when we know what is happening in Syria, when we see what is happening in Gaza and in different parts of the world — we remember young people and children who lose their lives."

Lieberman said her remarks were "inappropriate": and added that if Ashton wanted to refer to other children, she should have mentioned those "in southern Israel who live in constant fear of rocket attacks launched from Gaza."

The Foreign Minister spoke during his visit to China and emphasized that "Israel is the most moral country in the world and despite the fact that it has to fight terrorist who operate from within civilian populations, the IDF makes every effort possible not to harm that population."

While Hamas and allied terrorists operate from within civilian areas, "The IDF risks its soldiers' lives in order to minimize risk to civilian population," Lieberman added.

Opposition leader Tzipi Livni, in rare agreement with Lieberman, called Ashton's comments "outrageous" and demanded that she issue a retraction.


Eli E. Hertz uses images of actual children to refute Ashton's assertions about Palestinian children. Click here.

Contact Roger Bodle by email att rjbodle@xtra.co.nz

To Go To Top

Posted by History March, March 25, 2012.

According to figures released by the Public Security Ministry in January, while Arabs make up around 20% of the population, they are the suspects in 67% of homicides, 70% of attempted homicides and 52% of general arson attacks. Forestry arson by Arabs is about 89% ...knowing full well the meaning trees have to the country's loyal citizens.

A day doesn't go by when a stabbing does not take place somewhere in Israel...87% of the time the assault is by an Arab stabbing a Jew.

Assaults, including sexual, against students at Hebrew University,vandalism, and other acts of violence have gotten so bad, that demonstrations against the continuing Arab crime wave have recently taken place in Jerusalem.

The Arab neighborhoods of Isawiya and a-Tur are located close to Hebrew University and French Hill.


- Has anyone in Israel ever heard of 'urban renewal' - Demolishing run down crime infested areas and re-locating the residents to other districts.

------------------------------ -------------------

No figures are yet available on crimes committed by the 78,000 (mostly male) illegals that have infiltrated Israel from the Sudan, Eritrea, Congo, Ivory Coast and other sub-Sahara countries during the past seven years.

However, these unwanted dredges of African society come from countries where crime, rape, rioting, and pillaging are rampant.

No one yet knows, but it is quite possible that some Somali' terrorists may have entered the country along with the other Africans. Ethnically, the people from Somalia closely resemble Eritreans and even in some cases Ethiopians. Several months ago a group of young Somali's born and raised in Minnesota traveled to Somalia, where they joined the African branch of Al Quaeda...and conducted terrorist activities.

Contact the poster by email at historywatch@att.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Susana K-M, March 25, 2012.

This was written by Diana West and was published March 22, 2012


Warning: This column contains news of evidence of possible forgery and fraud in the long-form birth certificate of the president of the United States and — bonus — his Selective Service registration card.

I figure the warning is necessary to prevent Americans, particularly Americans who work in news media and politics, from hurting themselves on any hard, sharp facts that might poke through my discussion of what is surely the biggest scandal to emerge around the seemingly dodgy docs Barack Obama is using to verify his identity.

I refer to the logic — and history-defying news and political blackout of the March 1 press conference called in Maricopa County, Ariz., by Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Cold Case Posse.

I ask you: Have you read in your local paper about the technical evidence that led the posse's three retired criminal investigators and two attorneys to conclude that the birth certificate image White House officials uploaded at the White House website on April 27, 2011, did not originate in a paper format, but rather was created (forged) as an electronic file on a computer?

Have you seen on network or cable news the video clip (one of six posse videos at YouTube) re-creating exactly how an additional fraud might have been committed to forge the president's Selective Service registration card? Heard even conservative talk radio discussing the posse's discovery that immigration files in the National Archives recording overseas arrivals into Hawaii are missing from the week of Obama's 1961 birthday? Or about the retired mailman's affidavit attesting that the mother of ex-Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers enthusiastically told him that she helped with "foreign student" Barack Obama's education?

I know my ears pricked up when, watching the posse's press conference online, I heard lead investigator Michael Zullo explain that the 1961 Hawaiian newspaper listings of Barack Obama's birth confirm nothing because the posse "can prove beyond a doubt" that these newspapers announced arrivals of foreign babies as well as native-born. Zullo also announced the posse had "documented evidence of two adopted individuals who were breathing three years prior" and were similarly listed as newborn infants. Heard anything about that?

I know the answer. You have read, seen and heard nothing — and certainly not a peep from any representatives in Congress. The unique exception seems to be poor Republican Rep. Cliff Stearns of Florida, whose mere mentions (better than nothing) of "examining the evidence" get him insta-hammered by the media and White House alike. Obama's communications director, Dan Pfeiffer, one of the presenters of the birth certificate at the White House last spring, actually had the gall to call into question via tweet Stearns' fitness to conduct congressional investigations into the Obama administration's decision to funnel $535 million into Solyndra, the bankrupt solar company. Why? Because Stearns dared to express interest in evidence amassed by veteran law enforcement professionals under Arpaio, himself a 30-year federal law-enforcement official and five-time-elected sheriff.

"1984″-style, we mustn't question. We mustn't look. We certainly mustn't look at questions that cross the narrative of authority. What are we, free people?

Apparently not. One editor told me the problem is the evidence of fraud might prove to be true! A very famous conservative figure told me that if the president were proved to be an identity thief, "that would alienate too many people" from the Republican Party!

I am reminded of Groucho Marx's answer to the question, Are we mice or men? "Throw some cheese on the floor and we'll find out."

Recently, Breitbart.com's new editor at large, Ben Shapiro, was on Mark Gillar's radio show, "Tea Party Power Hour," promoting his conservative media organization's "vetting Obama" campaign. Gillar asked Shapiro if "vetting" Obama would include investigating Obama's birth and/or Selective Service documents. Absolutely not, Shapiro replied, explaining that he didn't believe this was an issue. "I am discouraging people from spending time on this," Shapiro said, emphasizing once again that he himself did not believe there were irregularities in the documents since, as he put it, he knew Media Matters would be listening to the interview.

The walls have ears? Shapiro's concern almost makes Media Matters sound like a secret police outfit with a gulag for journalists who ask too many questions. In reality, it's an ideologically driven, left-wing attack group funded by ideologically driven, left-wing George Soros.

Shapiro continued, quite candidly: "It's an issue on which people are being marginalized very easily and very quickly at this point."

Marginalized by whom? The Soros-funded attack machine? The liberal-dominated "mainstream media"? Fox News-dominated conservative media? The Obama White House?

Clearly, something has us all on lockdown. That's much, much scarier than even the amazing possibility that some con artist might be pulling off the biggest scam in history.

Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Shmuel Rabinowitz, March 25, 2012.

Jerusalem will no longer be built on hate. Jerusalem's future will not be written on its destroyed past.

Evil spirits surround Jerusalem.

Small-minded people are trying to undermine the foundations of the eternal castle; denying its past, erasing its identity. They are trying to take possession of King David's holy city.

No, I will not testify about the Jewishness of Jerusalem. Testimony will be given by the ancient coins found among the remains, etched with names of Kings of Judea. Testimony will be given by the burned stamps carrying biblical names. Testimony will be given by the walls of hope, built by Nehemiah, the rebuilder of Jewish settlement in Jerusalem over 2,300 years ago. Testimony will be given by the tremendous stone walls which surround Temple Mount, the site of the Second Temple, about which the Romans said nothing so magnificent had been seen anywhere in the world. Testimony will be given by the ritual baths carved in Jerusalem stone on the pilgrims' route.

No, I will not testify about the Jewish nation's devotion to Jerusalem.

Testimony will be given by the desperate etchings left by pilgrims on the stone walls of Jerusalem. Testimony will be given by the Holy Ark curtains, the wine goblets and other ritual objects which carry the image of the Western Wall stones in every place which Jews reached around the world. Testimony will be given by the prayers, the hymns and the liturgy recited in Morocco and Spain, in the mountains of Ethiopia and in the steppes of the Ukraine, etching the memory of Jerusalem in every heart.

No, I will not testify about the freedom of Jerusalem. Testimony will be given by the millions of pilgrims; Jews, Christians and Muslims who — for the first time in 2,000 years — have complete freedom of religion and worship in Jerusalem, who enjoy the status quo of mutual respect and of the safeguarding of the sacred places to the three religions, protected by the government of the sovereign State of Israel. Testimony will be given by the state archeological sites and museums in Jerusalem which preserve and tell the story of Jerusalem throughout the generations.

For 2,000 years, since my forefathers were expelled from it under the Roman sword, Jerusalem was destroyed and rebuilt time and after time. And when we merited to return to Jerusalem, we chose to stop the cycle of destruction, to return our beloved city to its eternal mission: "...that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established as the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it"; A city in which all believers can raise their eyes upward.

We must condemn those who wish to return Jerusalem to the cycle of denial and bloodshed, and who wish to erase its Jewish past in the name of political struggle.

One of Jerusalem's greatest rabbis once said, "If we were destroyed, and the world with us, due to baseless hatred, then we shall rebuild ourselves, and the world with us, with baseless love." Jerusalem will no longer be built on hate. Jerusalem's future will not be written on its destroyed past. Shame on those who wish to erase Jerusalem's eternal story.

Shmuel Rabinowitz is the rabbi of the Western Wall and holy sites. This article appeared in the March 20, 2012 issue of the Jerusalem Post,
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/ Article.aspx?id=262700

To Go To Top

Posted by Daily Alert, March 25, 2012.

This was written by Danny Ayalon and it is archived at
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=262240 Ayalon is deputy foreign minister and this op-ed is based on a speech he delivered at the official state ceremony in Buenos Aires to mark the 20th anniversary of the terrorist attack on the Israeli Embassy there.


On Friday we commemorated 20 years since the vile and murderous attack against the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires. As has become customary, every year we conduct a memorial service to remember and honor the 29 victims who lost their lives in this terrorist attack.

Among the victims were Israeli diplomats and their spouses, dedicated Argentinean embassy workers, and unconnected bystanders. The lives of the victims may have been cut short, but their mission continues.

As a former ambassador and as deputy foreign minister I can say firmly that this and other more recent attacks on embassies and diplomats will not deter us from continuing to represent the State of Israel in all locations and arenas.

Two years later, Buenos Aires suffered another fatal attack, when the Jewish community center, AMIA, was targeted, killing 85 people and wounding hundreds more. These attacks added a new element to relations between Israel and Argentina — the struggle against the scourge of international terrorism.

Many of those who planned and carried out these terrible crimes continue to walk freely and plan new attacks around the world. One is the current Iranian minister of defense, Ahmad Vahidi, who is wanted by Interpol for his role in these mass murders.

While many in my country are rightly worried about the potential threat of an Iranian nuclear weapon, the attacks which took place here clearly demonstrate that Iran has tentacles which spread across the globe, each of which will maintain the ability to murder whenever and wherever it chooses under an umbrella of nuclear immunity and impunity.

We know that acquiring nuclear weapons capability is only a means to an end for Iran, not the end itself.

Iran seeks first regional hegemony in the Middle East and then to confront the international community as a global hegemony.

In recent months we have witnessed many attempts to attack Israeli citizens and Jews in several countries, including India, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Thailand. Many of these attacks were specifically aimed at Israeli diplomats, whose profession was originally created to avoid war and bloodshed. By targeting the very symbols of peaceful relations between nations, the Iranians are deliberately sowing conflict, proving that the Iranian regime's rationale is against peace, stability and security.

Today, the Iranian government's greatest export is terror, its foremost trade is murder and its ambition is chaos and bloodshed. A nuclear weapon will merely increase the scope of its ambitions and make its goals more attainable.

We know the recent attack on southern Israel by terrorist organizations in Gaza were also at the behest and with the full backing of the Iranian regime. The government of Israel will take all necessary action to protect its citizens and interests at home and around the world. We will do whatever is required to prevent further death and destruction and to deprive the Iranian government of the ability to achieve its bloody aims.

We will do this hand in hand with the international community, which shares our deep concern over Iran's activities.

The manifestation of solidarity with the victims of the attack at the Israeli Embassy by distinguished Argentinean officials is evidence of our shared values. If we unite and join forces, we will overcome evil and build a better world for ourselves and our children.

Preservation of historical memory is an essential element in building such a world. The struggle against terrorism is not the responsibility of any one country. This is a global battle, fought across continents, cultures and borders.

Only an all-out war on murderers who do not hesitate to intentionally harm helpless civilians can ensure the existence of freedom and peace in our world. To the bereaved families in Israel and Argentina, we send a clear message that the Israeli government and people will never forget this horrible crime.

The memory of your loved ones is engraved on our hearts forever. The State of Israel will not rest until those who committed this atrocious crime receive justice.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, March 25, 2012.

"Looking at something changes it."
— Werner Heisenberg

Watching the river flow and running for cover


The Mighty Jordan. Or is it the Mighty Mississippi, I forget? Muddy Mississippi? I guess the Muddy Jordan will have to do. And it was muddy. I had to dodge large raindrops as well to keep my equipment dry, shooting one-handed while holding an umbrella aloft. Weather, any kind but hot and dry, is an outdoor photographer's best friend, always adding interest to the sky and landscape and challenge to the adventure.

Standing on a narrow bridge directly over the river, I waited out the rain to catch a shot with sunlight reflecting off the water. Although it was midmorning, a time when I shun photographing, the heavy cloud cover, wet ground and rushing water combined for a unique view of Israel's most important river. I cropped the image to bring the water into the photo from the lower right corner and lead the viewer downstream.

In the lower photo, I scrambled down closer to the water and framed the scene with a patch of mustard grass, helping to define the season the photo was taken. In both photos, I waited until the sun crawled out from behind clouds to add a little sparkle to the highlights on the moving water. Israel has been blessed with ample rain this winter, but the water will surely recede and the trees retreat from midstream to their usual spot along the bank's green edge.


Upper Photo: Nikon D700, tripod mounted, manual exposure, evaluative metering mode, f22 at 1/250th sec., ISO 200. Raw file converted to Jpeg. Lens: Nikon 28-105 zoom at 38 mm. Date: Mar. 16, 2012, 10:22 a.m. Location: Jordan River crossing at Kibbutz Neot Mordechai, Israel.

Lower Photo: Nikon D700, tripod mounted, manual exposure, evaluative metering mode, f11 at 1/2000th sec., ISO 400. Raw file converted to Jpeg. Lens: Nikon 28-105 zoom at 34 mm. Date: Mar. 16, 2012, 10:32 a.m. Location: Jordan River at Kibbutz Neot Mordechai, Israel.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, March 25, 2012.

Why should this surprise anyone? Israel's Supreme Court under Aaron Barak staged a coup d'etat and on its own asserted that it was the supreme arbitrator of what is law in Israel. Once the precedent was established that you could grab power and keep it, well now anyone with enough guns (physical or political) can do it.

The real problem with Israel's system of government is that there is no system. Everything is ad hoc. It is a patch quilt of laws, institutions and agencies that have been thrown together with no unifying concept other than that a certain group of people should always be in charge no mater what happens. There are no institutional checks and balances and no concept of personal responsibility. Anyone can do whatever they want as long as their boss (the real boss and not necessarily their immediate supervisor) approves.

What comes out of this is that Israel has the Old World system of two political classes. There are those with Royal or Aristocratic rank and there are the peasants. If you are of Royal rank no peasant may contradict you and under certain circumstances you may even maim or kill them. It is your Divine Right.

Think I am exaggerating? Let us see what happens to Mr. Shlomo Moskowitz. Under a democracy in which the rule of law is the operating principle, he would be summarily discharged and indicted for rebellion. No way in Israel. He is an aristocrat and the mere peasants of the Knesset can not interfere with his actions.

This below is called Israel's Junta — IDF Overrules Barak in Sansana

and was written by Gavriel Queenann. It was first published February 24, 2012.

The IDF Civil Administration on Thursday took the unprecedented step of rejecting a government plan to normalize the status of the Sansana community in the South Hebron Hills.

In Israel, as in other democracies, military officials are beholden to policy decisions made by civilian officials and are expected to implement their directives in good faith.

The Civil Administration decision that "there is no justification for a new settlement, as [new homes] can be constructed within an existing settlement" comes 12 years after Sansana was established.

In 1997 a Nahal outpost was established at Sansana, but the first homes were not built until 1999. In 2000, the first families moved to Sansana, which currently has 60 families.

In 2009 Defense Minister Ehud Barak approved a plan to for 440 housing units at the Sansana site, including retroactively approving some that already existed.

However, to avoid violating a promise to Washington not to build "new settlements" the plan was presented as "an extension of nearby Eshkolot."

Now, three years after Barak approved the plan, officials in the Civil Administration are overruling their boss, who represents Israel's civilian authority.

Civil Administration planning committee chairman Shlomo Moskowitz wrote "There is no need to 'expand' Eshkolot," arguing there was "plenty of room" for new housing within the communities existing boundaries.

He noted Eshkalot is slated for 347 housing units, of which only 70 have been built. He also argued that Sansana is 7km from Eshkolot and that there was "no justification" not to build in Eshkolot itself.

Most shockingly, he wrote that the IDF Civil Administration planning committee is the only body that can approve building plans in Judea and Samaria, and "does not take dictates from the government."

Critics of Moskowitz's decision say it effectively turns the Civil Administration in a "junta" in Judea and Samaria and violates all democratic mores that inform civil-military relations.

Civilian control of the military is a doctrine in military and political science that places ultimate responsibility for a country's strategic decision-making in the hands of the civilian political leadership, rather than professional military officers.

Widely seen as a prerequisite for a stable democracy, it flows from the rationale that broad strategic decisions, such as the decision to declare a war, start an invasion, end a conflict, or expand settlement in 'disputed territories' have a major impact on the citizens of the country/

As such, civilian control allows the people (through their political representatives) to determine their own course, rather than leaving it in the hands of an elite group of narrowly focused tactical experts.

Observers say Moskowitz's decision will at best complicate — and at worst totally nullify — the stated policy of Israel's sitting elected government to normalize threatened Jewish communities like Sansana.

Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel.

To Go To Top

Posted by Naomi Ragen, March 25, 2012.

Ayatollah Khomeini put it this way: "Whatever good exists is because of the sword and the shadow of the sword."

Can we talk Iran out of wanting to kill every man, woman and child in Israel? That seems to be the question these days.

If Iran were a mental patient, in our psychiatric notes we would have to record the following:

On August 28, 2001, at a rally for Quds (Arabic for Jerusalem) Day, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told a Tehran crowd that "the Zionist regime is the axis of unity among all the thieves and criminals of the world." In 2005, he said, quoting the Imam Khamenei, Israel should be "wiped off the map."

While the world was busy nit-picking the translation of those words, particularly Israel's "good friend" Jonathan Steele of The Guardian, arguing Iran's leader was just referring to a regime change of the evil expansionist Zionists now in power in Jerusalem, not physical annihilation of a sovereign state, Joshua Teitelbaum pointed out in his important rebuttal of these foolish semantics that Michael Axworthy, Britain's consular officer in Tehran, testified that slogans draped over missiles in Iran's military parades stated: "Israel must be wiped off the map." Ahmadinejad's own speech was peppered with "Marg bar Esrail" (Death to Israel).

On February 20, 2008, Ahmadinejad called Israel "a black and filthy microbe," and in 2011 he likened Israel to "a cancer cell that spreads through the body," stating that "this regime infects any region [and must therefore] be removed."

As a psychiatrist, we would have to ask the patient: Why, when you have no border with Israel and your citizens are not affected in any way on a daily basis by anything that Israel does, are you filled with enough hatred to want to kill millions of men, women and children, most of whom are the treasured survivors of a nation decimated by mindless atrocities and slaughter only 60 years ago?

The most honest answer would require courage, honesty and some real insight, all three of which are in short supply in the present Iranian regime. However, Robert R. Reilly probably comes closest to the truth in his book The Closing of the Muslim Mind: "The fuel for the permanent war is the same for Islamism as it was for Marxism-Leninism and Nazism; it is hatred. Only the object of hatred changes — from race hatred in Nazism and class hatred in communism to hatred of the infidel in radical Islamism."

As stated in the Koran (60:4) itself (and quoted by Osama bin Laden): "Battle, animosity and hatred — directed from the Muslim to the infidel - is the foundation of our religion." Or, as Abdullah Azzam, bin Laden's mentor, put it: "Glory does not build its lofty edifice except with skulls. Honor and respect cannot be established except on a foundation of cripples and corpses. Jihad and the rifle alone, no negotiations, no conferences and no dialogue." Ayatollah Khomeini, the former supreme spiritual leader of the Iranian regime, put it this way: "Whatever good exists is because of the sword and the shadow of the sword."

With the Internet, this "virtual community of hatred," a phrase coined by Professor Jerrold M. Post, professor of psychiatry, political psychology and international affairs at George Washington University, is now almost exclusively and most murderously directed at the Jews, particularly the Jewish state. This has reached ludicrous proportions.

According to the Middle East Media Research Institute, in 2009, Iranian TV declared swine flu to be an Israeli conspiracy. In June 2008, an Iranian movie critic, Dr. Majid Shah-Hosseini, traced the origins of the film Saving Private Ryan to exalting the American- Jewish soldier: "Names may be selected for their rhyming value. Zion becomes Ryan." Hasan Bolkhari, adviser to the Iranian Ministry of Education, wrote in 2006 that the cartoon Tom and Jerry was "a Jewish conspiracy to improve the image of mice because Jews were called dirty mice in Europe."

Lest anyone point the finger at the Arab-Israeli conflict as the culprit for this mindless hatred, it should be pointed out that one of the first religious laws enacted in Iran in the late 19th century forbids Jews from going outdoors in inclement weather "for fear that the rain or snow carry their impurities to the Muslims" (The Jews of Islam by Bernard Lewis).

Still, the belief in the "talking cure" for Iran continues to be supported throughout the world.

Peter Beaumont, writing in The Observer on March 11, maintains that a rational dialogue with Iran is both possible and necessary. "Israel's security concerns and its ever-louder threats to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities... far from illuminating what actually motivates Iran in its nuclear ambitions... has tended to obscure Tehran's motives instead."

Right. It's Israelis who are irrational.

But the irrational views of one mediocre journalist would be of little import were they not echoed by Israel's so-called "best friends."

Barack Obama told the annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee policy conference on March 4, "I firmly believe that an opportunity remains for diplomacy, backed by pressure, to succeed." On March 7, the president of the United States stated even more clearly: "Diplomacy can still resolve the crisis over Iran's possible pursuit of nuclear weapons," accusing his Republican critics of "beating the drums of war."

Echoing the president, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared in a joint press conference with Libyan Prime Minister Abdel Rahim al-Kib on March 9 that Washington wants "to begin discussions with Iran." British Prime Minister David Cameron said, "We've been very clear: If there was an Israeli strike, we wouldn't support them."

Charles Krauthammer, a long-time friend of Israel, summed up the dangers of such a view in an article published on March 13: "These negotiations don't just gain time for a nuclear program [over] whose military intent the IAEA is issuing alarming warnings. They make it extremely difficult for Israel to do anything about it (while it still can) lest Israel be universally condemned for having aborted a diplomatic solution."

Israel's enemies, it seems, have all the time in the world to dither. After all, what's the worst thing that could happen? As an Israeli, I can only feel chilled to the core that the idea of the Jewish state and all its inhabitants being wiped out doesn't seem to terrify the West nearly as much as a preemptive Israeli strike to prevent it. Israel, it seems, is facing the madman alone.

If you Google "Is Iran Sane?" what you get is a stream of articles on the death of Sane Jaleh, who died instantly when he was shot by suspected Basij, the paramilitary wing of the Terrorist IR Regime during a demonstration in Tehran. According to Wikipedia, Sane, a Kurdish Iranian, was a film student at the Tehran Art University and a member of the national student union (Tahkime Vahdat).

"Eyewitness accounts suggest that between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. of the 14th of February Basij paramilitary thugs opened fire on demonstrators, shooting at them indiscriminately." And thus, with his death, perhaps the only person who could legitimately be called sane in Iran (I refer to the leadership, and not some of the brave opponents of the regime) was buried.

For all of us who retain our sanity and our love for humanity and for Israel, it should be clear that dangerous mental cases like the Iranian regime should not be free to lie on the couch while their nuclear program churns out deadly weapons for them to fulfill their darkest and most insane fantasies.

Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and journalist who lives in Jerusalem. She can be contacted at www.naomiragen.com, where you can subscribe to her newsletter. This article was first published in the Jerusalem Post on 23 March, 2012.

To Go To Top

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, March 25, 2012.

This was written by Charles Krauthammer and it is archived at
http://israel-commentary.org/?p=3098. Charles Krauthammer's email address is letters@charleskrauthammer.com.


Yes, of course, presidents have no direct control over gas prices. But the American people know something about this president and his disdain for oil. The "fuel of the past," he contemptuously calls it. To the American worker who doesn't commute by government motorcade and is getting fleeced every week at the pump, oil seems very much a fuel of the present — and of the foreseeable future.

President Obama incessantly claims energy open-mindedness, insisting that his policy is "all of the above." Except, of course, for drilling:

  • Off the mid-Atlantic coast (as Virginia, for example, wants).

  • Off the Florida Gulf Coast (instead, the Castro brothers will drill near there).

  • In the broader Gulf of Mexico (where drilling in 2012 is expected to drop 30 percent below pre-moratorium forecasts).

  • In the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (more than half the size of England, the drilling footprint being the size of Dulles Airport).

  • On federal lands in the Rockies (where leases are down 70 percent since Obama took office).

But the event that drove home the extent of Obama's antipathy to nearby, abundant, available oil was his veto of the Keystone pipeline. It gave the game away because the case for Keystone is so obvious and overwhelming. Vetoing it gratuitously prolongs our dependence on outside powers, kills thousands of shovel-ready jobs, forfeits a major strategic resource to China, damages relations with our closest ally and sends billions of oil dollars to Hugo Chavez, Vladimir Putin and already obscenely wealthy sheiks.

Obama boasts that on his watch production is up and imports down. True, but truly deceptive. These increases have occurred in spite of his restrictive policies. They are the result of Clinton- and Bush-era permitting. This has been accompanied by a gold rush of natural gas production resulting from new fracking technology that has nothing at all to do with Obama.

"The American people aren't stupid," said Obama (Feb. 23), mocking "Drill, baby, drill." The "only solution," he averred in yet another major energy speech last week, is that "we start using less, that lowers the demand, prices come down." Yet five paragraphs later he claimed that regardless of "how much oil we produce at home ... that's not going to set the price of gas worldwide."

So, decreasing U.S. demand will lower oil prices, but increasing U.S. supply will not? This is ridiculous. Either both do or neither does. Does Obama read his own speeches?

Obama says of drilling: "That's not a plan." Of course it's a plan. We import nearly half of our oil, thereby exporting enormous amounts of U.S. wealth. Almost 60 percent of our trade deficit — $332 billion out of $560 billion — is shipped overseas to buy crude.

Drill here and you stanch the hemorrhage. You keep those dollars within the US economy, repatriating not just wealth but jobs, and denying them to foreign unfriendlies. Drilling is the single most important thing we can do to spur growth at home while strengthening our hand abroad.

Instead, Obama offers what he fancies to be the fuels of the future. You would think that he'd be a tad more modest today about his powers of divination after the Solyndra bankruptcy, the collapse of government-subsidized Ener1 (past makers of the batteries of the future) and GM's suspension of production — for lack of demand — of another federally dictated confection, the flammable Chevy Volt.

Deterred? Hardly. Our undaunted seer of the energy future has come up with his own miracle fuel: algae. Yes, green slime, upon which Steven Chu's Energy Department will be sprinkling yet another $14 million of taxpayer money.

This is the very same Dr. Chu who famously said in 2008 that he wanted U.S. gas prices to rise to European levels of $8-$10 a gallon — and who Tuesday, eight months before Election Day, publicly recanted before Congress, Galileo-style.

Who do they think they're fooling? An oil crisis looms, prices are spiking — and our president is extolling algae. After Solyndra, Keystone and promises of seaweed in their gas tanks, Americans sense a president so ideologically antipathetic to fossil fuels — which we possess in staggering abundance — that he is utterly unserious about the real world of oil in which the rest of us live.

High gasoline prices are a major political problem for Obama. They are not just a pain at the pump, however. They are a constant reminder of three years of a rigid, fatuous, fantasy-driven energy policy that has rendered us scandalously dependent and excessively vulnerable.

Jerome S. Kaufman is National Secretary of the Zionist Organization of America and hosts the Israel Commentary website (http://www.israel-commentary.org).

To Go To Top

Posted by Maxi Justice, March 25, 2012.

Why isn't Jonathan Pollard free? If he were in a Russian prison, people would be asking.

Sheila Mediena

Contact Maxi Justice by email at maxijustice@videotron.ca

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 23, 2012.

From the day Israel had set at the negotiation table with Yasser Arafat's terrorists team, the Jewish state has talked about giving the Arab-Palestinians space, on her land, for their own state, meaning voluntarily, Israel agreed to shrink the sizes of her own land.

In the Six Day War Israel has achieved the ultimate goal, which she undermined with the Oslo Accords; Israel had returned into her possession land that legally belongs to her, which was conquered and illegally occupied, by Jordan, for nineteen years, and in one smack, with the Oslo Accords, she offered to give away, that very same land, to the very same people who first took it away from her, is an aggressive war and with only one goal in their mind, which was to destroy her.

Since Israel's Independence War, then the Six Day War and Yom Kippur War, nothing has changed in the Arabs' mindset; they wanted and still want to destroy Israel in any way possible. With Israel's full assistance of the Oslo Accords' misguided politics, by Israel being pigheaded to reverse the Oslo, by annexing Judea and Samaria, and with Israel's putrid public diplomacy, the Arabs have turned their loss in the Six Day War into a successful enterprise of media, economic, political, intellect, diplomatic, military and stealth jihad against Israel.

What has changed is Israel. Where, in 1967 and 1973 she was determined, that determination has been lost, sunk deeply in the Oslo mindset of the Government of Israel.

If Israel is to shrink, by allowing the Arabs to have a state, living side-by-side, at an ongoing war with Israel, as they live now, Israel will find herself in a much more dangerous position than ever before. Because Israel will have a second Gaza, with longer border along hers, firing rockets at Tel-Aviv malls and beaches and at Ben-Gurion airport's landing and taking off airlines planes.

From her inception, Israel has always existed under dangerous circumstances, because the armistice lines, within which Israel existed, invited her enemies to start aggressive wars against her; her aggressive and hateful enemies, the Arab neighboring states, wish, past and present, for her not to be.

A war must be fought to win; Israel knew this but now she acts as if this rule of engagement in a war has been somewhat forgotten. Israel's enemies know this rule all too well. After all, they are working hard to be able to have victory that will bring about the end of Israel.

Israel never wanted wars but she was forced into fighting them. Everyone knows that Israel seeks peace and she has proved this desire tenfold. By now, everyone, with open eyes and conscious, know that Israel's enemies do not wish to live in peace, side by side with her. But this fact has been deliberately ignored, with great peril to the Jewish state, since 1993 Oslo, by all of the government of Israel and many who support the death to Israel two state [dis]solution.

Israel has never called for the destruction of her enemies, they do, all the time. Israel has been defending herself from the Arabs' attacks, that have taken place from one hudna to another, for 64 long and bloody years. (Hudna an Arabic term that means a temporary truce, or armistice as well as calm, quiet period from war and aggression. The hudna period gives the enemy time to regroup, rearm and then launch the next attack.)

It is no fun to have rockets launched at you each day, as over one million Israelis, in south Israel, have been experiencing, since 2005, when the Ariel Sharon's government, voluntarily, evacuated, by unfathomable force, 10,000 Jews, who lived, enormously productively, in Jewish hometowns they have built, with the full encouragement and support of their government, in the Gaza Strip.

It is no fun to see your citizens butchered on their homeland, just because they are Jews. It is no fun to have terror afflicted on your citizenry in their homes — the Fogel Family, in their cars- Asher Palmer and his son, in restaurants, on buses, in wedding halls, markets, performance auditoriums, shopping centers and universities. No country wants it; and that is the Arabs' goal! To demoralize and weaken Israel. Moslem-Arabs do not have much value to life, especially not Jewish life, or any life, and not surprising, not even their own. If they did, they would have lived, in peace and prosperity with the Jewish state, Israel long, long ago.

Sadly, Israel and Jews' existence, anywhere in the world, angers way too many. Whether it angers Arabs living as Israeli citizens, i.e. the Nakba Day in which they participate each year and violently express their dismay, (Nakba Day, means the day of the catastrophe; the catastrophe that the state of Israel was established in 1948), or the nations, members of Arab Leagues, who launched war after war against Israel, or Mohamed Merah, in France, and his like, who go murder Jews, and those who boycott Israel, or those who talk ill about her and Jews, and this putrid list never ends. Being anti-Jews-anti-Semite-anti-Israel is a disease that has no cure, never had a cure and who knows if a cure will ever be found for this genetic disease that is so deeply embedded in the blood of so many.

The Arabs see blood when they hear the words "sovereign Jewish State," "Jews," "Israel," Zionism" and the like, words that are all connected to the Jewish People and their Homeland, the Nation State of the Jewish people, Israel.

Bottom line: the time is now for the entire Jewish Nation to stand strong with the only homeland the Jewish Nation has, Israel, and end all second-guessing her every move.

The hottest topic of discussions these days is the eradication of the two-state solution Oslo mentality, exchanging it with the one state solution, the democratic Jewish state of Israel, spread from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea; the purging of the shrinkage of Israel mentality, replacing it with annexation of Judea and Samaria, thus making Israel a safe and secure and a whole, on all the land west of the Jordan River.

Supporting a two state solution is siding with Israel's enemy.

The time is now for every leader of every Jewish organization and community, including those who think of themselves to be opinion shapers and all people who support Israel, by word and deed, to end fighting on the Jewish State enemy's lines and stand where they ought to be — on the State of Israel's side.

I tell my fellow Jews who have been enabling Israel's enemies, Enough is Enough of your regrettable behavior.

We need to undo Israel's gaffes: one, her ongoing ignoring all her legal rights to the land that permitted her to annex Judea and Samaria immediately after the Six Day War, just as it annexed the old city of Jerusalem; second, her misguided policy of the Oslo Accords, that Israel, voluntarily, concocted, and third, that the annexation of Judea and Samaria has not yet taken place, as it should have been done already.

The shrinkage of Israel mentality and pursuing it in action, as Israel has already done, must end, now. If the government of Israel cannot take the actions it needs to take, which is annexing all of Judea and Samaria right here, tight now, we, the people, will force them to do so. This is what a real democracy is all about, for the people, by the people!

The shrinkage of Israel mentality and pursuing it in action, as Israel has been doing for so long, must end, now. If the government of Israel cannot take the actions it needs to take upon herself, which is, annexing all of Judea and Samaria right here, right now, we, the people, will force them to do so. This is what real democracy is all about, for the people, by the people!

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Gail Winston, March 23, 2012.

As always, Caroline Glick has captured the essence, nature and evil of the murderous Muslim perpetrator, Mohamad Merah who shot at point blank range and murdered Rabbi Jonathan Sandler, 30, a religious instructor at the Ozar Hatorah Jewish Day School, his sons, Arye, 6, and Gabriel, 3; and Miriam Monsonego, 8, the daughter of the school principal — critically wounding a 17 year old boy.

Glick captures the essence: Merah was NOT a lone crazy killer. He had many accomplices. Among them his trainers in jihadi-ism: Kill Jews and here's how. The Media: which propagated many past such depraved massacres, including the 2002 decapitation of Daniel Pearl; the murder and torture of the Jewish boy, Ilan Halimi in 2006; the Media extravaganza of US Army Maj. Nidal Malik, who massacred 13 US servicemen at Ford Hood in 2009; Naveed Haq, the American Muslim who murdered one Jewish woman, wounding a second at the Seattle Jewish Federation Building in 2006 — and more.

[I would add the trial run on Air Trans from Atlanta, Georgia to Houston,Texas when 11 Muslim men refused to sit down, stop used their cellphones to photograph each other, denied the crew the proper behavior for safe flying, made threatening gun-like hand signals to the crew, etc. The Media obliterated the Muslim aspect of this dangerous event.]

The leadership (both Jewish and non) of the (supposedly) Free World who usually refuse to recognize the Muslim nature of the depravities when they occur. Of course, in this week's massacre even as French Interior Minister Claude Gueant gave us Merah's name they gave Merah his excuse, : "He was upset with Israel's murder of Palestinian children."

Of course, we know that Israel puts her own soldiers at risk instead of bombing the Muslim crews who send their Qassem and Grad rockets from within the homes and hospitals of their own men, women and children. But, if Merah got his news from his fellow jihadis or even the Western media, how would he know that?

Especially if the Western media propagates the blood libels themselves. For example, France 2 TV's antiSemitic blood libel with its October 2000 tale of Muhammad al-Dura's alleged death by Israeli gunfire. It took until 2008 for the truth to finally rise above the lie.

Then in this week's massacre of Jewish children and their Rabbi father, Catherine Ashton, the European Union's Foreign Policy Chief also conflated Merah's massacre with the latest media blood libel that Israel kills Palestinian children in Gaza. For this single slur which may sadly lead other jihadis to take their license to kill Jews, Ashton must resign.

Caroline Glick continues to analyze the depths and viciousness expressed by the various Western elites in Media, leadership or other. Please read on and keep her piece for your own research into: Why Muslims kill Jews.

This below was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post

Caroline Glick is the senior Middle East Fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post. Her book "The Shackled Warrior: Israel and the Global Jihad," is available at Amazon.com. Visit her website at www.CarolineGlick.com. Contact her by email at caroline@carolineglick.com.


Mohamed Merah (Reuters/france 2 TV)

The massacre of Jewish children at the Ozar Hatorah Jewish day school in Toulouse presents us with an appalling encapsulation of the depraved nature of our times — although at first glance, the opposite seems to be the case.

On the surface, the situation was cut and dry. A murderer drove up to a Jewish school and executed three children and a teacher.

Led by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, all of France decried the massacre and announced its solidarity with the French Jewish community. World leaders condemned the crime. The killer died in a standoff with French security forces. Justice was served. Case closed.

But dig a little deeper and it becomes clear that justice has not been served.

Indeed, it hasn't even begun to be addressed. The killer, Mohamed Merah, was not a lone gunman. He wasn't even one of the lone jihadists we hear so much about.

He had plenty of accomplices. And not all of them were Muslims.

An analysis of the nature of his crime and the identity of his many accomplices must necessarily begin with a question. Why did Merah videotape his crime?

Why did take the trouble of strapping a video camera to his neck and filming himself chasing eight-year-old Miriam Monsonego through the school courtyard and shooting her three times in the head? Why did he document his execution of Rabbi Jonathan Sandler and his two little boys, three-year-old Gavriel and six-year-old Aryeh?

The first answer is because Merah took pride in killing Jewish children. Beyond that, he was certain that millions of people would be heartened by his crime. By watching him shoot the life out of Jewish children, they would be inspired to repeat his actions elsewhere.

And he was surely correct.

Millions of people have watched the 2002 video of Daniel Pearl being decapitated. Similar decapitation videos of Western hostages in Iraq and elsewhere have also become runaway Internet sensations.

Led by Youssef Fofana, the Muslim gang in France that kidnapped and tortured Ilan Halimi to death in 2006 also took pictures of their handiwork. Their photographs were clearly imitations of the photos that Pearl's killers took of him before they chopped his head off.

The pride that jihadist murderers take in their crimes is not merely manifested in their camera work. US Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who massacred 13 US servicemen at Fort Hood in 2009, showed obvious pride in his dedication to jihad. Hassan gave a presentation to his colleagues justifying jihad. He carried business cards in which he identified himself as an "SOA," a soldier of Allah.

Similarly, Naveed Haq, the American Muslim who carried out the attack at the Seattle Jewish Federation building in 2006, murdering one woman and wounding another five, bragged to his mother and friend about his crime in monitored telephone calls from jail. Haq boasted that he was "a jihadi" and that his victims deserved to die because they were "Israeli collaborators."

The exhibitionism common to all the men's behavior makes it obvious that that their attacks were not the random actions of isolated crazy people or lone extremists. All of these killers were certain that they were part of a global movement that seeks the annihilation of the Jews, the subjugation of the Western world and the supremacy of jihadist Islam. And they were convinced that their actions served the interests of this movement and that they would be viewed as heroes by millions of their fellow Muslims for their killing of innocents.


THIS SITUATION is bad enough on its own. But what make it truly dangerous are the West's responses to it. Those responses together with the crimes themselves expose the depraved and perilous nature of our times. And they show that Merah's death can bring no closure to this story.

There are five interrelated aspects to the West's response to these crimes and the jihadist reality they expose. The first aspect of the West's response is denial.

Time after time, Merah and his ilk throughout the Western world show us who they are and what they want. And time after time, the Western elites, and even much of the Jewish leadership, turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to their cries of murder and calls for the destruction of Western civilization.

In the case of Halimi's murder, for instance, Paris police refused to view his abduction as a hate crime. Despite the fact that Fofana and his followers called Halimi's family and recited Koranic verses while Ilan screamed out in agony in the background, the Paris police treated his disappearance as a garden variety kidnap-for-ransom case.

Even after Ilan was found naked at a rail heading with burns on more than 80 percent of his body and died en route to the hospital, it took French authorities over a week to admit that he had been the victim of an antiSemitic crime.

On a lesser note, everyone from the media to Jewish communal leaders in the US abjectly refuse to recognize that mainstream Muslim groups like the Muslim Students Association are sympathetically inclined towards Hamas. Moreover, they refuse to recognize that sympathy for Hamas necessarily entails sympathy for Hamas's genocidal platform of annihilating the Jewish people in the name of jihad.

As David Horowitz wrote in a recent article at FrontPage magazine, Jewish student leaders at places such as the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill prefer to attack messengers like himself, than accept the inconvenient truth that Muslim student leaders on campus with them support the annihilation of Israel.

Ignoring and denying the openly expressed aims of jihadists like Merah is of course only part of the problem. The second aspect of the West's effective collusion with these killers is Western elites' justification of their crimes.

After initially pinning the blame for the Toulouse massacre on Nazis, when French authorities finally acknowledged Merah's jihadist identity, they also provided his justification for murder. Speaking to reporters, French Interior Minister Claude Gueant gave us Merah's name and his excuse at the same time.

Gueant told us that Merah was associated with al-Qaida and he was upset about what he referred to as Israel's "murder" of Palestinian children.

It should be unnecessary to note the simple truth that Israel doesn't murder Palestinian children. Palestinians murder Israeli children.

But then, if Merah got his news from the Western media there is a reasonable chance that he wouldn't know that.

EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton was rightly condemned by Israeli political leaders this week for her equation of the actual massacre of Jewish children in Toulouse with the imaginary massacre of Palestinian children in Gaza. But she is not alone in this behavior. US President Barack Obama engaged in similarly outrageous libels when during his speech to the Muslim world in June 2009 he compared the Holocaust with Israeli treatment of the Palestinians.

And the line separating these libels from actual incitement is often hard to find.

French television, which Merah no doubt often watched, is notorious for crossing it. It was France 2 that gave us this century's first antiSemitic blood libel with its October 2000 tale of Muhammad al-Dura's alleged death at the hands of IDF soldiers.

The France 2 story was exposed as a fraud by an appellate court in Paris in 2008. The appellate court overturned a lower court's libel ruling against Internet activist Philippe Karsenty who wrote on his personal website that the al-Dura story was a hoax.

The appellate court viewed France 2's unedited footage from the scene. That footage showed al-Dura moving after the France 2 cameraman had declared him dead. The footage led the court to overturn the decision of the lower court that had found Karsenty guilty of libel.

Apparently the same French establishment that now declares solidarity with France's Jews is unwilling to part with the al-Dura hoax that incited the spilling of so much Jewish blood in the past decade. Last month, France's Supreme Court overturned the appellate court's ruling and ordered it to retry the case.

As far as the Supreme Court of France is concerned, the appellate court had no right to ask France 2 to provide evidence that its story was true. According to the court, the unedited footage which proved the story was a blood libel should never have been admitted as evidence. The truth should never have been permitted to come to light.

IN ADDITION to denying, justifying and inciting jihadist violence, Western elites and authorities also engage in facilitating it and, after the fact, excusing it. In the case of Merah, although details are still unclear, it has been reported that he underwent jihadist training by al-Qaida in Afghanistan and was apprehended by Afghan authorities.

Despite his ties to al-Qaida, either US or French military authorities decided he should be sent back to France even though he clearly constituted a danger to French society.

Moreover, according to media reports, French authorities knew that he was dangerous and still failed to apprehend him. They had been informed that at least on one occasion, Merah sought to radicalize a 15-year-old Muslim boy. And yet, he was allowed to remain at large.

As the mother of the teenager said, "All these people had to die before they finally arrest Mohamed Merah. What an enormous waste. The police knew this individual was dangerous and radicalized. I complained to the police twice about Mohamed Merah and tried to follow up several times."

In the US, Hasan's colleagues and commanders knew of his sympathy for jihad and his connections to jihadist leader Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen. And yet they promoted him to major and sent him to Fort Hood.

The West's complicity with these jihadist crimes doesn't end with their perpetration.

After failing to acknowledge that Halimi was abducted by jihadists who murdered him because he was a Jew, French authorities conducted his murderers' trials behind closed doors. Hidden from public scrutiny, in their first trial, Halimi's killers were given pitifully lights sentences. Fofana was rendered eligible for parole within 22 years. It was only the outcry of activists within the French Jewish community that caused French authorities to hold a retrial.

In Seattle, Haq's first trial for his attack on Seattle's Jewish Federation was declared a mistrial. Seattle's mayor and media went out of their way to present Haq as mentally ill. The prosecution failed to seek the death penalty and didn't bother to present the records of Haq's phone conversations bragging about his crimes until his second trial.

Together, the behavior of proud jihadist warriors of the West like Merah, Hasan, Haq and Fofana, and the depraved silence, indifference and complicity of Western elites with their jihadist aims, form the physical and moral landscape of our time. And it is because of this evil mix of perpetrators and enablers that Merah's death is not a victory of justice.

Gail Winston is a Middle East analyst and commentator. Contact her by by email at winston@winstonglobal.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Ken Timmerman, March 23, 2012.

March 23, 2012 — Kensington, MD — The murder of a Rabbi and three children at a Jewish school in the south of France this week by a jihadi Muslim gunman should remind us that no one is safe. The threat of terrorism against the Jewish community here in Montgomery County is as great as it is in Toulouse, New York, Bangkok or Mumbai. We need to take better defensive measures now before it is too late.

As families prepare to celebrate the Passover seder, I am calling on the intelligence community to redouble and expand cooperation with local law enforcement organizations, community leaders and our elected officials to better protect synagogues, local schools and community organizations under threat.

Jihadi terrorists drunk on the hate-filled ideology of Muslim preachers of hate such as Yusuf Qaradawi or Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will be watching. I know they will not rest until they have shed more innocent blood. We need to stand shoulder to shoulder as a community and recognize that when one of our members is at risk, we all are at risk.

On Wednesday, the NYPD announced it has interviewed at least 13 people with ties to the Islamic Republic of Iran regime who had conducted "pre-operational surveillance" of New York landmarks and other sites as potential terrorist targets.

While I have confidence federal law enforcement agencies are working hard with the Capitol Police to ensure that our national landmarks are safe from potential terrorist attack, the Toulouse attacks and this new threat information from the NYPD clearly demonstrate that schools, synagogues and community centers here in the Washington, DC suburbs face an imminent risk. Targeting children is a heinous and cynical strategy that terrorists use to undermine the security of our society as a whole. We need to take preventive measures now.

I welcome citizen support for strengthening the protection of our community's Jewish religious institutions, which are the most visible targets of the jihadis and their allies. I am sure Chris Van Hollen, my political opponent, will join me in pushing for increased protective action to be taken now to secure our communities.

Ken Timmerman if a Republican Candidate for U.S. Congress from Maryland. Contact him at timmerman.road@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Chabad.org, March 23, 2012.

My heart is broken. I am unable to speak. There are no ways for me to be able to express the great and all-consuming pain resulting from the murder of my dear husband Rabbi Jonathan and our sons, Aryeh and Gavriel, and of Miriam Monsonego, daughter of the dedicated principal of Ozar Hatorah and his wife, Rabbi Yaakov and Mrs. Monsonego.

May no one ever have to endure such pain and suffering.

Because so many of you, my cherished brothers and sisters in France and around the world, are asking what you can do on my behalf, on behalf of my daughter Liora and on behalf of the souls of my dear husband and children, I feel that, difficult though it may be, it is incumbent upon me to answer your entreaties.

My husband's life was dedicated to teaching Torah. We moved back to the country of his birth to help young people learn about the beauty of Torah. He was truly a good man, loving, giving, and selfless. He was sensitive to all of G‑d's creatures, always searching for ways to reveal the goodness in others.

He and I raised Aryeh and Gavriel to live the ways of Torah. Who would have known how short would be their time on this Earth, how short would be the time I would be with them as their mother?

I don't know how I and my husband's parents and sister will find the consolation and strength to carry on, but I know that the ways of G‑d are good, and He will reveal the path and give us the strength to continue. I know that their holy souls will remain with us forever, and I know that very soon the time will come when we will be together again with the coming of Moshiach.

I wholeheartedly believe in the words of the verse: "The L-ord has given, and the L-ord has taken away; blessed be the Name of the L-ord." I thank the Almighty for the privilege, short though it was, of raising my children together with my husband. Now the Almighty wants them back with Him.

To all those who wish to bring consolation to our family and contentment to the souls of the departed: Let's continue their lives on this Earth.

Parents, please kiss your children. Tell them how much you love them, and how dear it is to your heart that they be living examples of our Torah, imbued with the fear of Heaven and with love of their fellow man.

Please increase your study of Torah, whether on your own or with your family and friends. Help others who may find study difficult to achieve alone.

Please bring more light into the world by kindling the Sabbath candles this and every Friday night. (Please do so a bit earlier than the published times as a way to add holiness to our world.)

The holiday of Passover is approaching. Please invite another person into your homes so that all have a place at a Seder to celebrate the holiday of our freedom.

Along with our tearful remembrance of our trials in Egypt so many years ago, we still tell over how "in each and every generation, they have stood against us to destroy us." We all will announce in a loud and clear voice: "G‑d saves us from their hands."

The spirit of the Jewish people can never be extinguished; its connection with Torah and its commandments can never be destroyed.

May it be G‑d's will that from this moment on, we will all only know happiness.

I send my heartfelt condolences to the Monsonego family for the loss of their daughter Miriam, and I pray for the speedy recovery of Aharon ben Leah, who was injured in the attack.

Thank you for your support and love.

Contact Chabad.org by email at subscriptions@chabad.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Bryna Berchuck, March 23, 2012.

This was written by Aaron David Miller and it appeared March 6, 2012 in Foreign Policy
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/03/21/ big_lies_about_jerusalem_washington_jews_White_House?page=full.

Miller is a scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. His new book, Can America Have Another Great President?, will be published this year. "Reality Check," his column for Foreign Policy.com, runs weekly.

What I found most surprising in this article is that Miller saw himself as pro-Israel. If his contribution to screwing Israel was the act of a friend, I hate to think what an enemy would have to do to be judged an enemy. Arafat ran rings around him, manipulated the situation, and walked away when he wanted to, even though he'd gained large concessions from the American "honest brokers", who would twist Israel's arm, hoping to get something-anything-they could tout as a peace treaty. The Americans were so hungry for a deal, they were always ready to pressure Israel, which was usually the more accommodating by far.

Miller, unwittingly writes something important below. He writes: "To wit, President George H.W. Bush and Baker's decision to deny the Israelis billions of dollars in housing-loan guarantees because of settlement construction on the eve of the Madrid conference made sense. It sent a powerful signal to the Israelis and Arabs at a critical moment that America meant business."

Note, no pressure was put on the Arabs. Ever. The Arabs violated every promise they made. They weren't called on it. Why did successive American administrations push on Israel and not on the Arabs? The answer is really quite simple: because Israel let them. And the Arabs stood firm.


From the Jewish cabal to the Capitol Hill Knesset, the worst leaps of logic when it comes to Israel, U.S. politics, and the Middle East.

Several years after leaving government, I wrote a piece in the Washington Post titled "Israel's Lawyer." The article was an honest effort to explain how several senior officials in U.S. President Bill Clinton's administration (myself included) had a strong inclination to see the Arab-Israeli negotiations through a pro-Israel lens. That filter played a role-though hardly the primary one-in the failure of endgame diplomacy, particularly at the ill-fated Camp David summit in July 2000.

Unsurprisingly, the piece was hijacked in the service of any number of agendas, especially by critics of Israel only too eager to use my narrow point about the Clinton years to make their broader one: America had long compromised its own values and interests in the Middle East by its blind and sordid obeisance to the Jewish state and its pro-Israeli supporters in the United States.

Here we go again. Election years seem to bring out the worst-not only in politicians, but in advocates, analysts, and intellectuals too. Nowhere are the leaps and lapses of logic and rationality greater than in the discussion of Israel, the Jews, domestic U.S. politics, and the Middle East. Once again, we're hearing that a U.S. president is being dragged to war with Iran by a trigger-happy Israeli prime minister and his loyal acolytes in America.

Before we lose our collective minds (again), it might be useful to review some of the myths and misconceptions about domestic U.S. politics and America's Middle East policies that still circulate all too widely in Europe and the Arab world-and sadly in the United States too. Here are a half-dozen of the worst ones.

1. The White House is Israeli-occupied territory.

The idea that American Jews in collusion with the Israeli government (and, for some time now, evangelical Christians) hold U.S. foreign policy hostage is not only wrong and misleading but a dangerous, dark trope. It coexists with other hateful-and, yes, anti-Semitic-canards about how Jews control the media and the banks, and the world as well. It's reality distortion in the extreme, with little basis in fact. The historical record just doesn't support it. Strong, willful presidents who have real opportunities (and smart strategies to exploit them) to promote U.S. interests almost always win out and trump domestic lobbies.

Indeed, when it counts and national interests demand it, presidents who know what they're doing move forward in the face of domestic pressures and usually prevail. Whether it's arms sales to the Arabs (advanced fighter jets to Egyptians or AWACS to Saudis) or taking tough positions on Arab-Israeli negotiating issues in the service of agreements (see: Henry Kissinger and the 1973-1975 disengagement agreements with Israel, Egypt, and Syria; President Jimmy Carter, Camp David, and the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty in 1978 and 1979; and Secretary of State James Baker and the 1991 Madrid peace conference), administrations have their way. The fights can be messy and politically costly, but that doesn't preclude policymakers from having them.

No U.S. president would pick a fight with a close ally, particularly one that had strong domestic support, without good reason and a clear purpose. To wit, President George H.W. Bush and Baker's decision to deny the Israelis billions of dollars in housing-loan guarantees because of settlement construction on the eve of the Madrid conference made sense. It sent a powerful signal to the Israelis and Arabs at a critical moment that America meant business. President Barack Obama's war with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over a settlement freeze didn't: One was a productive fight with a purpose, and the other was an unproductive one with no strategy. At the end of the day, Obama got the worst of all outcomes: He pissed off the Israelis and the Palestinians, and he got no negotiations and no freeze. That Obama was seen to have backed down in the end only made matters worse, making it appear that he lost his nerve with Netanyahu. Even so, none of this means the Israelis run the White House. Obama's failure was much a result of a self-inflicted wound.

2. The U.S.-Israel relationship rests on shared values alone.

Israel's critics believe that without domestic politics, there would be little to the U.S.-Israel special relationship. Israel's supporters, meanwhile, like to believe that politics has little to do with it. Neither is right. The U.S.-Israel relationship is a curious marriage of shared values, national interests, and domestic politics.

Sure, common values are at the top of the list. There's no way the bond between Washington and Jerusalem would be as strong and as durable these many years without broad public belief that it was in America's national interest to support a fellow democracy. These shared values more than anything else-not Israel's importance as an strategic ally-is the foundation of the bond.

Since 1950, only 22 countries have maintained their democratic character continuously-and Israel's one of them. That the Jewish people have a very dark history of persecution and genocide and that millions of Americans have powerful religious connections to Israel and the Holy Land has only made the sell easier and the bond stronger.

But let's not kid ourselves — and activists at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and other Jewish organizations don't. Without the strong vocal support of a unified American Jewish community that brings pressure to bear in Congress, assistance levels to Israel would not be nearly as high as they have been for so long. AIPAC not only assiduously guards the pre-existing pro-Israeli tilt among the American public, but it also defines for much of the Jewish and political establishment what it means to be pro-Israel in America today. Its clout on Capitol Hill sends a powerful message to elected officials, many of whom already share general sympathy with Israel and who have no desire to cross swords with a powerful lobby that might jeopardize what they've come to Washington to do: advance their constituents' interests.

3. Lobbies are evil.

The United States' Founding Fathers were very worried about factions with special interests. But lobbies and special interests advocating causes — from guns to tobacco to senior citizens — aren't some kind of dark cabal plotting in a cloakroom. They are a natural part of America's democratic political system and, yes, part of a culture that has many excesses that bend the system and often reflect the seamier aspects of U.S. politics. But good luck trying to eliminate the practice of citizens and groups organizing to press their elected representatives to support an issue. The U.S. system — whatever the Founders intended — was a natural for lobbing and special pleading.

I'm not sure that has ever been clearly understood in the Middle East or in Europe, where lobbies are viewed as some nefarious force operating in the shadows with the aim of holding U.S. foreign policy hostage. When a former Arab diplomat I know once referred to the U.S. Congress as the Little Knesset, he was not only mocking a system — he was jealous too. Arab Americans only wish they could marshal AIPAC's power.

America's foreign policy — like its unruly politics — is forged in a competitive arena of many voices, influences, and interests. But let me be clear: I don't want the American Jewish community controlling Washington's Middle East policy; nor do I want it run by Congress or regional specialists in the State Department for that matter.

Here's where a willful, smart president with a sound strategy is critically important — both in exercising constitutional powers and in responding to the practical reality that the executive branch is the only actor in the U.S. system that can guide and lead the country abroad. Indeed, the power of the pro-Israel community recedes the farther away you get from Capitol Hill. The pro-Israel community has a powerful voice, but it doesn't have a veto.

4. His Jewish advisors made him do it.

This charge — which has been leveled at senior officials in both Clinton's and George W. Bush's administrations — that presidents are controlled by a tiny group of American Jewish advisers is as absurd as it is pernicious. I speak from personal experience. I admit it freely: Several Clinton administration officials, including me — with the best of intentions — adopted an approach to the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians in 1999 and 2000, both on substance and on process, that reflected Israeli needs far more than those of the Palestinians. These views, however, gained currency not because the president's advisors, who happened to be American Jews, were pushing them, but because they made sense to a non-Jewish president with great sensitivity for the Israelis — and a great deal for the Palestinians too.

Some of these same advisors worked for Bush 41 and Baker too, yet policy turned out quite differently, much more balanced and tougher on Israel (take, for example, the denial of loan guarantees). The fact is that policy advisors — to paraphrase The Eagles in one of the band's better love songs — don't take policymakers anywhere they don't already want to go. Here is where adult supervision is essential. Indeed, it's ultimately the responsibility of the president to sort through these views and determine which ones make sense and which ones don't — and then to make the best decision possible. The key is to have a variety of views. To blame senior official X as the primary reason a president supports Israel or favors this approach or that is absurd.

Obama is no lawyer for Israel. If he chooses not to push his confrontation with Netanyahu, it's not because an advisor with a pro-Israel agenda is whispering in his ear; it's because the president has his own political agenda, has other priorities, or realizes the fight won't produce the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations he seeks. In the Obama administration, you'd better believe that it's the president who runs things.

5. Election-year politics are driving Obama to war with Iran.

You've heard the rap many times. Election-year politics erode a president's room to maneuver, chain him to collecting votes, and increase the odds substantially that political interests will trump the country's. This year's presidential election has been dominated by the economy, but when foreign policy has intruded into the campaign, it has been on one issue: Iran. It's erroneous, however, to conclude that because it's an election year, Obama is being pushed to war — either by Republicans or by the pro-Israel community. Sure, he has toughened his rhetoric, but whether that's smart politics or smart policy (to keep the Iranians under pressure) isn't clear. It's probably both.

The fact is, this president doesn't do anything quickly or recklessly — or under pressure. He's the deliberator-in-chief. And as he ponders, one thing is clear: The last thing he needs leading up to an election he has a very good chance of winning is a war in the Middle East. And an Israeli strike or an American one that would bring on $200 a barrel oil, thus raising prices at the pump and deflating the fragile U.S. economic recovery, is not something Obama wants. Whatever the Israeli prime minister got from the president in their meeting this month at the White House, it wasn't a green-or even a yellow-light to strike Iran's nuclear sites.

6. Barack Obama is just as pro-Israel as Bill Clinton or George W. Bush.

There's no question that Obama understands and appreciates the special relationship between Israel and the United States. But Obama isn't Bill Clinton or George W. Bush when it comes to Israel-not even close. These guys were frustrated by Israeli prime ministers too, but they also were moved and enamored by them (Clinton by Yitzhak Rabin, Bush by Ariel Sharon). They had instinctive, heartfelt empathy for the idea of Israel's story, and as a consequence they could make allowances at times for Israel's behavior even when it clashed with their own policy goals. Obama is more like George H.W. Bush when it comes to Israel, but without a strategy.

If Obama is emotional when it comes to Israel, he's hiding it. Netanyahu obviously thinks he's bloodless. But then again, the U.S. president can be pretty reserved on a number of issues. Obama doesn't feel the need to be loved by the Israelis, and perhaps American Jews either. Combine that with a guy who's much more comfortable in gray than in black and white, and you have a president who sees Israel's world in much more nuanced terms, which is clearly hard for many Israelis and American Jews to accept. In Obama's mind, Israel has legitimate security needs, but it's also the strongest regional power. As a result, he believes that the Israelis should compromise on the peace process, give nonmilitary pressures against Iran time to work, and recognize that despite the uncertainties of the Arab Spring, now is the time to make peace with the Palestinians.

If Obama had a chance to reset the U.S.-Israel relationship and make it a little less special, he probably would. But I guess that's the point: He probably won't have the chance. If he gets a second term, he'll more than likely be faced with the same mix of Middle East headaches, conflicting priorities, narrow maneuvering room, and the swirl of domestic politics that bedevils him today. If the U.S. president fails to get an Israeli-Palestinian peace, it will be primarily because the Israelis, the Palestinians, and Barack Obama wouldn't pay the price, not because the pro-Israel community in America got in his way.

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Freund, March 23, 2012.

As the U.S. election season enters into high gear, an important Gallup poll released earlier this month offers Israel and its supporters much reason to cheer.

For despite an onslaught of Palestinian propaganda and disinformation, the results demonstrate that the Jewish state continues to enjoy overwhelming support among broad swathes of the American public.

Each year, as part of its annual World Affairs survey, Gallup asks respondents about their views towards various countries around the globe.

The results regarding Israel could not have been more decisive.

A whopping 71 percent of Americans said they view Israel mostly or very favorably. This broad support extends across the political spectrum, with 80 percent of Republicans, 71 percent of independents and two-thirds of Democrats all standing behind the Jewish state.

By contrast, only 19 percent expressed favorable views of the Palestinian Authority.

And when Gallup asked people, "In the Middle East situation, are your sympathies more with the Israelis or more with the Palestinians?" the results were similarly lopsided, with Americans favoring Israel by more than a 3 to 1 margin.

"Americans," the findings concluded, "have consistently been more sympathetic to the Israelis than the Palestinians since Gallup started asking the question in 1988. Since the mid-2000s, Americans have become increasingly sympathetic to the Israelis, while the percentage sympathetic to the Palestinians has stayed the same."

What makes this so remarkable is that this overwhelming level of American popular support for the Jewish state comes after decades of anti-Israel bias in much of the mainstream press.

Despite all the distortions, half-truths, misrepresentations and falsehoods that have been peddled over the years by the liberal media, a super-majority of the American public still views Israel favorably and prefers her over her foes.

Can you imagine what the poll results would look like if the media were truly fair and balanced?

Now, we all know Israel's public diplomacy, or hasbara, has been woefully inadequate over the years in terms of explaining Israeli policy and highlighting Palestinian shortcomings and misdeeds.

The other side has succeeded in storming college campuses, exploiting international forums, and hijacking the narrative of what takes place in the Middle East, all in an attempt to turn public opinion against Israel.

Nonetheless, all their calls for boycotts and divestment, and their slanderous accusations about "apartheid," have seemingly gotten them nowhere.

After all, the Jewish state still earns exceedingly high marks.

As Gallup further noted, "The United States has long been an ally of Israel, and Americans continue to show decidedly positive views toward that nation. As nations throughout the Middle East undergo tumultuous change, perhaps making the region more politically unstable, Americans still appear to see Israel as important, with large majorities viewing it favorably and many more giving their sympathies to the Israelis than to the Palestinians."

In light of this, it seems fair to ask a simple yet important question: does hasbara really matter? Should we be investing so much time, energy and resources into the battle for ideas when we seem to have so much already going in our favor?

The answer, of course, should be crystal clear: we dare not rest on our laurels.

Public opinion is decidedly fickle and there is no telling over time just how it might change.

Just because we have been winning the information war does not in any way guarantee that this will continue to be so.

Even the best team on the field still needs to prepare methodically for each game it plays, if only to ensure that its performance will be top-notch.

Likewise, Israel and its supporters must not desist from making our case, fine-tuning our arguments and constantly looking for new means and methods with which to disseminate them.

Take, for example, the rapidly growing power of social media networks such as Facebook and Twitter, whose reach and popularity make them ideally suited to spreading the truth about Israel and the Middle East.

A pioneering effort in this regard has been undertaken by a group called United with Israel, whose Facebook page has already garnered more than 1 million 'likes' since last autumn.

Founded by my friend Michael Gerbitz, an American immigrant to Beit Shemesh, it operates on a shoestring budget but manages to distribute quality information about Israel to a global audience on a daily basis.

Such efforts are crucial precisely now, when a younger generation that is not as familiar with Israel is coming of age and new mechanisms will be necessary to cultivate their support.

