| HOME | Featured Stories | May 2006 Blog-Eds List | Background Information | News On the Web |
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers
|
HONORING THE MEMORY OF DANIEL WULTZ
Posted by Cinnamon Stillwell, May 31, 2006. |
|
In times of war, when daily doses of death and destruction are the norm, one learns to steel oneself against the tide of bad news. Particularly since the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and the many horrors committed by our enemies in the years since, it often feels as if nothing's shocking anymore. Yet occasionally something pierces the armor that we've constructed about ourselves and reminds us just what we're up against. The tragic death of Florida teenager Daniel Wultz[1] was one such instance. Daniel was visiting family in Tel Aviv for Passover last month, when he was seriously injured in a suicide bombing at the restaurant where he and his father were having lunch. They were two of sixty innocents injured, on top of the nine who were killed. Daniel remained in a coma for several weeks, only waking up once, before succumbing to his injuries on May 14. American-born Israeli novelist and playwright Naomi Ragen[2] became personally invested in DanielÂ’s recovery and her writings on the subject touched a nerve. Following the bombing, she sent out several e-mails to her mailing list asking members to pray for Daniel's recovery and to send messages of support to his family. As a result, his family received hundreds of such e-mails and expressed their profuse gratitude. When the news came that Daniel had woken up briefly, it seemed as if all those prayers had been answered. But sadly, it was not meant to be. The last message sent out on the subject included the eloquent words of Rabbi Michael Gold[3] of Temple Beth Torah, Tamarac Jewish Center in Florida. Rabbi Gold visited Daniel's Hebrew Day School and spoke to the students he'd known. When faced with the moral relativism so common among the youth these days, the rabbi told them this: "There are absolute standards of good and evil. The deliberate taking of innocent life to advance a political cause is always wrong, in every culture and every society." Such moral clarity is in stark contrast to the sentiments of Abu Nasser, a senior leader of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, which along with the Islamic Jihad was one of the terrorist groups involved in plotting the attack that ultimately killed Daniel. Nasser[4] rejoiced in the news, saying that he was, "sorry there was not more of this stuff. American and Zionist -- this is the best target combination we could dream of. This is the ideal target. He is a young American who came to encourage the enemy to continue his war against us." Daniel was one of over 200 Americans[5] to either be wounded or killed by Palestinian terrorists, but such crimes against humanity should be condemned, whether the targets are American, Israeli or anyone else. Yet somehow when it comes to Jewish deaths, there are still those who dismiss them as some kind of deserved end. Apparently any Jew inhabiting or visiting Israel, whatever their nationality, is fair game in their view. Meanwhile, Palestinians can get away with any atrocity (even when their own people are on the receiving end) and there will always be those willing to turn a blind eye. Furthermore, far too many in the Jewish community seem to believe that they can avoid such violence by ingratiating themselves with their enemies. Author and talk show host Dennis Prager[6] devoted a recent column to trying to explain this very pathology. But Jews' enemies do not differentiate between the secular or the devout, the young or the old, the civilian or the warrior. As Islamic Jihad senior member Abu Ayman[7] put it, "The meaning and the goal of our lives is to fight the devil spiritually and physically. The Jews are the expression of both kinds of devil. No mercy for devils." Still, all too often, appeasement continues to be the order of the day. Indeed, as Israel's new Prime Minister Ehud Olmert visits the U.S. asking for funding so that his government can continue to expel Jews from their homes, one can only shake their head and wonder what has happened to the Jewish people? What happened to the warrior spirit, the pride and the ability to overcome even the most insurmountable odds? Have Jews been so crippled by the self-loathing endemic to years of leftist indoctrination that they no longer have the will to survive? A glimmer of hope can be found in a Washington D.C. rally timed to coincide with Olmert's meeting with the Bush administration. The "anti-retreat" rally on May 23 was the brainchild of Jonathan Silverman, who with the help of groups such as B'nai Elim, Chabad, Women in Green, AFSI, Manhigut Yehudit and the local chapter of the ZOA, organized the rally in order to urge the US government not to fund further Israeli withdrawals and concessions. But ultimately, it's up to the Israelis to chart their own course. Let's hope they do so wisely. For Jews owe it to Daniel's memory to stand up for themselves and for the existence of a Jewish State. Footnotes 1. www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961336110& pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull 2. www.naomiragen.com/ 3. www.heartfelt.com/ 4. www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49952 5. news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060514/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_american_victim 6. frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22479 7. www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49952 Cinnamon Stillwell is a columnist for SFGate.com, The San Francisco Chronicle online, and a staff writer for the New Media Alliance. She maintains a website at www.cinnamonstillwell.com and can be reached by email at stillcinn@yahoo.com |
|
TEACHING JOHNNY ABOUT ISLAM
Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 31, 2006. |
|
Read the below 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision about the right to teach Islam in our Calif schools. If this were about Judaism or Christianity, the teaching would have been declared as a violation of separation of church and state. I hope this case is appealed to the Supreme Court! This was an Issues & Insights editorial in Investors.com May 19, 2006 (www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20 &artnum=3&issue=20060519). Please send this to all you know, especially talk radio show hosts. Education: In our brave new schools, Johnny can't say the pledge, but he can recite the Quran. Yup, the same court that found the phrase "under God" unconstitutional now endorses Islamic catechism in public school. In a recent federal decision that got surprisingly little press, even from conservative talk radio, California's 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled it's OK to put public-school kids through Muslim role-playing exercises, including: Reciting aloud Muslim prayers that begin with "In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful . . . ." Parents of seventh-graders, who after 9-11 were taught the pro-Islamic lessons as part of California's world history curriculum, sued under the First Amendment ban on religious establishment. They argued, reasonably, that the government was promoting Islam. But a federal judge appointed by President Clinton told them in so many words to get over it, that the state was merely teaching kids about another "culture." So the parents appealed. Unfortunately, the most left-wing court in the land got their case. The 9th Circuit, which previously ruled in favor of an atheist who filed suit against the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, upheld the lower court ruling. The decision is a major victory for the multiculturalists and Islamic apologists in California and across the country who've never met a culture or religion they didn't like -- with the exception of Western civilization and Christianity. They are legally in the clear to indoctrinate kids into the "peaceful" and "tolerant" religion of Islam, while continuing to denigrate Judeo-Christian values. In the California course on world religions, Christianity is not presented equally. It's covered in just two days and doesn't involve kids in any role-playing activities. But kids do get a good dose of skepticism about the Christian faith, including a biting history of its persecution of other peoples. In contrast, Islam gets a pass from critical review. Even jihad is presented as an "internal personal struggle to do one's best to resist temptation," and not holy war. The ed consultant's name is Susan L. Douglass. No, she's not a Christian scholar. She's a devout Muslim activist on the Saudi government payroll, according to an investigation by Paul Sperry, author of "Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington." He found that for years Douglass taught social studies at the Islamic Saudi Academy just outside Washington, D.C. Her husband still teaches there. So what? By infiltrating our public school system, the Saudis hope to make Islam more widely accepted while converting impressionable American youth to their radical cause. Recall that John Walker Lindh, the "American Taliban," was a product of the California school system. What's next, field trips to Mecca? This case is critical not just to our culture but our national security. It should be brought before the Supreme Court, which has outlawed prayer in school. Let's see what it says about practicing Islam in class. It will be a good test for the bench's two new conservative justices David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
AN ENDTIME PROPHECY IN ISRAEL WAS FULFILLED THIS VERY DAY
Posted by Renalee Colon, May 31, 2006. |
|
This was written by Reuven Prager of Beged Ivri and it is called "Shavuoth 5766". Contact him at http://www.begedivri.com or send an email to reuven@actcom.com On 26 Iyyar 5766 (May 24, 2006) I received a phone call summoning me to the upcoming weekly meeting of the Sanhedrin, followed the next day by a written invitation to appear. This was followed by two more calls that day preparing me for the meeting. I was told that I should be patient. It was likely that I would be the last called to speak, and the possibility existed that because of the amount of work covered at each meeting, they might not even get to me, and I might need to come to a subsequent meeting to speak, I shouldn't take offense. Asked if this was okay with me I responded with "of course". I was also told that I would have a maximum of 15 minutes to speak, without exception. I was informed that there was at least one Chaver Sanhedrin that was already predisposed to rejecting my entire work on behalf of the restoration of the Holy Half Shekel, who had himself created a Half Shekel coin. I asked if it was possible to purchase two of his coins for our archives. I was also told that it would be recommended at the meeting that a committee be appointed to deal with the whole subject of the Half Shekel, on an ongoing basis, to act as liaison between the Sanhedrin and Beged Ivri. What prompted the summons was a discussion at the previous session in which ideas were raised as to how to create a means of income to support and expand the activities of the Sanhedrin, and the idea was raised to institute a levy of 1/2 NIS as a monthly donation given by Jews resident in the Land. The discussion led to one Chaver Sanhedrin suggesting that since they were talking in terms of a half shekel levy, they should contact Beged Ivri, as an expert in the field, to come to the next meeting to discuss it. Wow. After nine years of minting, distributing, collecting, and performing 26 Trumat HaLishka ceremonies, the Holy Half Shekel was to have its "day in court." Sort of. It was clear to me that the intention of the Sanhedrin WAS NOT to discuss the restoration of the fulfillment of the commandment of giving the Half Shekel. Nonetheless, I also knew that this was exactly what it would become. I spent the week preparing for the meeting. I put together 23 packets which each included the following; 1) 1 Year 58 Half Shekel What was to be my goal here? After all, I was being summoned, I hadn't asked to appear. I certainly wasn't seeking confrontation or permission. I knew the reason I was invited. So how to make the best of the opportunity? It became clear to me that my goal for this initial meeting was to leave that room having taken the Half Shekel from "concept" to "reality". When I left, I needed to leave those people in attendance with a clear, unambiguous knowledge that the Half Shekel was REAL, not just a concept, not something that was merely to be "used" as has been the case for the last century, where the concept was used, in remembrance of the Half Shekel, to raise funds for various religious institutions in the month of Adar. How best to affect this? I put together from our archive's collections, a fabulous selection of ancient weights, scale pans, and coins from the First and Second Temple Eras, actual ancient artifacts that were used by our ancestors to fulfill the commandment. In addition, I brought to the meeting the nine coins we have issued to date as well as photos of the Chests for New Shekels and Old Shekels, which have been used to collect the coins. As the day of the meeting approached my thoughts became more concentrated on the upcoming encounter. This morning, 3 Sivan (May 30th) I awoke with just one thought; how to make the Half Shekel REAL in the minds and hearts of the Chavre Sanhedrin, and rather than start work or run errands, sat wrapped in Tefilin (phylacteries) for hours concentrating and focusing my energy on this momentous meeting. My thoughts flew at an accelerated pace. Though the meeting was called for 1:30-4:00 pm, I was there at 1:00. I waited outside for 10 minutes, watching for the Chaverim to arrive. I saw one elderly gentleman arrive and enter the building. I waited outside trying to figure out whom from amongst the people passing the building would turn into it. The thought occurred to me that the Sanhedrin members ought to have a special dress appropriate for the office, just as judges who appear at the bench don robes to distinguish themselves from the public. At 1:10 I entered the building and made my way to the meeting room. There were two members present. When I entered the room one asked me who I was, and not recognizing my name, asked for what purpose I was present and when I replied the Half Shekel he responded; "ah Beged Ivri, please, have a seat." A few minutes later a third Chaver entered and seeing me sitting there began to ask the other two members if it was correct to have a guest present for the opening of the meeting or if the invited guests should wait outside and be called when it came time for them to speak. I immediately arose and offered to wait outside so they could discuss this privately and they asked me to remain, and went into a huddle at the far side of the room to discuss it between themselves. They decided that I should come to them and discuss whatever it was I had to share with them, right then and there, and to be rid of me within minutes before the other members arrived and the meeting began. Now I had prepared myself for what I thought was any eventuality; not being allowed to speak at all, being shot down, being given short shrift, and even fantasized a standing ovation for the exceptional contribution I had made to Am Yisrael. But this? Being treated with such disdain? Given five minutes to have my say and thrown out before the majority of attendees even arrived? Of course I complied, came to the head of the conference table where the three Chaverim sat, asked if it wasn't more sensible to wait till the meeting began so what I had to share could be heard by all those expected to attend? I was told -- no, begin now and whoever comes while you're talking comes. My head swimming with this unexpected slight, especially since I had invested so much thought into what I brought to share, I said "I would like to begin by giving you the historical background of what the Half Shekel was, so that we can better understand what we are talking about." They agreed. I opened my briefcase and began to fill a tray with weights and coins, silently, and during the five minutes it took me to prepare the tray, several other members arrived. I began to explain the items on the tray and how they were used to fulfill the commandment in each of the centuries, each of the millennia. The first question asked, and repeated over and over again, was, "are these real?" Again and again I repeated that by me, everything is real. Forty five minutes later, after I had covered the historical background as well as the work of the last nine years I tied it to the reason I was invited. By this time the room was full, I had regained my composure and was speaking at full force, having completely established my credentials and the direction of the discussion. When it was said that the Sanhedrin can not be involved in sales, I suggested that an affiliate group be established to distribute the coins, both regarding the soldier's program and the general public, under the auspices of the Sanhedrin, which would earn an income for the Sanhedrin. Questions were raised. How many coins have been collected by Otzar Hamikdash and what was their value? I answered that Otzar Hamikdash has not counted the coins collected in the last nine years, but that their value had increased threefold in the last year due to the rise in the price of silver, and that we were talking about thousands of coins. I was asked if I was willing to oversee the programs I was suggesting and I replied that by myself I would not be able to achieve these goals, but that working together with the Sanhedrin I could. This prompted one member to remark that nothing plus nothing is nothing (meaning that the Sanhedrin, as yet unrecognized by most, together with Beged Ivri's efforts, also universally ignored by the Jewish People, would amount to nothing.) I replied; "our Aperion (Royal Wedding Litter) weighs about 350 pounds, and together with the bride, is a heavy load to lift. Individually our Litter bearers would not be able to lift it, but together they lift it easily. Likewise, two groups that come together can accomplish more than the individuals can working alone." I emphasized that just as the public ignores Beged Ivri's efforts, likewise they ignore the Sanhedrin, and that working together we can bring legitimacy to both endeavors. I then went on with a vision track, how rather than the Sanhedrin meeting in such an incongruous venue, a first class, though temporary, venue should be established in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, big enough to house the Sanhedrin, Otzar Hamikdash and the Lishka (Treasury Chamber) with enough room to create the other 11 Chests for the collection of Temple related funds and how the Half Shekel could provide the means to accomplish this. I shared how the universal reinstitution of the Half Shekel would provide enough funds to replace the ridiculous security "fence/wall" surrounding Jerusalem with proper Walls of Jerusalem. A latecomer, who also happened to be the Chaver who I was forewarned, was in opposition to my work, arrived during the last five minutes of my speaking. He asked if the Sanhedrin was considering the recognition of the restoration of the fulfillment of the commandment or was merely speaking about selling coins to raise funds. The chairman of the meeting replied "the latter" and another Chaver repeated several times "as a zecher" (as a remembrance), thereby allowing everyone present to accept the proposal. A committee was duly established to continue discussions with Beged Ivri, and I was dismissed. It was mentioned in passing that this Chaver had also created half shekels, and that he had made copies of the ancient Tyrian Half Shekel as his suggested "restored half shekel". (In the Talmud, bringing down teachings from the Second Temple Era, it is stated that "anywhere where the Torah commands payment of Shekalim, only Tyrian coinage can be used." This was because of the 95% silver purity of the coins, as well as the fact that we were under Roman Imperial rule forbidding us from minting our own coins. Of course with the outbreak of the First revolt, our first act of rebellion was to mint our own 95% silver coinage, without the face of a foreign god on the obverse, which obviously ignored the halachah quoted above.) The ridiculousness of reviving a coin depicting the face of a foreign god was so overwhelming at this point that this Chaver did not even offer his "revived" coin for consideration. When I left the meeting I sat down to consider what had transpired. It became clear to me that I had succeeded in leaving the meeting with the Half Shekel as an absolute physical reality in the minds of everyone present, which I thought beforehand was my goal, and at the same time completely failed to make the half Shekel a spiritual reality in those same minds. They just weren't ready for it. A complete disassociation between physical reality and spiritual reality, the same disassociation that haredi elements make regarding the State of Israel. The Half Shekel coins -- yes, as a fund raising means, as a zecher (a remembrance) . The restoration of the fulfillment of the commandment -- no way. And this from our revived Sanhedrin, which is exactly on the same plane as the Half Shekel. How amazing. And it doesn't matter an iota. The fact is that whatever one wishes to call it, what has begun will eventually become the universally acknowledged fulfillment of the commandment of giving the Half Shekel, just as Hebrew has returned as the universal language of Am Yisrael in Eretz Yisrael, over the objections of all the nay Sayers, just as the restoration of the State of Israel has become reality despite all those "holy warriors" who still bury their heads in the sand with their muffled screaming Galut is our salvation! G-d Bless,
Contact Renalee Colon at renalees@yahoo.com |
|
PLEASE HELP US PASS THE US ISRAEL ENERGY COOPERATION ACT
Posted by Jack Halpern, May 31, 2006. |
|
Please urge your representatives in the U.S. House and Senate to call for swift Congressional passage of the U.S.-Israel Energy Cooperation Act highlighted in Prime Minister Olmert's Speech to a joint session of the U.S. Congress. HR 2730 the House Bill, and S 1862, the Senate version, respectively of the U.S.-Israel Energy Cooperation Act are sponsored by a bipartisan coalition of more than 65 House Members led in the House by Representatives John Shaddegg (R-AZ) and Brad Sherman (D-CA) and in the Senate by Senators Gordon Smith, Dianne Feinstein, Maria Cantwell, Bob Menendez, Barack Obama, Frank Lautenberg, Tim Johnston and Mike Dewine. It is an outgrowth of efforts by AJCongress over the last three years to promote U.S.-Israel collaboration on energy research and development. It would apply Israel's extraordinary engineering and scientific talent to help the United States address our energy needs through a collaborative program of alternative energy technology R&D. Not only would passage of the U.S.-Israel Energy Cooperation Act reduce United States dependence on foreign oil, it would reduce the flow of petrodollars that currently support terrorism and the arming of Israel's and America's enemies, and it would help establish a new energy industry in Israel. Background In 2003, the American Jewish Congress under the auspices of the Energy Independence Task Force Chaired by Senior Vice President Jack Halpern hosted a conference in Israel, along with the U.S. Department of Energy and Israel's Ministry of National Infrastructures to initiate cooperation between our two countries to solve the energy. At that conference, the concept of establishing a permanent mechanism for such cooperation was established. Key to this concept was the understanding that Israel has enormous scientific and engineering talent, as exhibited by those who helped produced the Arrow Missile in cooperation with the U.S.; those who produced unmanned aerial vehicles; treatments for heart disease and cancer; and advances in computer science. If past collaborations are any measure of future success, these similar talents should be applied in helping solve America's energy problems. When we arrived back in the U.S. our staff worked with members of Congress to establish such a cooperative program of research and development in alternative energy technology. We were fortunate to find skilled and committed champions in Congress who took up this cause and shepherded the bill to the point where passage this session is possible. This past Tuesday, we visited Washington in advance of Prime Minister Olmert's trip and hosted a meeting on Capitol Hill in order to promote passage of the bill. Senator Frist helped make that meeting possible; he joined us at it, along with more than 15 other Members of House and Senate. HR 2730 and S. 1862 would both establish a program of grants totaling $20 million per year for alternative energy research and development (both basic and applied research) through the U.S. Department of Energy, in cooperation with the Binational Science Foundation (BSF) and Binational Industrial Research and Development Foundation (BIRD). Only projects entailing both a U.S. and an Israeli partner would be eligible for funds. It is important to note that funding pursuant to the bills are grants, not foreign aid, and are subject to repayment provisions. All you need to do is click here to reach your Senator. Once you do, you will then be directed to the page where you can reach your House Representative. Jack Halpern chairs the American Jewis Congress Energy Independence Task Force. Contact him at EITF@AJCongress.org. Contact the American Jewish Congress by email at communications@ajcongress.org |
|
THE REAL CONFLICT
Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, May 31, 2006. |
|
At least three years before George W. Bush entered the White House in January 2001, Ariel Sharon said a Palestinian state is inevitable. Israel's greatest warrior had succumbed to a self-fulfilling prophecy, to defeatism, in fact, to Arafat's cunning campaign of psychological warfare. Given Mr. Sharon's reputation as a hawk, is it any wonder that Mr. Bush became the first American president to publicly advocate a Palestinian state? Sharon's self-fulfilling prophesy, repeated over and over again by the media, has demoralized the people of Israel. That self-fulfilling prophesy has advanced the Arabs' phased plan for the annihilation of the Jewish state. That self-fulfilling prophecy reveals that Sharon was not only a defeatist, but also ignorant of some basic principles of military science. Carl von Clausewitz, perhaps the greatest military scientist in the modern era, understood that to achieve excellence as a military scientist one must also possess the knowledge of a political scientist. One must understand not only the strengths and weakness of your own country and of its allies, but also the strengths and weakness of the enemy and of its allies. This is not merely a matter of taking a few courses in comparative government and international relations, because political science, properly understood, includes knowledge of the social sciences, especially psychology. By propagating the self-fulfilling prophecy that a Palestinian state is inevitable, Sharon, the world-renowned warrior, must be held responsible -- more than others -- for the Palestinian Authority's psychological, diplomatic, and political victory over this country. There is not a single nation in the world whose policy toward Israel is not warped by that prophecy. But this does not exhaust Sharon's culpability. Prime Minister Sharon was actually given the green light to destroy the entire leadership of the Palestinian Authority! In The High Cost of Peace (2002), Yossef Bodansky, then director of the U.S. Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, writes: "In late June [2002], a very senior member of the Bush White House privately told a senior Israeli minister that the administration 'would not shed a tear if you (Israel) get rid of Arafat.' And on July 11 [2002], National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, told Israel's Channel 2 TV News that the Bush administration resolved that the entire PA leadership should be replaced..." More than 1,000 Jews were murdered by Arab terrorists during the premiership of Ariel Sharon -- on that basis alone the worst prime minister in Israel's history. And now Prime Minister Ehud Olmert boasts of being Sharon's heir. He is certainly committed to Sharon's brainless legacy. The people of Israel must know and face the truth: They have been undermined by their democratically elected prime ministers at least since July 1992 when Yitzhak Rabin formed the government responsible for the disastrous Oslo or Israel-PLO Agreement. Democracies do make mistakes. But one of the virtues of a genuine democracy is its inherent tendency to be a self-corrective system of government by virtue of freedom of speech and of the press -- a freedom that facilitates criticism of government policies. But is Israel really a democracy? I have exploded this myth in books and in countless articles. But if further proof is wanted, Israel's gallant Nadia Matar is being tried for "insulting a public servant," Yonaton Bassi, who was appointed by Prime Minister Sharon to head the Evacuation Administration, which supervised the expulsion of 10,000 Jews from Gaza and northern Samaria. Mrs. Matar sent Bassi a fax comparing his appointment with a letter that had been written by the Berlin Judenrat in 1942 to the Jewish community, with details and explanations of their approaching deportation. The trial of Nadia Matar is not only indicative of the paltry despotism to which this country has fallen. No, her trial for insulting Sharon's lackey is symptomatic of the on-going psychological victory of the Palestinian Authority over the militarily powerful but morally impotent and degraded State of Israel. Far more than freedom of expression is involved in the trial of Nadia Matar. Israel's raison d'etre as a Jewish state is on trial. The conflict is between what the heroic Nadia Matar stands for and what defeatists like Ariel Sharon or Ehud Olmert stand for. It is nothing less than a conflict between good and evil -- indeed, between life and death. Professor Paul Eidelberg is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at pauleid@netvision.net.il |
|
ISRAEL HAS SURRENDERED ITS RIGHT OF SELF DEFENSE
Posted by Marcel Cousineau, May 31, 2006. |
|
Israel Has Surrendered Their Right of Self Defense. Israel has surrendered this right to the Master of the false peace Road Map. They are not permitted to defeat their enemy and willingly go along with the dead end Road Map which is set up to exterminate the people of Israel and their land. The two state solution of emperor George is Israel's death sentence and the blind and faithless, the fearful and the Idol worshipers go along with the suicide of their nation. Their hands are tied and they must 'consult' the emperor before any real action is taken. Only token, limited and useless responses to attacks are permitted and the new Puppet P.M. Olmert is very,very obedient to his Master, sacrificing Israel to the president's demonic vision 2 state final solution from hell. The Road Map is Satan's plan and the president is his loyal disciple. Israel has been severly limited by the dragon who slowly destroys her before our eyes under the LIE and LIAR of peace. The Jews are 'cautioned' not to endanger this phony peace by any determined action against the growing Palestinian threat. So Israel has allowed it self to be restrained in every response. This is why we see such small rockets fired by the IAF and why the IDF fire artillery into empty fields. The marriage Israel has made to the U.S. for no peace is a noose around it's neck which has choked much of the life from it! Will G-d annul this marriage? YES, He will !!! Contact Marcel Cousineau by email at up2zionsg8@yahoo.com or
visit his website:
|
|
PRESBYTERIANS: DIVESTMENT IS A COSTLY MISTAKE
Posted by Larry Rued, May 31, 2006. |
|
Two years ago, Presbyterian Church USA leaders began a divestment of corporations doing business in Israel. Since then, thousands of writers have written millions of words on the topic. Today, a Google search with keywords (Presbyterian(s), Israel, and Divestment) produces 181,000 hits. Missing in the 181,000 results is an analysis of the money spent by the PCUSA creating and promoting its Israel Divestment Movement. A volunteer group of Concerned Presbyterians[1] have studied the obvious and hidden costs of our church's anti-Israel actions. One finding: "The Middle East resolutions passed by the 216th and prior General Assemblies have created a network run amuck of headquarters staff, GA committees, and outside organizations receiving PCUSA funding." Our three page report details the major players. Another finding: "As the estimates show, our leadership has directed 4% of the national budget to staff, committees, and outside organizations dedicated to promoting a propaganda attack on Israel." Four percent of the PCUSA national budget is $4 million per year. Our letter rhetorically asked: "Who has paid for this biased and unfounded propaganda against Israel? We have, through our contributions to per capita and special offerings." Contributions from churches to the denominational offices are voluntary. Our analysis has been emailed to over 11,000 Presbyterians. While the number is large, it is but 5% of the membership. We are asking for your help to reach the other 95%. As we wrote in our letter to fellow members: "Presbyterians, neither the Israeli Government nor the American Jewish Community can stop this assault on Israel. It is our problem -- and our responsibility." Presbyterians need to contact their commissioners before General Assembly begins June 15. The actions detailed in our analysis have been reported by many writers. For the first time, the actions have been put into one document[2] with their associated cost. Thank you for your consideration and help to End Israel Divestment Now. Larry Rued
1. "Divestment is a Costly Mistake"
2. Download the document from
http://concernedpresbyterians.net/Funding.pdf"
Contact Larry Rued at LRued@tampabay.rr.com
|
|
HEBREW UNIVERSITY MOONBAT'S WANT TO BAN MILITARY OFFICERS FROM CAMPUS
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 31, 2006. |
|
1. So the daughter of the head of the Hamas gets arrested inside Israel while trying to sneak into a prison to visit with prisoners using a fake ID. And what do the cowards who run Israel do? They let her out again! 2. A minor brouhaha has been operating at the Hebrew University in recent weeks. It seems the university opened a special program for officers in Israel's intelligence services. The Campus Moonbatocracy, led by the far-leftist anti-Israel "post-Zionist" professors, had a conniption. The leftist profs claimed that the Hebrew U had lowered admissions requirements for the officers. The University denied that. The leftist profs oppose lowering admissions standards for anyone unless they are Arabs. But of course the real reason for the selective outrage on the part of the Hebrew University's academic friends of the Hamas was the same as the reason for all those protests on US campuses against ROTC and the right of army recruiters to speak to students. They simply hate their own country and express this hatred by doing everything they can to show their contempt for the military. The difference of course is that in Israel the military is the only thing standing between the jihadniks and their plans to conduct a second Holocaust of Jews. The irony is that Israel's security services are themselves largely dominated by leftists who would feel well at home in some of the goofier corners of Mt. Scopus. The two main crusaders against allowing intelligence service officers on to the Hebrew U campus have been Moshe Zimmerman and Baruch Kimmerling. Both are fanatic anti-Israel extremists. Zimmerman is best remembered for his frequent denunciation of settlers as nazis and of settler childen as Hitlerjugend. (see http://www.meforum.org/article/87) This same prof who wants to bar the intelligence officers from campus has a policy in his classes according to which students in prison for refusing to do military service get automatic exemptions from assignments and tests, while students called up for reserve duty do not. Kimmerling is a Marxist sociologist who is widely acknowedged by himself as being some sort of expert on Palestinians. He claims to detect signs of a Palestinian "sense of national identity" centuries before any Palestinian claimed any such thing. He turns out pathetic poorly-written, shallow, transparently propagandist "books" about "Palestinians". Kimmerling in the past has justified terrorist bombings of Jewish civilians (see http://www.meforum.org/article/87). Kimmerling is so extremist that he is a hero of the fanatic anti-Semite Jonathan Cook at the fanatically anti-Semitic Counterpunch magazine (see www.counterpunch.com/cook05302006.html). Israel's failure to tar and feather Cook or at least deport him to Syria has long been a matter of great regret. Kimmerling also writes for Counterpunch, in part because he despises the United States (see www.counterpunch.org/kimmerling1009.html). He played a crucial role in the "Jenin Massacre" fabrication and blood libel (www.counterpunch.org/kimmerling0501.html). He is arguably the worst anti-Zionist at the Hebrew University (see www.frontpagemag.com/ARticles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14906), although Zimmerman is also a serious contender also (see www.discoverthenetwork.org/moonbatcentral/2005/03/ hebrew-ward-churchills-of-_111044620767719192.html). 3. Hang George Galloway! George Galloway, Saddam's paid agent in the British parliament, unreformed commie stooge, has issued a call to murder Tony Blair. The Independent reports that Galloway wants to see Blair assassinated! In an interview with GQ magazine, the reporter asked him: "Would the assassination of, say, Tony Blair by a suicide bomber - if there were no other casualties - be justified as revenge for the war on Iraq?" (In photo, something here stinks.) Mr Galloway replied: "Yes, it would be morally justified.... It would be entirely logical and explicable. And morally equivalent to ordering the deaths of thousands of innocent people in Iraq - as Blair did." Galloway has never seen an Islamofascist terrorist he does not wish to promote. He makes Lord Haw-Haw look like a patriotic Brit. He has never met a Jew he does not think needs to be murdered. He is the darling of teh Left and personally exemplifies the convergence between the Far Left and the Neo-Nazi Right. We strongly recommend the Hang Galloway blog. 4. May 30, 2006
Two months ago, at a government-sponsored training course for Bucharest's political elite, I had the opportunity to teach a section on the Holocaust. The topic sparked some unexpected reactions. One participant ranted on about how Israeli companies and employers doing business in Romania are allegedly the source of contemporary anti-Semitism in the country. Another wondered how so many Jews managed to escape from the Twin Towers on Sept. 11, 2001, thus giving credence to the anti-Semitic lie that the Jews and Israel were behind these terror attacks. On Romanian TV, meanwhile, it is not unusual to see Orthodox priests repeating that 2,000-year-old charge of deicide: "The Jews killed God." Jew-bashing in Romania seldom comes without racist attacks on the country's other ethnic minorities, Roma and Hungarians. Nationalism is so popular that not one but two xenophobic parties compete for votes. There is the extreme nationalistic Party of Greater Romania (PRM), which won 13% in the last parliamentary elections and gets up to 18% in recent opinion polls. Then there is the New Party Generation (PNG), not (yet) represented in parliament but also gaining in popularity, getting around 6% in polls. Finally, the illegal but tolerated Iron Guard -- which traces its roots to the main pre-World War II fascist party of the same name -- is gaining influence on university campuses. Even the mainstream media have found praise for some members of this criminal movement. The leader of the PRM is Corneliu Vadim Tudor, a megalomaniac demagogue whose political program boils down to vicious hatred toward Hungarians, Jews and Roma. He was Nicolae Ceausescu's court poet and denounced fellow writers and dissidents to the former dictator's feared secret police, the Securitate. An open admirer of Slobodan Milosevic and Saddam Hussein, Mr. Tudor regularly publishes in his weekly Romania Mare publication anti-Roma and anti-Semitic incitements, Holocaust denials and "black lists" of political adversaries he considers "guilty of anti-Romanian activities." Among his campaign promises is to rule with the machine gun and organize public executions. Mr. Tudor believes that "America is a colony of Israel...a small mouse dragging after it a giant elephant" and that "Zionism keeps the planet under terror, and puts Christianity and Islam into a state of conflict and of reciprocal extermination." Gigi Becali, leader of the PNG and a rich, vulgar, violent man, promises to "turn Romania into a country like the holy sun in the sky," a close variation of an old Iron Guard slogan. Mr. Becali calls himself an "athlete of Christianity" and has generously endowed the Maglavit church, the gathering point of Romania's mystical extremists in the '30s. While everywhere else in Europe the extreme right is politically isolated, some of Romania's political establishment help these demagogues gain an aura of respectability. One could not imagine Jean Marie le Pen even coming close to the gates of the Elys.e Palace, let alone being invited into the president's office. And it would simply be inconceivable for a French socialist leader to negotiate with the extremist Front National. But in Romania, Mr. Tudor maintains friendly ties with many prominent members of the opposition Social Democratic Party (PSD), who discreetly try to help him gain credibility with Western governments in exchange for cooperation from Mr. Tudor. The two parties are in talks for a formal parliamentary alliance. The recently elected president of the Romanian parliament, Bogdan Olteanu, who represents the pro-Western, business-oriented Liberal Party, won his new job with the crucial support of the PRM. The president of Romania, Traian Basescu, receives Mr. Tudor at his palace and socializes publicly with Mr. Becali. The PSD, meanwhile, gives Mr. Becali campaign advice in hopes of weakening the PRM. That mainstream politicians would find it so easy to rub shoulders with extremists is not that surprising in a country where the use of racist and populist rhetoric is not limited to the fringes of the political spectrum. Particularly anti-Hungarian, anti-Roma and homophobic comments have become vote-winners for all political parties. The boundaries between extreme and mainstream parties are more fluid in Romania than in other countries in the region. And although Holocaust denial is a crime, no Holocaust denier has ever been punished in Romania. As in many other domains, the country does not lack tough laws but rather the will to enforce them. How are such odious dealings possible in a country that is a NATO member and ready to join the European Union next year? History is, as always, a good guide. Visceral nationalism has a long tradition in Romania, going back to pre-World War II times when the Iron Guard, which would later play an important role in preparing the destruction of the Romanian Jewish community during the Holocaust, advocated hate toward foreigners in general and Jews in particular. Communist dictator Ceausescu for years hammered the same themes into the national conscience. Is Romania now reverting to its pre-World War II roots? Is nationalism the only real ideology in today's Romania? Is it justifiable to get close to the extreme right in order to divide it and steal its votes, as some mainstream politicians have claimed? Romania's political class should not have a short memory. Striking alliances with extremists always backfires. After the 1937 elections, when the Iron Guard and the anti-Semitic National Christian Party won 22% of the votes, the Romanian political class followed the same course as it is doing again today. Back then, mainstream political leaders also entered into electoral alliances with extremists, foolishly believing they could control them. Fifty-one years of fascist and communist dictatorship followed. Playing this dangerous game with the extreme right tarnishes not only Romania's image abroad but threatens its national security. Mr. Ioanid is author of "The Holocaust in Romania" and "The Ransom of the Jews."
Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. |
|
THE TAXI DRIVER
Posted by Naomi Ragen, May 30, 2006. |
|
I had a lecture to give in Haifa the other day. My usual driver wasn't available, so I called a local cab company to arrange a ride. Call it instinct, but when the cab arrived and I looked at the driver, he just didn't look the part. For one thing, he was in amazing shape: handsome, young, with an athlete's lean body. Not what I usually find in the men who sit behind the wheel all day. Something about his face, the way he spoke, too, struck me as unusual. "It's a long ride to Haifa," I finally said. "How do you like being on the road so much?" "Oh, it's fine. I like driving. Actually, I haven't been in the business long. Just a few months," he said smiling. 'And before this....?" "I worked for the Ministry of Defense. I was a security guard." We spoke a little more, and I began to realize that I was in the presence of one of the men from those elite units who protect the lives of our most elite citizens, including our former Prime Minister. "You didn't like the work?" "No, actually....." This is what happened. A yeshiva graduate, he had served in the army's most elite units. He had been trained in advanced counter-terrorism techniques, and had been asked to lead men into battle in some of the most dangerous missions possible. He had spent 3.5 years in Lebanon. It was no wonder that the leaders of the country had put him on staff to protect their lives. And then came the disengagement. They asked him to be responsible for leading soldiers to attack the residents of Gush Katif should trouble ensue. He knew Gush Katif well. he had been stationed there. "The people there treated us so well," he said. "They made sure we had enough to eat and drink. They invited us over on Shabbat and holidays. They were the most wonderful people in the world. How could I now go into their communities and treat them like enemies? How?" So, he walked into Sharon's office (which should give you an idea of who this person is, and what kind of job he had). I said: "I'll do anything you want. If you want me to wipe out a terrorist cell. Fine. That's what I'm trained to do. But please don't ask me to do this. Please." Sharon didn't budge. Wasn't interested. He also didn't budge. Despite the years he had spent risking his life to defend his country, and the people who run it, he was not only fired, he was thrown into jail for more than a month! When he got out, he married his girlfriend. He wasn't worried about getting another job. "The security companies were lining up to hire me. But when I went to get a weapon's license, I found he'd been blackballed. "It was pure revenge. So it was impossible for me to work." He bought a taxi, and now he drives. His wife is expecting. He's not making anywhere near what he used to make. You've paid quite a price, I told him. "I'm not sorry for a minute. I got my medal when my father told me he was proud of me. In the end, I have to live with myself. I have to face my little nephews. What would they think of me if I treated my own people like the enemy?" Instead, he went to visit the people of Gush Katif, in their hotel rooms and dormitories. He hugged them, and they hugged him. "I don't have a single regret," he shrugged. He has a court case against the government for denying him a license. I wished him well. And I thought of the men in power, those complacent, greying old men whose lives he had risked his young one for so many times. And I was glad he wasn't protecting them anymore. Glad that he wasn't being sent on dangerous missions anymore. Not for these men anyhow. And I thought of what he had sown, and what he had reaped. And how much we were all losing because he couldn't use his skills. And once again, the reality of living in a country with wonderful people and terrible leadership struck me full force, making me want to punch somebody in the nose; somebody really high up; somebody fat, complacent, and careless, who makes all the wrong decisions and makes others pay the price. 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. |
|
"BURN HER TWO CHILDREN TO DEATH..." TO MAKE HER "CONFESS"
Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 30, 2006. |
|
Where are the militant feminists? Why are they not picketing the Iranian embassy? Why are there no human shields for female activists and their children in Iran? Why is the ISM, an INTERNATIONAL solidarity movement, showing no solidarity with Iran's dissidents? Note the child abuse: "It was only when they threatened to burn her two children to death in front of her that she agreed to put her name to the documents." Burn her children to death in front of her!!.....where are the advocates on behalf of children? Where is UNICEF? And let's recall that this is extreme barbarism of Moslems against Moslems, in the name of Allah and the Moslem clerics. Where is the Moslem outrage of such treatment of Moslems and such a desecration of the teachings of Islam? Why does gut-wrenchingly brutal Moslem barbarity against Moslems, Christians, Jews, women and children get a free pass with most Western press? This is called "Child Abuse - Mullah Style" and was written by Philip Sherwell. It appeared today in www.Telegraph.co.uk. A leading Iranian pro-democracy and women's activist, who was jailed on trumped-up charges last year, has revealed how the clerical regime cynically deploys systemic sexual violence against female dissidents in the name of Islam. Roya Tolouee, 40, was beaten up by Iranian intelligence agents and subjected to a horrific sexual assault when she refused to sign forced confessions. It was only when they threatened to burn her two children to death in front of her that she agreed to put her name to the documents. Perhaps just as shocking as the physical abuse were the chilling words of the man who led the attack. "When I asked how he could do this to me, he said that he believed in only two things - Islam and the rule of the clerics," Miss Tolouee told The Sunday Telegraph last week in an interview in Washington after she fled Iran. "But I know of no religious morality that can justify what they did to me, or other women. For these people, religion is only a tool for dictatorship and abuse. It is a regime of prejudice against women, against other regimes, against other ethnic groups, against anybody who thinks differently from them." Miss Tolouee's account of her ordeal confirms recent reports from opposition groups that Iranian intelligence officials use sexual abuse against female prisoners as an interrogation technique and even rape young women before execution so that they cannot reach heaven as virgins. Few women from the Islamic world are willing to discuss such matters, even with each other, but Miss Tolouee said that the regime routinely committed sexual attacks against female detainees. She dropped her voice to a whisper and sobbed quietly as she described her experience, hoping not to upset her six-year-old son, Nima, as he picked at a piece of pizza in a hotel restaurant. But he tried to comfort her. "I don't like it when my mummy talks about prison. It makes her cry," he said sadly. Miss Tolouee, who founded a women's group in Iranian Kurdistan and then launched a monthly magazine that was closed down by the judiciary last summer, was detained in the city of Sanandaj in August after taking part in anti-regime demonstrations that spread across Kurdish areas. "Four armed men and three armed women barged into my house at night and took me away," she said. "My kids were terrified and crying. I was questioned all night by different interrogators and then thrown alone into a cell." She was held in solitary confinement in the prison of the feared internal intelligence service, with only a blanket and a cup that often had to serve as a lavatory. For the first six nights, she was taken to a basement where interrogators demanded that she admit to organising the protests, and also that she identify co-conspirators on a list of names they put to her. "When I wouldn't do what they wanted, they slapped me. But after the sixth night, the routine changed. I was left alone in a small dark room with two men. One was the assistant prosecutor and called himself Amiri. The other had a filthy mouth and said terrible things. They started slapping me again. For the rest of the night they did to me what no woman should ever experience. Amiri said, 'I'm going to hang you, but before I hang you, I will make an example of you so that no woman will dare to open her mouth here again'." He then sexually assaulted her. When she asked Amiri how he could act like that, he told her that only Islam and clerical rule were important to him. The attack left her badly bruised and bleeding internally, but she refused to sign the papers they put before her. To her assailants' fury, she demanded to see a lawyer and cited international treaties on human rights. The following night they did not sexually molest her again as she was still bleeding - and hence "unclean". Instead, they told her that they would kill her children by setting them on fire before her eyes. Finally, she admits, she cracked. "I threw myself at Amiri's feet and begged him not to harm my children. I said I'd do anything they wanted. Whatever they wanted, I would sign." She admitted to conspiring against the regime by giving interviews to the foreign media and leading the protests, but said that she did not implicate others. After several more nights in solitary confinement, Miss Tolouee was moved to a general women's prison, where she saw horrendous festering wounds inflicted by lashings on other detainees. Trying to maintain her dignity and strength, she taught the women about their basic human rights and helped to secure the provision of sanitary supplies for the first time. "We had a great feeling of camaraderie," she recalled. Miss Tolouee was released on bail after 66 days in jail because, she said, "The regime had got what it wanted". But she still feared for her children's lives and decided to flee. She made it first to neighbouring Turkey with Nima and then her daughter Shima, 14, was smuggled out to join them. Fearful of the reach of regime agents, who have killed exiled dissidents, an opposition group called the Alliance of Iranian Women helped them to reach the United States last month. Miss Tolouee has been granted political asylum and intends to maintain her campaign against Teheran. She still has relatives in Iran - she does not want to go into details for reasons of security - but says that they have given her their blessing to speak out, despite the possible consequences. The world's attention is currently focused on Iran's nuclear ambitions under its hardline president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who came to office while Miss Tolouee was in prison. But inside Iran, she says, little has changed. "Sometimes the regime seems a bit better, sometimes a bit worse, but for the people of Iran, the suffering continues," she said. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
WHO CAUSED THE ARAB "REFUGEE" PROBLEM?
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, May 30, 2006. |
|
Arab leaders told us to flee Israel in 1948 PMW has documented yet another corroboration by an Arab "refugee" that it was Arab leaders who were responsible for the flight of Arabs from the new State of Israel in 1948. A backbone of Palestinian Authority (PA) ideology, and indeed of anti-Israel propagandists worldwide, is the myth that Israel expelled hundreds of thousands of Arabs from Israel and created the Palestinian "refugee" situation. However, an elderly woman who left Israel during Israel's War of Independence, and is today still considered a "refugee," confirmed in a PA newspaper last week that it was Arab leaders and not Israel who told her and her neighbors to flee, for tactical military reasons. This corroborates Israel's contention of the last 58 years that Arab leaders were responsible for telling their own people to leave Israel, and for the subsequent "refugee" problem. Following is this most recent testimonial, as well as two earlier statements by other "refugees" that have appeared in the PA press, all of which corroborate Israel's historical narrative. The latter two are significant because they were corroborated by still other more public Palestinians, indicating that the responsibility of the Arab leaders is known in the Palestinian world. One was confirmed by Arab Member of Knesset, Ibraham Sarsur, who was then Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel, and the other by a Palestinian journalist, Fuad Abu Higla, in the official PA daily. The following are three statements corroborating that Arabs fled Israel, under instructions of the Arab leaders: 1. Woman who fled Israel in 1948 "We heard sounds of explosions and of gunfire at the beginning of
the summer in the year of the Nakbah [1948]. They told us: The Jews
attacked our region and it is better to evacuate the village and
return, after the battle is over. And indeed there were among us [who
fled Israel] those who left a fire burning under the pot, those who
left their flock [of sheep] and those who left their money and gold
behind, based on the assumption that we would return after a few
hours." 2. Son and grandson of those who fled in 1948 An Arab viewer called Palestinian Authority TV and quoted his father and grandfather, complaining that in 1948 the Arab District Officer ordered all Arabs to leave Palestine or be labeled traitors. In response, Arab MK Ibrahim Sarsur, then Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel, cursed the leaders who ordered Arabs to leave, thus, acknowledging Israel's assertion. Statement of son and grandson of man who fled: "Mr. Ibrahim [Sarsur]. I address you as a Muslim. My father and grandfather told me that during the "Catastrophe" [establishment of Israel in 1948], our district officer issued an order that whoever stays in Palestine and in Majdel [near Ashkelon- Southern Israel] is a traitor, he is a traitor." Response from Ibrahim Sarsur, Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel: "The one who gave the order forbidding them to stay there bears guilt for this, in this life and the Afterlife throughout history until Resurrection Day." 3. Article by senior PA journalist Fuad Abu Higla, then a regular columnist in the official PA daily Al Hayat Al Jadida, wrote an article before an Arab Summit, which criticized the Arab leaders for a series of failures. One of the failures he cited, in the name of a prisoner, was that an earlier generation of Arab leaders "forced" them to leave Israel in 1948, again placing the blame for the flight on the Arab leaders. "I have received a letter from a prisoner in Acre prison, to the Arab summit: Conclusion It is clear from these statements that there is general acknowledgement among Palestinians that Arab leaders bear responsibility for the mass flight of Arabs from Israel in 1948, and were the cause of the "refugee" problem. Furthermore, the fact that this information has been validated by public figures and the media in the Palestinian Authority confirms that this responsibility is well-known - even though, for propaganda purposes, its leaders continue to blame Israel publicly for "the expulsion." Itamar Marcus is director of PMW - Palestinian Media Watch - (http://www.pmw.org.il). PMW is based in Jerusalem. Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. Contact PMW by email at pmw@pmw.org.il |
|
SAUDIS FLOUT VOW TO US TO END ISRAEL BOYCOTT
Posted by Michael Freund, May 30, 2006. |
|
Despite renewed assurances given to Washington that it is no longer enforcing a trade boycott against the Jewish state, Saudi Arabia continues to prohibit Israeli-made goods from entering its territory, The Jerusalem Post has learned. And while a senior US trade official sought to assure Congress last week that the embargo had in fact been removed, the Post found ample evidence to indicate that it remains in place. "If a product is made in Israel, then it is a problem. It is not allowed here," Muhammad al-Matrafi, a spokesman for the Director's Office of the King Khalid Airport in the Saudi capital of Riyadh, said by phone on Monday. "That is the law here in Saudi Arabia, and we do not allow those kinds of things into the kingdom," he said, adding, "If there is any mention of Israel on the container or on the product, then it can not enter Saudi Arabia." A Saudi customs official at the Persian Gulf port of Ras Tanurah was equally adamant that no Israeli-made goods would be permitted to enter the country. "There is still a ban on Israeli products, and anything declared as coming from Israel will not be allowed," said the customs official, who gave his name only as Capt. Hosni. "Some people may try to say that a product was made elsewhere, but if there is anything which shows it was made in Israel, then it is a problem," he said. Another Saudi customs official at the Al Durah land crossing on the Saudi-Jordanian border reaffirmed that the ban on Israeli-made goods remains in place. Asked by phone if products made in Israel could be brought into the desert kingdom, he angrily replied, "No, no, no. Absolutely not," before hanging up. The Saudi position appears to contradict assurances given last week by US Deputy Trade Representative Susan Schwab. In written responses to questions raised by members of the Senate Finance Committee, Schwab said that Saudi Arabia had told Washington that it was abiding by its pledge to end the boycott of the Jewish state. In November 2005, the Saudis promised the Bush administration that they would remove restrictions on trade with Israel, after Washington conditioned Riyadh's entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) on such a move. But, as the Post first reported on March 7, the Saudis went ahead and played host to a major international conference aimed at intensifying the anti-Israel boycott, raising concerns in Congress about Riyadh's compliance with its commitments. In addition, an official Saudi delegation took part in a meeting of the Arab League's boycott office in Damascus earlier this month. "We have raised this issue directly with senior Saudi officials on several occasions, both in Riyadh and in Washington," Schwab told the Senators last week. "In all cases, we have received assurances that Saudi Arabia fully understands and remains committed to its WTO obligations, including the WTO obligation to treat all WTO members according to WTO rules." The WTO bars members from engaging in discriminatory trade practices, such as embargoes or boycotts. Nonetheless, the Post has also found that a report authored by a former US diplomat and issued recently by one of the largest banks in Saudi Arabia reaffirms that the country's boycott of Israel remains in place, despite Riyadh's accession to the WTO. The 44-page document, "Saudi Arabia and the WTO," was prepared by Brad Bourland, chief economist at the Saudi Samba Financial Group. Bourland previously worked for the US State Department for 18 years, including as first secretary of the American Embassy in Riyadh, where he was responsible for analyzing the Saudi economy on behalf of the US government. In a question-and-answer section Bourland's report notes that, "Saudi Arabia's trade stance toward Israel does not change due to WTO accession... The primary Arab League boycott of Israel remains in place." Michael Freund served as an adviser to former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. This article is archived at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/ Satellite?cid=1148482069432&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull |
|
SYRIA EXTORTS TERRORIST SUBSIDY; RUSSIA AND THE ARABS, AGAIN
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 30, 2006. |
|
THE ANTI-FREE-SPEECH MOVEMENT A new trend in the West is to demand that one's adversaries be investigated and punished for mere opinion, and be tried for crazy conspiracies and impossible-to-commit crimes. US government officials constantly leak and try to railroad opponents by falsely accusing them of leaking. A Pentagon anti-terrorism expert, Michael Rubin, was accused of making a leak from a country he was not in at the time. Mr. Rubin lectured in Iceland, where local activists, some even calling themselves democrats, tried to block his events and called him a war criminal for having served in the US military and advocating the liberation of Iraq. His other crime is being a Jew. "On April 15, 2002, Austria, Belgium, France, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden endorsed a U.N. Human Rights Commission resolution legitimizing suicide bombing as a legitimate form of resistance. Europe calls its lock-step approach multilateralism, but it is group-think. Human-rights groups have condemned Israel's security fence, while ignoring previous construction of anti-terrorism barriers on disputed land not only by India, Saudi Arabia, and Morocco, but also by the United Nations itself." The resolution shows the good sense of Bush administration policy against the Intl. Criminal Court, which would subject Americans to sanctions by criminal judges. Unfortunately, Sec. Rice indicated that the US is veering towards accepting that Court (Middle East Forum, 5/12). The UNO makes more trouble than it is worth. Imagine, endorsing terrorism, totally criminal! NEW SYRIAN WAY OF AIDING TERRORISM Syria has compelled some minority-owned businesses to contribute to foreign terrorist organizations (IMRA, 5/13). One does not want to be arrested by the police of Syria! I READ THIS HASTILY "Jordan: About 2,500 Immigrants to Arrive in Israel This Summer" That was the headline of an IMRA article. I misread it as indicating that Israel was accepting 2,500 immigrants from Jordan. I was dismayed at this further evidence of Israeli stupidity about the Arab enemy. Actually, the Jordan news agency was reporting immigration of Jews into Israel. ANOTHER ARMS SMUGGLING ATTEMPT Another ship was spotted sailing from Gaza to Egypt and then back through prohibited areas. The Israeli Navy halted it. Israeli sailors boarded the ship before the Arabs could throw all the bags of explosives overboard, to destroy the evidence. This is the second known attempt at maritime smuggling, this month (IMRA, 5/15). I won't report every such incident, but wanted to show that the effort to smuggle arms continues. The proposal to let the P.A. have a port would lead to more terrorism. RUSSIA & THE ARABS, AGAIN The government of Russia intends to subsidize the P.A.. The euphemism for supporting the P.A.'s bigoted jihad is "humanitarian." It is the only evidence I have seen of Russia being humanitarian. What a strange way to manifest it, by bolstering a jihad society! The Soviet Union did the same thing, using the euphemism, "anti-imperialist." Pres. Putin, who was a dedicated Communist functionary then, and claims to have transformed himself, although he expresses nostalgia for the good old days (of mass-murder), learned to express his imperialist drive in a more acceptable, positive term. The frightening thing about this new drive against the Jewish people, as the memory of the old drive fades, is the spectacle of the supposedly more reformed and decent Western world jumping on the bandwagon. Europe is hardly Christian, and many Christian sects in the US don't level charges of "Christ-killer." But they nevertheless put the Jews in jeopardy in the name of human rights. Their indignation is reserved in behalf of Arabs hurt by Jewish self-defense, and not against Arabs acting out their bigotry in violence against Jews' human rights. Many Islamists deny that Jews have human rights or are human. The West ignores that. Sometimes people suggest that someone is not all bad, for being sincere. No credit is deserved for evil programs just because some of their followers are sincere or idealistic. Evil is evil. EVERY ONE FOR HIMSELF The "not in my neighborhood" syndrome has reached a new low in Europe's lowlands. A naturalized member of the Dutch Parliament, an ex-Muslim who reveals Islam's program for conquest, had to have guards at her apartment house. Her neighbors won a lawsuit demanding her eviction. They complained that her presence risked their lives. Muslims trying to murder her might injure them. Then evict the Muslims! They are making the whole country unsafe. In what house might she live? The government found she lied on her immigration application, so it is deporting her. She had changed her name to avoid her husband tracking her down to capture her. Muslim men do that. It's another mark against their religion, not against her. She is taking refuge in the US. The Netherlands is a country from which loyal citizens must evacuate under threat from disloyal ones, because it thinks tolerance means condoning the disloyal ones, who are intolerant and violent. Worse, political correctness is combined with selfishness. Each person looks out for himself. There should be national solidarity against the alien threat of Islam. The Dutch should expel the Muslims, and live in freedom and security. They have political correctness but neither security nor freedom of speech. Let them jettison political correctness, which couldn't be more ethically incorrect! 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. |
|
INT'L SOLIDARITY MOVEMENT CONTINUES ANTI-ISRAEL OPERATIONS
Posted by Hillel Fendel, May 30, 2006. |
|
The Int'l Solidarity Movement, an organization working in tandem with terrorist groups in Palestinian Authority areas, has begun its summer recruiting activities. Some call it a dangerous cult. The organization's goal, writes long-time anti-ISM fighter Lee Kaplan, is "to interfere with anti-terror operations of the Israeli army [and to] act as human shields for terrorist groups opposed to the existence of Israel." Citing the example of the anti-Israel rallies every Friday in the village of Bil'in, he says ISM activists incite the local Arab villagers to riot and attack Israeli soldiers guarding the security fence, and interfere at IDF roadblocks set up to keep out suicide bombers and armed terrorists. Investigative journalist David Bedein of the Israel Resource News Agency told Arutz-7, "The Israeli government classifies the ISM as a terrorist organization. This has been known ever since it was found that the two terrorists who committed the Mike's Place terrorist attack entered Israel as ISM activists." Three Israelis were murdered in that Tel Aviv attack in April 2003. Several weeks afterwards, it was learned that the terrorists had gained entry into Israel as British "peace activists." They spent the next two weeks before the attack taking part in anti-IDF demonstrations, as well as visiting Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Hevron, Ramallah, Shechem, and Gaza. They even had themselves photographed by the Western Wall, complete with kippot on their heads, while in fact they were observing and recording the security arrangements at the holy site. While traveling the country, the pair made use of their ISM contacts, some of which had been made in Gaza, with Italian journalists and with an Arab from the village of Na'ama. The Prime Minister's Office released a statement at the time condemning the ISM for playing an active role in "illegal and violent actions against IDF soldiers...." and for conducting activities "under the auspices of Palestinian terrorist organizations." Undercover Agent Kaplan, who has attended many ISM meetings in the United States, writes that the organization's volunteers are told to work "in solidarity" with Arabs who throw Molotov cocktails or rocks at soldiers. The goal is two-fold, he writes: "To try and create an international incident by having ISM activists from abroad be arrested by Israeli Authorities to undermine Israeli sovereignty, and to train US and other foreign anarchists for their perceived 'revolution' against the capitalist West and, most notably, eventually against the United States itself." Kaplan says he knows of an ISM cell in Massachusetts, named Boston2Palestine, whose members are apparently "planning on going to the Middle East for a summer of fun interfering with the Israel Defense Forces and aiding the new Hamas government in the Palestinian Authority." He has forwarded their photos to the Israel security services. In Georgetown several months ago, would-be ISM volunteers changed their minds about joining when they heard that their identities would be forwarded to the Israeli border authorities. Robert Malovany, the father of one ISM activist has written to Kaplan as follows: "I thought I would give you an update on our situation with our son Brian. As you might have expected, our relationship has gone from bad to worse. We had hoped that we would have some warning [before he went] back to the West Bank with the ISM. It didn't work out that way... He took off for Israel and stayed there for 4 or 5 months doing the kind of mischief the ISM is famous for... Interestingly, we stayed in contact with his girlfriend [who] gradually realized that he had become absorbed in a cult (ISM)... The ISM cult really has a hold on him... The local director of the Solidarity Movement, George Rishmawi, explained to the San Francisco Chronicle that the recruitment of American student volunteers is useful to the Palestinian Movement because "if some of these foreign volunteers get shot or even killed, then the international media will sit up and take notice." For more information, go to http://www.stoptheism.com/ Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Israel National News. |
|
'ASABIYAH
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, May 30, 2006. |
|
In light of all the current unilateral concessions the Jew of the Nations continues to make to merely gain acceptance for its survival from a largely hostile world, there is some important advice and wisdom to be heeded originating in the Muslim world itself. Zionism has come to mean different things to people over the millennia. The one thing that all the various interpretations have had in common, however, involved an eradication of the victimization and statelessness the Jew had witnessed since he took on the Roman conqueror of much of the world for his freedom and lost. Massacres, forced conversions, ghettoization, demonization, dehumanization, inquisitions, and such all carefully paved the road to Auschwitz. The Jew was the alleged deicide people in the Christian West and kilab yahud--"Jew dog"--killers of Prophets in the Muslim East. Zionism meshed together all of the Jews' subsequent diverse fears, hopes, and dreams for a better tomorrow. And the key to its future had everything to do with transforming the powerless state of the Jews as a people. Enter 'Abd-ar-Rahman Abu Zayd ibn Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Khaldun. Born in the early 14th century C.E., Ibn Khaldun was one of the most important philosophers, jurists, and scholars the Islamic--or any--civilization would ever produce. Graduate students in Middle Eastern Affairs usually come to know Ibn Khaldun through his work, The Muqaddimah. It is actually the introduction to and Book I of the Kitab al-'Ibar, his History of the World. Besides simply giving an account of events, he offers a rational explanation of the "hows" and "whys" they occurred. Using frequent historical illustrations to make his points, it is here that this great Muslim scholar has some very important things to say about both Jews and Israel. Indeed, Israel's current leaders should pay careful attention to the lessons. Before The Muqaddimah was introduced into this discussion, I had mentioned the tragic state of the Jewish experience and the negative consequences which had derived from this. Ibn Khaldun spoke to this matter as well. Let's listen: "Students, slaves, and servants brought up with injustice and tyrannical force are overcome by it ... it makes them feel oppressed induces them to lie, be insincere... their outward behavior differs from what they are thinking. Thus they are taught deceit and trickery... they become dependent on others... their souls become too indolent to acquire ... good character qualities. Thus they fall short of their potentialities and do not reach the limit of their humanity. That is what happened to every nation which fell under the yoke of tyranny and learned the meaning of injustice. However one chooses to respond to his assessment, Zionism's non-religious raison d'etre would have been obvious to Ibn Khaldun, one of the world's most important thinkers of all times. He devoted much effort to the evolution and development of the Jewish nation, its early struggles with its adversaries, and its later fight for freedom with the mighty Roman Empire and its consequences. He then followed this with an analysis of the Jews' condition of powerlessness throughout subsequent generations. Ibn Khaldun would have well understood the rebirth of Israel and the 'asabiyah -- the essential group consciousness emphasized throughout his writings--which made it possible... even if it was a consciousness born not only out of a "noble house" but also from the desperation of the Jews' perpetual victim, scapegoat, and whipping post status. While he commented that the Jews, who had one of the most "noble houses" in the world, had subsequently lost their 'asabiyah and for centuries suffered constant humiliations as a result, he would have applauded and understood their desire to end this unfortunate turn of events. The Muqaddimah emphasizes that the Jews were forced to wander in the desert for forty years due to their "meekness." Ibn Khaldun stressed that this was necessary so that a new generation would arise with a new, more powerful 'asabiyah. Prime Minister Olmert and his supporters should pay close attention to this...Jews can't afford another of such wanderings. At a time when Arabs are demanding their 22nd state (most having been created by the conquest of non-Arab peoples and their lands), this great Muslim scholar would have approved and viewed the resurrection of Israel as an answer to the unique plight of stateless Jews... the end of an even more tragic and extensive wandering and period of meekness and powerlessness in the desert. Gerald A. Honigman, a Florida educator, has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in both the print media and on websites. Contact him at honigman6@msn.com or go to his website: http://geraldahonigman.com/blog.php |
|
WASH POST CONTINUED SLANTED REPORTING ON ISRAEL
Posted by Robert Samet, May 29, 2006. |
|
Friends:
The Washington Post has continued its steady drumbeat of slanted and agenda-driven reporting and editorializing on matters pertaining to Israel. Many of you have been following our alerts on the Eye On The Post web site at http://www.eyeonthepost.org. For those of you who may have missed them, we are setting forth below the headlines of our alerts for the months of April and May, 2006, along with a clickable link to enable you to read the full alert. Whether or not you live in the Washington, DC area or even subscribe to the Washington Post, you are vitally important to us. Part of our success depends on widespread circulation of our message. The Post is protective of its reputation as one of the leading newspapers in the US, and it will respond if shown that its image worldwide is suffering because a few editors or journalists are determined to inject their own political opinions and biases into news reports. You can help us simply by reading our alerts, being aware of the Post's anti-Israel agenda and then forwarding this email alert to as many people as you know who care about the damage being done to Israel's image. Our alerts are already reaching many thousands of people around the world. With your help we can expand our readership exponentially. Sunday, May 21, 2006 The Washington Post Fails To Report On The Constant Stream Of Vicious Anti-Semitism Preached And Taught Throughout The Arab World Friday, May 19, 2006 Carping At Israel Is Habit Forming - Post Prepares for Olmert Visit By Donating Op-Ed Space to Critics of Israel's Planned Unilateral West Bank Withdrawal Thursday, May 18, 2006 The Washington Post Doesn't Just Report News, It Makes It - Post Campaigns To Reverse International Community's Suspension Of Direct Aid To Hamas Monday, May 15, 2006 Post Op-Ed Piece Advocates Appeasement Of Hamas Friday, May 12, 2006 Post Reporter Injects Own Opinion By Asserting, Without Adequate Support, That Withholding of International Aid is Causing Palestinians to Increase Their Support for Hamas Tuesday, May 9, 2006 On Eve of Quartet Meeting, Post Publishes Slanted Article Favoring Resumption of Funding of Hamas-Led Palestinian Authority - Conceals Hamas's Violent Past and Goal To Destroy Israel Monday, May 8, 2006 Post Uses Terminology Portraying Terrorist Groups and Their Acts As Those of Legitimate Armies During Times of War - Continues to Airbrush Hamas by Omitting Any Reference to the Thousands of Israelis Murdered and Goal to Destroy Israel Saturday, April 29, 2006 Post Columnist David Ignatius Sees Iran, Al Qaeda, Hamas and Hizbollah as Fighting A War Against The West For Dignity and Respect Saturday, April 1, 2006 Washington Post Fails to Report Terrorist Launch of Katyusha Rocket
Into Israel
Robert G. Samet is Chairman EyeOnThePost, Inc. Contact "Eye on the
Post" at info@eyeonthepost.org
|
|
THE REVOUTIONARY REVELATION
Posted by Sarah Yoheved Rigler, May 29, 2006. |
|
In Honor of my mother
What would the world look like if the Torah had never been given? Join me, if you will, for a tour of New York City in a hypothetical world where the revelation at Sinai never took place. We drive across the Brooklyn Bridge, speed down the FDR Drive, and park our car in a massive concrete-and-steel garage. We walk through the streets of downtown Manhattan and crane our necks to gaze at the glittering tops of the skyscrapers. Knowing that the pagan civilizations of antiquity excelled in technological accomplishments, we're not surprised that technology forges ahead in a world devoid of Torah. Next we meander through Lincoln Center. We hear the music of a concert in progress, pass a theater where a contemporary drama is being enacted, and see well-dressed people lined up to buy tickets for the ballet. Art does not need Torah to flourish. From there we head to Wall Street. We peek into the Stock Exchange. Business and commerce are thriving. No difference here. Our tour then takes us to residential neighborhoods crammed with high-rise apartment buildings. Here for the first time we notice something missing. There are no schools. What happened to PS 132 and Woodrow Wilson High School and City College? Uptown, we are told, there is one lively academy for the wealthy and well-born, but education for the masses? Our guide snickers. "How ludicrous!" As Rabbi Ken Spiro points out in his superb book, WorldPerfect education for all was an implausible notion in the pagan world (as in polytheistic societies today), where the literacy rate was generally 1/10 of 1%. Even ancient Rome, which needed a literate ruling class to administer its far-flung empire, boasted a literary rate of only 10-15%. Not only did Greece and Rome not deem it beneficial to educate the masses, but they viewed education as a potential danger to the stability of society. The Torah innovated the idea of education for all. It specifically commanded parents to educate their children. [Deut. 6:7] In fact, a code of law as intricate as the Torah and as obligatory on all members of the society, inherently demanded study. If a Jew didn't know what all the commandments entailed, how could he fulfill them? Thus mass education was a Torah-mandated value throughout Jewish history, causing the medieval monk Peter Abelhard to write: "A Jew, however poor, even if he had ten sons, would put them all to letters, not for gain as the Christians do, but for understanding of God's law. And not only his sons, but his daughters." As we continue our tour of New York City, we notice that we have not heard a single ambulance siren. When we ask, "Where are the hospitals?" we are met with a blank stare. "You must know what we mean," we persist, "the place where the sick are cared for and lives are saved." A glint of understanding: "Oh, yes. We have a place which provides medical care... for those who can afford it, of course." "And for the others?" we ask, appalled. "You can't just let them die." "Why not?" is the puzzled retort. No society before Torah or without Torah attributed intrinsic value to human life. It follows that for the government or society to spend its resources to heal or preserve life -- and to feel such urgency to save life that they would outfit ambulances -- would be considered a nonsensical enterprise. The right to life, which the American Declaration of Independence considered "self-evident," was not evident to any society in the world before or after Sinai, except where the Torah's influence penetrated. On the contrary, infanticide of undesirable babies (such as girls and those with even minor disabilities) was universally practiced, and endorsed by such "enlightened" thinkers as Aristotle. Killing for entertainment was the most popular amusement in ancient Rome, where 50,000 people would crowd into the Coliseum to watch convicted criminals (for capital crimes such as professing Christianity), slaves, and POWs fed to the lions and gladiators fight to the death. In between these spectacular killings, lest the crowd get bored, routine executions by burning, beheading, and skinning people alive were offered for amusement during intermission. Into a world where killing for convenience or sport was the universal norm, the Torah introduced the concept of the sacredness of life. "Do not murder," the sixth of the Ten Commandments revealed at Sinai, was not simply ethical pragmatism as it was in other ancient law codes, whose goal was to protect not the individual, but rather the stability of society. The Torah asserted that all human beings -- including infants, slaves, and convicted criminals -- were holy because they were created in the image of God. As the Talmud proclaimed: "He who saves one life is as if he had saved the whole world." The value of the individual -- and therefore his or her life -- is a Torah innovation. In India in 1981, I knew a couple whose 22-year-old son had been injured in a traffic accident while riding his motor scooter through the streets of Calcutta. The young man lay on the crowded thoroughfare for seven hours, until he bled to death. This is a society where Torah has not penetrated. Our tour of Manhattan-sans-Torah takes us to a small but stately building. We're informed that this is the courthouse for the entire city. "How can such a small courthouse serve millions of people?" we ask, perplexed. "Millions of people?" is the astonished reply. "Only a few thousand people -- the elite -- have the right to bring lawsuits." When the Torah laid down the principle of equal justice before the law, the rest of the world must have laughed. "You shall not commit a perversion of justice; you shall not favor the poor and you shall not honor the mighty" [Lev. 19:15] would have been regarded as outlandish had not God commanded it. According to the Torah, even a king is not above the law and even a slave is not below it. Jewish courts do -- and always have -- heard cases initiated by wronged workers, women, and foreigners. By contrast, ancient Athens, the so-called "cradle of democracy," extended full legal rights to only a few thousand men who owned land, leaving its other hundreds of thousands of residents (including women, artisans, peasants, and slaves) with no recourse to the law. In the corridor of the courthouse, we notice something curious on the wall. It is a conglomeration of twelve lines of numbers. "This is a calendar," our guide explains. "It marks off the days, months, and years." "What about the weeks?" we ask. "What are weeks?" our guide inquires quizzically. The division of time into seven-day units punctuated by the Sabbath, a day of rest, is an invention of the Torah. It corresponds to no natural cycle. Completely counter-productive of material goals, the Sabbath addresses the unique spiritual need for reconnection and re-creation. Even those denizens of the Western world for whom "the weekend" means not spiritual refreshment but shopping at the mall must appreciate the Torah's gift of one day off in seven. Having lived in India, a society where every day resembles every other (except for the Sunday closing of schools and government offices, imposed by the British colonizers), I have seen how human beings are eroded by the tedium of a 365-day year of unremitting work. Now, in the small courthouse, I look around and notice the same exhausted expressions. We head over to First Avenue and 46th Street only to discover that the familiar landmark of the United Nations headquarters is absent. Bewildered, we ask: "Isn't there some international body whose purpose, at least in principle, is to settle disputes between nations in a peaceful manner, without resort to war?" Our guide is confused. "What would be the point of that? War is the noblest endeavor of man. War spawns heroes -- mighty warriors whose prowess vanquishes the enemy. And how else will a nation expand its borders and increase its power without the glorious enterprise of war?" We despair of a meeting of minds, and begin to search for a curved wall where the antithetical vision of the Hebrew prophet Isaiah is emblazoned: "And they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks, nations shall not lift up sword against nations. Neither shall they learn war anymore." We search in vain. There is no inscription, no wall, not even the ideal of peace in this world in which the Torah was never given. We walk north, past the fashionable uptown, into a low-income neighborhood, and here the most conspicuous difference grips us. The streets are lined with unfortunates -- blind people, crippled people, starving children. They reach out their hands and plead with us for help. It reminds me of the cities of India. "Why are these people on the street?" we demand. "Where are the orphanages? The social service agencies? The institutions for the blind and the deaf? The soup kitchens? The rehabilitation centers for the handicapped?" "What are you suggesting?" comes the outraged response. "There's nothing like that here, and why should there be? We didn't hurt these people. It's not our fault if they're hungry or handicapped. We bear no responsibility to help them." As Ken Spiro points out in WorldPerfect, into a world where numerous law codes prohibited murder, theft, and various anti-social behaviors, the Torah burst into the scene with a completely novel concept: the obligation to proactively do good. "Love your neighbor as yourself," [Lev. 19:18] and "Do not stand by your neighbor's blood," [Lev. 19:16] charged humankind with social responsibility, an idea that sans-Torah societies never dreamed of. The Torah, which Thomas Huxley called, "the Magna Carta of the poor and of the oppressed," drove this point home with a multitude of specific commandments aimed at providing aid to the impoverished, the widow, the orphan, and the alien. The Torah obligated human beings to take responsibility for the welfare of people outside their own clans and beyond the precincts of their own homes, not because it was salubrious for the body politic, but because a just and loving God demanded compassion from all His children for all His children. This planet has never known a more original idea. THE TORAH REVOLUTION Our tour of New York City would not suffice to reveal the truly cataclysmic revolution caused by the revelation at Sinai. Without Torah not only our world but also our lives would be profoundly different. If we lived in a world in which the Torah had never been given, we
would be unrecognizable to ourselves. As author Thomas Cahill, a Without the Jews, we would see the world through different eyes, hear with different ears, even feel with different feelings. And not only would our sensorium, the screen through which we receive the world, be different: we would think with a different mind, interpret all our experience differently, draw different conclusions from the things that befall us. And we would set a different course for our lives. It is important to keep in mind that all the innovations with which Cahill credits the Jews (whom he labels, "the inventors of Western culture") have their source not in the Jews themselves, but in the Divine revelation to the Jews. While the Patriarch Abraham was indeed an original thinker and the one who discovered monotheism, no person or force in the world could have so radically changed the world. The lever which lifted the planet had to be positioned outside it. Such drastic transformation could have been initiated only through Divine revelation. What was the paradigm shift that revolutionized human thinking and striving? Cahill points out that all ancient cultures viewed time as cyclical. No event or person was unique. He writes: The Jews were the first people to break out of this circle, to find a new way of thinking and experiencing, a new way of understanding and feeling the world, so much so that it may be said with some justice that theirs is the only new idea that human beings have ever had. But their worldview has become so much a part of us that at this point it might as well have been written into our cells as a genetic code. Time is the warp upon which human beings weave their sense of reality. Where time is regarded as cyclical, reality is characterized by fate, the inexorable predictability of nature, the devaluation of the present moment, and the futility of human striving. Circles have no purpose; they revolve round and round. The gods of the ancient pantheons, like the gods of India today, claim no purpose. Their actions are divine sport, lila in Hindu terminology, meaning "play." In such a worldview, the only worthy human goal is liberation -- to somehow escape the wheel of birth and death. The Torah introduced a purposeful God, with a plan for human history. If humankind will obey the commandments -- the Divinely ordained blueprint -- then a utopian world will ensue. The future will be different -- and better -- than the past. Thus the Torah introduced linear time. In so doing, it catapulted humanity into a world of meaningful moral choices, where human beings could create their own destinies, forge their own futures. The narratives of the Torah take place in linear -- not cyclical -- time. They recount the stories of people who were important not as archetypes (as in all other ancient epics), but as individuals, people who were important not because they wielded great power, but because they made significant choices. Those inner choices impacted their descendents and created history. History not as a record of wars waged and won, but as a testimony of moral battles that gave life meaning and purpose. Abraham obeying God even at the cost of his precious son's life, Jacob wrestling with the angel of evil, Joseph resisting the temptations of Potipher's wife, Moses reluctantly accepting the mantle of leadership at the burning bush -- these are the momentous events which the Torah chooses to recount. In so doing, it imbues all of our lives, all down the ages, with meaning and possibility. THE REVELATION AT SINAI The upcoming holiday of Shavuot commemorates the world-shaking event of the Divine revelation at Sinai. It is a day to reaffirm our commitment to studying and implementing the Torah. On that day 3316 years ago, the infinite God burst through the barrier of human finitude and in the presence of an entire nation revealed His Commandments. Thomas Cahill's description of the setting is lyrical: It is no accident, therefore, that the great revelations of God's own Name and of his Commandments occur in a mountainous desert, as far from civilization and its contents as possible, in a place as unlike the lush predictabilities and comforts of the Nile and the Euphrates as this earth of ours can offer. If God -- the Real God, the One God -- was to speak to human beings and if there was any possibility of their hearing him, it could happen only in a place stripped of all cultural reference points, where even nature... seemed absent. Only amid inhuman rock and dust could this fallible collection of human beings imagine becoming human in a new way. The revelation at Sinai was the singular most momentous event in human history. When I consider what our lives would have been without it, I can only shudder. Sara Yoheved Rigler is a graduate of Brandeis University. Her spiritual journey took her to India and through fifteen years of teaching Vedanta philosophy and meditation. Since 1985, she has been practicing Torah Judaism. A writer, she resides in the Old City of Jerusalem with her husband and children. Her articles have appeared in: Jewish Women Speak about Jewish Matters, Chicken Soup for the Jewish Soul, and Heaven on Earth. Sara Rigler is one of the feature authors in Aish.com's latest book, "Israel: Life in the Shadow of Terror". This article is archived www.aish.com/shavuotthemes/shavuotthemesdefault/ The_Revolutionary_Revelation.asp |
|
HUMAN-RIGHTS SCHIZOPHRENIA
Posted by Gerald M. Steinberg, May 29, 2006. |
|
Human Rights Watch shows a disturbing disparity in its treatment of Israel and China. This article appeared in National Review (http://article.nationalreview.com/ ?q=YzdkNDA3NTY4ZmMwMzFmNWYwYTBkMWU4MzFiMTMxNGM) Human Rights Watch, published a powerful piece on China coinciding with President Hu's recent visit to the U.S. It was an eloquent defense of the need to press China to implement basic human rights, and it was evidence that HRW, when it is not influenced by personal political agendas, can be an effective advocate of human rights. Unfortunately, when it comes to Israel, this has not been the case. HRW has been criticized in the past for Israel-bashing. This has been the source of intense disagreements between Roth and me. I went so far as to call for his replacement, accusing him of exploiting human-rights norms in promoting a radical anti-democracy agenda. In his article on China, however, I found myself agreeing with his every word. And the same has been true with respect to HRW's recent emphasis on Sudan, Syria, and Iran. So either it is I, along with other critics of HRW, who blindly oppose legitimate criticism of Israel (it might be dismissed as part of a neoconservative ideology), or it is Roth and HRW who apply different and unique criteria that single out Israel unfairly. The evidence shows that it is the latter. As a detailed NGO Monitor study has shown, between 2001 and 2004, during the height of the terror attacks against Israel, HRW focused one-third of its entire Middle East effort on condemnations directed at Israel. This went far beyond legitimate criticism, and suggested an obsession. Far more pages, reports, press conferences, letters, films, and photography-exhibits sponsored by HRW were devoted to allegations against Israel than to the slaughter taking place in Sudan, or the Palestinian terror campaign. Roth and other HRW officials adopted the false characterization of an "all powerful and aggressive Israel" in contrast to "Palestinian victimization." In the process, human-rights norms were reduced to instruments used to promote personal ideologies and entirely subjective perceptions of power. The most infuriating instance of HRW's bias came in 2004, when Roth went to the American Colony Hotel in Jerusalem to promote "Razing Rafah," a one sided denunciation of Israeli policy. Its contents were based primarily on unsubstantiated reports of Palestinians, selected journalists, and so-called experts on tunneling. (The IDF actions were in response to the smuggling of weapons and explosives through tunnels under the border with Egypt.) Apart from the tendentious reporting, the extensive use of loaded terms, such as "war crimes," "violation of international law," etc. -- used far more often in HRW reports on Israel than in reports on all other Middle East states -- fed anti-Israel divestment and boycott campaigns. HRW officials participated actively and directly in demonstrations to promote the Caterpillar boycott, and in pressing the U.N. resolutions referring Israel's security barrier to the misnamed International Court of Justice. As a result, it is questionable whether HRW's reports on and activities concerning China and elsewhere can be considered credible. The answer, which is far from satisfactory, lies in the recognition that Israel is increasingly treated emotionally, making for an exceptional case in almost every sphere. In contrast, there is no such political or ideological framework that taints HRW's activities with respect to China. After the Cold War, Robert Bernstein, who founded Helsinki Watch (HRW's original name) in the 1970s, has focused much of his energies and attention on China. For him, and for many other HRW's founders, opposition to China's oppression of dissidents is a direct continuation of Helsinki Watch's original mission. Moreover, HRW's activities concerning China are overseen by serious professionals, such as Harvard Professor Merle Goldman. As a result, HRW's articles and reports on China are focused, credible, and do not reflect personal and agendas and emotions. This is not the case for HRW's activities with respect to Israel. In addition to Roth, Reed Brody, who served as legal counsel, has shown a particular antipathy to the Jewish state. Brody headed HRW's delegation to the NGO forum of the 2001 Durban Conference, which adopted the strategy of labeling Israel as an "apartheid state." He was also among the leaders of the effort to bring Prime Minister Sharon to trial in Belgium. (Brody's candidacy for a position on the U.N. Commission on Human Rights was recently withdrawn.) HRW's Middle East group also includes Joe Stork, who had been a senior figure in the radical MERIP, Sarah Leah Whitson, whose anti-Israel agenda was reflected in her work with MADRE, and Lucy Mair, who had previously written for the Electronic Intifada. These are not professional appointments, and do not create confidence in the credibility of HRW's reports on Israel. This bifurcation, or even schizophrenia, in HRW's approach to evaluating human rights is disturbing. The absence of credibility in one area inevitably spills over into the others, as HRW's board members increasingly recognize. In the past year, they have imposed a control mechanism on activities dealing with the Middle East, leading to a noticeable (if belated) emphasis on Darfur, as well as adding Syria, Libya, and Saudi Arabia to HRW's agenda. The hostility toward and distortions concerning Israel continue -- as seen in recent public letters with the standard condemnations -- but the volume has been reduced significantly. Nevertheless, if HRW wants to be seen as credible, and to have the moral impact on China, Darfur, and elsewhere that its founders and main supporters seek, the emotional anti-Israel agenda that goes far beyond legitimate criticism must go. Beyond rehabilitating this important organization, these measures will help to restore the tattered reputation of human-rights worldwide. Gerald Steinberg heads the Program on Conflict Management at Bar Ilan University and is the editor of NGO Monitor. |
|
ISRAELI POLICE FOLLOW ABUSIVE SOVIET MODEL; ISRAEL'S WORST GOVERNMENT PICKS WRONG ENEMY
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 29, 2006. |
|
HEAVILY ARMED EGYPT TOTTERING Egyptians are rising up in. Only naked power keeps the government in position, for now. The US has again confused the arming of a foreign government for external war with keeping it stable against civil strife. As people protest openly against corruption and oppression, their ostensibly democratic movement may pave the way for Islamist hegemony. The result would be more oppression and the use of that big army that US taxpayers provided. It would be a big victory for jihad. I don't know whether US criticism of Egyptian corruption and oppression, unaccompanied by warning about Islamic oppression, helps or harms. We don't want to be identified with the outgoing regime, but we don't want to grease the skids for an incoming Islamist regime. There is no indication that the US is aware of the problem. Likewise, there is no indication that, when the US denounced Russia for its retreat into totalitarianism, it stressed the issues it is likeliest to get results with. Did we just goad Pres. Putin to dig his heels in? Were we warning him or our own people of the Cold War's return? Did we try to convince Putin that Russia's interest lay in working with the US to stop Islamism, contain China, and gain prosperity without risking nuclear war by rogue states? How come he talks about the US being an enemy? How do we try to dissuade him? Tactfully or bullyingly? But I digress. How did Egypt descend into semi-anarchy? For one thing, Pres. Bush set in motion a movement for democracy without defining "democracy." All the dissidents now claim to speak in its name, though some of them are far from democratic. For another, dictators often don't have good retirement plans. They usually try to retain power until they are too feeble to sustain it. They defer putting their successors into the limelight in time to show there is what appears to the people as a legitimate succession. Perhaps they amass wealth too long, far beyond what in the few years left to them, they can spend in eventual exile. ISRAELI POLICE: LIKE U.S. OR SOVIET POLICE? Hebron Jewish activist Noam Federman has been arrested on false charges dozens of times. Recently his wife, of slight build, held weekly, legal demonstrations outside his jail. One night, the police kicked her, threw her down, and beat her in front of her children and followers, whom the police kept at bay. She asked to go to the hospital for her injuries. The police instead interrogated her for three hours at the station, before letting her go. Her injuries kept her from demonstrating the next week, but she is not afraid. She has her husband's courage. Those are people to be proud of. The government is to be ashamed of. It has a reputation of being a democratic, but speech is not free, policemen's fists are. US police would have let her be treated first. ISRAEL IN DENIAL ABOUT ROCKET MENACE The Arabs have been firing rockets daily from Gaza. They have been trying to smuggle rockets into Judea-Samaria and to manufacture them. IDF raids have destroyed some of those rocket factories. The IDF raids have been minimal, rather than sweeping. Several times the Army denied that rockets have been fired at Israeli cities from Judea-Samaria, but then admitted they were fired from there. The political leadership knows of these attacks, but does not comment about them. If the leadership publicly admitted that rocket raids have begun from Judea-Samaria, and that if the Jewish population and Army were removed from Judea-Samaria, the Arabs would get thousands of rockets, which could reach all of Israeli cities, the withdrawal policy would come in for thoughtful criticism. Could official government policy be that what the people don't know, will hurt them? (IMRA, 5/11.) Persisting in a policy that the leaders know would lead to thousands of casualties is more than stupidity but neurotic. It shows the grip upon supposedly sentient human beings of ideology, corruption, bias, and neurosis. SHORT-LIVED TRUCE IN P.A. After a long period of daily strife among the armed groups in Gaza, Hamas and Fatah declared a truce. It lasted one day. Then Hamas people attempted to assassinate Fatah members. Fatah men shot some Hamas men in retaliation. The EU got Israel to relinquish some funds into that snakes' den for "humanitarian" reasons (Arut-7, 5/11). MUSLIM ARAB COMPLAINTS Since the 1920s, before there was modern Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, the Palestinian Arab leadership frequently has tried to rouse its masses to violence by claiming that "the Jews" were attacking al-Aqsa mosque or planning to destroy it or were at war with Islam. A Nazi ally, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem accused the British of plotting to destroy Islam (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/11). Islam does not respect other religions' rights; Israel does. Britain and Israel practice appeasement of Islam. Muslim complaints about attacks and plots by Britain and Israel bear no truth. Non-Muslims should disregard Muslim complaints as mere propaganda. The complaints are no reliable than those of the Nazis and Communists. Totalitarians paint themselves as victims to mask their aggression and to provide a pretext for attack. Our government and journalists should become adept at exposing the false accusations. JORDAN DOESN'T GET IT Jordan has uncovered plots by Hamas, which smuggled arms into Jordan, to attack in Jordan. Jordan invited Hamas to discuss a resolution with it, but Hamas refused. The royal government issued a statement expressing puzzlement that despite its support for the Palestinian Arab cause, Hamas tries to attack it (IMRA, 5/11). Doesn't Jordan get it? Islamists don't work against its enemies in an orderly, hierarchical way. It doesn't attack only those whom it considers its worst enemies. It attacks lukewarm friends. It seeks power wherever it can get it. As fellow Muslims sharing the same religious beliefs and code of ethics that permits dissembling and requires intolerance, Jordanian officials should understand that. Just as W. European appeasement of Islamists did not leave it safe from the Islamists, neither does Jordanian appeasement. The only safe way to be safe is to crush the Islamists and to keep them from organizing. ISRAEL'S WORST GOVERNMENT PICKS WRONG ENEMY Israel may have its worst government ever. From the Prime Minister on down, all the officials seem to have been given their posts as inducements to support PM Olmert's abandonment scheme. Many of these officials are under threat of indictment for corruption. Few are competent to run any department. They have been acquiring riches and power, while neglecting water shortages and defense. They are training the Army to attack Jews and not the real enemy. The abandonment scheme fits in with Bush policy. There may be a fake peace obtained by major Israeli concessions, so that Pres. Bush can pretend he is leaving a legacy of peace and to have solved the Arab-Israel conflict (Winston Mid East Analysis, 5/12). If there were the alleged Zionist propaganda machine, it would denounce Olmert's scheme and undercut Bush's pretense by showing no fake peace would last. ARAB REFORMER SEES VICTORY An Arab reformer took the taped death threats by the three most notorious Islamist leaders as marks of desperation. He contends that they know they cannot win by argument, so they resort to threats. He thinks they are being ground down and that the reformers slowly are winning (IMRA, 5/12 from MEMRI). Not convincing. Although those three are in hiding, Islamists are gaining ground in the P.A., Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Israel. They are strong in Lebanon, are fighting now in Somalia, and are making a comeback in Afghanistan. The other N. African countries just granted Islamists an amnesty, which indicates seeking their support. The government of Iraq is dominated by Islamists. The US and Israel practice a degree of appeasement. Appeasement encourages people to join the Islamists. Our timidity emboldens them. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com. |
|
THIS IS OUR LAND
Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, May 29, 2006. |
|
In his book The Future of Israel, historian Devin Sper writes eloquently about the Land of Israel. He cites ancient writers who confirmed that the Land of Israel had the most excellent and fertile soil, productive of every variety of fruit. Josephus is quoted: The whole area is excellent for crops or cattle and rich in forests of every kind, so that by its adaptability it invites even those least inclined to work on the land... All their steams are remarkably sweet, and lush grass is so plentiful that the milk-yield of their cows is exceptionally heavy. The final proof of their outstanding productivity is the swarming population of [Judea and Samaria]. Linen from Beth Shean was considered the best in the Roman Empire. Israel was the only source in the world for balsam, the most valued fragrance in the ancient world, sold for its weight in gold. The Dead Sea produced a superior asphalt known as "Bitumin judaicum," valued for caulking ships and for medicinal purposes. From the Mediterranean shores of Haifa and Tyre came the world's only source of the snail from which was produced the purple dye sought by all royalty in the western world, still the color of royalty today. And on these same shores were beaches -- seasonal delights -- and elsewhere hot springs for relaxation and natural mineral baths. Crowning this glorious land was her capital Jerusalem. Jerusalem was deemed by foreign observers as among the most strongly fortified and most beautiful of cities. Alas, all this beauty was destroyed by the Romans, and, over the centuries, the Land itself was laid waste by the Arabs. But Sper reminds us: "In what other land do people, whose ancestors resided elsewhere for almost 2,000 years, on arriving for the first time, kneel down and kiss the ground? 'For every Jew, wherever he lives, possesses a portion of the Land of Israel.' What other people, when forbidden the opportunity, to live in its land, has over centuries, insisted on being buried there, consoled by the hope that their remains might yet touch its sacred soil." This land is ours. Our law instructs us to mourn for the land as we would mourn for the dead. Rav Avraham Kook, the first Chief Rabbi of Palestine, teaches us: "The hope of Redemption is the force that sustains Judaism in the Diaspora [and] the Judaism of Eretz Israel is that very Redemption." Nahmanides (the RAMBAN) instructs us: "In all generations we were enjoined to conquer the land; and I say, that the precept to which the Sages ascribe such importance, namely to dwell in the Land of Israel -- all of it is a positive precept. Consequently this is a positive precept incumbent on each generation, binding upon every one of us even in time of exile." The Rabbis taught, "A man should ever strive to live in the Land of Israel, even in a city whose inhabitants are mostly heathens, and should avoid living outside the Land even in a city whose inhabitants are mostly Jews. For he who lives in the Land is like one who has a God, whereas he whom lives outside the Land is like one who has no God." Sper reminds us that, "Jews, whose ancestors had resided in other lands for centuries, proved ready to pick up and leave at a moment's notice when promised even the faintest hope of return to the Land of Israel. In the 17th century, return to the Land of Israel was not only preached but also actualized by followers of Shabtai Zevi, the Gaon of Vilna, and the Baal Shem Tov: hundreds settled in Safed, Tiberias, and Jerusalem." Most remarkable, the Jews of Yemen, who had resided in Yemen since Biblical times, upon hearing of the reestablishment of the Jewish state in Israel in 1948, simply started walking "home" en masse, across the Arabian Desert! In every synagogue throughout the world the entire congregation faces the Land of Israel. This land belongs solely and exclusively to the Jewish People. This land is ours. Professor Paul Eidelberg is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at pauleid@netvision.net.il |
|
'GOD'S CHOSEN PEOPLE' HAVE RIGHT TO SURVIVE AND THRIVE
Posted by Gary S., May 29, 2006. |
|
This was written by Susan Philips, who has been a delegate to the Church of Ireland Dublin and Glendalough synod and was for several years an independent member for Wicklow County Council. Rite and Reason: It is disconcerting that God's plan for the Jewish people - their return to the land from which they were dispersed - is ignored by those who support the Palestinian cause, writes Susan Philips. If any sense is to be made of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict it is imperative for writers to understand that politics and religion are inextricably intertwined. To even remotely suggest that the hatred and antagonism between the two is merely a matter of land, completely ignores the dictates of Muslim extremism where jihad (holy war) is not an option but a duty. The very roots of this argument lie in a spiritual conflict between two opposing faiths and therefore can never be resolved solely through political initiatives or liberal ideological reflection. The Church of Ireland is a broad-based church and therefore allows for diverse opinions in relation to biblical understanding. However, when John Couchman, writing in this column from his position as a delegate at the recent General Synod, discusses the Palestinian/Israel impasse and openly champions the Palestinian cause, it is disconcerting to find that in doing so he ignores the spiritual and Biblical exhortation to bless Israel. He prefers to adopt an anti-Semitic stance in his open support of Hamas, a recognized terrorist group whose demands include "a single Palestinian state from the sea to the sea". Their recent elections may indeed have been under democratic rules, but does that confer legitimacy to an internationally-labelled illegitimate organization? As Europe sped towards the Holocaust in the 1930s, similar misplaced liberal support helped keep the train for Hitler's final solution firmly on the tracks. Central to the Israel/Palestinian dispute is that land which was for centuries the home of Jewish people, was conquered by Muslim armies in the 7th century and generally remained under their control until the Ottoman Empire was disbanded after the first World War. It is important to understand that within fundamental Islam it is considered an abomination for land that was once Dar al-Islam (land controlled by Muslims) to become Dar al-Harb (land where the struggle for ownership continues). This explains why Muslims are waging war along the edges of the Islamic world in countries such as Chechnya, Indonesia, Somalia, Kashmir, the Philippines, Sudan and Ethiopia and why those behind the Madrid bombings spoke of the return of the Spanish city of Seville to the "lost paradise" of Al Andalus. The Moors left Spain in 1492! Meanwhile Israel has had to fight five wars in order to survive the barely 50 years of official statehood. It is of little wonder that although they do react to international pressure and recently, for example, withdrew from the Gaza, they also resort to fences, checkpoints and some pretty brutal retaliation in order to preserve their existence. Actually, many know that the concept of some "land for peace" will never lead to a settlement because Muslims see it as their religious duty to cleanse all land previously under Muslim rule. And even if the international community managed to herd Israel into a patch the size of a tennis court, the Palestinians will demand more. But at least on this point Hamas are totally upfront with both their manifesto and rhetoric demanding the total destruction of Israel. Such aspirations are summed up by Imam Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi who was reported as stating in a Gaza City mosque recently: "We are convinced of the future victory of Allah; we believe that one of these days, we will enter Jerusalem as conquerors, enter Jaffa as conquerors, enter Haifa as conquerors, and all of Palestine as conquerors, as Allah has decreed." How on earth can anyone do business with that sort of opinion? Jewish and Christian belief places the roots of their faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and understand from the Old Testament that God's plan for the Jewish people was always to include a physical return to the land from which most were dispersed by the Romans. Christian replacement theologists like to see such God-given promises as spurious and confused, but the fact remains that against all odds the Jewish State was established by the United Nations in 1948, fulfilling biblical prophecy. Many argue that as Christians we should support the existence of Israel as it faces the vast opposition of the Islamic world. As the Quartet (US, Russian Federation, EU and United Nations) discuss the holding back of funding to the Palestinian people, perhaps we should wonder why it is that we never hear about any serious alternative funding by their oil-rich Arab neighbours. When John Couchman refers to the "superb" record accorded to Hamas in areas of social provision, some might wonder what he makes of their official policy of honouring/financing those who offer their sons and daughters to the fire of suicide. The inference that Arab Christians are suffering due to Israeli aggression is to totally ignore the Muslim practice of dhimmini where Christians in Muslim jurisdictions are relegated to second class citizenship with rights to property and participation totally limited. In recent times, Islam has been particularly harsh to the Christian population of the Middle East and Christianity leads a precarious existence in the region, with the Copts of Egypt fearful for their future or in Saudi Arabia where churches and the Bible are totally banned. Interestingly, the only country in the Middle East which has genuine freedom of religious practice is Israel. Come on guys, let us here in the West wake up to the threats on our doorstep and not even consider lending credence to Hamas, a regime fully intent upon a 21st century Holocaust. Ireland has not always had a very good record in relation to its treatment of the Jews, and it behoves us as a nation to demand the right of "God's chosen people" to survive and thrive. Contact Gary S. by email at ahavat@telkomsa.net |
|
CREATING JOBS FOR THE GUSH KATIF REFUGEES
Posted by Rachel Saperstein, May 29, 2006. |
|
With the expulsion of our people from Gush Katif came the reality of almost total unemployment. The need for jobs became acute as government promises of fair monetary compensation remained just that, promises. FRIENDS OF GUSH KATIF, under Lior Kalfa and Dror Vanunu, are behind many exciting projects providing employment for refugees. JOB KATIF, founded by Rabbi Yosef Zvi Rimon, came to the rescue with an excellent program of finding employment in nearby cities. Unfortunately, the vast majority have yet to find work. OPERATION DIGNITY is taking another approach complementary to the efforts listed above by creating businesses that will employ Gush Katif refugees. "The Orange Gallery" is moving ahead with plans to establish a Gush Katif gallery for artists and artisans in Nitzan, the largest relocation center. The plans include mobile shows throughout Israel as well as an on-line website for people abroad to view and buy directly from the gallery. Artwork will include paintings, sculpture, paper-cuts, glassworks, Judaica, mosaics, jewelry and original hat designs. A brochure and disc are now in preparation. The staff includes Artistic Director Miriam Greenblatt [0545-684158, motag1@biu.013.net.il] , Marketing Director Debbie Rosen [0547-775779, debbie_r@walla.com] , and Financial Director Einat Danino [0547-446741, asherd1@014.net.il]. The gallery appears to have excited not only the powers on high, but our artisans are delighted that their wonderful wares will be on sale. On Thursday night, 22 June, we will be exhibiting and selling our artwork at the Gerard Behar Auditorium in Jerusalem. A music play in English for women only based on a Gush Katif motif, written and performed by the women of Beit Shemesh, will be presented. On the evening of 27 June a musicale, for women only, dedicated to Gush Katif will be presented at the Emunah Center, 7 Ben Zion Street, Kiryat Moshe, Jerusalem. Once again the Orange Gallery will be exhibiting and selling our artwork. A "Beauty Spa" will be established to cater to the needs of women from nearby Ashkelon and Ashdod. Over thirty Gush Katif women took "beauty culture" courses, only to find no jobs available. A planned day Spa will give each woman an area of her choice. The Spa will provide manicures, pedicures, hair design, facials and massage under one roof. "A Gift of Makeovers" will be the thrust of our advertising in the southern cities. We are in need of a building and the equipment necessary for this venture to come into fruition. "Dr. Fixit" is our third employment venture. Many Gush Katif men worked in maintenance and are skilled craftsmen. Their skills will be used to provide much needed home repairs to city people. Providing honest labor by religious men would be a godsend to women living alone. This project will need an office, a toolshed, tools and a van to transport our men to their jobs. The various funds you are supporting are working together to bring employment to our people, who were turned into refugees and need your help. And the best help is a job. OPERATION DIGNITY, in the forefront of creating jobs, continues to aid families in need. Send contributions earmarked for OPERATION DIGNITY to Central Fund for Israel
OR Central Fund for Israel
Rachel Saperstein and her husband Moshe lived in Neve Dekalim, Gush
Katif, Gaza, Israel. She was a teacher at the Neve Dekalim ulpana and
a spokeswoman for the Katif Regional Council. Her recent book,
"Eviction: A Gush Katif Viewpoint", with photos by Moti Sender can be
ordered from www.pavilionpress.com.
They now live in a trailor camp in Nitzan.
|
|
THE MARRIAGE IS NEARLY OVER
Posted by Arlene Peck, May 28, 2006. |
|
Years ago, I remember speaking with a psychologist who told me that the opposite of love was not hate, but apathy. When a couple came into her office fighting, she knew that they had a chance. However, when one of them sat there, bored and uncaring, she knew the relationship was over. That, folks, is how I am getting to feel about my constant defense of Israel. Oh, I still feel that unshakeable tie to and emotion about the Jewish State. I, even for the most part, consider myself an American-born Israeli. However, I am getting to that point of apathy in the relationship. For more years than I care to count, I have written columns and given talks to groups and on my television show promoting Israel and trying to warn about the dangers that I hoped were obvious to everyone. I would write about how they just didn't "get it". However, I never considered the people of Israel being so stupid that they would vote people into government who are determined to destroy the country, either for their own greed or for personal political power. Yet, from what I see, it is fast approaching the point of no turning back and I just do not want to deal with it anymore. Hell, I don't even have the energy to deal with my anger on a local level anymore. I write a syndicated column and also have a television show, Wow! It's Arlene Peck! My program has a pretty wide audience. For the most part, I have a celebrity interview show. However, every four or five shows, I try to do something for Israel. The next topic would have been "Victims of Arab Terrorism". Virtually every time I have called into the consulate office and offered my show as an outlet to show Israel's viewpoint, I've been told on a regular basis, "Sorry, the Consul or the Vice Consul or anyone from the media or any other office is 'too busy' to go on." In my less-than-humble opinion, they should have at least six fabulous speakers available who, at a moment's notice, could be ready, even raring, to go on camera and promote Israel. So, why should I be surprised or even appalled that the people of Israel now have a prime minister who seems to be hell-bent on finishing the incompetent and incomplete job that other loser, Ehud Barak, started? I just cannot anymore support and promote the Olmert-led corrupt and stupid coalition now in power. I cannot justify a government that promotes national suicide, even if voted in by the people of Israel. They don't need the terrorists and their suicide bombers to destroy them. The conduct of the corrupt and incompetent officials they voted in will do it for them. All this, they believe, is done under the guise of compromise. However, you do not compromise with enemies that want to kill you. They need to be destroyed. Period. And Israel needs to remember that she once had guts and did not consider herself impotent or act like a banana republic. This would be the time to conduct a mass protest attended by millions - millions! - protesting the Chamberlain appeasement now in progress. It is ironic that while I was reading about the trip of Olmert to beg for 10 billion dollars to cleanse the Jewish areas of Judea and Samaria, the anti-Israel Los Angeles Times had a headline that said: "Gaza Gets Police Force of Militants". Who gives George Bush and Olmert the right to give away a country? If Israel is really a democracy, don't the people of Israel have the right to debate and then vote on something as crucial to their existence as this? Frankly, I am delighted that Palestinian Authority savages, because of the security fence in Israel and specific targeted killings of the Hamas leaders, cannot get into Israel with the ease they once did. Now they're 'forced' to kill each other. It's almost comical that the Times considers the terrorist group Fatah the "good guys" and writes, "Until now, the security forces have been dominated by the largely secular-minded Fatah." It doesn't matter anyway, because everyone knows that Bush and Olmert are gleefully and stupidly planning to de-Judaize much of Israel, leaving the fate of the Jews to the 80,000 Palestinian "security forces" that Shimon Peres and others like him armed, resulting in the armed terrorist state of Gaza. I'm surprised, considering the mentality that I've seen these past few years in Israel, that they haven't offered the terrorists seats in the Knesset. Perhaps I speak too soon. Arlene Peck is an internationally syndicated columnist and television talk show hostess. She can be reached at: bestredhead@earthlink.net and www.arlenepeck.com |
|
OPRAH'S ANGEL NETWORK AND "FREE THE CHILDREN" IGNORE THE REAL VICTIMS
Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 28, 2006. |
|
Two emails commenting on Oprah Winfrey and her strangely one-sided approach to helping victims of terrorism. 1. "Oprah Winfrey's world," Last month, Oprah's "O" asked readers to understand "The Heart of a Destroyer," Mohammed Atta -- the Al-Qaeda ringleader of the 9/11 hijackers who murdered 3,000 Americans. Beneath a picture of young Mohammed and his smiling sister on the Egyptian beach, "O" exhorts you to read a book that "sets out to understand the hearts and minds of the men behind the photos" of the 9/11 hijackers, a group of "lonely, exiled young men." The book, "O" tells us, "is a simultaneously passionate, compassionate, and dispassionate book that [doesn't] indict Islam." But the fatherless and motherless children who lost their parents to Atta -- they go unmentioned. To add insult to injury, the latest issue, "O"'s June 2005 edition, demands that we understand the pain and turmoil of Yusra Abdu, a teen-age Palestinian would-be homicide bomber, fiancée of Hani Akad, leader of Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine terrorist group. Akad's group, funded by Libya (one of "O" Mag's "Five Places to See in Your Lifetime"), murdered 27 children and injured 134 when they attacked a Jewish school in Ma'alot, Israel (and has carried out hundreds of attacks against Israeli civilians since then: DML) "O" calls Akad "a charismatic and young rebel." (a new euphemism for terrorist? DML). "O" describes Abdu and Akad as "a Shakespearean tragedy." Nowhere in that tragedy is there any awareness of the death and suffering of the innocent civilian victims of these "Shakespearean" players. And it's not their fault that they're homicide bombers. Or Islam's fault. "O" quotes Saudi-funded Islam apologist John Esposito blaming not Islam, but the desperate "context" of their lives. Nowhere is it mentioned that in reality most Palestinian homicide bombers, like the 9/11 hijackers, come from well-to-do middle class or even wealthy families. Also omitted conveniently is their oft-proclaimed hatred for Jews, America, and Christianity; and the Palestinian education into hatred and "martyrdom" that begins in kindergarten. Incredibly, Oprah calls this psychobabble-ish, understanding-the-world's-Islamic-terrorists sob-story, "Rescuing the World's Girls, Part Five." And to help right the wrongs of this "Shakespearean tragedy", Ophra urges readers to donate to Oprah's Angel Network, "which is awarding a grant to one or more programs that work to prevent Palestinian children from becoming suicide bombers." Or donate to UNICEF, "which runs summer camps and trauma programs for Palestinian children." [Nowhere it is mentioned, but actually, UNICEF helps UNRWA (both UN agencies) propagandize future Islamic terrorists from cradle to grave, maintain terrorist training bases in refugee camps, and provide bombs and ammunition to terrorists]. And through all of this caring about the impact of violence, nothing emerges about Israeli children's trauma resulting from the heinous deeds of these "Shakespearean" terrorists? Oprah's agenda isn't new. Her unique understanding of Islamic terrorists is manifest in:
Keep the above in mind when someone solicits money from you to "Rescue the World's Girls" by donating to Oprah's Angels Network. [Edited and shortened from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/columns/column052505.shtml by David ML] 2. Subject: Your work
Dear Sir "Free The Children is the largest network of children helping children through education in the world, with more than one million youth involved in our innovative education and development programs in 45 countries. Founded by international child rights activist Craig Kielburger, Free The Children has an established track-record of success, with three nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize and partnerships with the United Nations and Oprah's Angel Network." This all sounds very encouraging. Before I send you a donation, however I would like to know how "Free the Children" is helping Palestinian children's education and safeguarding their human rights: I know that Palestinian children exhibit a range of psychological problems. Hamas, (and before it Yasser Arafat's PLO and Fatah) rarely takes steps to shield children from the consequences of their incursions into Israel. Rather they deliberately launch attacks on Israeli civilians from centres of civilian popluation in the West Bank and latterly in Gaza. There is widely available television footage of children hurling stones, rocks and molotov cocktails at Israeli soldiers whose standing orders are not to retaliate. Palestinian terrorists deliberately launch attacks on soldiers using these children as human shields. What are you doing to encourage the parents of these children to take more care to keep them safe? The incidence of neglect and violent child abuse is high in the West Bank and elsewhere in Arab countries in the Middle East (in Iran little girls as young as nine years of age are married off to much older men). What are you doing to safeguard these children's rights? Quite apart from all this, there is the deliberate encouragement of Palestinian children to aspire to an early and horrific death by suicide bombing, by means of comic books, school textbooks and children's television programmes. This, whatever the distorted rationale for it, is morally reprehensible and is an infringement of their human rights. This wish for death is inculcated into them almost from kindergarten age, thereby ensuring that there will be generation after generation of children who are reared to love killing and death: www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pal-child-abuse/ index.php?imgIndex=0&autoShow=off www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pal-child-abuse/ index.php?imgIndex=0&autoShow=off www.internationalwallofprayer.org/ A-096-Child-Abuse-In-The-Palestinian-Authority.html www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=5626 www.antiwar.com/ips/biedermann.php?articleid=3863 And this one in particular: www.jcpa.org/jl/vp441.htm Once again, my question to you, and to Oprah Winfrey whose idea
the Angel Network is, are you going to speak out against this and do
something about it, or do you just want to look nice?
David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli,
currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern
studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director
of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org).
Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com
|
|
KEEPING OUR ENEMIES ALIVE
Posted by Fern Sidman, May , 2006. |
|
It has been recently reported by Arutz Sheva that Israel has decided to arm PA President Mahmoud Abbas' (Abu Mazen) Presidential Security Force in light of growing reports that he has been targeted for assassination by Islamic opponents. Violent clashes and shooting attacks between Hamas and Fatah-aligned security forces have sharply increased over recent weeks, prompting a Ramallah meeting on Thursday, seeking to reach a truce that would bring an end to the internal fighting and increasing death toll. While Abbas is powerless to speak on behalf of the PA since losing the winter election to the now-ruling Hamas party. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has agreed to a recommendation from Defense Minister Amir Peretz, permitting the transfer of a limited number of weapons to Abbas' security personnel. The weapons are intended for the expressed purpose of keeping Abbas alive. According to Israeli sources, the weapons will be closely monitored and only handed to those troops known to be loyal to Abbas. Opponents to the move have stated that the weapons will be turned against Israel and fired at residents of Sderot and western Negev communities. Ironically, Olmert has signaled his intent to enter into negotiations with Abu Mazen in the immediate future, but openly commented that Abu Mazen cannot speak on behald of the PA since he is no longer in a position of power. PA Prime Minister Ismail Haniyah, affiliated with Hamas, has repeatedly stated that he and his colleagues will never recognize Israel's right to exist, and the existing western-nation economic boycott will not succeed in bringing his administration to its knees. Haniyah stated he will raise the badly needed funds among Arab nations, thereby substituting the missing donor nation funds previously forthcoming from the European Union and the USA. And while Israel is making attempts to protect Abbas from an assassin's bullet, Abbas, the so called moderate and peacemaker is busy declaring that Arab terrorists are "heroes" of the Palestinian people. Palestinian Media Watch, an organization that monitors and reports on anti-Israel hatred in the PA media, reveals that Abbas twice this week referred to Arab terrorists servings "tens of life sentences" in Israeli jails as "our heroes." PMW's Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook report that the terrorists referred to are "arch-terrorists who have personally killed tens of Israelis and are sentenced to one life sentence for each murder." Speaking on PA TV on May 23 about the jailed terrorists' recent "conciliation plan" between Fatah and Hamas, Mahmoud Abbas expressed his satisfaction with the initiative of those he called "our brothers, our jailed heroes... their initiative proves that these heroes, who are sentenced to tens of life sentences, fell too that the homeland is in danger." The PMW concludes that "Abbas rejects terror for tactical reasons only, and not because it is immoral... Abbas has always been careful, in Arabic, not to condemn terror because it is evil or immoral. He has criticized suicide terror only because it hurts the PA cause, as he did after the December 2005 suicide attack that killed five in Netanya." It is quite clear that Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) is no friend of Israel. It is also clear that President Bush's attempts to persuade Olmert to enter into a diplomatic process with Abbas are clearly futile. Despite Bush's hopes that this move will help Abbas muster enough support to regain control and once again move into a decision making position is unrealistic at best and totally preposterous at worst. Hamas is clearly in control and they voice the desires and aspirations of it's constituency. They do not want peace and will not accept a Palestinian state in pre-1967 borders. And while the state of Israel rushes to protect it's enemies such as Abbas, it also attempts to expedite the process of evacuating tens of thousands of Jews from their homes in Judea and Samaria in the futile attempt to reach an "unreachable" peace with Hamas. Abbas' influence in negligible despite his political rhetoric aimed at the Bush administration. In the last few days we witnessed tens of thousands of Jews in the streets of Jerusalem and it's old city, in celebration of the 39th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem. In 1967 we witnessed the power of the Almighty G-d of Israel when Israel defeated six Arab armies and the holy city of Jerusalem was once again in Jewish hands. It was General Mota Gur who declared, "the Temple Mount is in our hands." And yet, we took this great and awesome miracle and threw it away. The leaders of the State of Israel seek to protect the lives of those who would celebrate the eradication of a Jewish presence in Jerusalem. We protect the rights of those who would destroy our holy sites and defile the name of the G-d of Israel. The leaders of the State of Israel are busying themselves with providing military aid to protect our enemies, while Jerusalem Police Chief Ilan Franco appeared in Supreme Court to defend his decision not to allow the Temple Loyalists to visit the Temple Mount. He said that the site is "extra sensitive," and that the Moslems would be likely to respond with violence to any perceived Jewish intention to visit the Mount en masse. It is now the Arabs that can say that the Temple Mount is in their hands. Who is the conqueror and who is the conquered? Is the holy city of Jerusalem truly liberated and in Jewish hands. Is it truly the undivided capitol of the State of Israel, under sovereignty of a Jewish government? Despite all the governmental pronouncements of the special and unique quality of Jerusalem for the Jewish people, it is the very same government that is paving a path towards the relinquishing of Jerusalem as it's capitol. And that is just the first move towards the relinquishing of the entire State of Israel into the hands of its enemies. The same enemies that it seeks to protect. If only the leaders of the State of Israel would make such attempts to preserve Jewish lives and Jewish land. Woe to a people that has turned it's back on it's only savior. Hashem Yisborach, the Almighty G-d of Israel, who in His infinite kindness and compassion allowed us to reunify Jerusalem and preserve it as His holy city. It is only through Jewish pride and Jewish power that we can maintain our very existence in Jerusalem and the Land of Israel. In the next few days, we will (G-d willing) celebrate the Yom Tov of Shavuot. And we will beseech Hashem as we do on all the Shalosh Regalim (three festivals) with the words of the Ya'aleh V'Ya'avo prayer we can ask for "the remembrance of Jerusalem the city of Your Holiness, and the remembrance of Your entire people, the House of Israel, before you for deliverance, for goodness, for grace, for kindness and for compassion." May it be the will of the G-d of Israel that he give us the wisdom and strength to protect ourselves and not our enemies. Contact Fern Sidman at AriellaH@aol.com |
|
ISLAM MAY TRIUMPH IN WW 4 DUE TO CHRISTIAN RIVALRIES AND ANTI-SEMITISM
Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 28, 2006. |
|
Below in (1.) is an email from a Chicago Professor of Modern Italian history. He compares modern UK and EU anti-Israel sentiment to 1938 Italy and its fascist collaboration with Nazi Germany in the isolating and demonizing of Jews. His comparison is apt. Many have pointed out the similarities between the pre-World War 2 Nazi Jew-hatred that permeated much of Europe, and the current rise of Jew-hatred and Israel-hatred which is spreading, thanks in large part to Islamofascist Arab leaders, throughout that same Europe and the UK. Historian Will Durant condemned Europe (including the UK) for the near-success of Nazism and the even-nearer-success of the Holocaust. He called that great and incredibly tragic debacle the "failure of Civilization". Durant minced his words. It was NOT a failure of "civilization". It was a failure of Christian civilization in Europe (including the UK). Now, 70 years and 2.5 generations later, it looks as though Christian civilization in Europe is heading toward the same failure, with the same victims, deja-vu all over again. There is, however, one critical difference that today's UK and EU and USA hate-mongers fail to notice. Islamic leaders along with rank-and-file Moslems before and during World War 2 were the camp-followers of the Nazi war machine. Moslem states in the Balkans, Syria, and Iraq declared their fealty to Germany and lined up behind Hitler's leadership. The Hajj Amin el-Husseini, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and thus chief spiritual leader of all the Moslems in British Mandatory Palestine, tagged along after Hitler in Germany, urging Der Fuehrer to transplant his genocidal campaign against world Jewry into the fertile soil of Moslem Palestine, with pre-Israel Zionists as their target. Today, the Moslem leadership under the guidance of the European Arab League (EAL) has taken the lead (*). This time, the Christian Jew-haters and Israel-haters of the EU and UK enthusiastically fall into line behind the EAL's anti-Israel machinations, and they gleefully cooperate with Arab anti-Jewish propaganda. The boycott movement in the UK and the divestment movements (in universities, churches, and minor political parties) in the USA are manifestations of just this active and enthusiastic cooperation. Universities' acceptance of the ghastly anti-Semitic diatribe of Moslem anti-Israel events on campuses all over the USA, England and Canada, along with the routine and nonchalant acceptance of toxic anti-Jewish hate speech as protected manifestations of free speech... hese are examples of Western society's tacit but no less palpable cooperation. But, blinded by their hatred of Jews and/or Israel, these Christian collaborators in the Arab genocidal campaign against Jewry world-wide (with its epicenter in Israel) fail to note that they are helping history to repeat itself in a manner that augers ill for Western Civilization and for Christianity world-wide. The early Caliphs, leading primitive and ill-equipped armies much smaller than those of the Greeks, conquered the Eastern Byzantine Empire in part because they were sly enough to employ the age-old tactic of divide and conquer. With the help they received from renegade Christians who had a theological or financial axe to grind with Byzantine Christianity, the 7th century Arab Moslem armies of Arabia were able to dismantle Byzantine defenses in Israel, Syria, and Egypt....piece by piece. The Christian collaborators thought they were advancing their own ends against their Christian Byzantine brethren. Too late they discovered that their fate was the same as that of their Christian erstwhile enemies.....dhimmitude: crushing, humiliating, impoverishing, blood-sucking dhimmitude, under the religious apartheid and imperialist triumphalist supremacist rule of Islam. The same strategy worked in the East as the Arab Moslem armies conquered Persia and destroyed the Sassanian empire and imposed first a "convert or die" and then a "dhimmitude or die" regime over the Zoroastrian world. There was no need for this strategy as the forces of Jihad swept across north Africa, conquering and converting Copts and Berbers (**). But mighty Christian Visigoth Spain fell to its Arab invaders in 711 only because of the same successful Arab strategy of divide and conquer. Local princes of one Spanish Christian kingdom connived with the Arabs against an enemy neighboring Christian kingdom. And in the end, all but the very northernmost of the Christian kingdoms of Spain fell to the Arab invaders.....for almost 800 years. The same strategy worked for a while in France, where the Arab armies crossed the Pyrenees and enlisted the cooperation of Lang-d'Oc French against the forces of Lang-d'Oiu Charles Martel. But, fortunately for Europe and the West, Charles Martel decisively defeated the Moslems at Poitiers (English historians say it was Tours) in 732. And his son, Pipin the Short, and his grandson, Charlemagne, continued the victorious campaign until the Moslems were bottled up in Spain. Had they failed, all of Europe would have fallen prey to Islamic Jihad. Sicily fell to the Arab onslaught, and southern Italy, in the same way, with the help of Christians who thought they could advance their own particularistic designs by enlisting the aid of the Moslem Jihad leaders; only to discover too late that they and their Christian enemies were both, in the end, easy prey to the advance of imperialist Jihad. Jihad continued for hundreds more years. In the 15th century Constantinople fell to the Ottoman militant purveyors of Islam; in part because of the alliance of Hungarian Christians with the Ottoman Turks. The Hungarians, after all, were very unhappy with the overlordship of the Greek Byzantine Christians. Western Christianity failed to come to the aid of their eastern co-religionists; because, after all, the Eastern Christian (Byzantine) Empire was at odds with the Western Christian (Roman) Empire over a variety of doctrinal differences that still engage the zealous interests of the Latin and Greek Orthodox churches today. The Hungarians regretted their perfidy when they too fell to the Saracen scimitar, brutal slaughter, conversion at sword-point, and centuries of humiliation and degradation as dhimmi to their new Moslem overlords. And Western Christians soon rued the day that they abandoned their Greek Orthodox brethren in the East, as Ottoman Moslem Jihad continued to assail the gates of Europe and turn the eastern Mediterranean into a great Islamic lake for the next two hundred years. It took two hundred years of Turkish Moslem imperialist aggression before eastern Europe could unite to end the endless threat of Islamic Jihad. John Sobieski, king of Poland, decisively turned the tide against the Turks in 1673 and 1682, when he led a three-country army to victory against the Turks, at the very walls of Vienna itself. Had he failed, all of Europe could have fallen prey to Islamic Jihad. But it took two hundred years more before Hungary, Romania, the Balkans, Crete and Greece would be able to free themselves of what Byron's Childe Harold called "the dead hand of the Turk" -- the dhimmitude fate of the non-believer under the religious supremacist imperialism of Islamic Jihad. Today, after 1,300 years of almost continuous Moslem assault against Christianity at one end of Europe or the other, leaders in Christian and secular institutions in the EU, the UK, the UN, Russia, and the USA are still unwilling or unable to unite in order to face the old, but newly invigorated, threat of Islamic Jihad. Islamic Jihad is a war against global non-belief. Global non-belief is all of us: Christians and Jews and atheists and agnostics, and even Moslems who are not Moslem enough (***) Under the leadership of Osama bin Laden, Ayman ez-Zawahiri, Abu-Mus'ab az-Zarqawi, Abu-Yusuf el-Qaradhawi, Khaled Mash'al, Hassan Massawi, and scores of other mostly Arab terrorist practitioners, the Moslem world is being led into an unrelenting religious and imperialist war against the West. And all of Western civilization is in its cross-hairs. The boycotters, the divestors, the media who refrain from calling a terrorist a terrorist, the diplomats and parliamentarians and congresspersons who accept petro-dollar bribes, the academicians who rant against Israel and the USA as their institutions crave and receive multi-million petro-dollar grants, the anti-Semitic hate mongers who maintain an endless rabid diatribe against Israel and Jews while praising the Islamic purveyors of religious apartheid and hatred of all things non-Moslem, and the countless followers who mouth the vapid words and chant the toxic slogans and attack Jews all across Europe... they are all, knowingly or not, setting themselves up for the dhimmitude or death that has befallen every other Christian quisling to Islamic Jihad. The fascist Nazis led the war against the Jews in the 1930's, and most of Europe followed. By 1939 the fascist Nazis began their war against the rest of the world. Within a year all of Europe was in flames, and over the next five years somewhere between 50 and 70 million died. Today the fascist Arab world leads the war against the Jews (and Israel)... and most of Europe is following. How long will it take before Europe is again in flames, and how many millions will die before Christian Europe wakes up to the threat of its own extinction? Footnotes (*) The European Arab League, EAL, established in the 1970's with headquarters in several European cities, is a mechanism for the Arab League to have direct interaction with, and influence over, European leaders on behalf of the rapidly growing and increasingly influential Moslem communities in Europe and the UK. EAL Arab leaders are in close contact with the Prime Ministers and Parliamentary leaders of EU countries and the UK. The EAL has very heavily influenced, and to some degree even guided, the development of the EU's and UK's failed policies of dealing with the massive immigration of Moslems into Europe and the UK. It was directly involved in the instigation, and indirectly involved in the management, of the massive Moslem riots that afflicted many European capitols from September 2005 to February 2006. (**) Many Copts, fervently believing Christians, chose death over Islam. Many others submitted to dhimmitude. All Berbers, pagan animists at the time, converted to Islam. (***) See below articles (2) and (3) from recent JihadWatch email newsletters. The practitioners of terrorist Jihad tell us, in no uncertain terms, that they intend to conquer the West, destroy Christianity, and make Islam uber alles. The first article below is about 1938 Italy and modern Europe. It was written by Wiley Feinstein, Professor of Italian at Loyola University, Chicago. The other two are from Jihad Watch. My comments are in square brackets and italics. (1.) As a scholar who has worked in the area of Italian anti-Semitism, I find campaigns against Israeli scholars particularly appalling. I have studied in depth the anti-Semitic campaigns in 1937-38 Italy and the zeal with which two or leading cultural figures of the 1930s Giovanni Bottai and Giovanni Papini attacked Jewish thought and Jewish scholars in particular and led the successful charge to have all Jewish professors expelled from Italian universities as per the Sept 5, 1938 edict. In the 1930s in Italy as now in Europe, Zionism was hyper-demonized and Italian Jews were forced to repudiate Zionism in absolute terms. In the 1930s when the anti-Semitic campaigns were raging in Italy, a famous WWI area Italian Jewish general (Liuzzi) marveled at how all the newspapers in Italy could be so adamant in singling out Jews as alien elements in an Italian society in which there were many other ethnic and racial elements (Liuzzi gave the examples such as Greek and Albanian elements). I along with many others ask the precise same question that Liuzzi asked in 1938 Italy: why are British teachers so intent on the singling out of Israeli scholars for boycott? Whose vision of peace and justice is being promoted by this boycott? Is there no knowledge among British teachers that the work of scholars who blame Israel for all the problems of the Palestinians and of the Arab world has many serious detractors and that reasoned consideration of the controversial nature of anti-Israel "scholarship" would incline one to stay far, far away from reckless boycott campaigns? Have none of you any sense of reason, proportion and also ... decency? www.spme.net/cgi-bin/display_petitions.cgi? ID=2&Action=View&Rank=1&Mode=all For more on the UK boycott, check out: (2.)"Jihadists coming home to roost" In my book Onward Muslim Soldiers I discuss the phenomenon of mujahedin traveling the world, going from jihad to jihad. From the looks of this report by Kathryn Haahr for The Jamestown Foundation, the next battleground is Europe. "Foreign fighters allegedly returning to Europe," from the International Relations and Security Network: Recent pronouncements by a Spanish judge who has led high-level inquiries into al-Qaida in Spain, Baltazar Garzon, and the head of France's domestic security service, Pierre de Bousquet, imply that Iraqi foreign fighters are already returning to Europe to re-establish or establish new networks to support terrorist operations in Europe (AFP = Agence France Presse, 9 May). While Garzon's and Bousquet's official comments provide no concrete details about the number of European Islamists returning from Iraq nor their nationalities, it is apparent that there is terrorist activity. With Iraq being the new center of gravity for jihad, Europe has become the de facto center of gravity for recruitment, weapons and financial activities, all critical to ensuring the continuation of jihad in Iraq and, increasingly, in Europe. The return of jihadists from Iraq and Afghanistan would transform European states from logistical platforms (support infrastructure) to "battle front stations" (operational structures). After their experiences in Iraq, jihadists are probably returning infused with the intention to engage in jihad in their respective European countries and to make Europe the new front in the international jihad. These jihadists will bring back ideological concepts and recruitment and fighting techniques that can assist their efforts in radicalizing and mobilizing segments of the Muslim populations in Spain, Italy and France. Of particular concern is training they may have received in fighting techniques (such as IED's and suicide bombings) and the use of chemicals for unconventional attacks. Several jihadi personalities, including Abu Musab al-Suri, have legitimized the use of chemical, biological, nuclear and radiological weapons as a tool in jihad. (3.) "Terrorism: Europe A Target of Iranian Suicide Bombers,"
Tehran, 26 May (AKI) - (Ahmad Rafat) - On Thursday afternoon in Tehran's cemetery of Behesht Zahra a group of 100 aspiring suicide bombers was sworn in at a ceremony also attended by a group of Hezbollah militants from Lebanon. The would-be terrorists are the new recruits of a movement which claims to have 50,000 members and is called Setad Pasdasht Shohadaye Nehzat Jahani Islam (Headquarters for the Commemoration of the Martyrs of the International Islamic Movement). A day after the ceremony, Mohammad Ali Samadi, the organisation's spokesman, told Adnkronos International (AKI) in a phone conversation that "Each Israeli, soldier or civilian, must not feel safe wherever he or she is." [How is it that this devout Muslim doesn't know that Islam forbids the killing of civilians, as we are tirelessly told in the West? - Jihad Watch editors ask] Samadi said Israel is a target of the group along with the US and European Union countries where the group has allegedly recruited militants. "We have brothers who are ready to sacrifice their lives for the triumph of Islam in Great Britain, France, Belgium, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands and also the United States," he said. Samadi's organisation was created two years ago and is led by a woman, Forouz Rajaifar. According to Samadi, there are over 50,000 members of the group who are ready to become suicide bombers. Sources in Tehran say the number is widely exaggerated though they claim the group can still count on 25.000 would-be attackers. "A fatwa from a leading cleric is enough to set off these madmen," said a political analyst and reformist, who asked that his name be withheld. [Why would a leading cleric, who has devoted his life to the study of Islam, issue such a fatwa if it were really so patently un-Islamic as Islamic apologists in the West would have us believe (without a shred of evidence)?: Jihad Watch editors ask.] Samadi said aspiring organisation members must fill in forms asking them, among other things, which enemy they want to fight against. The options ain the form are three: "Americans who desacrated the sites of Shiite Islam occupying Iraq and Afghanistan"; "Jews who occupy Jerusalem"; and the "British who gave protection to [Indian writer] Salman Rushdie" against whom Iranian clerics have issued a fatwa for his 1988 book Satanic Verses. However, Samadi said his group is thinking to "widen the list" of targets in the membership forms and include the Netherlands, Italy and France. "We have learnt that they want to make a follow up to the trash movie 'Submission'," by Theo Van Gogh, who was killed in 2004 by a Dutch-Moroccan Islamic militant, he said. Submission highlighted the repression of women in some Islamic cultures. France will reportedly be a target "for greatly offending Islam after it prohibited to young women to go to school with the hijab." [Why does he think that violence is a legitimate response to those who offend Islam?: Jihad Watch editors ask.] Italy was included in the potential list of new entries for granting political asylum in March to an Afghan man who risked the death penalty for converting to Christianity from Islam. "Giving political asylum to an idiot who defied Islam is a very serious offense which cannot be ignored," said Samadi. "We will make Italians pay for this offence." [Why doesn't he know what Abdurrahman Wahid assured us, that Islam actually allows for freedom of conscience?: Jihad Watch editor asks.] Samadi's group, Setad Pasdasht Shohadaye Nehzat Jahani Islam, is registered in Iran as a non-governmental organisation and is supported by leading members of the religious elite. [Why would leading members of the religious elite support something that is so obviously un-Islamic -- or at least not in accord with the view of Islam that we must accept in the West or else risk being denounced as "Islamophobes"?: ask Jihad Watch editors.] Many Ayatollahs in the holy city of Qom support it along with members of Abadgaran, the main political force supporting the government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Its meetings are attended by well known clerics such as hojjatolislam Heidar Mosalahi, who represents within the armed forces Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme guide. Ayatollah Hossein Nouri Hamedani, a mujtahed - a cleric with the authority to interpret the Koran and Sharia, and who can issue a fatwa - is another supporter of the movement. Recently Ayatollah Mohammad Mohammadi Golpayegani, who heads the secretary's office of Ayatollah Khamenei, also gave his blessing to the group. Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khameni has still not issued a fatwa supporting suicide attacks but he has recently said that "should the United States or the Zionist entity [Israel] attack nuclear power plants in Iran, the Islamic Republic would respond without hesitation and would strike the aggressor's interests worldwide." Suicide attacks were also blessed by the head of the office of Iran's spiritual guide. "Our leader [Seyyed Ali Khamenei] has volunteers ready to take action everywhere, also in the United States and Israel," said hojjatolislam Mohammad Mohammadi Golpayegani. [What has gotten into all these clerics? Don't they know the Qur'an teaches peace?: asks Jihad Watch editors] Members of parliament such as Mehdi Kuchekzadeh, Marzieh Dabbagh, Fatemeh Alia, Eshrat Shayegh and Mohammad Hossein Rahimian regularly attend the group's meetings. The man who is believed to be the group's strategist is Hassan Abbasi, a professor at the University Imam Hossein in Tehran and an advisor to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. "Our youths who are ready for martyrdom will be more effective in striking the enemy than any missiles system," Abbasi allegedly vowed to the would-be suicide bombers at the cemetery Behesht Zahra in Tehran on Thursday night. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
A RATHER IRONIC ALTERNATIVE TO THE QUR'ANIC TEACHINGS OF CONQUEST AND HATRED
Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 28, 2006. |
|
An alternative to the Moslem tradition of Jew-hatred and Fascist Imperialist Triumphalist Supremicist Totalitarian Terrorist Jihad There are many Moslem spokespersons in the West who speak to American groups: students from high school through university, military and prison populations, corporate and government leaders, media editors and journalists. Their message is the same: Islam has been misunderstood. True Islam does not countenance terrorism. True Islam is "Radiant Islam": a religion of peace, a religion that respects other religions, a religion of love and acceptance and universal caring. The problem that some in those audiences encounter is the abundance of hate speech, hate preach, and call to universal and eternal Jihad that is so abundant in the Qur'an and related sacred text (the Sunna, collection of Ahadith, and rulings of Shari'a Islamic religious jurisprudence). And those who know Moslem history wonder at the incongruity between the Radiant Islam of these spokespersons and the 1,300 years of brutal barbaric bloody imperialist triumphalist totalitarian Islamic Jihad. There are at least (after a while it is hard to keep count) 123 verses, in the Qur'an's 114 chapters, which command the Moslems to the war and murder and torture and execution and captivity and enslavement and degradation of Jews and Christians and pagans (kufar and mushariqoon). And there are many other verses that command the Moslem to avoid contact with Jews and other non-believers, to shun them socially, to consider them impure (najji = putrid, unclean, foul) and thus not touch or greet them, and to look upon them as thought they were the descendents of apes and pigs. And then there are numerous verses in almost every surah (chapter) which declare in no uncertain terms that all other religions are false, and that the practitioners of these religions will burn in hell for all eternity. No one cometh unto the Father save through the Prophet. And then there is the famous "Hadith of the rock and the tree", listed in the collections of Bukhari and Muslim (and a few others) from which we learn that Mohammed, in an extra-Qur'anic tradition, taught that the final redemption of the world, the Moslem "end of days" scenario, would come only after the Moslems had killed all the Jews in the world. Salvation must await the genocide of the world's entire Jewish population (Hmmm... no wonder the Hajj had such an affinity for Hitler). The Moslem knocks on heaven's gates with the skulls of Jews. But our Moslem spokespersons focus only on the verses listed below, which tell of God's choosing the Jews for a special relationship with Him, giving them the Holy Book of Power( the Book of Moses), settling them in their Promised Land, and then bringing them all back to the Holy Land before the apocalyptical events of the end-of-days. And, of course, there are the oh-so-often-quoted verses in Surah 109:2 ("Your religion is your religion, and my religion is my religion"), and Surah 2:256 ("let there be no compulsion in religion"). These are the only two verses in the entire Qur'an which describe Islam as a religion that seeks tolerance, peace, and accommodation with other religions. The Israel-friendly verses: 2:47 & 122: Oh, Children of Israel! Call to mind the favor which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all other nations. 5:20-21: "Remember when Moses said to his people: 'O my people, call in remembrance the favor of God unto you, when He produced prophets among you, made you kings, and gave to you what He had not given to any other among the people. O my people, enter the Holy Land which God has assigned unto you, and then turn not back ignominiously, for then will ye be overthrown, to your own ruin.'" 7:137: And We made the children of Israel, who were considered weak (and of no account), inheritors of lands in both east and west, - lands whereon We sent down Our blessings. The fair promise of thy Lord was fulfilled for the Children of Israel, because they had patience and constancy, and We leveled to the ground the great works and fine buildings which Pharaoh and his people erected (with such pride). 10:93: We settled the Children of Israel in a beautiful dwelling-place, and provided for them sustenance of the best: it was after (divine) knowledge had been granted to them. 17:104: And We said thereafter to the Children of Israel, "Dwell securely in the land of promise"... And we said to the Children of Israel afterwards, "... scatter and live all over the world -- and when the end of the world is near We will gather you again into the Promised Land". 20:80: O ye Children of Israel! We delivered you from your enemy, and We made a Covenant with you to give you the right side (the blessed side) of Mount Sinai, and We sent down to you Manna (special food) and quails. 32.23-24: And certainly We gave the Book to Moses, so be not in doubt concerning the receiving of it, and We made it a guide for the children of Israel... And We made of them Guiding Lights and leaders to guide by Our command as they were patient, and they were certain of Our communications. 44: 32 And We have chosen them (the Children of Israel) above the 'Alamîn (mankind, and jinns) and Our choice was based on a deep (i.e., divine) knowledge. 45:16: We did aforetime grant to the Children of Israel the Book the Power of Command, and Prophethood; We gave them, for sustenance, things good and pure; and We favored them above all other nations. So, to summarize the above: according to the uncreated, inviolable, and inerrant Qur'an: The Jews are Allah's chosen people The Jews are Allah's chosen people, chosen from among all other nations (2:47 & 122; and 44:32). He protected them and fed them in the desert (20:80); and He made them a chosen people, blessed with Divine knowledge in the divinely bequeathed Book of Moses (Book of Power: 45:16); and He made them as a guiding light (unto other nations? Would that include the Moslem nation?)(32:23-4) Allah gave them the Holy Land as an eternal possession Allah gave the Jews the Holy Land as their divinely pre-destined possession, thus recognizing the sovereign right of the Jews over the Land of Israel (5:20-21) Allah made the Holy Land the inheritance of the Jews because they were loyal to Him (7:137) Allah settled them in that beautiful land once they were equipped with Divine Knowledge (10:93) Allah will gather Diaspora Jewry back into the Holy land before the End of Days Allah had them dwell there securely, then scattered them, but will bring them back to their Holy Land shortly before the end of days, thus declaring that it is the will of Allah Himself to gather the Children of Israel again in their promised land before the end days (17:104) (How, then, can any Muslim interfere with the in-gathering of Diaspora Jews back into Israel -- since by doing so, the Muslim will be countervailing the sacred will of Allah and thus interfering with the Divinely promised end-of-days?). And what our Moslem spokespersons showing us the "radiant face of Islam" neglect to tell us is how, over 1,300 years of Islamic jihad and Jew-hatred, Islamic religious leaders reconciled the so very numerous verses of hatred and rejection and Jihad against Jews with the fewer but very specific verses of Israel's election and its divinely ordained possession of the Promised Land. And the same regarding the endless relentless Qur'anic diatribe against the kafir (Christian and Jew as unbeliever but possessed of divine scripture) and the pagan (all other non-believers bereft of divine input). For that we must ourselves learn about and understand two very important Moslem theological concepts: the concept of naskh (also pronounced nasikh = abrogation), and the concept of "satanic verses". Naskh Mohammed himself (Abuh) recognized that there were earlier verses in his teachings that were contradicted by later revelations. So, several times in the Qur'an, he declared that if a later verse contradicts an earlier verse, the later verse rules (*). The later verse abrogates the earlier verse. The verses speaking kindly about Jews and affirming the Jewish concepts of "chosen people", divinity of the "Book of Moses", "Land of Israel for the people of Israel", and in-gathering of exiles at the end of days, are all chronologically early in the process of Qur'anic revelation. So, per many Moslem theologians, they are abrogated by the later verses. The later verses rule. Thus, Moslem animosity to Jews is what Allah wants. Unfortunately, the only two verses in the Qur'an which decry religious imperialism (Surah 109: 2, "Your religion is your religion, and my religion is my religion:, and Surah 2:256, "let there be no compulsion in religion") are both considered to be abrogated by the very many other verses calling every Moslem to the imperialist triumphalist supremacist Jihad by means of which Islam will replace all religions and reign supreme in the world. The most famous of these later verses is in Surah 9, especially vss. 5 and following; also known as ayat as-sayif (the verse of the sword). So, conversion or death for the pagan, and conversion or death or dhimmitude for the Jew and Christian, still remain the only religiously viable options for non-Moslems according to traditional Islam today. Satanic Verses Later Moslem theologians had difficulty with some verses that contradict others even among chronologically contemporaneous segments of the Qur'an. To explain this, they developed the concept of "Satanic verses". These are verses that were put into the sacred text by Satan himself (**). Satan did this in order to confuse the true believer and make him doubt that the Qur'an is divine, and thus inerrant, inviolable, and uncreated. The problem with this theological legere-de-main is that different scholars disagree as to the number and the identity of the verses in question. The lowest number of verses identified as "satanic" is 5. Some scholars find hundreds. And, predictably, the theologians don't agree as to which specific verses are of Satan's authorship. The Way Forward Ironically, these two concepts themselves open the portals to a re-interpretation of Islam's militant, violent, and hate-mongering texts. It is interesting that Moslem scholarship does not seem to have noticed a rather obvious oxymoron in the concepts of Naskh and Satanic Verses. These two orthodox, Moslem, centuries-old and widely accepted concepts disprove the traditional Moslem insistence that the Qur'an is uncreated, inerrant, and inviolable. This is an important issue. The inerrancy and inviolability of the Qur'an, and the belief that the text of the Qur'an is in toto a product of divine revelation (hence: uncreated) and not the product of human interaction with the divine (created by man under divine inspiration), are critical cornerstones of orthodox Moslem belief. Yet, the concepts of Naskh and Satanic verses make it clear that:
And, indeed, as noted above, over the centuries, Moslem scholars have disagreed as to which verses abrogate which, and which verses are to be ascribed to Satan. They cannot all be right, and they could all be wrong. So, given that by virtue of the orthodox and revered theological institutions of Naskh and Satanic verses, there is room for human interpretation in the Qur'anic tradition, and that some verses can be condemned to the trash-heap of history (as abrogated by other verses) or rejected as the product of Satan, it stands to reason that Moslem religious scholars today could apply these same two concepts to the verses of hatred and violence, compulsion and conquest... if they chose to. It might be possible, therefore, for modern Moslem Qur'anic scholarship to argue that the verses that speak positively about Jews are not abrogated; and that Jew-hatred and Christian-hatred and Hindu-hatred and hatred of all things non-Moslem are themselves the verses inserted by Satan. Indeed, is not hatred a characteristic of Satan, and quite the antithesis of peace, love, and acceptance of others? As such, the modern phenomena of el-Qaeda and Wahhabi Islam and Jihad against "global non-belief" and Hamas' genocidal insistence that Israel must be destroyed and its Jews exterminated...these are all of demonic origin and are at variance with Allah's divine will expressed in the Qur'an. But, so far, to my knowledge, the only Moslems pontificating on the Islam of peace and love are those speaking to Jewish and Christian audiences in the West; and telling us about the "radiant face of Islam" -- the religion that preaches love and peace and respect for other religions. When will Moslem religious leaders like Kyai Haji Abdurrahman Wahid (see below: the Indonesian scholar writing in the Washington Post) start issuing fatwas and huqums against Osama bin Laden and Ayman az-Zawahiri and Abu Yusuf el-Qaradhawi and Abu Mus'ab az-Zarqawi and Hassan Nusralla and Khaled Mash'al and Isma'il Haniyeh? When will these Moslem spokespersons for the radiant Islam start telling Osama and his pals how wrong they all are, how they have misunderstood Islam, how they are really under the influence of Satan? If Islam really is a religion of peace, then thousands of Moslem leaders, with hundreds of millions of Moslem followers, have demonstrated their total mis-understanding of the true tenets of "radiant Islam"...for 1,300 years. Then, today, the hundreds of millions of Moslems who cheer at the deaths of innocent non-Moslems, and the hundreds of thousands of terrorists world wide (almost all of whom are Moslems) who perpetrate almost daily acts of terror and mass murder against non-Moslems all over the world. ...they are all fundamentally mis-directed. Isn't it time that those Moslems who do understand "radiant Islam" start to educate the deeply misguided and tragically mis-informed Arab terrorists and Moslem Mujahideen who seek to destroy Israel, genocide its Jews, conquer the West, put an end to Christianity and Judaism, re-conquer India, and ultimately make Islam "...uber alles"? At very least they could issue some supportive statements for those very few and very courageous individuals who have spoken out: inter alia Wafa Sultan, Walid Shoebat, Brigitte Gabriel, Nonie Darwish, Joseph Farah, Irshad Manji, and Fu'ad Ajami. What are they waiting for? Or are they part of the demonic Islam of Jihad and genocide and hatred and terrorism? Is their role the application of Taqiyyeh and Kitman to lull the West into a placid acceptance of the religion and its practitioners who seek to destroy Western civilization? .all in accordance with Mohammed's pronouncement: "War is Deceit." (***) Footnotes (*) Cf. Surah 2:100: "For whatever verse We cancel or cause (the messenger: aka Mohammed) to forget, We bring a better or the like." Surah 13: 39: "Allah deletes or confirms what He wills; with Him is the mother of the Book." Surah 16:103: "When We substitute one verse for another -- Allah knows best what He sends down -- they say: 'Thou art simply an inventor'; but most of them have not knowledge." (**) Surah 22:51: "We have not sent a messenger or prophet before thee; but when he formulated his desire Satan threw (something) in to his formulation; so Allah abrogated what Satan threw in, then Allah adjusted His signs". (These are from Richard Bell's translation in his An Introduction to the Qur'an, as quoted in Ibn Warraq's What the Koran Really Says.) (***) For a detailed explanation of taqiyyeh (lying to advance the cause of Allah), and kitman (deceit), cf. "Islamic Honesty and Honor" in Faithfreedom.org, by: Vernon Richards (islam_undressed@yahoo.com); extracted from his book Islam Undressed, available free upon request. See also at http://www.think-israel.org/richards.html See also Robert Spencer's critique of Wahid's article in Front Page Magazine. "Is Islamic Law "Extremist?", May 26, 2006, www.FrontPageMagazine.com. The article below is called "Extremism Isn't Islamic Law." It is by Kyai Haji Abdurrahman Wahid, and it appeared May 23, 2006 in A17, The Washington Post. For a few days this year the world's media focused an intense spotlight on the drama of a modern-day inquisition. Abdul Rahman, a Muslim convert to Christianity, narrowly escaped the death penalty for apostasy when the Afghan government -- acting under enormous international pressure -- sidestepped the issue by ruling that he was insane and unfit to stand trial. This unsatisfactory ruling left unanswered a question of enormous significance: Does Islam truly require the death penalty for apostasy, and, if not, why is there so little freedom of religion in the so-called Muslim world? The Koran and the sayings of the prophet Muhammad do not definitively address this issue. In fact, during the early history of Islam, the Agreement of Hudaibiyah between Muhammad and his rivals stipulated that any Muslim who converted out of Islam would be allowed to depart freely to join the non-Muslim community. Nevertheless, throughout much of Islamic history, Muslim governments have embraced an interpretation of Islamic law that imposes the death penalty for apostasy. It is vital that we differentiate between the Koran, from which much of the raw material for producing Islamic law is derived, and the law itself. While its revelatory inspiration is divine, Islamic law is man-made and thus subject to human interpretation and revision. For example, in the course of Islamic history, non-Muslims have been allowed to enter Mecca and Medina. Since the time of the caliphs, however, Islamic law has been interpreted to forbid non-Muslims from entering these holy cities. The prohibition against non-Muslims entering Mecca and Medina is thus politically motivated and has no basis in the Koran or Islamic law. In the case of Rahman, two key principles of Islamic jurisprudence come into play. First, al-umuru bi maqashidiha ("Every problem [should be addressed] in accordance with its purpose"). If a legal ordinance truly protects citizens, then it is valid and may become law. From this perspective, Rahman did not violate any law, Islamic or otherwise. Indeed, he should be protected under Islamic law, rather than threatened with death or imprisonment. The second key principle is al-hukm-u yadullu ma'a illatihi wujudan wa adaman ("The law is formulated in accordance with circumstances"). Not only can Islamic law be changed -- it must be changed due to the ever-shifting circumstances of human life. Rather than take at face value assertions by extremists that their interpretation of Islamic law is eternal and unchanging, Muslims and Westerners must reject these false claims and join in the struggle to support a pluralistic and tolerant understanding of Islam. All of humanity, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, is threatened by the forces of Islamist extremism. It is these extremists, masquerading as traditional Muslims, who angrily call for the death of Abdul Rahman or the beheading of Danish cartoonists. Their objective is raw political power and the eventual radicalization of all 1.3 billion Muslims worldwide. Western involvement in this "struggle for the soul of Islam" is a matter of self-preservation for the West and is critical given the violent tactics and strength of radical elements in Muslim societies worldwide. Muslim theologians must revise their understanding of Islamic law, and recognize that punishment for apostasy is merely the legacy of historical circumstances and political calculations stretching back to the early days of Islam. Such punishments run counter to the clear Koranic injunction "Let there be no compulsion in religion" (2:256). People of goodwill of every faith and nation must unite to ensure the triumph of religious freedom and of the "right" understanding of Islam, to avert global catastrophe and spare millions of others the fate of Sudan's great religious and political leader, Mahmoud Muhammad Taha, who was executed on a false charge of apostasy. The millions of victims of "jihadist" violence in Sudan -- whose numbers continue to rise every day -- would have been spared if Taha's vision of Islam had triumphed instead of that of the extremists. The greatest challenge facing the contemporary Muslim world is to bring our limited, human understanding of Islamic law into harmony with its divine spirit -- in order to reflect God's mercy and compassion, and to bring the blessings of peace, justice and tolerance to a suffering world. The writer is a former president of Indonesia. From 1984 to 1999 he directed the Nadhlatul Ulama, the world's largest Muslim organization. He serves as senior adviser and board member to LibForAll Foundation, an Indonesian- and U.S.-based nonprofit that works to reduce religious extremism and terrorism. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
WHAT ABOUT THE SAUDS?
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 28, 2006. |
|
Perhaps the most influential terrorist regime in the world Saudi Arabia, underwriters of Wahhabi madrassas most notably in Pakistan, a/k/a homicide/suicide human bomb factories, escapes the evil eye of industrial oil-dependent Western nations that are customers, including the U.S.A. and E.U. Should any significant war on misogyny and terrorism not include that "evil-doer" country on a short list of villains? Is such a sanctimonious pass even tolerable if morality and justice have any meaning whatsoever? Schools within that Islamic royal autocracy, despite promises to reform, still demonize Jews, Christians, and all those including other Muslims who do not adhere to an intolerant jihad-obsessed repugnant hate-filled fundamentalist faith. Rulers of that regime, alas, know that the reservoir of fossil fuel they possess trumps all. Oil uber alas, indeed, remains the motto of this "fascist in robes" dictatorship, and Western nations, especially the U.S.A., that rail about terrorism let the Sauds get away with their criminally abhorrent policies. On the other hand, let us note former and current despotic Middle East sovereignties such as Iraq and Iran, likewise saturated with fossil fuel, not so curiously were and are lambasted in much of the Western press. The Bush Administration and a handful of allies, including Britain, preemptively invaded Sadist Hussein's dysfunctional Iraqi enclave, a regime more enthralled with petroeuros than petrodollars, and now attempt to put the pieces back together. Emerging nuclear nemesis Iran, with a yen to direct its oil flow eastward, concurrently yearning to wipe Israel off the map, is boldly and justifiably displayed in the crosshairs of many Western governments including the U.S.A., ruminating the possibility of branding it with the scarlet S (for sanctions). What about the Sauds? Of course, you don't bite the hand that turns the fossil fuel faucet for you. No doubt, Iran's nuclear ambitions are of paramount concern, still any Saudi wealth that directly or indirectly finances WMD projects worldwide should also be of paramount concern, yet it is not. There is nothing accidental about the fact that 15 of the 19 infamous 9/11 hijackers, as well as the planetary mindset-altering event's planner bin Laden, were all native products of Saudi Wahhabiism, yet dots remain intentionally unconnected when it comes to holding the House of Saud, in fact the Allahfather of the worldwide Islamic terror network, accountable. Faustian fossil fuel contracts denominated in petrodollars trumps all, thus that one overriding factor explains an otherwise inexplicable Western case of regal blindness, especially in the U.S.A., when it comes to the despicable Sauds. Furthermore, Russian reluctance to sanction Iran is also traceable to its fossil fuel contracts with that terror promoting state. Not surprisingly, the choice by "humane" nations planet wide to provide ineffectual lip service in lieu of a coordinated military effort ever-needed to stop the genocide in Darfur Sudan, is similarly explained by heartless world leaders, especially those in China, not wishing to ruffle the robes of sadistic Islamic rogue royal rulers in Khartoum lest they renege on contractual agreements, withholding addictive black gold ever necessary to power oil-dependent economic dynamos, especially one possessed by that up and coming Oriental superstar. Essentially, there is little chance the Sauds or kindred spirit terror promoting nations will alter their behavior while they hold their particular clienteles of energy craving industrial states hostage. Hence the war on terror is truly a war complicated by fossil fuel dependence, not likely winnable until planetary powers break their addictions to the vicious viscous substance, allowing them to deal appropriately with their favorite pushers. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
GET REAL!
Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, May 28, 2006. |
|
In response to Nadia Matar's article, "Psychiatrist Needed Urgently!" (see below) which contains much wisdom, allow me to say the following: As that gallant lady well knows, far more than a psychiatrist is needed to overcome Israel's malaise. Needed is nothing less than a revolution. But inasmuch as the government controls all the levers of power, what can be done to facilitate a revolution? WORDS will accomplish nothing if not geared toward ACTION -- by which I do not mean protest demonstrations. Episodic ACTION will not change the suicidal course of this country. The people of this country are jaded. They are sick of words and unaffected by conventional demonstrations. They have been inundated by so many lies, and have either witnessed or suffered so much abuse, that questions of truth and falsity, of right and wrong, do not seriously impact their lives any more. So long as they can repair to the malls on Saturday night, they cannot take words about existential threats seriously. Only "right-minded" people worry about existential threats -- yet they too have serious shortcomings. They indulge in excessive ANALYSIS which only leads to PARALYSIS. Mere analysis is futile because the Left, having corrupted the language of public discourse, has corrupted the mentality of countless Israelis. And there's nothing "right-minded" people can do about this decrepit state of affairs merely by calling "Disengagement" of "Realignment" a CRIME, or by saturating Internet with CRITICAL ANALYSIS. WORDS are not going to cure Israelis of their moral malady. Nor will words deter the Olmert government from repeating the CRIME of its predecessor. The SYSTEM is a cesspool of corruption, of self-aggrandizing and heartless politicians -- religious as well as secular. So allow me to suggest this to our "right-minded" people -- those who fear that Israel faces a threat to its existence. If this is what you fear, GET REAL. If you are going to talk about an "existential threat," GET REAL and form a Congress of National Salvation! If you think Israeli governments¸ regardless of which parties are at the helm, are perfidious, don't wait for another (futile) election, but form an "Alternative Government." GET REAL! Professor Paul Eidelberg is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at pauleid@netvision.net.il |
|
ISLAMISTS KILL TENNIS PLAYERS IN BAGHDAD FOR WEARING SHORTS
Posted by Avodah 15, May 28, 2006. |
|
(Hat tip: LGF readers.)
BAGHDAD -- An Iraqi tennis coach and two of his players were fatally shot last week in Baghdad because they were wearing shorts, authorities said yesterday, reporting the latest in a series of recent attacks attributed to Islamic extremists. ... In the Baghdad incident, gunmen stopped a car carrying the Sunni Arab coach and two Shi'ite players, asked them to step out and then shot them, said Manham Kubba, secretary-general of the Iraqi Tennis Union. Extremists had distributed leaflets warning people in the mostly Sunni neighborhoods of Saidiyah and Ghazaliyah not to wear shorts, police said. "Wearing shorts by youth are prohibited because it violates the principles of Islamic religion when showing forbidden parts of the body. Also women should wear the veil," the leaflets said. Wearing shorts "violates the principles of Islamic religion" -- but murdering athletes apparently doesn't. Contact Avodah 15 by email at avodah15@aol.com |
|
PROPHETS OF ISRAELI DEMOGRAPHIC DOOM CAN'T COUNT CORRECTLY
Posted by IsrAlert, May 28, 2006. |
|
This was a JTA oped May 4, 2006. It was written by Bennett Zimmerman, Dr. Roberta Seid and Dr. Michael Wise. 1. Demographic fatalism underlies the assumption that a retreat from geography -- which possesses a critical security significance -- is required to salvage Jewish demography. Demographic fatalism (that Jews are, supposedly, doomed to be a minority west of the Jordan River) has marginalized the role played by the issues of History and Security in Israel's political debate about Judea & Samaria. 2. The "Prophets of Demographic Doom" have managed to weaken the resolve of the Jewish State -- and its friends - more effectively than have Palestinian terrorism and global pressure. They've instilled unprecedented faintheartedness in the national state of mind - a self-destruct prescription in the Mideast. 3. However, the "Prophecy of Demographic Doom" has been based on grossly erroneous assumptions and on misrepresentations. In fact, a 67:33 Jewish majority has been in effect west of the Jordan River (without Gaza), at least, since 1967! Long term trend indicates a rise in Jewish birth rate with sustained positive migration (Aliya), while Palestinians experience (since 1990) a decline in birth rate and a high annual emigration. 4. This OpEd, on the Jewish Demographic Momentum in Israel, sheds light on some of the misrepresentations perpetrated by the "Prophets of Demographic Doom" (JTA, May 2006, http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=16575&intcategoryid=1). The OpEd was written by Bennett Zimmerman, Dr. Roberta Seid and Dr. Michael Wise. 5. Corroborated by evidence from the Palestinian Ministry of Health, Ministry of Education and Central Elections Commission, a 70% inflation in the number of Arabs in Judea & Samaria has been documented. 6. According to Dr. Nick Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the recent study on Palestinian demography "caught the demographic profession asleep at the switch." 7. For more information on the demographic study -- which featured
at a March 8, 2006 House International Relations Mideast Subcommittee
hearing -- please visit www.pademographics.com.
Arab Demographic Momentum has become part of the Israel lexicon. In this theory, population growth in the Arab sector will overwhelm the Jewish population as "baby boom| generations give birth to an even greater number of children. Arab births will accelerate even if birth rates remain stable or drop slightly because such a large number of women will enter their childbearing years. But the evidence is now in: demographic momentum exists -- but the momentum is occurring among Jews, not Arabs. Jewish births grew rapidly, from 80,000 per year in 1995 to 96,000 in 2000 and to over 103,000 in 2003. The demographic outlook for Jews has been improving because the Jewish total fertility rate (TFR), or the number of children a woman is likely to bear over her lifetime, has been rising. In 2005, it reached 2.7, the highest rate in any advanced industrial nation. While the ultra-Orthodox contributed to this rise, secular Israelis and the immigrants from the FSU also experienced increasing fertility. When aliyah and returning Israelis (averaging over 20,000 per year from 2001 to 2004), are added to the mix, the demographic weight of the Jewish sector grows even further. In contrast, the absolute number of births in the Israel Arab sector grew from 36,500 births in 1995 to 40,800 in 2000 and has remained there ever since. In fact, after rising slightly to a record 41,400 births in 2003, the number of Israel Arabs births fell for the first time in 2004 to 40,800. The overall Israel Arab fertility figure (which includes Israel Moslem, Christian Arabs, and Druze) declined from 4.4 in 2000 to 4.0 in 2004. Israel recently enacted policies that are impacting the highest fertility sectors of the Israel Arab population. In 2004, the government stopped granting stipends for every child born to a family, restricting them to only the first two children born. There was an immediate drop in Bedouin pregnancies. The problem with demographic predictions is that they apply yesterday's or today's fertility rates to tomorrow's forecast. However, earlier childbearing patterns may have little relationship to the number of children the next generation will have. By applying the Muslim TFR rates from the 1960s (between 9-10 births per woman) to forecasts, Israeli demographers had projected that Israeli Arabs would overtake Israeli Jews by 1990. When the TFR dropped to 5.4 in the early 1980s and 4.7 in the second half of the decade, demographers applied this rate to their next series of forecasts. However, by 2005, the Arab TFR had dropped even further, to 4.0, echoing the more dramatic drops reported throughout the Middle East where most nations display fertility levels near 3 births per woman while countries such as Iran have displayed fertility below 2 births per woman. Furthermore, Israel Arab women currently in their 20s will not necessarily repeat the same childbearing characteristics of today's 30 year olds. Thus, Israeli Arab women who are having fewer children in their late teens and 20s might have fewer children in their 30s than today's 30 year olds who still display fertility characteristics of earlier generations. In contrast, Israeli Jewish women in their 20s might carry their choice to have more children into their 30s, at numbers above the current set of 30 year olds. The practice of applying yesterday's activity to tomorrow's forecast is a common mistake. The UN Population Division had confidently predicted in 2000 that the world's population would balloon to 12 billion people by 2050. Remarkably enough, four years later, they dramatically revised the forecast and now predict that today's 6.3 billion global population will plateau at 9 billion persons by 2050. With constantly changing birth patterns, what is a forecaster to do? To have any relevance a forecast must constantly be updated with the most current information and any changes in trend. The Gallup organization recently published the results of a survey which showed a convergence in desired family size among Jews and Arabs west of the Jordan. The ideal family size has fallen to 5.1 for Arabs in Gaza and 4.5 in the West Bank. The desired family size among Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs is now identical at 3.7. While Gallup found no difference in the preferred number of children by younger Israelis, younger West Bankers aged 15 -- 19 believe an ideal family should have 4.1 children versus their older relatives over 50 years who believe the ideal family has 5.0 children. The convergence in desired birth activity among Israeli Jews, Israeli Arabs, and particularly among younger West Bankers is likely to further impact the future demographic outlook for Israel and the West Bank, where Jews now form a two-thirds majority. Demographers had concentrated on past patterns in the Arab population while they were blind sighted to evidence of a slowdown in the Arab sector and the demographic revolution already being measured among Jews. By focusing on the past, forecasters anticipated demographic momentum in the wrong sector and produced an outlook that couldn't even get the present correct, let alone the future. Bennett Zimmerman, Roberta Seid, and Michael L. Wise are authors of Arab Population in the West Bank and Gaza: The Million Person Gap, recently published by the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies in Israel. Forecast for Israel and West Bank 2025 debuted at the Herzliya Policy Conference in Israel and in the USA at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. The studies can be found at www.pademographics.com Harv Weiner, a businessman in Dallas, Texas, is the founder and moderator of Isralert. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
SECRET CONVERSATIONS RELEASED: KISSINGER WANTED A "SMALL ISRAEL"
Posted by IsrAlert, May 28, 2006. |
|
This is an Associated Press article from Ynet. It is archived at
We encourage you to read the whole document at
The United States reached out to hostile Arabs three decades ago with an offer to work toward making Israel a "small friendly country" of no threat to its neighbors and with an assurance to Iraq that the U.S. had stopped backing Kurdish rebels in the north. "We can't negotiate about the existence of Israel," then Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told his Iraqi counterpart in a rare high-level meeting, "but we can reduce its size to historical proportions." 
left to right: Yitzhak Rabin, Golda Meir, Kissinger and Lea Rabin (Photo: GPO) A December 1975 memo detailing Kissinger's probing conversation with Foreign Affairs Minister Saadoun Hammadi eight years after Iraq severed diplomatic relations with Washington is included in some 28,000 pages of Kissinger-era foreign policy papers published in an online collection Friday. George Washington University's National Security Archive released the collection, drawn from papers available at the government's National Archives and obtained through the group's Freedom of Information requests. p>With Rabin in 1975 (Photo: GPO) In it, Kissinger tells Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai in June 1972 that the United States, mired in Vietnam, probably could live with a communist government in South Vietnam as long as that evolved peacefully. "If we can live with a communist government in China, we ought to be able to accept it in Indochina," he said. He also hints that the United States, newly courting China, would consider a nuclear response if the Soviets were to overrun Asia with conventional forces. At the time, Chinese-Soviet tensions were sharp and the United States was playing one communist state against the other as best it could while seeking detente with its main rival, Moscow. But when the Japanese recognized China with what Kissinger called "indecent haste," he branded them "treacherous." 
With Ariel Sharon in 2001 (Photo: GPO) The transcript of Kissinger's meeting with Hammadi in Paris sheds light on a little known maneuver that spoke to America's broader effort to win friends in the Arab world even as it was giving military support to the Jewish state. The meeting was frank and open - diplomats' preferred description of any such meeting but in this case, true. And Hammadi, a friend of the Soviets, was a tough sell. "We are on the other side of the fence," he asserted. "What the United States is doing is not to create peace but to create a situation dominated by Israel." Kissinger pressed: "Our attitude is not unsympathetic to Iraq. Don't believe; watch it." He said U.S. public opinion was turning more pro-Palestinian and U.S. aid to Israel could not be sustained for much longer at its massive levels. He predicted that in 10 or 15 years, "Israel will be like Lebanon - struggling for existence, with no influence in the Arab world." Mindful of Israel's nuclear capability, a skeptical Hammadi peppered Kissinger with questions, including whether Washington would recognize Palestinian identity and even a Palestinian state. "Is it in your power to create such a thing?" Kissinger said he could not make recognition of Palestinian identity happen right away but, "No solution is possible without it." "After a settlement, Israel will be a small friendly country," he said. Israel returned the Sinai Peninsula, one of its territorial gains in the 1967 Six Day War, to Egypt in a 1979 peace deal. Current Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has offered to give up at least part of the West Bank for a Palestinian state. President Bush is the first U.S. president to call explicitly for creation of a Palestinian state. Kissinger said U.S. officials had believed Iraq was a Soviet satellite state but had come to a "more sophisticated understanding now. We think you are a friend of the Soviet Union but you act on your own principles." Saddam Hussein was then vice president, in control of internal security and oil. When Hammadi persisted with complaints about U.S. support for the Kurds, Kissinger brushed them off by saying, "One can do nothing about the past." "Not always," Hammadi countered as the meeting closed and he escorted Kissinger to the door. Washington and Baghdad renewed relations after the start of the Iran-Iraq war; Hammadi became prime minister in the Saddam era. The collection, also available in microfiche, consists of some 2,100 memoranda of Kissinger's secret conversations with senior officials abroad and at home from 1969 to 1977, serving under presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. William Burr, senior analyst for the research group, said the papers are the most extensive published record of Kissinger's work, in many cases offering insight into matters that the diplomat ignored or merely touched on in his prolific memoirs.
Harv Weiner, a businessman in Dallas, Texas, is the founder and
moderator of Isralert. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to
isralert@aol.com
|
|
PSYCHIATRIST NEEDED URGENTLY!
Posted by Nadia Matar, May 28, 2006. |
|
If we want to save the settlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria, and thereby the very existence of the State of Israel, we apparently will have to begin with a considerable portion of our national-religious public receiving psychiatric care so that he can cure us of a mental disease that is deeply entrenched within us. As long as we suffer from this malady, we will not be able to act properly. I am referring to the fact that most of our public apparently does not regard the plans for the deportation of Jews, the destruction of settlements, and the handing over of parts of the homeland to the Arab enemy as a CRIME . And once this is not seen as a CRIME, then the public does not go out of its way to stop it. I received proof of this, once again, when I read through the responses to a report on Arutz7 Internet about Rabbi Lior's statement that "a community must vomit out a Kadima Member of Knesset." On his weekly show on Arutz 7, Rabbi Lior from Kiryat Arba had been asked by a resident, who is a neighbor of a Member of Knesset who went over to the Kadima party, what should be the attitude to this MK. "I want to ask about the attitude we should have to a religious MK, who acts for the destruction of settlements in our land. This MK has spoken for some time about the need, so he says, to destroy a large number of settlements in the Land of Israel. Since his election to the Knesset, his talk has not been just the expression of an opinion. He takes concrete actions in his position as a legislator, apparently at the behest of the Prime Minister, for the actual preparation for the deportation of Jews, the destruction of their property, and their exile from their place of residence. How are we to relate to him? I have known him for many years, and at times I meet him. His behavior is quite cordial, but I find it very difficult to respond to him in a friendly manner, as I did in the past." In his response, Rabbi Lior said: "A healthy body that eats something spoiled immediately vomits it. If you are a healthy public, you will naturally vomit him out in order to stay healthy. If he had any intelligence, he would leave the settlement on his own, and would not live in a place that he is taking steps to destroy." Dozens of people responded to the article, many of them attacking Rabbi Lior's answer. The following two responses show the severity of our mental illness: one comment is by a woman who defines herself as a "proud settler"(!), who says: "We must not forget that we are all brothers, and before all, even when there are differences of opinion, we must respect one another." And an even more pathological comment, from a resident who calls himself: "Boaz - a resident who does not want to vomit": "Yes, I, we, the residents of the settlements in Judea and Samaria, totally oppose the withdrawals, and loathe the insane ideology behind them, but to vomit out neighbors? With all due respect to his eminence (i.e. Rabbi Lior), the Rabbi does not understand the meaning of life in a communal settlement. If and when we succeed in building healthy community life, this is mainly because we had among us quarrels, intrigues, nonsense, and the like, over the course of years.... If we extricated ourselves from all this, it was because we undertook, as a group and as individuals, to forgive, to ask pardon, to understand weaknesses, and not to vomit. If we vomit what is not suitable - we will fall apart." I felt compelled to answer those attacking Rabbi Lior. This is my response to Boaz and to that "proud" settler: I have a question for you. What if someone in your community was known to go around among the people in the settlement, especially among the children and youth, and forcibly inject them with dangerous drugs, and for whatever reason the authorities did not arrest him, and despite all the times people spoke with him, he did not desist? To the contrary, he was proud of his criminal acts, and publicly announced that he intends to continue with his terrible deeds, and perhaps even to begin to rape little girls. If, in consequence, a group of parents arose and demanded that this person be vomited from the settlement - what would you say? "That we must not forget that we are all brothers, and we must respect one another? That in our communal life, we must forgive and understand weakness? That all in all, we are talking about someone with different opinions, who we should respect?" Or, perhaps, you would join those who want to vomit him from the community, and in order to protect the community and your family, you would not have anything to do with him? I am certain that you would join those who want to remove him from the area. You would understand that there is a difference between a person who takes drugs, and thereby harms only himself. This is sad, but that is his own personal concern. With such a person, it is possible to sit and talk, and even to persuade him to stop. Someone, however, who goes about in the community and actively takes measures that endanger the lives of those living in that area, must be sent away. And if there are people in the settlement who do not want him far away - then they suffer from a mental illness. Now I have an additional question for Boaz, and the "proud" settler, and our entire camp: Why do you think that someone who actively takes steps for the destruction of the entire settlement undertaking in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza - activity that endangers the entire national homeland, and not just your private house - should be treated differently than a criminal? Why don't you relate to such a person in the same way that you relate to the one in the settlement giving drugs or to a rapist? Master of the Universe! How can we relate to people from Kadima, including people who call themselves "religious" such as Otniel Schneller, Yonatan Bassi, and others, as people with "just another opinion"? As regards the acceptance of people with "different opinions," no public is more tolerant than the national-religious public, for which we can be proud. But deportation-plan criminals no longer represent "a different opinion"! They are acting with force, against our will, to impose their opinion on an entire public; now, they are planning to destroy, raze, and demolish the entire life's work of that public! There is a difference between a person who eats non-kosher food, that is his private concern, and a person who comes to your home, and, threatening you with a gun, forces you and the members of your household to eat non-kosher food! We continue to respect and love the first person, but we cast out from our midst and vomit the second. If there are people who are willing to embrace the second person, the one who comes to you and threatens you with a weapon, then these people are suffering from a mental illness. This might be the profound, underlying real reason for our failure last summer. We might have found here the true problem with our public: perhaps the problem is that our public felt, and still feels, the pain of the destruction of Gush Katif and Northern Samaria and the handing over of the territory to the Arab enemy, but it did not really regard this as a CRIME. When a CRIME is planned and implemented, then regular life stops, as long as the criminal is active. If we are not successful the first time, then we mobilize even more seriously, so that the second time we will triumph and prevent the criminals from carrying out their malicious plans. But if something like deportation is perceived as "not good," but still within the category of "it's not so terrible, either," then we merely protest in a moderate manner! We will then be written in the history books as having protested, but nothing much more than that. The fact that a majority of our public did not relate to the destruction of Gush Katif and Northern Samaria as a CRIME, and did not view the implementers of the deportation as criminals, with all that this implies, is the greatest failure of the national-religious education. This is the reason why these places were destroyed so easily. This is also the reason why so many rabbis defied former Chief Rabbi Shapira's clear ruling and did not call upon their yeshiva soldiers to disobey the order of the uprooting. For if something is not considered a CRIME, why should a soldier refuse orders? The solution for a successful struggle against Olmert's plan to destroy the settlements in Judea and Samaria apparently is to be found here. We must give our public a quick psychiatric session, to heal the public of its mental illness. I describe this illness as: "If someone comes to eliminate you, get up early to embrace him". We must explain to everyone that the Olmert plan constitutes an existential threat for us and for the entire State of Israel. It should, therefore, be regarded as a CRIME. As soon as we understand this, we will also know how to act decisively, without "sensitivity", so that the government will understand that it will not be worthwhile for it to take us on! Where is that psychiatrist who can treat our public ÂÂ and urgently? Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org. Or write an email to wfit2@womeningreen.org |
|
ISRAELI MEDIA FINALLY ADMITTING OLMERT'S US VISIT NOT A ROARING SUCCESS
Posted by Batya Medad, May 26, 2006. |
|
The Israeli media is finally admitting that Olmert's U.S. visit wasn't such a roaring success. It's one of those classic "good news/bad news" stories for me. The good news is that they don't like the plan, but the bad news is the reason why. I don't like Olmert's plan and strategy, because it endangers the security, the very existence of the State of Israel. It's based on a fallacy that by giving away our historic Homeland, the Arabs will give us peace. According the article I linked to in the first sentence and can be found at samizdatblogfree.blogspot.com/2006/05/jm-post-article-about-olmerts-us-visit.html, the reason the Americans and the rest of the world don't think Olmert's unilateral (that means doing it for nothing in return) withdrawal isn't good is that: "A viable Palestinian state," The New York Times on Thursday wrote, "It's long been clear that getting a workable, feasible Palestinian state out of two geographically separate masses of land in the desert will be an uphill battle. Now, because of two culprits and one enabler, Hamas, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel and President [George W.] Bush, that hill is becoming a mountain." That's right. The aim of the world is a "A viable Palestinian state," not an independent viable State of Israel. It's about time, or rather late but never, for Israel to face facts. We have no friends and no allies. The United States, England, Europe, United Nations etc are willing to sacrifice us, the State of Israel, for another Arab state, one whose essence, very aim is our very destruction. This is not something one can negotiate. Wise up! Batya Medad lives in Shiloh. She can be reached by email at Shilohmuse@yahoo.com or visit her website http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/ or go to http://www.shilo.org.il |
|
THE IMPACT OF ISRAEL'S PROPOSED RETREAT ON U.S. INTERESTS
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, May 26, 2006. |
|
This article appeared on http://yoramettinger.newsnet.co.il 1. VITAL U.S. INTERESTS would be impacted by Israel's proposed retreat ("Realignment") from terrorist strongholds in Judea & Samaria. 2. Israel's retreat from So. Lebanon catapulted HIZBALLAH from a small -- to a regional - terrorist organization, the role model of Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs), haunting US servicemen in IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN. 3. Israel's 1994-1998 series of retreats from 85% of Gaza and 40% of Judea & Samaria created the Palestinian Authority: the Mecca of homicide bombing and anti-US and anti-Jewish hate-education (please see Cloakroom #190). Palestinian terrorists fought the US in Iraq and Afghanistan. ANTI-U.S. TERROR has increased since the initial 1993 Oslo retreat! 4. Israel's 2005 retreat ("Disengagement") from Gaza and Northern Samaria has established the largest terrorist base in the Mideast, adrenalizing anti-US terrorism. 5. Israel's 2005 retreat has been perceived as a cave-in by the role-model of counter-terrorism to the role-model of terrorism. It paved the road to HAMAS' electoral victory and upgraded the posture of ISLAMIC JIHAD and AL-QAEDA, thus providing friendly platforms for IRAN, SYRIA, SUDAN, YEMEN and the PRO-SADDAM elements. 6. Bolstered Palestinian profile constitutes a present and immediate lethal DANGER TO PRO-U.S. REGIMES in Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Gulf states, threatening US troops in the Gulf area. 7. Expanded Palestinian Authority facilitates the strategic re-entrenchment of RUSSIA, CHINA and NO. KOREA in the Mideast at the expense of US interests in the eastern flank of the Mediterranean and throughout the Mideast. 8. Another Israeli retreat would further undermine Israel's posture of DETERRENCE, which is critical to the enhancement of regional stability. 9. U.S. ENCOURAGEMENT of another Israeli retreat from Palestinian terrorist strongholds would exacerbate the threat to US interests. Would the US learn from recent history by repeating -- or avoiding -- past errors?! Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is a consultant on US-Israel relations as well as the Chairman of Special Projects at the Ariel Center for Policy Research. Formerly the Minister for Congressional Affairs to Israel's Embassy in Washington, DC, Ettinger also served as Consul General of Israel to the Southwestern US. He is a former editor of Contemporary Mideast Backgrounder, and is the author of the Jerusalem Cloakroom series of reports. Contact him at yoramtex@netvision.net.il |
|
AMERICAN ZIONIST ORGANIZATIONS
Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, May 26, 2006. |
|
Watching the many standing ovations Ehud Olmert received when he addressed a joint session of the American Congress and spoke of his so-called Realignment Plan -- which would dispossess and displace 50 to 100 thousand Jews in Judea and Samaria -- it occurred to me that those standing ovations were living proof that American Zionist organizations have no significant impact on U.S. foreign policy regarding the Israel-Arab conflict. The leaders of these Zionist organizations must surely realize that all their noble efforts have not diminished the American government's commitment to a Palestinian state, hence, to a tortured future for the Jewish people. Surely the leaders of these Zionist organizations, which have labored so long and so hard on Israel's behalf, raising and spending considerable sums for lobbying missions to Washington, for trips to Israel to boost the morale of depressed settlers, and for publishing reams of articles critical of Israel's insane policy of "territory for nothing" -- surely they must realize that none of their brave and tireless efforts has made the people of Israel more secure, or Israel's government more Zionist toward Eretz Yisrael. Gaza has become the Mecca of international terrorism, and arsenals of weapons are being shipped from Gaza to Judea and Samaria such that every city of Israel will soon be threatened by missile attacks. Nevertheless, senators and congressmen and other public officials gave Ehud Olmert standing ovations for his Realignment Plan to forcibly dispossess countless Jews from their homes to facilitate the establishment of a Palestinian state. Those standing ovations make a mockery of American Zionist organizations. Surely the leaders of these organizations ought to engage is serious soul-searching. They should try to understand why, despite all their lobbying in Washington, congressmen continue to respect and applaud Israel's paltry and perfidious politicians so anxious to give away the birthright of their people to appease the Palestinian Authority -- a consortium of thugs and terrorists. The leaders of these Zionist organizations should try to understand why, despite all their efforts in America and despite all their missions to Israel, they have failed to have the slightest impact on the course of the Jewish state. They should try to understand that regardless of the evil consequences already experienced by retreat from Gaza -- a policy criticized by Israel's highest military and intelligence officials -- Prime Minister Olmert received standing ovations by asking the United States to play the role of Dr. Kevorkian and help Israel commit national suicide. What is there about Israel or about its reputation that fosters this madness? Professor Paul Eidelberg is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at pauleid@netvision.net.il |
|
"REALIGNMENT" IS JOINING IN SYMPATHY WITH THE ENEMY NOT THE WAY OF RUTH
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, May 26, 2006. |
|
In Memory of My Mother, Marion D. Solomon A"H who always read me the news and influenced me to write to right the wrongs of men who thought they saw what they wanted to see, who realigned truth because they had an unaligned agenda, hallucinating that their misaligned view is true. As Kadima goes forward with its realignments, let's consider the symantics of the romantics romancing with Hamas, Jihad, Hizballah and other terrorist organizations. Let' s consider the reconsiderations of those who would rather be like any other nation than those who chose monotheism in contrast to Sodom and its warlords, who chose The Creator and not destroyers, who chose the higher laws for a better world and not the law-asiding for their personal interests. As we are about to read The Book of Ruth, the geress, the great, great, grandmother of King David, that happened in the days when the Judges judged, we see the wisdom of following the path of the Jews and the blessings. It happened that Elimelech chose to flee Beis Lechem and not trust in HASHEM; he and his two sons perished in the land of Moab. The people of Beis Lechem were remembered and the famine subsided. Ruth chose to continue with her mother-in-law, Naomi saying, "Wherever you go, I will go; where you lodge, I will lodge, your people are my people, and your Gd is my Gd, where you die, I will die, and there I will be buried...." Ruth, with the kindness of Boaz, partook in the lechem, bread of Gd's house and he redeemed her and like Rachel Imeinu who died "on the way" in Beis Lechem and Leah buried in Hevron, so close to Tel Rumeida where Ruth and Yishai, the father of David HaMelech are buried, Ruth merited and her good deeds are recorded in the Torah given on Shavous. The Pathways of the Torah are the way to actualize the positive potential of the world. As some intellectuals at a Hillel Conference in Washington DC attempted to bust the foundations of Judaism such as monotheism and midos, redefining monotheism as a basis for terrorism and not a purging of warlords, immorality and decadence, and reclassifying the first Chief Rabbi of Israel HaRav Kook as a terrorist and not one who appealed to both the religious and the secular and was a friend of peaceful Arabs as well as an appreciator of all Gd's gifts to the world, all the variations of people and nature, the time tested Torah truths are still the prognosis for reality. As an Iraqi refugee in a Washington Hotel asked me, "What's wrong with the Jews? Don't they know that they lived in Iraq, Iran, Syria. Lebanon. Egypt, that they were exiled without their property, that even the property they sold and the money already in Swiss banks was stolen, that they were in refugee camps in Cyprus? What's wrong with the Jews, don't they know the West Bank is theirs and their enemy is my enemy. Why don't they know when we know? They are hurting my people in Iraq." He asked me to help him who fears reprisals even in America. As this Iraqi refugee and his people are suffering from the same pan-Jihad warlords as those in Darfur and in Israel, it is strange that the intellectuals at the Hillel Conference cannot connect the dots from one terrorist to another, cannot see that their own people are victims and are excusing their scapegoating by scapegoating and blood libeling themselves and America. For some strange reason, Kadima is realigning with the enemy while sacrificing its roots, relatives and reality. Kadima is out of tune. It's time for a tune up of their "idol" peace rushing down the road, crashing and crashing again and causing a multiplication of crashers. Kadima is without brakes, breaking up the Judeo-Christian foundations which have moved humankind forward. Kadima is unkind to its disengaged and planning more amputations for further terrorist invasions. Unsympathetic to its victims, Kadima plans to victimize not only its settled, but unsettle Israel's very foundations and its place among nations. This unsettlement is having repercussions all over the world from the universities to the governments and is a thorn in the tires of those too tired to fight for their legacies, legitimacies, life. At this time of Shavuos, let us rally as our ancestors did from past to present in unity, with conviction and confidence. As Ruth, the geress, chose the ways of graciousness, goodness and giving and got to merit the lineage of Moshiach, let us not change our allegiance to our role models because they are ancient. Our models have endured, keeping the Jews as survivors while all the taking imperialistic empires and mass fads have passed, annihilating themselves and their allies. Let the Jewish people continue to follow the lead of our role models and actualize the potential granted by HASHEM for all future generations. Contact Evelyn Hayes at haze@rcn.com |
|
WHAT WOULD ARIEL SHARON DO?