If we care about Israel and its standing in the world, it behooves all of us to join in such activities and support them.

That is the surest way of guaranteeing that in the eyes of the public, the Jewish state continues to win over many hearts and minds.

Michael Freund is the founder and chairman of Shavei Israel (www.shavei.org), which assists Anousim in Spain, Portugal and South America to return to the Jewish people. He served as an adviser to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in his first term in office.

To Go To Top

Posted by Samuel Levinson, March 23, 2012.

An observant Jew who lived on Park Avenue built a Sukkah on his balcony.

Some of his non-Jewish neighbors brought him to court. They claimed that the Sukkah on his balcony was an eyesore and was having a negative impact on the value of their homes in this posh neighborhood.

In court, the man was very worried about the outcome. It was the eve of the eight-day holiday, leaving him no time to make alternative arrangements in case the judge ordered him to take down the Sukkah. He prayed for help. And Hashem listened.

Judge Ginsburg, who was Jewish himself, had a reputation of being a very wise man. After hearing both sides, he turned to the observant Jew and scolded him:

"Don't you realize that you live on Park Avenue, and not in Brooklyn? There is a certain decorum which is expected on Park Avenue. You have no right to be putting up an ugly hut on this lovely street without a building permit authorizing it. I hereby rule that either you remove the hut, or I will fine you one thousand dollars.

You have exactly eight days to do so! Next case!"

Contact Samuel Levinson by email at leviltd2@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Leslie J. Sacks, March 23, 2012.

Most claim it has not started, others say Israel will not survive without it: democracy, equality, fraternity — all demand it!

This revolution is indeed quite simple — it invites all of Israel's youth to contribute to society, be a part of the countries' evolution and to equally share the burden of "Tikkun Olam", the giving back to one's people, one's country, and one's world.

Currently only about 50% of Israel's youth gets conscripted into the army, a QuietRevolution4tough 36 months for the men, and 24 months for the women. And the divide is growing between those who willingly accept their role in Israel's defense forces, the essential security structure that has enabled Israel to survive multiple wars, decades of terrorism and a threatening neighborhood, and those who opt out, who deny their communal responsibilities, who get a free ride. But it's not as free as many jobs go rather to army graduates, who learn skills and even professions in the army that are not easy to acquire elsewhere.

The society resents these "opt-outs", who range from conscientious objectors, the selfish, the cowardly and the confused to those in the orthodox religious community (Haredis) who refuse army conscription and use the lawful escape hatch of remaining in their "Yeshivahs", the ubiquitous and intense bible study groups that operate at the expense and the invitation of a captive government. Captive because those select religious groups demand and get, in return for coalition voting support in the ruling government, financial subsistence for continuing their endless religious studies that replace any need for joining the workforce or the army.

This is a personal choice for students and charitable people alike — it is not the purview of government to tax the working class and subsidize these scholars for life.

In contrast, a good portion of the religious youth does indeed form an essential and strong part of the army, a contribution of unrivalled quality. Also, some Jewish women from the religious Zionist sector already join an existing alternative national service for 12 or 24 months, helping in special education, disadvantaged communities and wherever needed. America's peace corps offers some interesting examples of goodwill ambassadors. Israel needs a bottom-up revolution, a community service to match and parallel the army service. No longer should anyone be exempt from Israel's national service without volunteering for a national community service, whether it be in education or otherwise. Many communities in and outside of Israel desperately need educators, social workers, doctors, nurses, agriculturalists — the list is endless.

Israel's youth should not be divided into those who graduate the army with privileges, respect, camaraderie and focus, and those that are beyond the pale, perhaps alienated, perhaps bitter. Israel's Arabs are exempt from service in order to avoid a conflict between allegiance to their country and to their Arab brethren in surrounding countries. They should not be and those that are conscientious objectors need to contribute in other ways. The Bedouin do it — so do the Druze. And if Arabs in Israel can be and are Supreme Court judges, members of parliament, doctors and lawyers, they can certainly be infantrymen, generals, educators, translators and community workers.

No more should an ever dwindling pool of Israel's youth carry the burden, the casualties of war, alone. The society is fracturing with this growing gap and only a conscripted community service for those justifiably exempt from military service can help re-tie those strands that strengthen society, that connect all its disparate groups. How else can Israel integrate the enormous variety of cultures, religions and races that make up the most diverse country in the Middle East.

The religious extreme (the ultra-orthodox) have a stranglehold on coalition politics and hence preclude any changes to their military exemptions. Once the primary centrist parties resolve to join forces in a moderate coalition (Israel generally never has a single dominating party, only a proliferation of smaller parties: Arab, Communist, labor, left and right wings amongst others) they need to pass the "community service act", effectively the next revolution.

The advantages would be game-changing. Out of a population of 7.6 million, 1.5 million are exempt Israeli Arabs, and a similar amount are extreme religious orthodox families whose youth do not participate in Israel's service. Yet the latter possess some of the finest and most analytical minds in Israel, interpreting, as they do in a never ending daily ritual, the five books of Moses (Old Testament) via an intense daily discourse of commentaries, arguments, subtle meanings and ambiguities.

They are perfect soil for the complex needs of the military's non-combat, intelligence units, information gatherers and computer analysts.

The Arab youth likewise, even if never in combat units, yet because of their Arabic language skills and cultural familiarity with Israel's antagonistic neighbors, could provide, where amenable, likewise enormous information processing and translation, and could further teach Arabic to soldiers.

All the community service participants could as well teach in disadvantaged communities, could provide outreach programs, and support every style and type of volunteering to strengthen most of society's ills and weaknesses and act as Israel's ambassadors worldwide, especially where disasters and wars around the world deserve response.

This program is eminently sensible and practical ensuring all youth participate in giving back to society, in bridging gaps between all social classes and groups, building both commitment and appreciation on all sides. They can choose their preferred QuietRevolution2path based on their ability and their ethical constraints.

The program can be initiated with the support of the majority of Israel, without pandering to the special interests, to the extremes or the minorities — it can start with a 12 month period, growing in length over time to perhaps 24 months for women and 36 months for men.

Every disadvantaged sector in Israel's society can receive monumental support from these programs. Alienated and anti-Zionist youth can be moderated through giving, sharing and potentially reintegrating them into a society from which they feel increasingly disconnected. And it's that connecting that will enhance the fabric of society, the strength of the country and the building blocks of a more common identity, offsetting as well many radical influences permeating their societies via the internet and from around the world.

In the end, we love and respect what we give to, what we sacrifice for, as any mother knows — hopefully this quiet revolution will appear sooner rather that later.

Contact Leslie J. Sacks at Leslie_J._Sacks@mail.vresp.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Jerry Sobel, March 22, 2012.

If not so tragic it would be comical the way today's generation of left wing Jewish "intelligentsia" are in lock step with the Palestinian/Islamic narrative concerning the Middle East conflict. Many, included within this group are M.D.s, PH.d's, Professors, and their impressionable undergraduate wards that were either not alive or too young to remember what actually happened on the lead up to the Six Day War, or how and why Israel came to control Judea and Samaria; what some erroneously call the West Bank.

To the dyed in the wool, left wing ideologues the following will be meaningless. Their disdain for the Jewish character of Israel is so great that actual quotes from the key players leading up to and subsequent to the war will hardly dent their disposition. Thus the following is not aimed at them. From these people I expect nothing more than a deluge of requests to be immediately removed from my mailing list before even finishing this intro. These minds can never be changed because truth is not on their agenda only propaganda. And although entitled to their own opinion, they're not entitled to their own facts.

For people of my generation that were alive and dreaded each ominous commination hurled at the Jewish state as we listened to our transistor radios, the following quotes will be a flashback of those scary, daunting days. More importantly, the ensuing should be read by the uninitiated that wish to get a truthful, non-propagandized understanding of this seemingly irreconcilable conflict and how the Middle East has reached the point where it is today.

For those seeking such an understanding, this time line of quotes should be read in its entirety, you will soon realize that although the actors have changed, other people are playing the same parts today. Pay particular attention to Israel's then chief antagonist, Gamal Abdul Nasser. His villainous role today is today being acted out by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad whose objectives are no less threatening and unnerving.

To check the veracity of these quotes, I've included the URL at the end of each citation. Reference is to


The Six Day War: Crucial quotes

"Our goal is clear — to wipe Israel off the map"
President Aref of Iraq,
May 31st 1967.

March 8th 1965
"We shall not enter Palestine with its soil covered in sand, we shall enter it with its soil saturated in blood" — President of Egypt, Gamal
Abdel Nasser [20]

Feb 22nd 1967
"it is the duty of all of us now to move from defensive positions to offensive positions and enter the battle to liberate the usurped land...Everyone must face the test and enter the battle to the end." — President Attassi of Syria[1]

April 8th 1967
"(this battle will be)...followed by more severe battles until Palestine is liberated and the Zionist presence ended." — Syria's information minister Mahmoud Zubi [1] http://www.sixdaywar.co.uk/timeline-references.htm#1

May 12th 1967
"In view of the fourteen incidents of sabotage and infiltration perpetrated in the past month alone, Israel may have no other choice but to adopt suitable countermeasures against the focal points of sabotage. Israel will continue to take action to prevent any and all attempts to perpetrate sabotage within her territory. There will be no immunity for any state which aids or abets such acts." — PM Levi Eshkol speech [10]

May 13th 1967 Egypt must expect "an Israeli invasion of Syria immediately after Independence Day, with the aim of overthrowing the Damascus regime" [10] Soviet misinformation delivered to Anwar Sadat in Moscow.

May 15th 1967
"Israel wants to make it clear to the government of Egypt that it has no aggressive intentions whatsoever against any Arab state at all" — Israel's Prime Minister Levi Eshkol [4]

May 16th 1967
'...I gave my instructions to all UAR forces to be ready for action against Israel the moment it might carry out any aggressive action against any Arab country. Due to these instructions our troops are already concentrated in Sinai on our eastern border. For the sake of the complete security of all UN troops...I request that you issue your orders to withdraw all troops immediately. [5] — written request from Nasser to Commander UNEF (Gaza)

"The existence of Israel has continued too long. We welcome the Israeli aggression. We welcome the battle we have long awaited. The peak hour has come. The battle has come in which we shall destroy Israel." — Cairo Radio

May 17th 1967
"All Egypt is now prepared to plunge into total war which will put an end to Israel" — Cairo Radio

"We had hoped yesterday that tension in the Israel-Syria-UAR triangle was dropping after an ostentatious Egyptian show of putting its forces around Cairo on alert. Last night, however, we and the Israelis learned that the Egyptians have moved forces into the Sinai. Now they have moved forces in front of the UN Emergency Force on the Israel — UAR border and all but ordered it to withdraw." — Memorandum From the President's Special Assistant (Rostow) to President Johnson [30 Doc 7]

May 18th 1967
"The Zionist barrack in Palestine is about to collapse and be destroyed. Every one of the hundred million Arabs has been living for the past nineteen years on one hope — to live to see the day Israel is liquidated...There is no life, no peace nor hope for the gangs of Zionism to remain in the occupied land."

"As of today, there no longer exists an international emergency force to protect Israel....The sole method we shall apply against Israel is a total war which will result in the extermination of Zionist existence". — Cairo Radio's Voice of the Arabs broadcast

"Egypt has decided to terminate the presence of the United Nations Emergency Force from the territory of the United Arab Republic and Gaza Strip. Therefore I request that the necessary steps be taken for the withdrawal of the Force as soon as possible." — Egyptian ambassador Kony informs U Thant — U.N. A/6730/Add.3 26th June 1967

"Irrespective of the reasons for the actions you have taken, in all frankness, may I advise you that I have serious misgivings about it for...I believe that this Force has been an important factor in maintaining the relative quiet in the area of its deployment during the past ten years and that its withdrawal may have grave implications for peace." — UN Secretary General U Thant cables Cairo advising that UNEF would be withdrawn.

"The presence of the Emergency Forces in the Sinai desert had kept tensions down. We don't have to look further for a United Nations success. Yet the Government of the United Arab Republic has made a formal request for the withdrawal of UNEF from its territory as soon as possible.

It really makes a mockery of the peacekeeping work of the United Nations if, as soon as the tension rises, the United Nations force it told to leave. Indeed the collapse of UNEF might well have repercussions on other United Nations peacekeeping forces, and the credibility of the United Nations in this field are thrown into question." — George Brown (British Foreign Secretary), speaking at United Nations Association annual dinner in London [21]]

..."UNEF was established with the full concurrence of the United Nations...any decision to withdraw the force should be taken in the United Nations after full consultation with all the countries involved — it should not be taken as the result of some unilateral decision." — George Brown (British Foreign Secretary), speaking at United Nations Association annual dinner in London [21]

"You are correct, Mr. President, in stating that we are having our patience tried to the limits. There have been 15 attempts at murder and sabotage in the past six weeks. We have not reacted. This in itself proves that there is no lack of temperance and responsibility on our part. On the other hand, the problem is not solved indefinitely by inaction. We cannot always rely on the stroke of fortune which has so far prevented the terrorist acts from taking the toll of life and injury intended by the perpetrators. — extract from telegram from Eshkol to Pres. LB Johnson.

May 19th 1967
"I do not want to cause alarm but it is difficult for me not to warn the Council that, as I see it, the position in the Middle East is more disturbing...indeed more menacing than at any time since the fall of 1956." — UN Secretary General U Thant, Security Council meeting — U.N. S/7906 26th May 1967

Israel [will] not initiate hostilities "...until or unless (Egyptian forces) close the Straits of Tiran to free navigation by Israel" — Prime Minister Levi Eshkol message to France's President de Gaulle.

"Israel would stop at nothing to cancel the blockade. It is essential that President Nasser should not have any illusions." — Eshkol tells leading maritime powers

"Our intention to regard the closing of the Straits as a casus belli was communicated...to the foreign ministers of those states which had supported international navigation in the Straits in 1957 and thereafter. There can be no doubt that these warnings reached Cairo. One thing was now clear. If Nasser imposed a blockade, the explosion would ensue not from 'miscalculation', but from an open — eyed and conscious readiness for war." — Abba Eban [10]

May 20th 1967
"Our forces are now entirely ready not only to repulse any aggression, but to initiate the act ourselves, and to explode the Zionist presence in the Arab homeland of Palestine. The Syrian army, with its finger on the trigger, is united. I believe that the time has come to begin a battle of anihilation." — Syria's Defence Minister Hafez Assad (later to be Syria's President).

May 22nd 1967
"The Israeli flag shall not go through the Gulf of Aqaba. Our sovereignty over the entrance to the Gulf cannot be disputed" — Egypt's President Nasser

"We want a full scale, popular war of liberation... to destroy the Zionist enemy" — Syrian president Dr. Nureddin al-Attasi speech to troops [6]

May 23rd 1967
"[The Arab blockade of Israel shipping in the Gulf of Aqaba is] illegal and potentially disastrous to the cause of peace. ...The purported closing of the Gulf of Aqaba has brought a new and grave dimension to the crisis. The United States considers the gulf to be an international waterway."President LB Johnson — Times May 24th 1967 full text here.

May 24th 1967
"[Egypt's blockade] must not be allowed to triumph; Britain would join with others in an effort to open the Straits." — UK Prime Minister Harold Wilson to Israel's foreign minister Abba Eban

May 26th 1967
"Taking over Sharm el Sheikh meant confrontation with Israel (and) also meant that we were ready to enter a general war with Israel. The battle will be a general one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel" — Gamal Abdel Nasser speech to the General Council of the International Confederation of Arab Trade Unions

May 28th 1967
"The existence of Israel is in itself an aggression...what happened in 1948 was an aggression — an aggression against the Palestinian people. ...(the crisis had developed because) "Eshkol threatened to march on Damascus, occupy Syria and overthrow the Syrian regime. It was our duty to come to the aid of our Arab brother. It was our duty to ask for the withdrawal of UNEF. When UNEF went, we had to go to the Gulf of Aqaba and restore things to what they were when we were in Aqaba in 1956" — Gamel Abdel Nasser at a press conference for several hundred of the World's press. [9]

"We will not accept any...coexistence with Israel....Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel....The war with Israel is in effect since 1948". — Gamel Abdel Nasser press conference

May 29th 1967
"Now, eleven years after 1956 we are restoring things to what they were in 1956...The issue now at hand is not the Gulf of Aqaba, the Straits of Tiran or the withdrawal of UNEF, but the rights of the Palestinian people." — Nasser speech to General Assembly in Cairo: — Vance, Vick, and Pierre Lauer: Hussein of Jordan. (London: Peter Owen, 1968)

May 30th 1967
"The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel ... to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not of more declarations." — Gamal Abdel Nasser speech

May 31st 1967
"The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear: to wipe Israel off the map" — President Aref of Iraq

"Under the terms of the military agreement signed with Jordan, Jordanian artillery, coordinated with the forces of Egypt and Syria, is in a position to cut Israel in two at Qalqilya, where Israeli territory between the Jordan armistice line and the Mediterranean Sea is only 12 kilometres wide". — Al Akhbar, Cairo's daily newspaper

UK Parliamentary debate regarding the hasty removal of the United Nations Emergency Force:

"Taking the fire brigade away just when fire was about to burst out" — Foreign Secretary George Brown

"Entirely incomprehensible" — Edward Heath.

"a fatal and perhaps fateful error of judgment" "...this was the last chance for the United Nations to get a grip on themselves and apply the principles of their Charter" — Sir Alec Douglas — Home

"...the first casualty (of this crisis) had been the United Nations. It would need an immense effort, an almost superhuman effort, to restore the prestige of that organization" — Sir Alec Douglas — Home

" ...they could not expect the people of Israel, who have done nothing wrong, to sit for a prolonged period until the pincer movement had got them so entrapped that they could not go on." — Sir Barnett Janner

"The characteristic of this situation is the declared aim of one side not to win concessions from the other. Their demand is that Israel should cease to exist — indeed has never existed. ...What had to be sought was not merely how to avoid war but to create the conditions of peace. One condition of a lasting peace must be the recognition that Israel has a right to live. Israel had been for nearly 20 years a member of the United Nations entitled to the respect and protection of the United Nations." — Prime Minister Harold Wilson The Times [27]

June 1st 1967
"Brethren and sons, this is the day of the battle to avenge our martyred brethren who fell in 1948. It is the day to wash away the stigma. We shall, God willing, meet in Tel Aviv and Haifa" — Radio broadcast by Iraqi President Abdel Rahman Aref

— 11.00 GMT June 1st 1967, Baghdad Domestic Service in Arabic, Foreign Broadcast Information Service

"Those who survive will remain in Palestine. I estimate that none of them will survive." — Ahmed Shukairy, chairman of PLO in Jordanian Jerusalem, asked in news interview what will happen to the Israelis if there is a war

"When the organs of Arab propaganda raised the contention that Israel is concentrating forces in order to attack Syria, I invited your Ambassador in Israel to visit the frontier to find out for himself that there was no truth in this allegation. To my regret, the Ambassador did not respond to our invitation. The Chief of Staff of the UNTSO checked these claims and informed the Secretary-General of the UN and the capitals of the region that there were no Israel concentrations on the Syrian border. The Secretary-General even included a statement to this effect in the Report he submitted on May 19th to the Security Council." — Levi Eshkol, Prime Minister of Israel, to Russian Premiere Kosygin [17],

June 2nd 1967
"We will coordinate efforts of the PLO with responsible authorities in Jordan in all fields — politically, militarily and materially..." "It was very probable that the Jordan army might start the battle." — Ahmed Shukairy, The Times, Nicholas Herbert, Amman, June 1st

June 3rd 1967
"You must not do anything to entangle Israel with the Jordanians..." — Israel's newly-appointed Defence Minister Moshe Dayan, instructs the head of the Israeli Army Central Command[6], June 4th 1967 to the Zionist trap of supporting Israel in the present crisis.

"There are no words I can use to express my disappointment at the attitude that the British Government has taken with regard to the Gulf of Aqaba — King Husain of Jordan, press conference in Amman — The Times, June 5th 1967 p4, Nicholas Herbert, Amman "WARNING TO BRITAIN BY KING HUSAIN: Danger of losing Arab friends".

June 6th 1967
"I have just come from Jerusalem to tell the Security Council that Israel, by its independent effort and sacrifice, has passed from serious danger to successful resistance.

Two days ago Israel's condition caused much concern across the humane and friendly world. Israel had reached a sombre hour. Let me try to evoke the point at which our fortunes stood.

An army, greater than any force ever assembled in history in Sinai, had massed against Israel's southern frontier. Egypt had dismissed the United Nations forces which symbolized the international interest in the maintenance of peace in our region. Nasser had provocatively brought five infantry divisions and two armoured divisions up to our very gates; 80,000 men and 900 tanks were poised to move." — Abba Eban, Israel's Foreign Minister addresses UN Security Council,

June 14th 1967
"Wars are not always begun by shots. They are often begun by action and the action which really created the state of war in an acute sense was the imposition of the blockade. To try to murder somebody by strangulation is just as much attempted murder as if you tried to murder him by a shot, and therefore the act of strangulation was the first violent, physical act which had its part in the sequence. But also on that Monday morning we acted against the movement of forces. The Egyptian air force had been making incursions into Israel before, whether for reconnaissance or for other reasons, but there had been a pattern of encroachment. One never knows when aircraft come towards you what their intention is. A document which we subsequently captured revealed a very instructive picture. The Egyptian command was taking a very intense interest in the disposition of Israel's very few airfields. They wanted to know where they were, and there was an operation plan, which I read to the Security Council, about how to knock them out. My impression is, therefore, that those aircraft which appeared on our radar screens that Monday morning were the start of an operation agianst our air fields. Whether they were to make the first reconnaissance move or the first knock-out is not relevant in this era of war. But we acted against movement towards us in the air." — Abba Eban TV broadcast [18].

June 19th 1967
"If a single act of folly was more responsible for this explosion than any other it was the arbitrary and dangerous announced decision that the Straits of Tiran would be closed. The right of innocent, maritime passage must be preserved for all nations" — US President Lyndon Johnson,

Contact Jerry Sobel by email at jerrysobel@israeliadvocate.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, March 22, 2012.

What can one say to this...

Little Gabriel, 3, was the younger of Rabbi Yonaton Sandler's sons to be murdered in Toulouse.

Gabriel Sandler, May G-d Avenge his Blood (Credit: Flash 90)

It has been revealed that this beautiful child had been named for Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg, who was horrendously slaughtered in Mumbai shortly before he was born.

Rabbi Shimon Rosenberg, father of Gavriel's wife Rivki, who was murdered alongside her husband, attended the Sandler funeral yesterday.


Gabriel's murderer is dead now: after a 36-hour police siege, a gun battle ensued and then, as Mohammed Merah jumped from a window, police shot him in the head. They say they had hoped to take him alive.

This doesn't bring back those whom he killed — but police indicated he had been planning additional attacks and he is now out of commission for good.


I observed, in yesterday's posting, that the French cannot dismiss the Toulouse murders as an aberration, a case of one kook who was influenced by evil associates in a far-off place. The enemy, which is certainly radical Islam, must be named, I said: There are, without a shadow of a doubt, a good many radical Muslims in France...It's time to talk about these things.

That was before I saw the report from the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism in Herzliyah. And now that I have (thanks to Judith N.), I am doubly convinced of the need to talk — volumes — about what's going on.

"According to various French sources, Merah was linked to Forsane Al'Izza [The Brave Horseman], a radical Salafist group that operates in France..."

The Institute describes a video by French Salafists calling themselves by that name that it had monitored. The video, "which was filmed in Paris and is in French, decries French Islamophobia and what Forsane Al'Izza calls 'the campaign of incitement and persecution' being waged by French public figures, led by President Sarkozy, against France's Muslim population and against the group. In the clip, Forsane Al'Izza declares that it does not recognize France's secular democratic regime, and is working to see shari'a [Islamic religious law] implemented in France...the clip praised the efforts of Forsane Al'Izza to protect the downtrodden Muslims in infidel lands..." (Emphasis added)
http://www.ict.org.il/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket= 99fFLwpcQLQ%3d&tabid=320


Daniel Greenfield, writing as Sultan Knish, doesn't mince words, and in "The New Nazis" he's especially on the mark with regard to what's transpiring today in France:

"There was a time when Jewish children were hunted down and killed in France. Their killers believed themselves to be members of a superior group that was destined to rule the world and enslave or exterminate members of inferior groups. The cowardice and appeasement of the French authorities allowed them to operate freely, to kill Jews and launch attacks on other countries.

"What was then is now again. The occupying army doesn't wear uniforms, it wears keffiyahs. It doesn't speak German, it speaks Arabic. It doesn't believe that it is superior for reasons of race as much as for reasons of religion. It does not view all others as Untermenschen, but as infidels. It looks forward not to a thousand year Reich, but to a thousand year Caliphate.

"Between all the non-stop coverage, the expressions of grief, the political pandering, no one is stating the obvious. France has been occupied all over again. Once again the occupation has been carried out with the consent of the authorities who have decided that cowardice is the only way. Vichy France has become Vichy Europe...where the blatant appeasement is disguised as honor... "...The old Nazis marched in at the head of an army. The new Nazis bought a plane ticket. The old Nazis had to get by the French Armed Forces and the Royal Air Force. The new Nazis are welcomed in and anyone who says a word otherwise faces trials and jail sentences. The old Nazis deported Jews to camps. The new Nazis kill them right in the cities. And the killing will not stop until the Muslim occupation of Europe comes to an end." (Emphasis added)


Prime Minister Netanyahu has gone to visit the bereaved families from Toulouse. He told Ava Sandler that Israel will do everything possible to help her. And he said, "the State of Israel was established to be a shield for the Jewish People."

This is, in fact, a huge point, which should never be forgotten.

PM Netanyahu on condolence visit (Credit: PMO)


Before moving to other subjects, one last point. Obama has placed a somewhat delayed call of condolence to President Sarkozy with regard to what happened in Toulouse. What does it tell us that — even though some of the murdered were Israeli citizens, and they were all buried in Israel, and all of Israel mourned — he did not, to the very best of my knowledge, call Netanyahu as well?


I also mentioned yesterday that the Israeli Ambassador to Egypt had left the country. I now have it from a reliable source that this does not seem to be permanent and he is expected to go back in. Documents from the Embassy in Egypt apparently have been flown to Israel, however, suggesting a situation that is less than secure.

Last Wednesday, I heard Daniel Pipes, head of the Middle East Forum, address a Knesset committee on immigration. There was no Egyptian revolution, Pipes declared. There was only a coup d'etat. The military remains firmly in charge.

Saturday night, I head Israeli commentator and author Barry Rubin speak. Don't imagine for a second, he told his audience, that the military is solidly in charge in Egypt. The situation is very unstable and the Islamists are moving in.


A signal lesson on how difficult it is to interpret the very fluid and rapidly fluctuating events in this part of the world.

The fact that the Israeli ambassador to Egypt had left the country seemed to be — but in the end apparently was not — of particular significance because just last week Egypt's parliament, which is dominated by Islamists, voted to expel Israel's ambassador. This was just a symbolic vote, as the ruling Military Council makes the decisions on such matters and is not interested in breaking its relationship with Israel.

The overriding question is how long this situation will hold.


A NYTimes article on Iran of a few days ago irked me greatly, and I have been wanting to address it — as many of you may have seen it.

In brief, the article said that US intelligence people believe that Iran stopped working on a nuclear bomb in 2003 and have not started again — and that basically the Mossad agrees, even though Israeli politicians are pushing for a quick attack.

The goal here, once again, was to represent the Israeli government as "trigger happy": Look, even the Mossad says Iran isn't building a bomb.

But the logic here is seriously flawed. For Israel has never claimed Iran is building a bomb now. Rather the concern is that Iran is developing the potential to do so, and has, in fact, already reached what is called a point of no return. That is, Iran has done sufficient development domestically at present to be able to build that bomb should it want to, without having to resort to assistance or equipment from the outside.

This is a major point that is all too often glossed over. It represents a significant difference in what Israel and the US see as the red line with regard to Iran. The US, it seems, is prepared to wait until Iran is actually starting to build that bomb (which, depending on sources, might take anywhere from two months to a year). Israel is not prepared to wait that long.


Dore Gold, president of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, was asked recently if there is proof that Iran has a nuclear program. His response: If you saw someone come into the kitchen and take out the bread, and the peanut butter and the jelly, you'd be pretty sure he was going to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. This is where we are now with regard to Iran. All the elements are in place. They have enriched uranium beyond what they would need for domestic purposes. How much proof do you need?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syddleJjDUc&feature= youtu.be


Bret Stephen's "The Bogus Iran Intelligence Debate" offers both a similar analogy and a sophisticated analysis:

"All this [debate about intelligence] sounds like it matters a whole lot. It doesn't. You may not be able to divine whether a drinker, holding a bottle of Johnnie Walker in one hand and a glass tinkling with ice in the other, actually intends to pour himself a drink. And perhaps he doesn't. But the important thing, at least when it comes to intervention, is not to present him with the opportunity in the first place.

"That's what was so misleading about the 2007 NIE, which relegated to a footnote the observation that 'by "nuclear weapons program" we mean Iran's nuclear weapons design and weaponization work...[W]e do not mean Iran's declared civil work related to uranium conversion and enrichment.' What the NIE called 'civil work' is, in fact, the central piece in assembling a nuclear device. To have sufficient quantities of enriched uranium is, so to speak, the whiskey of a nuclear-weapons program. By contrast, 'weaponization' — the vessel into which you pour and through which you can deliver the enriched uranium cocktail — is merely the glass. (Emphasis added)

"...In other words, having a debate about the quality of our Iran intelligence is mostly an irrelevance: Iran's real nuclear-weapons program is hiding in plain sight. The serious question policy makers must answer isn't whether Iran will go for a bomb once it is within a half-step of getting one. It's whether Iran should be allowed to get within that half-step.

"...it should come as no surprise that an intelligence community meant to provide decision makers with disinterested analysis has, in practice, policy goals and ideological axes of its own. (Emphasis added)

"...For real intelligence, merely consider that a regime that can take a rock in its right hand to stone a woman to death should not have a nuclear bomb within reach of its left.
http://online.wsj.com/article/ SB10001424052702304636404577291331867079346.html


The toughest sanctions yet have now been imposed on Iran: Belgium's Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), which handles most international bank transfers, has eliminated Iran from its services.

There is no question in my mind but that this tougher stance was generated because PM Netanyahu — as a centerpiece of his public statements — has expressed Israeli concerns and maintained that Israeli has a right to defend herself. Sad, that it takes fear of an Israeli hit to make nations respond, when they should be responding simply because the situation requires such action.

Undoubtedly, these new sanctions will generate additional difficulties for Iran. Whether they will prove pivotal in convincing the Iranians to halt what they are doing remains highly dubious. There are always loopholes and nations willing to work with Iran. Just this week, the Obama administration announced that it will exempt a group of European countries and Japan from financial sanctions, because they have significantly curtailed their oil imports from Iran.


There is broad expectation, but not certainty, that in the course of time Israel will hit Iran. The over-riding question is when. What has become increasingly clear to me is that Israel may be in possession of bunker busters powerful enough to extend the window of time for doing so.


The UN Human Rights Council has now adopted a resolution that establishes a major "fact-finding mission" to investigate alleged violations of human rights committed by Israel with regard to "settlements."

Prime Minister Netanyahu's response to this outrage:

"This is a hypocritical council with an automatic majority against Israel. This council ought to be ashamed of itself.

"Until today, the council has made 91 decisions, 39 of which dealt with Israel, three with Syria and one with Iran. One only had to hear the Syrian representative speak today about human rights in order to understand how detached from reality the council is. Another proof of its detachment from reality came last week when it invited before it a representative of Hamas, an organization whose ideology is based on the murder of innocents."


Let me close, then, with a wonderful video of Kenneth Meshoe, a black member of the South African parliament, who explains why the notion that Israeli is an apartheid state is ridiculous. See it, save it, share it when Israel is attacked.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 22, 2012.

The leaders in the West are obstinate, or fearful, to admit that Islam is at war with the West.

Therefore, we, the people, must take the lead and put the facts out there, as they are to be read and heard:

Islamists intend to kill us all.

We, in turn, need to be ready and have full intent to destroy as many Islamists as we can.

Negotiations with and compromises made to Islamists brought upon Israel and the West the great danger every person in Israel and the West is now facing.

One has to be utterly out of one's mind to "wait" until the Iranians Islamist regime enemy has nuclear weapons to attend to the dangers they intend to inflict on Israel, the West and their rival Moslems.

Islamists do not conform with the Western rationality, as it has been robustly demonstrated, time and time again.

Islam is a cult of death; a political college discussion, or a debate forum, is not quite the way they do their business.

Islam must be confronted and its roots cut off, just like destroying the weed's roots in the garden.

Unless of course the people will leave the leaders to go on with their misguided and misplaced politics. And then, the people will be forced to convert to Islam or be part of the mass murder Islam is planning for all infidels.

These are the only two options from which to choose.

The choice is ours!

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Fern Sidman, March 22, 2012.

Over 150 people gathered at the Lincoln Park Jewish Center in Yonkers, New York several days ago, for an evening dedicated to the future of Har HaZeitim (Mount of Olives). Sponsored by International Committee for the Preservation of Har HaZeitim, the focus of the speakers' addresses was on eliciting a collective response regarding the escalating dangers to this most holy of burial sites where G-d fearing Jews from all over the world have traditionally asked to be buried.

Rabbi Jay Schoulson of the Sons of Israel Synagogue in Long Island City, New York, spoke of the continued Arab desecrations of Har HaZeitim and the failure of the Israeli government to stop them.

"The Arabs believe that the Jews' Messiah will come through the Gate of Mercy (Shaar HaRachamim), leading to the Temple Mount, so they closed up the gate and have created a cemetery there to prevent Elijah, who is a Cohen, from entering," he explained. Cohanim, those Jews who descend from Moses' brother Aaron, are prohibited from being in the same area as the dead, for reasons of ritual purity.

A profoundly shocking video presentation depicting the wanton desecration of graves on Har HaZeitim was shown. Images of garbage strewn everywhere drew gasps from audience members as the historical and religious significance of this ancient cemetery was told. [See it here.]

Dating back thousands of years, Har HaZeitim has over 150,000 graves and it was noted that an additional 50,000 graves and markers were destroyed by the Jordanians during the years of 1948 through 1967, in which head stones were used for latrines and building roads.

Visitors to the Mount can see the destroyed tombstones next to restored ones, a painstaking job that has been aided by Bnei Akiva youth group volunteers. Famous Hassidic rabbis — including the Nadvorna Rebbe who died just two weeks ago — are in designated areas, as are Rabbi Avraham and Rabbi Tzvi Yehudah Kook, Rabbi Avraham Shapira, 1929 terror victims, Gush Katif transferred graves. Headstones describe people from the Diaspora whose bodies were brought to the site and new areas have been prepared along the sides of the Mount.

Rabbi Rigoberto Vinas of the Lincoln Park Jewish Center displayed packets of soil from Har HaZeitim that are used to line the coffins of Jews being buried anywhere in the world.

Menachem Lubinsky, the co-chairman of the International Committee for the Preservation of Har HaZeitim and co-sponsor of the evening along with his brother, Abe, spoke of Har HaZeitim as the burial place of their beloved parents. With palpable emotion, they described Arabs playing soccer there and being paid to trample on graves.

Calling the State of Israel's failure to boldly respond to the destruction of Har HaZeitim a "national shame", Mr. Lubinsky said he had spoken with Knesset members who were ostensibly unaware of the pervasive desecrations.

In an attempt to arouse public consciousness and to mobilize elected officials, the ICPHH has organized missions to Har HaZeitim. Led by Malcolm Hoenlein, chairman of the Conference of Major American Jewish Organizations, Reps Jerrold Nadler (D) and Eliot Engel (D) of New York attended the mission and personally experienced being pelted with stones by Arabs during their visit.

Speaking of Har HaZeitim as the hallowed burial place for our prophets, rabbis, writers and simple Jews murdered in riots and buried in mass graves, Helen Freedman, executive director of Americans For A Safe Israel (AFSI), underscored the paramount importance of resisting efforts to relinquish holy sites in Israel to Arab hands. She then spoke directly to Rep. Eliot Engel when she castigated the Obama administration for "violating and circumventing" United States legal statutes which prohibit funding of UNESCO, as the organization has now accorded full recognition to the Palestinian Authority.

Condemning UNESCO's "efforts to erase the history of the Jewish people in Israel and to Islamicize Israel's holy sites," Ms. Freedman said that President Obama "has already requested $79 million for UNESCO in the 2013 budget, along with an additional $40.5 million for "contingent requirements."

Abe Lubinsky, Chairman of the ICPHH, took the present leadership in Israel to task for their indifference towards Har HaZeitim. "Prime Minister Netanyahu declared at the recent AIPAC conference that Jerusalem will never be divided again but he must come out of the closet. He must defend Har HaZeitim if he truly cares about an indivisible Jerusalem," he said. Mr. Lubinsky told the gathering that while at Har HaZeitim he witnessed police chasing the Arab stone throwers, but, he added, "The Arabs know they won't be prosecuted and if they are detained, it's a revolving door, so they continue their attacks."

Committee Speakers.

OR see here.

This appeared today in Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com).

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, March 21, 2012.

You may just learn something, without prejudice, but from one woman's personal experiences. This comes from ACT! for America Education. Brigitte Gabriel is author of this report.


This is only one aspect of American education being analyzed. How much else in the "soft sciences" is being misrepresented, I wonder? Anthropology, for instance?

The institution ACT!, founded by Brigitte Gabriel, has produced a meticulously documented review of 38 textbooks widely used in American schools, specifically focused on their historical depiction of Islam, including recent history. The report, titled "Education or Indoctrination? The Treatment of Islam in 6th through 12th Grade American Textbooks," compares what it found in the textbooks with 275 historical sources, listing 375 footnoted citations, to conclude that America's textbooks are laced with "historical revisionism."

Specifically, the report details dozens of ways in which it contends the textbooks stray from accurately teaching about Islam, including the following list, quoted directly from the report's summary:

* The doctrine of jihad is omitted, incorrectly defined, inaccurately described, or understated.
* Faulty description of women's rights under Islam: The oppressive and discriminatory nature of Shari'a law with respect to women is omitted, mischaracterized or understated.
* Omission or minimization of the Islamic slave trade, in sharp contrast with what is typically an extensive and appropriately critical examination of the Atlantic slave trade operated by Europeans.
* Aggrandizement and elevation of Muhammad's character that is contradicted by accepted historical facts.
* Omission or minimization of Muslim conquest and imperialism, in sharp contrast with what is typically an extensive and appropriately critical examination of European and other imperialism.
* False claim of Islam's historical tolerance of Jews and Christians.
* Misrepresentation of Shari'a Law in such areas as its applicability to non-Muslims and the separation of church and state.
* False presentation of the Crusades as the cause of the animosity between Christianity and Islam.
* Faulty historical narrative of the Crusades. Muslims in the Holy Land are commonly depicted as innocent victims of unprovoked aggression who were defending "their" lands against Christian invaders, rather than what is historically accurate: (1) that Muslims invaded and conquered the Holy Land centuries prior to the Crusades; (2) that Christians and Jews were victims of Muslim conquest and aggression centuries prior to the launching of the Crusades; and (3) that the Crusades were launched to wrest back control of the Holy Land from the Muslim invaders and conquerors.
* Chronological revisionism of the historical development of Judaism, Christianity and Islam which incorrectly portrays Islam as preceding Judaism and Christianity and the Muslims/Arabs as the indigenous people in the Holy Land, resulting in the delegitizimation of Israel.
* Treatment of Islamism (the Lesser Jihad) as though it has no origins within classical Islam and Islam's Holy Books.
* Islamist Holocaust revisionism attributes the creation of Israel to world guilt over the Holocaust and incorrectly maintains that Arabs were forced to give up land for the survivors of the Holocaust.
* Omission of the fact that the United Nations created a two-state partition for Palestine, one for the Jews and one for the Arabs.
* Omission of the fact that the Arabs refused to accept the offer of an independent Arab state contained in the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine.
* False claim of Israel's responsibility for the Palestinian refugee problem.
* Omission of the fact that the PLO's recognition of Israel's right to exist was and remains a verbal acknowledgement only, never committed to print, contradicted by the unrevised PLO charter.
* Inaccurate claim that most Middle Eastern terrorist groups have roots in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
* Omission of the fact that Islamic jihadists target Americans not only for their support of Israel but also for what they consider the "decadent nature" of Western way of life that threatens the spread of Islam throughout the world.
* Failure to explain why the Islamic jihadists targeted the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and to identify the fourth target as the White House.
* "Perhaps the greatest disservice done to students," the report concludes, "is the net effect of the accumulation of these errors — the creation of a faulty historical narrative that not only misrepresents Islam but creates an inaccurate comparison between Islam, Christianity and Judaism, and between the Muslim world and the West. Regardless of the issue — slavery, conquest and imperialism, the Crusades, the Arab-Israeli conflict, to name a few — Islam and the Muslim world are not generally held to the same rigor of historical analysis that the textbooks apply to Christianity, Judaism and the West."

With regard to the techniques used to implement the historical revisionism common in these textbooks, some are blatant and obvious, while others are subtle and deceptive.

Three particular categories of techniques stand out:

(1) Errors of omission, in which information crucial to gaining an understanding of the topic is left out: e.g., omission of the historical fact that the Arabs refused the offer of an independent Palestinian state as part of a two-state solution proposed by the United Nations in 1947.

(2) False statements or claims, presentation of facts that are demonstrably false and/or unsupported by historical or other evidence: e.g., the false assertion that Islam has historically been tolerant of Jews and Christians.

(3) Partial truths, or the inclusion of some facts while omitting others that might be quite relevant to interpreting and understanding the issues at hand: e.g., asserting that under Islam women had certain "rights" and/or "spiritual equality", while omitting the facts regarding the many restrictions and legal disabilities imposed upon women in the Qur'an and under Islamic Shari'a law.

But to many Americans, the politically correct nature of handling 9/11 may be the most surprising.

The report, for example, quotes the textbook "Horizons," published by Harcourt in 2005: "On Sept. 11, 2001, the United States was the target of a horrible act of terrorism, or violence to further a cause." The report explains, "The statement that the 9/11 attack was carried out to 'further a cause' is left undefined. There is no mention that the 'cause' was Islamic jihad." It continues, "Rarely are the terrorists identified as Muslims, and the jihadist motivations for their actions are omitted. Omitting these two critical facts leaves students with an incomplete, and thus inaccurate, understanding as to why 9/11 happened."

ACT! for America Education claims it has sent the executive summary of its finding to over 70,000 state and local school board members nationwide. In addition, the executive summary contains a list of recommended actions on its final pages, for those who, according to Gabriel, want to "wake up America to what this report has uncovered."

Brigitte Gabriel, the founder of the institution that produced this report, was born in the Marjayoun District of Lebanon to a Maronite Christian family. She recalls that during the Lebanese Civil War, Islamic militants launched an assault on a Lebanese military base near her family's house and destroyed her home. She and her parents were forced to live underground in all that remained, an 8'x10' bomb shelter for seven years, with only a small kerosene heater, no sanitary systems, no electricity or running water, and little food. She says she had to crawl in a roadside ditch to a spring for water to evade Muslim snipers. Gabriel says that in 1978 a stranger warned her family of an impending attack by the Islamic militias on all Christians. She says that her life was saved when the Israeli army invaded Lebanon in Operation Litani. Later, when her mother was seriously injured and taken to an Israeli hospital, Gabriel was surprised by the humanity shown by the Israelis, in contrast to the constant propaganda against the Jews she saw as a child.

She has been described in the New York Times Magazine as a "radical Islamophobe".

Executive Summary:
http://www.actforamericaeducation.com/downloads/ textbook_research/executive_summary/Executive_Summary.pdf

Harcourt Brace textbooks (the briefest and perhaps most digestible report, and quite disturbing enough):
http://www.actforamericaeducation.com/downloads/ textbook_research/reports_by_publisher/textbook%20 report%20Harcourt%20Brace%20report.pdf

Full report: http://www.actforamericaeducation.com/downloads/ textbook_research/full_report/Full_Report_version_3.1.12.pdf

Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il Go to to see more of his graphic art at

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Shamrak, March 21, 2012.

Egypt Revising the Camp David Accords
(http://jerusalemcenter.wordpress.com/2012/ 03/15/the-new-egyptian-parliament-takes-aim-at-the- camp-david-accords/)

by Jonathan D. Halevi

On March 12, 2012, Dr. Mohamed Al-Saed Idris, Chairman of the Arab Affairs Committee in the new Egyptian Parliament, presented the committee's official outline of Egypt's regional policy.

The committee's operative recommendations called for an official definition of Israel as an enemy, severing diplomatic relations, full support for the armed struggle against Israel, re-adoption of the total boycott of Israel, raising the issue of Jerusalem in the international arena, and a review of Egyptian nuclear policy.

In its eyes, Israel is the foremost enemy of Egypt and the Arab and Islamic world, and the peace agreement with it (the Camp David agreement) is considered a dead letter.

Egypt is setting itself on a collision course with Israel, using the Palestinian issue in all its aspects — including Israeli military operations against Palestinian terrorism as well as Israeli policy in Jerusalem or the West Bank — as an excuse for direct Egyptian intervention.

Defining Israel as a "major enemy" means building a military capability to deal with the "Israeli threat," including an attempt to deny Israel any advantage in the nuclear field and/or the development of Egyptian nuclear weapons.

At present, the new Egyptian political leadership cannot translate these policies into actions. But this situation is likely to change after the presidential elections on May 23-24 and the establishment of a new civilian government. (It is a well know secret that any agreement Arabs sign with Israel is just tactical maneuvering in preparation for the next war!)

Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak

The current state of Jewish communities and Israel reminds me a Soviet era joke: "I need a medical specialist — what I hear, I can't see; what I see, I can't talk about; when I talk about it, nobody wants to hear." Disunity, assimilation, lack of a national goal and absence of leadership are existentially eroding our future. Does anyone care?

No Truce if Terrorism is Disallowed

The combined Egyptian-Israeli-Hamas effort to negotiate an early ceasefire in the current round of Palestinian-Israeli violence ran into the ground Monday, March 12. The Egyptian mediator tried unsuccessfully to introduce a clause obliging Palestinian terrorists to withdraw from Sinai and stop using the peninsula as a launching-pad for attacks on Israel.

Infants Moved to Bomb Shelters

Ashkelon's Barzali Hospital is moving children and mothers to bomb shelters and is sending home as many patients as possible as the Gaza missile bombardment continues and moves northward. (Almost all houses and flats in Israel are built with a bomb-shelter room)

'Righteous' Turkey Attacked Kurds

Turkish warplanes launched a series of air strikes on Northern Iraq late on Tuesday. The region is home to several bases used by Kurdish separatists from the PKK that Ankara regards as terrorists — and frequently targets with its military. (Turkey, outspoken critic of the Assad regime, has been suppressing and waging war against its Kurdish and Armenian minorities for a long time)

Obama Pastor Endorses March on Jerusalem

Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who was US President Barack Obama's pastor for 20 years at the Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's south side, has endorsed the planned "March to Jerusalem". It follows on the heels of the anti-Israel, anti-Semitic Doha Conference in Qatar, a two day long effort to demonize Israel and deny Judaism's more than three thousand year connection to Jerusalem.

Ceasefire Only Applies to Israel

On Monday, Cairo claimed a ceasefire it brokered had gone into effect. On Tuesday, the Palestinians fired 13 rockets and mortar shells without an Israeli military response. An Iron Dome anti-missile battery intercepted one of the two incoming Grads before it landed in Beersheba. (Maybe it is time to realise that ceasefires with Arabs do not work and to implement a more effective solution to the conflict — the Sinai Option: Road to Permanent Peace

Americans, not Obama, Love the IDF

More than 1.300 business and philanthropic leaders donated $26 million at Friends of the Israel Defence Forces (FIDF) dinner in New York. IDF Chief of Benny Gantz thanked the supporters and told them, "This is very important for us to know that we are not alone."

Hamas Furious Over Lack of Al-Jazeera Coverage

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri wrote on his Facebook page that Al-Jazeera's coverage of events in Gaza showed a "bias against Palestinians". He also described Al-Jazeera's coverage as "downplayed and hashed over," saying they were not taking the story "seriously." (One may wonder, is the terrorism an attention seeking exercise in order to squeeze funds from Iran, Saudi Arabia and others interesting in instability in the Middle East parties?)

Hypocrisy of the Headlines:

"Israel must end impunity of violence by settlers"
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/ middle-east/israel-must-end-impunity-of-violence-by-settlers-7565668.html

— www.independent.co.uk — Really, this is the main cause of the problem. What about tens of thousand of rockets fired from Gaza, endless attacks with knives and stones at Jews perpetrated by Arabs, so-called Palestinians and Israeli ones?

Best and Brightest Compete for Annual Intel Prize


Fifty-six Israeli teenage finalists who carried out 52 different projects in the exact, natural, computer and social sciences and humanities are participating in the 15th annual competition. The development of a patch to give medications via electrical signals through the skin instead of swallowing them; a robotic nurse that hands out drugs to the elderly at the correct time and dosage; determination of the type of forest trees that consume less water are just some of the projects. Winners will be announced at the Knesset.

10 Point Program of the PLO
http://www.un.int/wcm/content/site/palestine/cache/offonce/ pid/12354;jsessionid=ED2AC7E70A82F5C7CCB42BC6357FCDEC

Political Program Adopted at the 12th Session of the Palestine National Council — after the Oslo Agreement! This is still an active plan, which PA, Fatah and Hamas are pursuing!

The Palestine National Council,

On the basis of the Palestine National Charter and the Political Program drawn up at the eleventh session, held from 6-12 January 1997; and from its belief that it is impossible for a permanent and just peace to be established in the area unless our Palestinian people recover from all their national rights (who cares about Jewish rights) and, first and foremost, their rights to return and to self-determination on the whole of the soil of their homeland...:

1. To reaffirm the Palestine Liberation Organisation's previous attitude to Resolution 242 (which Arab rejected), which obliterates the national right of our people and deals with the cause of our people as a problem of refugees. The Council therefore refuses to have anything to do with this resolution at any level, Arab or international, including the Geneva Conference. (Must Israel obey those international resolutions, which do not allow Israel to fight her enemies effectively and to end the conflict?)

2. The Palestine Liberation Organisation will employ all means, and first and foremost armed struggle, to liberate Palestinian territory and to establish the independent combatant national authority for the people over every part of Palestinian territory that is liberated. This will require further changes being effected in the balance of power in favour of our people and their struggle. (This has been successfully implemented)

3. The Liberation Organisation will struggle against any proposal for a Palestinian entity the price of which is recognition, peace, secure frontiers, renunciation of national rights, and the deprival of our people of their right to return and their right to self-determination on the soil of their homeland. (Why does not Israel do this for the Jewish people?)

4. Any step taken towards liberation is a step towards the realisation of the Liberation Organisation's strategy of establishing the democratic Palestinian State (we have seen their kind of democracy) specified in the resolutions of the previous Palestinian National Councils.

5. Struggle along with the Jordanian national forces to establish a Jordanian-Palestinian national front whose aim will be to set up in Jordan a democratic national authority in close contact with the Palestinian entity that is established through the struggle. (it means all Palestine, including Jordan)

6. The Liberation Organisation will struggle to establish unity in struggle between the two peoples and between all the forces of the Arab liberation movement that are in agreement on this program. (Hamas and Fatah are in agreement with the program but far from united, as are most Arabs/Muslims)

7. In the light of this program, the Liberation Organisation will struggle to strengthen national unity and to raise it to the level where it will be able to perform its national duties and tasks (Terror against Israel).

8. Once it is established, the Palestinian national authority will strive to achieve a union of the confrontation countries, with the aim of completing the liberation of all Palestinian territory, and as a step along the road to comprehensive Arab unity. (Interesting that Fatah, claims to be a secular organisation, supportive of creating Islamic caliphate!)

9. The Liberation Organization will strive to strengthen its solidarity with the socialist countries, and with the forces of liberation and progress throughout the world, with the aim of frustrating all the schemes of Zionism, reaction and imperialism. (but, motivated by greed for oil and anti-Semitism, the Western democracies continue to support this hideous movement)

10. In light of this program, the leadership of the revolution will determine the tactics which will serve and make possible the realisation of these objectives.

The Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organisation will make every effort to implement this program, and should a situation arise affecting the destiny and the future of the Palestinian people, the National Assembly will be convened in extraordinary session. (When will Jewish leadership start to talk about the destiny of Jewish people?)

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Laura, March 21, 2012.

This comes from the Commentator website and is archived at
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/1014/anti_zionists_ \must_now_hang_their_heads_in_shame_over_french_jewish_ school_shooting


Barely had the news broken that the appalling killings at a Jewish school in Toulouse earlier this week had been perpetrated by a French Muslim motivated by anti-Zionism than the head of the Grand Mosque in Paris was out in the media calling for the revelation not to lead to the stigmatisation of French Muslims in general. He's right of course. It shouldn't.

Our gripe here is not with what he said, or with him personally, it is with what most Muslim leaders don't say in such circumstances. For it is now clear that the killer was motivated by the same kind of lies about Israeli actions in Gaza that have been peddled and therefore legitimised for years by Muslim leaders in France and across Europe.

Let us be clear. There has not been one single instance, ever, of the Israeli military deliberately targeting Palestinian children in a school in Gaza. Palestinian children have died in the overall conflict of course. But even that indirect responsibility lies with the people who have started all the wars, namely Palestinian terror groups such as Hamas.

That is the incontrovertible truth of the matter. Yet you'd never know it if you listened to Europe's Muslim leaders who have whipped up the kind of hysteria against Israel in which the sort of attack that took place on Monday was always likely to take place.

The Union of Islamic Organisations of France (UOIF) in 2008, for example, spoke of Israel's actions in Gaza in terms of "starving an entire population". That's not far short of an accusation of attempted genocide. In 2003, to quote one of many such instances from the UK, the Muslim Council of Britain openly described Israeli policy towards the Palestinians as "genocide" and made a thinly veiled comparison with the Holocaust.

It's not just the Muslim organisations of course. Mainstream media outlets across the continent have added a further layer of legitimacy to this lethal ideology with papers and magazines such as the Guardian and the New Statesman engaged in what is little better than a hate campaign against the Jewish state.

Still another layer of legitimacy has been added by senior politicians. Only this week, EU foreign policy supremo (and national disgrace) Catherine Ashton approvingly referred to a Palestinian child's description of Gaza as a "prison". Rather than contribute to the edifice of dishonesty, why didn't she tell the Palestinian group she was addressing that peace will only come when their parents stop lying to them and inciting hatred of Jews? (She was misquoted on Toulouse, but that's another matter)

Parliamentarians across Europe have far too often joined in the hate fest. Last week it was the turn of Sigmar Gabriel, leader of Germany's Social Democrats, who slammed Israel for "apartheid", one of the anti-Zionist movement's most common and most dishonest epithets.

No one will ever know whether the tragedy in Toulouse would not have taken place if the atmosphere were different. But we can say that history teaches that mass demonisation can all too easily lead to the dehumanisation of the group or people or nation that is being demonised. From there it is only one single step to the belief that murder itself can be justified.

Muslim leaders, politicians, and journalists who have participated in the agenda of lies and hatred against Israel should today hang their heads in shame.

Contact Laura at LEL817@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, March 21, 2012.

The bodies of the four Jews, one teacher and three children, shot down in Toulouse, France, were brought by El Al to Israel at dawn and laid to rest late this morning in a funeral at Har Hamenuchot cemetery in the Givat Shaul neighbor of Jerusalem. Thousands, mostly French-speaking religious Jews, attended. Because of the intense emotions and the strong sun, some 30 in the crowd collapsed.

Funeral of Toulouse victims (Credit: vosizneias.com)

Knesset Speaker Ruby Rivlin was there, and spoke, as did the two Chief Rabbis of Israel, Shlomo Amar and Yona Metzger, and ministers of the government.

With tears streaming down his face, Chief Sephardi Rabbi Amar told the deceased, "G-d will avenge your deaths." Israel's enemies' hatred of Jews — "Esau's hatred of Jacob" — will never change, he declared.

Minister of Diaspora Affairs Yuli Edelstein alluded to those of "Amalek," who, as in the Torah, "lack both the strength and the courage to face up to us on the field of battle, and so they target the weak and the unprotected among us... They have been able to kill us but they will never destroy us."

There was a feeling of enormous Jewish solidarity with the mourners, who in truth are all of us. Rivlin said Jews around the world were "standing with us today," in shared pain. Edelstein told the families of the victims, "An entire nation embraces you."

Many non-Jews clearly were with us as well. Showing French solidarity, French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe was present and pledged:

"Your grief, your pain is ours too. All of France is in shock.

"We will fight anti-Semitism everywhere in France. Every time a Jew is cursed, attacked, or injured on French territory, we will react. Attacks on French Jews are not just attacks on the Jewish community, but on millions of French citizens who cannot tolerate such behavior."

Let it be so.


Eva Sandler has lost her husband and two sons. A one-year old daughter remains, and she is pregnant. An Israeli citizen, she will not go back to France.

Her words tell us that she is a remarkable soul:

"People ask me what they could to help me, and I tell them, 'The only help I'm requesting is that people should observe the mitzvot [commandments] and cling to the words of the Torah. If this holy audience keeps the mitzvot, I believe that the souls of my children will be accepted in heaven."

(Note: It is a traditional Jewish belief that the souls of the departed are elevated through the good that we do here — study, observance, charity, etc.)

After the funeral she walked to the freshly covered graves, and cried, in French, "Come back home!"

She is shown here with her husband.

Rabbi Sandler and wife (YNet)

I don't have the name of the mother of Miriam Monsonego. But I know a bit about her anguish and that of her husband, Rabbi Yaakov Monsonego, who, it has been reported, both wept inconsolably in the funeral parlor. Miriam was the long-awaited baby of their family, and, according to grown son Avishai Monsonego, had brought much happiness.

According to the Times of Israel, Madame Monsonego arrived at the funeral by ambulance and had to be carried out.

Funeral of Toulouse victims (Credit: Gil Yohanan)

At the funeral Avishai begged G-d to give his parents the strength "to endure the worst trial that can be endured."

"Keep going, keep going, keep going," he implored them.


And so...what Nazi?

Rivlin said it properly at the funeral: "Again we stand before small, silent bodies, before small graves." Again, and again, and again.

Over the centuries, the hatred has remained but the outward identity of our enemies has shifted. Today, our murderers most often are radical Muslims. Thus, the minute we heard about these despicable murders, most of us thought, "Radical Muslim!" I know I did.

But, no, the news said it was suspected that a neo-Nazi was at work this time. OK. That's what I reported.

Now today different information reaches us, and we are not surprised.


Mohammed Merah is a French citizen of Algerian descent. He has spent time in Afghanistan, where he had radical associations — in fact, according to the JPost, he was imprisoned there but helped by the Taliban to break out. Merah says that he is a mujahideen (a term often associated with the Taliban, and signifying dedication to jihad) and belongs to al-Qaeda. As I write, he is holed up in an apartment in Toulouse, and has been under siege by the police since the small hours of the morning.

Police seem certain he is the Toulouse murderer. Reported French Interior Minister Claude Gueant, "He wanted revenge for the Palestinian children and he also wanted to take revenge on the French army because of its foreign interventions."

Are we surprised? Hardly.


Reports coming out are a bit confused. He threw out one gun to the police, but was known to have other weapons — a rifle, a machine gun. He said he would surrender in the afternoon, but subsequently contact with him was cut, and then re-established. Some of his relatives have been arrested. The apartment building he is in has been evacuated and there is talk that special forces may storm his apartment. A report that he has been taken into custody has been denied by the police.

We'll know how this ends soon enough.


I received a communication this morning from a friend who lives in Paris. She wrote in part that, "Of course all the politicians are out to reassure the Muslims that this will have no impact on the Muslim community!" And, indeed, I, myself, picked up in at least one news release some such words of reassurance from members of the French government.

But — if indeed Merah is guilty of the Toulouse murders and apparently others — this incident cannot be dismissed as an aberration, a case of one kook who was influenced by evil associates in a far-off place. The enemy, which is certainly radical Islam, must be named. There are, without a shadow of a doubt, a good many radical Muslims in France, and neighborhoods where the French police are afraid to operate. It's time to talk about these things, and the consequences of turning a blind eye to radicalism.


There is a great deal to report — including the fact that the Israeli Ambassador to Egypt has reportedly flown out. Tomorrow I will return to other news and analysis.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, March 21, 2012.

Elite French police are engaged in a gunfight this moment at a four-story building with the suspected Toulouse murderer, who is of Algerian origin and is linked with Al Qaeda.

One police officer suffered serious wounds, and two others were wounded lightly. The suspect is a 24-year-old Muslim who French officials said has travelled to Pakistan and Afghanistan. Police brought his mother to his apartment building, but she said she was unable to convince her son to surrender. The apartment is relatively close to the Otzar HaTorah Jewish day school, where the terrorist shot his victims.

The suspect is armed with a high-caliber rifle, and he announced he would not surrender alive. Simultaneously, police searched for and arrested the brother of the suspect, who reportedly was in the house when the raid began.

He told authorities that he and his brother carried out the murders of the three French soldiers in Montauban and of the Jews at the Toulouse day school to protest the deaths of Gaza terrorists and France's involvement with the war on terror in Afghanistan.

French Interior Minister Claude Gueant is at the scene of the raid, which began a few minutes after 4 a.m. Israel time, as the neighborhood was sealed off. He said that the police want to capture the suspect alive so he can stand trial, but other French sources said that police may decide to kill the man and end the operation.

Terror has also hit Paris, where an explosion was heard at a foreign embassy. No injuries were reported.

France is in shock over the serial murders of French soldiers and Rabbi Yonatan Sandler, his two young sons and the little daughter of the principal of the Otzar HaTorah school in Toulouse on Tuesday. Their bodies have been flown to Israel, where they are to be buried in Jerusalem at 10 a.m. Wednesday.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy commented, "When you grab a little girl to put a bullet in her head, without leaving her any chance, you are a monster. An anti-Semitic monster, but first of all a monster.'

Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today.

To Go To Top

Posted by Israel Hayom, March 21, 2012.
by Boaz Bismuth, Nitzi Yakov, Yehuda Shlezinger, Eli Leon and Yori Yalon

Israel Hayom's special correspondent to Toulouse reports from the city after Monday's shooting attack at a Jewish school that left four dead; Jews from across France descend on Toulouse to support the Jewish community.

Stunned parents and children in Toulouse, Monday. (AFP)
TOULOUSE — The Jews of Toulouse in southern France had so little to fear that six months ago they decided they did not need a guard at the entrance to the Ozar Hatorah Jewish day school. "Everyone thought the security cameras and the iron door were enough," a Jewish resident of the city told Israel Hayom on Monday. A little after 8 a.m. that day, their confidence turned out to be exaggerated, and gave way to deep shock.

An anonymous, black-clad gunman on a motorcycle stopped near the school as the students were entering, and opened fire on them with an automatic rifle. He did not stop shooting until his weapon jammed, then he replaced it with a revolver.

Toulouse prosecutor Michel Valet said the man "shot at everything that moved," chasing down some of the children and even grabbing a little girl by the hair and executing her. Soon afterward the shooter got back onto his motorcycle, believed to be a Yamaha, and fled the scene, leaving behind four bodies, three of them children.

The dead are Rabbi Yonatan Sandler, 30, his two sons, Aryeh, 6, and Gavriel, 3, and Miriam Montesango, the 8-year-old daughter of the school's principal. The four were standing on the sidewalk near the entrance to the school when the shooting started.

Miriam Monsenego, whom Mohammed Merah grabbed by the hair before he fired a bullet into her head, filming the execution.
"I saw two bodies at the entrance to the school, including those of two small children," said one eyewitness. "It was appalling." In addition, a 17-year-old student was seriously wounded in the attack.

'We ran to the basement'

Dozens of panicked parents rushed to the school after hearing of the shooting. One was Hagit Ben Shaul, whose son Jonas is a student there. "My sister called me and said she feared that all the children in the school had died," Ben Shaul said. "She was hysterical and said she had seen my son. I rushed to the school, and when I got there I saw police and ambulances. We waited at the entrance to the school and saw the bodies lying there. They wouldn't let us see our children. We only had phone contact with them. They were with several teachers who didn't want them to come outside and see the bodies."

"We were in the synagogue and suddenly we heard shooting," Jonas, Ben Shaul's son, said. "We went out the back door and ran with to the basement with the rabbi. I did not see the motorcyclist, just heard shots. All of my friends were in shock and couldn't speak. I was afraid, but there were others who were even more afraid than me."

At this stage, the motive for the attack remains unclear. Police believe that one of the guns used by the shooter was also used to murder three French soldiers, two of whom were Muslim, in two attacks that took place in Toulouse and nearby Montauban last week.

"A murderer is loose in our midst," Pierre, a local bus driver, said on Monday. "Last week it was the paratroopers, then it was a soldier dressed in civilian clothing. They were all North African or black, and now, it's the Jewish school. Until they find him, we will all live in fear."

Meanwhile, Ozar Hatorah is attempting to recover from the shock. "School will not open tomorrow [Tuesday]," the school's vice principal Chaim Sabag said on Monday night, while trying to organize accommodation for the many Jews who had arrived from around France as a show of solidarity with the community. "I am very concerned that many students will leave the school because parents have already told me they are afraid to send their children to a Jewish school in France."

Following the incident, French Interior Minister Claude Gueant instructed the police to increase surveillance of Jewish schools. At 11:00 a.m. Tuesday all schools in France will observe a moment of silence in memory of the victims.

French President Nicholas Sarkozy visited the Ozar Hatorah school a few hours after the incident on Monday. "We must not retreat in the face of terror," Sarkozy said. "This is a day of national tragedy. They weren't just your children, but all of ours." The president also revealed that about 120 police officers had been assigned to investigate the incident.

France's Jewish community reacts

Understandably, members of the Jewish community in Toulouse had trouble understanding what had happened. "We're not used to events like this. It's absolutely terrifying what happened here," Yosef Germain, a leading community activist, said on Monday.