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 26, 2006. |
|
What would erstwhile field general Ariel Sharon do? Israel's neighbor Gaza is in chaos, on the brink of an anything but civil, civil war. Iraq is in chaos, likewise on the brink of a similarly dysfunctional civil war. The core issue for both enclaves is Islamic fundamentalism verses a more secular brand of that faith, albeit in Iraq centuries of Sunni verses Shiite hatred further complicate their battlefield. Indeed, Shiite vengeance is not something savored cold nor is the second fiddle role foisted upon a Sadist Hussein bereft minority Sunni populace, starkly inferred by scores of tortured bullet ridden cadavers belonging to both sects, strewn about the surreally battered landscape of what was once the cradle of civilization. Although Gaza abuts Israel and Iraq does not, both enclaves would be presciently assessed by warrior Sharon and savvy advisors, before surrendering most of Judea and Samaria to morphed Jordanian Arabs in turmoil. Conflagrations throughout the entire Middle East region could merge into a unified raging inferno, thus any major land concessions by Israel could result in disaster to say the least. Iran's Persian fundamentalist Shiite rulers salivate, ever-enriching their cache of wealth with extorted fossil fuel revenues, anticipating a wider sphere of influence in the longed for Shiite dominated Iraq of their maniacal dreams, and the monetary means to assert a fundamentally intolerant influence throughout the Middle East. Do farsi translations for Gaza, West Bank, and even Jerusalem sound sweet to fanatically intolerant AhMADinejad and company? Jihad obsessed fundamentalist Islam trumps all, even those fighting feuding Muslim-style Hatfield-and-McCoy-like Shiites and Sunnis, thus a few billion petrodollars morphed to rials funneled towards fundamentalist Hamas Sunnis to purchase weapons of Fatah destruction, compliments of got-rocks fundamentalist Iranian Shiite oil tycoons, could be in the Persians' deck of kings and aces. Would Sharon pull his troops out of Judea and Samaria, leaving those enclaves ripe for jihad junky pickings, considering all this? Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, presumably carrying Sharon's baton, has little of the military strategist's instincts. A good coach changes game plans when warranted, as does a good leader. Per barrel oil prices have surged dramatically over the last year or so, as has the wealth of Jew/Israel-despising Middle Eastern regimes. Furthermore, one such regime Iran has suggested Israel be wiped off the map. Ceding land emboldens terrorists, casting an image of weakness to those that yearn for Israel's destruction. Hamas would once again loudly assume credit for Olmert's folly, if it is perpetrated, accept financing from Iran, buy bigger and better weapons, perhaps of the WMD variety, and attempt to use them against the perceived retreating Jewish State. In a Middle East jungle, weakness begets aggression. Sharon might have adopted a more prescient point of view, noticing among other things current unrelenting wanton missile attacks from Gaza into Israel, contemplated the error of his ways, and changed course. Then again, perhaps Sharon knew all along that Gaza would erupt in chaos if given the chance, thus presume world opinion would encourage him to maintain control over Judea and Samaria lest those enclaves too would become potential bastions of terrorism. We cannot be sure as to what the former Prime Minister of Israel was thinking when he gave away Gaza. However, it should be crystal clear that any more land giveaways would only bring more tsuris to an already beleaguered Jewish State. What might it take to convince the current Prime Minister that he must reverse direction; no longer offering justifiably secured Israeli land for in effect nothing at all? What might it take for but an ort of sanity to permeate the minds of Israel's current leaders? Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
FOUR CROCKS DO NOT A SETTLEMENT MAKE
Posted by Ted Belman, May 26, 2006. |
|
A close look at the addresses of President Bush and Prime Minister Olmert yesterday yields the following. Bush addressed the goal, "In 2002, I outlined my vision of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side in peace and security. Prime Minister Olmert told me that he and his government share this vision. The international community seeks to realize this goal to the road map, which calls for a comprehensive settlement that resolves all outstanding issues between Israelis and Palestinians."So the Roadmap is a path to the "vision" and does not supplant it. That's good for Israel because the vision places high hurdles on the "Palestinians". But what this wonderful vision fails to make clear is that the green line is the intended border. "While any final status agreement will be only achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes, and no party should prejudice the outcome of negotiations on a final status agreement, the Prime Minister's ideas could be an important step toward the peace we both support." Thus Olmert's convergence plan are now considered to be "ideas" only. One wonders why a final status agreement can "only be acheived on the basis of mutually agreed changes" as opposed to negotiations. Bush repeats the mantra "no party should prejudice the outcome of negotiations". This was and is an outrageous imposition on Israel. To illustrate, when it comes to Iran, "all options are on the table". When it comes to Israel only one option is on the table. Israel must have the right to take steps to better her position while negotiations are ongoing and even more when they are not. As for the Iranian bomb, "We're determined that the Iranian regime must not gain nuclear weapons." This is a very weak statement. A strong statement would have been, "under no conditions will the US permit Iran to gain nuclear weapons". It is little comfort, that in "the event of any attack on Israel, the United States will come to Israel's aid." What ever happened to "pre-emption"? Olmert also referred to the "vision" as the basis for a settlement. "The vision which you outlined in your historic speech of June 2002, of two democratic states living side-by-side in peace and security, is the basis of any progress towards a solution in this region."Bush demanded, and Olmert agreed, to attempt negotiations before resorting to his ideas. but even then Olmert said, "The implementation of these ideas would only be possible with the comprehensive support of the United States and the international community" So clearly convergence is conditioned on support. Just as Bush is required to exhaust all possibilities for diplomacy to stop Iran before taking more aggressive action, so too must israel demonstrate that she has exhausted all possible diplomacy first. In both cases it is fair to say, Is vet du gournisht helphen or in English, "diplomacy doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell." Furthermore, The Roadmap does not require negotiations until there is an end to violence etc. So why is Bush demanding negotiations now? Another crock. Underlying all their remarks is the message, "Abbas, good; Hamas, bad." This is a crock, too. Nevertheless the US strategy continues to be based on the need for a "negotiating partner" rather then on the existence of one. Abbas and Fatah have done nothing to confirm that they are such a partner and they are not in power. Another crock is to separate the people from their duly elected government. "Our beef is not with the Palestinian people. Our beef is with the government that -- a group in the government that says they don't recognize Israel." Bottom line is that there will be no convergence without international approval and no international approval without more diplomacy. My take is that the international community will exact a heavy price for recognizing Olmert's proposed borders, should it decide to do so, and will insist on a quid pro quo for the "land grab". The idea that Israel can get more from negotiating with the US than with the Palestinians is another crock. Friends of Israel must realize that the peace process and all negotiations with respect thereto lead only to one place, the Saudi Plan. Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com |
|
ABBAS AT THE NOBEL COMMITTEE; BAHRAIN DISSEMBLES ABOUT BOYCOTT
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 26, 2006. |
|
ABBAS AT THE NOBEL COMMITTEE
Abbas discussed peace with the Nobel committee. He told them there is no military solution nor clash of civilizations. Favoring inter-faith dialogue, he wants to negotiate peace. As head of the PLO, which signed the previous agreements with Israel, he may conduct negotiations. He requests foreign arbitration, however, because, he said, otherwise Israel would make arbitrary decisions. Israel violates international law. It commits terrorism by using missiles to assassinate people, claiming civilian lives in the process. There would be peace, if Israel would release all prisoners, adhere to UNO resolutions and signed agreements, and not withdraw unilaterally nor build settlements. UNO Resolution 194 would resolve the refugee problem, if followed. He seeks a state on 22% of "historic Palestine." "Let us make Jerusalem, as we dreamed, the capital of two states, Palestine and Israel, open to all believers who can exercise their freedom of worship." But PM Netanyahu passed legislation that compelled the Arabs to flee Jerusalem, and change the Arab character of the city. Israel blocks many P.A. Arabs from working in Israel and denies the P.A. a port and airport. Israel thus keeps the P.A. economy down. Israeli actions produce Arab hatred, and Israeli strikes against the P.A. police prevented the P.A. from stanching Arab violence. Israel has many settlements in Gaza and is striving to keep 76% of Judea-Samaria (IMRA, 4/26). The fundamental distortion in his presentation is to make the Arabs seem the victims. Ignoring the state of war that his side launched, he blames Israel for fighting back. The real problem besides Arab aggression is that the war drags on, because Israel does not fight to win and to win quickly. His favorite Arab propaganda trick is to turn history on its head by truncating the last half-century and more. Then he claims that the Arabs merely are reacting to Israeli initiatives and hating Israel for them, in what he falsely describes as a territorial dispute. His Fatah and PLO Covenants and the Hamas Covenant make clear that the war is Islamist. The Arabs started terrorism decades before Israel, in self-defense, took over the Territories and turned to methods of anti-terrorism about which Abbas now complains. Indeed, it was Israel's peacefully intended offer of autonomy that enabled the Arabs to mount its escalating terrorism. Such is that state of the world that the committee sat there and accepted his crock of false and misleading statements. I've explained many of these points before, but summarize them here, to show how much of a liar an Arab leader is, and how meekly or ignorantly the world hears him. 1. "No military solution"? There is no diplomatic solution, not to jihad. If Israel fought to win, it would solve the problem as far as the P.A. is concerned. To solve the problem with the surrounding countries would require reform of Islam. 2. No "clash of civilizations"? Iran declared a clash of civilizations. The Islamists declare jihad. Most Muslims are sympathetic, until the Islamists turn on them for insufficient zeal. 3. Inter-faith dialogue is the Muslim way of gaining respectability among infidels and putting them off guard. 4. Negotiate peace? He lacks authority to implement agreements. Arafat had the authority and violated them. Islam sanctions violations, not peace. Islam wants victory, not conflict resolution. Hence, Hizbullah contrived an excuse for continuing to wage war on Israel, even after Israel evacuated from southern Lebanon. UNO Resolution, negotiations, and withdrawals all make matters worse, because even if not biased, though they usually are, they help the jihadists. 5. The Arabs want foreign arbitration, because in the anti-Israel climate, foreign governments take the Arab side, however unjust and however harmful to themselves. 6. Israel does not violate international law. Missile attacks on terrorists are legal. That's war. Civilian casualties are by-products of the Arab war-crime of keeping their militias in civilian areas. Terrorism is aiming at civilians. Israel does not do that. The Arabs do violate international law, by committing terrorism and aggression. 7. Israel does adhere to signed agreements, but the Arabs breach them all, until Israel decides, upon occasion, that its one-sided compliance is unfair. The Arabs put deliberately false interpretations upon signed agreements, such as: (a) Claiming that a UNO Resolution requires total Israeli withdrawal, when the US that drafted the Resolution explained that its draft does not; (b) Ignoring the requirement that withdrawal be predicated upon peace; (c) Asserting that Olso forbids Jewish settlement-building, when it expressly permits it and the Palestine Mandate expressly requires it; and (d) Ignoring that 194 does not require refugee return. Abbas the supposed moderate demands refugee-return knowing that those enemies would destroy Jewish statehood from within. 8. There is no requirement to release Arab prisoners, not even at war's end. They are not prisoners of war, but war criminals. Half of the ones released resume terrorism. Better to keep them in prison. 9. Who dreamed of making Jerusalem also the capital of an Arab state? Not Israel but its enemies, using the notion to further undermine Zionism. When the city was divided, the Arab sector fired into the Jewish sector. Abbas citers freedom of religion asa false pretext for a land grab. Fact is, the Arabs deny freedom of religion and Israel grants Muslims and Christians freedom of religion within some limits for security. The Muslims have been destroying ancient Jewish artifacts on the Temple Mount and attack Jewish shrines and synagogues. 10. There is no "historical Palestine." Palestine just was a concept, not a governmental area until the Mandate. Judea-Samaria and Gaza are about 4% of the Palestine mandate, as of before Jordan and Israel gained independence. But the Arabs already have, in Jordan, 78% of the Mandate. If they gained that additional 4%, they would have 82%, leaving Israel only 18%. No parity, there. All told, the Arabs have about 500 times as much land as the Jews. It is false to say that the Muslim Arabs want statehood over only Judea-Samaria and Gaza. They want sovereignty over Israel, too. Their Covenants reflect Arafat's strategy of conquering Israel in phases, using the Territories as a base for taking over Israel. 11. Israel chasing out Christians? Arabs? PM Netanyahu did not promote such legislation, and, in fact, the population of both has increased in Israel. The population of Arabs has increased in Jerusalem. The P.A., however, like Muslim states, has oppressed Christians and made many flee. The Christian population in Judea-Samaria is but a shadow of its former self. Abbas made a generalization without supporting specifics. He is covering up for ethnic cleansing by Muslims. 12. Jerusalem did not have a particularly Arab cast. It long was a Jewish city. Israel would be within its rights to keep it that way. It happens that Arab rulers repress minority cultures, Israel doesn't. 13. Yes, Israel bars many P.A. Arabs from working in Israel. That is its right; the P.A. Arabs have no right to work in Israel. When they are allowed to enter freely, they bring in terrorists among them. That Abbas failed to mention. By omitting Israel's reason -- Arab perfidy -- he hides Arab guilt and makes Israel seem guilty of arbitrarily imposing hardship upon the Arabs. The same is true about the port and seaport, after the Arabs smuggled weapons in even without those ports. 14. Israel was willing to do much for the P.A. economy, but the Arabs made war on Israel, thereby discouraging Israeli help, foreign investment, and domestic investment. The Arab rulers extorted, stole, monopolized, and failed to institute business law. Hence the Arabs stifled their own economy. Abbas became rich as a result of his position. 15. Israel produces Arab hatred? What about the P.A. media and curriculum of bigotry, calling for the murder of Christians, Americans, and Jews? One of the actions usually cited as producing Arab resentment is establishing checkpoints. If Israel didn't have them, terrorists would murder thousands more Israelis. The fault is the Arabs. Abbas was supposed to have eradicated terrorism, but he honored it, yet blames violence by Arabs on Israeli reaction to Arab violence. 16. Abbas claims that Israeli attacks on the P.A. police crippled its ability to fight terrorism. Nonsense. The P.A. still had 70,000 police. If properly paid and motivated, they could have eradicated Fatah and Hamas, but they were allies of those militias. If I were the PM of Israel, I would have attacked Hamas more, but the point is, the P.A. police either were committing terrorism or fought against Israeli raids on terrorists. The P.A. never made an effort against terrorism. Arafat financed terrorism! I checked the given date of the speech, and saw that it was 4/26/06, which is months after Israel evacuated from Gaza settlements that Abbas complains about. Obviously he is lying. It also is clear, both from plans that PM Olmert has alluded to and from the evacuation from northern Samaria, that Israel is striving to keep just a few percent of Judea-Samaria. Abbas' complaints are false, seeking to give an unfavorable impression about Israel and to make the Arabs seem the victims. Abbas and his people are as deceitful and vicious as any ever. He and they should be international pariahs. They they are not, and that Israel is, demonstrate the pervasive power of antisemitism, ignorance, political correctness, mercantilism, and Western defeatism. U.S. DECISION TO CONTINUE P.A. SUBSIDY UNSURPRISING For 12 years, the P.A. Arabs have violated their peace agreements, and the US has subsidized them. They never had to face serious consequences for their war crimes. Finally, their election of a nakedly belligerent P.A. regime got some Western donors (whose contributions largely have been embezzled or diverted to war) to indicate they would withhold the funds until the Hamas regime dropped jihad. Hamas makes clear at every opportunity that it won't. The West caved in. Not surprising, in view of its record of not holding Palestinian Arab war criminals accountable. Its rationalization that it is providing only humanitarian aid is a thin tissue. For one reason, many of the P.A. employees who would thereby get paid are the teachers who indoctrinate Arab children in hating Jews and Westerners (IMRA, 5/11 from ZOA). The US boycotts other totalitarian regimes, why not this one? BAHRAIN'S BOYCOTT OF ISRAEL Bahrain negotiated a free trade agreement with the US. An agreed-upon US condition was that the Arabs would close the anti-Israel boycott office and end the boycott, in favor of free trade. As the agreement is about to go into effect, the Arabs claim they are in process of closing the office, but one of their officials asserts they won't (IMRA, 5/11). Why should closing an office take long? This is the usual Arab way of dissembling -- conflicting stories, stalling, and non-compliance. Their promises mean nothing. Their behavior is disgusting, but since the US winks at it, the US is contemptible -- pretending to have principles. If the US were serious, it would make its condition that the agreement does not take effect until Bahrain complies. Imagine how much simpler Israeli life would be, and how many fewer terrorist attacks, if Israel had not invited the PLO into the Territories to take over the Arab areas and had insisted that the Oslo accords hold only so long as the Arabs repress terrorism! IRAN UNCONCERNED ABOUT ISRAEL Iran's list of major Mideast problems did not include Israel. Israel needs to get the point across that the region has so many problems, that stability would not be enhanced by its making concessions to the Muslim fanatics. Those fanatics may divert their people from the problems by blaming Israel and making war on it (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 5/10). 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. |
|
WHAT IF OLMERT DROPPED A 'BOMB' IN CONGRESS
Posted by Ted Belman, May 25, 2006. |
|
Make no mistake about it, it was a great speech. Olmert said all the politically correct things in just the right way. Assume for a moment that instead of doing so, Olmert spoke truth to power. That's the bomb I am speaking of. iMembers of Congress We hold these truths to be self evident;
Only this will end the conflict and bring peace to the Land of Israel. So I ask you, the Members of Congress, will you support Israel in the cause of peace. Or will you instead punish Israel for telling the truth. Remember the words of our great rabbi, "The truth will make you free". Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com |
|
PLEASE DO THIS ONE TINY YET HUGE FAVOR FOR ME! BUDDY
Posted by Buddy Macy, May 25, 2006. | |
|
Please take 120 seconds out of your busy schedule and make this one call. I just did it myself. Call President Bush between 9 & 5 Eastern Time, at: 202-456-1111, and, when the operator personally answers, say, "Please tell Mr. Bush to release Jonathan Pollard NOW!" THAT'S IT!!! Thank you so much!!! If you have never acted on one of my suggestions in the past, I beg of you to take action on this one; it is so simple to do. I am sending this email to nearly 2000 people. Imagine if all of you make the call, and send this message to all of the people on your email list. If the White House receives 10,000 phone calls in one day, demanding the release of this Jewish Martyr, he WILL be freed!! Please imagine yourself in his jail cell for one hour. He has been there for seven thousand, five hundred days! buddy macy Jonathan Pollard is serving his 21st year of a life sentence in the U.S. for warning Israel about the build-up of unconventional weapons of war for use against Israel, and about enemy plans to destroy the Jewish state. Pollard's life sentence is the harshest sentence ever meted out by the U.S. for spying for an ally. Indeed, it is much harsher than the sentences meted out to most of those who have committed far more serious crimes by spying for enemies of the United States. Jonathan's speech was delivered today, Jerusalem Day, on his behalf. It follows:
*Translation of title: Zion won't you seek the welfare of your
captives? ** The Shechina: In simplest terms, the Shechina (n.f.) is the
presence of G-d which dwells with Israel, offering comfort in sorrow
and accompanying her in exile.
Contact Buddy Macy at vegibud@aol.com
|
|
TALKING TO ARLENE KUSHNER
Posted by Lee Caplan, May 25, 2006. |
|
Shalom everyone. Please read the following of my talk with Arlene Kushner, all of which are extremely important. If anyone has any suggestions or thoughts, especially with regards to Arlene Kushner's call to action (which is underlined), please share them, as we are all in this together! Tizku lemitzvos. Arlene's email address is Lee
Lee Caplan: What's your reading on the meeting between Bush and Olmert yesterday? Arlene Kushner: What to make of the meeting yesterday between President Bush and Prime Minister Olmert? There were press reports that focused on various aspects of what was said in their press conference or shared by diplomatic staff. The emphasis within these press reports varied, but tended to be upbeat. Bush, while hesitating to fully endorse Olmert's plan, seemed surprisingly positive, calling it "bold," and saying, it "could be an important step toward the peace we both support. I'm encouraged by his constructive efforts to find ways to move the peace process forward." I read that, and I had one of my "HUH?" moments, which tend to come frequently these days. Bush has been advised by several sources -- including Jordan's King Hussein -- that Olmert's plan will destabilize the region and give terrorists a larger area within which to operate. This advances the peace process? Of course, Bush qualified his statements by saying that a negotiated final status agreement would best serve the cause of peace. But, he conceded, it's difficult to negotiate such a settlement with Hamas in charge of the PA. And, if it turns out that negotiations are not possible (because Hamas won't abandon terrorism, recognize Israel's right to exist, and accept all previous agreements), Olmert's "ideas could lead to a two-state solution." Another "HUH?" Pulling back and giving land to Palestinians who won't abandon terrorism, recognize Israel's right to exist or accept all previous agreements leads to a two-state solution? Well, it turns out, unsurprisingly, that there's a lot of diplomatic double talk in all of this. There was a desire to make things positive and smooth and upbeat during Olmert's first visit. Certainly there could be no overt public tough talk. However, what is clear -- which we knew going into this meeting -- is that Bush is signaling Olmert to try to negotiate seriously with Abbas. No one realistically thinks a full settlement will come tomorrow, if Olmert meets with Abbas, but, as a State Department spokesman said, "We think it's very useful to keep those channels of communication open." I would guess that as long as there are "channels of communication" open then the U.S. is going to say hope isn't dead, there is a chance of negotiated settlement, and so the time for unilateral action is not yet. Bush says that he will want to learn more about this plan in the months ahead before signing off on it. And, say diplomatic sources, Bush will be looking for an international consensus on this. According to the Jerusalem Post, "The U.S....does not want Olmert to push forward with his plan before it has a chance to gain support from European countries and from Israel's Arab neighbors [Jordan and Egypt]." Need I tell you what the chances are of the international community and Arab nations signing off on an Israeli plan that the Palestinians object to, and that Jordan and Egypt fear? This may be Bush's out. Having gone it alone on Iraq and fared badly, he is unlikely to buck international consensus on this to support Olmert. And there is yet more. President Bush, in his press conference with Olmert, said, "...any final status agreement will be only achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes, and no party should prejudice the outcome of negotiations on a final status agreement..." Aaron Lerner, Director of IMRA, explains this: "The United States won't stop Israel from bulldozing Jewish communities - but warns that just because Mr. Olmert bulldozes some communities doesn't mean Israel can keep the ones it doesn't bulldoze. That's up to the deal Israel ultimately strikes with the Palestinians." Olmert originally said that Israel would unilaterally set borders if the Palestinians won't negotiate, and then hedged a bit, saying the lines would be very close to final borders. Bush is saying, "No way." Olmert has been saying that Jewish settlements that will be retained will be annexed and made part of Israel proper. Bush is saying that this would "prejudice" later final status negotiations. The Palestinians aren't going to agree to Israel keeping anything over the pre-67 lines, and State Department policy supports this. At the press conference -- see http://imra.org.il/story.php3?id=29378 -- Bush was asked by a journalist about major settlement blocs being annexed to Israel and whether he would support this. His answer: "...refer to my April 14th, 2004 letter. I believed it when I wrote it, and I still believe it." This is an extremely instructive answer. He is referring to the letter that PM Sharon returned with when the "disengagement" was being discussed. "You see!" he crowed then, "President Bush has given us the right to keep major settlement blocs. We have gained his support." It wasn't true then, and it isn't true now. A simple reading of that letter made it clear that (even though it would seem that demographic changes should influence the situation) the U.S. supports the right of the two parties to determine borders and will not interfere. But who read it? People believed Sharon. The task that now falls to those of us on both sides of the Atlantic who understand the folly and the dangers of Olmert's plan is to make sure people are not taken in a second time. Olmert must not be given the opportunity to hype this visit and make it seem as if the president of the U.S. supports his intentions. Who is going to read the press conference text? Everyone must know Bush's real position. Everyone must be made to realize that even if Israel pulls back, further pullbacks will be demanded by the international community down the road. There will be no Israeli unilateral setting of borders with the Palestinians and no international recognition of Israeli annexation of any settlements. Giving up land now simply weakens us. Deputy National Security Advisor Elliot Abrams and Assistance Secretary of State David Welch will be coming here next month to discuss the plan, and reportedly Secretary of State Rice, who has already done us damage with the Rafah agreement, is scheduled to be here in the fall. For the record, the plan is apparently being renamed "realignment," because it sounds better. That's the key for Olmert, isn't it? Packaging what he intends to do so it is palatable for the people. In a later conversation. Lee Kaplan: What do we need to do to make sure that people are not taken in a second time? Arlene Kushner: That is the key question, isn't it, Lee? For
starters, we who write must make these matters clear.
Communication on lists helps as well. Exposure, focus on the
facts, as much as possible. What I wish for, here in Israel,
is the small fortune that would be required to place ads in
Hebrew in all the major papers responding on a regular basis
to the lying claims Olmert is going to make. Know anyone there
who has that small fortune and might be interested in
investing it this way? Short of this, there are ways of
getting information into the news without cost via press
conferences by people important enough to make the news, and
other techniques. We have to think creatively and dynamically.
We cannot lose this time.
Contact Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com
|
|
WITH WHOM SHOULD ISRAEL NEGOTIATE?
Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 25, 2006. |
|
Your editorial, "A Viable Palestinian State" (NY Times, 5.25.06) speaks eloquently for the need to create a state for the Palestinians. But your assertion, couched in the language of advice to President Bush and PM Olmert, that "...there will not be peace in the Middle East unless the Palestinians have a say in creating a state that can function", is a sad testimony to your abysmal ignorance of the history and reality of the Arab-Israel conflict. For the 27 years from June, 1967 to June, 1994, the West Bank and Gaza Strip experienced an amazingly successful expansion of economy, education, infrastructure, technical and medical advances, and democracy....under Israeli sovereignty. World Bank statistics show that the GDP of these territories grew between 6 and 13% per year during those 27 years, there was almost no unemployment as close to 300,000 Arabs crossed the "green line" daily to work in the Israeli economy, tourism skyrocketed, roads and sewerage and water supply and telephones and electricity were brought into the 20th century, the population more than tripled (from c. 950,000 in 1967 to more than 3,000,000 in 1994), infant mortality plummeted and life expectancy rose, and seven universities sprang up where only 3 teacher-training colleges had existed before. Most of this unprecedented progress and prosperity was due to Israel's "Mini-Marshall plan". Israel poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the West Bank and Gaza Strip, in the hope that the economic progress and material well-being of the Arab residents would translate in to what we then called a "peace dividend"...the recognition that peace is better than war, and cooperation promises a better life and life-style for all of us and our children than does the endless relentless commitment to terrorism and confrontation. It didn't work. When Arafat came to power, thanks to Oslo (9/13/1993), Israel's sovereignty over much of the West Bank and Gaza Strip came to an end; but all of this progress and prosperity came to a grinding halt and was quickly reversed. By 2004 the GDP of the West Bank was less than one-tenth of what it was ten years earlier. All thanks to Arafat and his terror war. The prosperity and viability of these territories during the 27 years of Israeli sovereignty can be easily replicated no matter where, or how, the borders of the new state are determined; but only if and when the Arab leadership abandons violence, rejects terrorism, stops incitement, sits down to peaceful negotiations without pre-conditions, and commits to a future of peaceful cooperation with Israel and with Jordan. Abbas has no power to do this. He cannot control his own government. He cannot stop Hamas' terrorists or even his own. He cannot deliver. So there is no point to negotiating with him. Hamas is in control of the Palestinian Authority. Hamas can deliver. But Hamas will not negotiate with Israel. Hamas will not recognize Israel. Hamas will not stop the terror war until Israel is destroyed and its 5,400,000 Jews are dead. So what is the point of pressuring Israel to negotiate with the Palestinian Authority? Today, no matter what size or shape the future state of Palestine may be, and whether those dimensions are decided by Olmert unilaterally or via negotiations with some future Palestinian Authority leadership, the Palestinian state's viability will be determined by its leaders' commitment to peace and cooperation. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
MISTER CON MAN GOES TO WASHINGTON
Posted by Ruth Matar, May 25, 2006. |
|
Dear Friends,
This morning I read the following front page headline in the Jerusalem Post: BUSH, CONGRESS APPLAUD WEST BANK PULLOUT PLAN I literally wanted to cry! My native country is falling for this con-artist who went to Washington D.C. for the express purpose of pulling the wool over America's eyes with his "convergence plan". By the way, Ehud Olmert changes the name of his plan almost daily. First it is "convergence"; then it is "consolidation"; presently it is "realignment". He is like a vendor of snake oil in the Old American West, who is looking for a catchy label for his product. The intent of Olmert's plan is the withdrawal of Israel from the heart of its own country; withdrawal from its inheritance and lands, that, in essence, endanger the very existence of the State of Israel. Olmert's "Convergence Plan" will bring Hamas, Hizbullah, and Al-Quaeda, and in their wake, Iran--the true power behind these powers--to the very heart of Israel, inside Jerusalem, the Capital of Israel, and to the rest of the cities of this country. The "Convergence Plan" is in essence a plan for Israel's suicide. Mister Olmert stops at nothing! He insists that he is following Sharon's plan to retreat from Judea and Samaria. This is an outright lie. But since Sharon is in an irreversible coma, he is not able to refute Olmert's declarations. On the last visit which Ariel Sharon made to the United States, then Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom accompanied the Prime Minister. Silvan Shalom, in an article in today's Jerusalem Post denies that Olmert's "retreat plan" was "the Sharon way". "Arik said that there would not be another disengagement AND PUBLICLY DENIED IT when Olmert spoke a year and a half ago of a second disengagement." EXCERPTS FROM THE BUSH-OLMERT PRESS CONFERENCE AT THE WHITE HOUSE: PRESIDENT BUSH: "I outlined my vision of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side in peace and security. Prime Minister Olmert told me that he and his government shared this vision." [RM: What Olmert should have told President Bush is that the People of Israel do NOT share this "dream" of the creation of a second Palestinian state carved out of the Holy Land. In the historical perspective, the "Land of the Bible" is the birthright of the Jewish People as G-d promised to our forefathers.] President Bush said that it is necessary to come up with a mechanism to get food and medicine and aid to the Palestinians and invited Ehud Olmert to comment on this. OLMERT: "Thank you, Mr. President. Indeed, the government, Sunday, decided to spend NIS 50 million buying medical equipment--about $11 million--for the time being, to buy medical equipment and drugs needed for the hospitals in Gaza. And as I said during the cabinet meeting, we will spend any amount of money needed to save lives of innocent Palestinians suffering from the indifference of their government." [RM: Olmert forgot to mention the Israeli colon cancer patients who are currently demonstrating in Jerusalem for drugs to be included in the government's health basket, which have until now been denied. They have been hunger striking and demonstrating outside the Knesset, demanding the National Government include lifesaving drugs in the national healthcare basket. The protestors told the media that the drugs that have the potential to save their lives cost tens of thousands of shekels monthly, and that they do not have the ability to acquire them privately, blaming the government for "signing their death sentences". The cancer patients announced that their demonstration is being joined by breast cancer and chronic asthma patients. Ehud Olmert, charity begins at home! Why don't you concern yourself with saving the lives of innocent Jews suffering from the indifference of their government, since you are the Prime Minister of Israel?] OLMERT'S ADDRESS TO CONGRESS Suddenly Olmert loves to quote the Bible, something we have never heard from him before! "My parents came to the Holy Land following the verse in the Old Testament in the book of Second Samuel, 'I will appoint a place for My People Israel and I will plant them in the their own land and they will dwell in their own place and be disturbed no more.'" [RM: Olmert has no shame whatsoever! He, together with his mentor Sharon, "disturbed" 9,000 Jews in Gush Katif by forcibly expelling them from their homes in the Holy Land. Some of these Jews, who only nine months ago were productive homeowners, with farms, businesses or employment, have now become homeless "refugees" still waiting for their compensation payment. Some have been paid a pittance advance money, which they are still using for food, rather than being able to save for a new dwelling place. Others have received nothing at all and have to rely on charity for food and clothing.] OLMERT: "We owe a quiet and normal life to ourselves, our children and our grandchildren. After defending ourselves for almost 60 years against attacks, all our children should be allowed to live free of fear and terror." [RM: Does Mr. Olmert think we are all mentally incapacitated? The Kassam rockets and the more dangerous Katusha rockets are increasingly raining down on southern Israel, and Ashkelon, with its essential installations of electricity plants and oil pipelines. Terror and suicide bombing has increased substantially since the disengagement from Gaza. A recent victim of terror is Daniel Cantor Wultz, a 16-year-old high school student from Florida, who came to spend Passover in Israel. Some people are surprised that Olmert invited the Wultz family to hear his address to Congress, since their son was a victim of the increased terror after the disengagement from Gaza.] The megalomania of Ehud Olmert has no boundaries. On every possible occasion, he keeps repeating, almost like a mantra, "I WILL SET THE PERMANENT BOUNDARIES OF ISRAEL." Ehud Olmert has put himself in direct opposition to the words of the G-d of Israel and the Bible: HASHEM said to Abram after Lot had parted from him, "Raise now your eyes and look out from where you are: northward, southward, eastward and westward. For all the land that you see, to you will I give it and to your descendants forever. I will make your offspring as the dust of the earth so that if one can count the dust of the earth, then your offspring, too, can be counted. Arise, walk about the land through its length and breadth! For to you I will give it. And Abram moved his tent and came and dwelled in the plains of Mamre, which are in Hebron; and he built there an altar to HASHEM." (Genesis: 13:14-18) On that day HASHEM made the covenant with Abram, saying, "To your descendants have I given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates." (Genesis: 15:18) "I will make you most exceedingly fruitful, and make nations of you; and kings shall descend from you. I will ratify My covenant between Me and you, and between your offspring after you, throughout their generations, as an everlasting covenant, to be a G-d to you and to your offspring after you; and I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojourns - the whole of the land of Canaan - as an everlasting possession; and I shall be a G-d to them." (Genesis: 17:6-8) Ehud Olmert, add the following scripture to your list of Bible quotations: "You shall not move a boundary of your fellow, which the early ones marked out, in your inheritance that you shall inherit in the Land that HASHEM, your G-d, gives you to possess it." (Deut: 19:14) With Blessings and Love for Israel, Ruth Matar PS: Dear Friends, it is very important that you pass this Letter from Jerusalem on to everybody you can think of. Especially to President Bush, your Senators and your Congressman. In order to find out the names of the two Senators of your State, and the Congressman of your District, call the U.S. CAPITOL SWITCHBOARD: 202-224-3121 The telephone number of President Bush is: 202-456-1111 His fax number is: 202-456-2461 |
|
SAYING NO TO OLMERT
Posted by Ragen, Naomi, May 25, 2006. |
|
Friends, We live in strange times. An Israeli Prime Minister comes to America to ask American approval to throw thousands of Israelis from their homes, in order to hand the land over to her sworn enemies. Americans, who probably can't figure out what the heck is going on, and why an Israeli thinks this ridiculous idea is good for the country,are scratching their heads while calling it a "bold plan." Try "reckless," unthought-out", "stupid." The "if-we-don't-have-a-peace-partner- then-we'll-have-to-insist-on-retreat mantra, currently in vogue among Israeli politicians, who puff out their chests when they say it, as if it's a threat to our enemies, instead of a wonderful reward, has to be the dumbest line our Foreign Ministry has ever tried to sell. But then, our Prime Minister was never a very bright man, but rather a shrewd, self-serving, unprincipled politician who was in the right place at the right time. He's like a car salesman going to sell the latest BMW to someone he knows loves BMW's, only buys BMW's, and wants another BMW. Selling another Israeli withdrawal to the Americans has to be the easiest task any Israeli Prime Minister ever had to "achieve." I hope Israel still has some real friends in Congress who will see through this sickening travesty of a foreign policy and resist. Below, Caroline Glick describes all we have to lose by giving in to the slick campaign to pull the wool over our eyes once again. Her article appeared in The Jerusalem Post (www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1148287842900) May. 22, 2006. I'm afraid I'm no longer a good customer for the Israeli leftist-propaganda machine. I was there when Oslo was being sold. We all paid the price for our passivity and ignorance. And keep on paying. Resist. Question Israeli spokesmen. Don't line up like ducks behind the Olmert machinery. Resist, resist, resist. In your synagogues. In your Jewish organizations. In your communities. To support Israel, means to support all her people, her long-term needs, not the deluded government of the moment. Naomi If all goes as planned, as Prime Minister Ehud Olmert meets today with US President George W. Bush in the White House, several thousand protesters from around the US and Canada will be across the Mall by the US Senate protesting Olmert's visit. These will not be the standard Israel haters from the Left or the Islamist crowd. They will be neither neo-Nazis nor Communists. Rather the planned protest is being organized by Israel's staunchest Jewish and Christian supporters. The people getting on buses to travel to Washington to protest Olmert's visit believe that Olmert's planned withdrawal from some 95 percent of Judea and Samaria and partition of Jerusalem are suicidal for Israel and will have a devastating impact on US national security. As they note in their press release, Olmert "seeks to secure the approval of President Bush to carry out more Jewish expulsions and giving over of land to Hamas (a Teheran-sponsored terrorist group), actions that totally undermine America's war on terror." Voices from inside of the Bush Administration claim that Olmert's planned withdrawal is "a done deal." The relevant administration officials argue there it would be futile for the US to register any objection to Olmert's plan because Olmert and his government are wholly committed to carrying it out. But the "plan" is anything but a done deal. The mass expulsion of Israelis from their homes in Judea and Samaria has not begun. The security fence whose completion is supposed to precede the enactment of the mass expulsions is far from complete. Indeed its route has yet to be finalized. The IDF has made no plans of any kind for defending Israel from the indefensible 1949 armistice lines. Top level Jordanian government officials have voiced serious concern to US lawmakers, Israeli officials and the media about the ramifications of Olmert's plan for the survivability of the Hashemite regime. It is simply disingenuous to say that it is too late for the US to consider opposing Olmert's plan. ASIDE FROM that, over the past 58 years, the US has never considered anything that Israel has done to be "a done deal" if it hasn't agreed that it should be a done deal. In 1956 for instance, Israel conquered the Sinai Peninsula. Then prime minister David Ben-Gurion got on the radio and announced joyously that Israel would never leave the Sinai. Washington had other ideas. Several days later, after some overtly hostile strong arming from then president Dwight D. Eisenhower and his advisors, Ben-Gurion got on the radio and announced that Israel would be withdrawing from the Sinai forthwith. In 1999, Israel finalized an agreement to sell three Phalcon spy planes to China. The Chinese started making their payments. Then president Bill Clinton summoned then prime minister Ehud Barak to the White House for urgent consultations the day before a planned visit to Jerusalem from China's leader, and Barak cancelled the deal. So there is no credibility to the claim that the US cannot stop an Israeli government from doing what it has its heart set on doing. THE QUESTION is not whether the US can weigh in on the issue. The question is whether the US should intervene. To determine the answer to this question it is important to keep certain truths in mind. First, Olmert maintains that the election results that propelled him to the Prime Minister's Office were proof that he has public support for his planned withdrawal. Yet, as Hillel Halkin pointed out this month in Commentary, the elections were anything but a referendum regarding Olmert's plan. The election results, which gave Olmert's Kadima faction less than a quarter of the seats in the Knesset, were a sign that Israel's body politic is unraveling. The electorate's fragmentation was made clear both by record low voter turnout and by the dismemberment of the major parties like Likud and Labor and even Kadima to the benefit of sectoral parties like Shas, Yisrael Beitenu and the Pensioners Party. During the campaign Kadima registered its greatest losses of support after Olmert began discussing his plan to withdraw from Judea and Samaria. Yet even if Olmert did not receive a mandate for his withdrawal plan from the Israeli voters, he is the legally elected prime minister. In the eyes of many of Israel's supporters in America, it is wrong for the US to second-guess the wisdom of the Israeli leadership. While in theory this position is correct, it comes apart at the seams when the ramifications of Olmert's plans for US national security are taken into account. Knowledgeable sources in Washington policy circles maintain that in the two weeks preceding Olmert's visit to Washington, Israeli officials were asked to allay American concerns regarding the security consequences of Olmert's plan. Specifically, Israeli officials have been called upon to explain how Judea and Samaria will be prevented from following the model set in Gaza when Israel's retreat enabled the transformation of Gaza into a base for international terrorists along similar lines to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan. Israel's military attache in Washington, Maj. Gen. Dan Harel was reportedly sent to the White House to dispel these concerns. It should be recalled that Harel commanded last summer's retreat from Gaza. Harel was lionized at the time by the Israeli media for successfully implementing the mass expulsion of Israeli civilians from Gaza while averting civil war. Yet Harel has never been called to account for the fact that he made no plans for Israel to defend itself from the threats that - as foreseen - arose from Gaza and from the Sinai in the aftermath of the retreat. Because of his failure, IDF forces in the Southern Command were left without contingency plans for contending with the transformation of Gaza into a base for global jihad and without adequate means to secure Ashkelon and the other communities bordering Gaza from the daily missile, rocket and mortar attacks to which they have been subjected since the retreat. This is relevant because Harel reportedly told his US interlocutors that they have no reason to worry about the consequences of Olmert's plan because it only involves the mass expulsion of Israeli civilians from Judea and Samaria. The IDF, he said will retain its current positions in the areas. WHETHER OR not Harel realized it at the time, he was not being wholly truthful to his American audience. Even if the plan today is for the IDF to retain control of the areas in which the civilians are set to be expelled, and to retain their present deployments, any educated observer of Israel's political and cultural dynamics will attest that there is no way that this can happen. If Olmert expels tens of thousands of Israeli citizens from their homes, he will destroy the entire domestic rationale for the IDF deployment. As was the case in Lebanon, radical leftists within Israel will rise up and demand a full retreat. For its part, the nationalist camp will become so alienated by the expulsions that in the best case scenario, its members will simply cease to identify with the state. They will not support any military activities in the heartland of Jewish civilization that the state ethnically cleansed of all Jewish presence. Aside from this, whether the IDF remains or not, the Israeli destruction of Israeli towns and villages will be broadcast throughout the world and be celebrated - rightly - as a strategic victory of jihad. Zionism isn't about the IDF, it is about Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel. Israeli destruction of Israeli villages in the Land of Israel is the death of Zionism and our enemies know it even if we insist on denying this basic truth. AND SO we return to our starting point. Olmert will meet Bush today and present to him a plan that will unravel Israeli society, which was already dangerously fragmented by the withdrawal from Gaza. He will present to him a plan that is based upon the anti-Semitic notion that Jews should be prohibited from living in certain places because they are Jews, and the perverse notion that a Palestinian state founded on the principle of lebensraum and racial purity because by definition no Jews will be allowed to live in Palestine, will be capable of living at peace one day with the Jewish state. Olmert will present a plan that provides a strategic victory to the forces of global jihad in a war they wage not only against Israel but against the US and the Western world as a whole because they will see Israel destroying itself under the gun of their terror and enabling the establishment of yet another base for global terrorists. Given all this, the question of whether or not the US should object to Olmert's plan is superseded by the question of how the US should make its rejection of this plan known to Olmert and whether its objection should similarly be communicated to the Israeli public. Any ambiguity on this issue to Olmert; any retreat behind disingenuous statements about "done deals," will be nothing less than the revocation of the cardinal US strategies for winning this war: the advance of liberal values and the denial of bases of operation to global terrorists. 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. |
|
THE PALESTINIAN CHARADE
Posted by Bryna Berch, May 25, 2006. |
|
This is a news item from the Telegraph in England (www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/ opinion/2006/05/25/dl2502.xml). A reader commented, "Abbas (Abu Mazen) did not lift a finger to make peace, or even carry out the first step of the "Road Map", when his Fateh movement wss in power. It is highly, highly unlikely that he could deliver any pact with Israel that the Palestinians would honor and stick to." A second reader said, "Hitler too was democratically elected, and for most of the 1930s Britain was at the very forefront of those who appeased him. This was an appeasement that ultimately cost the lives of many millions of people including the great majority of Jews then living in Europe. Is the Telegraph now suggesting that the world appeases once again a group dedicated to the destruction of millions of Jews? Has the Daily Telegraph really learned nothing in the last sixty years?" Another commented, "It is so rare to read a sensible article about Israel in the British or European media." (Or as sensible as Eurobia is likely to get. Appeasement by any other name is still appeasement. It never works.) In their dealings with the Palestinians, the United States and Israel are engaged in a charade. During Ehud Olmert's first visit to Washington as prime minister, George W Bush reiterated his support for a two-state negotiated solution in accordance with the Middle East "road map". He also praised his visitor's plans as "bold ideas" that could be an "important step" towards peace, should that process falter. The reality is that the road map has been in tatters since it was first agreed by America, the European Union, Russia and the United Nations in 2003. Steps towards permanent borders have been taken by Israel on its own: the building of the barrier and the withdrawal last year from the Gaza Strip and four West Bank settlements. Having assumed the leadership of Ariel Sharon's Kadima party, Mr Olmert has campaigned for a continuation of that unilateralism: pulling out of more West Bank settlements, but incorporating the larger ones within Israel, thereby imposing a border. In the face of unremitting hostility by Hamas to the existence of a Jewish state, the prime minister has said he will attempt to negotiate with Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority. But Mr Abbas, whose Fatah movement was defeated in parliamentary elections in January, is a busted flush, unable to deliver anything. Unless Hamas radically changes its views, Mr Olmert will go through the motions of talking to the Palestinian president before proceeding unilaterally with his plans, which he hopes to complete within three to four years. The prime minister realises the futility of talking to Mr Abbas, and so probably does Mr Bush. But his administration is tying itself in knots over how to deal with Hamas. Unwilling to talk to a terrorist organisation, it is planning to channel funds to Mr Abbas to pay the security services and fund public works. In an attempt to starve a democratically elected government, it is favouring the co-founder of a movement that has became a byword for corruption. Nothing is better calculated to boost support for Hamas in the Occupied Territories. The Islamist challenge is real, but does not justify policies that are just plain stupid. |
|
ABBAS: TERRORISTS ARE "OUR HEROES"
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, May 25, 2006. |
|
Israelis leaders anxiously look to Mahmoud Abbas as a potential peace partner, largely because of his moderate statements in English. However, his Arabic statements continue to show admiration for even the most depraved terrorists. Likewise, Abbas rejects terror for tactical reasons only -- not because it is immoral. During a television interview this week, Abbas twice referred to those terrorists serving "tens of life sentences" in Israeli jails as "our heroes." The terrorists who are serving "tens of life sentences" are those arch terrorists who have personally killed tens of Israelis,, and are sentenced to one life sentence for each murder. These are the people whom Mahmoud Abbas calls "our heroes." In the statement on PA TV about the jailed terrorists' recent attempts to bring peace between the Fatah and Hamas, Mahmoud Abbas expressed his satisfaction with the: "initiative of our brothers, our jailed heroes, who have presented a similar initiative [for dialogue] ... the initiative proves that these heroes, who are sentenced to tens of life sentences, feel too that the homeland is in danger..." -- [PA TV May 23, 2006] As PMW has reported in the past, even in his so-called "condemnations" of terror attacks, Abbas has always been careful in Arabic not to condemn terror because it is evil or immoral. He has criticized suicide terror only because it hurts the PA cause, as he did after the December 2005 suicide attack that killed five in Netanya. Read "PA on Terror: 'Condemns' on paper, praises in practice" at the PMW website. PMW Comment: Israeli and Western leaders are so eager to find a viable partner for peace that they often mistake Palestinian Authority leaders' "lip service" in English as statements of truly peaceful intentions. But as PMW has reported for the past decade, the only way to understand these leaders' real opinions is to pay attention to what they are telling their own people in Arabic. These are the only messages that count. Itamar Marcus is director of PMW - Palestinian Media Watch - (http://www.pmw.org.il). PMW is based in Jerusalem. Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. |
|
WHY BRING THE CHAOS OF BAGHDAD TO JERUSALEM?
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 25, 2006. |
|
Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, with the not so subtle connivance of President George W. Bush, was not content with the debacle they brought to the Gaza Strip. They now wish to destroy Jerusalem by bringing the chaos of Gaza and Baghdad to Israel's Eternal Capital City. Olmert, playing the role of Machiavelli, urged Sharon to abandon Gaza and Northern Samaria for the self-serving advantages Olmert and Sharon said it would bring. Here we find the other mirror image of Machiavelli, the Arabist State Department, whispering their pernicious hate-filled advice to the sophomoric boy President to sign on to another Gaza-like blunder in the "west bank". It wasn't enough to fail to pacify Iraq as the Iraqi people and the Mujahadeen (a mixture of terrorists for Islam) are killing American soldiers by road-side explosives and suicide bombs - with impunity. Now they wish to bring the same failed pacification to Israel! It wasn't enough to attempt the pacification of Afghanistan which is failing as the Taliban radical Muslims mount resurgent attacks, killing Afghans, U.N. and American soldiers. It wasn't enough for Ariel Sharon to (at first) successfully fight off the Arab Muslim Terrorists at the furthest reaches of Israel's minuscule land mass but, they had to bring the enemy closer by running out of Gush Katif/Gaza and then from Samaria. What exactly did each of these men hope to gain by pretending they knew how to appease and pacify the Muslim Jihadists (fighters for Islam)? We know President Bush is desperate to politically offset American losses in Iraq and Afghanistan by creating an illusion of successfully befriending the hostile Palestinians whose votes demonstrate that they prefer Hamas Terrorists as their nation builders. We know that PM Olmert cares almost nothing for the Land of Israel, her Jewish history and the Jews' Right of Return. We know he is has a reputation as a self-serving politician and lawyer, dedicated to his own pockets and the power he squeezes out of his position as Prime Minister. If ever there were two men who were willing to spit in the face of a G-d they either despise or simply don't believe in, it is Bush and Olmert. Even the earliest of Muslim scholars believed the Land was bequeathed to the Jews by G-d but, not Bush and Olmert. Some believe, and with good reason, that the calamities which have cascaded down upon America are the fault of President Bush and his allegiance with his oily Arab Muslim friends - to the detriment of Israel. Those Jews, now called Kadimites in the new Sharon/Olmert Party, have similarly called down upon the nation of Israel Katyusha Missiles and Kassem Rockets with an ever increasing range and accuracy, plus car bombs, drive-by and sniper shootings, suicide/homicide bombing with explosive belts worn by Muslim Arab Palestinians - and more. The Price Israel is going to pay will shock even the most radical Leftists, including the Kadimites. But, Olmert, a small-minded, insignificant man wishes to be known for something bigger than he could ever be, even if it means sacrificing Jews he doesn't really care much for anyway. In brief, two selfish political charlatans are perfectly willing to use an embattled nation IF they can gain advancement for themselves politically or for their historic legacies. We all know many unethical politicians feed on their own people to gain political or monetary advantages. In this case the banquet will be the Israeli people and, of course, Jerusalem will be the featured entreé. Is there any doubt that Olmert and Bush will bring the chaos of today's Baghdad to Jerusalem? They are already preparing their denials of fault and carefully drafting excuses as to why it's best for all if Israel must suffer missiles, rockets and suicide/homicide bombings. As for Bush's pledges to protect Israel, you will note the absence of specificity. Bush needs to improve his poll numbers and Olmert must get whatever financial rewards plus an historical change of reputation from low to high. So, both juggle with the safety of Israel at the top of their voices. But in the end, both will be ignored by history - except for the endless trail of victims who will be the casualties of their pathetic ideas that failed. Even Sharon, who had an earned reputation as a great warrior finally succumbed to the lure of being regarded by the world as a "peacemaker" who sacrificed his own people to grasp that elusive trophy of glory, gifted by the U.N., E.U., U.S. State Department and other notorious practitioners of Jew-hatred. For me, I had prayed before Sharon has his first message to desist, that he would lie in his bed, staring at the ceiling and only be able to hear the news caused by his perfidy against the Jewish people. As for Olmert and Bush, similarly may no man lift his hand against them but, let them inherit a like judgement for their planning to sell the Jewish people to the Ishmaelites. May they and all other Kadimites who hate the true Jewish people share the emptiness of Sharon's poor judgement. If you don't believe that they hate their own people, then ask: "Why are they deliberately cutting the tiny state of Israel down to an even smaller size that will look vulnerable and attractive for the Muslims to attack?" Why, too, are they so desperate to bring the chaos of Baghdad to Jerusalem? And finally, why would Olmert compress the Jewish people of Israel into the smallest compressed Ghetto he could manage. There is a belief among observant Jews that, should a man experience justifiable, long term pain before he dies, his time in Gehenna (Hell) will be somewhat lessened for the evil he did during his life. Clearly, there are many leaders and nations who failed the litmus test of how they treated the Jewish people who are now paying their debt and with much more to come. So, let us set the penalties now so those who play carelessly with the lives of their own people, thinking there is no penalty, will not be so quick to throw them to the Muslim Arabs and Palestinian wolves. I wonder how many millions of lives have been lost by arrogant, stupid leaders who believe they know best, merely because they have captured the levers of power in government. Rarely are they stopped in time before they have sacrificed the very lives of their own people. Occasionally, they were held accountable either by a victorious adversary or by their own people. One thinks of Mussolini hanging for his crimes strung up by his own people. Hitler died by his own hand while his collaborators were hung by the Nuremberg Tribunal. Hafez Al Assad died of cancer before he could be brought to man's justice. Saddam is now going through a trial for crimes against his own people and, no doubt, he will be (should be) hung by his own people. That indeed will be true justice. Dictatorial leaders invariably punish their people for daring to defy their insane orders. They tell their people, often by way of a corrupt court system slaved to their tyrannical rule, that they are teaching them a lesson in obedience - only they call it "the law". One looks forward to the day when decent, truly law-abiding people will rise up and teach their arrogant tyrannical rulers a lesson. But, why wait for the inevitable "big" lesson from on high to pronounce judgement on a travesty waiting to happen. There is already a delayed sentencing for what Sharon and Olmert have done to their own Jewish people in Gush Katif and the entire Southern Front which will soon be emptied of Jews, more Jews will be forced out by rockets and missiles from the Global Center for International Terrorism, created when Israel "ethnically cleansed" the Gaza Strip. Remember that before the garush (evacuation) of 10,000 Jewish men, women and children from Gush Katif and Northern Samaria and destruction of their beautiful homes, farms, schools, synagogues, businesses, factories and even the cemeteries those 21 Jewish communities in Gaza were declared "at risk". Before his "ethnic cleansing" in August of 2005, Sharon had the Knesset vote that, instead of the 21 communities at risk, after the eviction 44 communities in the Negev would then be at risk. Sharon knew those in so-called "Israel proper" would come under fire but he put them at risk anyway. And so they are. Katyusha Missiles (Grad missiles from Russia by means of Iran) and "homemade" Kassem Rockets are falling on the Negev communities. The schools in Sderot were ordered by the Knesset to have their roofs reinforced with concrete - but, this was never accomplished. Only miracles have so far prevented deaths and dire injuries - so far. The people of Israel should be furious and unforgiving and NOT ignore the dangerous criminal stupidity of Sharon, Olmert and the entire Cabinet who voted for this uprooting. Those responsible should (minimally) be charged for crimes against the Jewish people after having exposed these innocent people to the predictable missiles and rockets that are now falling on the South. Why should the innocent, hard-working people of Israel pay this price when the shallow political dimwits have comfortable, safe dinners at home when they foisted this danger upon them with their frivolous decisions? I have always believed that the Oslo Accords caused the subsequent 1500+ deaths and thousands of injuries - many maimed for life. Those who voted for Olso should have been held culpable and should be tried with penalties ranging from prison to a hanging offense as perpetrators of causing death. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@interaccess.com |
|
POLITICAL PERSECUTION IN ISRAEL; THE FIELDSTON'S SCHOOL LEFTIST AGENDA
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 25, 2006. |
|
This is another Israeli case originally reported earlier, but which has since then come to trial, part of which my colleague attended. She also interviewed defense counsel. I added explanatory comments. This trial went on for about 3 years, with different appeals and legal work. David Ha'ivri, a former American known as David Axelrod from Long Beach, L.I., was on trial for selling T-shirts with a picture of Rabbi Kahane on the front and a slogan on the back, "No Arabs, No Terror." Claiming the slogan means to kill all the Arabs, the prosecutor charged Ha'Ivri with "incitement" and racism against the Arabs. The Defense attorney David Heimowitz explained that if Americans were bombing buses, he would write, "No Americans, No terror." That would be a factual statement, not a call for murder, but the judge did not gasp that logic. My colleague perceived the trial as trying Rabbi Kahane from the grave. They said that his picture on the front of the shirt was a punch in the face to the Arabs and the slogan on the back was racist. Actually, the trial was political (ideological warfare carried on by politics). (If the courts really oppose bigotry, why aren't Arabs prosecuted for actually chanting "death to the Jews," which are not mere expression of sentiment but rabble-rousing words?) Rabbi Kahane's son testified that his father taught him to love Jews, and didn't speak about killing or hating Arabs. Prof. Paul Eidelberg (whose book on democracy I found enlightening) offered his documents on democracy and freedom of expression. The judge would have accepted it, but the prosecutor rejected them. Since the official language of the country is Arabic or Hebrew, said she, the court must rejecting Prof. Eidelberg's lesson on freedom of speech, written in English. (In that politicized judiciary, judges often take their cues from prosecutors carrying out the government line, rather than seeking justice.) What happened in the street? A policeman confiscated the shirts on Ben Yehuda St. from another person, not Ha'ivri. The owner was arrested, but not charged and soon freed. Meanwhile, the cop gave the sack of shrits to a second cop, who didn't know what was in it. This cop didn't remember or see if the rabbi's picture was on the back or front. Meanwhile, where was Ha'vri? He was standing at a demonstration on Aggripas St., when the shirts were confiscated on Ben Yehuda St.! He was nowhere near the shirts. The police, however, sent him a letter to pick up the shirts. Ha'ivri came to the police station to get them. Well, if they weren't your shirts, the prosecutor said, why did you come to the police station? His answer was that the police asked him to come. The police had a letter ostensibly signed by him and bearing his identification number. Ha'ivri said, "Look at the signature! It isn't mine. I don't know who got my number. Someone else sent it in and you called, so I came." The prosecutor admitted she was not prepared by asserting she didn't know about the police report that the shirts were taken from another person, though the report was described in the documents given to her before trial. The police testimony did not add up to inculpate the accused. In America they would throw that case out, and defense counsel asked in vain that this case be dismissed. The prosecutor retorted that if Ha'ivri goes free with the slogan on the shirt, then Israeli is like Nazi Germany. (No, she is like the Nazis, in punishing innocent Jews.) The judge said, "He may not be guilty of the Incitement charge, but he still may be guilty of something. I am charging him with something. I am charging him with 'Obstruction of Justice.'" That is for not asserting at the outset that he had not signed the petition to get back the shirts. After postponements and appeals, a judge dropped the new charge but reinserted the original one of "incitement." Ha'ivri was sentenced to hard community service for 2 months with a two-month suspended sentence. He lives in Tapuach, from which he has to go quite a distance to fulfill the sentence and work all day lifting heavy boxes. Ha'ivri said that it would be easier in jail. (A suspended sentence gives the system a lever for intimidating protestors from persisting.) In Israel, Jews are considered guilty without evidence, unless proved innocent. Their self-defense against Arab assailants and warning against Arab sedition are considered criminal! The justice system pretends that it is concerned to safeguard life, but it prosecutes Jews who shoot in the air, and not Arabs who attack them with rocks and threaten to mob them. (If there were justice in Israel, prosecutor and judge would: (1) Recognize that the slogan was political and factual and not criminal; (2) Investigate how the police got the ID number of the defendant. This seems to be like another case of the secret service framing an nationalist Jew. It is a terrible subversion of democracy, when the secret service is out of democratic control like that; and (3) At least shift the prosecution to the one distributing the shirts, rather than blaming for it someone else. At another incident, Ha'Ivri's daughter was in court, having been arrested at a demonstration for Israel to keep the Territories, which are in the Land of Israel. Mr. Ha'Ivri insisted on the right to speak with his daughter. Court police rushed into the room and beat him badly, until the judge demanded they cease. Likewise, young Shimson Cytrin, indicted for attempted murder because he threw rocks back at Arabs who were not indicted but had thrown rocks at Jews, was sitting in court when his sister came to say something to him. Police pulled her away. Their father said, "Don't you dare touch my daughter." Security men came into the room and beat him until he had to be taken to the hospital. The family related this incident to my colleague. The Arabs have a different attitude towards their daughters. If the daughter is merely suspected of having done something immoral, which may have been only kissing a man to whom she was not married, her parents or brother will stab her to death for "shaming the family." The murder doesn't shame the Arabs, it 'redeems' the family honor. Such a story was shown on Israeli TV news, recently. Those are the primitive, brutal, feuding Arabs with whom the Israeli leftists imagine they would make peace, if only the Jewish settlers wouldn't block the deal of a territorial give that the leftists suppose would bring the peace. But jihadists don't make peace, and Arabs don't keep agreements, as the dozen years of their violations of the Oslo Accords demonstrates. The Left would be wiser to think about how to win the war. When anti-Zionists call Israel a fascist state, they are half right and half wrong. They are right that the government uses fascist tactics, but wrong that the Arabs are the victims of fascist tactics. It is more like Egypt, when it had Jews, for it beat them up and dispossessed them. Much of the Western media is anti-Zionist. It looks for opportunities to criticize Israel. It does not criticize Israel, however, for persecuting Jews. What a reflection upon media for not being objective! If the NY Times were a decent newspaper, it would criticize these political persecutions, star-chamber trials, and wanton beating of dissidents. It would ask Israel why it doesn't order police to tell people who may be speaking out of order in court to sit down, then arrest them, and not to use force beyond what is necessary to arrest them. A country lacks justice when police feel free to punish dissidents brutally. PRES. OF ISRAEL TO MUSLIM RELIGIOUS LEADERS Speaking to a group of Muslim religious leaders, Pres. Katsav asked how come Israeli Jews contend that Islam does not sanctify blowing up buses of innocent people, but the Muslim leaders either fall silent or deny the contention (MEFNews, 5/8). By now it should be clear that Muslim leaders sanctify terrorism and have a firm religious basis for doing so. It is futile and fatuous to appeal to humanitarian instincts in a religion that puts conquest first. The mass of Islamic officials, if not also of Muslims, apparently accepts any means of deceit and violence that advances the supremacy of Islam. They don't recognize international law, the rule of law, and Western ethics except to distort their meaning in attempts to appeal to Western good nature so as to lull its defenses. FIELDSTON SCHOOL IMPOSES LEFTISM The Fieldston School in Riverdale had scheduled a debate on the Arab-Israel conflict by two Muslims. One would argue that Israel should give up the Territories, and the other would argue that Israel should give up the ghost. The School called that balanced. Parents and alumni objected sufficiently to get the event canceled. The School scheduled a new event, supposed to be more balanced. Pro-Israel speakers were restricted to side panels, but the main, school-wide forum featured Prof. Tony Judt, who opposes Jewish statehood, and Rashid Khalidi, who supports the Arab struggle against Israel. Again there were protests, but the School persisted. The School has an agenda, an anti-Zionist one. Replacing Israel with an Arab state, however, means setting up an Islamist state. That hardly accords with the supposed ethical culture principles of Fieldston (Andrew Wolf, NY Sun, 5/9, p.3). Some attendees thought the forum was fair, and that the panelists were scholarly. A parent said that Hamas acceded to power because some Jewish groups call any counter argument about the conflict antisemitic (Shlomo Greenwald, NY Sun, 5/10, p.3). What could be sillier than to suppose that the Arab voters in the P.A. voted for Hamas because some Jewish groups call arguments against Zionism antisemitic! One wonders whether such people can recognize what is fair. Leftist educators pursue their agenda regardless of facts and logic to the contrary, the failure of their theories, and other people's feelings, whether it is anti-Zionism or reading instruction by memorizing whole words. They are not democratic. WHO'S STUPID, BUSH OR KERRY? Iran has offered again to negotiate its nuclear development. UNO ambassador Bolton responded, "The Iranians are always interested in talking when the squeeze is put on them." The White House said the offer doesn't address international concerns (Benny Avni, NY Sun, 5/9, p.5). The Bush administration realizes that Muslim dictators stall for time. Kerry didn't, at least when the issues of Iraq and Iran came up during the election. He mistook negotiations and UNO proceedings for serious attempts to solve the problems. WORD OF INTERNECINE P.A. VIOLENCE GETTING OUT For months, armed militiamen and clans clashed with each other in the P.A., injuring bystanders in the process. The media focused almost exclusively on injuries from Israeli counter-attacks against terrorism, professing great concern about those Arab casualties but not noticing the others. I've remarked about that inconsistency. By mid-May, P.A. civil strife was featured in the NY Sun and NY Times. But the world has not yet washed its hands of such vile people. JURIES TOO CONFUSED TO PUNISH TERRORISTS PROPERLY? A jury was deciding whether to apply the death penalty to Moussaoui, who confessed to being part of the 9/11 hijacking crew. They decided against it. They felt there were mitigating factors. One was his "unstable early childhood and dysfunctional family." Other people with poor home lives, however, do not become mass-murderers. His religion, however, encouraged him to do so (Cal Thomas, NY Sun, 5/9, Op.-Ed.). I don't think he should be rewarded for having had a poor home life. Neither is it a mitigating factor, because it is not relevant to the crime, for which he is responsible, not his mother. A mitigating factor in, say, a robbery, would be if a robber administered first aid to a victim or returned his share of the loot. SELF-INFLICTED GAZA POVERTY The Arabs blame their problems on other people. The poverty in Gaza, however, is self-inflicted. The upper class has no sense of responsibility for the lower class, and no compassion for them. (Indeed, it exploits them, via monopolies.) It shucks that responsibility off onto UNRWA, to which the US has just doubled its contribution. The Arabs do not try to develop their economy. (They are not about development but about jihad. The Arabs refused Israeli help in development) The P.A. also pretends it has no responsibility for its own people on the false grounds that it is occupied. What that has to do with it, is not explained. It got ridiculous when, from having a slight supervision over Gaza, Israel withdrew almost entirely, but the P.A. still calls itself occupied, as an excuse for lack of progress and as a means of continuing to denounce Israel and maintain a war footing against it. The excuse that poverty and occupation drives people to terrorism is false. The ones who exhort to terrorism are the professional clergy and government officials. The people who become terrorists mostly are educated and affluent. Terrorism began before Israel controlled the Territories. Unfortunately, the Arabs have persuaded the world otherwise (Middle East Forum news, 5/10). How were the Arabs able to persuade the world of these canards? The media is not honest about it. Western education neglects or is politically correct about jihad, although jihad is the West's primary enemy. Partly, of course, Westerners and others are receptive to defamation of the Jewish people, constantly repeated. 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. |
|
ROADBLOCKS -- THE ONLY ONE WAY TO FIGHT OLMERT
Posted by Zeev Shemer, May 25, 2006. |
|
25 years ago we discovered the one thing that Israeli officials and left-wing oriented Israeli citizens fear the most: Road Blocks. Zu Artzeinu, was the group that started blocking roads through out the country. The group was lead by Moshe Feiglin (currently in the almost extinct Likud as a minority and outsider) and Shmuel Sacket (currently in the US raising funds for Feiglin). They were ferociously persecuted, incarcerated and harassed because they had discovered Israel's real weakness. Much money and effort was put by Sharon and his cronies to make sure that the "leaders" of the right (the Orange fringe) would not allow their followers to commit to such a strategy. The Yesha Council (a bunch of corrupt self-appointed leaders of the settlement movement) made sure to indicate to the thousands of young activists to limit their actions to handing out orange stripes and literature but for no reason they were to block highways or major intersections. So it was that when Sharon deployed his Kappo police to Gaza and northern Shomron, the Yesha leaders advised the 250,000 protestors that showed up at Kikar Rabin in Tel Aviv, to drive down to Gaza and persuade peacefully our troops to desist from expelling our Jewish brothers and sisters from their homes. Needless to say, Jews were stopped in places not even close to the communities they quickly destroyed. The youth was dispersed and lost, as they saw the destruction take place while their leaders (purposely) wasted time giving useless directions. With 40,000 Jews, we could have brought Tel Aviv, Ramat Gan, Hertzlia, Ramat Aviv and Hod HaSharon to their knees. There would have not been a Disengagement. If no individual would have been able to go to work or get back home, every hour that Tel Aviv would have stood still it would have represented millions in economic losses and there would have been an immediate call to stop the Disengagement. Before Zu Artzeinu, the people had an even more terrifying weapon: Rabbi Meir Kahane, a controversial right wing voice that through reason and logic, attracted hundreds of thousands of diverse Jews to the understanding that throwing the Arab out was the key to Jewish survival. After he was murdered, and after the subsequent murder of his son, the only weapon left is Road Blocks. They are terrified that someone will raise his voice and advocate such action against the supporters of national suicide. But they are not too worried, because they know they have the Yesha Council in their pocket, together with the sold-out Shas and their always loyal "mamlachti rabbis" (politically correct rabbis). Feiglin, Sacket, Kleiner, Marzel, none of them will remind the people of the power they have. The Road Blocks that can stop Olmert will forever only be "if only we had..." Zeev Shemer lives in Ramat HaGolan. Contact him at liviorosenberg@yahoo.com |
|
OLMERT'S CONVERGENCE PLAN -- POLICY, POLITICS OR INEXCUSABLE STUPIDITY?
Posted by Mordechai Ben-Menachem, May 25, 2006. |
|
"For all the morons out there who haven't figured this out for themselves. Olmert is destroying Israel -- he must go!" The above line was the "subject field" in an email that I sent out to some of my lists yesterday. I received two objections (from about a thousand people) and many supporting emails. They both objected to my use of strong language (moron). The expected thing would be to apologise for such use. That is not the intention of this mail. I object to being blown up in my bed, or bus, or train, or anywhere else, or for that matter, to my friends being murdered by these modern monsters. As I continually tell my students at the U., Real Life is Tough! One person said that they stop listening when tough language is used. That is childish. Tough language is called for when tough subjects come up. Perhaps that is cultural. That is the culture that I live in. I do not think it is "coincidence" that I am writing this on Jerusalem Day. The objection seems to be based upon the concept that this is an issue of a policy decision and that policy can be legitimately debated. If this is the case, then the use of strong language can be objectionable. This is not an issue of a legitimate policy decision. This is an issue of one of the most stupid concepts yet thought up. And, for this area of the world, that is really saying something. I do apologise that this email is rather much longer than is my wont. Evidently, some people are either lacking basic information or need it to be shown to them in a manner that prevents them from continuing to ignore it. Real life is tough. Albert Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. We have retreated from both Southern Lebanon and Gaza. In the former case, the retreat was done in the most cowardly manner, clearly showing Hezbollah that it was their victory and not our choice; even leaving some two billion dollars worth of military equipment in the field for their added prize. We now have some 12,000 Hezbollah rockets on our northern border. This has changed a tactical annoyance into an existential strategic threat. In the case of Gaza, we knowingly expelled some 9000 citizens, with legally owned property, houses, businesses, social and religious infrastructure. It is to be emphasized that all of this was legally owned property, incontrovertible, even by our leftist-extremist court system that continually attempted to find excuses to make life difficult for law-abiding citizenry. Not a single family has yet to be accommodated in permanent housing, many are still out of gainful employment (ALL were gainfully employed previously), it has already cost the Israeli taxpayer almost twenty billions of sheqels, and NONE of them have yet to be fully compensated for their losses, nor is there any such intention. Legality of property was ignored. In addition, while previously, the Egyptian government "allowed" smuggling via tunnels, now there is wholesale importation of major, long-range weapons systems. The Egyptian government views our weakness and has been assiduously working towards abrogation of the treaty preventing remilitarization of Sinai. There is constant smuggling of weapons, terrorist, drugs, prostitutes and etcetera over the Sinai border, in never heretofore quantities. Again, changing a minor tactical annoyance into a strategic necessity -- there is now a movement afoot to build yet another fence along the entire Israel-Egypt border, of hundreds of kilometres, at an enormous cost. (It will need to be much more than just a physical barrier as it is in desert and needs to be constantly patrolled, both on the ground and from the air.) Anyone of sense ought to know why it is important for Egypt to remilitarize Sinai, as they've spent tens of billions of dollars on arms for the past two decades. Hint: they do not need the weapons against Qaddafi? Okay, let's presume the absurd and say this time, it'll be different, with a different result. Einstein was wrong. Let's examine this. First the basic facts of the plan, what are we being asked to do? The idea is to 'converge' over 100,000 people into territory that it incontrovertibly Israeli. In so doing, we would be strengthening our holds, enhancing the Jewish-ness of the population and making Israel more defensible. This will cost between 100-200 billion sheqels (more than tens times the number of people, less than ten times the cost -- there is no reason why this should make sense). That cash does not exist, even if the US can be convinced to contribute to it. Israel today is one of the most densely populated nations in the world, with a population density of 270 persons per square kilometre, as compared with Arab population density of 46. By the way, don't tell me about desert, 2/3 of Israel is desert. The evacuated areas have about fifty percent of our water supply. This will lengthen our eastern border by many hundreds of kilometres, making the path of the border very circuitous, and over terrain difficult to patrol. On our eastern border today sits Jordan, the only Arab country with whom we have reasonable relations. They, of course, strongly object to this proposal, for obvious reasons. Hamas is already working very hard towards a crash of that regime, which is over 70% Palestinian. It is clear to anyone that this would spell a rapid demise of the Hashemite kingdom, putting Iran in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan. This is not smart; this is not even foolish; THIS IS MORONIC! Not even a stupid person can justify support of this. For the first time since the seventh century, the Persian Empire stretches from the Gulf to the Mediterranean -- they already control Syria and Lebanon, via their proxies, the Alawites and Hezbollah. For the first time since the ninth century, Sunni (Moslem Brotherhood) and Shi'a are uniting; not just common cause, but actual unity of action AND purpose, and by choice not conquering. The US military in Iraq will be faced with organized enemies on all sides. Israel will be faced with organized enemies of all sides (one of the results of the Six-Day War was to break the encirclement -- that is what we are being asked to return). What are we offered in return for all this? In future negotiations, we'll have nothing to give. What will then be the Europeans' demands? They are already hinting that then they can demand controlled immigration (Aliyah). Obviously, the 'demography' bluff can't be used to justify this; even if it did exist (the Palestinian population figures are grossly inaccurate). Okay, so you dislike my use of strong language. Fine, I dislike having my murderers supported by stupidity. I have yet to hear one, single argument which can be used to support this moronic idea. One person said, "Then, because they'll leave us no option, we can go to war with them. It's the only way to resolve the issue. Either they win, or we do." To be gentle, this is not the way real life works. A country is not a laboratory: either they win or we do. If they win, we are all dead -- get that? Dead, as in a second holocaust, a second six million dead! Just as the Arabs have stated, since Oslo. Get that? Either we win or we die -- there exists no third option. This stupid thinking is the same kind of stupidity that brought us 1429 dead since Oslo, with 29 dead in Lebanon, alone (by the way, not 3, as is promoted by the media). After this stupidity, the breadth of the country is 9 miles. What are the chances of our survival when our ENTIRE infrastructure is attackable from the sea? Olmert's plan is a certain recipe for national disaster. You don't like me calling its supporters morons? Neither do I. Show me an option. Mordechai Ben-Menachem is at Ben-Gurion University. He can be reached by email at quality@computer.org |
|
WHICH 37 MEMBERS OF CONGRESS VOTED AGAINST THE PALESTINIAN ANTI-TERRORISM ACT?
Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, May 25, 2006. |
|
Information and quotes from various sources.
May 23, 2006, by an overwhelming vote of 361-37, the House of Representatives passed the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act, H.R. 4681. The bill ends direct aid and contact with the Hamas-run Palestinian Authority until Hamas renounces violence, recognizes Israel's right to exist, and agrees to abide by all previous agreements. "The bill preserves necessary humanitarian aid for the Palestinian people, while keeping American taxpayer dollars out of the hands of a government run by terrorists. Hamas is a terrorist organization, whose involvement in the governmental process has not altered its stated goal of destroying Israel." Instead of using these last few months to work toward better relations with Israel, Hamas continues to reject Israel's right to exist and to endorse continued violence against the Israeli people. Hamas' newly appointed Foreign Minister stated in a recent interview that 'there is no place for the state of Israel on this land.' A Hamas spokesperson endorsed a recent suicide bombing that killed nine Israelis, stating that terrorists have "every right" to carry out suicide bombings against the Israeli people. This legislation sets out a clear path for the Hamas government -- end your support for terrorism and recognize Israel's right to exist and you will be recognized as a legitimate member of the international community. But until those conditions are met, the United States will not allow American taxpayer dollars to be used to support or legitimize a terrorist-led Palestinian Authority. Commended was the extraordinary work of Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) and Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA) who initiated the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006. The bill is the farthest U.S. lawmakers have ever gone towards cutting off the Palestinian leadership from U.S. aid and restricting assistance through non-governmental organizations. To voters curious as to Party affiliation of those that voted against the bill, the following information may be of interest: Of the 37 that voted against the bill 31 were Democrats and only 6 Republicans. The 37 are listed below: Arizona: Kolbe (R), Grijalva (D)
Some names will immediately stick out for their long anti-Israel voting record - Cynthia McKinney (D), Conyers (D), Dingell (D), Kilpatrick (D), Kucinich (D), Rahall (D), Obey (D) and most of the others that I have neglected to mention. Also of note is that of the 9 representatives who were present but elected to not vote, all were Democrats. The 9 are listed below: California: Watson (D)
Perhaps this information will be of some use when you are about to make political contributions or at your next visit to the voting booth? Comment from reader: Kucinich (D-OH) has a large Arab constituency and almost no Jews in his district, so his voting record should not be a surprise. He took over a seat previously help by Mary Rose OaKar, who went on to become president of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee after being charged with seven federal felonies in a 1995 indictment in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Fred Taub
Jerome S. Kaufman is National Secretary of the Zionist
Organization of America. and host the Israel Commentary website
(http://www.israel-commentary.org).
|
|
THAT SUPPORTERS OF FREE SPEECH -- ACLU --GAGS ITS OWN BOARD MEMBERS
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 25, 2006. |
|
Quick! When does the ACLU NOT believe in free speech?
Yes, the NY Times reports that the heads of the hyper-Left ACLU have gone on a jihad (or is it jughad?) against the rights of free speech of those critical of it! It seems that the American Civil Liberties Union is weighing new standards that would discourage its board members from publicly criticizing the organization's policies and internal administration. Where an individual director disagrees with a board position on matters of civil liberties policy, the director should refrain from publicly highlighting the fact of such disagreement," the committee that compiled the standards wrote in its proposals. "Directors should remember that there is always a material prospect that public airing of the disagreement will affect the A.C.L.U. adversely in terms of public support and fund-raising," the proposals state. Given the organization's longtime commitment to defending free speech, some former board members were shocked by the proposals. Nat Hentoff, a writer and former A.C.L.U. board member, was incredulous. "You sure that didn't come out of Dick Cheney's office?" he asked. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. |
|
PATHETIC, IT REMINDS ME OF...
Posted by Batya Medad, May 25, 2006. |
|
Last night, close to midnight, I caught a bit of the TV news. A very excited guest-"expert" was raving about how marvelous Olmert was, because they clapped for him in Congress when he gave this speech. The "expert," who was jumping so, you'd think him drugged, kept saying that Olmert's policies make him an international statesmen, and everyone loves Olmert, since he's doing what they want. Well, it reminds me of the girls who let the guys do "what they wanted," just to be popular. They would do absolutely anything, just so they'd be called again, to do it some more. Of course the entire school, both the boys and the girls, all laughed behind their backs. But "those girls" were oblivious to the ridicule and didn't care about the STD--Sexually Transmitted Diseases they were catching. So when I hear or read the Israeli "spinners," political commentators, justifying the destruction of Jewish towns and the exiling of Israeli citizens just because it makes the world love us, it reminds me of the pathetic tramps and whores... Batya Medad lives in Shiloh. She can be reached by email at Shilohmuse@yahoo.com or visit her website http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/ or go to http://www.shilo.org.il |
|
CAROLINE HAWLEY AT THE BBC
Posted by Barry Shaw, May 25, 2006. |
|
TO: Editors
Sirs, What type of journalistic standard is the BBC projecting when your reporter, Caroline Hawley, questions the arrest of a leading Hamas terrorist with the words "It is not clear why the (Israeli) army moved against Hamad". In light of the fact that Hawley knew Ibrahim Hamad was directly responsible for the murder of seventy Israelis in repeated suicide and terror attacks against civilian targets in Israel, this was an inexcusable accusation against Israel, and one that requires Hawley to be strongly censured if not fired. How dare your reporter put a personal statute of limitation on the arrest of murderers who deliberately target and kill innocent civilians. Or maybe, as she is the official spokesperson on the ground for the BBC, she is reflecting the official position of your organization? As this is just one more example of the constant Israel-bashing so prevalent from the BBC you have become unable to divorce your staff from adopting a strongly anti-Israel position -- even when we are upholding the law by putting our soldiers at risk by going into terrorist-controlled Palestinian areas in an effort to bring murderous terrorists and criminals to justice. According to the BBC, we are damned if we kill them, and we are damned if we bring them to justice. This ongoing support of Palestinian terrorists by the BBC has to stop! Barry Shaw is founder & chairman, the Netanya Terror Victims Organisation, in Netanya, Israel Contact him at netre@matav.net.il |
|
SAYING NO TO OLMERT
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 24, 2006. |
|
Thousands of street smart Jews and Christian Zionists protested PM Olmert's naive plan to divide Jerusalem and eliminate many of the Jewish homes in Judea and Samaria, creating a vacuum which is custom designed for Terrorists to occupy. Sadly, many of the primary Jewish organizations are repeating what frightened Jews of the 1930s and 40s did or didn't do when their leaders refused to confront their governments over the Genocide taking place in Europe. The Sha-Sha Jews, such as the AJCs, ADL, Conference of Presidents, National Council of Young Israel, Orthodox Union, etc. are not participating for all the wrong reason and are simply not to be relied upon. We must organize to protect ourselves as well as our brothers and sisters in Israel. This article was written by Caroline Glick and appeared yesterday in
the Jerusalem Post If all goes as planned, as Prime Minister Ehud Olmert meets today with US President George W. Bush in the White House, several thousand protesters from around the US and Canada will be across the Mall by the US Senate protesting Olmert's visit. These will not be the standard Israel haters from the Left or the Islamist crowd. They will be neither neo-Nazis nor Communists. Rather the planned protest is being organized by Israel's staunchest Jewish and Christian supporters. The thousands of people who traveled by bus to Washington to protest Olmert's visit believe that Olmert's planned withdrawal from some 95 percent of Judea and Samaria and partition of Jerusalem are suicidal for Israel and will have a devastating impact on US national security. As they note in their press release, Olmert "seeks to secure the approval of President Bush to carry out more Jewish expulsions and giving over of land to Hamas (a Teheran-sponsored terrorist group), actions that totally undermine America's war on terror." Voices from inside of the Bush Administration claim that Olmert's planned withdrawal is "a done deal." The relevant administration officials argue there it would be futile for the US to register any objection to Olmert's plan because Olmert and his government are wholly committed to carrying it out. But the "plan" is anything but a done deal. The mass expulsion of Israelis from their homes in Judea and Samaria has not begun. The security fence whose completion is supposed to precede the enactment of the mass expulsions is far from complete. Indeed its route has yet to be finalized. The IDF has made no plans of any kind for defending Israel from the indefensible 1949 armistice lines. Top level Jordanian government officials have voiced serious concern to US lawmakers, Israeli officials and the media about the ramifications of Olmert's plan for the survivability of the Hashemite regime. It is simply disingenuous to say that it is too late for the US to consider opposing Olmert's plan. Aside from that, over the past 58 years, the US has never considered anything that Israel has done to be "a done deal" if it hasn't agreed that it should be a done deal. In 1956 for instance, Israel conquered the Sinai Peninsula. Then prime minister David Ben-Gurion got on the radio and announced joyously that Israel would never leave the Sinai. Washington had other ideas. Several days later, after some overtly hostile strong arming from then president Dwight D. Eisenhower and his advisors, Ben-Gurion got on the radio and announced that Israel would be withdrawing from the Sinai forthwith. In 1999, Israel finalized an agreement to sell three Phalcon spy planes to China. The Chinese started making their payments. Then president Bill Clinton summoned then prime minister Ehud Barak to the White House for urgent consultations the day before a planned visit to Jerusalem from China's leader, and Barak cancelled the deal. So there is no credibility to the claim that the US cannot stop an Israeli government from doing what it has its heart set on doing. THE QUESTION is not whether the US can weigh in on the issue. The question is whether the US should intervene. To determine the answer to this question it is important to keep certain truths in mind. First, Olmert maintains that the election results that propelled him to the Prime Minister's Office were proof that he has public support for his planned withdrawal. Yet, as Hillel Halkin pointed out this month in Commentary, the elections were anything but a referendum regarding Olmert's plan. The election results, which gave Olmert's Kadima faction less than a quarter of the seats in the Knesset, were a sign that Israel's body politic is unraveling. The electorate's fragmentation was made clear both by record low voter turnout and by the dismemberment of the major parties like Likud and Labor and even Kadima to the benefit of sectoral parties like Shas, Yisrael Beitenu and the Pensioners Party. During the campaign Kadima registered its greatest losses of support after Olmert began discussing his plan to withdraw from Judea and Samaria. Yet even if Olmert did not receive a mandate for his withdrawal plan from the Israeli voters, he is the legally elected prime minister. In the eyes of many of Israel's supporters in America, it is wrong for the US to second-guess the wisdom of the Israeli leadership. While in theory this position is correct, it comes apart at the seams when the ramifications of Olmert's plans for US national security are taken into account. Knowledgeable sources in Washington policy circles maintain that in the two weeks preceding Olmert's visit to Washington, Israeli officials were asked to allay American concerns regarding the security consequences of Olmert's plan. Specifically, Israeli officials have been called upon to explain how Judea and Samaria will be prevented from following the model set in Gaza when Israel's retreat enabled the transformation of Gaza into a base for international terrorists along similar lines to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan. Israel's military attache in Washington, Maj. Gen. Dan Harel was reportedly sent to the White House to dispel these concerns. It should be recalled that Harel commanded last summer's retreat from Gaza. Harel was lionized at the time by the Israeli media for successfully implementing the mass expulsion of Israeli civilians from Gaza while averting civil war. Yet Harel has never been called to account for the fact that he made no plans for Israel to defend itself from the threats that - as foreseen - arose from Gaza and from the Sinai in the aftermath of the retreat. Because of his failure, IDF forces in the Southern Command were left without contingency plans for contending with the transformation of Gaza into a base for global jihad and without adequate means to secure Ashkelon and the other communities bordering Gaza from the daily missile, rocket and mortar attacks to which they have been subjected since the retreat. This is relevant because Harel reportedly told his US interlocutors that they have no reason to worry about the consequences of Olmert's plan because it only involves the mass expulsion of Israeli civilians from Judea and Samaria. The IDF, he said will retain its current positions in the areas. WHETHER OR not Harel realized it at the time, he was not being wholly truthful to his American audience. Even if the plan today is for the IDF to retain control of the areas in which the civilians are set to be expelled, and to retain their present deployments, any educated observer of Israel's political and cultural dynamics will attest that there is no way that this can happen. If Olmert expels tens of thousands of Israeli citizens from their homes, he will destroy the entire domestic rationale for the IDF deployment. As was the case in Lebanon, radical leftists within Israel will rise up and demand a full retreat. For its part, the nationalist camp will become so alienated by the expulsions that in the best case scenario, its members will simply cease to identify with the state. They will not support any military activities in the heartland of Jewish civilization that the state ethnically cleansed of all Jewish presence. Aside from this, whether the IDF remains or not, the Israeli destruction of Israeli towns and villages will be broadcast throughout the world and be celebrated - rightly - as a strategic victory of jihad. Zionism isn't about the IDF, it is about Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel. Israeli destruction of Israeli villages in the Land of Israel is the death of Zionism and our enemies know it even if we insist on denying this basic truth. AND SO we return to our starting point. Olmert will meet Bush today and present to him a plan that will unravel Israeli society, which was already dangerously fragmented by the withdrawal from Gaza. He will present to him a plan that is based upon the anti-Semitic notion that Jews should be prohibited from living in certain places because they are Jews, and the perverse notion that a Palestinian state founded on the principle of lebensraum and racial purity because by definition no Jews will be allowed to live in Palestine, will be capable of living at peace one day with the Jewish state. Olmert will present a plan that provides a strategic victory to the forces of global jihad in a war they wage not only against Israel but against the US and the Western world as a whole because they will see Israel destroying itself under the gun of their terror and enabling the establishment of yet another base for global terrorists. Given all this, the question of whether or not the US should object to Olmert's plan is superseded by the question of how the US should make its rejection of this plan known to Olmert and whether its objection should similarly be communicated to the Israeli public. Any ambiguity on this issue to Olmert; any retreat behind disingenuous statements about "done deals," will be nothing less than the revocation of the cardinal US strategies for winning this war: the advance of liberal values and the denial of bases of operation to global terrorists. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@interaccess.com |
|
THE CEASE-FIRE THAT NEVER CEASES THE FIRE
Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 24, 2006. |
|
Craig Gordon's "Bush praises Olmert but urges talks with Abbas" (SF Chron 5/24/06) does a good job of balancing Israeli input with Hamas assertions. But he does make two serious factual errors which skew the content and message of his article. "...Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh said..(that Hamas)..will continue a sixteen month cease fire and that Israel can enjoy a long-term truce if it withdraws from the West Bank and east Jerusalem..." Mr. Gordon is right to note that this offer does not satify Israel or President Bush. But what he neglects to point out is : a.) the the Hamas assertion about continuing the cease-fire is false. Hamas, while pretending to observe the cease fire of February, 2005, has guided, directed, funded, trained, armed, and sheltered the terrorists of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, el-Aqsa Martrys' brigade, Hezbolla and even el-Qaeda. Hamas, far from abiding by the cease fire, has sub-contracted its terrorism to kindred groups so that it can play "good cop - bad cop" with the West....and the West merrily buys in to the charade. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
A CALL FOR POLLARD -- PLEASE ACT NOW!