"There isn't a daily fear of anti-Semitism in the city," said Germain, "although there is a fear in the back of our minds. We hear about incidents of anti-Semitism in France. Especially after what happened to Ilan Halimi [a 23-year-old French Jew, was kidnapped, tortured and killed] six years ago, we've been more on edge, but we're not afraid to wear a kippah on the street or walk to the synagogue."

About 30,000 Jews live in Toulouse. According to Noga Raviv, an Israeli who has been living in the city for eight years, until now, there has been no real fear. "Everyone here is in shock at the awful attack," she said. "Jews are always walking around Toulouse in typical Jewish dress and nothing happens to them."

Yonatan Tal, a frequent guest in the home of the murdered rabbi, painted a different picture. "It is not very safe to walk around wearing a kippah," he said. "There have been times when people called me a dirty Jew; usually it was Muslims and foreigners from Africa. Most observant Jews prefer to wear a hat."

"We have no hatred, anger or desire for revenge," Marc Schulman, a resident of Toulouse, said. "There is fear, but above all there is the feeling of helplessness. It is not acceptable for children to wake up in the morning, go to school and be shot to death just for being Jewish. When such terrorist acts take place in places like Norway, we think, that's awful, but it is far away. When it hits closer to home, it's different. The state is helping us with security, but the problem with terrorist attacks is that no one can anticipate them."

On Monday, a memorial ceremony was held in the Synagogue de Nazareth in central Paris for those killed in the attack. French President Nicholas Sarkozy took part in the ceremony, along with Socialist presidential candidate Francois Hollande.

This article is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Marion DS Dreyfus, March 20, 2012.

In mid-March some 70 or 80 NYC locals traveled to Yonkers to attend an event aimed at raising awareness and monies for the tragic wreck of Har HaZeitim in Jerusalem. There seemed to be no shul closer than that of the faraway though terrific Rabbi Rigoberto Emmanuel Vinas' place in the double highway-edged Lincoln Park Jewish Center, on Central Park Avenue, in Yonkers 10704, that would host this peaceful, if mournfully sad, congregation of adult Jews outraged that the Israeli government annually permits hundreds of grave desecrations against this most holy cemetery, where past Israeli Prime ministers are buried, and the greats of our people are interred.

It has not a single policeman or even A cemetery GATE! Think of a single cemetery in the United States that does not have sturdy gates to keep people out after hours — you won't find one. Not to mention cameras in key loci, to prevent malevolent passersby, often arabs, from at will climbing and abusing our holy greats buried there. I have been to Jerusalem's up-to-the-second police HQ, and it is like a Hollyweird set for thousands of camera eyes in the sky — there is nowhere in the Old City that is not captured and traced on thousands of these cunning police surveilling eyes everywhere.

Yet on the holiest burial site in the world, not a camera. not a single camera to catch the paid miscreants (Shekels 1,000 to overturn tombstones and burial stones, paid by the Waqf) who depredate at will, every day.

All kovod (respect) to Rabbi Vinas for so valiantly hosting our event.

I could barely sit still for grief. And the money we gave, whatever money could have been collected from some 70-80 people from Manhattan and the nearby boroughs, could not amount to much — but it is a shaming tell against the Israeli government secularists, who clearly do not give a moldy knish about safeguarding our now-deceased greats. Disrespect that is echoed at practically every Jewish holy site.

Speakers included Rabbi Vinas, a moving word-picture of the grievous state of the Mount of Olives under the present oblivious Knesset, Rabbi Jay Schoulson (Sons of Israel, Long Island City), Menachem Lubinsky (Co-Chair, International committee for the Preservation of Har HaZeitim), a strong 10-minute video presentation (of vandalism on the Mount) by the ICPHH Mission to Har HaZeitim/Jerusalem Great Synagogue Forum), the heartfelt words of the indefatigable Helen Freedman (Executive director of Americans for a Safe Israel), Abe Lubinsky (Chair of the International Committee for the Preservation of Har HaZeitim), words by Congressman Eliot Engel, and closing remarks again by Rabbi Shoulson.

Stone-throwing and worse is a given if one tries to go to a gravesite, visit Kever (the grave of) Rochel, or even spend a peaceful weekend attending the M'ora Ha'Machpaella in Hebron. The world stood by silent as the Grave of Joseph was desecrated and razed by Palestinian thugs, who paid no heed to past promises to keep it inviolate, indeed erecting a contaminating mosque atop the ruins. When the ancient statues of Bamiyan, carved in 507 ACE and 554 ACE, these monumental 6th century statues of upright Buddhas carved into a cliffside 140 miles or so off northwest Kabul in the Bamyan (thus the nomenclature of Bamiyan statues) of central Afghanistan. Once sitting at an altitude of 1½ miles, 2,500 meters up (8202 feet), these religious symbols, represented a classical blended style of fabled Gandhara Art, and they were priceless.

In today's terms, they were worth millions — and several billionaires and slightly lesser financial wizards offered to dismantle, pack and ship them to their countries. No dice. They were blown up by fanatics oblivious to their priceless value from antiquity, the world lamented and bitterly resisted, some groups offering millions to redeem and transplant the millennial statuary from their ancient site to elsewhere, safe from the depredations of islamists impatient with competing religious symbology.

Nothing was done. The ageless classicism of these millennial sculptures was unceremoniously blown to smithereens without apology or recrimination from the primitives executing their rival Deities. The same way nothing is done to raze illegal mosques on Israeli-owned land near the Redemption Gate, and nothing is done to unseal the various approaches to the Golden Gates where the Messiah will reputedly come, virtually nothing, too, is done to defend these holy places.

How disconcerting we had to go all the way to Yonkers. That no one else wanted to host us.

All around, one sees determined and encroaching self-delusional dhimmitude. Tragic is not the half of it.

Marion Dreyfus is a writer and travelor; she has taught English in China on the university level. She can be contacted at dreyfusmarion@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, March 20, 2012.

Let's start today with a report from the Stonegate Institute written by Soeren Kern, Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Strategic Studies Group based in Madrid (with thanks to Micki L):

"The United States ambassador to Spain recently met with a group of Muslim immigrants in one of the most Islamized neighborhoods of Barcelona to apologize for American foreign policymaking in the Middle East.

"U.S. Ambassador Alan Solomont told Muslims assembled at the town hall-like meeting in the heart of Barcelona's old city that the United States is not an 'enemy of Islam' and that U.S. President Barack Obama wants to improve America's image in the Middle East as quickly as possible by closing the 'dark chapters' of the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the war in Afghanistan.

"'There are things that the United States has done badly,' Solomont said at the February 28 gathering organized by a non-profit organization called the Cultural, Educational and Social Association of Pakistani Women. 'But now the Obama government wants to improve relations with Muslims,' he promised."


Alan Solomont? A founder of JStreet and a key fundraiser for Obama (which is undoubtedly how he achieved the ambassadorship).


But Soeren tell us more:

"In Ireland...the U.S. Embassy in Dublin recently sponsored a seminar ostensibly designed to help Muslim immigrants increase their influence within the Irish business and financial communities.

"The opening speech at the event was delivered by Imam Hussein Halawa of the Islamic Cultural Center of Ireland, despite the fact that leaked U.S. State Department cables show that the U.S. government has known for many years that Malawa is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and serves as the right-hand man of the radical Egyptian cleric Yusuf al-51; Qaradawi. (Emphasis added)

"Halawa, an Egyptian immigrant who has dedicated his life to the cause of introducing Islamic Sharia law in Europe, told those in attendance that the main purpose of the conference was to bring the Irish banking system into conformity with Islamic legal principles. U.S. Ambassador Dan Rooney, a lifelong Republican turned Obama acolyte, said at the same conference that the United States was a 'solid partner' behind Halawa's venture. (Emphasis added)

"...In France, the U.S. Embassy in Paris co-sponsored a seminar to teach Muslims in France how they can politically organize themselves. Operatives from the Democratic Party coached 70 Muslim 'diversity leaders' from disaffected Muslim-majority suburban slums known as banlieues on how to develop a communications strategy, raise funds and build a political base.

"The French government — which has been trying to reverse the pernicious effects of decades of state-sponsored multiculturalism — expressed dismay at what it called 'meddling.'

"...In Norway, where Muslim immigrants already have more rights than native Norwegians, the U.S. Embassy in Oslo organized a 'dialogue meeting' designed to 'empower' Muslim immigrant women in the country.

"According to the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten, Obama's special envoy to the Muslim world, Farah Pandith, castigated the Norwegian government's integration policies as being insufficiently fair to Muslim immigrants. She also told Norwegians that Muslims are 'more free to practice Islam in the United States than in any other country in the world.' Conservative Party leader Erna Solberg said Norway has much to learn from the Americans.

"In Britain, U.S. embassy employees in London frequently conduct outreach to help 'empower' the Muslims across the country. According to a leaked U.S. diplomatic cable, for example, Ambassador Louis Susman 'engages with U.K. Muslim communities regularly...he has spoken to Muslim groups in Wales and Scotland, visited the London Central Mosque, and hosted an interfaith breakfast at his residence, among other activities.'

"Susman has come under fire for visiting another London mosque, namely the East London Mosque, which is one of the most extreme Islamic institutions in Britain. Built with money from Saudi Arabia to propagate Wahhabi Islam, the sprawling facility is home to the London Muslim Center, which the U.S. government has long known is a haven for Islamic extremists. During his visit, Susman spoke of his 'great admiration' for the mosque and his enthusiasm for meeting its staff." (Emphasis added)
http://www.stonegateinstitute.org/2916/ state-department-promoting-islam-europe


Not enough, however, that your head should spin on reading this material. It is essential to share it broadly. Let those who would vote for Obama understand precisely what they would be voting for.


And then we have EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, who yesterday noted the horrific murder of four Jews, three of them children, in front of a school in Toulouse, with these words:

"We remember young people who have been killed in all sorts of terrible circumstances — the Belgian children having lost their lives in a terrible tragedy [in a bus accident last week in Switzerland], and when we think of what happened in Toulouse today, when we remember what happened in Norway a year ago, when we know what is happening in Syria, when we see what is happening in Gaza and in different parts of the world — we remember young people and children who lose their lives."

It is difficult not to draw the conclusion from these words that she was comparing the deliberate and cold-blooded (see more below) murder of kids in front of a school with Israel's acts of self defense against rockets aimed from Gaza at Israeli civilians, including children.

The organization StandWithUs is demanding that Ashton either apologize or resign. StandWithUS France Director Laurent Preece has it right, I think, when he calls her statement "pandering." She was attending a meeting with Palestinian youth in Brussels when she made her comment.

Ashton is now saying she didn't intend to draw a comparison. As The Israel Project puts it, she is "backpedaling furiously." But such comments, made without careful thought for fallout, can be very revealing.


The four slain in Toulouse yesterday are to be buried here in Israel. Rabbi Yonatan Sandler, who was French born, studied here in Jerusalem before returning to France to teach. It was his hope to ultimately return to Israel with his family.

The last of the four to be killed yesterday was eight-year-old Miriam Monsonego. The murderer, after having shot the others, got off his motorbike, chased into the crowd, caught her and shot her in the head. This horrendous act was caught on a security camera.

"He assassinated them as if he was killing animals," said Nicola Yardeni, the regional president of the French Jewish umbrella group CRIF, cited by the Telegraph.

"You see a man park his motorcycle, start to shoot, enter the school grounds and chase children to catch one and shoot a bullet into her head. It's unbearable to watch. He was looking to kill."

Miriam Monsonego (Credit: Flash 90)

This? I'm not sure it makes the head spin. Rather, you look at the picture of this child, understand what happened to her, and it makes the heart stop for a moment.


There are no certainties yet, but in connection with the murders, police are searching for three former French paratroopers who reportedly were discharged after a picture of them was discovered with a swastika, their arms raised in a nazi salute.

The sincerity of French officials with regard to the grief they feel over this, and their intention of catching those responsible seems beyond question.

However, protestations that they are shocked that it could have happened ring a bit hollow.


Hamas official Ismail al-Ashqar, who has advocated terrorism against Israel, was scheduled yesterday to give testimony on the situation in Gaza to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. Don't try to make sense of this, for we are, after all, talking about the notoriously anti-Israel HRC.

After Israeli Ambassador to the UN in Geneva Aharon Leshno-Yaar registered a complaint, the testimony was cancelled and al-Ashqar, who was already in the building — in order to make a presentation at an event organized by the UN-accredited NGO Maarij Foundation for Peace and Development (MFPD) — was asked to leave.

Al-Ashqar's testimony was to be received in the context of a "general debate" on the human rights situation in "Palestine and other occupied Arab territories" that the Human Rights Council has opened. Rest assured the Council will not be investigating the deprivation of human rights visited upon Palestinian Arabs by UNRWA, Hamas or the PA.

They are, however, talking about sending a fact-finding mission here, to look at "settlements" and construction in eastern Jerusalem and how these impinge on the "civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian people."

Israel, which is being called upon to cooperate, most certainly will not, should this come to pass — which is dubious at present.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Ted Belman, March 20, 2012.

This was written by Joseph Curl and it appeared in the Washington Times
(http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/18/ curl-game-change-a-made-up-narrative-from-2-axe-gr/?page=1).

Joseph Curl covered the White House and politics for a decade for The Washington Times. He can be reached at jcurl@washingtontimes.com.


From watching "Game Change," this much is clear: (1) Steve Schmidt is an absolutely brilliant campaign strategist who gave Sen. John McCain the idea to put "Country First" (it had never occurred to the war hero); and (2) Nicolle Wallace is a demure, yet quietly ingenious, media savant who can handle any crisis.

Oh, but wait: Mr. Schmidt ran one of the worst campaigns in the history of presidential elections, losing to a first-term senator from Illinois with no experience governing anything, and Ms. Wallace let the entire message of the McCain campaign be overrun by — "Saturday Night Live"?

I spent a year of my life on the McCain campaign, and I can tell you this: Nuh uh. "Game Change" is a ridiculous farce of a movie — even more absurd as a chronicle of a major historical event — that appears to have been written mostly by Mr. Schmidt and Ms. Wallace, two players who have major axes to grind with the higher-ups of the McCain campaign.

Mr. Schmidt was a longtime loser when he entered the McCain campaign, losing race after race — he served as communications director for Lamar (Lamar!) Alexander's pitiful run for president: Need we say more?

Ms. Wallace took a similar path, starting out in California politics, then switching to Florida. Like Mr. Schmidt, she worked in the George W. Bush White House before joining the McCain campaign. I was covering the White House at the same time; she wasn't much of a force there, either.

Privately, she got crosswise with Sarah Palin almost immediately after joining the campaign, although publicly, she was all aboard. What's Mrs. Palin like on the trail?: "She works harder than anyone I've known in politics," Ms. Wallace said. "She'll go until 1 or 2 in the morning, and she's up again at the crack of dawn."

Yet Ms. Wallace appeared on MSNBC (now also a homestay for Mr. Schmidt), to tell a different story: She was in shock just "how close we came to having somebody a heartbeat away from the presidency so fundamentally unprepared and unsuited for the job," noting that (Poor Nicolle!) it was "the most traumatic experience to realize that they were working on behalf of somebody who — it's an open question whether she is fit to serve, I certainly don't think she was."

Now, just to jump back a bit, back to that bus I spent so many days of my life on. The campaign handled Mrs. Palin all wrong: She was (is) a major force — major. She is (brace yourself) brilliant — but brilliant in the way no other candidate has been since (brace yourself again) Ronald Reagan. Sitting down with Katie Couric? All wrong. Mrs. Palin should have been out more, especially with regional press. I was aboard her plane a dozen times; never saw her, never asked her a single question.

Was she qualified to be president when she was picked for vice president? Maybe not. But also, maybe so. She's a normal person — she gets it, America. Trouble making ends meet? She's been there. Having a hard time raising your kids? Tell me about it. Everything you're going through, she's gone through.

And her mind is a steel trap. I watched her from beginning to end. Yes, an Alaska governor doesn't know much about the Korean Peninsula (nor does an Arkansas or Texas governor, for that matter). But man, what a quick study she was. I followed every second up to and including her St. Louis debate with Joe Biden, and she dominated the Washington veteran who made his career on being a foreign-policy expert.

But "Game Change" fits the mainstream media narrative, one now being sold by the two former McCain aides. She was patently unfit to serve as vice president, but wasn't Barack Obama patently unfit to be president? Certainly seems so; wouldn't we all be better off now if Mr. McCain (shockingly still alive) and Mrs. Palin had won in 2008?

The HBO biopic is notably nice to Mrs. Palin — she seems OK, loves her kids, isn't a creationist wacko. But it's the subtle digs that kill: She thinks the queen runs the United Kingdom, thinks "Saddam" was responsible for 9/11. And there was this shouted question from a faux reporter: "What about the allegations that Trig is not really your child?"

The MSM gobbled it up. "I have little doubt that what shows up on the screen reflects what really happened," wrote David Horsey of the Los Angeles Times.

But one thing is clear: The Obama team is terrified of Sarah Palin. Why else commission a movie from his buddies at HBO about a woman who's not even running for office?

She is still a serious force. And no fool, she. Not to be obscure here, but you're about to find out her true power.

Ted Belman is a retired lawyer and the Editor of Israpundit. He made aliya from Canada last year and now lives in Jerusalem, Israel. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, March 20, 2012.

This was written by Jerome R. Corsi, a Harvard Ph.D. and a WND senior staff reporter. He has authored many books, including No. 1 N.Y. Times best-sellers "The Obama Nation" and "Unfit for Command." Corsi's latest book is "Where's the REAL Birth Certificate?"
the article was entitled


CHICAGO — Did the parents of former Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers help finance Barack Obama's Harvard education?

Did Ayers' mother believe Obama was a foreign student?

And was the young Obama convinced at the time — long before he even entered politics — that he was going to become president of the United States?

A retired U.S. Postal Service carrier who delivered mail to Tom and Mary Ayers in a Chicago suburb in the late 1980s and early 1990s and claims to have met Obama in front of the Ayers home emphatically says yes to all three questions.

Allen Hulton, who was commended for 39 years of honorable service with the USPS, has given a sworn affidavit to investigators commissioned by Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio to determine whether Obama is eligible for Arizona's 2012 election ballot. Hulton has recorded about three hours of video interviews with WND.

Hulton says that in conversations with Mary Ayers while on his route he learned of the couple's enthusiasm and support for a black foreign student. One bright, warm Chicagoland day, he recounts, he met the student who fit Mary Ayers' description in front of the Ayers home in Glen Ellyn, Ill. That young man, Hulton is convinced, was Barack Obama.

Hulton delivered mail to the Ayers, who are both deceased, when he was stationed at the post office in Glen Ellyn, an upper-middle class suburb 25 miles west of downtown Chicago, from late 1986 to 1997. He was a USPS employee from March 28, 1962, through March 30, 2001. (Editor's note: Although the Ayers family no longer lives there, WND is withholding the Glen Ellyn street address for the sake of the current residents' privacy.)

"It was a beautiful neighborhood — one of the nicer routes any of the letter carriers would have liked to have had," Hulton recalls. "It had some large and very beautiful homes."

As WND reported yesterday, Obama's relationship with Bill Ayers — whom he dismissed in a 2008 debate as "just a guy who lives in my neighborhood" — plagued him in the 2008 presidential campaign and could resurface in this year's election, as many questions remain.

Young Obama

Over a period of years in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Hulton estimates he spoke with Mary Ayers about 18 to 20 times and once to Tom Ayers, who died in 2007. Mary Ayers died in 2000.

"Sometimes Mary would be out when I delivered the mail, and we would exchange a few words on occasion," he says, recalling that she liked to talk about her family.

"One day, Mary came to the door when I came up to the house with the mail," he remembers. "After a greeting, she started enthusiastically talking to me about this young black student they were helping out, and she referred to him as a foreign student."

Hulton assumed that by "helping" the student, Mary Ayers meant she and her husband were financially supporting the black foreign-exchange student with his education.

See excerpts of Jerome Corsi's interviews with Allen Hulton:

He says that Mary Ayers told him the student's name, but that it was a "strange name" that he could not remember, even though at the time it sounded African to him.

"I was taken aback by how enthusiastic she was about him," Hulton says. "And I believe she said he was from either Kenya or Indonesia, and I favor Indonesia in my recollection."

WND has reported that when Obama was in Indonesia with his Indonesian stepfather and his mother from ages 6 to10, he was registered in school as an Indonesian citizen and a Muslim. He went by the name Barry Soetoro, adopting the surname of his Indonesian stepfather. His mother's passport listed him with the surname Soebarkah.

Obama refuses to waive privacy rights that would allow the Hawaii Department of Health to release any adoption records that may exist for him.

Even should Obama waive privacy rights, the Hawaii Department of Health might not feel compelled to release any adoption records that may exist. Tight restrictions to vital records have been enacted by the Hawaii State Legislature to seal any public documents pertaining to Obama's birth records and his adoption status.

If Obama were adopted by his Indonesian stepfather, he may have compromised his eligibility to be president, according to Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution, which requires that a president be a "natural-born citizen," which experts say means having both parents be U.S. citizens.

'I'm going to be president of the United States'

About a year after discussing with Mary Ayers the foreign student she and her husband were supporting, Hulton recalls meeting a young black male on the sidewalk in front of the Ayers home.

Hulton describes the man as being in his early 20s, noting that he was tall, thin, had a light complexion and that his ears stuck out.

"He greeted me," Hulton says. "He was very polite, dressed nicely, but informally — slacks and a dress shirt — and he spoke with no accent. Immediately this young black man entered into conversation with me. He told me he had taken the train out from Chicago and had come to thank the Ayers family personally for having helped him with his education."

Hulton remembers asking the young man what his plans were for the future.

"He looked right at me and told me he was going to be president of the United States," Hulton says.

"There was a little bit of a grin on his face when he said it — he sounded sure of himself, but not arrogant. I know how people will say things because they have an ambition, but it did not come across that way," Hulton says. "It came across as if this young black male was telling me he was going to be president, almost as if it were the statement of a scientific fact that had already been determined, as if his being president had been already pre-arranged."

Hulton says the claim made him speechless.

"I kind of stuttered a response and said that nowadays anything is possible. I wished him good luck with his ambition," he says.

Immediately, Hulton associated the young black man with the foreign student Mary Ayers had mentioned to him so enthusiastically about a year earlier.

"I remembered the conversation I had with Mary, and I associated this young man with the foreign student she had discussed with me, because Mary said they were supporting this foreign student, and the young black man I met outside the Ayers' home said he had come to Glen Ellyn to thank the Ayers in person for helping him with his education."

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Hulton observed several news reports detailing the relationship between Obama and Bill Ayers, and he recalled the encounter with the young man in front of Tom and Mary Ayers' home.

"The facial and physical characteristics, as well as candidate Obama's voice, matched that of the young black male I met in front of the Ayers' home," Hulton says in the affidavit he signed Nov. 12, 2011, for Sheriff Arpaio's Cold Case Posse investigation.

"I am positive that the black male I spoke with in front of the Ayers' house that day was indeed a young Barack Obama."

Hulton distinctly recalls that the day he met Obama in front of the Ayers' residence was a warm, sunny day and that Obama wasn't wearing a jacket.


Hulton recalls that he had one conversation with Tom Ayers, who was retired as CEO and chairman of Commonwealth Edison, shortly after the Ayers family moved into their home in Glen Ellyn.

"He asked me how I liked my job, and he started into what seemed to me a Marxist viewpoint on what it is like for the working man, trying to convince me that working people like me were exploited by their employers," Hulton remembers of the conversation.

"As an American citizen, I appreciated everything I had, and I was not at war with people who had more than I had," he says. "It surprised me to hear somebody who had been president of Consolidated Edison talking in these terms."

Hulton says he got the feeling that Tom Ayers thought he knew more about the plight of the workingman than he did.

Summer 1989

A likely timeframe for Hulton's alleged encounter with Obama is the summer of 1989, when Obama was an intern at the Chicago law firm Sidley Austin, after his first year at Harvard Law School.

Hulton says Obama mentioned to him taking the train. The Metra, a commuter from downtown Chicago, stops at a Glen Ellyn station a little more than a mile from the Ayers' residence.

Michelle Robinson, Obama's wife-to-be, was the attorney at the firm assigned to mentor Obama in the summer of 1989.

Bill Ayers' wife, Bernardine Dohrn, also had worked as a paralegal at Sidley Austin, from 1984 through 1988. Dohrn's 1960s radical activities as a self-described "revolutionary communist" landed her on the FBI's list of 10 most wanted fugitives, and because of her felony conviction, she was not allowed to take the Illinois bar exam.

Widely speculated in Chicago is that Dohrn got the job at Sidley Austin through the influence of her father-in-law, Thomas Ayers, who was one of the law firm's biggest clients.

Michelle Obama started at the firm in the summer of 1988 and remained there until 1991.

Hulton recalls meeting Dohrn at the home of her in-laws, although his encounters with her were limited to having Dohrn sign for mail addressed to her.

First reported in 2009

Hulton's account of meeting Obama in suburban Chicago was first reported by California lawyer and political scientist Stephen Diamond in September 2009.

Writing on his blog, Diamond reported that he had interviewed Hulton at length and considered his account credible.

"The statement by Hulton is the first eyewitness account of a possible relationship between Obama and Tom Ayers and the first that dates his relationship with the Ayers family to the mid-1980s," Diamond wrote.

As early as Oct. 13, 2008, prior to the November 2008 presidential election, Diamond had reported that Obama's relationship with the Ayers family dated back to 1988. At that time, Obama, as head of the Developing Communities Project, joined the Alliance for Better Chicago Schools, the ABCs Coalition. The lobbying alliance aimed to push through Chicago public schools the creation of "Local School Councils," or LSCs, to oversee teachers and administrators.

"The proposal was very controversial, and groups like Operation PUSH headed by Jesse Jackson did not support it, because many teachers were black — it was one of the first stable middle class careers a black person, and black women in particular, could aspire to in Chicago," Diamond wrote.

Tom Ayers and Bill Ayers were strong supporters of the LSCs, however, according to Diamond, and Chicago United, a group founded by Tom Ayers, joined ABCs too. Bill Ayers became chairman of ABCs.

Knew Ayers' brother

Hulton was in the same class as Tim Ayers, Bill Ayers' brother, at Glenbard High School in Glen Ellyn. Although he did not know Bill Ayers, Hulton thought he might have met him at the parents' home once or twice, but he could not say for certain.

Hulton attended Glenbard, now known as Glenbard West, for four years, but did not have enough credits to graduate. He later earned a GED while in military service. Taking leave from the USPS when he was drafted into the U.S. Army in 1965, Hulton returned to work as a mailman following his honorable discharge in 1967.

While in the Army, he was assigned to a Pershing Ballistics Missile unit in Germany. Although the Vietnam War was being fought at the time, he was never assigned to Vietnam.

Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il Go to to see more of his graphic art at

To Go To Top

Posted by John Lillpop, March 20, 2012.

On March 29, 2011, President Obama addressed the nation and unleashed a blast of his world-class, soaring rhetoric to justify military action in Libya, a nation in conflict, but where said conflict did not involve any national interest, direct or indirect, of these United States.

Obama's exact words from that date:

"Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action."

Obama's high-minded, conscience-driven rhetoric from nearly a year ago seems to have gone missing with respect to atrocities in Syria where the regime of President Bashar al-Assad has killed more than 8,000 Syrian rebels.

The war in Syria intensified significantly with the arrival of soldiers and weapons from Russia, sent to help Assad commit genocide against Syrian rebels.

As reported by ABC News

A Russian military unit has arrived in Syria, according to Russian news reports, a development that a United Nations Security Council source told ABC News was "a bomb" certain to have serious repercussions.

Russia, one of President Bashar al-Assad's strongest allies despite international condemnation of the government's violent crackdown on the country's uprising, has repeatedly blocked the United Nations Security Council's attempts to halt the violence, accusing the U.S. and its allies of trying to start another war.

Now the Russian Black Sea fleet's Iman tanker has arrived in the Syrian port of Tartus on the Mediterranean Sea with an anti-terror squad from the Russian Marines aboard according to the Interfax news agency. The Assad government has insisted it is fighting a terrorist insurgency. The Russian news reports did not elaborate on the Russian troops' mission in Syria or if they are expected to leave the port.

The presence of Russian troops in Syria could be a "pretty obvious" show of support to the regime, according to Russian security expert Mark Galeotti."

As Syrian rebels are slaughtered in the streets, President Obama fills his days and nights with fundraising events to raise campaign cash and with other political actions focused on the November elections.

Once again, this failed president has sent a loud and clear message to the world: America is no longer a moral and military leader and cannot be relied on to speak out for justice and freedom!

John W. Lillpop lives in San Jose, California. Contact him at johnlillpop@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Shamrak, March 19, 2012.

Egypt Revising the Camp David Accords

by Jonathan D. Halevi

On March 12, 2012, Dr. Mohamed Al-Saed Idris, Chairman of the Arab Affairs Committee in the new Egyptian Parliament, presented the committee's official outline of Egypt's regional policy.

The committee's operative recommendations called for an official definition of Israel as an enemy, severing diplomatic relations, full support for the armed struggle against Israel, re-adoption of the total boycott of Israel, raising the issue of Jerusalem in the international arena, and a review of Egyptian nuclear policy.

In its eyes, Israel is the foremost enemy of Egypt and the Arab and Islamic world, and the peace agreement with it (the Camp David agreement) is considered a dead letter.

Egypt is setting itself on a collision course with Israel, using the Palestinian issue in all its aspects — including Israeli military operations against Palestinian terrorism as well as Israeli policy in Jerusalem or the West Bank — as an excuse for direct Egyptian intervention.

Defining Israel as a "major enemy" means building a military capability to deal with the "Israeli threat," including an attempt to deny Israel any advantage in the nuclear field and/or the development of Egyptian nuclear weapons.

At present, the new Egyptian political leadership cannot translate these policies into actions. But this situation is likely to change after the presidential elections on May 23-24 and the establishment of a new civilian government. (It is a well know secret that any agreement Arabs sign with Israel is just tactical maneuvering in preparation for the next war!)

Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak

The current state of Jewish communities and Israel reminds me a Soviet era joke: "I need a medical specialist — what I hear, I can't see; what I see, I can't talk about; when I talk about it, nobody wants to hear." Disunity, assimilation, lack of a national goal and absence of leadership are existentially eroding our future. Does anyone care?

No Truce if Terrorism is Disallowed

The combined Egyptian-Israeli-Hamas effort to negotiate an early ceasefire in the current round of Palestinian-Israeli violence ran into the ground Monday, March 12. The Egyptian mediator tried unsuccessfully to introduce a clause obliging Palestinian terrorists to withdraw from Sinai and stop using the peninsula as a launching-pad for attacks on Israel.

Infants Moved to Bomb Shelters

Ashkelon's Barzali Hospital is moving children and mothers to bomb shelters and is sending home as many patients as possible as the Gaza missile bombardment continues and moves northward. (Almost all houses and flats in Israel are built with a bomb-shelter room)

'Righteous' Turkey Attacked Kurds

Turkish warplanes launched a series of air strikes on Northern Iraq late on Tuesday. The region is home to several bases used by Kurdish separatists from the PKK that Ankara regards as terrorists — and frequently targets with its military. (Turkey, outspoken critic of the Assad regime, has been suppressing and waging war against its Kurdish and Armenian minorities for a long time)

Obama Pastor Endorses March on Jerusalem

Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who was US President Barack Obama's pastor for 20 years at the Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's south side, has endorsed the planned "March to Jerusalem". It follows on the heels of the anti-Israel, anti-Semitic Doha Conference in Qatar, a two day long effort to demonize Israel and deny Judaism's more than three thousand year connection to Jerusalem.

Ceasefire Only Applies to Israel

On Monday, Cairo claimed a ceasefire it brokered had gone into effect. On Tuesday, the Palestinians fired 13 rockets and mortar shells without an Israeli military response. An Iron Dome anti-missile battery intercepted one of the two incoming Grads before it landed in Beersheba. (Maybe it is time to realise that ceasefires with Arabs do not work and to implement a more effective solution to the conflict — the Sinai Option: Road to Permanent Peace)

Americans, not Obama, Love the IDF

More than 1.300 business and philanthropic leaders donated $26 million at Friends of the Israel Defence Forces (FIDF) dinner in New York. IDF Chief of Benny Gantz thanked the supporters and told them, "This is very important for us to know that we are not alone."

Hamas Furious Over Lack of Al-Jazeera Coverage

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri wrote on his Facebook page that Al-Jazeera's coverage of events in Gaza showed a "bias against Palestinians". He also described Al-Jazeera's coverage as "downplayed and hashed over," saying they were not taking the story "seriously." (One may wonder, is the terrorism an attention seeking exercise in order to squeeze funds from Iran, Saudi Arabia and others interesting in instability in the Middle East parties?)

Hypocrisy of the Headlines:

"Israel must end impunity of violence by settlers" — www.independent.co.uk — Really, this is the main cause of the problem. What about tens of thousand of rockets fired from Gaza, endless attacks with knives and stones at Jews perpetrated by Arabs, so-called Palestinians and Israeli ones?

Best and Brightest Compete for Annual Intel Prize

Fifty-six Israeli teenage finalists who carried out 52 different projects in the exact, natural, computer and social sciences and humanities are participating in the 15th annual competition. The development of a patch to give medications via electrical signals through the skin instead of swallowing them; a robotic nurse that hands out drugs to the elderly at the correct time and dosage; determination of the type of forest trees that consume less water are just some of the projects. Winners will be announced at the Knesset.

10 Point Program of the PLO 

Political Program Adopted at the 12th Session of the Palestine National Council — after the Oslo Agreement! This is still an active plan, which PA, Fatah and Hamas are pursuing!

The Palestine National Council,

On the basis of the Palestine National Charter and the Political Program drawn up at the eleventh session, held from 6-12 January 1997; and from its belief that it is impossible for a permanent and just peace to be established in the area unless our Palestinian people recover from all their national rights (who cares about Jewish rights) and, first and foremost, their rights to return and to self-determination on the whole of the soil of their homeland&:

1. To reaffirm the Palestine Liberation Organisation's previous attitude to Resolution 242 (which Arab rejected), which obliterates the national right of our people and deals with the cause of our people as a problem of refugees. The Council therefore refuses to have anything to do with this resolution at any level, Arab or international, including the Geneva Conference. (Must Israel obey those international resolutions, which do not allow Israel to fight her enemies effectively and to end the conflict?)

2. The Palestine Liberation Organisation will employ all means, and first and foremost armed struggle, to liberate Palestinian territory and to establish the independent combatant national authority for the people over every part of Palestinian territory that is liberated. This will require further changes being effected in the balance of power in favour of our people and their struggle. (This has been successfully implemented)

3. The Liberation Organisation will struggle against any proposal for a Palestinian entity the price of which is recognition, peace, secure frontiers, renunciation of national rights, and the deprival of our people of their right to return and their right to self-determination on the soil of their homeland. (Why does not Israel do this for the Jewish people?)

4. Any step taken towards liberation is a step towards the realisation of the Liberation Organisation's strategy of establishing the democratic Palestinian State (we have seen their kind of democracy) specified in the resolutions of the previous Palestinian National Councils.

5. Struggle along with the Jordanian national forces to establish a Jordanian-Palestinian national front whose aim will be to set up in Jordan a democratic national authority in close contact with the Palestinian entity that is established through the struggle. (it means all Palestine, including Jordan)

6. The Liberation Organisation will struggle to establish unity in struggle between the two peoples and between all the forces of the Arab liberation movement that are in agreement on this program. (Hamas and Fatah are in agreement with the program but far from united, as are most Arabs/Muslims)

7. In the light of this program, the Liberation Organisation will struggle to strengthen national unity and to raise it to the level where it will be able to perform its national duties and tasks (Terror against Israel).

8. Once it is established, the Palestinian national authority will strive to achieve a union of the confrontation countries, with the aim of completing the liberation of all Palestinian territory, and as a step along the road to comprehensive Arab unity. (Interesting that Fatah, claims to be a secular organisation, supportive of creating Islamic caliphate!)

9. The Liberation Organization will strive to strengthen its solidarity with the socialist countries, and with the forces of liberation and progress throughout the world, with the aim of frustrating all the schemes of Zionism, reaction and imperialism. (but, motivated by greed for oil and anti-Semitism, the Western democracies continue to support this hideous movement)

10. In light of this program, the leadership of the revolution will determine the tactics which will serve and make possible the realisation of these objectives.

The Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organisation will make every effort to implement this program, and should a situation arise affecting the destiny and the future of the Palestinian people, the National Assembly will be convened in extraordinary session. (When will Jewish leadership start to talk about the destiny of Jewish people?)

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

To Go To Top

Posted by FSM, March 19, 2012.

James Delingpole is a British writer, journalist and broadcaster who is (he says) right about everything. He is the author of numerous fantastically entertaining books including Welcome to Obamaland: I've Seen Your Future and it Doesn't Work. His website is http://www.jamesdelingpole.com/ and he also has a blog at the Daily Telegraph.


I wonder how the BBC environment correspondent Richard Black would report it if the Climatic Research Unit's Phil Jones were suddenly to confess that everything he'd said in the last two decades about the anthropogenic warming threat was total rubbish. I'm guessing something like: "Hero climate scientist announces glorious discovery: world saved, research at CRU now shows!"

I wonder how the New York Times, or the Guardian environment pages or Huffington Post would report it if NASA's James Hansen were to burst in with a machine gun and grenades at the next Heartland climate sceptics' conference and wipe out half the delegates. "NASA expert helps solve global overpopulation problem!", probably.

If you think I'm joking consider how all the above-mentioned organs responded to the story of Fakegate, in which climate activist Peter Gleick engaged in identity theft and used a forged document in order to smear the Heartland institute with a pack of lies. The way they covered it, you'd think the real villain of the piece was not Gleick but Heartland. One liberal commentator went so far as to suggest that the person who had faked the one (and only) incriminating document was none other than Heartland's president Joe Bast. Some kind of sinister, false-flag operation to make the environmental movement look bad, I suppose. (Yeah, like it needs any help on that score.)

Anyway, now Anthony Watts reports that the forged document has been submitted to forensic analysis and that the most likely culprit turns out to be — as Steven Mosher suspected weeks ago — none other than Peter Gleick. Well quelle surprise and whoulda thunk?! Gleick denies it. Well of course he would. Looks kind of embarrassing, doesn't it, when your cause is so desperate that the only dirt you can manage to get on your opposition is dirt you've manufactured yourself?

After Climategate Donna Laframboise asked in a Tweet:

To those minimizing ClimateGate: How badly do people have to behave? What line must they cross before you'll stop excusing them?

And after Gleickgate/Fakegate she asked a similar question. Just how badly does the alarmist/warmist camp have to behave before their amen corner in their liberal MSM finally concedes that their behaviour is beyond the pale?

The answer, I fear, is more badly than you could possibly imagine. Climatism (as Steve Goreham calls it) has very little to do with science, if indeed it ever did. Rather it's the new global religion and as with all religions it's really not about evidence but about faith. And when you're filled with zeal of religious conviction, what crime is there that you wouldn't commit to spread your wondrous, right and noble creed?

As a perfect example of this blind faith in action, Jo Nova compares and contrasts the coverage of two stories — Climategate and Fakegate — by our old friend Richard Black of the BBC.

On ClimateGate, Black waited until after he had a spokesman from the CRU to comment, and having confirmed the emails were from the CRU, Black quoted exactly none of them. On FakeGate, Black posted so quickly that he had to rewrite it after Heartland replied, which happened in the first 24 hours.

With ClimateGate, Black ignored the emails that were effectively public property in the first place and turned out to be real. With Fakegate, Black either detailed or linked to quotes that turned out to be nonexistent (at least, I presume that's what he needed to "re-work", where is the original stored?).

Then there's the point that ClimateGate is material to the scientific practices of lead authors in an issue of major planetary concern; FakeGate is about small amounts of legal, private funding that are irrelevant to the science. Oh yessity, those influential tiny funds from anonymous citizens must be public knowledge, (and forthwith!) but the original raw data of the worlds temperature stations? I don't think so and stop harassing those scientists.

Point to note: Black is paid by public funds to report both sides of the story in an unbiased manner. The Heartland Institute is not.

Let's repeat that last one because it's so important, so true.

Point to note: Black is paid by public funds to report both sides of the story in an unbiased manner. The Heartland Institute is not.

Hey, but as anyone from the Warmist/Alarmist camp could tell you: never let the facts get in the way of a good story. In fact, if you're a believer in the great global warming religion, facts are actually your enemy. They're your enemy a) because they so comprehensively undermine everything you believe in and b) because facts are nasty, horrid things that "deniers" use, whereas true believers have no need of them: faith, that's the thing, pure blind faith.

Contact Family Security Matters (FSM) at info@ familysecuritymatters.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Sergio HaDaR Tezza, March 19, 2012.

After giving the whole of North Africa into muslim fundamentalist hands — destabilizing the whole Middle East and openly antagonizing Israel, the United States' only ally in the area who is not voting against the US in the UN at every opportunity — now Ohbummer is trying to give Syria too into the hands of Hamas' parent organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, Saudi Wahhabism and Al Qaida...as if those were better than Iran's friends... Only an idiot would chose between the SA and the SS, picking what he perceives to be "the lesser of two evils". Evil is evil, and must be fought.

This below is called "Obama's detachment policy on Syria" and was written by Tony Badran. It appeared March 15, 2012 on the Now Lebanon website

Tony Badran is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He tweets @AcrossTheBay.


On Monday, the editor of the pan-Arab Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, Tariq al-Homayed, penned a column that delivered a scathing critique of the Obama administration's Syria policy. The title of the piece said it all: "Obama is the problem, not just Russia." While one can't say for sure, it's hard to read Homayed's editorial as anything other than an indicator of Riyadh's exasperation with Washington's dithering as the Syrian uprising marks its first year anniversary.

The Saudis' frustration with the Obama administration's approach was already evident at the "Friends of Syria" gathering in Tunis last month, when Foreign Minister Saud al-Faysal left the meeting, citing lack of serious action. It was then that al-Faysal publicly went against the administration's declared policy, calling the arming of the Syrian opposition "an excellent idea." The Qataris, too, shared the Saudis' desire for more robust action, including direct support for the Free Syrian Army (FSA).

However, if that's the case, then why did Riyadh and Doha agree to yet another futile initiative with the Russians, which did nothing but buy more time for Assad to escalate his military campaign? In addition, reports continue to suggest that the Saudis and Qataris remain far from aggressively supplying the FSA with weapons. To answer these questions, one must again turn to Washington.

Last week, an anonymous administration official disclosed that a "decision has been made at the next Friends of Syria meeting to not oppose any proposals to arm the FSA and we're not going to publicly or privately message on that," the official said. "We're not going to publicly or privately tell the Friends of Syria not to do this."

The problem, of course, is that the administration did continue to message publicly against any lethal support to the FSA, and against any military options more broadly. As late as this Tuesday, the White House spokesman was still repeating the familiar mantra: "It is certainly our position that providing arms is not a move that we're considering right now because we believe it could heighten and prolong the violence in Syria... So it is our position that we do not want to contribute to the further militarization of Syria because that could lead down a very dangerous road."

In addition to administration officials making the same arguments in testimonies before Congress, press briefings were organized by intelligence officials with the sole aim of trashing the notion of arming the FSA. Unnamed US officials warned of al-Qaeda's supposed infiltration of the revolution, and exaggerated to a laughable extent the capabilities of the Assad regime in order to counter any push for military action, which some influential voices in Congress had begun voicing.

At the same time, the US renewed its efforts to engage Russia at the Security Council, introducing a new draft resolution, which, according to one leaked version, calls for a dialogue between the regime and the opposition, thereby making a remarkable concession to Moscow, tantamount to reversing the declared US policy of regime change.

Despite the embarrassing fiasco of the Kofi Annan mission to Syria, and the predictable lack of any progress with the Russians, President Obama yesterday still doubled down on this failed approach. "[F]or us to provide strong support to Kofi Annan, to continue to talk to the Russians, the Chinese and others... that's the most important work that we can do right now."

As a result, it's not hard to see why the Saudis and Qataris felt forced to go through Russia one more time. It was the expressed wish of the President of the United States. A careful rereading of the statement made by the anonymous official to ForeignPolicy.com shows that this was the message communicated to US allies.

The official noted that the US would take the passive attitude toward arming the FSA "at the next Friends of Syria meeting," which will take place early next month. In other words, the Obama administration opted to waste a full month banging on the Kremlin's door, yet again, as Bashar al-Assad escalated his military campaign in Homs, Idlib and Daraa.

The administration has been criticized repeatedly for not asserting leadership when it came to Syria. In reality, however, the administration did very much push its preferences on its regional allies. Its public messaging and diplomatic activity left no doubt that it continued to oppose any military aid to the FSA and that it insisted on going through Moscow one more time, regardless of the time this would buy Assad.

So, although the official said that the administration was not going to "publicly or privately" tell allies not to arm the FSA, as a matter of fact, Washington has been quite verbose these last three weeks, and its message to regional allies, like Saudi Arabia and Qatar, against arming the opposition, has been unmistakable. After all, the US Secretary of State herself twice said that arming the Syrian opposition might be like sending weapons to Al-Qaeda.

It's clear that President Obama, who's running on a policy of extrication from the region, sees that opening the door to military aid risks drawing the US in. Despite the increased pressure to move in that direction, the president is determined to keep the US out of the game.

This was not lost on Al-Sharq Al-Awsat's Homayed. "[I]t is clear that Obama is not concerned with the security of the region... rather [he] is preoccupied with his re-election bid," he wrote in his column.

The Saudis may not yet have gone as far as Senator John McCain, who the other day called the administration's policy "disgraceful and shameful." However, with their media now openly labeling President Obama as part of the problem alongside Assad's Russian allies, they're hardly being subtle.

Sergio Tezza can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net.

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, March 19, 2012.

Wasn't going to post today, but must simply to get out the word. I suspect many in the States will not have read about this:

Rabbi Jonathan Sandler, 30, was a teacher at the Ozar Hatorah school in Toulouse, in the south of France. This morning at about 8:00 AM he was on his way to bringing his two sons, Gavriel, 6, and Aryeh, 3, to the Gan Rachi (kindergarten) when all three were gunned down. With him was Miriam Monstango, the eight year old daughter of the head of Ozar Hatorah, who died of her wounds shortly thereafter.

Gunned down, please understand, because they were Jews.

They will be buried in Israel.


You see here the rabbi and the two sons, along with his wife, who was not present during the attack. Oh does my heart go out to her!

Jonathan Sandler, shot to death Monday in Toulouse, France, pictured with his two slain sons and with his wife (who was not hurt in the attack).

Rabbi Jonathan Sandler and his family. (Credit: Facebook)


The attacker approached the area on a moped, dismounted, and began shooting. He opened fire on everyone in front of him, wounding at least five others, some seriously. Then he fled, and is being sought in a massive manhunt. Police evacuated the school.

Otzar HaTorah Survivors (Credit: Reterns)


French President Nicholas Sarkozy visited the site of the attack at about noon, along with other officials. He gave a statement to a TV interviewer:

"Its a tragedy. And it's a tragedy that there are insane people who are capable of doing such a thing. I can't accept this idea than one can massacre Jewish children in front of their school.

"It's a day of national tragedy. The barbary, the savagery, the cruelty cannot win. Hate cannot win. The nation is much stronger."


Ah, but Jewish children were massacred in front of their school. We stare the savagery in the face, and we are horribly pained, but not terribly surprised. Who could be surprised after all we, as Jews, have seen?

Good that the president is determined that hate will not win. He will have a great deal of work to do. France, with a Jewish population of close to 700,000, has the largest Jewish community in Europe. Now there are voices raised from within that community fearing the beginning of a wave of anti-Semitic terrorism.

We'll know more when the gunman has been identified. A ballistics match seems to indicate a spree killer who was also responsible for shooting paratroopers recently. If this is so, all those killed in the spree were minorities but not all Jews.


For the statement by Prime Minister Netanyahu on this tragedy:

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Vic Shayne, March 19, 2012.

For nearly four years I worked on writing the life story of a Holocaust survivor and in the end, after publishing my book, I seemed to have more questions than answers, with the biggest one being: What was lost in the Holocaust?

"Lost" is the wrong word

Reading thousands of pages of testimonials, historical references and war stories, I kept coming across the word "lost." For example, "He lost his entire family," or "Yiddish civilization was lost."

My feeling is that lost is too inadequate a word. It's the wrong word. Relatives and friends were not merely lost, but rather murdered. The Yiddish civilization, rich and fruitful, was not lost, but rather destroyed. Belongings were not lost, they were stolen. And people were not lost, they were ruined, taken, abused, tortured, enslaved, imprisoned and traumatized.

Rewriting history is no longer shameful

Now we are living in a period of revisionism. That which was once shameful — to rewrite history because you don't want to face the facts — is now commonplace and accepted behavior.

Holocaust revisionism is a full time job for some people. The internet bears this out. You'll find troves of antisemitic hate speech thinly disguised as a campaign for historical accuracy. But the real reason these people deny the existence of the Holocaust is to diminish its importance and to ignore its wake of destruction. To invalidate one's suffering — an entire people's suffering — by rewriting history is as immoral as one can get.

Fortunately, there are some good and active organizations, including the United States Holocaust Museum and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, that diligently work to educate people on the realities of the Holocaust. Even more, they have become a force for recognizing and validating other atrocities borne of genocide the world over. And if you think long and hard about these acts of hate and destruction, you'll realize that there's no casual loss of life, tradition, health, relationships, communities or even languages.

Yiddish Civilization is a ghost

Millions of us owe our roots to the shtetls of Eastern Europe. Our grandparents spoke Yiddish, a word that simply means "Jewish."

Yiddish represents more than a language, however. It brings to mind an entire culture that was forged out of the wilderness. Jews have a way of turning lemons into lemonade. They were forced into the Pale of Settlement in Lithuania, Poland, and Russia. They were not afforded public education or rights. They were given nothing but poor land. But instead of wallowing in self pity and losing their souls, the Jews of Eastern Europe developed a culture rich in law, education, commerce, literature and music.

A glimpse of shtetl life

When I wrote Remember Us, I sought to give readers some insight into this rich and beautiful Yiddish culture. The subject of my book, Motel Schmulevicz, was born in 1916 and had poetic memories of his little shtetl, Maychet, in Belarus. He spoke of town crier calling out to usher in the Shabbas so that all the men would lay down their tools and work and come home to be with their families. He painted the portrait of a little community that walked down to the river during Rosh Hashanah to cast away their sins. And he told me how studying the Torah and Talmud was not merely a religious rite, but a means of better understanding the world at large.

Motel's family of 84 relatives were murdered along with every other Jew in the shtetl by their Polish neighbors when the Nazis came to town. Along with these Jews, and the other millions of Eastern Europe, Yiddish civilization was also murdered.

Murder is a heinous, horrific act. But we cannot allow the world to supplant the idea of murder with "loss." You lose your keys, but not your zayde, bubbie, friends, home and language.

Vic Shayne is the author of Remember Us: From my shtet through the Holocaust, Skyhorse Publishing. http://www.amazon.com/Remember-Us-Journey-Through-Holocaust/dp/1602397236/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330030835&sr=1-1. This appeared in Jewish Magazine and is archived at http://www.jewishmag.com/164mag/holocaust_history/ holocaust_history.htm

To Go To Top

Posted by Daily Alert, March 19, 2012.

Technician insists on fixing Iron Dome malfunction even as siren alerts of incoming rocket, saved from launch inferno by fellow soldier at the last minute

This was written by Yoav Zitun and it appeared in Ynet News


The recent round of violence in the south meant that Ashdod residents had to deal with a number of Grad rocket explosions.

Now it has been revealed that the exceptional actions of two Iron Dome system operators successfully prevented the explosion of at least one rocket and that the life of one of the soldiers involved was saved thanks to the resourcefulness of his comrade in arms.

The IDF's Iron Dome operators received wall-to-wall praise in the recent escalation after they managed to intercept 85% of the rockets that the system tried to stop.

Ynet has learned that at the height of the system's activity last week, a technician successfully fixed a malfunction which enabled the system to intercept a rocket fired at Ashdod, while another operator extricated him from the area where the intercepting missiles are launched.

The technician, career officer Sergeant First Class Eli Zada, was sent early last week to fix a technical failure on the Iron Dome battery responsible for protecting the capital of the Negev. Moments after the he began to fix the faulty battery, a siren alerting that at least one Grad missile was making its way towards the city was sounded.

The technician didn't hesitate and instead of running for shelter remained in place to fix the problem, making sure the battery was battle-ready.

According to Air Force safety regulations, troops are not supposed to remain within dozens of meters of the Iron Dome battery when an intercepting missile is launched, due to the incredible heat levels and fire that it emits.

The technician realized he didn't have any time to escape and his friends who noticed his position shouted at him to run. One of them, Eliran Siso, got into an army jeep and raced towards the battery where he managed to pick up Zada, who just barely managed to leap into the jeep at the last minute.

'Just doing our jobs' (Avi Rokach)

Ultimately, the Iron Dome operators managed to intercept the Grad rocket which had been heading for Ashdod.

Zada had leapt into the jeep without first collecting his equipment, against army regulations. When he returned to the battery he noticed that there was nothing left and that the equipment had all melted from the heat of the intercepting missile.

Both Zada and Siso were lauded for their actions by senior Air Force officers who praised them for their actions in defending the residents of Ashdod and their comrades on the Iron dome battery.

"It could have ended very differently without the resourcefulness of the technician who insisted on staying on the battery at great risk to his own life," Air Force officials stated.

In addition to the praise, the two brave operators were told that "the incident proves how very different our situation could be without the success of the Iron Dome system and more than that, without the work of the operating troops, technicians and combatants still posted in the southern cities around the clock."

Meanwhile, the two soldiers told their friends that "we were just doing our jobs and we are happy that the intercepting missile managed to thwart the Grad rocket fire."

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik, March 19, 2012.

Earlier this month, two Palestinian terrorists attacked an Israeli soldier in Hebron and stabbed him with a knife. Despite his wounds, the soldier managed to shoot both terrorists, one of whom was killed while the other was injured.

PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas sent a condolence telegram to the family in which he called the killed terrorist "courageous." The soldier's act of shooting the terrorist who tried to kill him was defined by Abbas as an "assassination." The official PA daily referred to it as a "loathsome crime," while the attempted stabbing of the Israeli soldier was called "legitimate struggle."

A few days later Mahmoud Abbas sent his personal representative, Abbas Zaki, to visit the families of both terrorists and to express the leadership's "solidarity." Zaky said that the death of Aram was "cold blooded murder" and "expressed the pride of the Palestinian leadership in this generation and in this heroism."

Palestinian Media Watch reported last year that Abbas sent a grant of $2000 to the family of a terrorist who was killed while attempting to attack Israeli soldiers with pipe bombs.

For more examples of Abbas glorifying terror, click here.

For more examples of the PA policy of glorifying terror, click here.

The following are the two reports of Abbas' honoring of the terrorists in the official PA daily:

"President Mahmoud Abbas sent a telegram of condolence to the Abu Aram family in Yatta, in Hebron, for the death of their courageous son, Zakariya Jamal Abu Aram.

In his telegram, the President said: 'I was greatly saddened by the announcement of Martyrdom death of your courageous son Zakariya Jamal Abu Aram, who was assassinated by the occupation army. His pure soul has ascended to the heights of glory in defense of the pure land of Palestine and the matters that are holy to our pure nation.'

The President denounced this loathsome crime, which was carried out as part of a string of crimes by the occupation army against our defenseless people, with the aim of striking fear into it and dissuading it from continuing in its legitimate struggle for freedom and the establishment of our independent state, with Jerusalem as its capital.'"
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 11, 2012]

"[Fatah] Central Committee member Abbas Zaki yesterday conveyed condolences in the name of President Mahmoud Abbas and the Fatah Central Committee to the family of the Martyr Zakariya Jamal Abu Aram from the town of Yatta in Hebron, who died as a Martyr after being shot by the occupation forces when he tried to prevent the arrest of the prisoner freed in the [Gilad] Shalit [prisoner exchange] deal. Zaki expressed the solidarity of the President and the leadership of Fatah with the family of the Martyr... He pointed out that the cold-blooded murder of Abu Aram is organized crime of the extremist Israeli government... Zaki also visited the family of the injured prisoner Mahmoud Omar Rashid who was also injured in town of Yatta (in the same incident).... He expressed the pride of the Palestinian leadership in this generation and in this heroism."
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 14, 2012]

Itamar Marcus is director of PMW — Palestinian Media Watch — (http://www.pmw.org.il). PMW is based in Jerusalem. This article is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, March 18, 2012.

Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il Go to to see more of his graphic art at

To Go To Top

Posted by Medicine Hat, March 18, 2012.

This article is archived at


Dr. Mark Ellis at work

A dentist said in a federal lawsuit he was fired from a job at a Dearborn, Mich., dental office because he is Jewish.

Dr. Mark Ellis alleged in the suit he was advised against wearing a yarmulke, a head covering traditionally worn by Jewish men, and tzitzit, ceremonial religious tassels, while working as a dental manager at Midwest Dental of Dearborn "since the office was located in Dearborn with a large percentage of Arabic patients," The Detroit News reported.

The suit, filed in federal court in Detroit, said the dental firm, which does business as Midwestern Dental, "permitted Muslim dentists to wear head covering or other clothing dictated by their religious beliefs."

Ellis, who worked at Midwestern Dental from 2007-2010, said in the suit he was discriminated against because of his religion and alleged his civil rights were violated as a result.

Ellis was not available for comment Thursday and efforts to reach Midwestern Dental officials were unsuccessful, the News said.

An observant Jew, Ellis alleged he asked his boss to change his work schedule so he could arrive home before dark on Fridays and observe the beginning of the Jewish Sabbath, as his faith requires.

He alleged the "defendant reluctantly allowed plaintiff to leave early on Friday but constantly questioned, ridiculed and harassed him about the legitimacy of his beliefs." The suit said Muslim dentists were given "an extra hour at lunch to attend prayers at a local Mosque."

Contact Medicine Hat at pswc@shaw.ca

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Ginsberg, March 18, 2012.

Anyone reading this Rav Kahane article and is not on my personal list to receive the weekly articles written by Rav Kahane and would like to be, please contact me at: BarbaraAndChaim@gmail.com Visit my blog for previously emailed Rav Kahane writings: www.barbaraginsberg-barbara.blogspot.com

This below is from Rabbi Meir Kahane's writing 1971-1973 (5732-33).

WHEN all is said and done and all the causes are separated from the effects, it becomes clear that the ultimate sin of the people who rule the State of Israel is that they have done everything to remove the significance, the magnificence and the sweetness of victory from the great miracle of Return and resurrection of the Jewish state.What they have done and do daily is to turn the miraculous into the ordinary, the hallowed into the profane and the truth of the matter is that, because of this all the miracles and wonders that have occurred to us in the nature of rebirth of the Land have come about, not so much because of the ruling circles, but despite them.

The decision by the government of Israel not to allow Jews to purchase land in that part of the Land of Israel known as the 'territories'(those lands liberated in 1967) is as grotesquely absurd as it is obscenely outrageous.Not since the Nuremberg laws and the years when their legislators held sway, has there been a land in which Jews, per se, have been singled out for a ban on land purchase.A Moslem, a Christian or a Buddhist may buy land in the Land of the Bible, but not a Jew. In the lands wherein strolled Abraham, Isaac and Jacob — the children of Ishmael may do what they will with land but not the children of the Patriarchs.The thing becomes an unfunny joke.A Jew from Tel Aviv asks to buy land and is turned down.He turns around, enters a Moslem religious court and declares his fealty to Allah, emerges as a Moslem and can now buy land in Eretz Yisroel.At least Nuremberg had the logic of anti-Semitism behind it — the hatred of the gentile for the Jew.The madness of the present situation is that the ban on Jewish purchase comes from Jews. All that is needed to complete the farce is for an appeal from the Anti-efamation League of B'nai B'rith and the American Jewish Committee, to the United Nations Human Rights Commission, citing the State of Israel for discrimination against Jews ...

It is no answer to say that the political situation in the world demands that Israel act as she does. That very argument is the one that strips naked the secularism and the un-Jewishnesss of the Jewish government in Israel.For it is not true that the ghetto mentality of the Jew exists only in the Galut, the Exile. It is alive and sick in the Jewish State in the forms of a Jewish government which — on a dozen issues — reacts according to the yardstick: "What will the goyim say?"It is the measure of their galut minds and their utter failure to understand the nature and destiny of the Jewish people.

When the government of Israel refuses to allow Jews to purchase land in the Land of Israel; when the government of Israel extradites Jews to non-Jewish areas, even when they are citizens, Israeli soldiers and Jewish freedom fighters; when the government of Israel refuses to ban missionaries who daily prey on the poor and the economically weak; when the government of Israel is stricken daily by the disease of Ebanism (from the root'Eban' as in Foreign Minister)

It is a symptom of Galut mentality and the desire to create in Israel a carbon copy of the Western, liberal, assimilated ideological state.Israel has become a state with Jewish people, not a Jewish State. Its reactions are assimilated ones for it has become like all the other states, learning from them, influenced by them, slavishly following their philosophical, ideologically a slave to the goy — but because of the ghetto mentality that makes it reject Jewish exclusiveness — in the end, a political subject too

The roots of the ultimate sin of the leaders of the State of Israel lie in that they do not recognize and never did recognize that the incredible survival of the Jewish people through two millennial of incredible exile was a simple miracle. (Usually, it is the miracle that is the more simple explanation rather than the torturous explanations that go into denying it and finding some other answer).Because they do not really believe in G-d (and let us not be put off by their evasive attempts to deny their denials) they also do not believe that the Jewish people are a people of G-d, whose past survival in the midst of seventy hungry wolves of the world was accomplished only through His power and whose incredible return to the Land, after centuries that saw the passing of every nation that once existed together with the Jews in ancient times, was part of the Jewish destiny as dictated by the hand of the All Mighty.

Everything that was miraculous, holy and special about the Jews was discarded and turned into an ordinary and profane story.Because they did not believe in G-d or in the Jewish destiny as being A Divine one that MUST be and that WILL be, regardless of "natural" or "logical" obstacles, these rulers fought against all the dreamers and the visionaries and id everything to impede the Return.

When the Nordaus demanded that Jews be thrust into the Land of Israel by the hundreds of thousands, those who then and who today, still, rule the Zionist Establishment — mocked him and exclaimed: "Impractical! Where shall we put them all? How will they live?" So they died.

When Jabotinksys demanded that Jews march out of the Exile and flee the ghettos and that the aim of Zionism be declared, openly, to be that of a Jewish State, the disbelievers, the men of "practicality", "logic" and political secularism brought forth all their mockery, the statistics and their skepticism to defeat the dreamers.

When the freedom fighters of Irgun and Stern demanded that the Jew rise up and fight for the Land of Canaan, the ruling circles of disbelievers condemned them — and condemned the entire people

In 1948, the ruling circles seriously considered putting off the declaration of a Jewish State and in 1956 they retreated from Sinai and in 1967 they listened for days to Eban and others not to go to war but rather trust the nations of the world.

The truth is, that the State of Israel, the return from Exile, the breathtaking miracles of three victorious wars, and the return to the Wall, to Jerusalem, to Hebron and to the Land of Israel, have all been miracles that have come to us not because of the rulers of Israel but despite them.For Israel is not blessed with the deep desire to be Jewish but rather with the disease of Ebanism.

Ebanism is that disease that sees Israel as a model Western, liberal, progressive state but that has no connection with the exclusive Jewish Destiny that is based upon a Jewish G-d, a Jewish heritage, a Jewish reaction and a Jewish Destiny that transcends Washington and Moscow, both.

Because Ebanism looks at the world through secular eyes, it also sees Israel's destiny in that world as a secular one.Because there is no place for G-d and the miracle of the Jewish destiny, every political question is based not on "what should Jews do and how should a Jew react," but on "what will the goyim say?"Because the Ebans of the Israeli cabinet do not really believe that there is a G-d, let alone a Hand of G-d that has returned His people and that will preserve their state under all circumstances, they refuse to allow Jews to buy their own land because of fear of Nixon.They return Jews to gentile prisons because of fear of Nixon.They refuse to limit the soul — snatchers of the Missions because of fear of all the Nixons, Catholic or Protestant. There is really no need to go to the trouble and expense of electing a new president of Israel.We already have one and he resides in Washington. ... No, there is no need for a new president of Israel — we need the old G-d.

We waited so long for the miracle of return and, finally, when it occurred we were cheated. We were robbed of the sweetness and the deliciousness of tis pleasure.The state for which we waited centuries became just as any other state, and the uniqueness of the Jew does not lie in a tank or jet — even if they are better than those of the gentiles. We waited for the return to the true lands of the Bible and now we have them — and no Jews can live there.Ebanism has taken a miracle and profaned it, taking it an ordinary thing.It has taken Eretz Yisroel, the unique and special land of the Jews and made it into any state, acting and reacting on the basis of realpolitik and power politics, making decisions on the basis of western secularism rather than on Judaism.This is what happens when Ebanism rules, when the waters that sprinkle the fields of policy making are drawn from the wells of Oxford and Cambridge rather than Jerusalem and Hebron.

The time is long overdue for the malady of Ebanism to be overcome with the healing herbs of Judaism.It is time for Israel to believe in G-d so that it can stop fearing man.On that day we will begin to allow Jews to purchase land in their own country; on that day we will allow Jewish freedom fighters to arrive in Israel without fear of extradition; on that day Israel will return to its true role — its only role — the servant of the Jewish people.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Darlene Casella, March 18, 2012.

When President Barak Obama gave a New Beginnings speech at the University of Cairo in June 2009, no one would have forecast the tumultuous new beginnings for Egypt and the Middle East.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was forced to resign, in January 2011. Defense Minister Muhammad Hussein Tantawi, leader of the ruling military council SCAF (Supreme Council of the Armed Forces) took control of the government. Power will be handed over to a civilian administration following the second round of Presidential elections in June, 2012.

The first round of Egyptian Presidential elections will be in May. To be eligible, a candidate must have been born in Egypt and not hold dual citizenship; not be married to a foreigner; must have the support of 30 Members of Parliament or 30,000 voters; and be at least 40 years of age. The President is elected by a majority vote for a 6 year term. The Prime Minister is appointed by the President.

Current candidates range from obscure Egyptians such as journalists and school teachers to internationally recognized leaders. There are nearly 500 candidates. Some of the current front runners are: Bassem Khafagi, the former Director of CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) with links to Hamas and terrorist groups. The FBI claims Khafagi instigated acts of violence and terrorism in the United States. He wants the implementation of Islamic Law. Bothaina Kamel is the first female candidate, and a controversial radio and TV personality who says that governments are for the people, and not the other way around. Hazem Salah Abu Ismail is a prominent Islamic lawyer who believes in the rights of women and non Muslims. Khaled Ali, the youngest candidate, is a lawyer and activist. In 2011 Ali won the Egyptian Corruption Fighter Award. Tawfiq Okasha, owner of Al Faraeen TV, is proud to be at war with America and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Abd Al-Mun'im Abu Al-Futuh is vehement in regard to refusing acceptance of US Foreign Aid ($1.2 billion a year), and promises to cut US interests in Egypt and end treaties with Israel. Amr Moussa was the Foreign Minister under Mubarak, former Secretary General of the Arab League, Ambassador to the United Nations and to Switzerland. Moussa has said that the Arab world must reform. American journalist Seymour Hirsch said on Al Jazeera TV that Moussa is America's favorite candidate.

Mohamed El Baradei was a popular prospective presidential candidate in 2011. However, on January 14, 2012 he withdrew his candidacy.

Nabil Elaraby, Former Ambassador to the United Nations, and to India, has held many high level international posts; and is incumbent Secretary General of the Arab League. Two major Egyptian newspapers announced that Nabil will announce candidacy. He would be favored by SCAF and by the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Maspero massacre, Christian Copt Church burnings and desecrations, being dragged from home without cause, beatings, torture, killings, and virginity tests are complaints that have been made against SCAF under Tantawi's reign. Amnesty International, The Washington Post, and CNN claim to have documentation. Video evidence and eyewitness testimonies differ from the military's version of events according to Gamal Eid, director of the Arab Network for Human Rights.

Since SCAF police first evacuated Tahrir Square last year and until March 9, 2012 there have been ongoing reports that demonstrators have been beaten, given electric shocks, strip searched, and women were forced to receive virginity testing; a humiliating experience videotaped by soldiers. Samira Ibrahim was virginity tested while in custody. She dared to challenge her abusers, bringing action before the courts. The military court exonerated the practice, blaming women for being at demonstrations. There have been mass arrests and torture has been alleged in the vicinity of the Egyptian Museum. Investigations conducted under military reign have fallen short of open and transparent scrutiny.

A crisis between Egypt and the U.S. exists regarding American Civil Society Organizations. The Egyptians released American hostages after $5 million was paid. The State Department claims that the ransom was paid by various Non Government Organizations for working without a license and for using illegal foreign funds to create unrest. These organizations are taxpayer funded.

Anne Patterson was appointed by President Obama as Ambassador to Egypt in 2011; she continues to be the target of Egyptian protest due to her comments regarding $40 million to Civil Society Organizations in Egypt. Egyptian media portrays her as against democratization and claims that she thwarts the revolution. Some 4,000 demonstrators were at the U.S. Embassy on March 9, 2012 demanding the Ambassador be expelled.

Leading the demonstrators was presidential candidate Tawfiq Okasha who said "We send a message to the American people, the U.S. Administration, and the State Department; you are our sworn enemy. We demand the expulsion of the U.S. Ambassador, the enemy of humanity. Obama, you will not enter Paradise before a camel passes through the eye of a needle. You renounced the Prophet Muhammad." Mathew 19:24 in the New Testament of the Christian Bible seems a strange choice for a Muslim to quote in conjunction with The Prophet.

The new beginnings President Obama hoped for in his Cairo speech do not appear to be the new beginnings that have transpired in Egypt.

Darlene Casella is a former English teacher, stockbroker, and president/owner of a small corporation. She lives with her husband in La Quinta, California; and can be reached at darlenecasella@msn.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 18, 2012.

This week I read a very disturbing article about Kalman Libeskind, a journalist, facing criminal charges after his family was attacked by an Arab gang —

Mr. Libeskind is calling on Israeli citizens to defend themselves, physically, against Arab attacks, rather than calling the police, which, apparently is inept. The article further indicates that Mr. Libeskind's call reflects a growing feeling among Israelis that Israel is slipping into anarchy, in regards to the physical safety of Jews from attacks by fellow Arab citizens.

I will say that Israelis live in an ongoing, sometimes of slow pace and sometime at exhilarated pace, intifada.

Recalling recent events, two soldiers, on leave, were almost lynched by a bunch of Arabs in Haifa, which landed them in the hospital. Then a man walking his dog lost his life in an attack by a group of Arabs, in Ramle; a soldier girl was stabbed few times, while riding the light rail train in Jerusalem and the attacker, an Arab. Where does it end, really end?

I also recall that several years ago, the lack of the appropriate police services have called for the establishment of an organization, named Hashomer Hachdash, established to defend Israeli citizens and their farms, whom the police failed to protect and come to their assistance.

There are some questions we need to bring to light.

Is the Israeli-Jewish police too busy beating up Jewish "settlers" and dissidents, which is a widely known truth?

Is it true that because Arab-Moslems serve in the Israeli police, the police is reluctant to act against Arab-Moslems, from the fear of protest and riots they see need to engage in for every little incident?

Is it true that as a rule, in disputes between Jews and Arab-Moslems, the courts in Israel, in most cases, rule in favor of the Arab-Moslems? And, if Jews see fit to protest, they are detained and never ending harassment ensues?

Citizens demanding changes in the faulty legal system of their country is what people, living under democratic laws, do and it is great. However, in Israel, where the supreme courts judges are self elected and the lower court judges are selected by the top courts and their associates, this needed change is highly unlikely to happen, unless the court system is changed.

I assume that Israeli journalist, Kalman Libeskind, means something more than just calling on Israelis to, physically, counter any physical assault on them — i.e. exercising citizens right for self defense, which is a given in a free society.

However, if Israel is indeed slipping into anarchy, because the police do not come to the aid of Jews, being attacked by Arabs, then isn't this a call on Jews to take matters into their own hands, rather than call the police, which will only descend the country, even further, into anarchy? Israeli vigilantism against Arabs is just a step away from what Mr. Libeskind is advocating.

Israelis should rise up and call on their police to do its job; that no efforts be spared to apprehend Arab-Israelis and Arab-Palestinians, who commit any crimes, especially violent, and that they be vigorously prosecuted, under the law of Israel and that their sentences on conviction, be the harshest possible. That will create a deterrence.

These issues are, of course, most sensitive, given the penchant for Arab-Israelis, Arab-Palestinians and most of the Muslim world to react, with anger and violence, at the word that Israel and Israelis have the inalienable right to defended themselves against Arab-Palestinians and other enemies attacks.

But the truth remains that in a democratic society, such as Israel, the authorities have the duty to protect the citizens and if the authorities failed their job, than the best next step is for the citizens to act in self defense, in any way possible available to them.

The one who comes to kill you, kill him first...!

For the Government Of Israel to act aptly, it must be made to believe that such action is supported by the electorate.

So who is failing whom? Is it the government of Israel failing the electorate or the Israeli electorate are not practicing their inalienable rights?

I have said before and I say it again, the Arabs carrying Israeli citizenship are nothing but Israel's fifth Column, growing stronger. Unless Israel eradicates this problem now, in no time this situation will get out of control just the way if Iran will not be stopped from acquiring nuclear weapons, now, it will be too late to stop Iran later and then, we all know the rest of the story...!

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, March 18, 2012.

Israel is helping the slowing Palestinian Authority economy even as Arab nations ignore pledges, and the PA's financial stability is questionable, according to an Israeli government report to the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee (AHLC) in Brussels.

The summary comes at the same time that the International Monetary Fund reported that the PA economy is in a "difficult phase" due to a drop in aid. Arab nations have failed to meet pledges of billions of dollars in assistance.

It also blamed Israeli restrictions on trade as a factor that harms the economy, but the Israeli government report noted, "In 2011, Israel continued to implement its policy of support for economic...by removing additional check points [and] upgrading commercial crossings."

Israel also increased the number of permits for Arab employment in Israel and pushed forward an agreement to build four electricity substations in Judea and Samaria to increase the amount of electricity available for further economic development

Economic growth in the Palestinian Authority in Judea and Samaria slowed to a 5.8 percent growth rate during the first nine months of 2011 while growth in Hamas-controlled Gaza soared by 25.8 percent.

Israeli purchases from the Palestinian Authority increased by 2.1 percent compared with 2010 while Israeli sales dropped by 1.1 percent.

In addition, there was a 33 percent increase last year in commercial goods shipped via the Allenby Bridge to and from Jordan.

Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today.

To Go To Top

Posted by Jim Kouri, March 18, 2012.

An American-born Islamist who left the U.S. to fight for Somalia's deadly and powerful terrorist group Al Shabaab, released a video on Friday on an Islamic web site complaining about...

An American-born Islamist who left the U.S. to fight for Somalia's deadly and powerful terrorist group Al Shabaab, released a video on Friday on an Islamic web site complaining about his treatment at the hands of his fellow Islamists, according to a member of the U.S. intelligence community.

During a telephone conversation with the Law Enforcement Examiner, the intelligence official, who requested anonymity, said that Omar Hammami a/k/a Abu Mansour al-Amriki complained about how he was treated and that there are internal problems with Al Shabaab ever since its officials aligned themselves with al-Qaeda while Osama bin Laden was still alive.

"This video by a well-known American member of an al Qaeda ally is not exactly good propaganda. al-Amriki is in hot water with his comrades now that he's openly complaining about Al Shabaab's deficiencies," said former military intelligence officer and NYPD police officer Sid Franes.

Franes believes that in spite of all the publicity al-Amriki garners for the radical Islamic movement, his latest Internet message trivializes the grandiose image that these terrorists project in their Internet messages and on their propaganda photographs.

"The photos may show tough men with heavy artillery ready to do battle, but al-Amriki's Internet presentation reveals a certain pettiness within the ranks of Al-Shabaab" he added.

"I record this message today because I feel that my life may be endangered by Harakat al-Shabaab al-Mujahideen due to some differences that occurred between us regarding matters of the Sharia (Islamic law) and matters of strategy," says in the video, according to a former American police sergeant now working in Israeli law enforcement.

Hammami (al-Amriki) is originally from Selma, Alabama. In the past he blended rape music with Islamic messaging against the United States. He is a familiar Internet figure among America's homegrown Islamist radicals who support al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Al Shabaab and other terrorist organizations.

Somalia is in a state of anarchy with a weak Transitional Government that is relying on the African Union and Ethiopian troops to fight the terrorists, warlords and pirates. Since the warlords toppled Somali dictator Mohamed Barre in 1990, Somalia has been a nation filled with violence, starvation, and death.

Since 2007, the fighting between Al-Shabaab and the Mogadishu government's forces has resulted in more than 25,000 people killed. However, some estimate that over one million lives were lost in the last 20 years.

The Somali terrorists' primary goal is to overthrow the new government and impose Islamic law-known as Shariah — on the entire nation.

Jim Kouri, CPP, is Fifth Vice-President of the National Association of Chiefs of Police (copmagazine@aol.com). This appeared in the Examiner at
http://www.examiner.com/law-enforcement-in-national/ american-jihadi-complains-of-treatment-by-terrorists-somalia

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, March 18, 2012.

On March 14, I attended a conference that considered the question, "Jerusalem: How Important Is It to the Muslims?" Held at the Menachem Begin Heritage Center, it was jointly sponsored by the Center and the Middle East Forum, of Philadelphia.

Speakers, in order of their presentations, were:

Dr. Daniel Pipes, founder and director of the Middle East Forum. Historian and commentator, he is the author of several books and position papers. His focus is American foreign policy, the Middle East and Islam.

Dr. Moshe Sharon, professor of early Islamic history at Hebrew University. A specialist in Arabic epigraphy, he has recorded all the Arabic inscriptions in the Holy land, and is the author of several books..

Dr. Mordecai Nisan, a scholar in Middle Eastern studies at Hebrew University and a contributing expert to the Ariel Center for Policy Research. He is the author of several books.

Dr. Yitzhak Reiter, Ashkelon Academic College. His expertise encompasses conflict resolution at sacred sites and holy places, Islamic law and religious institutions. He is the author of several books, most recently, The New Islamic Ethos of Jerusalem-Between Reality and Imagination.

Dr. Mordecai (Moti) Kedar is a lecturer in Arabic at Bar Ilan University; his areas of expertise include Islam, Islamic movements and Arab societies. He had 20 years of experience with IDF Intelligence.

Itamar Marcus, founder and director of Palestinian Media Watch.

Dr. Dore Gold, president, the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He has served as Israeli ambassador to the UN, and advisor to prime ministers. He is the author of several books, including, The Fight for Jerusalem: Radical Islam, the West, and the Future of the Holy City.


I offer the above information so that you might have a sense of the conference, but also because it provides a list of excellent references for issues related to Islam and Jerusalem. Of particular note:

Daniel Pipe's Middle East Quarterly
(http://www.meforum.org/meq/) provides a cogent and serious level of analysis by various commentators and academics. Recommended also are articles by Moshe Sharon and articles and books by Dore Gold — as well as briefings and analyses written by others for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
(http://www.jcpa.org/). The Palestinian Media Watch
(http://www.palwatch.org/) is an excellent source for what the Arabs are saying. Moti Kedar, who travels to the US frequently, is a dynamic and highly-informed speaker.


Here, I will, for the most part, consolidate and summarize what was said at the conference.

What must be emphasized at the outset is that Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Koran and is not directly associated with Muhammad (with more on this below).

A major thrust of several of the talks was that the position of Islam with regard to Jerusalem has shifted historically depending on circumstances. It is not a constant. Daniel Pipes says that it is related to the political climate of a particular time. For example, during the Crusades, Muslim interest increased because of Christian control of the city. Just as it became true again with Jewish activity in Jerusalem — which is the situation in which we find ourselves today.

In 682, there were political tensions in Mecca, fighting between Medina and Mecca. So, for political reasons an alternative for pilgrimage purposes was provided via Jerusalem. This is a typical example of transient importance attached to Jerusalem because of political circumstances and not because of the inherent value that was seen to adhere to Jerusalem.

There were many points at which Jerusalem was not central to Islam. Dore Gold provided an example from the 14th century, with Islamic historian Ibn Tair, who didn't see Jerusalem or Hevron as sacred.

Similarly, Moti Kedar shared a text written in 1925 by the Supreme Muslim Council. In referring to the Temple Mount, this book says, "Its identity with the site of Solomon's Temple is beyond dispute." Today Muslims vociferously deny this reality.

We see downplaying of the importance of Jerusalem with the Jordanians: When they controlled eastern Jerusalem, they wanted to build up Amman as more important — actually moved the Wakf (Islamic trust) offices there. I will add that it was only after almost 19 years of Jordanian control of eastern Jerusalem that King Hussein decided to build a palace there — the king of Jordan didn't spend time in Jerusalem even though he might have. But shortly after came the Six Day War. That "palace" sits only partially built until today.


What makes current claims of the importance of Jerusalem to Islam so difficult to combat is that, as Moshe Sharon has put it, "Islam has Islamisized history and geography." Islam, they say, existed since the beginning of the world — Muhammad was created before Adam and then was dissolved. The dust of Muhammad was used to create Adam, who was a Moslem, as was Avraham, Isaac, Moses, etc. Truth is only with Islam. There is a text, "Islamic holy places in Jerusalem before Islam."


There is a very famous Koranic verse — Sura 17.1 — that reads "Blessed be he who transported his servant from the near holy mosque to the farthest mosque." There is an historical explanation for what this referred to. Jerusalem, however, was then read into this retroactively in about 715, in the time of the Umayyads, who built al-Aksa. Today the verse is cited as proof that Allah transported Muhammad during his "night journey" to the farthest mosque, which is al-Aksa mosque in Jerusalem. But the al-Aksa mosque was built after the verse had been written.


Yitzhak Reiter says that during the last 50 years, a new Islamic ethos of Jerusalem has been developed to serve the political reality:

— a new history has been written
— Jewish attachment to Jerusalem is denied
— the status of al-Quds (Jerusalem) has been elevated
— all of Jerusalem and all of Palestine is claimed as wakf (holy Islamic trust)
— warnings are sounded that the al-Aksa mosque is in danger (threatened by the Jews)

A Muslim Arab history has been created that predates the arrival of the Hebrews in Canaan.

Says one Muslim writer: "The Canaanites and Jebusites and Amalekites came to Palestine from the Arabian Peninsula." Of course, the intent here is to show that those who inhabited Palestine from an early time were Arabs. But I rather liked this because it inadvertently ties Amalek to the Arabs.

There is denial of the fact of a Temple on the Mount. (It was in Yemen, or one of a dozen different places named without consistency.) Jewish presence is recent and there is not even any Jewish attachment to the Kotel, the Western Wall.


Mordecai Kedar, taking an approach that is significantly different from the other speakers, says that the underlying motivation for the Muslim approach to Jerusalem is essentially theological and not political. I found this to be exceedingly elucidating:

From its inception, Islam was viewed as an illegitimate religion; Muhammad was accused of simply recycling the earlier religions (saying that Moses, Jesus, etc. are all Muslim prophets). There was a struggle to prove that it was legitimate and independent — this became an obsession. The approach that was adopted was to say that Islam was meant to replace the earlier religions. (It is for this reason that mosques are built on top of churches — or in the instance of the Temple Mount, the Dome of the Rock on top of the ruins of the Temple.) Islam is not intended to live side-by-side with other religions.

Thus, 1948, when a Jewish nation was re-established in the traditional homeland of the Jews, it was a disaster for the Muslims. This, I believe, makes the concept of the Nakba (the view that the founding of the State of Israel is a "catastrophe") clearer than a purely political interpretation does. Islam was supposed to replace Judaism. How can there be a resurgence of Judaism? It undercuts the very raison d'etre of Islam. And then in 1967, the Jews took the Temple Mount as well.

Says Kedar, when Israel builds, proving that Jews are here to stay, it is unbearable for Muslims.

Elucidating, indeed, but holds out no promise for comprise or peace.


As part of his presentation, Kedar showed a video of his interview on Jerusalem done on al-Jazeera. It's delicious, and I provide the link to it here for your viewing pleasure:


Itamar Marcus provided ample evidence of Islamic attitudes regarding Jerusalem via Palestinian Media Watch. For example:

A video from PA TV that "shows a woman who apparently represents 'ancient Palestinians' (or possibly Muslims) going through the history of the land — replacing the Jewish people's actual history":

A video from PA TV that "mimics Jewish tradition: Imitates Psalms 137:5 'If I forget thee, oh Jerusalem'":

A clip from PA TV in which a lecturer Dr. Jamal Amar, says:
"There is a view that where it [the Dome of the Rock] stands was the Holy of Holies of the fictitious Temple — and by the way, that is merely an illusion. There is no remnant of it. It's a myth. A story of no value, like the Arabian Nights, and other legends... Only in Palestine... [after] 60 years of digging, and they've found nothing at all. Not a water jug, not a coin, not any earthen vessel, no bronze weapons, no piece of metal, absolutely nothing of this myth, because it's a myth and a lie. This digging has not left a single meter [unturned], but it has achieved absolutely nothing." br/> http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=487 (scroll down a bit for the clip)

Surely, Dr. Amar knows better. But what of the people who hear his statement?


Dore Gold's final presentation emphasized the need for all of Jerusalem to stay in Jewish hands. With the radicalization of Islam, he says, we are seeing something that was not the case historically. Even when Jews were second class citizens in Muslim lands, they were able to have synagogues. But now, there is a tendency to see the Muslim destruction of holy sites of other religions. Of course it was the case in eastern Jerusalem during the Jordanian occupation — when synagogues were systematically destroyed. But also with the eager rush by Palestinian Arab Muslims to damage Joseph's Tomb in Shechem. And the destruction by the Taliban of ancient Buddhist statues — a national treasure — in Afghanistan. And the disrespect of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem by Muslims. And what is happening to Coptic Churches in Egypt.

The Christian world, by and large, is promoting a "two state solution" that would put Christian sites into Muslim hands. But they had best ask themselves who is going to protect the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, which is in eastern Jerusalem, if it is under the control of Palestinian Arabs.

Only Israel is capable of protecting the holy sites of all religions.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Dr. Richard Swier, March 18, 2012.

Obama selected Dalia Mogahed as an adviser on the White House Office of Faith — Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. She is an open advocate of Sharia, so it's no surprise that she supports the Syrian revolutionaries, who are the same as the other "Arab Spring" revolutionaries: pro-Sharia Islamic supremacists. But for her to characterize Assad as not being able to deliver on "resistance to Israel," besides purveying the Palestinian jihadist canard of Israel aggression, also ignores the fact that Damascus was headquarters for Hamas and other jihad organizations, and Assad pursued a course of consistent hostility to Israel.

But not hostile enough for Obama adviser Dalia Mogahed.

This information is courtesy of Robert Spenser from Jihad Watch.


Contact Richard Swier by email at drswier@gmail.com and visit his website at
http://www.redcounty.com/rich — swier

To Go To Top

Posted by MS Kramer, March 17, 2012.

"They're at it again, those pesky Jews, agitating for war. Can't they get over the Holocaust? After all, it's so last century and how long are they going to milk that cow?" Is this not the way in which Israel is generally portrayed by the media?

A different perception of Israel is as a country that has a 4,000 year history in the Land and has had to fight for its existence many times, not always successfully. If absolutely convinced that Israel's existence is threatened, our leadership must act, regardless of what other friendly nations urge.

In 586 BCE, Nebucadnezar led the Babylonians to Judea, where they destroyed the First Temple. Even before the destruction, the best and brightest of the Jews were taken to Babylon. There they prospered, although they never forgot Jerusalem: "By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion. ... For there they that carried us away captive ... If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy." (Psalm 137)

A remnant of Jews were left in the Land of Israel, mostly farmers and shepherds. Fifty years later later, King Cyrus of Persia allowed Ezra and Nehemiah to return to the land and to rebuild the Temple, accompanied by thousands of fellow Jews. Nonetheless, the majority of Jews remained in the Persian empire.

Iran, successor to the Persian Empire, has a fabled history which predates the 7th century CE Muslim conquest. At its height about 500 BCE, the empire extended over 127 lands, "from India, even unto Ethiopia." Our recent celebration of Purim commemorated the triumph of the Jews in Persia over their enemies in the empire. Queen Esther, alerted by her Uncle Mordechai, enlightened King Ahasuerus (commonly identified as Xerxes the Great (486-465 BCE), to the fact that he had signed her death warrant by allowing the evil Haman to set a date for wholesale slaughter of the empire's Jews. So the king made additional proclamations ordering the Jews to defend themselves and to take vengeance on their enemies, which they did with vigor.

Alexander the Great (356-322 BCE), who conquered the known world, included Judea in his empire. But like in many other countries, his conquest was not by arms. He was known as a fierce opponent but a fair monarch, so many cities opened themselves to his army without a fight. In all those cities, a giant statue of Alexander was erected on the site of the largest paganTemple. But in Jerusalem, the desecration of the Jewish Temple was avoided. The Kohan (High Priest) went out to greet Alexander at the gate to the city and informed him that, in his honor, all of the sons born in Judea that year would be named Alexander. Suitably impressed, Alexander ordered that the statue was not enforced.

We know the details of the Jewish fight against the Greeks and Hellenism (the heritage of Alexander) from the two Books of the Maccabees as well as the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus. In 167 BCE, the Jews were part of the Hellenist empire ruled by the Seleucid (Syrian-Hellenic) monarch Antiochus Epiphanies, who was a fierce and powerful king.

Two years later the king's legions returned to Judea. The Jews were commanded to cease following their "strange" laws. Antiochus "forbid burnt offerings, and sacrifice, and drink offerings ... Set up altars, and groves, and chapels of idols, and sacrifice swine's flesh, and unclean beasts ... leave their children uncircumcised, and make their souls abominable with all manner of uncleanness and profanation ..." (1 Macc:45-49)

But there were zealots in the land who refused to submit to the Syrian abominators. They were led by the Maccabees, named after Judah the Hammer (Maccabee is derived from the Hebrew word for hammer). He was one of six sons of Mattathias, a priest (Kohen) and the patriarch of the Hasmonean clan. The Maccabees founded the Hasmonean dynasty, which ruled from 164 BCE to 63 BCE, reasserting the Jewish religion, expanding the boundaries of the Land of Israel and reducing the influence of Hellenism. Since that time until today we celebrate that victory on the festival of Hannukah. However, the Jews' independence was only temporary.

Rome was the major power around the Mediterranean Sea from 753 BCE until the Middle Ages, carrying on the Hellenistic tradition originated by Alexander the Great. The Hasmonean kings of Judea recognized Rome's dominance and sent envoys there as early as 161 BCE. Before long, Rome usurped the authority of the Hasmonean dynasty, turning them into puppets. In 67 CE, the Jews revolted against Roman rule and began the Jewish War. The result was the destruction of the Temple and the sacking of Jerusalem in 70 CE, and the fall of Masada a few years later. The Bar Kochba Rebellion against Rome (132-135 CE) also killed tens of thousands of Jews. The triumphant Romans renamed Jerusalem "Aelia Capitolina," and Judea "Palestina," in order to glorify Rome and obscure the Jews' ancient roots in the Land of Israel. Only the Jews had dared to contest the Romans' absolute rule; no other nation joined their rebellion.

Israel's Declaration of Independence in 1948 triggered a huge wave of organized warfare against the Jewish state. The most dangerous opponent of Israel (and the United States) is Iran, a nation that insistently declares its intention to destroy Israel (and the United States). Not by coincidence, Iran is developing a nuclear weapons industry. Israel is naturally hyper-concerned. But, if Israel attempts to pre-empt Iran's nascent nuclear weapons program, there will be massive, worldwide economic consequences. Prime Minister Netanyahu is well aware of this and of the blame and condemnation that will be heaped upon Israel if Israel attacks.

Until now, the West and others have feared Israel's potential attack on Iran because of the expected economic fallout from skyrocketing oil prices and because of Iran's retaliation against America, Israel, Jews, and possibly European "bystanders." Not receiving much attention is the fact that a nuclear-armed Iran will be even more of a rogue nation than it is today. With atomic weapons and delivery systems, Iran will be able to influence events in the Middle East with impunity and to push its campaign of terror to undermine the West.

There is a burden on Netanyahu's shoulders imposed by history, especially the events of the 20th century. Even at the risk of appearing to be a pesky nation agitating for war, Israel's leadership must not cave in to world opinion or succumb to political pressure. The welfare of the State of Israel is our leadership's paramount obligation, especially when Iran's ability to fulfill its repeated predictions for Israel's demise have the possibility to be realized in the short term.

Steve Kramer lives in Alfe Menashe. He has written a weekly opinion column for the Jewish Times of southern New Jersey (www.jewishtimes — sj.com) for the last ten years. He writes, "They're about history, politics, touring, or whatever excites me." He is author of "Encountering Israel — Geography, History, Culture." Contact him at mskramer@bezeqint.net and visit www.encounteringisrael.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Martin Sherman, March 17, 2012.

Support for a two-state solution has sown the seeds for the international delegitimization of Israel


Alan Dershowitz (Courtesy of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East)

It would be obnoxious for there to be a conference here [Harvard] on the subject of whether the Palestinians are a real people. They are, and so are the Israelis. The quest for a Palestinian state is a legitimate one, as is the need to preserve Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. — Alan Dershowitz, "Should Harvard Sponsor a One-Sided Conference Seeking the End of Israel?" (February 28)

Prof. Alan Dershowitz is a committed, articulate supporter of Israel. He has defended the Jewish state with eloquence and passion on numerous occasions, displaying commendable resolve and poise despite torrents of hostile reaction. The courageous, principled stance he has taken — regrettably rare among academics of his standing — should be greatly appreciated by Israelis across the political spectrum.

Ensnared by political correctness

However, in embracing several central precepts of politically correct but factually impaired conventional wisdom, Dershowitz has, along with many other well-meaning pro-Israeli figures, severely undermined the efficacy of his "Case for Israel."

This is particularly true regarding his unquestioning endorsement of Palestinian claims for statehood within the two-state paradigm, which for Dershowitz has seemingly become the litmus test for admission to civilized debate.

Thus in February 2010, when Palestinian hecklers prevented Ambassador Michael Oren from addressing students at the University of California, Irvine, Dershowitz rightly denounced this as anti-Israel censorship. However, what appeared to make this action particularly egregious in Dershowitz's eyes was the fact that Oren was "a moderate supporter of the two-state solution," thus hinting — perhaps without meaning to — that had Oren opposed this policy, silencing him might have been more understandable.

Indeed, as the citation above demonstrates, Dershowitz would consider any challenge to the authenticity of Palestinian national claims "obnoxious."

Conundrum for the future

Future historians will be baffled as to why such a manifestly disastrous, unworkable concept came to be embraced by so many prominent, allegedly well-informed pundits, politicians, and policy-makers. They will be particularly perplexed why the two-state solution was so enthusiastically endorsed not only by those who had a vested interest in feigning support for it, but by those who had a vested interest in exposing it as the duplicitous subterfuge it is. They will be mystified why — despite the fact that it proved devastating for both Arabs and Jews — it became the hallmark of enlightenment.

Recent events have brought home dramatically not only how futile it is for Israel and Israel-supporters to adhere to the two-state paradigm, but also how counterproductive it is.

For by pursuing the "vision" (read "fantasy") of two states, they will not only fail to reap the intended benefits this policy is purported to yield, but will precipitate outcomes highly deleterious to Israel — indeed the very outcomes the two-state policy was supposed to prevent.

The latest round of rocket fire from Gaza underscored just how ill-considered it would be to relinquish more land to the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria. The recent Harvard one-state conference demonstrated how clinging to an unfeasible formula has merely generated the opportunity to promote even more menacing alternatives.

Demonstrating the obvious

The 300 rockets that rained down on southern Israel since last Friday, forcing a million civilians to huddle in shelters, proved for the umpteenth time what by now should be seared into the cognizance of all Israelis and all Israel supporters abroad: Ceding territory — any territory — to the Palestinians — any Palestinians — is unacceptably risky. For while one might fervently hope that events in the "West Bank" would turn out significantly better than in Gaza, there is little basis for such optimism. Hoping — however fervently — that tangible dangers will fail to materialize is hardly a formula for responsible risk management.

The consensus among security experts — strongly corroborated by the precedent in Gaza — is that without the presence of the IDF, the Abbas administration would be swiftly dispatched and replaced by an Islamist successor.

What is the significance of such a prospect? Clearly, the repercussions would be far more severe than in the case of Gaza.

For whatever the final contours of a putative Palestinian state, it would entail a frontier of at least 300 kilometers — approximately six times longer than the Gaza front — much of which would be adjacent to Israel's most populous urban centers, from the environs of Haifa in the north to Beersheba and beyond in the south. (Significantly, Beersheba is much closer to the pre-1967 border of the "West Bank" than it is to the Gaza Strip).

Moreover, unlike in Gaza, a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria would reduce Israel's width in its most populous areas to a minuscule 11-25 km. — roughly the distance from Beverly Hills to Malibu along Sunset Boulevard.

Even more important than geographic expanse — or the lack thereof — is topographical structure. Unlike the flat Gaza Strip, the limestone hills that comprise the "West Bank" dominate the urbanized Coastal Plain, together with much of Israel's vital infrastructure, its only international airport, vital centers of civilian government and military command — and 80 percent of its population and commercial activity.

All of this would be in range of the weapons that forced a million Israelis into bomb shelters last weekend, now deployed along a much longer front and in far superior topographical positions.

Even given the impressive performance of the Iron Dome anti-rocket system, this would make any semblance of economic or social routine untenable.

'One does not have to a military expert'

Ever since Abba Eban characterized the pre-1967 Green Line as the "Auschwitz Borders," it has been widely accepted that such frontiers cannot, except under wildly optimistic and unrealistic assumptions, afford Israel acceptable levels of security.

Even iconic Labor Party moderate Yigal Allon declared: "One does not have to be a military expert to easily identify the critical defects of the armistice lines that existed until June 4, 1967," warning that they risk "the physical extinction of a large part of [Israel's] population and the political elimination of the Jewish state."

Numerous military experts have endorsed this position. In one recent study, a host of senior military and diplomatic figures, including a former IDF chief of staff, a former head of Military Intelligence and the National Security Council, and ambassadors to the UN, US and France, concluded that to meet minimum security requirements, Israel must retain control of the high ground in Judea and Samaria, as well as the Jordan Valley and the air space up to the Jordan River.

What do these minimum requirements, necessitating Israeli control of wide swathes of territory in the "West Bank," entail for the viability of Palestinian statehood?

The myth of defensible borders

The answer is provided by an article, "The Myth of Defensible Borders" by Omar Dajani and Ezzedine Fishere in the January 2011 edition of Foreign Affairs.

The authors — an adviser to the Palestinian negotiating team and an adviser to the Egyptian foreign minister, respectively — point out: "A policy of defensible borders would... perpetuate the current sources of Palestinian insecurity, further delegitimizing an agreement in the public's eyes. Israel would retain the discretion to impose arbitrary and crippling constraints on the movement of people and goods.... For these reasons, Palestinians are likely to regard defensible borders as little more than occupation by another name."

Recent events in the Mideast — a triumphant Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the ever-ascendant Islamist influence in Jordan — are hardly likely to reduce Israeli threat perception, thus only increasing the incompatibility between a viable Palestinian state and minimal requirements for a secure Israel.

Dershowitz's call that "Israel should recognize the right of Palestinians to establish an independent, democratic Palestinian state with politically and economically viable boundaries" appears increasing like a hapless attempt to "square the circle."

'Moderation' begets delegitimization

The point many well-intentioned friends of Israel seem be to missing is that it is precisely "moderate supporters of the two-state solution" who have, in large measure, sown the seeds for the delegitimization of Israel.

While this contention may appear counterintuitive, the logic behind it is unassailable. Once the legitimacy of a Palestinian state is conceded, the delegitimization of Israel is inevitable.

The chain of reasoning is clear: If the legitimacy of a Palestinian state is accepted, then any measures incompatible with its viability are illegitimate. But, Israel's minimum security requirements necessarily obviate the viability of Palestinian state. Thus, by accepting the admissibility of a Palestinian state, one necessarily admits the inadmissibility of measures required to ensure Israeli security.

Conversely, measures required to ensure Israeli security necessarily negate the viability of a Palestinian state.

For the notion of a secure Israel to regain legitimacy, the notion of a Palestinian state must be discredited and removed from the discourse as a possible means of resolving the Israeli-Arab conflict.

Indeed an invented people

This, of course, is easier said than done.

Rolling back the decades of distortion, deception and delusion that have become entrenched in the collective international consciousness will be a Herculean task.

But the immense scale of the task cannot diminish the imperative of its implementation.

The first — and most crucial — step along this arduous road is to expose the Palestinian claim to nationhood for the hoax it is.

For the Palestinians are indeed an "invented people." Not because Newt Gingrich deems them to be, but because they themselves declare this to be so.

The historical record is replete with proclamations from Arab and Palestinian leaders, echoing the frank admission by the late Zuheir Mohsen, former PLO Executive Council member, that a "separate Palestinian identity exists only for tactical reasons," and that the "the establishment of a Palestinian state is a new tool to continue the fight against Israel."

Indeed, the Palestinian National Charter (Article 12) concedes that the endeavor to "safeguard... Palestinian identity" in merely a temporary ruse.

Moreover, not only was the territory, now claimed as the age-old Palestinian homeland, under Jordanian rule for two decades prior to 1967, without even a feeble effort to establish a Palestinian state in it being made; but the Palestinians eschewed any sovereign claim to it, explicitly conceding (Article 24 of the 1964 National Charter) that it belonged to another sovereign entity — Jordan — which only in 1988 relinquished its claim to it.

It was only after these territories came under Jewish control that Palestinians began to see them as a location for their state.

A spiteful echo

Nothing could underscore more dramatically the fundamental truth about the Palestinian claim to nationhood.

It is a claim devoid of any substantive positive content. It is no more than the negation of Jewish claims to nationhood, merely a contrary — and spiteful — echo of Zionist achievement, without which it would have neither the conceptual rationale nor the practical capacity to exist.

As the late King Hussein — not Newt Gingrich — stated: "The appearance of the Palestinian national personality comes as an answer to Israel's claim that Palestine is Jewish."

What could be clearer? No claim that Israel is not Jewish, no Palestinian national personality.

It thus astounding that Dershowitz would suggest there is any semblance of equivalency between Jewish and Palestinians claims to nationhood. Indeed, by any accepted criteria for political selfdetermination, the two are antipodal opposites. The Jews have a unique language — the Palestinians do not; the Jews have unique script — the Palestinians do not; the Jews have a unique religion — the Palestinians do not. The Jews have a unique heritage and documented history dating back thousands of years; the Palestinians — at best — have a contrived history dating back a few decades and supported largely by archeological vandalism and "creative" chronicling of the past.

Imperative not 'obnoxious'

Dershowitz is gravely mistaken in dismissing debate on the authenticity of Palestinian claims to statehood as "obnoxious." It is difficult to conceive of any more proper and pressing imperative.

Refraining from such discussion has inflicted devastating damage on Israel and its international legitimacy.

By desperately adhering to a paradigm that is unworkable — because it would make Israel untenable geographically — the two-state advocates have not only made Israel appear insincere and conniving.

By shunning discussion on other Zionist-compliant alternatives, they have — unintentionally — catalyzed debate on far more ominous proposals that threaten to make Israel untenable demographically.

The recent Harvard conference is the harbinger of things to come.

Martin Sherman is the academic director of the Jerusalem Summit. He lectures at Tel Aviv University, served in Israel's defense establishment and was a ministerial adviser to the Yitzhak Shamir government. He has undergraduate degrees in physics and geology and a doctorate in Political Science and international relations. HE written extensively on water, including "The Politics of Water in the Middle East," London: Macmillan, 1999.

To Go To Top

Posted by GWY, March 16, 2012.

This was written by Soeren Kern and is archived at

Soeren Kern (http://www.soerenkern.com/) is Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook


"Whether or not you want us in the European Union, our influence in Europe is growing. We are more numerous. We are younger. We are stronger."

A second-generation Muslim immigrant in Austria has authored a provocative new book in which he argues that Europe's future is Turkish, whether Europeans like it or not.

The book's short, sharp and confrontational title says it all: "We are Coming"
(http://www.amazon.com/Wir-kommen-German-Edition-ebook/ dp/B007HDZ4WM/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid= 1331777337&sr=1-1).

The thesis is: "Regardless of whether or not you [Europeans] like us [Turks], whether or not you integrate us, whether or not you want us in the European Union, our influence in Europe is growing. We are more numerous. We are younger. We are more ambitious. Our economy is growing faster. We are stronger."

The author, a 25-year-old Austrian-Turk named Inan Türkmen, says his objective in writing the book is to change the terms of the debate about Muslim immigration in Europe.

Türkmen — who was born in Austria to Kurdish migrants and speaks fluent German — says he is sick and tired of the way Turkish immigrants are being portrayed in the European media. He believes the time has come for Turks to fight back.

Taking a page from the playbook of the American Tea Party movement, Türkmen says he wants to establish an "angry citizen movement" (Wutbürgerbewegung) in Europe. His Turkish Tea Party would unite Turkish immigrants in Austria, Germany and other European countries to protest against European arrogance
(http://www.ftd.de/politik/europa/:integrations- debatte-ihr-braucht-uns-tuerken-mehr-als-wir-euch/ 60176161.html)."

In an interview
(http://diepresse.com/home/panorama/oesterreich/ 736310/Aufstand-der-WutTuerken?from=simarchiv) with the Vienna-based newspaper Die Presse, Türkmen says he decided to write "We are Coming" after getting "hot under the collar" over a recent book about Muslim immigration by the renowned German economist Thilo Sarrazin.

Sarrazin's best-selling book, Germany Does Away With Itself
(http://www.amazon.de/Deutschland-schafft-sich- unser-setzen/dp/3421044309/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie= UTF8&qid=1283876601&sr=1-1), broke Germany's long-standing taboo on discussing the impact of Muslim immigration. The book, which was first published in August 2010, is now on its 22nd edition. At last count, more than two million copies have been sold, making it one of the most widely read titles in Germany since the Second World War.

Sarrazin's book has resonated with vast numbers of ordinary Germans who are becoming increasingly uneasy about the social changes that are transforming Germany, largely due to the presence of millions of non-integrated Muslims in the country.

The following are some excerpts from Sarrazin's book:

"In every European country, due to their low participation in the labor market and high claim on state welfare benefits, Muslim migrants cost the state more than they generate in added economic value. In terms of culture and civilization, their notions of society and values are a step backwards."

"No other religion in Europe is so demanding and no other migration group depends so much on the social welfare state and is so much connected to criminality."

"Most of the cultural and economic problems [in Germany] are concentrated in a group of the five to six million immigrants from Muslim countries."

"I do not want my grandchildren and great-grandchildren to live in a mostly Muslim country where Turkish and Arabic are widely spoken, women wear headscarves and the day's rhythm is determined by the call of the muezzin."

"If the birthrate of migrants remains higher than that of the indigenous population, within a few generations, the migrants will take over the state and society."

"I do not want us to end up as strangers in our own land, not even on a regional basis."

"From today's perspective, the immigration of guest workers in the 1960s and 1970s was a gigantic mistake."

The roots of Germany's current problems with Muslim immigration can be traced back to October 30, 1961, with the signing of a labor recruitment agreement between West Germany and Turkey. At the time, West Germany's post-World War II economy was booming and similar treaties with Greece, Italy and Spain were insufficient to supply Germany's seemingly endless demand for labor. By the end of 1969, more than one million Turkish "guest workers" had arrived in Germany to work in the "host country's" industrial zones.

The initial idea was that the Turkish laborers would return home after a period of two years, but the so-called "rotation clause" was removed from the German-Turkish treaty in 1964, partly due to pressure from German industry, which did not want to pay the costs of constantly training new workers. The predictable result was that many Turks never returned home.

Today, the Turkish population in Germany has mushroomed to an estimated 3.5 million, and Turks now constitute the largest ethnic minority group in the country. Demographers expect that the Turkish population in Germany will increase exponentially in coming decades, largely due to a high birth rate and Germany's continuing high demand for foreign workers.

Germany's demand for foreign labor is being fuelled by a demographic crisis in which the German population is not only ageing, but also shrinking, at a rapid pace. According to projections by the German Federal Statistics Office (https://www.destatis.de/EN/Homepage.html), Germany's current population of 82 million, the largest in the European Union, is set to decline by as much as 20%, to 65 million, over the next five decades. At the same time, 34% of the population will be older than 65 and 14% will be 80 or more by 2060, up from 20% and 5% respectively in 2009.

The twin challenges of depopulation and aging will have major consequences for the financial sustainability of Germany's cradle-to-grave social security system. For example, the number of pensioners that will have to be supported by working-age people could almost double by 2060, according to the Federal Statistics Office. While 100 people of working age between 20 and 65 had to provide the pensions for 34 retired people in 2009, they will have to generate income for between 63 and 67 pensioners in 2060.

This implies that in the future, Germany will become more, not less, dependent on immigrants. And Turks will continue to be a major source of labor, considering that the birth rate among Turkish immigrants in Germany is 2.4, nearly double that of the native German population (which at 1.38 is far below the replacement rate of 2.1 children per couple).

Time is on the side of the Turks and Inan Türkmen knows it. In a highly confrontational essay titled "You Germans Need the Turks more than the Turks Need You"
(http://www.ftd.de/politik/europa/:integrations- debatte-ihr-braucht-uns-tuerken-mehr-als-wir-euch/ 60176161.html) which was published by the Financial Times Deutschland, Türkmen writes: "Our consolation is that Turkish influence in Europe is growing and there is nothing you Europeans can do to stop it. Of course, Turkey has always exerted influence on Europe. Mozart, Hayden and Beethoven were all inspired by Turkish music. Soon you will not even realize it because you will all be a little Turkish. People mix into cultures and I am planning to contribute something to make this happen. Up until now, all of my girlfriends have been European, not Turkish. In the future, freckles will become increasingly rare sight in Europe. The point is: The future belongs to Turkey."

Contact GWY at gwy123@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gail Winston, March 16, 2012.

This was written by Amos Regev, Editor-in-Chief of Israel Hayom (http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=3525).


WINSTON MID EAST ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY March 16, 2012 Email: winston@winstonglobal.org Please disseminate & re-post. If you publish, send us a copy. Many of our articles appear on Websites at http://www.JewishIndy.com, freeman.org & gamla.org.il/english. Outgoing mail is virus-checked. To be removed from this list, please send your Email address

Never underestimate the capabilities of the IDF. It has achieved the impossible before. If it took Iran 20 years to get their nuclear program to where it is today, who is to say it can recover in a year? Yes, we can strike Iran. And yes, we can succeed.

We shouldn't be arrogant, but we shouldn't underestimate our own capabilities either.

Here is a well-known Israeli scene: A vehicle gets stuck on the uphill road to Jerusalem, the driver stands on the shoulder of the road, the hood of the car is open and a cloud of smoke rises from the engine into the man's sweating face. Another vehicle pulls up behind the disabled car and an obese man approaches the forlorn driver and bends down to view the overheated engine. "Let me do this, leave it to me," the supposed savior says, full of good will. "I know what to do, I was a mechanic in the armored corps." This usually doesn't end well.

"Leave it to me," U.S. President Barack Obama tells Israel, regarding the overheating Iranian issue. "I know what to do," Obama says, but he was not even a mechanic in the armored corps. And it is not at all certain that he is filled with goodwill. This too may not end well ...

"I am not bluffing," the president said to the audience at the AIPAC conference two weeks ago, and for one moment it seemed as if Uncle Sam would take care of the Iranian problem for us, while we sit in the bleachers and cheer him on. But the very next day, he did an about-face: back to more talks with the Iranians.

"This is the last chance," says the government which only a moment ago was praised for its announcement of an end to "containment." And so the days of "prevention" have arrived.

Distinguished commentator Charles Krauthammer was disgusted. "So what is Obama's real objective?" he wrote in his Washington Post column last week. Krauthammer quoted an administration official who told his newspaper "We're trying to make the decision to attack as hard as possible for Israel."

"Revealing and shocking," wrote Krauthammer. On one hand, there is an extreme terrorist country that will shortly acquire nuclear weapons and has declared as its aim the destruction of Israel. On the other hand, there is the president, whose only aim is to reach the November elections favorably, without wars, crises or high gasoline prices. The main goal for him is not to ruin his chances of being reelected, says Krauthammer. And he sums up the situation as follows: "A fair-minded observer might judge that Israel's desire to not go gently into the darkness carries higher moral urgency than the political future of one man, even if he is president of the United States."

The question of what to do about Iran's nuclear program has risen to the top of the international community's agenda, and unfortunately, the most turbulent and emotional debate in the Israeli media as well. All the dams have been breached, and even our national canon — that of destruction, exile, Holocaust and revival — has been ridiculed. How does history benefit and harm life, a prominent philosopher once asked, and he may have enjoyed seeing the pirouette-on-a-pinhead performed by former security officials, experts, writers and "intellectuals" who are trying to prove that black is white, two plus two does not equal four, the rational Iranians are not building a bomb, and if they are building one — they won't use it, and if they use it — it won't be against us, and in more general terms — it doesn't concern us, and he who believes we are in danger of being destroyed, is certainly mistaken.

History does play a role in the present as well, and it is good that is does. Every nation has its history, its narrative, its canon. In our case, the Holocaust plays a central role. "In every generation [there are those who seek our destruction]" is not just a verse from the Passover Haggadah — it is a historical truth. Not very pleasant, but true. And it is also true today. Ask the folks in Gaza and the West Bank, Tehran and Beirut. You don't want to believe them? That's your problem. When will you start believing? When it is too late? And in the meantime, should we do nothing, as author David Grossman suggests?

"Passive appeasement is what shaped the worldview of Britain's elitist leaders in the 1930s. Public opinion was that of 'no more war' and a refusal to rearm and a naive belief in collective security left their impression on the Left ... They may have condemned Nazi actions, but their revulsion at arms dealers and militarism was so great that they refused even a minimal rearmament (of Britain), and by so doing, proved they did not understand the uniqueness of Nazi evil." This is what highly acclaimed British historian Michael Burleigh wrote in his book "Moral Combat," describing the atmosphere of British appeasement in the face of the ever-growing danger from Nazi Germany.

Intelligence units do not read minds

Yet again a comparison between the Nazi regime and the regime in Tehran? Certainly. For the simple reason that it is the truth. True, two historical situations are never identical, but people play a role in every historical situation. And the cases are quite similar. Fact: the Bible, Greek tragedies, Shakespeare's plays and the great artistic works, are all relevant to people today as they were when they first appeared. Perhaps history is not repeating itself, but people, under similar circumstances, do react similarly. Popular uprisings in city squares existed prior to the age of Twitter and Facebook. Wars were fought before tanks and pilotless aircraft were invented. And genocide happened before gas chambers were invented. With the advent of nuclear weapons, it just became easier to perpetrate.

Nuclear weapons in the hands of Islamists is a danger to Israel. They live history. In their view, the Crusader invasion is a recent event, and as they see it, we, not to our credit, are also considered cursed Crusaders. They live this myth and are working to hasten the messiah — theirs. Give them nuclear weapons and they will use them. This is what they say. Whoever thinks this is simply "for internal propaganda purposes," may he revel in his belief. But just as a reminder, a short while before the attack on the World Trade Center, an explicit threat was posted on al-Qaida's Web page saying the organization was about to carry out an attack that would shock the world. U.S. intelligence agencies — the most sophisticated in the world — ignored the threat. The results are known to all.

The topic of intelligence is altogether problematic. In 2007, a U.S. national intelligence estimate [NIE] claimed that Iran had frozen its nuclear program in 2003. In Tehran, they burst out laughing. They probably read the best-seller "Legacy of Ashes" which describes all the failures of U.S. intelligence agencies. Even today — as senior officials in Washington admitted in a local news report — it is doubtful that American intelligence agencies will know exactly when Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei decides to assemble a bomb. They have satellites, eavesdropping systems, computers and radar — the most advanced technologies. But they still cannot read the Ayatollahs' minds.

It is also not certain that the Americans are capable of acting in the most effective way. If we put aside Bin Laden's assassination — a perfect targeted assassination after a decade of work — the U.S. military, unfortunately, has not been victorious all that much recently. Saddam Hussein's army was relatively easy to defeat in two campaigns. But terror brought about America's abandonment of Iraq, and terror is also about to bring about the departure of U.S. troops from Afghanistan as well. After the "Yes, we can" of the last U.S. presidential elections, a new phrase is taking root in the U.S. these days — "It is not doable," which is mainly being associated with the situation in Afghanistan. Is this what Obama — commander in chief of the U.S. army — needs, another unsuccessful war in the Middle East?

Tough decisions under uncertain conditions

Leadership is manifested in one's ability to make difficult decisions in the midst of uncertain circumstances and ambiguity. Such decisions have been made in Israel in the past. In 1948, then Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion decided to declare the establishment of the state despite many warnings of imminent Arab military invasions. In 1967, Israel's leadership decided to go to war — which later became known as the Six-Day War — despite the stranglehold placed on the country courtesy of the Egyptian, Syrian and Jordanian armies. In 1981, then Prime Minister Menachem Begin decided to strike Iraq's nuclear plant in Osirak, despite the fact that almost every expert and military commander advised him against doing so. Gambles? "Leadership is sometimes left with no choice but to take critical decisions which are essentially 'fuzzy gambles' for the whole pot, in that there may be no way of calculating the likelihood of success," Professor Yehezkel Dror wrote this week. "If the number of those killed in a future war will be far greater than the number of those killed in a war today, it is imperative to act today."

Had Allied forces invaded the Rheine district in 1936 to block one of Hitler's earliest moves, many would have probably perished in the ensuing battles. But the price would have been relatively minuscule compared with the price they were forced to pay three years later. It is not pleasant to "think about the unthinkable" as strategist and author Herman Kahn titled his classic book, but the numbers issue is indeed a significant calculation. An Iranian nuclear bomb may cause tremendous damage to Israel. "Israel is a single-bomb country," former Iranian President Ali Rafsanjani once said, referring to the possibility of destroying Israel with just one nuclear bomb. But if Iran's nuclear program is dealt a strong blow or completely destroyed, Iran's second-strike capability is limited. According to reports, they have only a few hundred surface-to-surface ballistic missiles that can reach Israel. Some of their missiles will be destroyed in an aerial assault. Others will encounter the Arrow anti-missile defense system, which is no less efficient than the Iron Dome. Only a few Iranian missiles will reach their destination, similar to Saddam Hussein's Scud missiles launched against Israel during the First Gulf War. Israel was struck by 40 missiles during that war, but the damage was bearable.

Will Hezb'Allah and Hamas — Iran's forward bases — join the war and launch 40 or 50 thousand rockets at their Zionist enemy? Not for certain. They know they have something to lose in doing so — their rule and their lives. And in any case we must take into consideration that if their intention is to retaliate if Israel decides to attack Iran, they may also do so if it is the U.S. who decides to attack Iran. In 1991, Israel did not join the coalition of forces that invaded Iraq, even though Saddam's missiles landed in our country. As Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in the Knesset on Wednesday, we can only imagine the brazenness of the terrorist groups if their patron (Iran) covers them with a nuclear umbrella. We can assume that once the Iranian issue is resolved, Hezb'Allah and Hamas will be weakened.

It would be very convenient for all of us if the Iranian crisis just disappears with a wave of a magic wand. But the problem is not going anywhere and is only getting worse each day. That is why we must solve it. And we can solve it. Some people say an attack on Iran will "set the Middle East ablaze." Others say an attack on Iran would shock the Middle East, but after an initial spike in oil prices, will not trigger a dramatic change. It would simply solve the problem, they say, just as the bombing of the Iraqi nuclear plant destroyed Iraq's nuclear program once and for all. If it took Iran 20 years to get to where they are today in their nuclear program, who is to say that they will recover from a military strike in a year or two?

We should never underestimate the capabilities of Israel's defense establishment, the Israel Defense Forces, and the Israel Air Force. We should not be arrogant either. We paid a price for our arrogance in the Yom Kippur War, and in other military campaigns as well. But we must also not be cowards. Passivity can also exact a heavy price. A combination of means, methods and motivation is a winning formula. The Israel Air Force has already done the impossible, more than once. A New York Times report two weeks ago emphasized the complexity of an attack on Iran. The report mentioned the distance, the anti-aircraft batteries and the large number of targets we would have to face. "They would need to send 100 planes," the writer warned. But someone forgot that in World War II some operations involved 1,000 planes (according to reports, Israel does not have that many planes ...). Since then, though, the technologies in the aircraft themselves, in navigation, electronic warfare, laser-guided weapons launched at targets from a distance, and pilotless aircraft have been able to compensate for a lack in quantity.

And above all, there is motivation. People my age will not forget the feeling we had on the eve of the Six-Day War, when everyone felt that we were on the brink of our greatest challenge, and we all worked together as one and faced the danger together. We will also not forget the Yom Kippur War, when after the sirens sounded we all ran home from the synagogues, filling the streets with human waves, and hurrying to put on our army boots and uniforms. Who can forget the feeling we had in 1976 when we heard of the successful mission in Entebbe? And even this past week, there was no fear or trauma in the shelters in the south. There were only reporters running around trying to get someone to say "Yes, for sure, it's frightening. We can't live like this any longer."

Difficult, daring and doable

There is a huge difference between the recent "bout" we experienced with Islamic Jihad in Gaza and a possible strike on Iran. This wasn't a "test-run" for a war with Iran. But it did prove that we are capable of initiating a justified campaign with the aim of thwarting terrorist activity and preventing massive attacks, and preparing ourselves properly for the inevitable retaliation. We can destroy most of the rockets and missiles that will be launched against us. We can also destroy most enemy targets with precision strikes. Our systems have proven that they work together as a system should, with one part backing up the other. Someone in the media called it "The most difficult confrontation we have had since Operation Cast Lead." Excuse me? As of Wednesday, no Israeli was killed, and there was minimal damage to homes and properties. On the other side, 20 terrorists were killed, few citizens were injured, and very little damage was reported.

Iran is a different story, though, of more immense proportions. If there is to be a strike on Iran, no amateur 'armchair strategist' will be running the operation. Only our very best people will be involved in conducting the strike. Only the cream of the crop. Our finest sons and daughters. Nearly 70 years after the Holocaust, these are state of Israel's spearheads. With the Americans or without them, it will be difficult; it will be daring; but it is doable.

Gail Winston is a Middle East analyst and commentator. Contact her by by email at winston@winstonglobal.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Phyllis Chesler, March 16, 2012.

As Islamist terrorists are being arrested in Baku for a plot to attack both the American and Israeli Embassies; as Muslims torture, murder, and exile Christians from their native Arab lands; as Hamas constantly bombards Israeli civilians with rockets launched from Gaza; even as Iran is threatening to send many "caravans of tens of thousands" of hostile Iranians to march on Jerusalem — guess what subject drew 225 eager audience members and the media to an upper west side Jewish Community Center?

The subject du jour was:"Combating Islamophobia," which featured panelists Rabbi Marc Schneier and Imam Shamsi Ali. The moderator: None other than former First Daughter, Chelsea Clinton.

Why are Jews confusing "Islamophobia" with anti-Semitism? One understands why Muslims who are used to feeling superior to all other religions, would want to assume whatever remains of Jewish victimhood and make it their own in order to gain sympathy for real and imaginary slights and for terrorist aggression — but why are Jews enabling them to do so?

In 2008, the FBI found that 66.1% of religious hate crimes in America targeted Jews, but only 7.5% of religious hate crimes targeted Muslims. Another 2011 study shows that religious bias crimes against Muslim Americans have remained relatively low with a downward trend since 2001, and are significantly less than the numbers of bias crimes against Jewish victims.

Nevertheless, Islamists claim that Muslims are suffering far more than Jews in America.

Are Rabbi Schneier and his partner, Imam Shamsi Ali the leaders we need?

Rabbi Schneier is quite the man about town. He has landed in the media many times both for his marital woes (four divorces) and for his interfaith work. He runs a very popular synagogue in Westhampton Beach on Long Island, which offers non-stop entertainment, lectures, films, gatherings, communal hot lunches and dinners, as well as religious services. He is also the son of Rabbi Arthur Schneier, the long-time rabbi of Park East Synagogue who began the tradition of having politicians and celebrities address his congregants.

Rabbi Marc Schneier is listed as the Principal Officer of The Foundation for Ethnic Understanding. According to its 2010 tax returns, the Foundation reported gross receipts of $825,638.00 for 2010; and receipts totaling nearly 3.7 million dollars for the period between 2006 and 2010. Rabbi Schneier is listed as the President/Principal Officer; among others, Russell Simmons and Alexander Machkevitch are listed as Directors. Since Machkevitch is a well-known billionaire from Kyrgyzstan and Israel, one might conjecture that he has funded some of the work of this Foundation.

In addition to his salary at the Foundation, as the Rabbi of the Westhampton Synagogue, Rabbi Schneier also receives a second handsome salary and a rabbinic allowance.

What about Schneier's media partner?

Imam Shamsi Ali replaced Sheik Muhammad Gemeaha, the Imam for the Cultural Center at the time of the September 11th attacks, who blamed Jews for the attack: "Only Jews" could have been responsible for the 9/11 attacks, and "if it became known to the American people, they would have done to Jews what Hitler did.".

One wonders whether the congregation has since forsaken its radical stance, became more tolerant, and less Jew-hating under the leadership of Imam Shamsi Ali. If so, the Imam is indeed a miracle worker. He is Indonesian. Therefore, on videos, his voice and manner are unassuming, soft, non-threatening, modest. The fact that he is not a bombastic anger-fueled Arab allows his statements about "Islam being a religion of peace" to sound eminently believable.

In person, the Imam is very likeable and charming. However, his stances on key issues are less so.

For example, in 2005, Imam Shamsi Ali condemned the Danish "Mohammed" cartoons and both religious leaders supported the Cordoba mosque/Park 51 mosque at Ground Zero.

I arrived at the Jewish Community Center and found that a protest organized by Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, and Christian activists was in progress. Banners held aloft read: "What Are Muslims Doing for Peace? Burning Churches, Honor Murdering Women. Where is the Muslim Protest?" "Since 9/11, Radical Islamists Committed 11,961 Attacks, Killed 75,038, Injured 115,255."

Inside, the panelists tip-toed through the tulips and landmines, with a well-meaning, well-practiced display of earnestness, "goodness," love, mutual admiration, and perhaps some self-admiration as well. There was no mention of terrorism, Islamism, or Islamic gender and religious apartheid.

Ms. Clinton, poised and very blonde, noted that "We are being protested against" which she considers a "positive sign. That means we are talking about something important."

Rabbi Schneier was stiff, pompous, and self-important.

"Seven years ago, my friend, Russell Simmons, challenged me to close the divide, narrow the chasm between Muslims and Jews. And now, we are now the international address for Muslim-Jewish relations."

Imam Shamsi Ali radiated warmth and good-natured humor. He defined 'Islamophobia" as "fear of Islam based on ignorance. People are fearful for no reason. Islam has been portrayed very badly in the media."

Rabbi Schneier defined "Islamophobia" as "anti-Muslim discrimination." "As a Jew, and as rabbi, I have a responsibility to speak out. I expect my Muslim brothers and sisters to do the same, to speak out about anti-Semitism."

The Rabbi and the Imam elicited laughter as they each explained that the Muslims are the "best" people (to follow God's right path) and the Jews are the "chosen" people — chosen to behave ethically.

Imam Shamsi Ali urged Muslims to reinterpret the Qu'ran. "Taking a camel to Mecca in our age, does not mean a camel. A jumbo jet is more like it."

Jumbo jet? Are they actually, finally, going to discuss the jumbo jets of 9/11?

No such candor.

Imam Shamsi Ali suggested that the word "jihad" needs to be re-interpreted. "We, the rabbi and I, are doing a jihad for peace. This is a big part of my jihad."

During the panel discussion, Rabbi Schneier proudly reminded us of their joint protest against the Peter King hearing. The Rabbi viewed his Foundation's "I Am A Muslim" Times Square event as a landmark, a benchmark, for Muslim-Jewish relations. He said: "We have to stand in the streets."

Proudly, almost boastfully, Rabbi Schneier discussed a phone call he received from Congressman Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress. He talked about Ellison getting together ten Muslim leaders who, for the first time, wrote to the head of Hamas about releasing Israeli captive Gilad Shalit. And then, they got ten more Muslim religious leaders from France to do likewise. Schneier said:

"Shalit's father told me: Rabbi, don't underestimate what this means."

I was stunned. How many well-fed terrorists did Israel have to return in order to receive one, undernourished, practically concentration camp-skinny Israeli soldier? It was 1,027.

The Rabbi and the Imam spoke about their "twinning" programs which pair a synagogue with a mosque. This is hopeful and interesting idea. Such programs takes place only one a year but on many continents: North America, Europe, and upcoming, South America.

They did not mention such programs in the Arab Middle East or in Muslim Asia. Nor did they discuss the colossal failure of their Buffalo "twinning" program. (A Jew-hating radical Sheikh blindsided a group of well-intentioned Rabbis.)

Ultimately, the evening was disappointing. It was really boring because too much was avoided. Too much "feel good" Kool-aid was passed around. Everyone seemed to be drinking it. What was not said was far more important than what was said.

The Imam was very sweet, modest. He always referred to the Qu'ran as the "holy Qu'ran." He was proud to be in America where people can so freely engage with each other.

The Rabbi quoted Burke, Neimoller, and towards the end, even Maimonides.

Rabbi Schneier is a dangerous Court Jew who is profiting from the gravy train of the "interfaith" business. He is profiting from his fiddling while Israel and the world burns. He is part of a grand taqqiya effort to present Muslims in a time of Islamism as peaceful partners. He is on a mission to persuade Jews to become agreeable dhimmis "for their own good;" otherwise, things will go badly for them and for other infidels. He thinks of himself as a great man. We have seen his sort before.

Dr. Chesler is an Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women's Studies at City University of New York. She is an author and lecturer and co-founder of the still ongoing Association for Women in Psychology (1969). Visit her website at http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/phyllischesler/. This article is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Rachel Ehrenfeld, March 16, 2012.

I should know: I helped infiltrate the UN for Ceaucescu.

This was written by Ion Mihai Pacepa and it appeared yesterday in PJ Media
(http://pjmedia.com/blog/wake-up-panetta-un-u-s- have-opposing-interests/?singlepage=true). Lt. Gen (r) Ion Mihai Pacepa is the highest-ranking official ever to have defected from the former Soviet bloc. He is currently writing a book on disinformation together with Prof. Ronald Rychlak.


On March 7, 2012, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta stated in the U.S. Congress that the United Nations and NATO have supreme authority over the actions of the United States military. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) reacted to Secretary Panetta's statement, saying:

I'm really baffled by the idea that somehow an international assembly provides a legal basis for the United States military to be deployed in combat. ... The only legal authority that's required to deploy the United States military is of the Congress and the president, and the law, and the Constitution.[i]

I paid with two death sentences for the privilege of becoming an American, I deeply love my adoptive country, and I highly esteem her leaders. But, with all due respect for Secretary Panetta, I have to say that his view reminds me of Ceausescu, who used to state over, and over, and over: I wrote the Constitution! I will re-write it.

In 1988 when I became an American citizen, I ended the few words I said as a sign of my gratitude with the last paragraph of William Tyler Page's creed:

It is my duty to my Country to love it; to support its Constitution; to obey its laws; to respect its flag, and to defend it against all enemies.

I also have good reason to believe that the UN is not interested in defending the United States. In my other life, when I was one of the top members of the Soviet bloc espionage community, one of our main assignments was to turn the UN against the United States. We in the Soviet bloc poured millions of dollars and thousands of people into that gigantic project. Virtually all UN employees and representatives from the communist countries — comprising a third of the world's population — and from our Arab allies were secretly working for our espionage services. Our strategy was to convert the centuries-old European and Islamic animosity toward the Jews into a rabid and violent hatred for the United States by portraying it as a country run by a rapacious "Council of the Elders of Zion" (the Kremlin's epithet for the U.S. Congress), which allegedly wanted to transform the rest of the world into a Jewish fiefdom.

Unfortunately, we succeeded. In 2003, the UN expelled the U.S. from the Commission on Human Rights by the overwhelming vote of 33 to 3, and it appointed the tyrannical government of Libya to chair that body. A year later, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan decided to secretly make the UN even more anti-American.

On December 2, 2004, Annan endorsed the 101 proposals of the "High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change," commissioned by him to build a UN "for the twenty-first century."[ii] The panel recommended that the U.S. be further isolated by establishing the rule that only the UN could authorize preemptive wars against terrorism or any other threats. For that, the panel concluded that the UN's bureaucracy should be significantly increased (by creating a "peace-building commission"), its efficiency significantly decreased (by greatly expanding the already inefficient Security Council), and the treasuries of its member countries additionally raided by having them "donate" to the UN an additional 0.7% of their GNP to fight poverty. (On December 7, 2007, Senator Obama introduced into the U.S. Senate the Global Poverty Act of 2007, demanding that 0.7% of the U.S. gross national product, totaling $845 billion over the next 13 years, be spent to fight "global poverty."[iii])

It is hard to believe, but true, that some of the authors of these proposals for "reforming" the UN were the same communist spies who had originally worked to subvert the UN. One eminent member of Kofi Annan's blue-ribbon panel was the nouveau riche Yevgeny Primakov, a former KGB general and Soviet intelligence adviser to Saddam Hussein who rose to head Russia's espionage service for a time — and to sing opera ditties with U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright while secretly running the infamous Aldrich Ames spy case behind her back. Another prominent member was Qian Qichen, a former Red China intelligence officer who worked under diplomatic cover abroad, belonged to the Central Committee of the Communist Party when it ordered the bloody Tiananmen Square repression in 1989, rose afterward to the Politburo, and in 1998 became vice-chairman of China's State Council. And then there was Amr Moussa, the secretary-general of the Arab League (another KGB puppet), who stated that he missed "the balance of power provided by the Soviet Union."

Kofi Annan had a point. The three were professional saviors. Let me exemplify with Primakov, whom I know best. After the Soviet Union collapsed, he saved its espionage service, the PGU[iv], from going into oblivion. Primakov broke it off from its mother organization, the KGB, rechristened it with the American-sounding name of Central Intelligence Service (Tsentralnaya Sluzhba Razvedki, or TsSR), and pretended it was a new democratic institution. That saved Primakov's skin as well. Five years later, he replaced Russia's pro-Western foreign minister Andrey Kozyrev. In 1998, Primakov became prime minister. He reintroduced Soviet Communists into the government and decided to transform Russia into a "managed democracy" whose institutions were to become "representative of the state: loyal, obedient, and indebted to those who have chosen them." Primakov even invented a word for his democracy: dogovorosposoniye, meaning, roughly, "deal-cutting."[v]

Primakov is an old enemy of the U.S. His espionage service — like my former one — used to spend every single day thinking up new ways to portray the American land of freedom as an "imperial Zionist country" that intended to convert the Islamic world into a Jewish colony. His first major victory was UN Resolution No. 3379 of 1975, which declared Zionism "a form of racism and racial discrimination." Officially presented as an Arab initiative, that projected resolution had in fact been drafted in Moscow under the supervision of Primakov, turned into the KGB's main Arabist. The resolution was openly supported by the Arab League and the PLO, two organizations on our payroll. My DIE was deeply involved in Primakov's UN operation.

On August 31, 2001, Primakov's boss at the UN, Kofi Annan, organized a UN World Conference on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, which opened in Durban, South Africa. Its task was to approve new pre-formulated Arab League declarations asserting that Zionism was a brutal form of racism, and that the United States was its main supporter.[vi] Yasser Arafat, Fidel Castro, and the same gaggle of Arab and Third World governments who had supported the UN's anti-Semitic Resolution No. 3379 in 1975 urged the participants to condemn Israel and the United States as Zionist powers who wanted to conquer the Islamic world.[vii] On September 3, 2001, the U.S. withdrew its delegation from Durban, charging that the UN conference had been "converted into a forum against Israel and Jews."[viii] The Israeli government followed suit. On September 4, 2001, Congressman Tom Lantos, a member of the U.S. delegation, told reporters: "This conference will stand self-condemned for yielding to extremists. ... I am blaming them for hijacking this conference."[ix]

The September 11, 2001, attacks came seven days later. On that same day the KGB was celebrating 124 years since the birth of its founder. The weapon of choice for that horrific act of terrorism that has changed the face of our world was the hijacked airplane, a concept that had originally been invented by the KGB.

Our 25th ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, once said that if the glass zoo on the East River that quarters the United Nations "lost 10 stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference."[x] I could not agree more. Most of the people "working" at the UN are probably still anti-American spies anyway, since old habits die hard in such organizations.

The peace and freedom of the world depend on the power of United States, not of the UN bureaucracy, as was always the case. Let us hope that our secretary of Defense and our secretary of State will learn that as well.


[i] Jed Babin, "Leon Paneta: Clueless or Brazen?" American Spectator, March 12, 2012.

[ii] "Follow-up to the outcome of the Millennium Summit: Note by the Secretary-General," United Nations, General Assembly, Fifty-ninth session, Agenda item 55, p.3.

[iii] Lee Cary, "Obama's Global Tax," American Thinker, May 21, 2008, as posted on http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/02/the_global_candidate_proposes.html

[iv] Pervoye Glavnoye Upravleniye, the First Chief Directorate of the KGB, or the foreign intelligence service.

[v] Yevgenia Albats, "Democratic Façade in Russia, The Washington Post, June 6, 2000, p. B7.

[vi] "New racism declaration unveiled," CNN.com/WORLD, September 4, 2001.

[vii] Reuters, Mandela urges fight against racist 'contagion,' The New York Times, September 1, 2001.

[viii] Pamela Constable, U. S., Israel Quit Forum On Racism, The Washington Post, September 4, 2001.

[ix] Betsy Pisik, U. S. walks out of conference on racism, The Washington Times, September 4, 2001.

[x] R. Emmett Tyrrell, "Bold U.S. voce to the U.N., "The Washington Times, March 11, 2005.

Contact Rachel Ehrenfeld at ehrenfeld@acdemocracy.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 15, 2012.

This week I read a very disturbing article about Kalman Libeskind, a journalist, facing criminal charges after his family was attacked by an Arab gang -

Mr. Libeskind is calling on Israeli citizens to defend themselves, physically, against Arab attacks, rather than calling the police, which, apparently is inept. The article further indicates that Mr. Libeskind's call reflects a growing feeling among Israelis that Israel is slipping into anarchy, in regards to the physical safety of Jews from attacks by fellow Arab citizens.

I will say that Israelis live in an ongoing, sometimes of slow pace and sometime at exhilarated pace, intifada.

Recalling recent events, two soldiers, on leave, were almost lynched by a bunch of Arabs in Haifa, which landed them in the hospital. Then a man walking his dog lost his life in an attack by a group of Arabs, in Ramla. Today, a soldier girl was stabbed few times while riding the light rail train in Jerusalem; the attacker, an Arab. Where does it end, really end?

I also recall that several years ago, the lack of the appropriate police services have called for the establishment of an organization named Hashomer Hachdash, established to defend Israeli citizens and their farms, whom the police failed to protect.
http://fundisrael.org/irgun-hashomer-hachadash- the-new-guardian-organization/

There are some questions we need to bring to light.

Is the Israeli-Jewish police too busy beating up Jewish settlers and dissidents, a widely known truth?

Is it true that because Arab-Moslems serve in the Israeli police, the police is reluctant to act against Arab-Moslems, from the fear of protesting riots they engage in for any little incident?

Is it true that as a rule, in disputes between Jews and Arab-Moslems, the courts in Israel, in most cases, rule in favor of the Arab-Moslems? And, if Jews protest, they are detained and never ending harassment ensues.

Citizens demanding changes in the faulty legal system of their country is what people, living under democratic laws do and it is great. However, in Israel, where the supreme courts judges are self elected and the lower court judges are selected by the top courts and their associates, this needed change is highly unlikely to happen.

I assume that Israeli journalist, Kalman Libeskind, means something more than just calling on Israelis to physically counter any physical assault on them — i.e. exercising citizens right for self defense, which is a given in a free society.

However, if Israel is slipping into anarchy, because the police do not come to the aid of Jews being attacked by Arabs, then isn't this a call on Jews to take matters into their own hands rather than call the police, which will only descend the country, even further, into anarchy? Israeli vigilantism against Arabs is just a step away from what Mr. Libeskind is advocating.

Israelis should rise up and call on their police to do their jobs; that no efforts be spared to apprehend Arab-Israelis and Arab-Palestinians, who commit any crimes, especially violent, and that they be vigorously prosecuted, under the law and that their sentences on conviction, be the harshest.

These issues are, of course, most sensitive, given the penchant for Arab-Israelis and most of the Muslim world to react, with anger and violence, at the word that Israel and Israelis have the right to defended themselves against Arab-Palestinians and other enemies.

But the truth remains that in a democratic society, such as Israel, the authorities have the duty to protect the citizens and if the authorities failed their job, than the best next step is for the citizens to act in self defense, in any way possible available to them.

The one who comes to kill you, kill him first...!

For the Government Of Israel to act aptly, it must be made to believe that such action is supported by the electorate.

So who is failing whom? Is it the government failing the electorate or the electorate are not practicing their inalienable rights?

I have said before and I say it again, the Arabs carrying Israeli citizenship are nothing but Israel's fifth Column, growing stronger. Unless Israel eradicates this problem now, in no time this situation will get our of control just the way if Iran will not be stopped from acquiring nuclear weapons, now, it will be too late to stop Iran later and then, we all know the rest of the story...!

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, March 15, 2012.

Very ugly, really. An Arab man boarded a train on the Jerusalem light rail near the Arab neighborhood of Shuafat, knifed a nineteen-year old woman soldier multiple times in the chest, and ran off the train.

The soldier is in moderate condition in the hospital, and is being treated for lung injuries; doctors say the knife just missed her heart. The attacker has been caught and confessed.


Ceasefire? What ceasefire? This morning a rocket landed near a school in Netivot where classes were going on; parents rushed to bring their children home. Not long after, a Grad rocket landed near a Be'ersheva school; the Be'ersheva municipality has closed its schools. Another Grad aimed at Be'ersheva was stopped by the Iron Dome.

Representatives of the Israeli government have declared the situation "unacceptable."

Said Minister of Security Affairs Moshe Ya'alon:

"As long as they fire, it isn't over. Anyone threatening us is risking his life. We will retaliate until they beg us to stop. They have to realize that the consequences of the rocket fire are not worth it."


Overnight, the IDF targeted a launching site in the north of Gaza and a tunnel in the south, in response to rockets fired earlier.

However, I have secured no specific information regarding other operations today, and it is not clear to me that they have taken place.

In fact, YNet cites "a political source," who said that "at this time Israel will not respond to rockets fired at the south since the ceasefire took effect...After each round of escalations we see what is known as the 'tail' (defined as a few hours during which there is still some fire, as if to show that they have the last word). The situation is still within Israel's containment. We're following the situation closely."

This is not a satisfactory state of affairs for Eshkol Regional Council Head Haim Yelin, who insisted:

"There is no calm, no ceasefire. These concepts do not exist when rockets are flying over Israel...they aim to make this the norm... there are no word to describe this situation. Certainly not words like 'calm' or 'lull'..."

He is very much on the mark here, and it is disconcerting to realize that the Israeli government-declarations of what is "unacceptable" aside — might turn a blind eye to a rocket here and a rocket there, as long as there is no major barrage. There should be zero tolerance for attacks on Israeli civilians.


In any event, a handful of attacks on launching sites and tunnels are not exactly going to make them beg us to stop. Precisely what did Ya'alon have in mind?


Prime Minister Netanyahu, in statements to the Knesset yesterday (about which more below), mentioned Gaza, where, he said, Hamas and Islamic Jihad work under Iran's umbrella. "Sooner or later," he declared, "the Iranian terrorist base in Gaza will be uprooted." That expresses ultimate intent but provides no real information with regard to how Israel will be responding now.


It is, or has been, Israeli policy, to hold Hamas responsible for whatever happens in Gaza. Now Hamas has blamed Islamic Jihad for breaking the ceasefire. Opinion in many quarters is that Hamas turns a blind eye and lets Islamic Jihad do the dirty work. But at this point — as I've been indicating — I believe that Hamas truly has lost control of the situation to some degree.


During his comments to the Knesset yesterday, Netanyahu's focus was on Israel's right to act in self-defense even if the US objects: "Israel has never left its fate in the hands of others, not even in the hands of our best friends." He then recounted a number of times in the past when Israeli leaders have moved in a direction that US leaders opposed: When Ben-Gurion declared the State in 1948; when Israel took pre-emptive military action in 1967; when Menachem Begin ordered a hit on the Iraqi nuclear reactor.

Begin, said Netanyahu, "fulfilled his obligation and acted." Now a nuclear Iran would pose an "existential threat" to Israel and so he has an "obligation" to maintain Israel's "independent ability" to defend herself.

This echoes his AIPAC speech. There is no hint here of backing down, even in the face of Obama's statements regarding the fact that acting military too soon would be a mistake. But neither is there anything definitive-nor should we expect there to be.


Here is an interesting twist on Obama's position on Iran. He seems to be playing the "good cop" to Israel's "bad cop." I am not suggesting that Israel conspired with him to lend this impression, but rather that the president chooses to let it be seen this way-that he's manipulating the situation.

Several news sources have now reported that the Obama administration (specifically Hillary Clinton) has asked Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to relay a message to Teheran: That is this the last opportunity for resolving issues via negotiations. Why the last opportunity? Implied if not said directly-because if this goes on too long Israel will attack militarily: Maybe the US would have sustained negotiations longer, but, gee, Israel won't let that happen.

Said Obama during a press conference: "I have sent a message very directly to them publicly that they need to seize this opportunity of negotiations with the PS+1 to avert even worse consequences for Iran in the future."


Netanyahu said recently that the best way to insure that there does not have to be a military strike is to make it clear that the possibility of such a strike is very real. And here Obama is, proving Netanyahu correct. This does not mean that a strike won't ultimately be necessary, but rather, that the specter of such a strike is the only thing that might possibly make Iran respond.

Obama has never made the threat of a US strike credible enough so that Iran might take it seriously. So he's utilizing the threat of Israel instead.

According to Reuters, citing the Russian paper Kommersant, a Russian diplomat has complained that "The Israelis are de facto blackmailing Obama. They put him in an interesting position. Either he backs the war of loses the support [of the American Jewish lobby]."

If Obama truly sees it this way, how delightful, and how delightfully ironic.


Many of you, especially in the US, may have heard the interview on TV with former head of the Mossad, Meir Dagan, who spoke against Israeli military action on Iran-raising much ire here, I will say.

Please see this piece by another former head of Mossad, Efraim Halevy, who offers a different take and explains why it is inappropriate for intelligence people to be involved in the decision making:
http://www.timesofisrael.com/before-we-give- the-green-light/


Last night I attended an excellent conference on Islam's connection to Jerusalem. I hope to provide a summary of information from this conference very soon.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, March 15, 2012.


1. A number of simultaneous marches to Israel's borders from the various Arab countries are planned for March 30, 2012, referring to themselves as part of the Global March to Jerusalem (GMJ). The marches are expected to take place in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. The anti-Israeli boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign is also planning a so-called "global activity day," combining propaganda events in various places around the world with Land Day, marked by Israeli Arabs. The organizers of the events set up committees and umbrella networks in the various countries to deal with logistic deployment and propaganda.

2. Evidence in our possession indicates that Iran openly and with its own propaganda supports the March 30 events and is also involved in organizational preparations for the marches. To that end it employs proxies, including organizations and individuals, affiliated with Iran.

3. Iranian support for the marches and its involvement in their preparations are additional proof of the event's extremist character. That is also manifested by the involvement of Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, extremist organizations in Asia and the terrorist organizations (such as Hezbollah and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad) in the preparations. In our assessment the radical Islamic nature of the marches casts a shadow over the participation of various Western human rights organizations and NGOs, and may even make them reconsider. In addition, the presence of extremist Middle Eastern elements in the planned events, especially in the Lebanese sector, heightens the potential for violence and provocation, despite the fact that the march organizers have repeatedly stated that they will be non-violent.

4. To summarize, there is evidence that Iran, both directly and through its proxies, supports the marches and possibly additional propaganda events planned for March 30. In our assessment, Iran has a number of objectives: to strengthen its regional influence by exploiting the sensitivity of the Arab-Muslim world to the issue of Jerusalem, to draw international attention away from itself, and to broaden and deepen the delegitimization campaign being waged against Israel by channeling it to Iran's own political needs.

Summary of Information about Iranian Involvement in the Marches

5. The following is a summary of the information in our possession, updated March 13, about Iranian direct and indirect involvement in the marches planned for March 30:

a) A February 26, 2012 Fars News Agency item quoted Khamenei as supporting the march to Jerusalem. He said Iran should openly support movements and groups operating against Israel. Support for the marches to Jerusalem was presented as part of a new strategy designed to increase regional unity against Israel, based on the so-called "resistance axis" [i.e., Syria and the terrorist organizations] and opposition to the so-called "occupation" of Jerusalem (Fars News Agency, Iran, February 26, 2012). In the same vein, Ghzanfar Asl Roknabadi, the Iranian ambassador to Lebanon, said he hoped all "Palestine" would shortly be liberated from its "Zionist occupiers" and that cries of "Allahu Akbar" would be heard throughout Rehavia [an elite neighborhood in West Jerusalem] (ISNA, March 4, 2012).

b) In Iran as well as in other countries, a local committee was appointed to make preparations for the marches, called The Board of the Global [March] to Jerusalem in Iran. Its head is Hossein Shaikhol-Eslam, described as secretary of the Board and march coordinator for Iran. In addition, the umbrella organizations directing the project have two Iranian participants, in our assessment handled and directed by the Iranian regime. One of them is Saleem Ghafuri, an Iranian who was spokesman for the Asian March and is now, according to the Fars News Agency, head of the GM2J Board of Executives. The other is the aforementioned Hossein Shaikhol-Eslam, secretary of the board of the Global March to Jerusalem (both quoted in the Fars News item on February 26, see below).

c) The Internet Haganah website, run by American professionals specializing in the analysis of jihadist Internet sites, examined the GM2J website and found indications of Iranian involvement in the marches. They found three domains of march organizers sharing an IP address with Ahl al-Bayt, an Iranian institution directed by Khamenei's office which spreads Shi'ite and Khomeini ideology around the globe. It is headed by Khojat el-Eslam Mohammed Hassan Akhtari, the former Iranian ambassador to Syria. Ahl al-Bayt has an active branch in Britain. It has connections to another Iranian-oriented organizations operating in Britain, the Islamic Centre of England, one of the organizations participating in London's annual Iranian-initiated Jerusalem Day (For further information about the Ahl al-Bayt institution, pro-Iranian bodies and individuals operating in Britain and their connection to GM2J, see the Appendix.).

d) Seyed Saleem Ghafuri, an Iranian participating in organizing the GMJ, told the Fars website that the [Asian] convoy was expected to arrive in Iran on March 14 (Fars News Agency, Iran, February 26, 2012). From Iran it planned to continue on to Turkey and from there to Lebanon.[2] The previous Asian convoy left Iran in December 2011 and passed through Iran on its way to the Gaza Strip. Its visit to Iran was exploited for meetings with senior members of the Iranian regime and to defame Israel (with an occasional anti-Semitic aside) and the West, while showering praise on the Iranians.[3] In our assessment the convoy's stay in Iran will again be exploited to the the same end.

The Iranian regime exploits the Asian convoy's December 2010 visit for propaganda. Left: The American and British flags burned during a reception for the convoy activists, held in Palestine Square in the heart of Tehran (IRNA, December 14, 2010). Right: Iranian president Ahmadinejad delivers a speech to the members of the convoy (Mehr News Agency, December 13, 2010).

e) In Lebanon Hezbollah and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, two overtly Iranian-oriented terrorist organizations, are involved in organizing the march. Sheikh Abd al-Majid Omar, the Hezbollah representative, and Abu Imad al-Rifa'i, from the PIJ, participated in a meeting which took place on February 21, 2012 in Hamas headquarters in a southern suburb of Beirut. Also present were representatives from other Islamist bodies in Lebanon. They examined the possibility of holding a mass march to the Israeli-Lebanese border similar to the one held on May 15, 2011 (the Nakba Day march, which ended with casualties). A committee was appointed to contact various elements with the objective of enlisting as many Lebanese and Palestinians as possible to participate in the march (Al-Safir, February 23, 2012). In addition, several members of the Lebanese parliament attended a coordination meeting held in the Lebanese city of Tyre on March 1, among them Hezbollah's Nawwaf al-Musawi (GM2J Arabic website).

f) An Iranian website connected, in our assessment, to the Iranian regime, initiated a cartoon contest in support of the marches. The cartoons are supposed to deal with the theme of the so-called "right of return" of the Palestinian refugees and with opposition to the so-called "occupation" of Jerusalem. Each of the three winning entries will receive a prize of $1000 and a trophy. Entries are to be sent to the Irancartoon.com website, the same site which on August 14, 2006, a few months before the Holocaust denial convention was held in Tehran, announced a contest for anti-Semitic, Holocaust denying cartoons. Two of the winning entries in 2006 were the following:

A Palestinian wearing the striped suit of an Auschwitz concentration camp inmate, submitted by Carlos Latif, a Brazilian who runs an anti-Semitic blog.

The Israeli security fence Judea and Samaria to prevent suicide bombing attacks compared to the electrified fences around Auschwitz, submitted by Abdallah al-Darqawi, Morocco.

g) The Iranian English-language Press TV channel was also enlisted to promote a propaganda campaign for the marches. On January 8, 2012, a video was posted on YouTube to promote the marches, produced by Press TV and featuring George Galloway, who gave his blessing to the marches, which, he said, would promote the return of the Palestinians to what [the Israelis] called Israel. Press TV also broadcast a conference call between George Galloway and a pro-Palestinian anti-Israeli Indian activist named Feroze Mithiborwala, an organizer of the Asian convoy and of the GMJ (YouTube). In addition, a Facebook page was opened in Farsi for the GMJ (Facebook.com/Farsi).

h) Another manifestation of Iranian participation in the GMJ propaganda campaign was an open letter, in our assessment planted by the Iranian regime, posted on the marches' website on March 5, purportedly written by Iranian Jews. Its heading was the Society of Iranian Jewry Supporting GMJ and it was signed by two Iranian Jews, one a Jewish member of the Majlis (the Iranian parliament) and the other a Jewish leader. In it the Society of Iranian Jewry expressed support for what the letter called a global demonstration in support of the liberation of Jerusalem from the Zionists, which was planned for March 30.[4]

6. For institutions and activists in Britain affiliated with Iran and their connection to the planned marches, see the Appendix.


1 Update of the February 22, 2012 bulletin "The organizations participating in the campaign to delegitimize Israel plan a series of propaganda events on Land Day, March 30, 2012, to challenge Israel and attract media attention. Among the events planned are a potentially violent march to Israel's borders from the neighboring countries and worldwide BDS activities" at http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/pdf/hamas_e153.pdf.

2 Awamibharat.blogspot.com.

3 For further information see the December 12, 2012 bulletin "A convoy from India and other Asian countries left New Delhi to reach the Gaza Strip at the end of December. Among the participants are extreme leftist and Islamic activists who were joined by human rights activists..." at http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/pdf/ipc_e146.pdf.

4 Aser Iran website, March 6, 2012/

Dr. Reuven Erlich is Head of the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center in Israel. Its website address is http://www.intelligence.org This is archived as

To Go To Top

Posted by Seth Frantzman, March 15, 2012.

On March 7, three heavy hitters of the "pro-peace" camp in the US, Americans for Peace Now, J Street and the New Israel Fund, released what they described as a "first ever joint statement." They claimed to be "outraged by Bret Stephens' attack yesterday on President Obama as 'untrustworthy' on the basis of the President's association with people involved in our organizations. His attack — grounded in a litany of guilt-by-association charges — fits well with the tradition established in the 1950s by Senator Joseph McCarthy."

It seems like a tempest in a teapot, among people who think their sandbox is being disturbed by some interloper. But the joint statement should be taken seriously not because of the dust-up with Mr. Stephens, but because of the substantive claim that these organizations are victims of "McCarthyism."

The "I'm a victim of the new McCarthyism" claim among left-leaning, Israel-centric organizations has its origins in an Israeli dialectic of "McCarthyism" that began several years ago. When Im Tirzu, a right-leaning student organization, and several other groups such as Israel Academic Monitor and Isracampus began speaking out about the prevalence of extreme left-wing academics who were pushing their ideologies onto students, they were accused of McCarthyism.

In an ironic twist, one academic circulated an email to his peers saying that they should find a way to sue those who were criticizing them so as to stop the verbal assaults.

In March of 2009, David Landau, former editor of Haaretz, claimed that "Israel has slid almost inadvertently a long way down the slope that leads to McCarthyism." Numerous other articles have been published flippantly using the word McCarthyism as a euphemism for any type of criticism.

It seemed at the time that the Israeli misuse of the word as a synonym for criticism was due to an ignorance of the historical record. But now the misappropriation has affected colleagues on the other side of the Atlantic.

Stephens, according to the current form of his article "The 'Jewish' President," which appears on The Wall Street Journal website, doesn't even use the word "untrustworthy." The article is primarily about Peter Beinart's claim in his soon-to-be-published book The Crisis of Zionism that Obama is a "Jewish" president because he knew many left-wing Jews growing up.

The "guilt by association" is actually a process used, supposedly, by Beinart to build up the President's credentials. Stephens argues that Beinart is wrong, that in fact the president's Jewish friends are mostly anti-Israel radicals.

So the "joint statement" is a condemnation of someone for writing an opinion about someone else's book which hasn't been published and which argues that Obama is Jewish-by-association. It's a debate about the debate about the debate, like one of those bureaucracies where they have a committee on committees.

How did all this get twisted around into a McCarthyist threat?

Let's recall that Beinart's book is a form of free speech, as is Stephen's critique of Obama's portrayal in the as-yet-unpublished work. NIF, APN and J Street are unhappy that "people involved in our organizations" were being critiqued for associating with the president.

But why didn't the organizations condemn Beinart, since he was the one who dragged them into the arena in the first place? But let's get back to the first question. Simply put, the red herring of McCarthyism is always brought up for the purpose of inflating an issue, so as to make it seem to be about our fundamental democratic rights.

Joe McCarthy, it should be recalled, served in the US Senate as a representative from Wisconsin from 1947 to 1957. He first came to the public's attention in 1950 when he claimed that he had a list of Communists who had infiltrated the government. In response a Democratic Senate investigated McCarthy and found his allegations to be a "fraud."

A left-leaning cartoonist coined the term McCarthyism and McCarthy, in an odd turn of events, embraced it and described his actions as "America with its sleeves rolled up." He then transformed the "Permanent Subcomittee on Investigations" into a center of his anti-Communism activity, aided by Robert "Bobby" Kennedy.

The committee investigated Communist influence at Voice of America before turning its sights on the US Army. Provoking the army was McCarthy's downfall; he was censured and died soon after leaving office in disgrace. The real workings of what was called "McCarthyism," namely the Congressional investigations of Hollywood, are often wrongly associated with the Senator.

The problem is that we have come to a point in the public debate, in both the US and Israel, where the term McCarthyism is often bandied about in relation to totally legitimate opinions expressed by activists or commentators.

It is not McCarthyism to complain that numerous lecturers at Israel's universities hold extreme anti-Israel views, whether or not that is true, and it is not McCarthyism for Mr. Stephens to discuss a book in an oped. When free speech and the miracle of a free press is confounded with "McCarthyism" it means that we no longer understand the underpinnings of a free market of ideas.

When organizations like the NIF, APN and J Street falsely play the victim to tar their critics they harm the cause of democracy they claim to support. Debate is part of a free society, government intrusion in debate is McCarthyism, cries of "McCarthyism" in relation to free speech damage the public's notion of what constitutes legitimate speech and what is demagoguery.

Contact Seth J. Frantzman at sfrantzman@hotmail.com and visit his website:
http://journalterraincognita.blogspot.com These essays appeared on his website.

To Go To Top

Posted by Dave Alpern, March 15, 2012.
Moshe Feiglin is a patriotic and religious Israeli Jew roundly condemned by many as a fascist. In forwarding his article below, I do not seek to argue for or against this condemnation. However, I will say that I am not convinced of the epithet's veracity.

Feiglin leads a faction of Israel's Likud Party called "Manhighut Yehudit" in Hebrew... for those who might not know, this means "Jewish Leadership" in English. I cannot disagree with the obscenity, ludicrousness, insanity and cowardice displayed in the phrase used for the atrocities that "Palestinians" have just perpetrated against Israel's southern areas: a "round of fighting."

If this is what we Israelis babble to ourselves about the war against us, is it any wonder that "the enlightened international community" continues to regard such "rounds" as an acceptable situation that should and must not be countered with "disproportionate force?" We all know that no other nation would be expected to tolerate the indiscriminate and wicked firing of rockets and missiles on its territory and CIVILIAN population, but Israel is nevertheless called upon and even ORDERED to tolerate it under penalty of international criticism, opprobrium and even possible political and economic sanctions.


The Chief Commander of the Expulsion from Gush Katif [the name of the area in the Gaza Strip from which the Jews living and working there were expelled - Dave], Dan Harel, praises the Iron Dome system (editor: during the present fighting between Israel and Gaza, the Iron Dome missile intercepting system has successfully intercepted 85% of the missiles heading for Israeli cities and towns). He forgot, however, to remind us of the leading role that he played in the operation that created the need for Iron Dome, in the first place. The media and reserve generals are justifiably lauding the abilities of the system that gives the government the maneuvering space that it needs to weigh the situation carefully. Without Iron Dome we might, perish the thought, have been forced to re-conquer Gaza.

The Iron Dome system does not give us maneuvering space to weigh the situation and its consequences. On the contrary, it is a fig leaf that absolves our leadership of its main role: Preserving State security.

The Iron Dome is a tremendous technological accomplishment. But the great technological success is also our great strategic failure.

Let us imagine that the IDF had decided to equip itself with the ultimate tank. Our brilliant engineers come up with a revolutionary proposal for a new type of tank shield. There is only one drawback: for every centimeter of shield, the tank's cannon loses one meter off its length and its range decreases by 20 kilometers. By all calculations, if we completely forgo the tank's ability to shoot and move, we will have a miracle tank, impervious to anti-tank weapons.

We all know how a tank like that would end up: It would never win a battle and its crew would eventually be taken captive.

All those Iron Dome enthusiasts need to take a short walk down memory lane. Try to remember Israeli mentality before Oslo. Let's say that the year is 1991. Now take this week's news reports on missiles in Be'er Sheva and Ashkelon and broadcast it as is in 1991. How would that news report go over?

Probably, we would think that it was a practical joke. Remember: missiles in Ashkelon are a casus belli — a reason for an all-out war.

And how is this war defined today?

Government and IDF officials and the media are calling it a "round." That's all. It is just a "round of fighting."

The Iron Dome reinforces the legitimacy to attack Israel's cities — highlighting the fact that Israel itself is no longer very legitimate.

Defense systems are important, just as tank shields are vital. But that is true only when we are on the offensive and focused on victory. In defensive-defeatist mode, these systems draw the end near. They are like aspirin for cancer.

By the grace of G-d, as these words are being written, there have been no serious injuries. But national leadership must first and foremost weigh its actions in light of national security. Just as with Gilad Shalit, our leadership is has taken the opposite tack; it is selling our future security for merely a short-term panacea.

Contact Dave Alpern at daveyboy@bezeqint.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 15, 2012.

These days the discourse in the Knesset revolves around the growing concern about Temple Mount-Har Habayit. That the Islamic Waqf, to whom Israel handed, with grace, the keys to the Holiest of Holy to Jews, is systematically destroying all evidence of the First and Second Temple they have found and want to make disappear. This, so the Jews will have no evidence to back their claim that Temple Mount-Har Habayit was ever Jewish, thus give more credit to the Moslems' claim that the site belongs to Islam only.

Immediately after the Six Day War victory Moshe Dayan ordered to take the Israeli flag from Temple Mount and handed the keys to Har Habayit to the Waqf Trust, thus, in one idiotic gesture denied all Jews the right to pray on Har Habayit and gave the Arabs the right to destroy all evidencing Jewish history there.

In one gesture Dayan wiped off the victory of war; as if the Jewish Holiest of Holy was rendered to the enemy then the victory of war became valueless.

Moshe Dayan formidable action was guided by his nefarious core of Jews who had hardly any connection to Judaism, rather to a secularist Israel. Handing the keys to Temple Mount to the Arabs, who, in the nineteen years of them controlling the old section of Jerusalem, desecrated and/or burned every Jewish synagogue and grave yard, was the mightiest sin a Jew can make.

Since the Temple Mount sin...

The government of Israel abandoned the Joseph Mausoleum, accredited to Ehud Barak; suspended financial support to the upkeep of Rachel's Mausoleum, accredited to Netanyahu; suspended financial support for Ma'arat Hamachpelah-the Cave of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs, the burial place of the Jewish Forefathers Abraham Jacob, and Isaac and the Foremothers, Sarah, Rebecca and Leah, accredited to Netanyahu. (The Matriarch Rachel was buried in Bethlehem as she died in childbirth there).

Legend and logic support that Adam and Eve rest in Ma'arat Hamachpelah as well.

There are, yet to be confirmed, reports that King David's and King Saul's burial locations have also been ceded to the Vatican, both accredited to Netanyahu.

Ceding control of Jewish holy places are not isolated "errors," made by innocent persons; these are acts of sabotage and high treason.

Today, the blame for not securing Temple Mount from Islamists damaging the archeological sites there and for not allowing Jews to pray on Temple Mount, falls on Prime Minister Netanyahu. However, unfortunately, he only continues a policy that begun by former Prime Ministers of Israel. The blame must also equally fall on the Israeli electorate for not demanding that Israel asserts her sovereignty over Temple Mount, to ensure that the archeological integrity of Temple Mount is protected and preserved and that Jews can, again, pray anywhere they want on Temple Mount.

Right now Moslem hooligans control Temple Mount and they intimidate the Israeli authorities to paralysis of action.

Perhaps, attempting to raise this issue, this time around, will catch fire, as it deservedly should, amongst the electorate and Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Knesset will be moved to assert full sovereignty over the Mount. We sincerely hope so.

As to the authority granted, in 1967, to the Moslem Waqf Trust, this authority should be pulled back, in part or in whole, as the guilty party and consequential to the Moslem desecration of the archeological evidence of Jewish history on the Holiest of Holy Jewish site.

As of today, the Israel authorities have not yet sought to withdraw the authority they granted the Waqf Trust.

Though there are valid reasons and alarming evidence to their crime that must lead to take away the caretaker Waqf's keys to Temple Mount, Israel has not tried to regain full sovereignty over the site.

Perhaps this time, the Israeli people wake up and demand of their government to assert Jewish sovereignty, where it belongs the most.

No Government of Israel will dare make such move, unless it knows it has the full support of the people. Even then you can well imagine the great risk of endless Arab violent reaction whether Arab-Israelis, Arab-Palestinians and in all likely the entire Muslim Middle East. After all, they controlling the holiest to Jews is a huge political victory, as nothing in Jerusalem means anything to the Moslems but political maneuvering against the Jews.

If this does not register, well, with the Jewish Nation, we will lose everything.

Post Judaism Israelis consider Temple Mount and the items in there to be "stones". For them Me'arat Hamachpelah, Kever (Tomb) Rachel, Kever (Tomb) Joseph, King David's Mausoleum, etc, are also "stones". They have no connection to our Jewish heritage, the Bible, and what these "stones" really mean to Jews.

When the government of Israel "disengage," whether from Jewish holy sites or throws Jews out of their homes, it is not a move, based on need for security, rather a sinister move to destroy what is Jewish and Jews.

In hindsight observation, forty-five after Moshe Dayan gave the Waqf the authority to destroy its Jewish history, we can openly say he made a horrible mistake; however, numerous Israeli administrations, from that time on, had many opportunities to make the change and bring back Israeli rule over Temple Mount. They did not. Perhaps because of the desire to keep the US off their back or the fear of Arab reaction or both. Now, when more than ever, the US appreciation of Israel is at an all time high, it is time to take control of Temple Mount, thus allowing prayer by all who want to pray there.

Or, it may come to the point, sooner than expected, when more people will join the claim that Israelis, and in particular post Judaism Jews, are simply unfit to govern the Land of Israel and even less, the Jewish people.

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Stanley Zir, March 14, 2012.

Stopping the Iranian madmen is not Israel's responsibility — it is America's as the Defender of the Free World. If Israel moves, she will become the scapegoat for any conflict that results. Where is US Jewry?


Iran is on the verge of securing a nuclear terrorist state and President Obama is stalling. Stopping the Iranian madmen is not Israel's responsibility — it is America's as the Defender of the Free World.

Jews in America, it is our obligation as citizens to demand that Obama end the impending global threat posed by Iran. If we, American Jews, declare our support for Israel's right to attack Iran, we will be absolving him of his duty to defend our Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic.

Once he does that, Israel becomes the scapegoat, because any steps Israel takes to defend her nation against Iran will appear as though she, not Iran, will have instigated a global conflict.

Yet not one Jewish organization points out this fact or demands that America not Israel destroy Iran's nuclear infrastructure now.

Israel has been treated like the dregs of the Earth because, for more than 60 years, not one Jewish group or organization ever stood up to Congress and said, "How dare you force the people of Israel to negotiate with terrorists?" This is the great stain and shame on American Jewry. Because of our complacency and neglect in supporting Israel, she is now surrounded on all sides by her enemies and facing a nuclear holocaust.

Our job in America is to take the boot forcefully from Israel's neck, but we didn't do it. We failed to stand firmly against one President after another who believes that America would achieve peace and financial security with the Islamic world that strives to annihilate Israel.

What a betrayal to America's core values! And American Jewry said nothing!

Ahmadinejad is now constructing chambers of death where nuclear bombs will replace Zyklon B to finish Hitler's work in their hell on earth. How dare any nation, especially Germany and France, say we should not immediately demand the destruction of Iran's nuclear war machine — but even my fellow-American Jews don't demand it. How dare they speak of their love for Israel and remain silent? It's time we take a firm stand!

I call on all American-Jewish leadership to create a firestorm so that all Jews from the national Jewish community call Congress, demanding they end the sanctions and take action against Iran now. While we must be polite and firm, we must not be deterred. Hound your representatives daily as though it were Israel's last day on earth.

I've been warned numerous times, "Don't push this agenda. It might upset our Congressional representatives who now support Israel. Don't push them too far." Is this what Emma Lazarus had in mind when she composed, ?Give me your tired, your poor," that immigrants who left their oppressive homelands for the new world might once again live in fear in America?

More specifically, that an American citizen of Jewish descent would dread abandonment by a Congressional representative because we dared to criticize proposals that do not go far enough to secure Israel's safety. Why is it that the Jewish people, victims of hatred and terrorism, feel we must hold our tongue when we are being short-changed, and be grateful for whatever favors we've been granted?

The Jewish Federations and religious leaders who represent us have adopted the same victim mentality that delivered our brethren directly into the gas chambers of World War II. Now, as in the past, these same groups hold in contempt those Jews who demand unrestricted action against those who planning our extermination. As if that were not enough, we now have new heirs to the thrones of leadership who say, "Wait until 2013," but offer no positive hope or direction to overcome this Iranian threat.

If we are to survive this final worldwide onslaught against the Jewish people, American Jews must reject the mindset of compliance that made us victims in every nation and every generation. The time has come to demand for ourselves what every other American takes for granted since the birth of our nation — that we have the right to be fearless, bold, boisterous when calling our leaders to account when dealing with Iran.

As American citizens, we can be rightly proud of Nathan Hale who said, "Give me Liberty, or give me death."

We need our own American Natan Halevy! — someone who has the courage to declare publicly, risking his life and his fortune, that the policies that the President of the United States is pursuing are leading to the destruction of the Jewish state and the persecution of the Jews worldwide.

He must be stopped.

This was written by Stanley Zir, founder of Never Again is Now. It appeared February 6, 2012 in Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). Tabitha Korol contributed to the writing of this article.

To Go To Top

Posted by Sanne DeWitt, March 14, 2012.

Hamas will have to live with the fact that PRC, Islamic Jihad pose a challenge to its control over Gaza.

This was written by Khaled Abu Toameh and it appeared today in the Jerusalem Post


PRC, Islamic Jihad pose a challenge to Hamas's control over Gaza (Photo: Suhaib Salem/Reuters)

Hailing the latest Egyptian-brokered truce as an "achievement," Islamic Jihad and the Popular Resistance Committees, the two groups who were behind the rocket and mortar attacks on Israel, have proven that Hamas is no longer the major player in the Gaza Strip.

As of this week, Hamas will have to live with the fact that these two groups pose a challenge to the Islamist movement's control over the Gaza Strip.


Until recently, Hamas had shown zero tolerance toward armed groups that defied its policies and rule. On a number of occasions, Hamas security forces did not hesitate to detain members of Islamic Jihad and the PRC who violated previous truces with Israel.

But now the rules of the game in the Gaza Strip appear to have changed. For the first time, Hamas refrained from taking action against the armed groups, instead seeking the help of the Egyptians in persuading Islamic Jihad and PRC to agree to halt their attacks.

By turning to the Egyptians, Hamas is in fact admitting that it no longer has influence over small armed groups operating in the Gaza Strip.

The latest round of violence has put Hamas in the same position that the Palestinian Authority found itself in when it controlled the Gaza Strip before 2007.

Back then, Hamas openly challenged the PA by launching terror attacks against Israel. PA leaders Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas also had to turn to the Egyptians to restrain Hamas.

Today, Hamas is facing the same kind of criticism that was directed back then at the PA: That it is sitting on the fence while Israel is launching military strikes against the Gaza Strip.

Representatives of Islamic Jihad and PRC and some Palestinians did not hide their discontent with Hamas for failing to participate in the fighting over the past four days.

Hamas's exodus from Syria and divisions within the top brass of the movement over reconciliation with Fatah have played into the hands of Islamic Jihad and PRC.

Hamas's refusal to support Syrian President Bashar Assad's brutal crackdown on his opponents has also led to a deterioration in its relations with Iran, which used to provide the movement with financial and military aid.

Unlike Hamas, Islamic Jihad continues to sit in Syria, where it enjoys the full backing not only of Assad, but also the Iranians. Both Damascus and Tehran now have an interest in strengthening Islamic Jihad as a way of punishing Hamas for its refusal to side with Assad.

Hamas's rapprochement with Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah faction has drawn sharp criticism not only from some of the movement's leaders, but also from Islamic Jihad and PRC.

The two armed groups are now accusing Hamas of "deviating from the path of jihad" in favor of reconciliation with Fatah. They have even gone as far as claiming that Hamas was on its way to recognizing a two-state solution and possibly joining the peace process with Israel.

Islamic Jihad and PRC leaders boasted Monday that they have succeeded in securing a truce that for the first time includes an Israeli commitment to stop targeted killings of terrorist leaders in the Gaza Strip — something that Hamas failed to achieve in the past. Israel has denied that it made such a commitment.

Whether Israel made such a pledge or not is irrelevant because the two groups know that it is only a matter of time before the next round of fighting erupts with Israel. But what is clear today is that Islamic Jihad and PRC, whose members fired dozens of rockets and mortars at Israel over four days, are posing a serious challenge to Hamas's rule in the Gaza Strip.

Sanne DeWitt publishes the East Bay IAC (IACEP) Newsletter. Contact her by email at skdewitt@comcast.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman, March 14, 2012.

This was written by Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman, a historian, lecturer, and author of How Do You Know That? You may contact her at Lfarhat102@aol.com or www.globalthink.net


Anthropologists have taught us not to judge other cultures, but to recognize that no matter how strange, the custom served a reasonable function. Until now, UN agencies appeared to buy in to that notion, but at last, even they see the folly of this position.

As the Karzai government in Afghanistan attempts to "dialogue" with the Taliban leadership, we are reminded that both the Taliban and the Afghan government stem from the largest Afghan tribe: the Pashtun. These fierce warriors have kept Afghanistan backward, violent, and safe from the currents of the modern world. This is their "functional" value.

Their customs predate Islam, but because Islam itself has tribal roots, it is not hostile to tribal values. One Pashtun custom that the UN is now condemning as a "harmful culture" is trading young girls as payment for elders' "shameful" crimes. A real case attracted the attention of the UN in February: an 8-year-old girl and her young cousin were snatched from their beds by thugs carrying AK-47s, claiming that the girls' uncle had run off with the wife of their warlord. For this crime, they took the girls in revenge, beating them daily for the dishonor that had been done to their boss. (The article did not say if they were raped, but I have little doubt of that.) The child, now 10, managed to escape and her family (uncharacteristically) went public. This custom is so common that it has a name: "baddi." Girl children are evidently regarded as fair game; they may be beaten, raped, traded, or married (a combination of all three practices).

While they are about it, the UN should also look at another hideous Pashtun custom: that men who can afford it buy "beautiful young boys" for sex and for the entertainment of their male friends. They have a name for this too: bacha-bazi (playboys). This custom is not regarded as homosexual by the adults. The homosexuals are boys being used as if they were women. Islam says nothing, unfortunately, because using boys as sex objects is an ancient custom throughout the Muslim world. At one time, bordellos exploiting children of both sexes were not uncommon, even in Egypt, and was a notorious Ottoman Turkish practice.

In Egypt and North Africa, down through the desert, female children are "circumcised" (genital mutilation that ruins their health for a lifetime, contributes to the childbirth death rate and sometimes bleeding to death on wedding nights). Women's groups have protested this horror for decades, and women representatives in the US and France have shamed their male colleagues into making this practice illegal. Immigrants who persist in violating their girl children this way are now subject to deportation.

Finally, one more monstrous custom that has had a surprising comeback in our time, pirates holding western captives for ransom. Now Egyptian Bedouin have reached far back into Muslim antiquity, holding poor Sudanese refugees fleeing the horror and hunger of their country, and torturing them daily until someone either pays ransom or the poor victim dies. Unfortunately this behavior cannot be dismissed as un-Islamic. The Prophet himself, during his later years as warlord, personally used torture to get his prisoners to tell where their treasures were hidden. For the next 1500 years, Muslim pirates terrorized and depopulated the Mediterranean for captives either to sell in their slave markets, or hold for ransom.

The UN should include these practices listed above as "harmful customs." However, even the first "custom" that was declared illegal by the UN in 1952 is still in practice: slavery. It was a noble effort, but left out one important element: that the treatment of women, even in marriage, fits well the definition of slavery. The slave may not refuse any order, may not travel or even go out of the house without permission or without a chaperone, and may be killed for "dishonoring" her master's family by trying to escape. That is the status of women in rural Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The UN's slave laws really should include marriage, but imagine the howls of "Islamophobia" if it did.

Contact Family Security Matters (FSM) at info@ familysecuritymatters.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, March 14, 2012.

"A picture is the expression of an impression.
If the beautiful were not in us, how would we ever recognize it?"
— Ernst Haas


The skies have it. And when they do I look around for earthly elements to complement their patterns and complete the composition. I have discovered two amazing locations in Israel where Blue Lupines grow abundantly. One is the well-known Tel Socho or Givat HaTurmusim in the Ela Valley near Beit Shemesh. The other is this lush hillside near the Galilee community of Gonen along Highway 918. I like this shot because the large tree seems to be conducting the cloud dance overhead and its wispy branches mimic the white streaks above.

This shot presented the difficulty of merging a bright sky with an underlit foreground, meaning the separate halves of the photo had diverging exposure requirements. One of the safer rules to follow with digital cameras is always setting the proper exposure for the highlights — the brightest areas of the photo — and letting the shadow or dark areas fall out where they will. The reason for doing this is that it is often possible to add light to a dark area but much more problematic if you want to darken a highlight, especially if the area is completely white and there is no detail to recover. By using my widest-angle lens, I was able to get very close to the Lupines in the foreground and then point my camera upward to corral the big sky. By dividing the land and sky into unequal halves, I avoided the visual confusion that can result when equally-sized areas compete for the viewer's eye.

Lupines are at their peak this week across Israel. Go out and photograph them or maybe just sit and enjoy the view for an hour or two.


Nikon D200, tripod mounted, manual exposure, evaluative metering mode, f11 at 1/400th sec., ISO 400. Raw file converted to Jpeg. Lens: Nikon 12-24 wide angle zoom at 13mm. Date: Mar. 5, 2008 4:42 p.m. Location: Near Kibbutz Gonen off Route 918, northern Galilee, Israel.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by YogiRUs, March 13, 2012.

This was written by Danny Getchell


Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who was US President Barack Obama's pastor for 20 years at the Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's south side, has endorsed the planned "March to Jerusalem" slated for March 30th.

It follows on the heels of the anti-Israel, anti-Semitic Doha Conference in Qatar on the Defense of "Occupied Jerusalem," a two day long effort to demonize Israel and deny Judaism's more than three thousand year connection to Jerusalem.

Both events are designed to reverse what their organizers call the "Judaization" of "occupied Jerusalem."

The White House has refused to comment on Wright's decision to endorse the "March to Jerusalem", or the presence of State Department consultants at the so-called Doha Conference.

The National Conference of Jewish Affairs said "That the President's long-time pastor and "spiritual leader" is now endorsing the Global March to Jerusalem, without a reaction from the White House, underscores President Obama's failure to recognize the unalterable significance of Judaism's multi-millennial connection to Jerusalem, which is the capital of the Jewish State, Israel."

Wright, of "God Damn America" notoriety, has also asserted on ABC News that the U.S. brought on the 9/11 attacks with its own "terrorism."

He has also made openly anti-Semitic statements saying Jews have robbed him of his influence over Obama, "Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he'll talk to me in five years when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office."

"[T]he Jewish vote, the A-I-P-A-C vote, that's controlling him," Wright also has also claimed.

Obama — who adamantly denied hearing any offensive statements from Wright during his 20 years he was part of the clergyman's flock, despite being shown numerous video clips of them — has sought to defend Wright in the past.

"It's as if we took the five dumbest things that I've ever said or you've ever said in our lives and compressed them and put them out there — I think that people's reaction would, understandably, be upset."

Contact YogiRUs by email at YogiRUs@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Micky Boyden, March 13, 2012.

Less than an hour after Ynet reported on the transfer of a Palestinian boy from Gaza to Israel to receive medical treatment, the same news source reports that a Palestinian rocket has just landed in a parking lot in the town of Netivot following an air raid warning. Two people are being treated for shock and damage was caused to a number of motor vehicles.

How can you deal with such people?

Micky Boyden is with We Are For Israel. Contact them at weareforisrael@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, March 13, 2012.

As I write, we have a "sort of" ceasefire with the terrorists groups in Gaza. Brokered by Egypt, it was to begin at 1 AM. It is "sort of" because here and there a mortar or rocket is still being aimed at southern Israel from Gaza. Which I don't quite get. Because Israeli leaders had said, "Quiet will be met with quiet. Fire will be met with fire."

Never mind if that is a good policy in any event — simply reacting to their fire (and I'll get to that in a moment). The point here is that we have stopped operations according to an agreement, in the process ignoring our own words. Islamic Jihad had said, "We won't stop unless Israel does first." Did we blink, allowing them a sense of victory? Did we blink because we didn't want to pursue this further?

As my readers will have already perceived, I'm not comfortable with this ceasefire. We've been down this foolish and frustrating road so many times.


After the ceasefire began, Chief of Staff Benny Gantz praised the resilience of the people in the south, who were in range of rockets, and the performance of the IDF.

There was never, he said, "any question that we are stronger." I think this is fairly obvious. However, he cautioned, "the terror groups and armies around us are getting stronger." (Emphasis added)

Uh, excuse me. If the next time we take them on will be more difficult than this time, why are we waiting until next time? Why are we willing to allow them to continue to build their arsenal of ever-more sophisticated weaponry towards that inevitable next attack?


The terror groups — most notably Islamic Jihad — were seeking immunity from future pin-point air attacks such as the one that dispatched PRC leader Zuhair al-Kaisi last Friday. That is, they wanted a commitment from Israel that there would be no further such attacks to be part of the ceasefire agreement.

Israel says there has been no such promise in the ceasefire agreement, which is informal and not written in any event, and that we reserve the right to attack when we judge it necessary.


Today Defense Minister Ehud Barak defended his decision to hit al-Kaisi. Since we had intelligence that this man, who had engineered a previous successful terrorist attack, was about to do it again, this was most certainly appropriate. Hopefully, there was a bit of deterrence achieved with this operation, as well. If the terror groups were not frightened that we might do it again, they would not have sought an Israeli commitment not to.


But look what else Barak said:

"At the moment we have achieved a satisfactory result, and we are prepared to act as required when this happens again. This morning was comparatively quiet, and it is quite possible that we have reached the end of the current cycle of violence." (Emphasis added)


The Ministry of Defense of Israel, the stronger party, acknowledges upfront that the enemy is going to attack again — that they haven't been hit hard enough to keep them from doing so?? And that they'll attack on their schedule.

There is a basic problem here. Particularly as PM Netanyahu has already accurately identified Islam Jihad as an Iranian proxy and has spoken about the need for strong deterrence.


There is no indication that Israel was hit during this "round" with the worst that is in the Islamic Jihad/Hamas arsenal: The Palestinian Arabs in Gaza are known to be in possession of Iranian Fajr missiles, which are both longer-range and more deadly accurate. What happens next time?

According to Aaron Lerner, director of IMRA, Israel Radio Reporter Nissim Keinan interviewed military affairs journalist Yoav Limor on Israel Television Channel 2 today, and Limor said, "Rockets reached ranges that are not permitted to report."

We let that be?


Speaking of Aaron Lerner, he also wrote a commentary yesterday on why "Quiet Should Not Be the Goal in Gaza":

"Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon told Israel Radio today in a live interview that Israel's goal today is to restore the quiet.

"Simply put, the Gazans have a green light to continue to dramatically improve the range, accuracy, payloads and sheer volume of weapons as long as they don't use them. Too much."

"...Planning horizons of days and weeks are very comforting for policy makers seeking to avoid costly decisions.

"But the purpose of the exercise isn't making it easier to indefinitely postpone what is best done today.

"The decision makers owe it to their constituents to look beyond the next weeks and even months...

"Time and again the Israeli street has begged its leaders not to take short cuts. To follow through and get the job done despite the cost."Time and again we have witnessed bereaved parents calling at the grave site for their dead son's commanders to carry on the battle to victory and not be deterred by their loss.

"Yes. The Israeli street is willing and able to make the sacrifices compelled by a planning horizon that goes beyond the next 24 hours.

"Is the leadership?"



Islamic Jihad — thank Heaven — did not succeed in killing or even badly wounding any Israeli in the last four days, although achieving this was a major goal of theirs. The Iron Dome batteries played a role in shielding people, as did the Israeli policy of protecting civilians by providing shelters, cancelling school, etc.

There were Palestinian Arabs killed and wounded — 20 plus. Of these 19 were terrorists (whom the Air Force targeted), but a very small number (2, 3 4?) were civilians — including at least one teenager. This happened in spite of exceptional care taken by the IDF to do pinpoint operations.

As David Hornick has written (http://spectator.org/archives/2012/03/13/report-from-an-asymmetrical-wa): "According to UN data cited by Richard Kemp, former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, the typical ratio when armies fight terror groups is three civilians killed per every terrorist killed by military forces." The IDF record then, is most extraordinary.

And here we encounter deja vu as well: The Arab policy, as we full well know, is to place rockets and launchers in civilian areas, and to seek a PR victory by "demonstrating" how cold-blooded the Israelis are. What is more, in their attempts to milk the issue to the maximum they are sometimes duplicitous.

For information on tweeted photos purporting to show Gaza victims that were false:
http://www.jta.org/news/article/2012/03/12/3092105/ tweeted-photos-claiming-current-gaza-violence-refuted

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Marc Prowisor, March 13, 2012.

This March marks tens years since one of the most horrid attacks and massacres that occurred during the Intifada or the War of 2000. This "uprising" or more accurately war, as some like to call it has actually yet to end. It is a war of ups and downs. The particular incident I am referring to is the attack at Wadi Haramiya, " the Valley of the Thieves". This particular attack occurred approximately 22 miles north of Jerusalem on road 60, known to us as the Way of the Patriarchs, between the communities of Ofra and Shilo. This attack claimed the lives of ten people, twelve were badly wounded, and many others scarred for life.

It has become infamous, and is used today as an example for both the good and bad. Where as this attack showed how dangerous our roads could be, it also showed how well our forces, both civilian and military could cooperate and work together to not only fight our enemies, but to provide first response, both tactical and medical.

It also showed the value that Jews from around the world play in the safety and protection of our people in Israel.

Some examples of that would be:

Bullet Proof vans donated through One Israel Fund by communities in the US, that found themselves in the line of fire, saved lives by providing cover from the deadly accurate fire of a sniper.

Bulletproof vests provided the minimum of protection to many of those who responded.

Medical equipment provided to both medics and ambulances was put quickly to use by medics who did not fear working under fire.

And optics enabled some to respond in a way only a terrorist would understand, ending his spree before he could do more damage.

If I sound too emotional about this incident it is because I was there, I remember the bodies, I remember the blood, I remember the heroes, I was RavShatz Shilo.

Those that are charged with first response throughout Judea and Samaria are called "RavShatz" or Military Security Coordinator. They and there teams work 24/7 keeping their communities safe. Be it the every day traveler, the farmer, the industrialist, the Security teams with the "RavShatz" at their head work hand in hand with the IDF, to provide this basic human right of security and saftey.

This special group is nothing new, they have been doing it for over 30 years. The renewed concept was set up when new Jewish communities started up throughout the Galil and Judea and Samaria.

The only differences between the groups is that the teams in Judea and Samaria were operating in coordination and under orders of the IDF due to the area is under military rule, the Galil being under normal police jurisdiction operates differently. Of course the threat factor is very different today, those in Judea and Samaria main challenge is their fight against terror and murder, whereas their contemporaries and volunteers in the Galil contend with theft and agricultural sabotage.

I admit the topic is personal to me, as I served as the Security Coordinator of the Shilo region between the years 1996- 2006, the high time of the Intifada. Almost everyday from September 2000, I had to deal with various means of terror attacks, eventually slowing down as the years went on.

This lack of notice of difference between the two goes on today, as we watch Jewish organizations throughout the world pay homage to others who have stepped up to do the job that police should have been doing in the Galil and Negev. Indeed, recollections of good old Zionist values are spoken of, as funds are showered, and podiums offered.

Yet this group of heroes who stop terror and put their lives daily on the line continues on in the shadows, barely recognized or appreciated by mainstream Jewish groups.

This piece is not being written out of envy, and by no means is it being written to downplay the value of a group working to strengthen our presence in the Galil in the face of continuing threats and challenges by the Arabs who terrorize and vandalize our farmers in the north. I might add again, doing work that the police should be doing.

It is being written so that proper credit is given where it is due, to acknowledge and to educate, and to honor the hundreds who put there lives in front of so many others, most of whom they don't even know.

Ten years ago, we in the security establishment saw how working together as one proved to be a win-win situation. Furthermore we saw when working in tandem with Jewish communities throughout the world, we were able to save more Jewish lives and provide more of a secure atmosphere to those who have continued the Zionist dream that many of us were brought up with.

The world too has benefitted from this combination, this win-win scenario of unity, as new strategies and technologies came about that combat worldwide terror today. We have not forgotten the "RavShatz" and his security and medical teams of Judea and Samaria, we never have and will continue to strengthen them and their teams and their heroic and superhuman efforts they make for all of us, all of our people.

One Israel Fund is proud to be apart of this, as being the first and foremost organization that these brave souls could always turn to in their, and our times of need.

After 18 years, "Chai" (Life) One Israel Fund remains that same organization, who will stand shoulder to shoulder with all who wish to provide safety and security to our people, who will continue to put their lives in harms way to keep our people strong and in our land, all of our land.

I too am proud to continue to be part of this effort and I remember to give credit where it is due.

Am Yisrael Chai!

Marc Prowisor is Director of Security Projects for the One Israel Fund.

Editor's Addition: I hope it's clear that the One Israel Fund is pro-Israel. The New Israel Fund is pro-Arab and would like to see the end of the Jewish State, with Arabs in the majority. Very different organizations, with the New Israel Fund much more often in the news.

To Go To Top

Posted by Raymond Ibrahim, March 13, 2012.

According to today's edition of Egypt's Al-Wafd, a popular political website, the latest candidate for the Egyptian presidency, Muhammad Muhammad Musa, claims he is the hidden Mahdi — a savior figure in Islamic eschatology.

Muhammad Muhammad Musa: Mahdi and savior of the Arab world?

After exiting from the Supreme Council for Elections, Musa said that "he is the awaited Mahdi who will liberate the Arab world, and that the anti-Christ [al-Masih al-Dajjal] appears to him daily in dreams trying to prevent him from running for the presidency and liberating the Arab countries from tyranny. He confirmed that he ran for presidency in 2005 against [ousted Egyptian president Hosni] Mubarak, but that the military intelligence service and police arrested his son in an effort to force him to withdraw from the race," which he did.

The Mahdi, of course, is "the rightly-guided one" who, according to Islamic tradition, will come immediately before the end times to battle the evil Dajjal and make the entire world Muslim. One of his signs is that "Muhammad" must be part of his name — and Musa has it twice — or some derivation, e.g., "Ahmad."

Nor is this some arcane fiction ignored by all. As Timothy Furnish writes over at Mahdi Watch:

Over the last 1400 years numerous claimants to the mantle of the Mahdi have arisen in both Shi'i and Sunni circles. Modern belief in the coming of the Mahdi has manifested most famously in the 1979 al-'Utaybi uprising of Sa'udi Arabia, and most recently in the ongoing Mahdist movements (some violent) in Iraq, as well as in the frequently-expressed public prayers of Iranian President Ahmadinezhad bidding the Mahdi to return and, in the larger Sunni Islamic world, by claims that Usamah bin Ladin might be the (now occulted?) Mahdi.

Contact Raymond Ibrahim at list@pundicity.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Sanford Aranoff, March 13, 2012.

Israel developed an anti-missile missile that works. Contrast this with American efforts. In 1967 I worked on an anti-missile program at Bell Laboratories in NJ. It never worked. Look at the Patriot anti-missile developed by Ratheon. During the first Iraqi war, many Patriots were fired at incoming scuds. Each Patriot cost $1 million. They did not intercept a single scud.

This profound American failure is due to the mentality of American workers. They do what they have to do in order to keep their jobs, instead of being focused on the objectives and goals as Israelis do.

I was a highly paid consultant with Grumman, working on JSTARS, a radar project during the second Iraqi war. My first day at work I looked at the computer code by my predecessor. I went to my manager saying this contained errors in high school trig, and asked him how did this incorrect code pass government inspection. He answered saying that the government inspectors certify work in order to keep their jobs. This is, of course, identical to cheating in college.

Obama's statements and decisions are irrational, yet the opposition candidates remain silent. This is because they fear people will get upset. In other words, politicians are focused in what they think will get them votes, not what they think is in the best interest of the country.

Dr. Sanford Aranoff is author of "Finite and Infinite Mathematics: Sets, Numbers, Lines, Equations, Probability", "Rational Thinking, Government Policies, Science, and Living". and "Teaching and Helping Students Think and Do Better ." Contact him at aranoff@analysis-knowledge.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Never Again is Now, March 13, 2012.

This was written by Tabitha Korol, who earned an award from CAMERA (Committee on Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America) "in recognition of outstanding letter-writing in 2009 to promote fair and factual reporting about Israel ." Her op-eds have appeared in Arutz Sheva (Israel National News), and she posts at Right Truth and Never Again Is Now.


I was compelled to write to President Mark Yudof concerning past and recent Sharia-compliant acts by administration, faculty, and campus police at school events on the University of California campuses, in opposition to our democratic principles and the Values posted on their University's website. They have not protected the non-Muslims students, specifically the Jewish students, from Muslim events such as the infamous Apartheid Week or a speaker such as Louis Farrakhan, or shown respect to visiting speakers who speak for Israel -and I firmly believe that the University most certainly would have taken extra precautions had they been Black, Latino, Asian, or Muslim students.

The goal of Islam is for each of their adherents to spread their so-called religion worldwide, although Islam is far more a political force than religion. Islam is a replacement theocracy and, just as Muhammad and his followers converted, enslaved, slaughtered and replaced Zoroastrianism, Coptic Christian and Pharoahic religions, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and Judaism with Islam throughout most of the Middle East, Muslims are Koran-bound to spread Islam by sword or stealth to the rest of the world. The mullahs have sent their young emissaries to Europe and to our shores to deny Israel's 4,000-year history, destroy Israel's economy with BDS, riot to terrorize and intimidate students, and subjugate the masses. Islamic youths are trained beyond the belts of explosives, and these universities permit totalitarianism to reign at the U of C. Why didn't the school implement some of the Respect, the cornerstone of human interaction, mentioned on theirValues page? Why isn't the school honor-bound to teach these students the values of our democratic way of life rather than permit the poison of Islam to infect the schools and population here?

Why didn't they implement the Intellectual curiousity, the commitment to learning, teaching, creativity and research?. Rather Muslims were permitted to inflame the continued bigotry and hatred that shapes their world. Why is there no staff available to instruct the truth about Israel's accomplishments: the highest ratio of university degrees per capita in the world, most scientific papers per capita than any other country, highest number of scientists and technicians per capita in the world, largest immigrant-absorbing nation per capita in the world (thereby refuting their apartheid accusations)? Why not note that Israel is the only country in the Middle East where the Christian population has grown over the last 50 years, rather than reduced by Islamic murderers? There is no dearth of Israel's exceptionalism to teach these hoodlums, but permission was given not just to seek Israel's delegitimization, but accept their interruptions, riots, and bullying, as part of an ongoing process to humiliate and terrorize the Jewish students.

Why shouldn't they be teaching the ills of Islam — torture of its own citizens, public beheadings and hangings, use of small children as cover for warfare, 270 million killed over 1400 years of Islamizing the Middle East, the true apartheid against their own women, the 18,553 deadly terror attacks since 9/11 against 5 religions — rather than protecting the behavior and emboldening these young adults to join their brethren in future terror attacks? It is incumbent upon this administration to teach them to accept our values if they are to live in our country! Is this the behavior we want to unleash to the streets of our cities — an Occupy all of America by Islamists? What will we pass down to your descendants — is anyone considering this obvious dreadfulness? Tolerance of intolerance is not tolerance, but cultural suicide. The University is accepting student fees under false pretenses, and failing the students who have come to this institution in search of an honest education in a safe environment — and conspiratorial in allowing the annihilation and replacement of our culture by theirs, which is treachery to ours.

The University is the responsible party in all of this, and they should be searching their conscience and stand up for our democratic way of life, and not forfeit it to Islam. Not only should they apologize to the students that were abandoned, endangered and made fearful, but they must speak out against the encroaching Islam and expel those students who cannot learn to be respectful citizens in the schools and in America.

Just because a group has "Justice" in its name, their purpose must be understood. The Students for Justice in Palestine have one purpose only — to create a threatening and harmful environment in which to oppress their perceived enemy. They are not equal to the groups that concern themselves with performing arts or community service; neither should they be treated equally. The campus police were ineffective, whether out of Sharia-compliance or ineptitude, both of which are unacceptable and violate state laws and University rules. Instead of hauling in the rioters, the victimized students were advised "not to walk alone!"

The issues have not sufficiently been addressed and the evil is permitted to flourish unimpeded. The Muslim Student Unions are affiliates of the Brotherhood, and advocates for the elimination of the Jewish State. It has nothing to do with settlements or any other concocted reason; it is to destroy the Jews and usurp the land. No other group in history has been so abused; neither would the administration have permitted it against any other target. When will the President stop this agenda? The Jewish students have been harmed (if not physically, certainly emotionally) and the Jews are always first — Christians and others will follow; they always do in a dictatorship. Hitler has proven that; the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was a devoted adherent of Hitler's and these children are the descendants. The University MUST uphold the values of Israel and America and not turn the institution into an Islamic community, with all the hate and violence for which Islam is known.

I have asked the President and his extended administration and staff to publicly condemn and nevermore tolerate the behavior and the boycott against Israel and the Jewish people, and take action against those who use the premises for such activities. Saying the school does not agree with the bigotry (as happened at the University of Pennsylvania) but allowing it to occur nevertheless, is not upholding the values of democracy. It is still being Sharia-compliant but with a veil of deceit — completely unacceptable in these United States.

And, over this past weekend, Louis Farrakhan was invited to speak at the University of California, Berkeley — the same Louis Farrakhan whose speeches and writings have been denounced by critics for decades as bigoted, homophobic and anti-Semitic. He mocked Asian accents, ranted about Zionists, the CIA, racism, and the end of the United States, all in the name of free speech. Have we become so divisive and willing to accept hate speech as acceptable — and even fashionable — to invite a hatemonger without an opposing view? Farrakhan received a standing ovation.

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Shamrak, March 12, 2012.

Please Let Us Have Our Backs Back by Gail Winston

President Barack Obama's biggest claim to support of Israel is: "When the chips are down, I have Israel's back." Sorry, Mr. Obama, that's not what America needs to "have". We don't need you at our backs, pushing us. We are not human shields which you can hide in "back" of. We need America to stand side-by-side with Israel — and our other Western allies — to defend all Western Civilization from Nuclear Holocaust.

Ms. Rice spoke about the (US's) "unshakable" relationship with Israel. Doesn't she know that the very word for "Intifada" means to "shake off" (the Jewish State of Israel)? An Ambassador should be careful with the words she uses. They may have other meanings — especially to the hostile "other" group she wants Israel "to live together with in peace and security".

By Obama and Rice, etc "having Israel's back", they are literally pushing Israel into defending not just herself but also America and the rest of the West. Israel is expected to take the existing (life-threatening and State-threatening) risks to get the job done. Hurray for our side! But, where is America and the rest of the West? Are they "resting" on Israel's "back"?

So, Mr. Obama, Let us have our backs back! Get off our backs! Don't push Israel into fronting for the United States. We are NOT your human shields!
Gifts of Arab Spring

The 100 missiles fired by the Palestinian Jihad Islami escalated Saturday and included Grad multiple rocket launchers mounted on vehicles and SA-7 anti-air rockets, the Russian version of the American Stinger, smuggled from Libya.

IDF officials say the 200 rockets fired
at Israel's southern communities since Friday marks a "dramatic development in terms of the quantity and rate of the fire." More than 50 of the rockets fired in recent days were medium-range missiles.

Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak

Since Al Jezeera became a main whole-sale supplier of the world news (at least in Australia), Israel has ceased to be a main item of attention and has almost disappeared from TV screens. It seems that public interest in news from Israel, which was often artificially invented and inflated, is a myth invented by anti-Jewish Western media.

Israel and China Signed Huge Water Deal

Business relations between Israel and China are set to grow significantly after Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz inked a deal worth over NIS 1 billion with Chinese officials. Under the deal, Israeli companies will export water technologies to China, to aid that country with water purification and agricultural projects.

Procrastination-Fake Diplomacy in Action

Iran invited UN inspectors to Parchin — after removing incriminating facilities. In the last three weeks, the monitors were twice barred from the site after travelling to Tehran for that purpose. The head of the UN agency nuclear agency Yukiya Amano spoke of "suspicious movements" around the site. There turned out to be a general clearance of incriminating equipment before the monitors arrived.

US Paid $5 Million Extortion to Egypt

Seven American rights workers left Egypt after the US paid nearly $5 million in bail costs to secure their freedom. Egyptian officials said the US paid $300,000 each for 16 Americans, nine of whom were already out of the country. The State Department said the money was paid by the nongovernmental organisations where the democracy and rights workers work. However, the NGOs receive US funding for their operations. (Where is dignity and self-respect? What happened to an official US policy of no negotiation with and payment to terrorists?)

Radical Islam Wins Big in Iran

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad appears to be the big loser against Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameini. Hardliners from the Islamist camp appear to have captured at least three-quarters of the 290 seats in the Majlis, the country's parliament.

Truth is Out: Don't Count on United States

Plain-speaking Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman warned that if the United States is too weak to be able to intervene to stop Syrian President Bashar Assad's "systematic murder of innocent civilians," it can't be counted on to come to Israel's aid. "If the international community is incapable of stopping the massacres in Syria, what is the value of its promises to protect the security of Israel?"

North Korea Tested Iranian "Dirty Bomb"

German and Japanese intelligence sources confirmed what Western intelligence had known for 11 months — North Korea tested an Iranian warhead or "dirty bomb" in 2010 for $55m. The disclosure invalidates the US President Obama persistence that there is still time for diplomatic pressure and sanctions to bring Iran's leaders to a decision to halt their nuclear momentum before military action was called for.

Spiritual Traitors — Not Leaders!

Chief Sephardic Rabbi (Rav) Rabbi Shlomo Amar has published a call to believers not to ascend to the Temple Mount. The call appears under the heading "avoid ascending to the Mount and touching its edge," which was the ruling about Mount Sinai in the Book of Exodus before the Ten Commandments. Rav Amar's declaration was co-signed by former Chief Sephardic Rabbi Rav Eliyahu Bakshi Doron; Rav Shalom Cohen, Head of Porat Yosef Yeshiva in the Old City of Jerusalem, Old City Rabbi Rav Avigdor Neventzal, and Kotel Rabbi, Rav Shmuel Rabinovich.

Hamas has Chosen Self-preservation

Hamas will not do Iran's bidding in any war with Israel, according to senior figures within the militant Islamic group. "If there is a war between two powers, Hamas will not be part of such a war," Salah Bardawil, a member of the organisation's political bureau in Gaza City, told the Guardian. He denied the group would launch rockets into Israel at Tehran's request in response to a strike on its nuclear sites.

Obama Rejects Red Lines

US President Barack Obama held to the line that "Iran does not yet have a nuclear weapon" and cautioned against a "premature attack" on the Islamic Republic. This assessment is certainly not shared by Israel and ignored its call for red lines to warn Iran it will be attacked if it takes its nuclear weapons program beyond them. (Obama plays "Yes, Prime Minister" text-book political game — deny it, wait, investigate, do nothing until it is too late. Then say: "Nothing can be done about it now"!)

Quote of the Week:

"The Jewish state will not allow those seeking our destruction to possess the means to achieve that goal. A nuclear armed Iran must be stopped. Amazingly, some people refuse to acknowledge that Iran's goal is to develop nuclear weapons. You see, Iran claims that it's enriching uranium to develop medical research. Yeah, right. A country that builds underground nuclear facilities, develops intercontinental ballistic missiles, manufactures thousands of centrifuges, and absorbs crippling sanctions — is doing all that in order to advance... medical research?" — Bibi Netanyahu speech at AIPAC meeting

Arabs Building on JNF (Jewish) Lands

For generations Jews who dreamed of Zion collected their pennies so the Jewish National Fund could purchase land in Israel. Today illegal Arab building on JNF lands goes unchecked by Israel's leaders.

No fewer than 700 illegal housing units have been built by Arabs in the past two years on land purchased for Jews by the JNF in northern Jerusalem.

Aryeh King, chairman of the Israel Land Fund, says his organisation is conducting a careful survey of the illegal structures using aerial photographs, but adds the problem is exacerbated by the fact that the illegal building occurs beyond Israel's security fence. Lands bought by the JNF are on both sides of the fence.

"We're discussing lands in Qalandiya," King explained. "All entry and activity has to be coordinated with the IDF and Ministry of Defence. No enforcement can be undertaken in these areas without the cooperation of the military and police. This is routinely denied on 'security grounds.'"

For example, King says, "We have an aerial photo of an old building from before 2005, but the security fence being built makes these areas out of bounds, and we have no way of documenting and making claims for enforcement."

"This inaction is politically motivated, and people don't realise what is happening. The JNF offers to purchase land at nominal prices in order to return them to the Jewish people, but that's not what is happening."

"I hope that those who donate to the JNF will think twice before giving their money to a body that does nothing to secure the assets they hold in trust for the Jewish people," King added. (Planting trees is not enough! We need to reclaim and free all Jewish land from Arab occupation.)


Dear Friends,

The aim of this independent editorial is to present the Jewish point of view on the Arab-Israel conflict and motivate people to support ideals and inspirations of true Zionism, the Jewish National independence movement. We are not affiliated with or sponsored by any government or political party.

Please visit our website . You may use its articles and letters on your website, FaceBook, YouTube etc. Feel free to introduce your friends and family members to our distribution list!

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, March 12, 2012.


It's been a while since I have provided an update on Zakkai, the little boy I had asked readers to pray for, and so I begin by providing one here.

Last I wrote on this subject I indicated that there was good news — the tumor on his spine was determined to be benign and not some rare form of cancer as originally thought. Since I wrote, the parents have taken great care to confirm this new diagnosis with several different medical institutions — and they indeed concur. This means the tumor will not metastasize, and no horrendous chemotherapy is called for. But the tumor is still there and has to be removed. The parents are investigating with tremendous diligence a number of top flight potential sites for having this surgery done — each offering its own recommendations and techniques. In a few weeks, at most, the decision will be made. At present the child is in very good spirits. The original surgery that was done on the tumor, which removed just some of it, relieved pressure on his spine.

This is what he now looks like:

You can access this site for more information about him on an on-going basis:
http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/zakkai And please, keep praying. Rafael Zakkai Avraham Ben Yakira Avigael.


Now as to that barrage:

Last November I wrote an article about the growing ascendency of

Islamic Jihad over Hamas in Gaza. It is still relevant:
http://frontpagemag.com/2011/11/04/ islamic-jihad-irans-new-favored-proxy/

Today we can see the growing impotency of Hamas. For Hamas is the group — ostensibly in control in Gaza — that the Egyptians are working with to secure a rocket ceasefire. But Hamas is no longer in full control: in spite of its declarations regarding its ability to stop other groups from launching rockets, Islamic Jihad, and to a lesser extent PRC (Popular Resistance Committees), are continuing to launch rockets in an attack that is escalating.

It is Islamic Jihad that is in possession of, and has been launching, the more dangerous Grad Katyusha rockets. At least five have been launched at Beersheva and a couple at Ashdod today. In most instances, Iron Dome has intercepted them. The radius of the rocket fire has grown and now reaches the Gadera area (some 12 km. east of Ashdod). Three women have been injured. Damage has been done to buildings and cars, in Gadera and Ashdod.

The Israeli Air Force is continuing to hit hard at targets, aiming at key Jihadists when possible. While Islamic Jihad maintains that it will not stop unless Israel stops first:

Declared Islamic Jihad Deputy Secretary-General Ziad a-Nahala, "Israel is the aggressor and so it has to halt fire first. After that, we will assess the situation and decide on a ceasefire." He said that Cairo had been informed that IJ opposes a ceasefire.


In the last 76 hours, according to the IDF, more than 200 rockets have been fired from Gaza. That's a huge amount, and it's appropriate to ask where we're going with this. All well and good that the Iron Dome batteries mitigate some of the risk. Some 1 million Israelis are still hunkered down in shelters, unable to live normal lives, and at risk even so.

This is not an acceptable situation. One feels the need to ask, Are our people to remain sitting ducks?

Both Chief of Staff Gantz and other IDF leaders have been commenting about the need to ratchet up the air attack on Gaza, without mentioning a possible land operation similar to Cast Lead. But only recently, Gantz — in the face of information about arms build — up in Gaza — had indicated that an operation there would be necessary before long (although he was very vague as to when this might be). The IDF is prepared. The decision is a political one.

If this continues beyond several days, stronger action will become necessary. Equally so will this be the case if — Heaven forbid — there are people killed or very seriously injured. This is the painful and ironic political reality: Once there is a tragedy, the equation shifts.

Already, the situation looms as serious enough so that there is the first hint of the possibility of a land operation. This is how PM Netanyahu's words spoken today — "The IDF is ready to expand its operations and continue them as necessary" — are being interpreted. He spoke of "crushing offensive capabilities" and the ability of the IDF to hit the terrorists "wherever they are."

While Minister of Strategic Affairs Ya'alon said today, "[the IDF will] continue to operate in Gaza until the other side thinks better of continued fire into Israel...At this point we see no need to enter Gaza, but the possibility exists."


Ostensibly, this barrage is in retaliation for our strike on the Popular Resistance Committees leader al-Kaisi, but there is a great deal more going on. When it was suggested at the Cabinet meeting yesterday that this was an attempt by Palestinian Arabs to bring the issues back on center stage after the recent focus on Iran, Netanyahu responded that:

"This is about Iran. If it were not for Iran, these extremists would not have their weapons, training or logistical support."

Perhaps we have to ask if Iran is sending a message in response to Netanyahu's tough talk at AIPAC. This possibility makes it all the more important that we respond in Gaza with great force.


Yoram Ettinger, writing in Israel Hayom, says:

"The war on terrorism cannot be won by defensive — but only by offensive — means, notwithstanding the impressive performance of the Iron Dome missile defense system...

"Personal and national security will not be advanced by the conclusion of another ceasefire with Palestinian terrorists, but by the destruction of the ideological, educational, political, financial, logistical and operational infrastructures of Palestinian fire.

"Israel's security will not be enhanced by deterring Palestinians from launching missiles at Israel, but by denying them the capability to launch missiles.

"Israel's security will not be bolstered by the power to retaliate against Palestinian missiles, but by the power to preempt and to prevent the launching of — and to eliminate — Palestinian missiles.

"An effective offensive against Palestinian terrorist capabilities should not be surgical and limited in scope and time, but comprehensive, decisive, sustained and disproportionate, aiming to devastate all terrorist infrastructures and capabilities, bringing the enemy to submission.

"A limited response to terrorism, and the pursuit of ceasefires, constitutes a prescription for a war of attrition — the dream of terrorists and the nightmare of democracies.

"An effective offensive should not strive for engagement and coexistence with — or the suspension of — terrorism, but for uprooting terrorism."
http://www.israelhayom.com/site/ newsletter_opinion.php?id=1534


Points of interest here:

  • Egypt, which is attempting to broker that ceasefire, is said to have warned Islamic Jihad about a possible Israeli attack on al-Kaisi. Islamic Jihad was told to restrict itself to operations in Gaza and to stay out of Sinai.

  • Al-Kaisi was directly connected to the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit. It was the Popular Resistance Committees that had grabbed him, interrogated him, and turned him over to Hamas.


Many is the time, writing in my postings and in private communication with readers, that I have sought to alert Americans to the danger that Iran presents not only to Israel, but to the US as well. Many is the time that I have felt something akin to despair at the apparent failure of many Americans to perceive what will be coming down the road if strong action is not taken.

Here I would like to share the observations of Ilan Berman, vice president of the American Foreign Policy Council, who asks, "Could Iran Threaten the US?"

"For years, more than a few policymakers in Washington have taken quiet comfort in the notion that, no matter how vexing a challenge Iran and its nuclear ambitions might be, the Islamic republic remained a distant adversary — one not yet capable of putting America at risk.

"That fiction, however, is becoming increasingly difficult to sustain. Take the intelligence community's latest assessment of worldwide threats, unveiled publicly before Congress in late January. That estimate, delivered by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, provides the clearest indication to date that Iran poses a direct threat to the U.S. on at least three levels. (Emphasis added)

"Latin America. Recent years have seen significant Iranian attention to, and activity in, the countries south of the U.S. border. Iran's vibrant strategic partnership with the regime of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela has captured the lion's share of media attention, but Tehran has established growing beachheads elsewhere in the region, including in Bolivia, Ecuador and throughout the region's loosely regulated free trade areas...

"Underpinning this activism is what amounts to a seismic shift in Iranian strategic calculations. As Clapper outlined, 'Iranian officials — probably including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei — have changed their calculus and are now willing to conduct an attack in the United States.'

Cyberwarfare... Iran's leadership is making major investments in cyberwarfare. Over the past year, it has announced the establishment of a dedicated cyber command under the country's Ministry of Information and Communications Technology and launched what is rumored to be a $1 billion plan to enhance its cyber-defense and cyber-offense capabilities, with significant results.

"'Iran's intelligence operations against the United States, including cyber capabilities, have dramatically increased in recent years in depth and complexity,' Clapper warned lawmakers.

"More and more, there are signs that these burgeoning capabilities could be aimed at the U.S...

"Ballistic Missiles. When the Obama administration unveiled its overhaul of U.S. missile defense strategy in September 2009, it staked its new 'phased adaptive approach' on the judgment that Iran was a long way from acquiring an intercontinental ballistic missile capability. Therefore, priority should be given to defending U.S. allies overseas, rather than the American homeland.

"Increasingly, however, that reading no longer rings true.

"'Iran already has the largest inventory of ballistic missiles in the Middle East, and it is expanding the scale, reach, and sophistication of its ballistic missile forces, many of which are inherently capable of carrying a nuclear payload,' the latest intelligence assessment holds.

"If anything, that's an understatement. As Uzi Rubin, one of the world's foremost experts on ballistic missiles, recently told an audience at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington, 'Iran is turning the corner, or soon will' in its development of intercontinental ballistic missiles...

"Needless to say, these advances make Iran a truly international threat.

"...it is by now apparent that the danger posed by Iran to American security is both clear and increasingly present."
http://www.ilanberman.com/11343/ could-iran-threaten-us

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Kataria N., March 12, 2012.

This comes from
http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/ article2984531.ece



Urging the authorities to take note of these forced conversions, HRCP officials told reporters on Saturday that culprits were taking advantage of loopholes in the law.

Amarnath Motumel of the HRCP said that within a month 20 forced conversions had taken place.

"Apart from minor school girls, married women with children are not spared either," he said.

The issue of Hindu girls being forcibly converted has come to the fore after the case of 18-year-old Rinkle Kumari from Sukkur who has converted and taken the Muslim name of Faryal after marrying a Muslim boy.

The family of the girl claim she was kidnapped and forcibly converted even after she appeared in court in Sukkur and claimed she converted out of her own free will.

But Motumel pointed out that not only were affected families warned of dire consequences but whenever a Hindu girl or her family appeared in court hundreds of religious zealots gather to pressurise them or they take to the streets as pressure tactics and to create an atmosphere of fear.

The families of Rinkle Kumari were also present at the conference in which her brother Inder said that had she been allowed to meet with her family members privately and even once she would never have converted.

"Despite the President's orders for the girl's rescue we are still waiting for something to be done."

HRCP official Professor Badar Soomro said there was a need to enact new laws to restore a sense of security among the Hindu community.

He also said if a girl is kidnapped and her family registers a case she should be kept in a Darul Aman at least for a month before she is produced in court to record her statement.

To Go To Top

Posted by Sergio HaDaR Tezza, March 12, 2012.

Yehouda Partouch, was the first person who greeted me after I moved to Ramat Mamrè: he got up from his seat to welcome me in the Synagogue my first Friday Night there, and we became instant friends. He would always bring me coffee, cake and fruits when I passed near his house on guard duty. We had many long conversations and great exchanges, half in Hebrew and half in French. He was a real Tsaddiq. He died protecting his pregnant wife and unborn child throwing himself on them when he heard the shots, which were all for his wife and child. Egged had refused until then to bullet-proof buses.

I remember the disgusting way the news were given by Chaim Yavin, "Mr. television", that night at Mabat, the 8P.M. news on what was then the only Israeli Tv Channel, in the typical way in which the Oslo-drunken, and settler-hating Israeli media would speak about settlers: "We received a report of an Egged bus being shot at at the Glass Crossroad: two dead and sixteen injured. Let's go to the sports news." That was it! Less words in Hebrew than the amount of shot Jews, many of whom were kids.

I thought at that moment: "had this happened in Savyon, or in some kibbutz, we'd have had an hour live report. But it's only us, settlers. Cheap meat."

Yehouda was the first of a sadly long list of friends assassinated with the freedom of movement and the weapons given by the Israeli Governments after Oslo to a bunch of Arab terrorists in uniform. We knew it then, there's no excuse. Since then, over 2,000 murdered Jews and over 20,000 injured. The peace of the graves.

This below was written by David Wilder.


Seventeen years ago, I seem to recall walking around outside in Kiryat Arba, when news of a terror attack started making the rounds. A bus had been shot at, not too far away, at the 'Glass junction' on the way to Hebron. I jumped in a car going in that direction and about five minutes later found myself face to face with two dead men, others injured, and a large group of people, who were, a few minutes before, passengers on that ill-fated bus.

Yehuda Partush had already been taken off the bus. A doctor examined him, did whatever he could, and then threw his hands up in disgust. Partush and his wife Mazal were coming back from Jerusalem with the keys to their new home, that they'd just purchased. When the shooting started, Partush jumped on his wife, who was then pregnant, saving her life. She later gave birth to their first son.

Nachum Hoss was still on the bus, sitting near the front. I knew him; We had met and talked a few days earlier. I helped to take him off the bus. I only remember mumbling, again and again, 'Nachum, we love you, Nachum, we love you.'

Today was the 17th anniversary of that horrible day. A small group of people, their family and from Hebron, met at the cemetery, to recite some Psalms, say a few prayers, and remember them.

I try, every year, to attend the short service. But, even after so many years, it still hurts. Especially to hear Yehuda's son, Aviel Yehuda, not yet 17 years old, repeating the holy Kaddish prayer for a father he wasn't privileged to know.

Aviel Yehuda Partush saying Kaddish (David Wilder)

That was terror past. But there still is terror, present.

Yesterday I participated in an event that was new to me. A few weeks ago I received a very emotional, actually heart-rending letter from Michael Palmer, father of Asher and grandfather of Yonaton Palmer. These two, father and son, were murdered at the end of September when Arab terrorists hurled a rock at their car from a moving vehicle. The rock went through the windshield, hitting Asher in the head, causing him to lose control of the car. He and his infant son were both killed.

Michael Palmer's letter described the first court hearing, held at a military prison outside Jerusalem. Michael and one of his sons were present. Along with dozens of Arabs, supporting the murderous terrorists. He suggested that perhaps others could attend the next hearing, together with him and his son.

I responded positively, as did many others. He presented a list of over 100 people who wanted to participate in the next hearing. He was told that only ten people would be allowed in the courtroom. (The six Arabs charged, with each one being allowed 10 representatives, could have at least 60 representatives to cheer them on.)

Yesterday morning I drove, with a few other people, out to "Machane Ofer" just over an hour away from Hebron. It was a nightmare come true.

In order to be allowed in, you had to be on 'the list.' I was on the list. One step in. Of course, I had to leave my ID at the gate, to be received back on the way out. After that, the fun began. I went through three security checks in order to be allowed in. The first two were the normal, magnometer machines. Just like the airport. Or Ma'arat HaMachpela.

But the third one was manual. The guard who went over me with a fine-tooth comb was given orders, before starting with me, 'to check us the same way they check the prisoners.'

Of course, we couldn't bring anything inside. Including, no beeper (pager) or mobile phone. I have a press card and asked if I could bring a camera, after identifying myself as an accredited journalist. The answer was no. However, later on, a group of journalists all came in, with their cameras, videos and recorders.

The actual hearing, which began about an hour after I got in, at 10:30, was horrible. It is very difficult to sit in a room with terrorist killers. I sat next to Michael Palmer and his son Shmuel. Behind us were the other nine they let in. On the other side of isle were a group of Arabs (I counted about 15), a group of journalists and somewhere between 15 to 20 security personnel.

Six handcuffed Arabs were led in from a side door. The handcuffs were removed; the leg cuffs stayed on. They immediately began conversations with their family members present. We were told that this is allowed. One by one, the terrorists were asked if they understood the charges against them. Two were indicted for murder. The others are suspected of participating in other such rock-throwings at moving cars from a moving car and also belonging to a group attempting to kill Jews. Some of them are charged with 25 such attempted killings, besides the actual killing of the Palmers. With one exception, they all pleaded innocent, saying they hadn't done anything wrong.

The proceedings, before a military panel of three officers, are in Hebrew, with full translation into Arabic. The lawyers for the terrorists are all Arabs. They are, of course, allowed to bring cell phones and the like into the courtroom.

One of the military people participating in the trial introduced himself to me and said, 'don't worry. All Am Yisrael (the Jewish People) are behind you. They'll get what they deserve." To which I responded, 'unfortunately they won't. They'll get a five star hotel for a few years until being released for a Jewish hostage." "Yeah," he said, "you should see the conditions they have here. They're better off in jail than at their homes."

This man, who conversed with me, isn't Jewish.

After each set of two men pleaded not-guilty, they were led out of the courtroom. When one was left, another Arab was brought in, for a different hearing. The two saw each other, smiled broadly and started hugging and kissing each other.

This too was allowed. It when on for at least five minutes. It was disgusting. When they sat down, they had their arms around each other, and continued smiling and talking. In a military courtroom, in front of three military officer — judges and the prosecutors. It sort of wanted to make you vomit.

When the last of the Palmer murderers left the room — I think he pleaded guilty — again they hugged. This time, after a minute or two, their mutual affection was broken up by the guards.

As I mentioned earlier, it's very very hard to sit near these rancid creatures. I really don't know how Michael Palmer does it. They killed his son and grandson. But we surely can't let him sit there alone, in a room filled with Arabs, showing support for these murderers. But it really was horrible.

If we knew, that at the end, they would hang from a pole somewhere...; but we all know that's not what's going to happen. They'll sit in an Israeli jail, receive 'compensation while imprisoned, get fed three times a day, and also graduate from an exclusive terrorist university, with at least one college degree, and a specialty in advanced terror tactics. And guess who pays for it!

In seventeen years, Asher Palmer won't have a son to say Kaddish for him at the annual cemetery service. His only son was killed together with him. But his daughter Orit, who was born only months after his murder, will likely stand next to her father's and brother's graves, asking herself, 'what was he really like' — thinking, 'I am so sorry I was never able to talk to him, hold his hand, have him pick me up and hold me.' And anyone else there, in seventeen years, like me today, at the service for Nachum Hoss and Yehuda Partush, will too, feel that pain, the pain of a child who wasn't privileged to know her father, because a terrorist killed him, because he was a Jew, living in Israel.

David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute directly in Israel to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB105, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, email: hebron@hebron.org.il or phone: 972-52-431-7055. In USA, write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, email: hebronfund@aol.com or phone: 718 677 6886.

To Go To Top

Posted by Daily Alert, March 12, 2012.
This below is an article by David Horowitz that appeared in the Times of Israel

Numbers, context and the choice now facing Hamas


It's a sequence that has played out, with minor variations, several times before.

Israel targets a Palestinian terror kingpin, acting on information that he is planning to orchestrate a major attack, but knowing that the act of thwarting him will likely prompt barrages of rockets aimed at towns and villages all over the south.

The rockets indeed start flying, the air force is dispatched again and again to stop the terror cells that are poised to fire still more salvos, and the Gaza death toll mounts.

Not so, mercifully, the toll on the Israeli side. The Gaza terror gangs are certainly trying, firing dozens of rockets. But Israel has alarm systems and protected rooms. It keeps its youngsters home from school. And it has the world's foremost anti-missile defense systems.

So the numbers tell nothing like the full story. But the numbers — and the Gaza funeral scenes — are flashed around the world as the apparent barometer of proportionality, or rather disproportionality. And Israel finds itself on the defensive, accused of exaggerated use of force, even as it strives to keep its populace safe.

As so often in the past, what's required to fairly assess the reasons behind the current Israel-Gaza flare-up is a smidgen of intellectual honesty, a glance beyond the headlines and the numbers.

Zuhair al-Qaissi, the leader of Gaza's Popular Resistance Committees, made no secret of his activities. It was al-Qaissi, immediately after Gilad Shalit was released in an extortionate prisoner "exchange" last October, who gave interviews to the Arabic and international media detailing how his organization had kidnapped the Israeli soldier, interrogated him, resisted Israeli pleas for his release, and handed Shalit over to Hamas for five years of incarceration.

Al-Qaissi was also reportedly the man who oversaw the transfer of funds from Hezbollah in Lebanon to other extremist groups in Gaza.

Given those central roles, when the Israeli security establishment claims, as it did on Friday, that al-Qaissi was one of the planners of last August's major infiltration by a group of terrorists — from Gaza, via the Sinai, and into Israel — in which eight Israelis were killed north of Eilat, the claim would seem anything but far-fetched. Likewise, when the Israeli leadership further declares, as it did this weekend, that it resorted to a targeted strike on al-Qaissi, with all the repercussions now being felt across southern Israel, because he was about to orchestrate another such major attack.

A glance beyond the headlines and the numbers would provide the reminder that Israel has no military or civilian presence whatsoever in the Gaza Strip — no territorial dispute. Wrenching thousands of civilians from their homes, Israel withdrew entirely from the Strip in 2005. The last Israeli who we knew was living in Gaza was Shalit.

After the 2005 disengagement, the Palestinians could have rehoused Gaza's refugees — there was no reason not to; the occupation was over — but they preferred to keep that wound open. They could have started building a mini-democracy in Gaza — if only to try to persuade an uncertain Israel that it could safely relinquish territory in the West Bank. But all-too evidently, not even the potential prize of territorial concessions in the West Bank was sufficiently compelling.

Instead, the greenhouses that had flourished in the Gaza settlements and could have flourished under Palestinian control were gleefully smashed, Hamas violently took power in 2007 after winning Palestinian parliamentary elections in 2006, and the rocket and mortar fire continued almost without interruption. In the period before al-Qaissi was killed, barely a day went by without a rocket salvo being fired into Israel; these attacks didn't make headlines because they didn't kill Israelis.

When the IDF's chief of the General Staff Benny Gantz said on Sunday that "Israel is not interested in escalation for the sake of it" in Gaza, that sounds credible, too. There had been no indication in recent weeks that the IDF was planning a repeat of the winter 2008-2009 Operation Cast Lead assault on Hamas. Israel has plainly been focused elsewhere — on Iran's drive to the bomb, on the uncertainties in Egypt, on Bashar Assad's daily massacring of his own people in Syria.

Nonetheless, seven years after it left Gaza, Israel is up against a leadership there that has exploited every opportunity to arm itself with only one enemy in mind — Israel — and to improve the capacity of its rockets to harm Israeli civilians. Sooner or later, therefore, Gantz and other Israeli leaders have said in recent months, Israel may have to resort to another ground offensive.

Whether that time is now may depend on Hamas. Will it decide to join the PRC and Islamic Jihad in firing rockets into Israel — and, remember, Hamas has Fajr missiles that can get to Tel Aviv, which would radically change the nature of this flare-up. Or will it stay away from a direct role and instead work toward a ceasefire? As of Sunday evening, the signs were pointing to the latter.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul Lademain, March 12, 2012.

"Palestinian official claims Israel plans to destroy al-Aqsa Mosque through artificial earthquakes...


Brilliant idea. Here's hoping the Jews skim the muslim pimple off the Temple Mount.

By the way, the mosque sits there at Israel's sufferance and good graces, and if you muslims piss them off then the Jews will finally connect their backbones to their brains and realize once and for all that Jews have every legal and moral right to pop that gilded pimple and drain its serpentine pus back to the desert sands where these snakes first festered.

The only reason why arabs got their twisted claws sunk deep into the Jewish holy site is because Israel's Fathers of Failure lacked the guts to stand up for what's right for Jews and their nation. Instead, like cowed dhimmis, they did as they were told and for decades they managed to get away with rationalizing their abject failure by blaming everyone else but themselves.

Remember this: Whatever evil schemes the euroids hope to do to Jews, can and will be done to them, too. And that goes double for Belgium.

Viva to the Patriots of Israel from the SC4Z. (Secular Christians for Zion) .

Paul Lademain is a Secular Christian for Zion (SC4Z). Contact him by email at lademain@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara and Chaim Ginsberg, March 11, 2012.


Maayana Miskin


MK Michael Ben-Ari hoped to present President Shimon Peres with a special gift on Thursday: a "magic" pen.

However, Ben-Ari did not see Peres at the annual memorial to slain minister Rehavam Zeevi, where he had planned to give his gift. Instead, he presented the pen to Justice Minister Yaakov Ne'eman, and explained its special properties.

"I see that in recent years, the pen that you all have has signed releases only for terrorist murderers," Ben-Ari told the minister. "I obtained a special pen for you with which you will be able to sign on the release of Jewish prisoners, in light of the terrorist release deal."

Ne'eman declined to respond to Ben-Ari's sarcasm.

Ne'eman has been under increasing pressure to release 12 Jewish prisoners accused of terrorism against Arabs. Those pushing for the release say they do not approve of the prisoners' actions, but feel their release would be just in light of the recent release of many hundreds of Arab terrorist murderers in exchange for Gilad Shalit.


Maayana Miskin
Arutz 7

Police cancelled a protest that was to take place Sunday in Nazareth due to the security situation in the south. MK Michael Ben-Ari (Ichud Leumi) decided not to let the setback stop him from showing his disapproval, and visited Nazareth without the backing of supporters — and with his trademark Israeli flag.

Ben-Ari was not entirely alone. Several police cars accompanied the Jewish MK to ensure that he did not come to harm while visiting the Arab city.

Police insisted on removing the freshman MK after just 20 minutes. In that time, a large Arab crowd had already formed to protest Ben-Ari's presence.

Locals held protests elsewhere in the city as well, and shouted anti0-Israel slogans, among them, "With our blood and our spirit we will free Palestine."

One of those protesting Ben-Ari was MK Hanin Zoabi (Balad). Ben-Ari had originally planned to be in Nazareth Sunday to protest Zoabi for her presence aboard the ship Mavi Marmara, which attempted to violently force its way through Israel's naval blockade of Hamas in Gaza.

Zoabi hailed the cancellation of Ben-Ari's protest as a victory over "fascism." Ben-Ari, for his part, accused the government of caving to terrorism.

Contact Barbara and Chaim Ginsberg at barbaraandchaim@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, March 11, 2012.

That chatter, of course, is all about Iran, Obama and Netanyahu. It would not be possible, or even productive, for me to touch upon everything that is being said.

Broadly, what I am seeing is a considerable degree of agreement regarding Obama's determination to protect his electoral chances by keeping matters quiet at all costs until the election.

The best of the commentators on this subject that I've encountered is Charles Krauthammer in "Obama vs. Israel." His piece is powerful and terrifying, and must be read (all emphasis added):

"After ostensibly tough talk about preventing Iran from going nuclear, the Obama administration acquiesced this week to yet another round of talks with the mullahs."

(See "Obama says time for diplomacy, not war":
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/ iran-says-it-will-allow-inspectors-from-un-nuclear- agency-into-secret-parchin-military-site/2012/03/06/ gIQAHRPKuR_story.html)

"This, 14 months after the last group-of-six negotiations collapsed in Istanbul because of blatant Iranian stalling and unseriousness. Nonetheless, the new negotiations will be both without precondition and preceded by yet more talks to decide such trivialities as venue.

"These negotiations don't just gain time for a nuclear program about whose military intent the International Atomic Energy Agency is issuing alarming warnings. They make it extremely difficult for Israel to do anything about it (while it still can), lest Israel be universally condemned for having aborted a diplomatic solution.

"If the administration were serious about achievement rather than appearance, it would have warned that this was the last chance for Iran to come clean and would have demanded a short timeline. After all, President Obama insisted on deadlines for the Iraq withdrawal, the Afghan surge and Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. Why leave these crucial talks open-ended when the nuclear clock is ticking?

"This re-engagement comes immediately after Obama's campaign-year posturing about Iran's nukes. Speaking Sunday in front of AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee), he warned that 'Iran's leaders should have no doubt about the resolve of the United States'...

"Won't sanctions make a difference this time, however? Sanctions are indeed hurting Iran economically. But when Obama's own director of national intelligence was asked by the Senate intelligence committee whether sanctions had any effect on the course of Iran's nuclear program, the answer was simple: No. None whatsoever.

"Obama garnered much AIPAC applause by saying that his is not a containment policy but a prevention policy. But what has he prevented? Keeping a coalition of six together is not prevention. Holding talks is not prevention. Imposing sanctions is not prevention.

"Prevention is halting and reversing the program. Yet Iran is tripling its uranium output, moving enrichment facilities deep under a mountain near Qom and impeding IAEA inspections of weaponization facilities.

"So what is Obama's real objective? 'We're trying to make the decision to attack as hard as possible for Israel,' an administration official told The Post in the most revealing White House admission since 'leading from behind.'"


Let's stop and rewind here for a minute: A White House official told Krauthammer that they are trying to make the decision to attack Iran as difficult as possible for Israel. Anyone reading this want to make the case for Obama as a friend of Israel?


Krauthammer's observation:

"Revealing and shocking. The world's greatest exporter of terror (according to the State Department), the systematic killer of Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, the self-declared enemy that invented 'Death to America Day' is approaching nuclear capability — and the focus of U.S. policy is to prevent a democratic ally threatened with annihilation from preempting the threat?

"...The new open-ended negotiations with Iran fit well with this strategy of tying Israel down. As does Obama's 'I have Israel's back" reassurance, designed to persuade Israel and its supporters to pull back and outsource to Obama what for Israel are life-and-death decisions.

"Yet 48 hours later, Obama says at a news conference that this phrase is just a historical reference to supporting such allies as Britain and Japan — contradicting the intended impression he'd given AIPAC that he was offering special protection to an ally under threat of physical annihilation.

"To AIPAC he...affirms 'Israel's sovereign right to make its own decisions ... to meet its security needs.'

"And then he pursues policies...meant, as his own official admitted, to stop Israel from exercising precisely that sovereign right to self-protection.

"Yet beyond these obvious contradictions and walk-backs lies a transcendent logic:...Obama wants to get past Nov. 6 without any untoward action that might threaten his reelection.

"For Israel, however, the stakes are somewhat higher: the very existence of a vibrant nation and its 6 million Jews. The asymmetry is stark. A fair-minded observer might judge that Israel's desire to not go gently into the darkness carries higher moral urgency than the political future of one man, even if he is president of the United States."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ obama-vs-israel-priority-no-1-stop-israel/ 2012/03/08/gIQAXKM1zR_story.html


I would suggest that, as correct as Krauthammer surely is, there may be an additional reason why Obama is taking his duplicitous position. This one has to do with internal politics: Still with regard to the election, but here, vis-a-vis his potential contenders.

To a person, the Republican candidates are criticizing Obama as weak and indecisive in his dealings with Iran. It seems to me that he had to respond to them, attempting to present a picture of himself as the one who was taking the "wiser action," being cautious not to respond military too soon.

In yet another sense, I see him playing both ends against the middle: If Israel attacks before the election and it goes well, he can point out to Jewish Americans that, see, he had acknowledged Israel's right to self-defense; he was with Israel all along. If there are repercussions (never mind that such repercussions pale in the face of the consequences of not acting), he can point out that it was out of his hands, but that he was really in favor of delaying action.


Evidence — or, better said, additional evidence — of Obama's lack of seriousness regarding stopping Iran can be seen in a Times of Israel piece on March 7, that speaks of Congressional intention to close the loopholes in sanctions by targeting all Iranian banks. This, says the report is "part of a sweeping effort to push the Obama administration to squeeze the Islamic republic's economy further...lawmakers in the House of Representatives and the Senate soon would introduce bipartisan legislation compelling the Obama administration to expand US sanctions."

What is going on, we might ask, that the Obama administration must be "compelled" in this respect?


A report from the LA Times paints an even grimmer picture of Obama's approach. For "senior officials familiar with US intelligence and spying capabilities in Iran" have doubts about whether US satellites, sensors and spies will know when Iran has "crossed a red line," as the Obama administration contends. That is, in being "cautious," they might wait too long.


Of course, there is endless speculation as to whether Netanyahu will cross Obama and order that attack before November 6. What does seem clear is that there are no illusions: Netanyahu knows full well with whom he's dealing.

I persist in my conviction that at the end of it all, he will have the courage to do what must be done. Because he understands all too well the horrendous stakes involved and the consequences of not acting. One way or the other, we'll see soon enough.

The question that remains is When? I certainly have no answer on this. But I do believe too much is being made of Netanyahu's failure to be more specific as to timing. This is being interpreted as indecision (as Netanyahu is said to be indecisive). But what is being ignored is the fact that if and when he decides to act, the appropriate stance will be vagueness as to timing. He is not going to make a general announcement in advance, now, is he?

On Thursday night, in TV interviews, the prime minister said that an attack would not come immediately, but is not years away, either. He acknowledged the fact that Israel and the US are on different timetables, and he indicated that he didn't think going ahead would irrevocably damage Israeli-US relations.


As to When... from a couple of different reports I've picked up information indicating that Obama may have promised Netanyahu additional bunker busters, possibly as well as equipment to facilitate re-fueling in the air. Those bunker busters, if the correct type, might conceivably open a bit wider our window of opportunity for attacking.


Meanwhile, we are at war in the south, even if the situation is not identified as such.

On Friday afternoon, the Israeli Air Force killed Zuhair al-Kaisi, the leader of the Popular Resistance Committees in Gaza, by bombing his car.


Along with him in his car, and also killed, was a terrorist who had been released in the Shalit trade. See this article in which an IDF officer expresses concern about an increased involvement in terrorism by those released in the Shalit deal:


The attack on al-Kaisi was initiated because intelligence indicated that he was planning a terrorist attack similar to the one near the Sinai border that killed eight Israelis last August. Not certain that they would be able to stop the attack, which might have been initiated via infiltration into Israel at any point along that border, the IDF decided to pre-empt it.

A barrage of rockets from Gaza then began in response to this — something that was not unexpected. By now more than 130 rockets have been launched; most have been Kassams, fired by the PRC, but including 25 more accurate and longer-range Grad Katyushas, fired by Islamic Jihad.


Several people have been hospitalized in Israel as a result of the attacks — none seriously wounded, and some for shock. Schools within a range of 40 km. from the border with Gaza have been closed and more than 200,000 Israeli school children are home. Many in the south — some million people — are hunkered down in shelters.

A school in Beersheva was hit by a Grad, but it was empty.

The Air Force has hit 13 different rocket crews as they were preparing to launch rockets, aborting those launchings and killing 16 Palestinian Arabs.

Egypt is attempting to negotiate a ceasefire with Hamas, but PRC and Islamic Jihad are resisting. It is anticipated that this will continue for some days yet, but the IDF, at least at present, is not planning a ground operation.


The big success during the current round of rocket attacks has been the three Iron Dome rocket defense batteries, operating in Beersheva, Ashkelon and Ashdod. When the batteries have been operated against incoming rockets, they have been successful 90% of the time, even intercepting barrages of five and six rockets at a time that were headed for populated areas. A fourth battery is due to be brought into the area shortly.


But with all this, we have nothing to worry about. For tomorrow the Quartet is meeting at the UN to discuss ways to move ahead the "stalled peace talks." Surreal. But I report it as it comes to me. Apparently Russia was pushing for this.

Netanyahu has made it clear that Israel will not participate in any talks as long as "unity" between the PA and Hamas is a possibility.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Marion DS Dreyfus, March 11, 2012.

Income totals of the OSCAR winners is not as impressive as you might think


It is important to recall that the fat in the movie market is not those who appreciate the fine wine of "The Artist" or the mulled mead of the lovely "Hugo," but the grease-encrusted, cholesterol-battened cheeseburger of the 14-26 year olds, most of whom have no understanding of the film-making past (silents) that gave rise to the current flock of stunt-guy-rich, tarted up (talkie) entertainments, or the data-dense, story-heavy beauty of the historic run-through exemplified by the empathetic "Hugo."

At the screening recently attended for the terrific "Act of Valor," marred by its ludicrous villain who is — against all rational facticity or knowledge — a Jewish hipster named (to smear both Judaism and Christianity in one unswell foop) Christo, the 20 minutes of upcoming film trailers were, every single one, detonic with explosions, violence, extremely unlikely whoop-and-holler craziness, complicated guns, and massive rat-tats, all in honor of the audience they thought they were playing to. Actually, the "Act of Valor" crowd-like that which flocked to Colin Firth in "The King's Speech" — skewed considerably older and more stable than the usual multiplex demographic, and they were notably more demonstrative in clapping and audible reaction, even weeping at the end, the extraordinary real feats of the real SEALS performing in the magnificent (exception noted) film.

So that is why these presumptive bejewelled winners, "The Artist" and "Hugo" (based on a compelling if largely unread book called The Invention of Hugo Cabret, and a film that made much better use of 3D than any other so-called 3D film in recent memory), cannot compete on a level field with "Harry Potter" anything, or "Mission Impossible" — the movie — going public is the steady drip-drip of kids taking their allowance or run-around money to feed their honeys popcorn and spoon with their star-struck dates.

The evident emes is that Academy members most often vote for the films that make them feel perceptive and smugly superior. "Hugo" won because it presupposes a vast lore of knowledge about the century of filmmaking: The Academy members, themselves in the vanguard of this cognoscenti crowd. It is a movie about making movies. But it was designed to compete financially with the Harry Potter runaway bonanza.

More interesting perhaps is that the delicious "Midnight in Paris" made more than Woody's usual music-happy and photography-replete hors d'oeuvres, and was a strong contender for the ultimate annual prize. The Woodster has said that his movies never break $100 mm, but they reliably make back about double their filmmaking investment, play for extended engagements at indie outlets, and he lives well, without fuss, on their steady returns. Plus: Actors kill to be in a Woodman project, income or no. Huge cachet, cult faves, and the rest of the la-di-dah attached to why people go to the movies.

Oscar digits: For all its winnability quotient, the actual take for "The Artist" was $31.8M (domestic) and $44.6M (international): $76.5mm total. In terms of inflation-adjusted grosses, one of the worst performing Best Pictures in the history of the Academy Awards. Adjusted for inflation, by the way, the still-best-performing film in the entire history of filmdom is 1930's "Gone With the Wind." (When movies cost under a dollar.) By comparison with "Artist," "Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows, Part 2" (#8 in the megahit Potter franchise) made $381mm domestic, $947mm foreign. With an impressive gross of $1,328mm, total, it enjoyed not a whisper of nominations, let alone awards.

In terms of cost, the math is dicier: "Hugo" cost $200+mm; but against this, the Graham King Films/Paramount 3D pic has to date grossed domestic $69.3mm, and foreign $46.4mm foreign, for a $115.8mm total, about the equal of a medium-vanilla actioner costing less than half that. One maven's theory is that it won all the tech awards because it "employed every member of every craft guild in Hollywood and beyond...and they all voted for it." As an investment, however, it will never "earn out" for what represents an eternity in Hollywood-land. TV, DVD, ROKU, Netflix and the like will make it a few more million, but the 'first-date virginal' element is already cooked in and done. Stick a fork in it.

The secondary market is super-important, overseas, Netflix, Comcast, etc., but the legs for a film come from the gen X and Y folks and young adult crowd getting the lips burbling about a film, and the strength of the overseas leap(s) is a function of the excitement generated here first.

Film-goers overseas are not too dissimilar in age, since film is very costly there, too. Adults go sparingly, unless it is a rare stellar outlier. Serious film gets its devotees, but indie films cost less, and make less, often the darlings of local indigenous movie industries. Breakout films like Iran's "A Separation" or Romania's "Morgen" are atypical. Most such gems, including even the feisty Israeli film industry's contender, "Flood," have a tough uphill struggle making it across the pond, then fight hard to land in distribution outlets showing them for longer than a week. Forget about TV or even cable, for most foreign works of merit. We used to race down to the black-market sales area in Wuhan, Hubei province, PRC, to pick up the newest releases (i.e., likely taped illegally, since they were available the initial week of their US releases), but they did not proliferate unless there was buzz in the US, first.

So how come "TinTin" — a kiddie attraction that skewed adult in wit and settings — did well overseas but died here? Everyone grew up with TinTin in the EU and the continent — but not many did, here. The necessary tie-ins were missing; the parents had not been read the stories decades ago by their parents, and they were not reading them to their kids now, either, even though the graphic novels were available at last in US bookstores. If you looked. But not enough of the demographic had perused the source material. When people no longer hum the show tunes of Broadway greats, Broadway dips below the line of mass receipts. Film suffers from the same inattention and non-familiarity by the once-better-read public. The pool of beloved and familiar tales is greatly shrunken, so that more film makers are taking to comic books and fairy tales, which at least guarantee parents accompanying children to see what might be basic child-fare without nudity or glaring crudeness.

The take-home is that, nice as the golden statuettes may be as a pat-on-the-back for Hollywood's dream machine spinners, they do not by any means guarantee a winning paycheck either before — or after — the Academy awards them the chance to sweep up the stairs and make thank you's and teary appreciations to their drama coaches.

Marion Dreyfus is a writer and travelor; she has taught English in China on the university level. She can be contacted at dreyfusmarion@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Sanford Aranoff, March 11, 2012.

"FDR was the undisputed greatest President America has ever had," wrote the newspaper. The truth is precisely the opposite. I was old enough to remember when FDR died, and how everyone was crying at his death. Looking back, it is like the North Korean people crying when their Dear Leader died. People in both America and North Korea fail to realize the enormous evil their leaders have caused. The reason for this failure is the failure to know how to think rationally. Rational thinking does not mean quoting professors or other experts. As a university mathematics professor, I see the difficulties with educating my students to think rationally about mathematics.

Rational thinking means two things. One is that the logic must be clear, starting from valid assumptions. This means people must be able to explain the logic themselves. If someone cannot explain it, but instead must quote others, this person does not understand the logic and cannot claim to be rational about it.

The second thing is the requirement for empirical evidence. Members of the Islamic faith accept as reality only things that are written in the holy books. Since they reject empirical evidence, they are not rational thinkers.

At the onset of the Great Depression, FDR decided to ignore the lesson of the depression nine years earlier. At that earlier time, the government cut back very seriously and harshly. This deep depression lasted only one year. FDR ignored this, and decided to spend money. The result was the depression lasted for years and years. It was over only when the government finally stopped spending.

The evil of FDR's government spending resulted in horrible poverty not only in America, but also in Germany. We can make a case that the Holocaust and World War II were caused by this American extreme poverty.

The idea that government spending will bring back prosperity is irrational for the two ideas underlying rational thinking. First, it is not logical, as it is senseless to say that taking people's money for government projects will be more productive than letting people decide in their own creative ways. Second, all empirical evidence contradicts this.

The question is why people are so irrational, in their strong support of FDR and today in supporting Obama. One answer is that the rational people are unwilling to fight. Although we praise our men and women for fighting and dying for our country, we do not praise our men and women for speaking out and losing their careers. Media people and professors who speak out against Obama can lose their jobs, in spite of the Constitution that promises freedom of speech. We must be willing to fight. We must be willing to speak out and to suffer any consequences.

The Republican candidates, with the exception of Newt Gingrich, fail to harp on the irrational statements and activities of the Democratic administration. People say Newt cannot be President because of his numerous marriages, when instead we must demand a leader to be a rational person with rational ideas. Mitt Romney is not a rational person for his failures to speak out and clarify the irrationality of the Obama administration. We must elevate rationality to a very high level, and give it utmost priority in selecting our leaders.

Dr. Sanford Aranoff is author of "Finite and Infinite Mathematics: Sets, Numbers, Lines, Equations, Probability", "Rational Thinking, Government Policies, Science, and Living". and "Teaching and Helping Students Think and Do Better ." Contact him at aranoff@analysis-knowledge.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nick Griffin, March 11, 2012.

Dear Patriot,

Do you remember David Cameron promising to stop funding so-called "peaceful" Islamist groups? He said that this strategy was "Like turning to a right-wing fascist party to fight a violent white supremacist movement." It seemed he was starting to understand the Islamic threat.

Despite Cameron's hollow promises, accounts that have been published recently show that many bodies closely linked to Islamic extremism have continued to enjoy an enormous amount of public funding in 2011. That means that you and I are subsidising people hostile to our values and way of life. We are being forced to pay to build the scaffold on which they intend to hang us.

Research shows that a number of Islamist groups, many associated with terrorists and pushing for the alien Sharia law are still receiving UK taxpayer funds. This includes an extremist group which declares fatwas against things like promoting religious tolerance, participating in Parliament or watching games of football.

This is how your money is being used to fund hatred:

The East London Mosque was paid at least £256,000 last year alone and the Osmani Trust received almost £600,000.

The Islamic Forum of Europe Both controls both of these organisations, who work to change the "very infrastructure of society, its institutions, its culture, its political order and its creed ... from ignorance to Islam" in a "global" Islamic state under Sharia law.

The mosque has hosted numerous hate and terrorist preachers, including Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical American Muslim cleric of Yemeni descent. He was linked to a series of attacks and plots across the world — from 11 September 2001 to the shootings at Fort Hood in November 2009.

Two schools in London with connections to Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT), an Islamic splinter group which is banned in many countries around the world, still get tax money. HT operates freely in Britain and its website promotes racism and anti-Jewish hatred, It calls suicide bombers 'martyrs', and urges Muslims to kill Jewish people. Shockingly they are still receiving six-figure sums from the taxpayer. This despite condemnation from Cameron three years ago of a completely unacceptable £113,000 subsidy.

Writing in a Hizb ut-Tahrir pamphlet, Farah Ahmed, the schools' head teacher and trustee, attacked the National Curriculum for "pushing the idea of 'religious tolerance'", saying English was "one of the most damaging subjects" a school can teach and criticised "attempts to integrate Muslim children into British society". Make no mistake, they hate us.

Let's not forget either that every penny given to those who want to drag our society back to the Dark Ages is money not given to deserving, decent causes. This money could be financing real life-changing projects. Think about those with Autism who once they hit 16 are faced with a drastic cut in support. Think about their parents and care-givers. Think about all the other worthy people this money, your tax money, could help. Then get angry. Get mad as hell like us. We've every right to feel that way.

We will keep on exposing the Muslim fanatics and bringing you the Truth about the mad policies of our Political Class.. We want the funding of these extremists stopped. We want our taxes spent on our people. We will keep fighting but we need your help. Join us or donate today. To beat the fanatics we must be resolute. We must be tireless. We must counter their hatred with a greater power — love. Love of our people and a belief in our values. As Churchill said of the Nazis: "Let them do their worst and we will do our best". Don't let the Islamofascists, the new Nazis, win.

Nick Griffin MEP is the British National Party Leader

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul Rotenberg, March 11, 2012.

This was written by Daniel Greenfield and is archived at http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/.


The old paradigm that a country has the right to decide who enters it has been decisively overturned in Europe, it's under siege in such first world countries as America, Canada, Australia and Israel by the creed that says it's the human rights obligation of every nation to accept every refugee.

Given a chance a sizable portion of the third world would move to the first, a minority because of oppression and a majority because the opportunities and freebies are much better there. Even low ranked first world nations still find themselves swamped with refugees looking to move in.

International law does not assign any priority to a nation's citizens over any person who happens to stray across the border. At the ground level that means the end of borders and the end of citizenship which is why immigration isn't just a touchy issue in Arizona, it's a touchy issue in Sydney, Tel Aviv and Birmingham. You can hardly open a newspaper of the liberal persuasion without being treated to another group of refugees in some troubled part of the world walled up behind fences and trying to get over to London, Sydney or New York.

This sort of thing can't be called immigration anymore, it's a straightforward migration and it has no apparent limits. However many you take in, there will be more waiting and always burdening you with an unsolvable crisis.

One approach is to try and stabilize whatever crisis they are supposedly escaping from. Too many Libyans running away to Italy? Just bomb their dictator and they'll go home again. At least that's the theory, it doesn't work too well in practice. For one thing Libya is more dangerous and unstable than it was under Gaddafi. Stabilizing it would require an Iraq level investment of money and manpower, and Iraq isn't stable either. And London is still full of Iraqi refugees dating back to the 1980's.

The disparities that make migration aren't fixable, but nor is mass migration a viable option. There's a reason that the refugees are running away and they are often part of the problem. Every nation is troubled in its own way and mass migration imports those troubles. It's why beheadings have come north of the border and the Jihad has set up shop in countless Western cities.

The melting pot myth was that people leave their identities behind to join in a mass identity. That worked only marginally back in the day, it doesn't work at all today when the refugees are immersed in their Little Mogadishus, which have popped up in a frightening number of American cities foretelling the day when those cities will become as violent and broken as the original Mogadishu.

In place of the melting pot is the No Go Zone, which is the inverse of integration, it sets up tribal encampments in major cities which run on the laws of the tribe. That sort of thing has always been around in one form or another and it is survivable in limited numbers so long as those zones don't also become factories of violence. That's the difference between Amish Country and a Muslim banlieue, it's also the difference between separatism and supremacism.

The United States has had its Fenian raids, its assorted wars being waged by immigrants from its soil, and the attitude toward those conflicts has been mixed, depending on whose ox was being gored. But there's a fundamental shift when those wars are being waged against it. That shift from immigrants using it as a conflict base to becoming the target of their conflicts is a somewhat recent one whose full implications have still not been absorbed.

Across the southern border it faces mass immigration from a country whose history is riddled with old scores to settle and whose politicians use it as a whacking post for their national troubles. And to the east and the west it faces mass migration from the Muslim world, which is operating on its own form of manifest destiny, settling Europe and European colonies, the way that European colonists once settled America.

The news is no better in Canada or Australia, it's certainly no better in Europe where the EU sees mass migration as a convenient way of completing its project of dissolving national identities. Encouraging separatism at the regional level is one way of doing it, but mass fragmentation of nations gets the job done even more thoroughly and comprehensively.

The EU is working off another melting pot model, much like the national governments who think that they can create a pliable left-leaning electorate by opening up the borders. What they actually end up creating is chaos and chaos eventually becomes order. The only question is whose order it will be. It isn't likely to be their order, which leaves few options.

If nations are meaningless, then national identities are equally meaningless. All that's left are clans, religious and ethnic groups in the borderless multicultural globe. A chaos that sorts itself out through the old reliable means of brute force, accompanied to dollop of deceit and coalition building. The coalitions that the left built up to consolidate its rule are being hijacked and used by the Brotherhood as the building blocks of their rule instead.

In a chaotic environment, tribalism and a compelling ideology can combine to carve out an expanding sphere of order. That is how Islam got its start, that is how it is operating now. In a fragmented environment, it has a leg up because it is organized and it has the money and vision to move forward, which is more than the natives or most of the other immigrants have.

To Islam, Europe, America and the rest of the non-Muslim world are all Mogadishus, they are the Dar Al-Harb, the realm of the sword, where the faithful are destined to bring order. Every social problem proves how much the infidel world needs them to bring order and the violence that they bring raises the stakes and drives everyone toward an inevitable conflict.

Borders are created to keep things out, like invading armies and suicide bombers. The border represents security and ownership, and when you take away the border those are gone and the soft vulnerable territories within are up for grabs to the ruthless and the canny. If the borders are down, then why not go north where there's wealth and power up for grabs and take some for yourself.

National identity in the Muslim world is already weak, outmatched by religious identity on the one hand and tribal identity on the other. That set of conditions makes it quite difficult for them to build and maintain functional countries of their own, but leaves them quite well adapted to using tribal and religious ties to take over regions in a state of multicultural flux.

Islam is not built for competence, it's built for conquest. Its effectiveness lies in its ability to create chaos, rather than maintain order. And every suicide bomber, every plot exposed, every riot over a cartoon demonstrates the power of that chaos and how far the local and global authorities who try to maintain order will go to appease the causers of chaos.

A West that has become increasingly secular, where nationalism is suspect and ethnic identity for the natives is taboo, is frighteningly ill-adapted to such a conflict. It has thrown away the survival skills necessary to cope with the situation and the survival skills it has are built on adapting to change by submitting to a new state of affairs, whether it's a new set of ideas, a new set of forms or a new set of laws. Change and future shock have become the way of the West. Islam's past shock follows the same narrative and makes the same demands. Adapt, learn to recite the new truisms and get on with your life.

The West has learned to forget and it no longer knows the answer to the question, "Who are we?". Who are we beyond people in an experiment to create a new and better society and then spread that wonderful society to the rest of the world? And what exactly is that society we are spreading?

Muslims who know quite well what new and better society they are part of, have an advantage because they understand their role better than the natives. The ability to answer the big questions is a key factor in any struggle. Every battle begins with an army that has to be composed of men who have to be convinced to leave their homes and participate in a conflict that may cost them their lives. Getting them lined up and in good fighting shape is a lot easier if they understand why they are here.

They are better adapted to the end of the state, because they have never truly internalized the reality of the state, than the Westerner for whom the state has become the fundamental unit of existence.

Westerners have become the ultimate refugees, lost at home, refugees in their own countries, wanderers in their own cities. The same processes that have turned their countries into superpowers are now drowning them in their own effluvia. And the citizen of the first world often finds that he seems to belong less in his own country than the refugees flooding it. He has become a displaced person, a familiar enough feeling to many of his new neighbors who are also victims of ethnic and religious conflicts. But while the conflicts they have fled are official, his conflict is not. He is the victim of a nameless conflict that cannot be named, of a colonization that cannot be described as such and of the ethnic cleansing of his national identity and the theft of his future.

Paul Rotenberg lives in Toronto, Canada. Contact him at pdr@rogers.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 11, 2012.

They say that if Israel falls, the United States will be the next one to fall.

They say that the United States needs Israel as much as Israel needs the United States and the two countries' destiny in intertwined.

They say that there are many similarities between the two nations.

In recent years the US has not been unable to conclude a war with a total victory because it does not want to!

In recent years Israel has been unable to conclude a war with a total victory and with the total submission of its enemy because it does not want to, or the world does not allow her to do so!

Both countries fight a politically correct wars, which cannot be won.

In many ways, today, the United State and Israel are made of the same fiber in many spheres.

In Israel there Israelis who are Israelis In Name Only, IINO, or unJews; some of these unJews are elected officials, who cannot be trusted to defend or lead the Jewish Nation.

In the United States there are many Americans who are Americans In Name Only, AINO; in Washington, especially in the Obama administration, to include president Obama, there are too many elected officials who are anti-America, who cannot be trusted to defend or lead the American Nation.

Having huge storage facilities, filled with great weapons, make no difference, if the military is not allowed or does not intend to use those weapons to inflict a terrible harm on the enemy until it surrenders, in a total submission. Just like Germany and Japan did, in WWII.

In Iraq, the US military moved out and al-Qaeda is already filling the gap the US military left there. The US military is now made of generals who speak for Washington not for the military they command.

In Israel the generals appear to be political peons (Peon is a Spanish-American day laborer or unskilled farm worker), preparing to take over, or be part of the government, so they play politics while in uniform. Such army command cannot win a war.

In general, military personnel make bad politicians.

In Israel and the US the public keeps on electing the same bureaucratic garbage, over and over again; the result, a government the public is most dissatisfied with.

I am ready to bet that if elections were made today, in both countries, both Barry Soetoro, a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu will be reelected.


No officer, above the rank of Captain, shall be allowed to enter any form of civilian government function after retirement.

In the US, the Tea Party should be leading the government.

In Israel, there is a need for a complete change of the government system. It needs to be a Representative elections, without military officers in any function. A new Judicial system is required as well.

If the changes will not be made, both, the United State and Israel are going to continue to suffer the decline in leadership and having the image of weakness rather than having the image of might.

The solution are all with the people.

About the power of the People: The demands of the people must be met with the leaders at the head or the heads of the leaders.

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Teresinka Pereira, March 10, 2012.


Every day
is the day of the woman
who works
because she loves
because she dreams

On the way
her feet go firm
in silence
breaking barriers
of discrimination

She swallows up her anger
to strengthen her soul
and convert it into pride
because she dreams
that the others will follow her
to the day of freedom
when she will be
a first class citizen
just as a woman.

Contact Teresinka Pereira at tpereira@buckeye-express.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, March 10, 2012.

Purim is the holiday in which Jews celebrate the killing of anti-Semites. While it has been hijacked by the dark forces of political correctness in recent years, who attempt to convert it into anything from a day for women's liberation to Kum-ba-ya niceness among peoples, it is clearly a day that commemorates the killing of anti-Semites. It is not even the holiday of the rescue of Jews from threats of annihilation. We know that from the date of Purim. The actual rescue of the Jews was in the month of Sivan, about nine months before Purim, when the writs of Hamas to massacre the Jews were cancelled. The date of Purim is set for when the Jews finished killing off the anti-Semites who had earlier threatened them. That, indeed, is why "Shoshan Purim" in walled cities is a day later, because the Jews there took an extra day to kill off the anti-Semites near them.

Purim time is the best time of the year for killing anti-Semites. That is why the cleaning operation in Gaza today was so spectacular, in which 15 terrorhoids were dispatched to their virgins, including Zuhair al-Qaissi, the arch-murderer commander of the Islamofascist "Popular Resistance Committee," the group that kidnapped Gilad Shalit. The anti-Semitic media are of course calling al-Qaissi a dead "militant," as if all he ever did while alive was march to save the whales. That is because the anti-Semitic media approve of terrorists murdering Jews.

Any day in which vermin like al-Qaissi are killed is a Jewish holiday, but in this case it fell right after Purim, Israeli children still wearing their costumes, to make the celebrations all the more festive. Now all that is left is to decide what to do with the murderer's carcass. I have started to come up with ideas, but someone should really put out a book about the 101 things to do with a dead Islamofascist terrorist, based on that book about 101 things to do with a dead cat.

Thirty Three Inspired Ideas of What to do with al-Qaissi's Carcass

1. Upset the environmentalists by using it to poison piranha fish.

2. Use it to help boost Purina's stock value.

3. One word: McNuggets.

4. Give it tenure at Ben Gurion University.

5. Fire it off into space so Barry Chamish's UFO friends will never want to visit earth again.

6. Clone it and sell the spinoffs as 21st century scarecrows.

7. Pretend it is Rachel Corrie and run a bulldozer over it.

8. Save Holland by using it to plug the dikes.

9. Let it occupy Wall Street with a sign reading "Will Terrorize for Food".

10. Market it as a carpet beater.

11. Let the US javelin team train on it for the Olympics.

12. Makes a great speed hump.

13. Tie it to a pole and use it as the bait at the dog race track.

14. Send it to the Harvard BDS leaders.

15. Enroll it in the Reconstructionist Rabbinical Seminary. Heck, it already has taken more Rabbinic courses than Michael Lerner.

16. Halloween Decoration.

17. Clearicil could use it in its commercials to show what happens if you use the inferior brand.

18. Export it to France as a wine supplement.

19. Sell it as organic produce in Berkeley.

20. Tie it to the back of cars for newlyweds in MTV commercials.

21. Use it to scare your kids when they refuse to clean their rooms.

22. Sell it as a Yigal Tomarkin original sculpture.

23. It gives people 101 reasons to prefer having a dead cat.

24. Use it to become the patron saint for dung beetles.

25. Sell it to that Museum in Sweden that ran the "Snow White Pure" sculpture.

27. Enter it in the Texas State Cow Chip Toss as the world's largest cow chip.

28. Make it the drummer in a punk rock band. Or better yet, the drum.

29. Tell Anna Nicole Smith it is rich.

30. "Fear Factor" TV show could make people sit on a bench next to it.


31. Put it in an envelope and send him to the Elect Ralph Nader committee.

32. Let Brandeis hire it for its peace and justice studies program.

33. Rent it to Cubans as a device to hold their place in the bread line while they go off fishing.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by The United West, March 10, 2012.

PLEASE READ THIS SHOCKING "FIRST PERSON" REPORT FROM OUR COUNTER-TERRORISM EXPERT MARC KAHLBERG IN ISRAEL. Contact Kahlbert by email at marc@mkisc.com and visit his website at www.mksecurityconsulting.com

Folks, we are at war with an enemy that will never trade land for peace, so get over that fairy tale...or simply surrender.


In total almost 100 missiles and rockets have been fired into Israel in the last 24 hours.

(There are unconfirmed reports that the terrorists apparently have fired new Iranian made missiles for the first time — we will see what these rockets are made up of soon?)

Forty are the upgraded grad rockets which have a long range and are very lethal if there are people in the surrounding area of say 40 to 50 meters. We always have to watch that there are no chemical or biological agents in the warheads as well. Damage to property is always great if directly hit.

We have 8 injuries (1 critical) over and above the shell shock and obvious mental and physical stress that people suffer in attacks like these.

Most of the missiles were fired during the course of Friday night and Saturday early morning. As you know Friday nights in Israel are where families get together for the Sabbath. All residents in the surrounding areas of Gaza were in bomb shelters anyway. All planned outdoor activities and certainly our Purim events in the area were cancelled (again). We always get attacked on Purim or Passover as these Jewish holidays have very specific meaning of denial for the terrorists.

The bigger problem is the Cities of Ashdod and Beer Sheva where there are very large populations.

Essentially we have around One Million people inside bomb shelters right now and that is what is preventing more casualties on our side. We are prepared and resilient but it takes a toll eventually.

My Son was in the thick of things last night (he is a soldier doing his compulsory 3 year military service). He lives in Beer Sheva, not far from his base, and was caught out on the streets coming home from visiting a friend, where at least 8 grads exploded very close to where he was. He obviously heard the blast and saw the results. He was not injured as he was a block away from the area where they fell. He certainly was shaken up and is still very stressed. I just spoke to him again (all night I was on the phone to him).

The defensive Iron Dome is not always used as it is extremely expensive and there are calculations made by the IDF as to when to use it or not.

The IDF attacked and killed two terrorists yesterday as they were in the final stages of a planned terror attack targeting the civilian Purim festivities in the Eilat area, where there would have been large crowds of people. The only way to stop these terror attacks is to deal with them before they get into the cities of Israel. There is no other way to stop an imminent terror attack of this nature but to be pro active.

The IDF pinpointed them and killed them in a proactive defensive move. The one terrorist was just released in the Gilad Shalit exchange and was a convicted terrorist with much blood on his hands.

This obviously sparked all of the missile attacks and I am certain that if this carries on the IDF will probably have to take more defensive action as we cannot hold a population of One Million in bomb shelters. The effects are too great (mentally, physically, financially and morally).

The terrorists are using "human shield" tactics and forcing innocent civilians in Gaza to stand where the missile launching sites are. As a result there are civilian injuries as well in Gaza.

I am certain that this will pass as it always does and that the world media will blame Israel (again). (Tom has already send me a clip from the New York Times that I have just read and this backs up my thoughts on the credibility of the global media).

Where are the Jewish organizations in Australia, South Africa, Great Britain and especially in the USA when we need their voice and support?

I would have expected every synagogue and community to come out and deplore these missile attacks.

What don't they understand about the fact that these missiles traumatize a nation. People are never the same again after these constant attacks. What do they require in order to understand? Do they want to see 500 or 1000 casualties before they speak out and do something?

History will repeat itself if nothing proactive is done and the understanding of the situation from a ground level perspective is not acknowledged. Most decision makers and politicians know only what they are told not what they see.

Contact the United West by email at info@theunitedwest.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Leslie J Sacks, March 10, 2012.

There are now many self evident and destabilizing developments:

1) Obama feels more comfortable with Turkey's Erdogan, Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah, perhaps even with the Iranian leadership, than with Netanyahu. He likely believes Netanyahu is the least rational, the least predictable in the arena.

Obama and Abdullah

2) Obama and many of his advisors have felt for a long time that containment of Iran's nuclear program (even its attainment of nuclear weapons), is not only possible but preferable to war.

3) Obama's public proclamations change creatively with the audience. He is, after all, the perfect politician, a natural chameleon. His recent support for Israel, at the preeminent Aipac conference, is too-little-too-late to fully dispense with his visceral dislike of Netanyahu and his consistent lack of empathy for Israel's past security policies. He has yet to visit Israel during his presidential term, yet he saw fit to wax eloquent in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey.

4) So Obama prefers no military confrontation. This would raise gas prices, hurt the economy (albeit temporarily), and damage Obama's reelection prospects, his primary and all-consuming goal.

5) The USA has the conclusive and indisputable ability to obliterate the Iranian nuclear program. It can do so in an exceptionally efficient, pin-pointed and largely non-lethal way. Iran would then measure its response modestly, for to be too aggressive would in turn invite America's wrath, most likely leading to the destruction of Iran's military and industrial capability. This follow-up response would put the regime at risk and embolden the opposition — the worst outcome for the ruling despots, as they could live without nuclear weapons but not without their absolute power.

Obama and Netanyahu

6) However, Obama abhors the idea of being identified as a war president, especially one who supported intransigent Israel against the victims of colonialism and imperialism in the Middle East. He would after all prefer to be president of the World's United Nations, rather than just the USA.

7) Ingeniously, Obama is playing a very deft poker game in the Middle East:

— First he established negotiation as his primary tool

— Then he instituted inconclusive and slow-acting sanctions

— Now that everyone is, as a result, running out of time, he sets a timeline for the USA that suits only Ahmadinejad and the State Department, that of disallowing Iran to actually assemble a bomb

— The danger is that only America can, at that late stage with its incomparable reach and firepower, destroy Iran's nuclear program

— Then Israel will necessarily be dependent on Obama's word, his changing assurances. Israel's timeline ends much sooner and she needs to take out the nuclear facilities before they are hardened further, before the essential components are dispersed even more widely

— Obama knows this and is relying on Israel's immutable commitment to retain control over its own destiny, to never allow its existential existence to fall into the hands of others, whether it's Obama or Khomeini

— So Obama, with vote enhancing pronouncements of support for Israel, will bide his time, forcing Israel's hand, ensuring Israel ultimately takes responsibility for its own fate and attacks Iran's facilities, thereby neutering Iran's nuclear risks for the USA and the world as well

8) The poker hand is thus played with disarming charm and panache, with believable concern. Israel is blamed for Iran's reaction, for oil price hikes, for economic dislocation. Obama is lauded as Israel's best friend, and gets re elected. Game over.

Bunker Buster

JUST IN A leading Israeli newspaper (and numerous blogs here in the USA) reported that Obama and the White House have offered Netanyahu crucial bunker busters and advanced refueling planes if, and only if, Israel guarantees to wait until after Obama's re election to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, a risky proposition indeed. These bombs and planes would presumably allow Israel to delay their preemptive attack as they would provide the ability to go deeper, for far longer. To place Israel's survival (and Iran's genocidal pledges) behind Obama's political agenda suggests an order of cynical and political blackmail no former U.S. president would likely have countenanced. The White House ambiguously denies parts of this story. I would like to believe the veracity of this report is suspect — I pray it would be so. Time surely will tell.

Related Articles:

Israel asks U.S. for arms that could aid Iran strike

Obama Promises Bunker Busters To Israel If Netanyahu Delays Iran Invasion Until After US Elections

Obama Plays Dangerous Game, Offers Israel Bunker Busters Needed For Iran Attack OpEd

U.S. denies Obama promised bunker busters to Netanyahu

The 'Jewish' President


German Paper: North Korea Tested Nuclear Warhead for Iran

Obama Vs. Israel: Priority No. 1? Stop Israel

Contact Leslie J. Sacks at Leslie_J._Sacks@mail.vresp.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Doris Wise Montrose, March 10, 2012.

Media Matters, shifting from domestic American politics to foreign policy, are attempting to pull the mainstream Democratic party toward the far Left.

This below was written by Daniel Halper, editor at The Weekly Standard. and it appeared today in the Jerusalem Post at


OVERVIEW: Media Matters for America (MMfA), a top liberal non-profit with close ties to the White House, is engulfed in controversy. The Daily Caller has been running an investigative series on the organization and its chief David Brock, documenting how the "organization (is) roiled by its leader's volatile and erratic behavior and struggles with mental illness." This morning the controversy spread to include how MMfA has been engaged in a three year campaign to attack Israel and undermine Democratic support for the Jewish State, especially in Congress, and how the centerpiece of their campaign was to hire Israel hater M.J. Rosenberg.

Daniel Halper of the Weekly Standard just published a blockbuster expose in The Jerusalem Post documenting how MMfA went out and deliberately hired Rosenberg in 2009 so he could attack Israel in what Rosenberg calls a "long game" to undermine American support for Jerusalem. Halper then documents how, once Rosenberg got to MMfA, he embarked on a campaign of anti-Semitic accusations and rhetoric against American Jews to accomplish the task he was hired to do. Rosenberg has been using his platform at MMfA to accuse American Jews of controlling Congress with money and of being "Israel Firsters" who drive America to war on Israel's behalf — and now Halper has shown how all of this was intentional.

Halper concludes by asking the very good question: "Rosenberg is at Media Matters — and Media Matters has influence, and even a line to the White House.... does the advice about Israel and the Middle East that Media Matters gives on these calls reflect Rosenberg's views?"

In September 3, 2009, M.J. Rosenberg made an announcement on his Talking Points Memo blog. "I am moving over to the Media Matters Actions Network to serve as Senior Fellow on Foreign Policy — with special emphasis on Israel, Iran, etc," Rosenberg wrote. Media Matters, he explained, is "joining this fight."

The fight Rosenberg apparently was referring to would " on promoting a solution to the Israeli Palestinian conflict that offers security, sovereignty, and justice to Israelis and Palestinians," as Media Matters would later describe its new effort in an internal strategy memo. (The document, presumably meant for staff, directors and donors, was eventually leaked to Ben Smith of BuzzFeed and the Daily Caller.) Media Matters describes itself as a "progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the US media." Its main focus has been to monitor and attack Fox News.

"Launched in May 2004, Media Matters for America put in place, for the first time, the means to systematically monitor a cross section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation — news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda — every day, in real time," the About Us page on its website reads.

So it might seem out of the organization's comfort zone to delve into Israel and the like. Indeed, it was an unexpected move for an organization that had been around since 2004 to be suddenly "joining this fight."

It was, however, in retrospect, the beginning of an institutional shift by Media Matters from domestic American politics to foreign policy — and an attempt to pull the mainstream Democratic party toward the far Left.


"WE'RE PLAYING the long game here," Rosenberg would later say to Ben Smith in a Politico article about the shift of new liberal groups, the Center for American Progress as well as Media Matters, away from pro-Israel policy positions. The process would be slow — but steady.

And, it would seem, the strategy would require having an attack dog against Democrats. For Rosenberg, a longtime policy hand who has increasingly lurched more and more leftward, there is hardly a difference between the two parties these days.

"The worst AIPAC tools are Democrats, led by Steny Hoyer. The GOP's only effective AIPAC tool is Cantor. The rest dont hold a candle 2 Dems," Rosenberg tweeted in August. Hoyer is the Democratic whip — an establishment figure a liberal group would not, until now, be keen to pick a fight with, especially about such a bipartisan issue as support for the state of Israel.

Yet, these are the sorts of fights that seem to consume Rosenberg.

Rosenberg's biggest target is the supposedly all-controlling Israel lobby which, if you are to believe him, manipulates American foreign policy to put Israel's interests before America's. He even often employs the term "Israel firster" to define an American politician or even pundit who he believes places Israel's interest above his own nation's. (The term itself was popularized by white supremacists.) For Rosenberg, support for Israel is tantamount to supporting a wouldbe murderous regime. "There is nothing Israel cd do to Arabs that Hoyer/Weiner/Ackerman/Berman/B erkley/Israel wd object 2.NOTHING," Rosenberg tweeted, linking to a piece he had written that blasted Congress for welcoming Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to deliver a joint session of Congress. Congressmen Steny Hoyer, Anthony Weiner, Gary Ackerman, Howard Berman, Shelley Berkley and Steve Israel are all Democrats — and Jews.

Rosenberg also pushes the supposed influence Jewish money has in politics, as well. "I wonder if any candidate in either party other than Joe L would slobber over Israel if it wasn't for the $. Actually I don't wonder," Rosenberg said on Twitter last month. The reference was to Joe Lieberman, the former vice presidential Democratic candidate.

Rosenberg himself credits notorious anti-Israel polemicists John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, authors of The Israel Lobby, for creating a political environment friendly to his own political and personal beliefs.

"What has changed since book maybe is that big institutions that rely on contributions hire people like us and aren't afraid to hire people like us," Rosenberg has said. "And that is an important change."

Or perhaps Rosenberg was hired because Media Matters embraced the Walt and Mearsheimer thesis.

"(Media Matters) is an amazing organization that is in the business of monitoring right-wing propaganda...until I got there they did not have any; they did nothing on foreign policy," Rosenberg would tell an audience at the Palestine Center in Washington a year later on September 23, 2010. "They made this decision to hire me and hire me with my views because they wanted to be involved with this issue. They wanted to be involved in the Palestinian issue. They want to be involved in stopping war with Iran. And this is a big thing."

Rosenberg's hire might not have been a big thing — except that this establishment Democratic — leaning group has moved to the fringe on the issue of Israel.

Rosenberg is at Media Matters — and Media Matters has influence, and even a line to the White House.

"The group operates in regular coordination with the highest levels of the Obama White House, as well as with members of Congress and progressive groups around the country," the Daily Caller reported earlier this month.

Does the advice about Israel and the Middle East that Media Matters gives on these calls reflect Rosenberg's views?

Doris Wise Montrose is with Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors. Contact her at doris@cjhsla.org.

To Go To Top

Posted by Anne Bayefsky, March 9, 2012.

Despite Prime Minister Netanyahu's valiant effort this week to educate President Barack Obama on the meaning of Purim and the centuries-old tale about the triumph of moral leadership and courage, the painful reality is that his message fell on deaf ears. The President does indeed "have Israel's back" — up against a wall.

Over the course of a week in which the President spoke frequently on the subject of Iran, one message stood out. By vociferously arguing that his administration's brand of diplomacy is realistically capable of ending Iran's efforts to acquire nuclear weapons, and that views to the contrary are irresponsible war-mongering, Obama is attempting to undermine the legality of an Israeli strike.

In fact, self-defense in international law depends on the assessment that the threat posed to one's civilian population is real and sufficiently imminent as to justify the use of force to prevent the impending harm. Given the catastrophic nature of the danger, it is not necessary for Israel — or America — to wait until the genocidal Iranian mullahs and President Ahmadinejad have their hands on the nuclear trigger.

But President Obama is painting a different picture. If Israel can be cast as pre-empting or foregoing the reasonable possibility of diplomatic success with a "rational actor" — as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey recently described Iran — then it would not be engaged in justifiable self-defense. Labeling discussion of the necessity of using force to stymie Iran's aggressive behavior as "loose talk of war" or "beating the drums of war" — in the President's words — is also to deny that such a move would be legitimate self-defense.

This explains why in Sunday's speech to the pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC, the President lunged the knife into Israel's back and twisted it: "I firmly believe that an opportunity still remains for diplomacy...Iran's leaders still have the opportunity to make the right decision...Israel...[has] an interest in seeing this challenge resolved diplomatically..." The insulting innuendo was that without his wise admonition Israeli mothers and fathers would be hankering to send their children into battle.

But even the spin doctors — desperate to explain away three years of policy development at odds with Israel (and America's) national security — cannot cover for a patently obvious lack of resolve.

Recall the huffing and puffing and the fuzzy shifting deadlines on Iran of the administration's first year in office. On July 22, 2009 Secretary Clinton said of U.S. action on Iran: "Our president came to office with a very clear preference for talking with people...I think there is still a lot of opportunity here, but we are not going to keep the window open forever." On July 27, 2009, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said: "The president is fully aware that the Iranians may simply try to run out the clock...I think the president is hoping for some kind of response...at the opening of the U.N. General Assembly session." On October 1, 2009, the President said: "Iran...must grant unfettered access to IAEA inspectors within two weeks...We're not interested in talking for the sake of talking. If Iran does not take steps in the near future to live up to its obligations, then the United States will not continue to negotiate indefinitely..." On November 29, 2009 White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said: "Time is running out for Iran to address the international community's growing concerns about its nuclear program."

Or compare the President himself in his first year in office to the Obama of today. On May 18, 2009 President Obama was asked about Iran and any deadlines for his "policy of engagement." He responded: "You know, I don't want to set an artificial deadline...We should have a fairly good sense by the end of the year as to whether they are moving in the right direction..."

Almost three years later, the President is still spinning his wheels. On March 6, 2012 after the administration announced a new round of talks with Iran, the President told a news conference in eerily similar terms: "To resolve this issue will require Iran to come to the table and discuss in a clear and forthright way how to prove to the international community that the intentions of their nuclear program are peaceful...They know how to do it, and the question is going to be whether in these discussions they show themselves moving clearly in that direction."

So let's recap. The leading state sponsor of terrorism is poised to acquire the world's most dangerous weapon. The President of the United States is still pretending that Iran could prove that its intentions are peaceful and is wondering where the Iranians are headed. And to forestall the possibility that Israel will give up on America's commander-in-chief having his own country's back, let alone theirs, President Obama is busy sabotaging the Jewish state's right of self-defense.

Twenty-four centuries later and Purim is as relevant as ever.

Anne Bayefsky is editor of EYEontheUN. She is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and at Touro College. Contact the organization at info@EYEonthe UN.org This article appeared today on PJ Media
(http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-atlantic-interview- obama-rewrites-his-record-on-israel/).

This appeared todayy in PJMedia

http://eyeontheun.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u= 779a7657507fa1127185b036a&id=9b7a5f3f03&e=5a65791601

To Go To Top

Posted by YogiRUs, March 9, 2012.

This was written by Charles Krauthammer and it appeared yesterday in the Washington Post
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/rw/sites/twpweb/ img/logos/twp_logo_300.gif). Contact him at letters@charleskrauthammer.com


It's Lucy and the football, Iran-style. After ostensibly tough talk about preventing Iran from going nuclear, the Obama administration acquiesced this week to yet another round of talks with the mullahs.

This, 14 months after the last group-of-six negotiations collapsed in Istanbul because of blatant Iranian stalling and unseriousness. Nonetheless, the new negotiations will be both without precondition and preceded by yet more talks to decide such trivialities as venue.

These negotiations don't just gain time for a nuclear program about whose military intent the International Atomic Energy Agency is issuing alarming warnings. They make it extremely difficult for Israel to do anything about it (while it still can), lest Israel be universally condemned for having aborted a diplomatic solution.

If the administration were serious about achievement rather than appearance, it would have warned that this was the last chance for Iran to come clean and would have demanded a short timeline. After all, President Obama insisted on deadlines for the Iraq withdrawal, the Afghan surge and Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. Why leave these crucial talks open-ended when the nuclear clock is ticking?

This re-engagement comes immediately after Obama's campaign-year posturing about Iran's nukes. Speaking Sunday in front of AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee), he warned that "Iran's leaders should have no doubt about the resolve of the United States." This just two days after he'd said (to the Atlantic) of possible U.S. military action, "I don't bluff." Yet on Tuesday he returned to the very engagement policy that he admits had previously failed.

Won't sanctions make a difference this time, however? Sanctions are indeed hurting Iran economically. But when Obama's own director of national intelligence was asked by the Senate intelligence committee whether sanctions had any effect on the course of Iran's nuclear program, the answer was simple: No. None whatsoever.

Obama garnered much AIPAC applause by saying that his is not a containment policy but a prevention policy. But what has he prevented? Keeping a coalition of six together is not prevention. Holding talks is not prevention. Imposing sanctions is not prevention.

Prevention is halting and reversing the program. Yet Iran is tripling its uranium output, moving enrichment facilities deep under a mountain near Qom and impeding IAEA inspections of weaponization facilities.

So what is Obama's real objective? "We're trying to make the decision to attack as hard as possible for Israel," an administration official told The Post in the most revealing White House admission since "leading from behind."

Revealing and shocking. The world's greatest exporter of terror (according to the State Department), the systematic killer of Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, the self-declared enemy that invented "Death to America Day" is approaching nuclear capability — and the focus of U.S. policy is to prevent a democratic ally threatened with annihilation from preempting the threat?

Indeed it is. The new open-ended negotiations with Iran fit well with this strategy of tying Israel down. As does Obama's "I have Israel's back" reassurance, designed to persuade Israel and its supporters to pull back and outsource to Obama what for Israel are life-and-death decisions.

Yet 48 hours later, Obama says at a news conference that this phrase is just a historical reference to supporting such allies as Britain and Japan — contradicting the intended impression he'd given AIPAC that he was offering special protection to an ally under threat of physical annihilation.

To AIPAC he declares that "no Israeli government can tolerate a nuclear weapon in the hands of a regime that denies the Holocaust, threatens to wipe Israel off the map, and sponsors terrorist groups committed to Israel's destruction" and affirms "Israel's sovereign right to make its own decisions .''' to meet its security needs."

And then he pursues policies — open-ended negotiations, deceptive promises of tough U.S. backing for Israel, boasts about the efficacy of sanctions, grave warnings about "war talk" — meant, as his own official admitted, to stop Israel from exercising precisely that sovereign right to self-protection.

Yet beyond these obvious contradictions and walk-backs lies a transcendent logic: As with the Keystone pipeline postponement, as with the debt-ceiling extension, as with the Afghan withdrawal schedule, Obama wants to get past Nov. 6 without any untoward action that might threaten his reelection.

For Israel, however, the stakes are somewhat higher: the very existence of a vibrant nation and its 6 million Jews. The asymmetry is stark. A fair-minded observer might judge that Israel's desire to not go gently into the darkness carries higher moral urgency than the political future of one man, even if he is president of the United States.

Contact YogiRUs by email at YogiRUs@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Zvi November, March 9, 2012.

Mark Steyn's AMERICA ALONE, THE END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT (the 2008 paperback edition) is a powerful book everyone must read. It focuses on the demise of European civilization. All of the European nations [with the possible exception of Muslim countries] have very low birth rates. Their populations are actually decreasing and the proportion of elderly pensioners is increasing. To continue to enjoy an easy lifestyle based on generous tax-supported pensions, Europeans import workers from the Muslim and Arab worlds. But along with young workers they have also imported Islam including its radical jihad version funded by Saudi petro dollars. Now foreign Islamic as well as home-grown terrorists are a very real threat as well. The Muslim minorities are constantly getting bigger and they show little interest in assimilating into their European hosts' cultures. Indeed, they are slowly but surely imposing their mores and values on accommodating native Europeans.

Through a policy of multi-culturalism, Europeans appease their "sensitive" Muslim newcomers. In effect, Islam is, step by step, conquering Eurabia because Europeans have pretty much abandoned their Christian heritage, lost confidence in the accomplishments of their own societies, no longer reproduce, rely (like little children) primarily on their bureaucrats to provide their welfare and educational needs and simply do not have the willpower to stand up to Islam's militant ideology that is imposing itself on the Continent today. Conversion to Islam is on the rise, there are calls for sharia law to replace Common Law and the Napoleonic codes, Islamic dress is seen everywhere while Western values of individually, personal freedoms and tolerance for diversity are declining.

Steyn contrasts American civilization with rapidly decaying Europe whose leading liberal thinkers often ridicule American ways as unsophisticated. Europeans, however, are protected by the American military while their own defense budgets are less than half of American outlays. Steyn does not think that America is perfect but he is definitely in favor of American self-reliance as opposed to European enervation and acquiescence to Islamic threats whether it be terrorism or cultural aggression.

The big question Steyn asks is: Can America survive alone (in 15, 20 or 30 years) after Europe becomes part of the Muslim world?

Here are a few quotes from the text.

"...on balance Islam's loathing of other cultures seems psychologically less damaging than the Western elites' loathing of its own." (p. 201) "An Islamic States of America, an Islamic Republic of France, an Islamic Kingdom of Belgium, an Islamic Dominion of Canada would all very quickly be societies in decline, living on the accumulated capital of their pre-Muslim past — as, indeed, much of Islam did at its zenith." (p. 202)

"...every year more and more of the world lives under Islamic law: Pakistan adopted Islamic law in 1977, Iran in 1979, Sudan in 1984. In the sixties, Nigeria lived under English Common Law; now half of it's in the grip of sharia..." (p. 202) [It is almost certain, following the 'Arab Spring', that Egypt, Syria and Jordan in a year or so will be ruled by Moslem Brotherhood officials.]

"Given the growing Muslim populations in Europe and the remarkable success hitherto obscure Muslim lobby groups have had in constraining certain aspects of the war on terror, it seems almost certain that Islamic political parties will arise on the Continent within the next decade. And, given the very few degrees of separation between very prominent Western Muslims — ambassadors, princes, professors — and the terrorists, it seems likely that many prominent figures in these parties will be supportive of the terrorists' ends. And given the governing principle of multi-cultural society — that Western man demonstrates his cultural sensitivity by pre-emptively surrendering - any smart Islamist, surveying the Madrid bombing and the aftermath [instant appeasement], must be contemplating the benefits of a twin-track strategy." (p. 204)

Contact Tsvi November at tsvinov@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by John R. Cohn, March 9, 2012.

This was written by Tim Infield, an Philadelphia Inquirer Staff Writer. It appeared yesterday in the Philadelphia Inquirer
(http://www.philly.com/philly/living/20120308_Dachau_ survivor__liberator_become_friends_67_years_later.html). It is entitled "Dachau survivor, liberator become friends 67 years later."

Tim Infield vividly captured the special friendship between Dachau liberator Don Greenbaum and Dachau captive Ernie Gross. Such stories put the lie to the Holocaust denial of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and others who compound that atrocity by rejecting the Holocaust's harsh reality. Fortunately for Gross, rescue arrived just in time in time on the day he was to be put to death. For tens of millions of Jews and other victims of brutality in the past century, from Nazi Germany to the killing fields of Cambodia, to Sudan, Rwanda and elsewhere, rescuers came too late. Unfortunately, the world most often just protested, if it did anything, as the massacres took place. This is why Israel's leaders so strongly insist they cannot rely on others to guarantee their national survival in confronting a neighboring state that threatens another Holocaust while seeking the means to carry it out.


Don Greenbaum (left) and Ernie Gross together in Northeast Phila. Their paths crossed on April 29, 1945.

Ernie Gross, 83, of Northeast Philadelphia, was a 16-year-old Orthodox Jew from Romania when on April 29, 1945, he found himself waiting to be put to death at the Dachau concentration camp in Germany.

Don Greenbaum, 87, of Bala Cynwyd, was a 20-year-old corporal from Philadelphia who, with hundreds of fellow U.S. soldiers, arrived to liberate Dachau that very day, literally in the nick of time to save Gross' life.

For almost 67 years, neither knew the other existed.

Now, they have found each other, and are becoming friends — two white-haired men with a shared determination that the world must never forget the six million Jews, along with million of others considered undesirable, who were murdered by the Nazis in World War II.

"I always wanted to meet somebody who liberated me, because I wasn't clear at the time," said Gross, who spoke Romanian and Yiddish as a child. "I knew it was April 29, because it was in the papers. But I wanted to talk to somebody about everything that was happening."

Greenbaum, above all, remembers the camp survivors reaching out in filthy rags, and his reply: "Ich bin ein Jude." "I am a Jew."

He has snapshots to remind him — and prove — that what he saw was real: boxcar after boxcar of emaciated dead spilled atop one another, limbs askew, eyes agog.

"I will never understand how a guy could go home and play with his children, and kiss his wife, and go to the movies or the theater, and go out the next morning and shoot people or push them into a gas chamber," he said.

Description: http://media.philly.com/designimages/square.gif

Gross was born into a family of nine in the Transylvanian town of Turt, near Romania's current borders with Hungary and Ukraine.

He recalls a lonely childhood. He didn't get much attention from his overwhelmed parents, and was teased or ignored in the Romanian-language school, where he was one of few Jewish boys. He was an indifferent student, but did better in Hebrew school.

On Sept. 1, 1939, Germany started World War II by invading Poland. The war — and the Holocaust — raged for 41/2 years before it came to Turt on the morning after Passover 1944.

Gross' mother had gotten him up early to help bake matzo. There was a rap on the door. Two Hungarian policemen stood outside. Although both Romania and Hungary were German allies, the area had come under Hungarian control.

The police ordered the Grosses, along with a couple of hundred other Jewish families, to vacate their home and assemble at the synagogue within one hour.

"They said, 'The only thing you can take with you is food for a day,' " Gross said. " 'And if after an hour we see you walking around, we have orders — we will shoot you.' "

For four or five days, with no toilets, the Turt Jews were locked in the house of worship. Then one morning, the door banged open. Wagons were waiting.

The Hungarians had decided to round up Jews and put them in ghettos, as the Germans had done in Poland.

After the ghettos, Polish Jews had been shipped to the Treblinka death camp. For the Turt Jews, the destination was Auschwitz.

The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum says that from April to July 1944, about 426,000 Hungarian Jews were sent to Auschwitz. About 320,000 died in gas chambers. The young and the fit went to slave labor camps in Austria and Germany.

Gross remembers the selection process as deportees got off the trains.

A Polish prisoner whispered, "Tell them you're 17."

At 17, he'd likely be chosen for work. If he gave his real age, 15, he'd be marked for death.

As he got to the front of the line, Gross stood before a German soldier in a gray coat.

He had never seen a German, but he was more afraid of a snarling German shepherd.

How old are you?

"I am 17."

How old?

"I am 17," he said again, louder.

He was sent to work.

Labor camps, for most, were slow death. For months, into the winter of 1944-45, Gross carried cement, wiped toilets, chopped wood in the forest.

For food, there was a crust of bread. Eight laborers, he recalled, had to share a small brown loaf. They'd tear it and draw lots for the pieces.

He said that a cousin, also an inmate, found a potato. Gross thought, "How do I ask him to give me some?" He decided to ask for the skin.

The cousin refused, an act that left a gulf between them after both, somehow, survived the war.

"My cousin said, 'If I give you a piece, maybe you are not going to survive, and I am not going to survive. But if I keep it for myself, maybe I am going to survive.'

"I learned, in order to survive, you have to be selfish."

Gross was shuttled among camps near Munich. Close by was Dachau: the end of the line.

Dachau had opened in the '30s as a detention site for intellectuals, homosexuals, the disabled, and others the Nazis saw as outcasts, as well as Gypsies and Jews. It had evolved into an extermination site because it had ovens.

On April 28, Gross was on a train to Dachau. En route, it was attacked by U.S. planes, causing a day's delay in reaching the camp.

On April 29, as he stood in line, with crematoriums in sight, he resigned himself to death.

"Then I saw the Germans throwing down their guns," he said. "I could not figure it out. I turned around, and the Americans were behind me."

Description: http://media.philly.com/designimages/square.gif

Greenbaum was one of three children of a leather manufacturer from the city's Wynnefield section. He joined the Army in 1943 after graduating from a military school in Georgia where he played football and ran track.

By April 1945, he was a seasoned veteran, a forward observer in the 283d Field Artillery Battalion. His job was to ride in front and spot German positions. He'd then call in artillery barrages.

The previous November, near Aachen, Germany, an enemy observer "spotted me first." An exploding shell knocked him cold. He awoke in a hospital with a wound to his side and a Purple Heart.

He was back in combat for the Battle of the Bulge, after which American troops advanced rapidly into Germany.

On April 29, German surrender was only eight days away.

Dachau, he recalled, was just an objective on a map. Allied troops had begun finding concentration camps, but he knew nothing of this.

"In those days, concentration camps, death camps, we had never even heard the expression."

A mile from Dachau, he said, "there was an odor we could not identify."

He remembers only that he saw no Germans — at least none living — after passing through a handsome gate, with a high wall and big trees.

At an inner compound, emaciated inmates lay dead or starving. Some walked in their prison stripes like ghouls.

A French priest gave Greenbaum and others a tour of the railhead, where hundreds of dead lay in the rail cars.

It was all beyond imagination, he said. It still is.

Description: http://media.philly.com/designimages/square.gif

The two men might never have met if Greenbaum's wife, Shelley, hadn't written an article about some of his war experiences for the Jewish Exponent in November.

Gross saw it and called Greenbaum. They met for lunch at the Tiffany diner on the Boulevard, near Gross' condominium apartment.

Both had children and grandchildren, but their lives had been much different.

Gross spent two years in a displaced-persons camp before a Jewish refugee agency sponsored him to come to America. With little formal education, he scrounged to make a living. He owned a deli, did janitorial work, ran a lunch truck on the Temple University campus.

He outlasted two wives, and now lives alone.

Greenbaum, after a flare-up of his physical wounds and suffering what he thinks was PTSD, spent time at the old Valley Forge military hospital. He graduated from Dickinson College and became a successful salesman. He still works and plays golf.

Gross, though younger, felt Greenbaum was "more energetic."

"We got along immediately, like we know each other all the time," he said.

The two have met several times, and often talk about their late-in-life commitment to sharing their stories — at schools, colleges, Rotary clubs, anywhere they can gain a hearing.

This is new for them, a realization that both camp survivors and camp liberators are, quite literally, a dying breed.

Contact John Cohn at john.r.cohn@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 9, 2012.

A maze is a tour puzzle, in the form of a complex branching passage, through which the solver must find a route. In everyday language, both maze and labyrinth stand for a complex and confusing series of pathways. However, technically, the maze is distinguished from the labyrinth, as the labyrinth has a single through-route with twists and turns but, without branches, and is not designed to be as difficult to navigate as the maze.

The corridors of the political world remind us and can be compared to a maze.

Although most of what is said about the new world order, the Luminaries, the desire of various groups to create a chaotic world, in order to establish a new central rule, exists and is true, most of the information about these subjects is hidden, not an open matter, and by their nature, these sects and groups prefer to remain hidden.

There is also room here to consider the question of who is right and what is the truth?

A short exploration leads to the all unpleasant information that challenges even the very rising and funding of the state of Israel, in the Land of Israel, and that it was a conspiracy.

It would be better not to fall for the rumors, the plots and conspiracies. In preference, form a fair and transparent democratic process, with the maximum involvement of all the people, and a minimal governance of politicians. Because politics is made of evil and corruption, thus, it attracts representatives of these hidden sects and groups.

There is an option to also take a better solution from the past, much suitable for the present. In the Biblical Book of Judges, the recurring theme was that the people of the Nation of Israel betrayed their God, and in return, they had suffered the cutouts of a cruel tyrant; then they cried out to their God, God sent His messenger — Prophet, who freed the Israelites from despotism, and God's messenger became the judge over the people and the country rested ...

Judges 3:7-11

7 The Israelites did evil in the eyes of God; they forgot their God and worshipped the idols. 8 And God got angry with Israel so He sold them into the hands of the evil king Cushan, the king of Aram Naharaim, to whom the Israelites were subject for eight years. 9 And the Children of Israel cried out to their God, He raised up, for among them, a rescuer, Othniel, the son of Kenaz, the brother of Caleb, his younger brother, who saved them. 10 And the spirit of God came upon him, so that he became Israel's judge and went to war. And God gave him the land of Cushan, of the evil king of Aram and Othniel hands overpowered evil Cushan. 11 So the land had peace for forty years, until Othniel son of Kenaz died.

If the world takes an example from the Jewish nation, apparently, the regime the Jews respect and listened to and along which they best functioned was a benevolent dictator, a single and unique leader, pure heart and mannered, ready to strike, without mercy, those who are evil and fleece.

So what will the Jews, residing in Zion, who simply want to live their lives quietly and peacefully do?

A. The people must understand that they will not live life, quietly and peacefully, until they give support to those who are willing to work for all the people.

B. The people must understand that they needs to educate their children to always act for the people, and to sanctify the family and community values. Not what the state will do for its citizens, rather what the citizens will do for their state.

C. The people must be tolerant toward one other, as even the unknown and the odd person is a human being and every person is entitled to a fair treatment. Always put yourself in the shoes of the person in front of you.

D. Remember, if only the one law saying, "Love your neighbor as yourself".

To our exaltation, the universe of God has a sense of basic justice, and in the end the good ones will always win; therefore, one should be good and without compromises, then everything will be better.

And most importantly, speak the truth only. Lying is the first sin, leading us on the road to a total moral decline. Words of truth no politicians has and speaks!

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Ted Belman, March 8, 2012.

"The Lord has heard my supplication; the Lord will receive my prayer. Let all my enemies be ashamed and much troubled; let them return and be ashamed in a moment."
Psalm 6, King David of Israel

This below was written by Eliana Benador. Visit her blog at


Obama "assured Israel's visiting leader [Netanyahu] Monday that the United States "will always have Israel's back," in a display of unity between allies who often disagree."

So, here we go again, the political theater surrounding the AIPAC yearly farce is in action. Naturally, Muslim Palestinians may be disappointed to see their "ally" Hussein Obama embrace Israel, but who can forget taqqiya, the Islamic sharia bound law? Taqqiya makes it legally acceptable to distort the truth and reality for the advancement of Muslim world domination.

AIPAC describe themselves as 'America's pro-Israel lobby', working to strengthen relations between the United States and Israel. But truth be told, the 'working' is most of all to facilitate businesses among participants and besides that, yes, protecting Israel... to the best of their abilities...

In reality it is about a meeting of the minds what happens at AIPAC. The Liberal minds, that is. For a longtime, AIPAC has appeared to represent the rights and aspirations and other interests of Israel. However, the concurrent amalgam of like-minded officials of both sides who are in attendance and who discreetly have the secret agenda to undermine the God-created-Land of Israel and who are disguised under different and very dissimulated wrappings, end up simply confusing the average reader.

That said, there appear to be increasingly more common denominators between these two [Netanyahu's and Obama's] groups that are meeting at AIPAC's yearly rituals.

Let's look back a year ago, when on March 27, 2011, Lee "Rosie" Rosenberg was appointed president of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee or AIPAC. Rosenberg, a former "jazz recording industry veteran capitalist who [surprise] accompanied U.S. President Barack Obama on his campaign trip to Israel..." Furthermore, Rosenberg also served on the president's national campaign finance committee.

Why would AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobby choose a hard-core liberal, an Obama-guy, to be at the helm of the pro-Israel institution previously known for their staunch, unfailing position defending Israel's interests in America -that seems to be part of the past as times are, obviously, changing.

Adding insult to injury, AIPAC's president is not only from Chicago, the home state of President Obama, but he is also on first-name terms with former White House Chief of Staff and current Mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, as well as David Axelrod, President Obama's former senior advisor.

Some may recall that in last year at AIPAC's fest, Obama did not fail to mention the Chicagoan delegation attending AIPAC, very likely "friends of Obama." And, this is what explains as well the standing ovation from an AIPAC Jewish audience last Sunday.

The list of actions taken by the Obama Administration to undermine the existence and the security and the safety of The Land of Israel, have been blatant, and they span from the betrayal of our first and foremost ally, Hosni Mubarak, which in the end has given birth to Obama's infamous "Arab Spring," to the largest arms sales ever made by the United States, to Saudi Arabia, for over 60 billion dollars, to mention a few.

However, the closeness of Obama and his entourage to the Muslim Brotherhood is the most terrible treason that could have been committed to a long standing friendship between our nations.

Obama in his own words, in this election year 2012:

"We have seen the terrible bloodshed that's going on in Syria, the democratic transition that's taking place in Egypt. And in the midst of this, we have an island of democracy and one of our greatest allies in Israel.... My personal commitment — a commitment that is consistent with the history of other occupants of this Oval Office — our commitment to the security of Israel is rock solid. And as I've said to the Prime Minister in every single one of our meetings, the United States will always have Israel's back when it comes to Israel's security. This is a bond that is based not only on our mutual security interests and economic interests, but is also based on common values and the incredible people-to-people contacts that we have between our two countries."

But, in all of this, betrayal to the Jewish People and to the holy Land of Israel does not come from Israel's true archenemy, Hussein Obama, but rather from Israel's own offspring, as we will see below.

Despite belonging to the so-called right wing Likud, it is much more accurate to say Netanyahu is a LINO, a Likudnik In Name Only...

As it is, in America, where the majority of the population has been contaminated with the liberal views of the Left, we find people like McCain, siding with the liberal views of the Administration more often than not, or Speaker Boehner, whose tender manners have more of a democrat disguised under the wrapping of a republican. Likewise, in Israel, the hawkish politicians, who are former members of the Israeli elite Sayeret Matkal, time and again, do not fail to disappoint with their liberal approach to Israeli national defense.

Sadly, there is ONE common denominator that reunites both arch-liberal, pro-communist, pro-Muslim Obama, his JINOs, or Jewish-In-Name-Only gang of Rahm Emanuel, Lee Rosenberg, George Soros, and all the others... And, on the other hand, on the Israeli side, the LINOs, or Bibi Netanyahu with his comrades Ehud Barak, Tzipi Livni, and so on...

And that common denominator is that both, current Israeli and American leaders betray the countries they were elected and mandated to defend.

For instance, how can the armies of both countries defend their country's territory, interests and people, when their military behavior is based in the treacherous "courageous restraint," the degenerated promotional suicidal version for our soldiers, that implies that the military are there to avoid civilian casualties from the... enemy! And, both our countries reward whoever of our soldiers gets to NOT shoot even in time of need, at risk of their own lives and more...

The truth of the matter is that it's obvious that in all likelihood, 90% of the people attending the AIPAC-Obama-Netanyahu fest have only one goal in mind: Their own personal, political and business agendas -and do not have in mind the security of either the Land of Israel or the United States.

Rampant moral corruption is uniting the fates of both countries, and with which their more accurate description may in the end be, whether we like it or not, that of Big Satan and Little Satan.

The conspicuous godless turn taken by both Israel and the United States, and the ineptitude, inertia, apathy and lethal lethargy that both their so-called conservative population are exhibiting, indicate a sure descent to hell as they distance themselves from the moral principles that have always made nations succeed.

On the contrary, the godless are having the upper hand and are bringing both countries down to their knees and destroying everything that was progress and advancement, to give room to their world inspired by the Greek and Roman empires -which we all know too well how they ended.

So, in the end, as AIPAC's meeting this year has been conspicuously two months earlier than last year, Mr. Rosenfeld must have been hard at work to make it match to Mr. Obama's electoral needs...

Not a bad thing when one is holding an election at the end of the year -especially when so many Jews see nothing wrong in funding evil against their own people and against the Land of Israel...

Obama is hard at work planning on his every single move. Sunday he appeared at AIPAC. Monday he met with Netanyahu, Israel's Prime Minister, assuring him that his "commitment to the security of Israel is rock solid," and all that chronometrically timed before his speech today -just as republicans hold their GOP Super Tuesday.

We are in the world of global political manipulation and the loss of God and as a result, breaking the rules set in this world with the purpose of establishing a sane habitat for its inhabitants, are starting to slowly and surely bringing it closer to Sodom and Gomorrah than ever before. And we know what were the consequences of such a closeness to a godless, unprincipled, degenerating and decrepit world.

May God bless and protect America and Israel.

Ted Belman is a retired lawyer and the Editor of Israpundit. He made aliya from Canada last year and now lives in Jerusalem, Israel. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Tamar Yonah, March 8, 2012.

This was written by Professor Paul Eidelberg. It appeared today in Arutz-Sheva


Countless Jews and even Gentiles are appalled and dumbfounded by Israel's Government. Its prime ministers exclude God from the domain of statecraft. We hear nothing of His Name in the pronouncements and policies and diplomacy of Israeli prime ministers. They cannot understand how Jewish prime ministers, backed by an undefeated army, could so utterly ignore Scripture by surrendering Judea and Samaria, the heartland of the Jewish people. And to whom? To thugs! What else are we to call those who elected a villain like Yasser Arafat as their president? And what should we say of Arabs who used their own children as human bombs?

But if these Arabs are beneath contempt, what shall we say of Israeli prime ministers who have consorted with these scoundrels, and have even given or rewarded them with Jewish land despite their having murdered Jewish men, women, and children? Such ignominy boggles the mind. Do you see Jews with down cast heads, let alone in sacks and ashes?

I am further appalled by an unanswered question. In view of the shameless behavior of Israeli prime ministers, what other events occurring in Israel are as important as to preempt the attention of journalists-the best and the brightest? And why don't we hear outcries from Israel's rabbis? Are these rabbis suffering from aphasia or spiritual laryngitis? Why haven't they assembled and denounced one government after another for desecrating God's Name?

Alas, all this was foreseen by the prophets and sages of old. They predicted that in the end of days the Jews would have a paltry government, that Israel would be ruled by "scorners" of the Torah. These scorners, said the Prophet Hosea (12:1-3), will fill Israel with lies and deception. They will strive after wind ("peace") and make alliances with Israel's enemies. And no one rebukes them.

The Prophet Isaiah (28:14-18) chastises these insolent Jews. He foresaw that they will make a "covenant with death," but that this covenant will not protect them. Remarkably, the Targum translates this covenant with death as a contract with "terrorists" (mechablim)!

Indeed, the Zohar (Exodus 7b) predicts that in the end of days certain Jews in Israel will make an alliance with the enemies of the Jewish people. The Israel-PLO Agreement manifests that alliance, which was consummated by the Labor Party and upheld by the Likud. How shameless! Has any Israeli prime minister been held accountable for its murderous consequences?

The Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 98a), tells us that in the end of days Israel will have the "cheapest" government. How else are we to describe politicians who hobnob with terrorists responsible for the murder and maiming thousands of Jewish men, women, and children? Do these politicians display any remorse or sense of guilt?

Let me cite and paraphrase the conclusions of Mishna Sotah (49b), and excuse me for my frankness:

"With the footsteps of the Moshiach, arrogance shall increase and honor will dwindle. The government shall turn to heresy [moral equivalency] and there shall be none to utter reproof. The council-chamber [the Knesset] shall be given to corruption.... [T]he dwellers on the frontier [in Judah, Samaria, and Gaza] shall go from place to place with none to take pity on them.

The wisdom of their writers [journalists and academics] will become insipid and degenerate [will become morally neutral, even anti-Jewish], and they that shun sin shall be despised. The truth shall nowhere be found [silenced in the universities steeped in nihilism]. Youth shall shame their elders, and elders shall stand up in the presence of youth [so commonplace in democracies] ... The face of this generation is as the face of a dog [impervious to shame] ... Upon whom, then, can we rely? Only on our Father in heaven.

  • Is it not obvious that Jews in Israel cannot rely on political parties to save them from disaster?

  • Is it not obvious from the Arab assaults in Lebanon and Sderot that Jews cannot rely on the Israel Defense Forces, given its policy of "purity of arms" and "proportionality"?

  • Is it not obvious that Jews cannot rely on rabbis who pontificate about pikuach nefesh while saying nothing about the IDF's suicidal "rules of engagement" which favor the enemy?

  • Is it not obvious that Jews cannot rely on political and strategic analysts to stop the suicidal course of Israel's government so long as these analysts lack the fire of the Torah?

  • Is it not obvious that Jews cannot rely on the United States or on information campaigns (hasbara) to save them from the successors of the Nazis who have yet to be identified by their real names?

  • And what shall we say of Jews who cling to Christian precepts such as "love your enemy," "resist not evil," "turn the other cheek"-which wise Christians know do not apply to war. Have not these apolitical precepts emasculated Israel?

Finally, and since I have not yet succumbed to desperation, allow me to call your attention to Rashi's commentary to Genesis 1:1: "If the nations of the world should [question Israel's title to Eretz Yisrael] and say: 'You are robbers in that you have seized by force the territories of the seven nations,' Israel can retort: 'The entire world belongs to the Holy One, Blessed be He. He created it and gave it to whomsoever it was right in His eyes. It was His will to give it to them and it was His will to take it from them and give it to us.'"

To whom are these words of many centuries ago addressed? Of course to you and me, the ever-young in heart. For unlike the senescent prime ministers of Israel, we have chosen life, and having chosen life the future is ours. The words of Rashi are therefore alive, alive with truth. So we are not dismayed that no Israeli prime minister has girded his loins and cited this Rashi. Neither has any religious party, when signing a government coalition agreement, insisted on the inclusion of this Rashi! But the words of Rashi, like truth, will prevail.

Of course, it will be said the nations will mock these words of Rashi and laugh at us." I reply: What have Israeli prime ministers offered in their place? Have their countless repetitions about "security" won the admiration of nations and made Israel more secure? Have their constant intoning he word "democracy" earned the respect of the democratic world? Has their willingness to yield Jewish land appeased the voracious appetites of Janus-faced Arab despots?

Has Israel won the respect of nations by yielding land to these pagans? Therefore I declare it is precisely because Jews have not based their claim to Eretz Yisrael exclusively on Rashi's cosmological commentary on Genesis 1:1 that Israel is so often disdained and condemned by the nations!

Not that citing Rashi will convince any nation that the Jews have a God-given title to Eretz Yisrael. The task of the Jews is not to convince the nations of anything! This has been the compulsion of assimilated Jews. Too many Jews-religious included-want to win the approval of the nations rather than the approval of God.

Legions of Jews rely more on the empty rhetoric of politicians than on Holy Scripture and the God of Israel. This is why the above Mishna indicates that in the end of days, when Jews have exhausted the heresies and vanities of our time and feel utterly helpless, they will turn to their Father in heaven!

This is not a counsel of despair. It is a plea for rational analysis of what we have already experienced year after year with flawed governments and the plethora of dismal political parties. Stop relying like drug addicts on failed ideas and flawed politicians. Get out of the mire of democratic politics. Put God back into the domain of statecraft, Start proclaiming and insisting that God alone has given the Jews an eternal title to Eretz Yisrael-and never mind the scorners! Just do it and leave the consequences to our Father in heaven, Who alone is the Master of war and peace.□

Contact Tamar Yonah by email at Tamar@israelnationalradio.com
To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Ginsberg, March 8, 2012.

Anyone reading this Rav Kahane article and is not on my personal list to receive the weekly articles written by Rav Kahane and would like to be, please contact me at: BarbaraAndChaim@gmail.com Visit my blog for previously emailed Rav Kahane writings: www.barbaraginsberg-barbara.blogspot.com


"He who removes from himself the yoke of Torah is given in its place the yoke of kingdom: (Avot 3)

It is an axiom that no rational Jew dare even contemplate questioning: Without the United States, Israel could not survive.It is an axiom that is repeated so often by Jewish shepherds and sheep alike, that it has succeeded brilliantly in inviting the worst kind of American pressure on the Jewish state and turning us if not into the 51st state, certainly into a pliant protectorate.The concept of the American savior has begun its inevitable metamorphosis into American extortionist — and enforcer.

And could it be different?It is only natural that an American President, hearing from the Mouths of Jewish leaders that Israel is dependent on the Unites States, sees in it a tempting door to enter and to pressure and use the leverage that this shtetl mentality gives him.And so, littler wonder that a United States that sees in Israel more and more, a vassal that cannot say "no" leans heavily and more arrogantly on it than ever.

This year alone, there were a number of outrageous, insulting infringements of Israeli sovereignty by Washington and its High Commissioner (a.k.a. Ambassador) Thomas Pickering.Any normal country with a modicum of self-respect (say, Togo or Zimbabwe) would have given Mr. Pickering his walking Pickering papers and warned the United States never again to dare use either the tone or the substance in dealing with the Jewish State. But the State of Israel, the supposed last of the ghetto and first of the new, proud Hebrews, in reality, is merely the largest of the shtels, comprised of an entire host of leaders who would put the shtetl beggar and shtadlan to shame.No ghetto Jew ever absorbed more humiliations and desecrations with greater smiling countenance, with greater ability to turn all his cheeks.No ghetto Jew ever could have performed better than the Odd Couple government in absorbing humiliation without missing a fawning beat.

First there were the tourists.On the one hand Arab-Americans and on the other the Black Hebrews.Both shared little in common except for the fact that they were American citizens who hate Israel and the Jews.Both believe that the land does not belong to the Jews. Both worked assiduously to guarantee that it will be taken away from the Jews.Both are deadly enemies of the Jewish people and the state

Little wonder that Israel looks upon every such tourist arriving in the country with deep suspicion. Little wonder that each is questioned at length and with greater care than the ordinary tourist.And so, they screamed, did these Jew-haters, screamed in protest to the American government.And Thomas Pickering's employers ordered him to issue a stiff and outrageously arrogant protest to the Israeli government. Protest? Say, rather, an ultimatum.An affront to any government with a modicum of self-respect. Ah, but we are speaking of the Odd Couple... In a matter of days, the New Hebrews had properly groveled and announced a new set of regulations guaranteeing that Jewish enemies would no longer be harassed, would be allowed to enter the country as all others.

But then there was the question of drilling for water near Bethlehem.Israel, whose existence depends on dwindling water resources, had planned to drill just outside Jerusalem in what the Americans, Alexander Schindler, the New Jewish Agenda, Yossi Sarid and Yasir Arafat called the "occupied territories."The Arabs set up a howl and could the Americans be far behind?Along came Pickering with yet another vigorous protest and down went Israel without even a parting shot at the High Commissioner. The drilling will not be.The cavity will continue to pain.

And with this glorious roll call of protestations, it was only a matter of time for the turn of the Lavi. A project of years into which Israel poured a billion of its own dollars (aside from U.S. ones); in which were involved some of the finest engineers and minds in Israel; which was well on its way to producing the finest plane in the world; which would, in turn, have freed Israel from its agonizing dependency on American largesse and threats (every time there is an Israeli action that particularly displeases the Americans they threaten to cut off spare parts for F-14s) — was cancelled.

Forget all the "reasons" given.Forget the nonsense and lies.Israel gave up the finest plane in the world; gave up on a billion dollars that went down the drain; gave up on hundreds of engineers who will now leave the country to find work in Italy, South Africa and the West; gave up on military independence — only because it gave in to American pressure.Only because it showed how far it has gone down the road to being a vassal-state, a protectorate, a country that cannot, in its little secular and unfaithful mind, ever say "no" to the United States on any vital issue.

And the United States, which saw in the Lavi a dangerous competitor for its own aircraft industry, understood more clearly than ever before how dependent and suppliant the state of confusion and this is how the State of Israel sees itself.It is a lesson that, one may be assured has been learned well in Washington, and the conclusions will be rapidly drawn.

The scrapping of the Lavi by the hapless government of Israel is a tragedy for Israel in every way. It deepens the terrible dependency on the gentile; it opens Israel up to many worse pressure, and above all, it shows more clearly than every before the gentilization of the Jewish state.For only a state that lost its faith in G-d and that ripped from its neck the yoke of Torah could ever have opened itself up to willingly accepting — like some dumb ox — the yoke of the gentile kingdom. A nation of faith, a government of deep belief in G-d, would have sent Pickering packing; would have turned to the Jewish people throughout the world for support and would have completed the finest plane in the world.And, of course, G-d would have helped.He always helps those who turn to Him and say: I believe, I believe.

All of which leads us directly to the subject of:


If the citizens of the United States do not feel that their interests are being served by Israel, then their obligation is to stop this economic aid.If, on the other hand, they believe that Israel serves a vital interest of the US, they should then put an end to their whining and deal with Israel as one would an equal partner who gives as he gets.

Of course, the nonsense about helping Israel because it is"the only democracy in the Middle East," has to be stopped.Nations do not help other states because they are "democracies" or "progressive" states, or "good".Nations have self-interests that lead them to ally themselves with other states. Those self-interests and not"morality" of the state are what determine foreign policy decisions.

It is Israel alone that gives the United States a guaranteed and safe base whenever needed. It is the Haifa naval harbor that is open to the US Sixth fleet regularly.It is in the Negev that the US stores tons of military equipment for use when needed.It is Israel that provides the Voice of America an area in which to build new, powerful transmitters.It is Israel that works hand in hand with the US to actively crush terrorism.It is Israel that flies US F-16 planes in real combat, to tell the Americans what defects exist.It is Israel that puts out of commission Soviet missiles given to the Syrians and then explains to Washington how it was done.It is Israel that captures a Soviet T-72 tank and shows it to the CIA for the first time.It is Israel whose Jericho missile makes Moscow nervous enough to protest a weapon that can reach its territory.It is Israel that has the brains, the technology, the ability to create; things that no other nation in the region has.And it is Israel that has the innate common hostility to the Soviet and other anti-western totalitarian states, shared by America.

If that is not worth the money -then stop it. Indeed the Administration has an obligation to stop"wasting" American money.But, if all that ads up to a priceless asset, then let the weepers and wailers shut up and pay for what they are getting and count themselves fortunate.

Contact Barbara Ginsberg at barbaraandchaim@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Maxime Myer-Smith, March 8, 2012.

Israeli soldiers fired rubber bullets at Palestinian stone throwers in the West Bank town of Al Ram, near East Jerusalem, last month.[emphasis added] (Abbas Momani/Agence France-Presse-Getty Images)

One or the underlying themes of New York Times coverage of the Middle East is blaming Israel for the Arab-Israeli conflict while removing Palestinian responsibility for the situation there. According to the Times' preferred story, Israel is the perennial aggressor while the Palestinians are the perennial victims. And if there happens to be no particular Palestinian grievance to play up on a given day, the New York Times will make sure to do so anyway: by recycling an older picture or creating a grievance of its own.  

Needless to say, stories that reveal the real situation, like the one about Palestinian leader Abbas demonizing Israel with false, inflammatory accusations at the recent Doha conference, are concealed.


Let's take as an example the front page of today's New York Times[*].

The above-fold, full color picture has nothing whatsoever to do with any breaking news from the region. Instead, the Times dredged up an older photo of soldiers with balls of fire at the tips of their guns with the caption:

Israeli soldiers fired at Palestinian stone throwers in the West Bank town of al Ram, near East Jerusalem, last month.

Actually, the masked Palestinians were throwing both rocks and firebombs-not exactly peaceful, and yes, this was last month, at about the same time President Abbas was demonizing Israel at the Doha conference, that went unmentioned in the Times.

Not only did a non-news photo take front page placement, but the front page story was a manufactured one about Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's visit to the U.S. pushing news about Palestinian grievances off the front page.

"For decades, as autocrats ruled their neighbors, the Palestinians were at the center of Middle Eastern politics, their struggle with Israeli occupation embodying the Arab longing for post-colonial freedom and dignity," lamented Jerusalem bureau chief Ethan Bronner. "But when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel visited Washington this week, the conversation was dominated by Iran, not peace talks or occupation."

Indeed, it seems that the New York Times is becoming a parody of its own anti-Israel obsession.

[*] "Mideast Din Drowns Out Palestinians" by Ethan Bronner, Mar 7, 2012, www.nytimes.com/2012/03/08/world/middleeast/arab-spring-and-iran-tensions-leave-palestinians-sidelined.html?ref=todayspaper

Maxime Myer-Smith writes for CAMERA. Contact her by email at maxime@camera.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Gavriel Queenann, March 8, 2012.

A special service was held on Purim morning Thursday at the tomb of Yehoshua Ben Nun in Kifl Hares in Samaria.

The morning prayer service and traditional second reading of the Book of Esther for Purim, was led by Samaria Regional Community Council head Gershon Mesika and Rabbi Uriel Genzel.

Of special note was the participation of the Ephraim Brigade, commanded by Col. Ron Kahane, who were lovingly welcomed by the residents of Judea and Samaria who attended.

Kahane and his men were toasted and given the traditional "lechaim" blessing — to life!

Earlier, when the first worshipers arrived at the tomb, they were shocked to discover local Arabs had desecrated the compound. The inner walls of the holy structure were painted with a large swastika and nationalist PA graffiti was spray-painted in Arabic.

PA security forces have allowed the tomb to be desecrated multiple times since Israel handed Kifl Hares over to them, but recently claimed they would prevent further desecration of tombs in their areas.

The worshipers brought white paint and tried to execute minor repairs to the tomb before the service..

Col. Kahane said he was confident that his soldiers will be inspired by hearing the Megillah in Yehoshua Ben Nun's tomb alongside their fellow citizens to exert themselves in their missions, and that the settlements will continue to grow.

Mesika said, "It was very exciting to read the Book of Esther, the Book of valor of Israel, at the grave of the great leader who brought us into the land — Yehoshua Ben Nun."

Mesika also drew a parallel between the tomb desecration and the Book of Esther "On a day where we read about the downfall of the genocidal Haman so many years ago, we are again reminded of those people who want to follow in his footsteps today."

Mesika explained, "A direct line connects the Persian Haman today — Ahmadinejad, who threatens the destruction of Jewish people — and the PA terrorists who choose to mark their actions with the swastika, a symbol of barbarism that desecrates the graves of our holy fathers."

"In the face of this darkness we still have light, the salvation of Purim, and the joy of building Israel," he said. "This Purim, especially in the face of the swastika Yehoshua Ben Nun's tomb, we draw immortal strength and joy from him, who told us 'go up and inherit the land,' for we have done so."

Gavriel Queenann writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today.

To Go To Top

Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, March 8, 2012.

"The Jews had Light and Gladness and Joy and Honor."
— Esther 8:16


For months, I had been anxiously dreaming of crystal dew drops, perfect circular wet orbs, sparking on backlit blades of wheat like the diamond sequins on Madonna's vest from her Like a Virgin tour. So I awoke at 2 a.m., summoned my driver and was chauffeured in my scarlet Hummer to the shores of Israel's least known body of water, Lake Hamanbegone in the heart of the bleak and barren Negev Badlands. We arrived well before sunrise so I slept while my personal chef prepared a breakfast of eggs, toast, coffee, Israeli salad, fresh orange juice and Ben and Jerry's Mint Chocolate Chunk with hot fudge and jimmies.

A heavy cloud cover, a dreary downpour, slushy snow and hellacious hail limited my options for staying dry but just as I emerged from my slumber, the skies split like the Red Sea. A glorious wheat field appeared before my eyes, like Manna from Heaven, as the first radiant ray of sun crested the horizon. I handed my camera to my loyal cat, Timmy, and he took these photos, being much smarter than any old dog. Then I went back to sleep until lunchtime.

!!!!Purim Sameach!!!!


Hyundai q42 disposable camera, handheld by my beautiful assistant, cumulative specular multi-matrix metering mode, f64 at 11/71ths sec., ISO 5. Raw pixelated celluloid converted to pegboard. Lens: Canon Date: May 14, 1948, 11:07 a.m. Location: Lake Iranbegone from the Middle East.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by NeverAgainIsNow, March 8, 2012.

Badil, (campaignnationalcommittee) hosted the first Palestine BDS Conference in Ramallah, November 2007, out of which emerged the BDS National Committee (BNC) to coordinate the international campaign. BDS has an unparalleled organization of boycott worldwide. The website delineates the Palestinian victimhood and formulates strategies and programs of action worldwide aimed at destroying Israel's industry and commerce. .

Ali Abunimah, frequent, popular speaker at BDS events, is a Palestinian-American journalist and co-founder of Electronic Intifada, part of The Third Jihad, said to contain a treasure trove of highly antagonistic writings against the Jewish State. A son of Palestinian refugees from the 1948 exodus, he was born in Washington DC, is a graduate of Princeton University and University of Chicago, and contributes articles to many publications. A member of many Arab-American activist associations, he proposes the one-state, civilizational jihad and seeks to extinguish Israel from the Middle East.

Ahmed Moor, a Palestinian-American journalist born in Gaza, writes regularly for Al Jazeera English, the LA Times, the Huffington Post, and anti-Zionist website Mondoweiss, etc. A graduate student of Public Policy at Harvard University, Moor questions Israel's right to exist as race-exclusive, thereby denying Israel's multi-racial citizens.. As noted on his blogspot, he sees Israel as a Netanyahu-engineered "economic miracle" as a result of "cash injections," and BDS as a means of terminating Israel's successes. He seeks the right of return of Arabs, and uses disproportionate warfare to corroborate their victimization, accusations against Israel's military defense, deflection from Palestinian leadership to blame non-productive lives on "others," and creates situations for which the adversary is blamed in court (Lawfare).

Helena Cobban, born in England, is a veteran writer, and columnist in several pro-Palestinian newspapers and the BBC. A founder of Just World Books (Mid-east focus), she praised the U of Penn BDS conference and its successes in boycotting Israeli products, Ahava and Sabra. She admires the PLO and Fateh. Daniel Pipes, upon reviewing her books, stated they are factually wrong, fraught with lies, and contains glaring omissions regarding the UN partition plan in 1948 and Arab attacks on Israel.

Harvard graduate Philip Weiss shares an anti-Zionist blog, Mondoweiss, with Adam Horowitz. Dedicated to the BDS movement, and includes praise of international boycott of Israeli products.

Anna-Baltzer, host of Jews sans frontiers, an anti-Zionist blogsite, is the national organizer of US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, which encompasses over 200 member groups through its partnerships with Friends of Sabeel-North America, one of the driving forces behind a campaign by mainline Protestant churches to divest from Israel; UFPJ, the anti-war coalition with anti-Israel messages; and the Council for the National Interest (CNI), an anti-Israel organization behind many inflammatory anti-Israel ads in major national newspapers. She has also participated in occupations in Oakland, Wall Street, Chicago, San Francisco, Atlanta, and beyond.

Rebecca Vilkomerson, as covered by The Huffington Post, is Executive Director of Jewish Voice for Peace. She has spoken at J Street and other anti-Israel groups to divest from TIAA-CREF, financial advisors and international investors with ties to major companies that conduct business with Israel. JVP and New Israel Fund are George Soros-funded organizations. My research also uncovered a connection between these groups and Rabbi Richard Jacobs, newly appointed head of the Union for Reform Judaism.

Hannah Schwarzchild, Philadelphia attorney, has a blogsite, "Occupied Gaza: News, Comment, and Analysis," on which she responds to the global call for BDS until "Israel ends its illegal occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem." As head of American Jews for a Just Peace, their method is to deshelve Israel products; advocate for enforcement of the US Arms Export Control Act and other US international laws; raise awareness of the Jewish National Fund's tree-planting and support the planting of olive and fruit trees in "Occupied Palestinian Territories."

Abraham Greenhouse describes himself as a longtime Palestine solidarity and BDS activist based in New York City, on his blog, where he focuses on theory and practice of Palestine solidarity activism, boycotting and proper disposal of the products (General Electric, Motorola, Ahava cosmetics).

Dr. Dalit Baum, Professor of Gender Studies and World Economy at the University of Haifa and Beit College, holds a Ph.D in mathematics. Northeast Intelligence Network describes her as a radical member of the Coalition of Women for Peace, primarily lesbians for jihad, and a member of Soros-funded New Israel Fund. She teaches anti-Israel subversion worldwide, including at UC Santa Cruz and UC Berkeley, where, for one course, her reading material required students to plan and carry out an activist attack, preferably on Israel.

Ilan Pappe, a radical left Israeli academic who earns a good living lecturing in Europe about the evil of Israel, his place of birth. A Jewish-Israeli historian and professor history of Exeter (UK) and former senior lecturer in political science at Haifa University, he is the author of Ethnic Cleansing for Palestine. He is also known for fabricating the story of a "massacre" at Tantura, proven in court to have never occurred.

Dear Readers, I wish this were the absolute end of the list, but it's only the tip of the sand dune. Nevertheless, it's a start and you can always continue the research to give you a fuller picture of the evil that infects our schools and our country.

Tabitha Korol:

Tabitha Korol, who began her political writing with letters to the editor, earned an award from CAMERA (Committee on Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America) "in recognition of outstanding letter-writing in 2009 to promote fair and factual reporting about Israel." Her op-eds have appeared in Arutz Sheva (Israel National News), and she posts at Right Truth and Never Again Is Now. An editor at the latter, she also does proofreading/editing for a monthly city newsletter.

A graduate of the Fashion Institute of Technology, her early career included fashion and fabric design, and she composed the music for the FIT alma mater. Once she and her family moved from New York to Ohio, she wrote customer service correspondence for two major manufacturing corporations for a combined 25 years, and obituaries/lifecycle events for a specialty weekly newspaper before her retirement and entry into journalism.

Thank you,

Stanley Zir

Reach Never Again Is Now by email at neveragainisnow@live.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 7, 2012.

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. Genesis 1:2

The world's luminaries' coterie are trying, with incredible and unfathomable haughtiness, to mimic the handiwork of God and create a New World Order, from the confusion and chaos they, themselves, are bringing about.

That is exactly their goal when they support of the 'Arab Spring', that is to cause global chaos, genocide and mass killing of innocents, robbery, theft, rape and threats and other such cruel and evil acts. All that so from all this chaos they can create a new order, that they want and work to build, with the help of the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood in the entire Middle East.

So far the luminaries were successful in achieving their goals and bring such chaos into Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Yemen and Syria and soon to Jordan too. For now, they have not finished the job of the Muslim Brotherhood's 'coronation', but task is working, by design, and on its way to be accomplished, as planned.

As for Israel, even there, the luminaries are trying to bring horrific chaos, by allowing Iran to become nuclear and the possible war with Iran. Obama has one objective in mind, which is to be reelected, at any cost. If Israel attacks Iran, it is possible he will not be reelected. Additionally, if Israel, alone, will go on the attack on the Shiite Muslim Satan, Iran, without U.S. help — at least initially — this event will allow later on to bring about a new order to the Jewish state, Israel, that will include a Palestinian state, one state for all the citizens, exactly in accord with the New Israel Fund-NIF charter and continuous mantra.

We may suppose that Israel's president, Shimon Peres, Defense Minister, Ehud Barak and retired supreme court president, Dorit Beinish and others are senior luminaries in Israeli, whose slogan is: 'Ordo Ab Chao,' its meaning is, "order out of chaos" — God created law and order out of chaos. That is, first once needs to create chaos and then, out of it build — the luminaries are also called 'builders' — the new order, along which they want the world to be operating.

Even former president George W. Bush once said:" And, you know, it'll take time to restore chaos and order out of chaos. But we will." — Washington, D.C., April 13, 2003. — George W. Bush

Barack Obama Is working for the New World Order clan.

For the past three years we have seen and heard, ad nauseam, Barack Hussein Obama and his associates and by now, we surely have figured them out very well.

The sovereign State of Israel must finally wean itself from the big brother, and act independently of the present US administration.

The pretense political game must end, and the daylight between the two countries must be revealed.

There is no need for declarations; however, if, for any reason, some declarations are necessary, they need to be short and to the point. The lip service, to the big lies and distortion, must end.

Israel must formally and clearly link Iran's declared plans to annihilate the Zionist entity and her unwavering determination to prevent them. A note on record to Israel's intentions must be sent to every state that is a member of the saboteur United Nations Organization-UN.

In view of Iran's repeated declarations of the mullah regime intent to destroy the state of Israel and kill its Jewish [and non-Jewish] population, Israel must make the record clear: that it intends to use all means, deem required, to prevent Iran from carrying out her threats.

Iran's wish is the same as the luminaries, which is a new world order, in which this Moslem Shia fanatic and genocidal regime wants to be the number one, or the only player.

The people in the free world must demand that their governments put the record straight: that they intend to use all means, deem necessary, to prevent Iran from becoming a terrorist nuclear power and then return the entire world to its original chaos.

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, March 7, 2012.
This was written by Joseph Farah, founder, editor and CEO of World Net Daily.

The End-Time is Here

2008 was God's last warning. 2012 is economic collapse & WW III www.the-end.com

How does Barack Obama's administration get away with it?

How does it systematically redistribute billions in taxpayer money to sham companies, take political contributions from those companies, watch the government subsidies squandered, and pay no political price with voters?


The secret to their success is being involved in corruption that is audacious and beyond the imaginations of most Americans, who simply cannot believe anyone would or could attempt to get away with such schemes.

Here's what I'm talking about:

  • On Oct. 27, 2009, Vice President Joe Biden announced with great fanfare that Fisker Automotive would produce plug-in hybrid electric vehicles at a former General Motors plant in Wilmington, Del. Here's what he said: "While some wanted to write off America's auto industry, we said no. We knew that we needed to do something different — in Delaware and all across the nation. We understood a new chapter had to be written, a new chapter in which we strengthen American manufacturing by investing in innovation. Thanks to a real commitment by this administration, loans from the Department of Energy, the creativity of U.S. companies and the tenacity of great state partners like Delaware — we're on our way to helping America's auto industry reclaim its top position in the global market." Since then, U.S. taxpayers have provided $529 million in federal loan guarantees. No vehicles were produced, but the staff was laid off last month. The company is going back to the Department of Energy for more federal help.

  • On Jan. 26, 2011, Biden worked his magic again. He visited the Ener1 plant in Greenfield, Ind., championing the company's plans to manufacture batteries for electric cars. Here's what he said: "Well, ladies and gentlemen, here at Ener1, we're going to harness electricity and bring it to the world like Edison did more than a century ago. We're going to reshape the way Americans drive, the way Americans consume, the way Americans power their lives. And, in turn, we're going to reshape America itself. We may not make battery power so cheap that only the rich can afford to drive their cars on imported oil, but — but — with Enron1 (sic) leading the way, we're certainly going to come pretty close." U.S. taxpayers were put on the hook for $118.5 million. No batteries were produced. In January, Ener1 filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

  • On March 11, March 2009, Biden visited St. Cloud, Minn., and the New Flyer bus company with the promise of more "stimulus" giveaways — designed to create jobs and clean energy. Here's what he said: "The goal is basic. Getting the vast majority of people feeling enough confidence to say to their children, 'Work hard, play by the rules, love your country and look out for others, and there's nothing you can't do. I'm absolutely positive we can restore that." The company did manage to produce some buses, but buyers for them were hard to find. Last year hundreds of jobs were cut as was production of the magic buses.

Do I need to go on? Can I take a shortcut here and list the following similar stimulus, "green energy" scandals?

  • Solyndra
  • A123
  • Beacon Power
  • Evergreen Solar
  • Mountain Plaza
  • Stirling Energy Systems
  • SolarWorld
  • SunPower
  • SpectraWatt

Some of the companies are still around. Some have actually produced something. But at least a dozen "green energy" stimulus projects have suffered layoffs, plant shutdowns or bankruptcies over the past two years.

Who pays? Taxpayers.

Who loses? Taxpayers and workers

Who benefits? The politically connected pseudo-entrepreneurs and Obama and other Democrats who benefited from the kickbacks to their campaigns.

Why aren't Republican presidential candidates talking about this monumental scandal every day?

Why aren't they making commercials of those appearances by Biden?

Why aren't they running against what amounts to a criminal conspiracy?

Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il Go to to see more of his graphic art at

To Go To Top

Posted by Victor Sharpe, March 7, 2012.

There are over twenty Arab states throughout the Middle East and North Africa, but the world demands, in a chorus of barely disguised animosity towards Israel, that yet another Arab state be created within the mere forty miles separating the Mediterranean Sea and the River Jordan.

Israel, a territory no larger than the tiny principality of Wales or the state of New Jersey, would be forced to share this sliver of land with a new and hostile Arab entity to be called Palestine, while seeing its present narrow waist reduced to a mere and suicidal nine miles in width — what an earlier Israeli statesman, Abba Eban, described as the Auschwitz borders.

Remember, there has never existed in all of recorded history an independent sovereign nation called Palestine — and certainly not an Arab one. The term "Palestine" has always been the name of a geographical territory, such as Siberia or Patagonia. It has never been a state.

But there is a people who, like the Jews, deserves a homeland and truly can trace their ancestry back thousands of years. They are the Kurds, and it is highly instructive to review their remarkable history in conjunction with that of the Jews. It is also necessary to review the historical injustice imposed upon them over the centuries by hostile neighbors and empires.

Let us go back to the captivity of the Ten Tribes of Israel, who were taken from their land by the Assyrians in 721-715 BC. Biblical Israel was depopulated, its Jewish inhabitants deported to an area in the region of ancient Media and Assyria — a territory roughly corresponding to that of modern-day Kurdistan.

Assyria was, in turn, conquered by Babylonia, which led to the eventual destruction of the southern Jewish kingdom of Judah in 586 BC. The remaining two Jewish tribes were sent to the same area as that of their brethren from the northern kingdom.

When the Persian conqueror of Babylonia, Cyrus the Great, allowed the Jews to return to their ancestral lands, many Jews remained (and continued to live) with their neighbors in Babylon — an area which, again, included modern-day Kurdistan.

The Babylonian Talmud refers in one section to the Jewish deportees from Judah receiving rabbinical permission to offer Judaism to the local population. The Kurdish royal house and a large segment of the general population in later years accepted the Jewish faith. Indeed, when the Jews rose up against Roman occupation in the 1st century AD, the Kurdish queen sent troops and provisions to support the embattled Jews.

By the beginning of the 2nd century AD, Judaism was firmly established in Kurdistan, and Kurdish Jews in Israel today speak an ancient form of Aramaic in their homes and synagogues. Kurdish and Jewish life became interwoven to such a remarkable degree that many Kurdish folk tales are connected with Jews'.

It is interesting to note that several tombs of biblical Jewish prophets are to be found in or near Kurdistan. For example, the prophet Nachum is in Alikush, while Jonah's tomb can be found in Nabi Yunis, which is ancient Nineveh. Daniel's tomb is in the oil-rich Kurdistan province of Kirkuk; Habbabuk is in Tuisirkan; and Queen Hadassah, or Esther, along with her uncle Mordechai, is in Hamadan.

After the failed revolt against Rome, many rabbis found refuge in what is now Kurdistan. The rabbis joined with their fellow scholars, and by the 3rd century AD, Jewish academies were flourishing. But the later Sassanid and Persian occupations of the region ushered in a time of persecution for the Jews and Kurds, which lasted until the Muslim Arab invasion in the 7th century. Indeed, the Jews and Kurds joined with the invading Arabs in the hope that their action would bring relief from the Sassanid depredations they had suffered.

Shortly after the Arab conquest, Jews from the autonomous Jewish state of Himyar in what is today's Saudi Arabia joined the Jews in the Kurdish regions. However, under the now-Muslim Arab occupation, matters worsened, and the Jews suffered as dhimmis in the Muslim-controlled territory. The Jews found themselves driven from their agricultural lands because of onerous taxation by their Muslim overlords. They thus left the land to become traders and craftsmen in the cities. Many of the Jewish peasants were converted to Islam by force or by dire circumstances and intermarried with their neighbors.

From out of this population arose a great historical figure. In 1138, a boy was born into a family of Kurdish warriors and adventurers. His name was Salah-al-Din Yusuf ibn Ayyub — better known in the West as Saladin. He drove the Christian crusaders out of Jerusalem even though he was distrusted by the Muslim Arabs because he was a Kurd. Even then, the Arabs were aware of the close relationship that existed between the Kurdish people and the Jews.

Saladin employed justice and humane measures in both war and peace. This was in contrast to the methods employed by the Arabs. Indeed, it is believed that Saladin not only was just to the Christians, but he allowed the Jews to flourish in Jerusalem and is credited with finding the Western Wall of the Jewish Temple, which had been buried under tons of rubbis during the Christian Byzantine occupation. The great Jewish rabbi, philosopher, and doctor Maimonides was for a time Saladin's personal physician.

According to a team of international scientists, a remarkable discovery was made in 2001. Doing DNA research, a team of Israeli, German, and Indian scientists found that many modern Jews have a closer genetic relationship to populations in the northern Mediterranean area (Kurds and Armenians) than to the Arabs and Bedouins of the southern Mediterranean region.

But let us return to the present day and to why the world clamors for a Palestinian Arab state but strangely turns its back upon Kurdish national independence and statehood. The universally accepted principle of self-determination seems not to apply to the Kurds.

In an article in the New York Sun on 6 July 2004 titled "The Kurdish Statehood Exception," Hillel Halkin exposed the discrimination and double standards employed against Kurdish aspirations of statehood. He wrote, "[T]he historic injustices done to them and their suffering over the years can be adequately redressed within the framework of a federal Iraq, in which they will have to make do — subject to the consent of a central, Arab-dominated government in Baghdad — with mere autonomy. Full Kurdish statehood is unthinkable. This, too, is considered to be self-evident."

The brutal fact in realpolitik, therefore, is that the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians have many friends in the oil-rich Arab world — oil the world desperately needs for its economies. The Kurds, like the Jews, have few friends, and the Kurds have little or no influence in the international corridors of power.

Mr. Halkin pointed out that "the Kurds have a far better case for statehood than do the Palestinians. They have their own unique language and culture, which the Palestinian Arabs do not have. They have had a sense of themselves as a distinct people for many centuries, which the Palestinian Arabs have not had. They have been betrayed repeatedly in the past 100 years by the international community and its promises, while the Palestinian Arabs have been betrayed only by their fellow Arabs."

The old nostrum, therefore, that only when the Palestinian Arabs finally have a state will there be peace in the world is a mirage in the desert. Fellow writer Gerald Honigman also writes on the world's preoccupation with the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians while ignoring the plight of the Kurds, Berbers, and millions of other non-Arab peoples of the Middle East and North Africa. Honigman's book was part of the LSS exhibit at the prestigious ASMEA Conference of scholars last November (and is now in at least a dozen major universities so far) and has several chapters focusing on the Kurdish issue. It's no accident that its foreword was written mostly by the President of the Kurdistan National Assembly of Syria.

During the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, the Kurds were gassed and slaughtered in large numbers. They suffered ethnic cleansing by the Turks and continue to be oppressed by the present Turkish government, whose foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, had the gall to suggest, at a meeting of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, that Turkey supports the oppressed of the world. He ignored his own government's oppression of the Kurds and predictably named the anti-Semitic thugdom in Gaza "oppressed." On the basis of pure realpolitik, the legality and morality of the Kurds' cause is infinitely stronger than that of the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians.

On the other hand, after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, the Kurds displayed great political and economic wisdom. How different from the example of the Gazan Arabs who, when foolishly given full control over the Gaza Strip by Israel, chose not to build hospitals and schools, but instead bunkers and missile launchers. To this they have added the imposition of sharia law, with its attendant denigration of women and non-Muslims.

The Kurdish experiment, in at least the territory's current quasi-independence, has shown the world a decent society where all its inhabitants, men and women, enjoy far greater freedoms than can be found anywhere else in the Arab and Muslim world — and certainly anywhere else in Iraq, which is fast descending into ethnic chaos now that the U.S. military has left.

Barack Obama, David Cameron, Angela Merkel, Nicolas Sarkozy, and all the leaders of the free world should look to Kurdistan, with its huge oil reserves, as the new state that needs to be created in the Middle East. It is simple and natural justice, which is far too long overdue. A Palestinian Arab state, on the other hand, will immediately become a haven for anti-Western terrorism, a base for al-Qaeda and Hamas (the junior partner of the Muslim Brotherhood), and a non-democratic land carved out of the Jewish ancestral and biblical lands of Judea and Samaria upon which the stultifying shroud of sharia law will inevitably descend. In short, it will be established with one purpose: to destroy what is left of embattled Israel.

Finally, it is also natural justice for the Jewish State — with its millennial association of shared history alongside the Kurdish people, who number over 30,000,000, scattered throughout northwestern Iran, northern Iraq, Syria and Turkey — to fight in the world's forums for the speedy establishment of an independent and proud Kurdistan. An enduring alliance between Israel and Kurdistan would be a vindication of history, a recognition of the shared sufferings of both peoples, and bring closer the advent of a brighter future for both non-Arab nations.

Mahmoud Abbas, Holocaust denier and present president of the Palestinian Authority, has never, and will never, abrogate publicly in English or in Arabic the articles in Fatah's constitution, which call for the "obliteration of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence" — or, in other words, the destruction of the Jewish State and the genocide of its citizens. So much for the man President Obama and the Europeans shower with money and praise.

It is the Kurds who unreservedly deserve a state. The invented Palestinian Arabs have forfeited that right by their relentless aggression, crimes, and genocidal intentions towards Israel and the Jews.

Victor Sharpe is a freelance writer and author of Volumes One & Two of Politicide: The attempted murder of the Jewish state. This article appeared yesterday in the American Thinker.

To Go To Top

Posted by Moshe Feiglin, March 7, 2012.

When Sharon introduced his "Disengagement" idea, it seemed like nothing more than a preposterous dream. Nobody understood what the State of Israel would gain from perpetrating this horrible crime against thousands of Israeli citizens. Nobody deceived themselves into thinking that this folly would bring peace; the Arabs of Gaza left no room for doubt. So how did Sharon manage to get his immoral and illogical decision into Israel's mainstream?

On the seventh day, when the heart of the king was merry with wine, he commanded Mehuman, Bizzetha, Harbona, Bigtha, and Abagtha, Zethar, and Carcas, the seven chamberlains that ministered in the presence of Ahashverosh the king to bring Vashti the queen before the king with the crown royal, to show the peoples and the princes her beauty; for she was fair to look on. (The Scroll of Esther 1:10-11)

After six straight months of drunken feasts, the foolish king had nothing to boast about — except for his wife's beauty. He commands her to appear before all the merrymakers to show the entire nation her beauty, attired in her crown — and nothing else.

Is there a royal decree more foolish than this? True, nobody will be expelled from his home, nobody's life will be shattered and barring Vashti's pride, nothing will be destroyed. Nevertheless, this was a classic case of a patently illegal order, complete with a black flag flying overhead.

But the queen Vashti refused to come at the king's commandment by the chamberlains; therefore was the king very wroth, and his anger burned in him. (The Scroll of Esther 1:12)

Vashti refuses to obey the immoral order. We would expect that with no further ado, the king would command to behead her. That is how he handled the murder conspiracy of Bigtan and Teresh and that is what Queen Esther feared would happen to her when she dared come before the king without being summoned. But Ahashverosh understood that he had painted himself into an immoral corner. He realized that his decree would not stand the test of reason and that he was essentially endangering the legitimacy of his leadership and reign on power.

What is the last resort of a criminal and foolish tyrant? How does he restore his legitimacy?

Then the king said to the wise men, who knew the times — for so was the king's manner toward all that knew law and judgment; 'What shall we do unto the queen Vashti according to law, for she has not done the bidding of the king Ahashverosh by the chamberlains?' (Esther 1:13,15)

Suddenly, Ahashverosh remembers the "rule of law." He consults with his legal advisors and defers to the High Court. The Midrash relates that at first, Ahashverosh turned to the Jewish wise men. But they quickly understood that he was not looking for justice, but rather for legitimacy for his immoral decree and for his very leadership. The Jewish wise men evaded his overtures. The Persian High Court, though, was happy to take on the case and found the penultimate creative legal solution to the royal predicament. It did not deal with the question of who was right. It dealt with only one issue — the perpetuation of the existing establishment. And so they wrote in their legal decision:

'Vashti the queen has not done wrong to the king only, but also to all the princes, and to all the peoples, who are in all the provinces of the king Ahashverosh. For this deed of the queen will come abroad unto all women, to make their husbands contemptible in their eyes, when it will be said: The king Ahashverosh commanded Vashti the queen to be brought in before him, but she came not. (Esther 1:16-17)

In other words, it makes no difference at all if the directive was logical, moral or even legal. Vashti, or Gush Katif or Migron, are not part of the equation. All that matters is the perpetuation of Ahashverosh's power. If the queen will not appear before the nation attired in nothing more than her royal crown, the subservience of all the women in the entire kingdom will vanish and the empire will crumble. That makes sense, doesn't it?

It is not the dubious honor of the king that is in question here. It is not even the need to be the darling of the media that lies behind the irrational decree to destroy settlements. It is simply a matter of responsibility toward the perpetuation of the leadership. For if we do not carry out our orders and drive women and children from their homes today, tomorrow nobody will carry out their orders and the state will be destroyed.

In fact, Ahashverosh's kingdom was indeed destroyed in a relatively short amount of time. But it wasn't because of Vashti's refusal to obey orders. On the contrary, it was because the state had lined up with the immoral conduct of its leader.

May this Purim initiate a new era in Israel's High Court; an era in which the "rule of law" is replaced by true connection between the High Court justices and the nation that they serve.

Happy Purim and Shabbat Shalom,

Moshe Feiglin

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Daily Alert, March 7, 2012.

This is a summary of YNET News


  • Netanyahu suggests three preconditions for Iran before the West enters talks with the Iranians:
    • One is immediate suspension of uranium enrichment in Iran's territory.

    • The second is the transfer of some 5,600 kg. (roughly 12,500 pounds) of low-grade enriched uranium out of Iran's territory.

    • The third is a halt to the installation of centrifuges and the dismantlement of existing ones at the Fordo facility, located deep underground near Qom. Running this site at full capacity of 3,000 centrifuges is considered by Israel as a situation where it would be unable to effectively hinder Iran's nuclear program via an aerial strike.

  • The Americans claimed that this triple demand is impractical, and that the Iranians must not be presented with the desired ultimate result of the talks as a precondition for starting negotiations.

  • Another issue raised in the meeting was the American reaction in case talks with the Iranians fail. In such a case, the Americans would impose another set of paralyzing sanctions they would try to pass at the Security Council.

  • The most difficult issue to resolve is what is America's "red line" — the point where Israel and the U.S. would agree that Iran's progress requires an Israeli or American military strike or a combination of the two. President Obama told AIPAC that the U.S. won't tolerate a situation where Iran possesses nuclear weapons. However, Israel says defining the "red line" this way would in fact enable the Iranians to become a nuclear power. While Tehran won't possess a nuclear warhead or atomic bomb, it would be able to produce a nuclear device at any given moment.

  • As opposed to uranium enrichment, the development of the actual weapon can be hidden relatively easily, and hence the Americans would not even know about it.

  • Hence, Israel demands that the American "red line" would be defined as "nuclear capability," that is, Iran's shift to producing 90% enriched uranium, or a large quantity of 20% enriched uranium. Netanyahu also made it clear to Obama that Israel's red line is a situation whereby the new, underground enrichment facility at Fordo will approach full capacity.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Aryeh Zelesko, March 6, 2012.

This is an ancient Greek graffito from Beth She'arim. Credit: American Friends of Tel Aviv University

History is often shaped by the stories of kings and religious and military leaders, and much of what we know about the past derives from official sources like military records and governmental decrees. Now an international project is gaining invaluable insights into the history of ancient Israel through the collection and analysis of inscriptions ­ pieces of common writing that include anything from a single word to a love poem, epitaph, declaration, or question about faith, and everything in between that does not appear in a book or on a coin.

Such writing on the walls ­ or column, stone, tomb, floor, or mosaic ­ is essential to a scholar's toolbox, explains Prof. Jonathan Price of Tel Aviv University's Department of Classics. Along with his colleague Prof. Benjamin Isaac, Prof. Hannah Cotton of Hebrew University and Prof. Werner Eck of the University of Cologne, he is a contributing editor to a series of volumes that presents the written remains of the lives of common individuals in Israel, as well as adding important information about provincial administration and religious institutions, during the period between Alexander the Great and the rise of Islam (the fourth century B.C.E. to the seventh century C.E.).

These are the tweets of antiquity.

There has never been such a large-scale effort to recover inscriptions in a multi-lingual publication. Previous collections have been limited to the viewpoints of single cultures, topics, or languages. This innovative series seeks to uncover the whole story of a given site by incorporating inscriptions of every subject, length, and language, publishing them side by side. In antiquity, the part of the world that is now modern Israel was intensely multilingual, multicultural, and highly literate, says Prof. Price, who has presented the project at several conferences, and will present it again this fall in San Francisco and Philadelphia. When the volumes are complete, they will include an analysis of about 12,000 inscriptions in more than ten languages.

History's "scrap paper"

The project represents countless hours spent in museum storerooms, church basements, caves and archaeological sites, says Prof. Price, who notes that all the researchers involved have been dedicated to analyzing inscriptions straight from the physical objects on which they are written whenever possible, instead of drawings, photos or reproductions. The team has already discovered a great amount of material that has never been published before.

Each text is analyzed, translated, and published with commentary by top scholars. Researchers work to overcome the challenges of incomplete inscriptions, often eroded from their "canvas" with time, and sometimes poor use of grammar and spelling, which represent different levels in education and reading and writing capabilities ­ or simply the informal nature of the text. Scholars thousands of years in the future might face similar difficulties when trying to decipher the language of our own text messages or emails.

Most of these inscriptions, especially the thousands of epitaphs, are written by average people, their names not recorded in any other source. This makes them indispensable for social, cultural, and religious history, suggests Prof. Price. "They give us information about what people believed, the languages they spoke, relationships between families, their occupations ­ daily life," he says. "We don't have this from any other source."

The first volume, edited by Prof. Price, Prof. Isaac, and others and focusing on Jerusalem up to and through the first century C.E., has already been published. New volumes will be published regularly until the project comes to a close in 2017, resulting in approximately nine volumes.

"I was here"

Graffiti, which comprise a significant amount of the collected inscriptions, are a common phenomenon throughout the ancient world. Famously, the walls of the city of Pompeii were covered with graffiti, including advertisements, poetry, and lewd sketches. In ancient Israel, people also left behind small traces of their lives ­ although discussion of belief systems, personal appeals to God, and hopes for the future are more prevalent than the sexual innuendo that adorns the walls of Pompeii.

"These are the only remains of real people. Thousands whose voices have disappeared into the oblivion of history," notes Prof. Price. These writings are, and have always been, a way for people to perpetuate their memory and mark their existence.

Of course, our world has its graffiti too. It's not hard to find, from subway doors and bathroom stalls to protected archaeological sites. Although it may be considered bothersome and disrespectful now, "in two thousand years, it'll be interesting to scholars," Prof. Price says with a smile.

Provided by Tel Aviv University

"Ancient 'graffiti' unlock the life of the common man." March 6th, 2012.
http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-03-ancient- graffiti-life-common.html

Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel.

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, March 6, 2012.

Prime Minister Netanyahu truly got it right — and eloquently so — when he spoke at the AIPAC Conference last night. For this I thank Heaven.

Benjamin Netanyahu at March 2012 AIPAC convention (Credit: Politico)

So much talk, so much worry, about the possibility of his caving to Obama's pressure. For naught. Actually, in the statement he made after he met with Obama earlier in the day, it was already apparent where he was going.

Below you will find a link that provides the text of his speech and a video of the entire speech (with appreciation to ElderofZion for putting it up).

He touched all of the right bases: He stated unequivocally that we have a right to act in our own self-defense, and that we will not depend on any other nation. (This addresses the position taken by Obama in his AIPAC talk a day earlier, which I will get to.)

"In every generation, there are those who wish to destroy the Jewish people. We are blessed to live in an age when there is a Jewish state capable of defending the Jewish people...

"As Prime Minister of Israel, I will never let my people live under the shadow of annihilation.

"...Today we have a state of our own. The purpose of the Jewish state is to secure the Jewish future. That is why Israel must always have the ability to defend itself, by itself, against any threat. (Emphasis added)

"We deeply appreciate the great alliance between our two countries. But when it comes to Israel's survival, we must always remain the masters of our fate." (Emphasis added)


And he did it in a politically adept way, not crossing swords with Obama or saying that his position was inadequate. Rather, he stated that the US and Israel had the same goal: to keep Iran from going nuclear.

His "thank you, but no thank you" was sufficient to deliver the message. No point in directly taking on Obama in a very public forum. The president has to be angry enough about Netanyahu's unwillingness to relinquish the right to unilateral action. And he will be more angry still if it should come to pass that we bomb Iran before the election.

In addition to which, Congress is quite solidly with us.


The prime minister was certainly forthright as he touched on a number of important bases in making the case (which is what this speech really was) for Israel to bomb Iran, and soon. He spoke about:

— The failure of the world to adequately confront the reality. "Ladies and Gentlemen, If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then what is it? That's right, it's a duck, but this duck is a nuclear duck. And it's time the world started calling a duck a duck."

— The inadequacy of international efforts, which have not slowed Iran's nuclear development.

— The dangers a nuclear Iran would present to America, as well as to Israel: "So you see, when that Iranian ICBM is flying through the air to a location near you [meaning in America], you've got nothing to worry about. It's only carrying medical isotopes [which is the pretense Iran offers]."

— The foolishness of imagining that a nuclear Iran might be contained.

— The nonsense of suggesting that the repercussions of stopping Iran would be worse than living with a nuclear Iran:

"A nuclear-armed Iran would dramatically increase terrorism by giving terrorists a nuclear umbrella. That means that Iran's terror proxies like Hezbollah, Hamas will be emboldened to attack America, Israel, and others because they will be backed by a power with atomic weapons.

"A nuclear-armed Iran could choke off the world's oil supply and make real its threat to close the Straits of Hormouz. If you're worried about the price of oil today, imagine how high oil prices will be when a nuclear-armed Iran starts blackmailing the world.

"If Iran gets nuclear weapons, this would set off a mad dash by Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt and others to acquire nuclear weapons of their own. The world's most volatile region would become a nuclear tinderbox waiting to go off."

"And the worst nightmare of all, Iran could threaten all of us with nuclear terrorism. It could put a nuclear device in a ship heading to any port or in a truck parked in any city."
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2012/ 03/netanyahus-speech-at-aipac.html


I love it! Whose idea was this?

Netanyahu presented to Obama the gift of a Scroll of Esther. This is the Megillah — it tells the story of the plot of Haman, in Persia, in the Fifth Century BCE, to destroy the Jewish people, and the way in which Esther foiled the plot, enabling the people to rise up and destroy their enemies: "And the Jews smote all their enemies with the stroke of the sword, and with slaughter and destruction."

Persia is the modern day Iran. The scroll will be read tomorrow night and Thursday morning in synagogue (and one day later in walled cities such as Jerusalem, where Shushan Purim is celebrated). Here you see an ancient illuminated scroll (beautiful, but clearly far more lavish then Obama's gift scroll):

Persian Megillah Scroll (Credit: ModiyaNYU)


If you are inclined, please take the time to write to Prime Minister Netanyahu, simply to express appreciation for his position at AIPAC. No long speeches, a simple "thank you" will communicate what must be said.

Fax: 02-670-5369 (From the US: 011-972-2-670-5369)

E-mail: Memshala@pmo.gov.il and also pm_eng2@it.pmo.gov.il (underscore after pm). Use both addresses


The official Israeli position is that a decision has not been made yet about bombing Iran. Netanyahu, quite properly, says he will never talk about this.

What has been presented is the case for Israel to do so, should it finally be decided that this is the wisest road to take. What has been defended is the unequivocal right of Israel to do so.

But — unless lightning strikes all of the mullahs soon, or they have an epiphany and turn pacifist — it's difficult to imagine a situation in which this will not be necessary at some point not far away.


What I'd like to do here is backtrack by one day, and look at Obama's speech to AIPAC, which you can find in its entirety here:
http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAnd Politics/Article.aspx?id=260434 .

While his words touch some of the right bases ("Four years ago, I stood before you and said that, 'Israel's security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable.' That belief has guided my actions as President..."), there is a great deal of grandstanding going on, and a huge gap between those words and his administration's record. There is also a lot of daylight between his pronouncements ("I will take no options off the table...I do not have a policy of containment...") and actual executable policy.

And in some places his logic is skewed-by design, I believe. He said, for example, that, "Already, there is too much loose talk of war. Over the last few weeks, such talk has only benefited the Iranian government, by driving up the price of oil, which they depend on to fund their nuclear program." But he has left something out: Driving up the price of oil also affects the US economy, which affects his chances of re-election. Only a dedicated Obama devotee would fail to connect the dots here.


Of all the commentary on Obama's speech, I found none more incisive and bone chilling — although much less so now that Netanyahu has spoken — than what Caroline Glick wrote, in "Obama makes the case for an Israeli strike on Iran."

Please read this with careful attention because it spells out issues of enormous import with great clarity (all emphasis added):

"Obama's speech was notable for a number of reasons. First, this was the first speech on an Israel-related theme that Obama has given since the 2008 campaign in which he did not pick a fight with Israel. And it is due to the absence of open hostility in his address that Obama's supporters are touting it as a pro-Israel speech.

"While he didn't pick a fight with Israel on Sunday, his speech did mark a clear attempt to undermine Israel's strategic position in a fundamental — indeed existential — way. As many commentators have noted in recent weeks, Israel and the US have different red lines for the Iranian nuclear program. These divergent red lines owe to the fact that the US has more options for attacking Iran's nuclear installations than Israel.

"From Israel's perspective, Iran's nuclear program will reportedly become unstoppable as soon as the Iranians move a sufficient quantity of enriched uranium and/or centrifuges to the Fordow nuclear installation by Qom. Since Israel reportedly lacks the ability to destroy the facility, Israel's timeline for attacking Iran will likely end within weeks. The US reportedly has the capacity to successfully bomb Fordow and so its timeline for attacking Iran is longer than Israel's.

"The reason this is important is because it tells us the true nature of Obama's demand that Israel give more time for sanctions and diplomacy to work. When one recognizes Israel's short timeline for attacking, one realizes that when Obama demands that Israel give several more months for sanctions to work, what he is actually demanding is for Israel to place its survival in his hands. Again, once Iran's nuclear project is immune from an Israeli strike Obama will effectively hold the key to Israel's survival. Israel will be completely at his mercy.

"To understand just how dangerous this would be it is worth considering the other issues Obama covered in his speech. Obama's speech essentially boiled down to three assertions, which he argued prove that he is the best friend Israel has ever had and therefore can be trusted to ensure its survival..."

Glick then dissects Obama's arguments regarding his friendship with Israel and Israel's ability to trust him. Obama stands on very shaky ground indeed with regard to his assertions. Consider:

"...while Obama touts the new anti-Iran sanctions that have been imposed since he took office as proof that he can be trusted to take action against Iran, the fact is that Obama has been forced to implement sanctions against his will by the US Congress and Europe. So too, Obama still refuses to implement the sanctions against Iran's Central Bank that Congress passed against his strong objections earlier in the year."

Concludes Glick:

"The fact is that Obama's actions and his words have made clear that Israel cannot trust him, not on Iran and not on anything. The only thing that has been consistent about his Israel policy has been its hostility. As a consequence, the only messages emanating from his administration we can trust are those telling us that if Obama is reelected, he will no longer feel constrained to hide his hatred for Israel."
http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2012/03/ obama-makes-the-case-of-an-isr.php


Other commentators I would recommend include Lenny Ben David, who writes in Times of Israel:

"The climax of President Obama's [speech] was a promise to 'prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.' In fact, 10 times in his speech the President referred to preventing the ominous 'nuclear weapon.'

"As a former speechwriter for American and Israeli political leaders, I found the constant repetition of the phrase 'nuclear weapon' to be both calming and curious. The president elaborated on the threat of a weapon — to Israel, the Middle East, US interests and world peace.

"But a speechwriter tries to give some variety to his words, and Obama's writers stuck with the phrase 'nuclear weapons' throughout the address, receiving tumultuous applause and the kudos of Israel's media analysts...

"Was it just a rhetorical tool to repeat the phrase? Or was it a policy decision to limit American reaction only to the final act of a 'obtaining a nuclear weapon?' That happens when the model is finally rolled out, put on the display floor, and the Iranian National Guard figuratively kicks the tires and is handed the key.

"But there are many — too many — Iranian actions leading up to the final assembly and the 'obtaining' of the Iranian nuclear weapon: the building of long-range missiles and launchers, the development of precision guidance systems, the acquisition of the right alloys for the missiles, the preparing of computer programs to test the timing devices on the warheads,...(etc.etc.)"

"...Perhaps that's why President Obama didn't add other phrases to describe the Iranian threat. He never voiced opposition to a 'nuclear Iran,' or to 'Iran's nuclear capability,' or to 'Iran's uranium enrichment program.'"

Another reason not to put Israel's fate in Obama's hands.
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/obamas-passover- seder-at-aipac-does-the-policy-contain-bitter-herbs/


Then there is Dan Senor writing in the Wall Street Journal about "Why Israel Has Doubts About Obama". Senor provides potent reasons, based on the behavior of the Obama administration, not to trust him. Citing a few:

"October 2011: Speaking to reporters traveling with him to Israel, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta raised provocative questions about Israel. 'Is it enough to maintain a military edge if you're isolating yourself in the diplomatic arena?'

"This characterization of self-created isolation surprised Israeli officials. After all, for almost three years President Obama had pressured Israel to make unilateral concessions in the peace process. And his administration had publicly confronted Israel's leaders, making unprecedented demands for a complete settlement freeze — which Israel met in 2010.

"The president's stern lectures to Israel's leaders were delivered repeatedly and very publicly at the United Nations, in Egypt and Turkey, all while he did not make a single visit to Israel to express solidarity. Thus, having helped foment an image of Israeli obstinacy, the Obama administration was now using this image of isolation against Israel's government...

"[November 2011] an open microphone caught part of a private conversation between Mr. Obama and French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Mr. Sarkozy said of Israel's premier, 'I can't stand Netanyahu. He's a liar.' Rather than defend Israel's back [which is what Obama now says he will do!], Mr. Obama piled on: 'You're tired of him; what about me? I have to deal with him every day.'

"...January 2012: In an interview, Mr. Obama referred to Prime Minister Erdogan as one of the five world leaders with whom he has developed 'bonds of trust.' According to Mr. Obama, these bonds have 'allowed us to execute effective diplomacy.' The Turkish government had earlier sanctioned a six-ship flotilla to penetrate Israel's naval blockade of Hamas-controlled Gaza. Mr. Erdogan had said that Israel's defensive response was 'cause for war.'

"February 2012: At a conference in Tunis, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was asked about Mr. Obama pandering to 'Zionist lobbies.' She acknowledged that it was 'a fair question' and went on to explain that during an election season 'there are comments made that certainly don't reflect our foreign policy.'"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240529 70203986604577257191372525750.html? mod=googlenews_wsj


It is not at all certain that I will post tomorrow, which is the Fast of Esther. Tomorrow night begins Purim: a time of joy and mandated silly celebration. It is unlikely that I will come back to post again until after Shabbat.

And so now I want to wish one and all a Chag Purim Sameach! A Joyous Purim.

You see here a gragger, a noise maker for drowning out the sound of the name of Haman. And hamantashen, a Purim pastry.

Here you have the classic Purim song, Chag Purim:
http://www.chabad.org/multimedia/media_cdo/ aid/652522/jewish/Chag-Purim.htm

May the story of Purim inspire us to hope, and to proper action. May the Almighty watch over us, now as then.

Please, pray for Israel during these times.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Robert Hand, March 6, 2012.

This was written by Wesley Pruden and it is archived at
www.washingtontimes.com/news/pruden-on-politics/ ?page=2. Pruden retired as Managing Editor of the Washington Times in 2008; he continues to write a column twice weekly.


Words, words, words. Stonewall Jackson famously told soldiers to "make short speeches, and when you draw the sword throw away the scabbard."

Barack Obama is obsessed with words. He never learned to make a short speech, and he's certainly no Stonewall Jackson. The Israelis understand that, however well-meaning he may be. The president may even believe most of the stuff he hears himself say.

Mr. Obama made another pretty speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, on Sunday and thrilled only those who gorge on the romance of rhetoric. Mr. Obama and his teleprompter put on a show of bluffery that was surely the envy of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. "Iran's leaders should know," the president said, "that I do not have a policy of containment. I have a policy to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. And as I've made clear time and again during the course of my presidency, I will not hesitate to use force when it is necessary to defend the United States and its interests."

Almost any Iranian truck driver could guide a Mack truck through the loopholes with no fear of scratching the paint. The president won't hesitate when it's "necessary" to defend the United States and its "interests." The president, of course, will decide when it's "necessary," and he gets to determine what those "interests" may be. It may be "necessary" to soothe the Islamic world by doing nothing beyond making still another speech. The "interests" of the United States, as Mr. Obama might define them, could only be defended by another bow from the presidential waist.

Binyamin Netanyahu, the visiting Israeli prime minister who is accustomed to tense visits to friends in Washington, reminded Mr. Obama the next day that despite the president's scolding about "loose talk of war" his own responsibility to his country is "to ensure that Israel remains the master of its fate." He could have reminded the president of the reply of Charles Cotesworth Pinckney to French demands for tribute and other bribes for "offensive" remarks by President John Adams to Tallyrand: "Millions for defense, sir, but not one cent for tribute." Such plain speech has gone out of style in Washington, when and where it is needed most. But not in Jerusalem, where the prospect of hanging naturally focuses the mind, as Dr. Johnson said it does.

Mr. Obama, with his high regard for his reputation as a man with singular gifts of pretty speech, no doubt imagines he has discharged his obligations to an ally with words (and a few notes of music). If he were a true student of the Muslim mind, instead of being merely an admirer of the cultural gifts of Islam (such as they are), he would understand that the hard men in Tehran hear his rhetoric not as kindly sentiment but as evidence of weakness and flaccid impotence. That's why they so eagerly get on with the pursuit of the weapons needed to "wipe Israel off the map." The Islamic despots understand a thing or two about empty rhetoric.

Nobody wants war, which is always bad for all living things. The Israelis understand that a nuclear weapon in evil hands will be bad for Israel most of all. "I have said that when it comes to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon," Mr. Obama told AIPAC, "I will take no options off the table, and I mean what I say." This echoes his declaration earlier to an interviewer that he doesn't bluff. Alas, a man who doesn't bluff never has to say so; if he makes such a boast it's usually a giveaway that he's bluffing. When Richard Nixon declared that he was not a crook everyone took that as confirmation that he was. Some things are most obvious when unspoken.

Through word and lack of deed, Mr. Obama leaves the inevitable impression that he regards the standoff between Iran and Israel in terms of moral equivalence, not as the harsh reality that it's Iran's boast that it is building the weapons to destroy the Jewish state that is the source of fear and loathing in the Middle East. It's Mr. Obama's insistence that he prefers diplomacy that reassures the mullahs in Tehran, that he is counting on his eloquent bluster, boasting and bombast that will make the Iranians and their like-minded friends repent and behave themselves.

The president's romantic rhetoric only persuades them that he wears an empty scabbard.

Contact Robert Hand at borntolose3@att.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Alexander Maistrovoy, March 6, 2012.

The Arabic Caliphate is not a figment anymore: fragments of the Middle Eastern regimes will soon form a group of islands called The Muslim Archipelago


"A specter is haunting Europe — the specter of Communism." These were the first words of Karl Marx's "The Communist Manifesto". More than a century later a different specter has appeared on the threshold of the Old World — the Specter of Caliphate.

A year ago Muhammad Badie — the General Guide of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood — stated: "improvement and change that the Muslim nation seeks can only be attained through jihad and sacrifice and by raising a jihadi generation that pursues death, just as the enemies pursue life".

According to Badie, the ultimate purpose of Arabs is to restore the true face of the Muslim world, which is the State of the Caliphate with Sharia Laws — the sacred and the highest form of human civilization.

A veteran member of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood Sheikh Ahmad Gad called "honorable Al-Azhar to rally the Islamic streams in order to unite the Muslim word and effort, restore the Caliphate... O Allah, guide us, open our hearts to faith, and restore this nation to its previous self — one united nation worshiping You and You alone".

Dr. Kamal Al-Helbawy, former Muslim Brotherhood spokesman in the West named this future Caliphate — "the United States of Islam". He implied that Arabs want to erase borders that were drawn up by imperialist nations and build global Islamic State.

This is how another Egyptian Islamic Scholar Ibrahim Al-Khouli has formulated the concept of the Muslim Brotherhood: "Forget about Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. That's not what I'm talking about. I am talking about Jihad which is led by the Islamic scholars ... I am talking about the Jihad of the entire nation. We must conduct jihad against the West, who are aggressors against the Land of Islam."

One can talk about the democratization of the Arab world, the "Arab Spring", and liberalization of the Arab society. However, this observation is only external — from another Time and another World — from the West of the XXI century. An internal perspective is completely different. It's derived from depths of centuries, and it is reflected in the lexis of Badie and Gad, Al-Helbawy and Al-Khouli, Sheikh Yousef Qaradawi ("Constantinople was conquered in 1453 by a 23-year-old Ottoman named Muhammad ibn Murad, whom we call Muhammad the Conqueror. Now what remains is to conquer Rome ") and Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Muhammad Ahmad Hussein who said: "The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until you fight the Jews. ... Our war with the descendants of the apes and pigs (i.e.,Jews) is a war of religion and faith".

Lastly, Qatari Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani declared that no efforts will be spared to spread Wahhabi Islam across the world, encouraging Jihad while investing €50 million in restoring Sharia in the French suburbs where hundreds of thousands of Muslim immigrants reside.

Al-Thani is considered a moderate pro-western ruler. A year ago this type of discourse would have been considered unthinkable. Nowadays these words are not only uttered, but are also validated by donations and financial support. Why one may ask? It is because al-Thani wants to be on the "right side of history". The time has come. All the obstacles, such as corrupt authoritarian regimes, towards the cherished dream have been scattered like sand dunes with the draft of khamsin.

Just like the Jews are coveting to return to Jerusalem ; the Christians are longing for the Second Coming of Christ and the kingdom of universal justice so the Arabs are yearning to restore Caliphate for centuries. Caliphate — a theocratic state — was the first and only authentic state in the Arab history, the embodiment of the Divine will.

Sharia Laws determine the internal structure of this state, Jihad — its foreign policy. Recently only starry-eyed professors, charmed by the Sufi spiritual practices, have been talking about Jihad as a self-improvement. Jihad, however is not a spiritual improvement, it is the fulfillment of the Divine will, and whatever is not a part of the "The House of Islam" (Dar al-Islam) is actually the "The House of War" (Dar al-Harb).

There hasn't been any dispute about the supremacy of Sharia Laws and the divine destiny of the Caliphate. Dividing Islam into "moderate" and "radical" one is the flight of imagination of Western intellectuals who confuse, primarily, themselves. Islam (like two other Abrahamic religions) is a fundamentalist one, i.e., literally interprets holy scripture.

Only in the XVII-XVIII centuries in Christianity (and later, influenced by the Enlightenment, in Judaism too) more liberal directions, treating the Bible in allegorical terms, have appeared. In general, the orthodoxy does not accept any abstraction. It is based on the concrete prophetic word. Creator is anthropomorphic in all three religions; He is not an impersonal substance of Deists and harmonious deity of Neo-Platonists. He establishes the laws and obliges obeying them. Sacred texts about the triumph of Islam "by the means of Jihad" are not a good will, they are a call to action.

Muslim theologians' standpoint has its own logic. Why would the Arabs adopt social systems alien to them and imposed on them less than a century ago — whether it is democracy, market economy or socialism? Moreover, they are familiar with the consequences of political experimentation in the recent past. Liberal democracy? What is the practical meaning of it? The absence of Divine Basis, Shape, Content? Desecration of God and His order? Refusal of values as the supreme value? Rejecting roots as a sacred principle? Desperate loneliness: "We are left alone, without excuse"?[**]. The triumph of "the substantial emptiness"?[***] Sexual laxity and perversions as an example to follow?

In order to understand someone you need to see the world through one's eyes. The liberal freedoms are a blessing for the West and a mockery of the will of the Creator for Muslims. The Islamists' victory in last elections in Egypt wasn't the result of brainwashing, but of a deep inner conviction.

The Arab world is ready for the State of Caliphate. It will resemble the theocracy in Saudi Arabia and Iran : the rough laws of "dhimmi" for the non-Muslims (who will survive the slaughter), the submission of women, stoning for adultery, prohibition of usury and homosexuality.

Creating a Caliphate will, obviously, take time. Primarily, it's necessary to neutralize the resistance of the military junta in Egypt, to eliminate the anarchy in Libya , to sweep away the regime in Syria, to crush the Hashemite monarchy and overthrow the rotten Palestinian leadership, suppress ethnic riots and stop the advancement of the Shiites in Iraq and Lebanon. Secondly, it is essential to affirm the principles of Sharia Laws in the minds of people, since these still exist in the collective consciousness as vague ideas. Finally, only then the scattered islands will be united into a single religious and cultural realm with the main goal — the beginning of Jihad.

Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis are not in a hurry. Sheikh Ahmad Gad said "There is no hope for reform without a return to divine rule, which the Creator chose for man...There is no other way but gradual action, preparing the souls and setting an example, so that faith will enter their hearts...".

Unlike the European people, the Arabs can wait, but they also know how to mobilize their forces. "Be patient if you are an anvil. Be swift if you are a hammer" — says Arabic wisdom. It took Prophet Muhammad two decades to create Islamic Caliphate in the Arabian Peninsula, and it took his followers less than a decade to conquer Persia, Egypt, and to corner the mighty Byzantine Empire .

"There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come" — Victor Hugo wrote.

If you want liberal democracy for Arabs, you will get State of the Caliphate in your own house. "A specter is haunting the Middle East ... the specter of Caliphate"...


[**] — Jean-Paul Sartre
[***] — Ulrich Beck  

Alex Maistrovoy is an Israeli journalist. Contact him by email at alfeldm55@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 5, 2012.


Muslim attempts to turn some Islamic law into American law have been countered by legislation to ban foreign law in America. Muslims have falsely denied their goal of imposing their law. They pretend that when American patriots seek to protect themselves from becoming victims of Islamic law, they make Muslims victims of American law.

Nor are Islamists consistent. "CAIR — PA announced that its 2012 banquet will be headlined by two men who have expressed support for transforming the U.S. into a Shari'a-run state: Siraj Wahhaj and Sherman Jackson." "Cinnamon Stillwell explains that in a book Jackson coauthored, he 'proposes that American Muslims approach the 'difficult task of penetrating, appropriating and redirecting American culture' ... to 'influence the legal order in America.' He writes that 'once this is done, there are no Constitutional impediments to having these [Islamic] laws applied in the public domain.' Jackson even muses about how gradual 'changes in American culture' could result in the normalization of barbaric punishments such as stoning and flogging."

Our source suspects that Islamists feel they can deny what they do, because the major media will not expose their self-contradiction.

Consider Pennsylvania House Bill 2029. It forbids courts from utilizing a foreign code that denies some of the liberties in American constitutions. Like other such bills, it does not mention Islamic law.

Islamic law does conflict with American legal principles. For example, it deems women inferior in inheritance, divorce, child custody, etc.. Concern over this is not idle — Islamic law has been applied in Pennsylvania, as in distribution of assets, and in other states.

Opposing the bill is the Philadelphia office of Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR is linked to Hamas.

Islamic law covers all aspects of life. Islamists cite non-threatening aspects to assuage concern, but ignore the threatening parts. CAIR suggests Islamic law is no more threatening than Halal meat. Deceptive propaganda.

In a newspaper interview, a University of Pittsburgh law professor claimed that women and children would suffer if judges could not consider Islamic law. As stated earlier, Islam discriminates against women.

He even called Islamic law superior. He cited its requirement that to convict someone of adultery, four male witnesses must testify. Actually, in Islamic country, it also applies to rape. When the woman can't find such witnesses, Islamic courts often convict her of adultery. [She becomes victim twice over. In the U.S., adultery is not a crime.]

The law professor blames harsh penalties such as amputation on resistance to Western cultural "imperialism." As if that brutality prescribed in the Koran, did not precede conflict with the West!

Another tactic is to blame the bill on a conspiracy against Islam, for which no proof or evidence was shown. A rabbi likened the bill to Nazi defamation of Jewish law. But the bill does not mention Islamic law and a memo describes Islamic law as "inherently hostile to our constitutional liberties," as we have shown it to be. Hence, no defamation by the bill (only against the bill).

What should Americans do about this? Learn more about Islamic law and its challenges. Politicians should distinguish between Islamic practices that the U.S. Constitution protects and those that it does not. That would keep Islamists from making certain false claims about the issues. Shame those who equate defense of our freedom with Nazism. Encourage passage of the bills and disregard of multicultural extremists. Publicize the falsity of Islamist denials that they want to impose their law on America. Expose the dishonest jihadist tactics and bigoted jihadist objectives (David J. Rusin, FrontPage Magazine, 2/13/12)
http://www.islamist-watch.org/9192/ cair-fight-against-pennsylvania-foreign-law-bill).

The article did not indicate that Muslims objecting to the bill adduced any evidence that they are victims of American law. The flogging that Muslims propose would make victims.

The various dishonest tactics of Muslim opponents of the bill does not speak well of the Muslim case. Their falsity is similar to their claims in the Arab-Israel conflict. Americans had better catch on to the mendacity of jihadists. Although Americans voice suspicion of politicians, they do not realize what suckers they are about non-politician propagandists.


You've heard that victors write history prejudiced. In the same way, that powerful institution, the New York Times frames issues of ideological interest to it favorably to it. Consider the issue of an Arab Supreme Court Justice in Israel who refused to sing the national anthem.

The article quoted people's opinions pro and con. Some Israelis felt insulted and considered his silence disloyal. Hence an MK proposed a bill limiting Supreme Court membership to veterans, of whom few are Arabs.

Others understood that he could not express Jewish hopes that the anthem espouses. Of those, some were satisfied with the respect he showed by standing. The rest seized upon this incident to suggest that the anthem be neutralized. They want the Jewish state to have an anthem with which non-Jews can identify.

A commentator ventures his opinion that the Judge is a good one. His record is not explicated.

The article notes that foreign criticism mostly is about Israeli treatment of Arabs in the Territories. According to the article, "their territory and lives remain under Israeli control and strictures."

The article contends that Israeli Arabs are less well off than Jews and have fewer opportunities. It blames the government for that (Ethan Bronner, NY Times, 3/5/12, A10).

Jewish leftists who suggest neutering the anthem, as some Arabs have suggested, really don't want a Jewish state and majority rule. This issue is an excuse for them.

As for Supreme Court membership, at present it is practically a self-perpetuating body that imposes its personal views on the country, views that usually are anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish. They rule contrary to the precedent, contrary to evidence, and contrary to law. They overturn law because they simply don't like it. There is where reform should be aimed, rather than on ethnic grounds.

Apparently the author could not resist bringing the territories into the discussion. Never miss an opportunity to make anti-Zionist propaganda? Israeli treatment of Arabs in the Territories is better than Arab treatment of Arabs in the Territories and everywhere else. Foreign criticism of Israel is not in behalf of Palestinian Arabs, for whom the foreigners do not care. I think it is an excuse to be antisemitic without being called to account for it.

The lives of Arabs in the Territories hardly is under Israeli control. The Palestinian Authority (P.A.) rules them, except for foreign policy and except for curbs on their terrorism, weak curbs at that. Weak, I say, because the P.A. allows terrorist militias and Hamas brings in rockets and develops rockets.

The phrase, "their territory," is not clear. Arabs do not and never did have a country there.

It is questionable whether Israeli Arabs are less well off than Jews. Which Jews? The almost equal number of Ultra-Orthodox who also have large families and less education? What is Israel's fault, here? Israel gives Arabs more scholarships to college, and lets them have years more of time to work by exempting them from military service. What is wrong with veterans' preferences? Arabs can volunteer and get preference. Some do.

I think that the newspaper framed the issue too narrowly. The question is whether the large Arab minority is loyal or subversive. Judging by the radical politicians they elect, the lynching they attempt, the stones they throw, the influence of the Islamist movement there, I think that most Arabs are not loyal, though many Druze and Bedouin are.

It would have been fairer to have mentioned that many Israeli Arabs identify with the external Arabs seeking to destroy the Jewish state. The question really is, considering that there are so many Arab countries, why should Israel condone a large, subversive ethnic group. Bi-national states usually fail. All the more likely to fail are states in which one side is jihadist. Considering that the P.A. wants still another Arab state, one that would bar Jews, the Arabs don't mind barring other ethnic groups. Then how could they object to Israel barring theirs?

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

To Go To Top

Posted by American Hindu Association, March 5, 2012.

TIRUPATI: US-based human rights activist Richard Benkin, who has been tirelessly fighting for the cause of Bangladeshi Hindus, urged all humans across the globe to 'recognise' the silent ethnic cleansing of Hindus going on unchecked in Bangladesh and raise their voice against atrocities on the Hindus there.

Speaking on 'Ethnic Cleansing of Hindus in Bangladesh' jointly organised by Madabhushi Institute of Public Affairs (MAIPA) and Bhavan's Kendra, here on Monday, Benkin expressed deep anguish over international community, human rights organisations, people and government of India keeping quiet on the ordeal of Hindus in Bangladesh, which he said was emboldening radical Islamic elements.

These elements continued their crimes against Hindus terrorised them forced them to flee from the country.

Stating that Hindus who were one third of East Pakistan's population, at time of partition of India in 1947 had dwindled to nine percent in 1971 when Bangaldesh was created and further down to 7 percent now. He stressed on exposing Bangladesh government's complicity abetting crimes against Hindus, forcing them flee the country or covert to Islam.

Citing that Jews in United States in one voice had raised alarm on atrocities on Jews in Communist Russia in 1971, he wanted firstly the citizens of India to be made fully aware of silent ethnic cleansing of hindus in Bangladesh, raise their voice louder and louder, start a movement here to build up a strong public opinion to halt what he called "government tolerated murder, rape, abduction and forced conversion of Hindus to Islam in Bangladesh.

Later answering a question, he said that the UNO could do anything to save the hindus and added that it is the Indian government which has to act fast to stop atrocities on Hindus.

In this connection, he said that Australian government had promptly acted on attacks against Indian students, there, which saw attacks come down and accused Bangladesh government of totally supporting radical elements to continue their crimes against Hindus.

On the occasion, MAIPA chairman and former speaker, Agarala Eswara Reddy spoke and released the book 'English Blues' brought out by The New Indian Express.

This is archived at
http://expressbuzz.com/states/andhrapradesh/ ethnic-cleansing-of-bangla-hindus-is-on/365547.html

To Go To Top

Posted by Teresinka Pereira, March 5, 2012.

In the well

the reflection

of a convulsed love.


The Moon

caught in the water

splashes her singing

like a blind bird.

Contact Teresinka Pereira at tpereira@buckeye-express.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gil Ronen, March 5, 2012.

Two knife-wielding terrorists who tried to infiltrate the Samaria community of Elon Moreh Monday morning have been caught.

At about 8:45 a.m., the outlook position at Elon Moreh identified two Arabs approaching the fence surrounding the community.

The Elon Moreh Security Coordinator arrived at the scene and the Arabs ran away to the nearby village of Azmut.

The security coordinator entered the village with a battalion-sized IDF force. The two terrorists were caught. An initial inquiry showed that they are residents of the Balata "refugee camp" and that they were armed with knives.

Samaria Regional Authority Head Gershon Mesika congratulated the Samaria Brigade Commander Col. Nimrod Aloni for the quick way in which the event was handled.

"The IDF outlooks' alertness and the alacrity of the IDF soldiers and the Elon Moreh Security Coordinator prevented a terror attack," he said. "The nation of Israel thanks the IDF's soldiers. It has been proven yet again that when the IDF is allowed to act determinedly, it can defeat terror."

Gil Ronen writes for Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.org), where this article appeared today.

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 4, 2012.

Whereas, in ancient Persia, Esther and her uncle, Mordechai, saved the Jewish Nation from Haman's ominous edict to annihilate the Jewish People, who were at that time in exile in Persia, hence, the Jewish Festival of Purim, in two days of this writing, the events that took place in Persia may, somewhat, meet with Purim Festive 2012 events.

On March 7, 2012, the Jewish People will be celebrating Purim, the victory of goodness over evil; today, March 4, 2012, during the Purim celebrations week, AIPAC-American Israel Public Affairs Committee began its annual conference, in which the center topic of the speeches will be the ominous Iranian regime — whereby Iran of today is where ancient Persia once stood — and its relentless ambitions to acquire nuclear weapons, with which they are planning to destroy the Jewish State of Israel — wipe the Zionist regime of the map, as they keep on chanting. The ancient wicked Haman equals to evil Hitler and now his follower, the genocidal President or Iran, Ahmadinejad and the Iranian Mullahs backing him; the Jewish State of Israel equals to Esther and Mordechai, who save the Jewish people from one of many genocidal intentions Haman and others, throughout history, planned for the Jews.

We overcame Persia's Haman, the Israeli Air Force formation flew over the Concentration Camp, Auschwitz, and we shall overcome Iran's Ahmadinejad too!

The Nations of Israel is alive!

Happy Purim to all my family, friends and Colleagues and Israel, the Nation State of the Jewish People.

Purim Parades in Tel Aviv, Palestine - 1932-1933-1934

By Adam Soclof -March 4, 2012

Purim segments from Yaakov Gross' movie 'Legend in the Dunes', directed by Yaakov Gross. This footage is from the early 1930s, in Palestine-borrowed from the Spielberg Film Archives and the Jerusalem Cinematheque Archives — shows Purim like you've never seen it before. In this movie clip — Purim Celebrations — in the 1928, 1932, 1933, and 1934 years, in the 1934 Parade the Nazi Swastika images are sticking out, as part of the Jewish community-yishuv struggle with Hitler and the Nazis rise to power. In those days, despite of the obvious threat, there was still joyous atmosphere in the streets.

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at nurit.nuritg@gmail.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, March 4, 2012.

Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il Go to to see more of his graphic art at

To Go To Top

Posted by Dave Alpern, March 4, 2012.