Posted by Lee Caplan, May 24, 2006. |
|
mishpachah@mac.com wrote: Please read and send this to as many fellow Jews as possible. Please send "blind" copies, so that others' e-mail addresses are not given out against their will or preference. Thank you! A CALL FOR POLLARD: It takes only a few seconds to pick up the telephone and dial 202-456-1111. This is the White House Comment Line. It is open from 9 a.m. until 5 p.m. Comments are taken by operators to be given to the President. We are beseeching all Jews to call this line daily to seek immediate freedom for Jonathan Pollard. We are all commanded by G-d not to stand by while our brothers blood is shed. It appears that Jonathan Pollard is slowly dying in prison. We are also commanded to help secure the release of our brothers and sisters in captivity. It is a great mitzvah to help secure Pollard's release. When, you call the Comment Line, tell the White House operator: WE ARE CALLING TO IMPLORE THE PRESIDENT TO PARDON AND RELEASE JONATHAN POLLARD FROM PRISON IMMEDIATELY. Our plea is insufficient to compare to what Pollard himself has written. You can see the text of his letter to The Jewish People in Pollard's Yom Yerushalayim letter, by clicking on his website at: http://www.jonathanpollard.org. Further, on the home page of the website, you will find a wealth of information about the Jonathan Pollard case including many ways to help. You will also find a listing of Israeli and U.S. government officials, including your Congressmen and Senators, whom you can call, e-mail, fax and/or write. Pollard's address is also on the website in case you want to write to him. Make the White House Comment Line a part of your daily routine: 202-456-1111. Both husbands and wives, and all children old enough to understand the basics of the Pollard case, should try to make this call every day, except, of course, on Shabbat or the other Jewish holy days. We ask that you send this e-mail to as many fellow Jews as possible. We also ask that, as a courtesy to others, you send blind e-mails, so that others' e-mail addresses are not published at large, perhaps against their will or preference. Last, but what should be first, is of course, to pray for Jonathan (Yehonatan ben Malka) and for his release and reunification with his wife Esther and for his return to to the Land of Israel. Call Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com. |
|
HOW TO TELL A TERRORIST FROM A FREEDOM FIGHTER
Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 25, 2006. |
|
If you, or anyone you know, gets to thinking that maybe "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"; or that ... Hamas or
......or any of the other scores of terrorist groups in the world [almost all of whom are Moslem, with almost all of the Moslem ones being Arab or led by Arabs]........ ....... are really just popular liberation movements struggling desperately against some juggernaut oppressor (like Israel or the USA).... ....read Prof. Beres' article below, and attached. If they intentionally target innocent civilians, children, toddlers, babies, pre-natals in utero, women, elderly, ill, crippled.....they are terrorists. It does not matter what their ideology, what their cause. The ideologies are merely the convenient excuses by means of which psychotic mass murderers justify or lionize their own psychoses, white-wash or sterilize their mass murder, to gain the support of others who are not (yet) the target of their psychotic urges. This is called "International terror law" and was written by Louis Rene Beres, who is the author of many books and articles dealing with terrorism and international law. This was in today's Washington Times. From the standpoint of international law, there is little point to linguistic transformations of murder. Those who would identify the willful maiming and execution of noncombatants in the name of an abstract ideal are defiling legal rules. When Palestinian insurgents claim the legal right to use "any means necessary," they are flat out wrong. Even if their claims for "national self-determination" were supportable, there are always firm limits on permissible targets and levels of violence. The limited rights of insurgency under international law do not include the use of nail-filled bombs dipped in rat poison. These rights can never supplant the rules of humanitarian international law. Nowhere is it written that there are political goals so worthy that they can allow the incineration of infants in cribs or the shooting of children at play. Supporters of Palestinian terrorist violence against Israelis still argue that the ends justify the means. But the ends can never justify the means under conventional or customary international law. For more than 2,000 years, binding legal principles of world politics have stipulated that intentional forms of violence against the innocent are always prohibited. Under law, one man's terrorist can never be another man's freedom fighter. Although fashionable to repeat at cocktail parties, this expression is merely an empty witticism. While it is true that certain insurgencies can be judged lawful, these permissible resorts to force must always conform to the laws of war. Even if Palestinian claims of a hostile "occupation" were reasonable, their corresponding claim of entitlement to oppose Israel "by any means necessary" would remain false. National liberation movements that fail to meet the test of just means are never protected as lawful. Even if we were to accept the spurious argument that Hamas and its sister groups somehow meet the criteria of "national liberation," it is plain that they do not meet the standards of discrimination, proportionality and military necessity. These critical standards have been applied to insurgent organizations by the common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and by the two protocols to these conventions of 1977. They are also binding upon all combatants by virtue of broader customary and conventional international law, including Article 1 of the Preamble to the Fourth Hague Convention of 1907. This rule, called the "Martens Clause," makes all persons responsible for the "laws of humanity" and the "dictates of public conscience." Every use of force by insurgents must be judged twice, once with regard to the justness of the objective (in this case, a Palestinian state to be built explicitly upon the charred ruins of an ecstatically dismembered Israel) and once with regard to the justness of the means used toward that objective. Murderers of young children are never "freedom fighters." If they were entitled to such a designation, we would then have to concede that international law itself was nothing more than an authorization to commit evil in world affairs. American and European supporters of Palestinian independence continue to presume a "two-state solution." For them, the new Arab state will simply coexist with the extant Jewish State. Significantly, this kindly presumption is dismissed everywhere in the Arab/Islamic world. The "Map of Palestine" at the official website of the Palestinian National Authority still includes all of Israel. Terrorist crimes mandate universal cooperation in apprehension and punishment. As punishers of "grave breaches" under international law, all states are expected to search out and prosecute, or extradite, individual terrorist perpetrators. In no circumstances are any states permitted to characterize terrorists as "freedom fighters." This is emphatically true for the United States, which incorporates all international law as the "supreme law of the land" at Article 6 of the Constitution, and which was formed by the Founding Fathers according to the timeless principles of Blackstone's Commentaries and antecedent Natural Law. As Americans, we have a genuine and historic obligation to avoid specious manipulations of law. Whether in New York or Tel Aviv, "freedom fighters" do not war against office workers, nursery schools, buses, flower markets or ice-cream parlors. Until we accept this most elementary human understanding for the Middle East, we will run the real risk of transforming ghoulish gangs into governments. And in time, these terrorists-turned-governments will likely have easy access to weapons of mass destruction. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
THE HEBREW UNIVERSITY DECLARES WAR ON ISRAEL!
Posted by Steven Plaut, May 24, 2006. |
|
1. So let us see if we have this straight. No illegal Mexicans entering the US are committing mass murder nor suicide bombings. Yet it is reasonable for the US to wish to control access to its territory by erecting a sophisticated security fence. But when Israel does it, it is a human rights violation and makes Israel an "apartheid state"... Got it?
"What is a Jewish state, anyway?" my professor asked the class last week. "Is it like a Jewish chair? I mean, I know what a Jewish person is, but how can a state be Jewish?" A few minutes later, the same professor compared Israel to apartheid South Africa, calling it a "fake democracy." Not for the first time at Hebrew University's Rothberg International School, I squirmed in my chair. Was this a course on Israeli politics, or a Hamas press conference? David and Goliath The following day, another professor of mine informed students that Israel has no reason to make its case in the international arena. "You look at the occupied territories and Israel is Goliath and the Palestinians are David," the professor said. "Why bother trying to explain anything Israel does if this is all people see". The rhetorical question was followed by silence from the class. My classmates, both Jewish and non-Jewish, come to Jerusalem from Argentina, Taiwan, and a score of countries in between. Prior to studies in Israel, many of them received information about Israel from biased CNN coverage and anti-Israel divestment and boycott movements back home. Some classmates. Questions early in the year shed light on their impressions of Israel. "Did the Jews murder Arabs at Deir Yassin because they were hungry for blood, or was there an actual reason?" a young German woman asked the professor in my friend's Palestine 1948 class. "Since a Jew murdered Rabin, we can say Jews don't really want peace, right". asked a young man from Azerbaijan during an introductory class on Israeli history. Balance needed It's clear that some of my classmates would benefit from a balanced, multi-sided examination of the Israeli-Arab conflict. Many will leave Jerusalem to become journalists, diplomats and teachers around the world. Unfortunately, some will depart with the words of professors ringing in their ears: "Israel is a fake democracy. Israel is an apartheid state. Israel has no excuse for its actions vis-a-vis the Palestinians." Not all professors at my school ignore historical and political context for Palestinian suffering and Israeli actions like the security fence. Some have impressed me and other "pro-Israel" classmates with their ability to distill the conflict's complexities and foster reasonable discussion of the issues. Others, however, let their political beliefs determine classroom discourse, such as one professor's labeling the Israeli government a "colonialist regime" and another referring to an outspoken, kippah-clad student as "Lieberman". Obviously, professors are entitled to their opinions, and to elucidate them in class; however, there is a line between political commentary and "Israel-bashing," as one classmate described some professors' behavior. Special responsibility Labeling Israel an aggressive "Goliath" victimizing the helpless Palestinian "David" distorts the conflict's true scope -- that of a tiny island of Jewish sovereignty surrounded by more than a few genocidal extremists. Like every democracy on Earth, Israel is flawed. Does this mean the Jewish state has no more intrinsic value than a "Jewish chair," as my professor implied? I respect the academic freedom and vigorous discourse abundant at
my school; however, the international division of Israel's flagship
university bears a special responsibility to students and supporters.
If Israel cannot receive a fair hearing in the hallowed halls of Mt.
Scopus, where can it?
4. Getting the French Upset:
Steven Plaut's description of France in his article "Le Bouffon Grandiose" (op-ed, May 5,) does not fit the facts. First, actor Dieudonne's provocative remarks are his alone and he has been convicted and fined by a French court, on the basis of the Lellouche Act which is among the world's toughest legislation on hate speech and anti-Semitism. Second, to claim that an individual's anti-Semitism reflects French society as a whole is unjust and wrong: According to a poll published in Maariv in September 2005, 82 percent of the French like the Jews, with France ranking second among countries expressing a positive opinion (after the Netherlands). Anti-Semitism is in total contradiction with France's values. As President Jacques Chirac declared on Nov. 17, 2003, "When a Jew is attacked in France, it is an attack against the whole of France." The French Government has demonstrated its absolute determination to fight this scourge, and its efforts have been widely recognized by both the Israeli authorities and the national leaders of the American Jewish community. Its zero-tolerance policy has borne fruit: anti-Semitic acts in France declined 48 percent in 2005 compared with 2004. Finally, Mr. Plaut's references to an "Islamic republic" in France are totally baseless. France is actively pursuing a strategy both to combat radical Islam and better integrate its Muslim community into the French society. France acted to stop the Eurosat satellite from rebroadcasting Al Manar channel programs to its territory and moved successfully to have Yahoo.fr filter Internet sites promoting hate and anti-Semitism. Francois Delattre
Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. |
|
CHURCH OF SCOTLAND REJECTS BOYCOTT
Posted by Simon McIlwaine, May 24, 2006. |
|
From Anglicans for Israel: We are pleased to announce that the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland has accepted a motion which calls upon the Foreign Secretary to use her influence both as the representative of Her Majesty's Government and in co-operation with her colleagues within the EU to encourage HAMAS to issue a statement accepting Israel's right to exist. But there's more: the whole motion explicitly recognised Israel's right to security, rejected a boycott and called for economic engagement with both sides. We congratulate the General Assembly for having the courage to stand against the militants and, naturally, we recommend that Anglicans seek to emulate the good sense displayed by the Church of Scotland. Contact Simon McIlwaine by email at Simon.McIlwaine@ormerods.co.uk
|
|
IN THE STREET?
Posted by Anita Tucker, May 24, 2006. |
|
Today the head of the board of the Netzer Hazani community in EIn tzurim, Monique Zarbiv, received a phone call from an admistrator of The Sela Commission (Minhelet) Motti Elimelech,that since he sees that our Netzer Hazani "disengaged" families are not yet moving into the caravillas as per the letter they had sent some of the families, he was sending a letter to the Kibbutz Ein Tzurim guesthouse and the Hafetz Haim guesthouse that The Sela commission was stopping all further funding to the guesthouse for the Netzer Hazani families. Our representative asked to receive this in writing. This in fact is saying that since we will not move into the caravillas though they are not yet completed, some without water nor electricity,and though the site as a whole is far from completed, and though the site is very dangerous for the children as well as the ill and the elderly -- i.e., open sewage holes, protruding poles, piles of blocks, hills and ditches, obstacle courses, etc. etc. -- then we will be thrown into the street (this after nine months in the minimal old small rooms of the guesthouse, which we obviously anxiously await leaving -- however not to be thrown in the street). If you care, please feel free to call Minhelet SELA and express you opinion to Motti Elimelech and whomever else there as to why it is taking them so long to complete the Ein Tzurim caravilla site completely as planned. If they don't complete site quickly, properly and safely there will be caring Jews from all over the country and the world working to publicize their incapabilities. Sela:
Anita Tucker is a farmer and grew formidable vegetables before she together with the other Jews of Gush Katif were kicked out of their homes and saw their greenhouses destroyed and/or vandelized by the Arabs. Contact her at tucker.anita@gmail.com |
|
NEWS FROM JUDEA-SAMARIA; WHAT REALLY HAPPENS IN YESHA?; PA SLANDERS CHRISTIANS & JEWS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 24, 2006. |
|
NEWS FROM JUDEA-SAMARIA
A former colleague whose reports I find reliable has retired to Judea-Samaria. She is filling me in with news witnessed by herself or her neighbors. Much of it is not reported elsewhere or rarely so -- which, itself is a sad commentary about the dearth of reliable news in the supposed "information age." Her news is informed by insights from decades of Zionist activity and a non-conformist attitude. She was among the traffic-blockers protesting against the expulsion of Jews from their houses in Gush Katif, Gaza. A policeman roughly tore her banner out of her hands, and threatened to "take care of her." (What, are police brutality and threats legal?) Fortunately for her but not for others, he turned to younger people to fling onto the pavement, hard. (Injuring instead of arresting means government policy is brutal aggression, not law-enforcement.) The special anti-settler police corps went to Amona, after having tried to provoke violence in Hebron as if seeking a pretext to shoot some. The police walked through a group of Jews in Hebron, praying on the Sabbath, shoving them for no reason. The worshippers prudently did not react. Carnage avoided. My colleague went to visit friends in Beit El. Her armed caravan hurried through some Arab towns. They were prepared to defend themselves. The government insists, however, that Jews under attack turn back. She considers that neurotic. (Many Israelis, including soldiers, fail to fire back until given permission by some politically correct commander. Others defend themselves but then are investigated for criminal sanctions. (Cowardice forfeits Arab respect and therefore encourages more Arab attacks.) The caravan suffered no attacks, but the roads are dangerous (partly because the government fails to demolish Arab houses illegally built too close to them). The government of Israel responded to this menace by barring Jews from many of the roads, instead of removing the Arabs. "In Beit El the checkpoint was at the back entrance to keep Jews from leaving Beit El for Jerusalem on that road." "The road leading from Tekoa to Jerusalem is a closed Military Zone for Jews, and Arabs are allowed to travel the road." Again, it more than doubles the time for people from Tekoa to get to Jerusalem and cuts out the short cut to Efrat. A resident of Tekoa "told me that the road is not dangerous. Tekoa will be on the Arab side of the fence, and they want to make life hard for them and cut them off from Efrat and double the time to Jerusalem." Restricting Jewish drivers isolates some Jewish towns, by making their commuting onerous. She observes that this outcome coincidentally, or is it coincidentally, makes it easier to pick off those towns and dispossess the Jews from each, one town at-a-time.
(The NY Times has articles about the hardships endured by P.A. Arabs. It ignores the hardships endured by Jews. The differences are that the Jews are innocent but the Times is anti-Zionist and practices advocacy journalism.? (A few years ago, one read complaints about the bypass roads built for Jews. The complaint was that this discriminated against Arabs. The complaint was not so much asinine as biased, for it ignored the fact that Arab vehicles were used to commit terrorism against the Jews. Now that Jews are being denied the use of roads in favor of the Arabs, those same upholders of human rights are silent. Hypocrites!) WHAT REALLY HAPPENS IN YESHA? Fair reporters elicit the truth by interviewing both sides. Experience teaches, and Islamic philosophy holds, that the Arabs lie about the Arab-Israel conflict and the government of Israel lies against Israeli settlers. Sometimes right-wing news reports assert all sorts of drastic conclusions that I find the stories do not back up. Other interpretations may be possible. Sometimes they omit unfavorable things. The news about Judea-Samaria in the NY Times generally omits bad news about the Arabs and favorable news about the settlers. In the NY Sun, the editorials and columnists are reliable in disputes between Israel and the Arabs, but not about the settlers. The Sun gets much of its foreign news from the Daily Telegraph and Associated Press, and one of its editors is Hillel Halkin, who favors abandonment without considering fairly in his columns the arguments against it. The major media rely upon Arab handlers and reporters and upon police and official statements ranged against the settlers. It does not check with settlers. My former colleague is on the scene there, and explains what really goes on. She reports, for example, that Arabs constantly dumped garbage in an Efrat security employee's yard. One day he saw them. He told them to stop. Three Arabs then came out of the truck and approached him. He called the head of security, and asked him to call the police. The telephone was busy. He took out a pistol and ordered them to halt. They came closer, whereupon he fired in the air. Then the police came, but arrested them. They told him that the Arabs had telephoned to complain that he attacked them. (The police usually take the word of Arabs over Jews, because they favor Arab settlers over Jewish settlers.) The police had not gotten the call from the head of security. They were going to put the victim on trial. The Arabs were laughing at him and at Israel. (The police ignored their mocking attitude about their trickery.) The victim fortunately had witnesses, and the head of security backed him up. He was released. The Arabs went unpunished. (Ridiculous laws are enforced against Jews and necessary laws are not enforced against Arabs.) Shimshon Cytrin, a Jew from Gush Katif, Gaza, is soon to be tried for attempted murder, for having thrown rocks at Arabs. The media did not photograph the Arabs throwing rocks, but waited until Jews retaliated. However, a Jewish girl was shown whose face the Arabs had smashed, earlier, with a rock. When an Arab was slightly hurt by a soldier's rifle butt, as both admitted the police arrested young Shimshon, without any evidence that any rock he threw had struck that Arab. They boy's family, not affluent, already has spent $40,000 on legal fees. Why no Arabs indicted? A Jew was walking with his dog on the beach in Gaza, before withdrawal. Arabs came and threw rocks at the dog. The Jew fired into the air. The police arrested him for shooting an Arab in the leg. (If he had, it would have been justified, but Israel is not a country of law, common sense, or justice for settlers.) The allegedly wounded Arab was not found. Nor did the Arab doctor there treat one. The Arab complainant did not identify the accused. But the judge convicted the Jew and sentenced him to two years for "endangering life." While awaiting his appeal, he sits in jail. He's already spent eight months there. No habeas corpus or trial by jury, just pro-Arab prejudice. FATAH & HAMAS HAVE AT EACH OTHER After trading accusations of previous attacks, members of Fatah and Hamas opened fire on each other with automatic weapons. They wounded 11 people, of whom three were fellow gunmen and eight were civilians, including five children (IMRA, 5/9). Wanton Arab violence does not produce international condemnation for shooting innocent civilians, including children, nor for terrorist movement among civilians. When Israelis shoot an Arab civilian incidentally in the course of self-defense against terrorism, it reaps international condemnation for harming innocent civilians. That is not a humanitarian response but a hypocritical and anti-Zionist one. WITH FRIENDS LIKE THESE The Quakers, or Friends, have a philosophy of non-violence but a politics of leftist violence. They supported the leftist revolutionaries in Latin America but opposed the anti-leftist forces. The Abington Friends School in Jenkintown bans t-shirts that advertise for causes that embrace violence, such as Israeli Army symbols. On the other hand, the school does not ban t-shirts that publicize the violent Che Guevara. The Friends contradict themselves. The Friends called exaggerated the reports of genocide in Cambodia, but used Saddam's exaggerated figures of children's deaths in Iraq (largely from Saddam having sold their food and medicine), ignored Saddam's murdering an even larger number, and mostly ignored the genocide in Sudan. It does protest vigorously against Israel's security fence, though the fence does reduce violence by terrorists. The Friends issued a report calling for ending the Arab-Israel conflict. It failed to call for ending terrorism. Terrorism, the ultimate evil in violence, since it deliberately but randomly targets the innocent, should be the most denounced type of violence by a supposedly pacifistic organization. The Friends demand that the US stop subsidizing Iraq and that the US keep subsidizing the P.A., even as the P.A. declares war and lauds terrorism (MEFNews, 5/9 from Michael Rubin & Suzanne Gershowitz). Because the source's argumentation for other severe charges is not logical, I omitted them. UNO REFORM? Annan started his UNO career as a reform candidate. He still is, though he has secured no major reforms and his regime is noted for corruption. The Secretary-General improperly defended an official accused of sexual harassment, until he had to try to get the accused official to resign. Annan's aide, brought in to reform the UNO, told the supposedly independent internal investigation agency to exonerate higher ups. He advised Annan to accept a $500,000 prize from Dubai, but told other staffers to refuse gifts for more than $250. Annan appointed one of those who helped him get that prize head of the UN Environmental program. The problem with most reform proposals is that they would centralize power with the Secretary-General. With Annan there, what reform is it? (Benni Avni, NY Sun, 5/8, p.6). P.A. SLANDER OF CHRISTIANS & JEWS A senior P.A. religious figure, Hamed Al-Tamimi, a member of the Supreme [Islamic] Judicial Council and the director of the Inter-Religion Dialogue Department, accused the YMCA of worshipping Satan. He accused Christian pro-Zionists and Jewish Zionists of hating Muslims and seeking to destroy Islam. His diatribe had other, similar defamation. Public prayers in the P.A. often call for the murder of Christians and Jews (Arutz-7, 5/8). Worship Satan? Is he crazy? Maybe not, but that is the level of Islamic discourse. The YMCA in the P.A. has Muslims on its board, and far from hating, it offers charity to the Arabs there, non-denominatinally. The hatred that the Muslims impute to Christians and Jews, too many of whom are appeasement-minded towards the Muslims, does not exist. The hatred is Islam's and the defamation is part of their jihad, to rally their faithful to war. Christians and Jews should awake to the danger that Islam poses and to the need to fight against Islamism, if not also Islam. ARAB MARCH: RIGHT TO PROTEST OR ORGANIZING SEDITION? Israeli Arabs want to parade in Lod to protest creation of the State of Israel as a catastrophe. They would carry banners of Hamas, which is in a terrorist war on Israel, and would urge the destruction of the Jewish state (Arutz-7, 5/8). "When Israeli Arab MK Jamal Zahalka (National Democratic Assembly) was asked in a live interview broadcast on Israel Radio's ... news magazine today to relate to the question of loyalty to the State of Israel, Zahalka replied "we are loyal to values -- not institutions." (IMRA, 5/8.) Translation: Israeli Arabs are loyal to Islam and not to their country. The Arabs don't put it baldly for Jews to hear and to become alerted to their Arabs being a fifth column. Arabs reply by saying what their people know is aggressive but naïve Westerners do not. The march is a rally for sedition. Get away with that, and they become bolder. HOW OLMERT STRIVES TO PUT OVER SCHEME To strengthen the likelihood of his scheme for territorial abandonment passing in the Knesset, PM Olmert's party is granting more key committee seats to Arab Party MKs. The Arabs then would support the scheme. Right-wing MKs object to the resulting disproportionate representation conferred upon the Arabs (IMRA, 5/8). Olmert is letting the country's enemies tip the balance on issues of national security. It indicates inability to persuade the country of his policy. His policy allies himself to those enemies. The Arabs complain about Israel being a Jewish state. Why are they complaining -- can't they see that the Left is dismantling that state? The Left's strategy is elevating the Arabs into a gradual position of dominance. That would make the country untenable for the Left. But for now, it controls the country, and informed patriots are unable to stop it. Were normal Israeli Jews in control, they would stop kowtowing to the Arabs and start getting the Arabs out, in self-defense. The West must learn fast that it cannot co-exist with internal Arab populations, because the Arabs strive for dominance, are intolerant, and are deadly. 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. |
|
UNITED ORANGE
Posted by Alan Jay, May 23, 2006. |
|
Did you know Ehud Olmert's "Convergence" plan:- 1. Places Tel Aviv and All Other Israeli Cities (except Haifa and Ashdod!) within Ketyusha Rocket Range (22km) from Israel's new border with Hamas; 2. Evacuates and destroys entire Jewish Cities, Towns, Villages, Yeshivas, Shuls, Schools, Businesses.... directly creating 70,000-90,000 Destitute Jewish Refugees; 3. Gives Hamas and Global Islamic Fundamentalism their greatest "victory" since 9/11. 4. Will NOT bring Israel either internationally recognized borders, nor any step towards Peace. If this concerns you, join the new "United Orange" email list, by sending an email to:- unitedorange-subscribe@yahoogroups.com Contact the poster at alanjay7236@yahoo.com |
|
A NEW UNIVERSITY - WITHOUT POLITICS
Posted by Professors for a Strong Israel, May 23, 2006. |
|
Now that a suit has been filed opposing the upgrading of the College of Judea and Samaria to a university, Professors for a Strong Israel wishes to point out that the college in Ariel is, by any academic standards, the most highly qualified for this step among all colleges in Israel. The diversity of its faculties and departments and the quantity of research undertaken join with its sheer size in making it the largest college in the country. We urge that the process of turning it into a university be accelerated. The political voices in opposition, which have no academic basis, should simply be ignored. Contact Professors for a Strong Israel at 050-551 8940 |
|
FATAH VERSUS HAMAS
Posted by Barry Rubin, May 23, 2006. |
|
Is there going to be a Palestinian civil war? Probably not. But there is a major struggle going on that could be described as the biggest internal Palestinian conflict in memory, perhaps in history. On one level, the battle is between Hamas and Fatah, between Islamism and nationalism. It is also a struggle between two groups each wanting the fruits of leadership: power, prestige, and money. With the demise of unchallenged Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat and--no less important--Fatah's inability to gain a state due to its own intransigence, the way was open for Hamas's rise. This trend was also made possible by Arafat's encouragement of anarchy and attempt to use Hamas for his own purposes. Of course, it can also be traced to Fatah's corruption and incompetence in running the Palestinian Authority (PA) for 12 years. The turning point was Hamas's landslide victory in the January 25, 2006, election, partly due to Fatah's internal splits. Another factor was Fatah's incredible arrogance and inflexibility. It assumed that no one else could possibly lead the Palestinians. As Fatah's campaign manager told me before the balloting, "People will vote for Abu Mazen and everything will be okay." Since then, power has been divided between Mahmud Abbas (Abu Mazin), the PA's leader and self-styled president, and a Hamas-dominated parliament and cabinet. Abbas has unilaterally given himself control over borders, the media, and some security agencies. Hamas is fuming but cannot do much about this power grab. To make matters worse for Hamas, the 60,000-member PA bureaucracy, including security forces, is dominated by Fatah members. International sanctions against giving money to the Hamas regime also hurt the Islamists. Yet the European Union had earlier stopped aid to the PA because of its financial irresponsibility. This kind of thing should be remembered in the face of a strong temptation to declare Fatah, as opposed to Hamas, the "good guys" or at least the lesser of two evils. While Fatah is somewhat less horrible than Hamas--and of course there are some different views within the organization--it is Fatah's past incitement, terrorism, and refusal to make real peace that are at the root of the current situation. There is no reason to believe it would do better in future if restored to power. There is much discussion on why Hamas won the elections. Some would say that Palestinians supported Hamas's program; others that voters were merely reacting against Fatah's corruption. Both points are valid but there is more to the story. About half of Hamas's voters have shown they support its program. The other half has no problems with its views except that of Islamizing society. Yet regarding terrorism, Israel, peace, and general world view there is not a big difference between Fatah and Hamas, except on this issue. What of the future? First, can Fatah return to office? This is possible but far from certain. Not the slightest reform has taken place in Fatah nor has any of the leadership been replaced or the younger generation fully incorporated. Fatah, as was once said of France's reactionary Bourbon dynasty, has neither learned nor forgotten anything. A Hamas-Fatah deal is also possible but not so likely. Any such arrangement would necessitate Fatah accepting the role of junior partner, which Hamas never did. Given the Fatah mindset this seems unlikely though some cadre may join Hamas out of their own views or opportunism. One reason for keeping up the pressure on the Hamas regime is to discourage such a rapprochement. Second, how is Fatah competing with Hamas? Certainly, it is not doing so by laying out an alternative, moderate line. If Fatah so wished it could--an option available for a decade--urge an end to the eternal struggle and a compromise with Israel that would quickly win it a state and international support. While a few people in Fatah do think this way, Abbas among them to some extent, there is no sign that anyone is seriously considering such a strategy. Instead, Fatah is competing by trying to prove that it is just as militant as the Islamists, including the escalation of its own attempts at terrorism. Since the election, Fatah statements and actions are more, rather than less, extreme. Of course, Fatah can also hope that Western and Israeli pressures will bring down Hamas and simply hand it power once again. Fatah is encouraging its supporters to blame Hamas for the economic problems of the PA and to demonstrate demanding their pay. Equally, Fatah is resisting any moves by Hamas to take over the security forces and put its own people into the bureaucracy. This effort may even succeed. But such an outcome cannot be taken for granted. Finally, will there be a civil war? Clearly, armed resistance to Hamas's encroachment on Fatah-controlled areas and institutions is happening periodically. Yet both sides are trying to avoid an all-out struggle. Continuing anarchy and periodic clashes seem more likely than full-scale battle. It is important not to underestimate the staying power of either Hamas, Fatah, or the PA. The stakes are too high for both sides to give much ground. Equally, there is a deep-seated strategy of being willing to sacrifice the welfare of the Palestinian population in the fight against each other and Israel. Let them suffer, the activists and gunmen argue, and that suffering will force the West and Israel to ease the pressure and give into their demands without Palestinian concessions. This seems a strange approach but it is one that the Palestinian movement has used for a half-century and does not seem to have yet transcended. On more than one occasion in the past it has even worked. Often, however, it has led to disaster. And in this case the latter outcome appears more likely. Barry Rubin is Director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Interdisciplinary Center university. His co-authored book, Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography, (Oxford University Press) is now available in paperback and in Hebrew. His latest book, The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East, was published by Wiley in September. Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at: http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. |
|
INSANITY -- RATHER WELL PUT
Posted by Zalmi, May 23, 2006. |
|
A television advertising campaign in the United States is reminding viewers of the costs of transferring territory to the Palestinian Authority. The Center for Security Policy The ad succinctly reviews the consequences for Israeli and U.S. interests if land is surrendered to terrorist control, as well as the past history of territorial concessions in southern Lebanon and Gaza. Download the ad at
Contact Zalmi at zalmi@zalmi.net |
|
RELIGIOUS APARTHEID IN EGYPT
Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 23, 2006. |
|
Dear Christian leaders, The next time that you, or someone you know, sees some kinship between Israel and the formerly apartheid state of South Africa (as is often asserted by Arab propaganda), give them the following email. If you want to find real apartheid today, real religious apartheid, look to Egypt....the 2nd most westernized and liberal of Arab countries. And recall, too, that the punishment for selling land to Jews in Jordan is death. Jordan is the first most westernized and modern and liberal country in the Arab world (Lebanon used to be the most liberal, but not since it has been taken over by Syria and Hizbollah). In Israel, whether you are a minority by virtue of your religion, your sexual preference, your gender, your national origin, or your race....it does not matter. You enjoy the democratic freedoms of a western state and benefit from government support and protection for that freedom despite your minority status. There are problems in Israel...not unlike the problems of many western democratic modern liberal states. But there is no apartheid. It is precisely because you will find real apartheid, real religious apartheid, in much of the Moslem world, and most of the Arab world, that Arab propaganda seeks to demonize Israel as an apartheid state. They can't pretend that Arab states are liberal democracies with social and gender and religious equality. So they try to divert your attention to the sham accusations of non-existent apartheid in Israel. Don't fall for it. Read how the Copts (among the earliest Christians in the world) suffer in Egypt. If you are concerned about Apartheid, speak out against Mubarrak's apartheid, and speak out on behalf of the oppressed and repressed Copts. From: The Copts Digest (www.copts.com)
President Hosni Mubarak opened the World Economic Forum in Sharm El Sheikh Saturday with a surprisingly tough speech. He implied the United States was running a foreign policy that promoted double standards on nuclear issues. Mr. President, I am surprised that you are concerned about double standards and further astonished with your preaching of equality. On one hand it is good to hear that you have come to grips with the concept of double standards and have realized that such a concept exists. On the other hand, it is sad that your countryEs constitution, laws and almost every aspect of life in your country are founded on the very concept that you complain about. While politicians and political analysts could differ on whether your foes are promoting double standards, the whole world, including the business men who were listening to you, can agree that double standards are entrenched in almost every aspect of life in your country b you probably do not see it but the whole world sees it. You have a constitution for Muslims specifying Quran a source of legislation, but have no constitution for Christians. You have laws restricting the building of churches but have no law that restricts building of mosques. You have publicly funded universities, such as Al Azhar, that can be accessed only by Muslims but access to Christians is denied. You have laws for freedom of travel for men and other laws restricting travel for women. You have inheritance rules for men and different ones for women. You have Ids issued to certain religions but cannot be issued for others, like Bahaiis. And the list goes on but the air in your country is full of double standards Mr. President, look around you... There was once a government called South Africa, following double standards and segregation like yours. That government is now history. Mr. President, I plea to you, in the interest of saving from further deterioration what remains from the old reputation of the great nation of Egypt, that you refrain from educating the West and other civilizations about double standards. Before you endeavor discussing this subject with the educated world you may wish to fix double standards in your home first. And before pushing for peace negotiations for the Palestinians, bring peace in your home first. (name withheld for personal security reasons) David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |