HOME Featured Stories May 2007 Blog-Eds List Background Information News On the Web

Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers

Posted by Yoram Ettinger, May 31, 2007.

This essay was published in Makor Rishon Daily, May 27, 2007.

The more entrenched is the defensive state of Israeli mind -- as has been the case since the 1993 Oslo Accord -- the more intensified is Palestinian terrorism.

The defensive world view on one hand and the "No Military Solution to Terrorism" on the other hand, have eroded Israel's steadfastness, have revolutionized the potential of Palestinian terrorism and have advanced its step-by-step strategy to annihilate the Jewish State:

  1. To weaken Israelis' confidence in their government's capability to safeguard personal/national security;

  2. To transform terrorism into a routine cost-of-living in Israel;

  3. To establish war of attrition as an acceptable mode of Israeli-Palestinian relations -- terrorists' "wet dream" and western democracies' nightmare;

  4. To undermine Israel's conviction in its cause;

  5. To entice Israelis to accept the concepts of "moral equivalence" and shared-responsibility for the "cycle of violence";

  6. To exacerbate Israeli battle fatigue, resulting in sweeping Israeli concessions and rewarding/fueling Palestinian terrorism, which is driven by hope for further concessions;

  7. The collapse and the abandonment of the Jewish State.

The "Oslo Legacy" and its derivatives -- from the Hebron Accord through Wye Accord, the flight from South Lebanon, Camp David II, "Disengagement", Lebanon War II and "Convergence" -- have transformed "fortifications and defense", "Separation", "Containment", "Low Intensity Warfare", "Back to 1949 Lines" and the recruitment of counter-terrorism subcontractors (Egypt, Jordan, Arafat/Abu Mazen, international forces) into key battle tactics against Palestinian terrorism. Such tactics dismiss the option of bringing the enemy to submission, and therefore add fuel -- not water -- to the fire of terrorism.

Instead of defending Israeli citizens, the "defense-fortification-separation" tactic has been employed, in order to rescue the "Oslo-Separation" theory from an extremely costly collapse: Over 2,000 Israelis murdered since 1993, compared with 250 murdered during 15 years preceding Oslo; a multi-billion dollar cost of homeland security measures; severe erosion of Israel's confidence in its cause and in its capability to confront its enemies; undermining Israel's posture of deterrence in the Middle East and in the US.

The sealing of windows with sand sacks and the erection of a series of protective walls, did not stop the 2000-1 Palestinian sniping at Jerusalem's Gilo neighborhood. In fact, it energized Palestinian terrorists and enabled them to improve their terrorist capabilities. The sniping was totally aborted -- and overall Palestinian terrorism was curtailed by 90% -- when Israel's military took over the Palestinian breeding ground of terrorism in Beit Jallah, Bethlehem, Hebron, Ramallah, Jenin, Nablus and other major towns in Judea & Samaria. Israeli military re-engagement with these areas -- rather than the Fence or the Wall -- reasserted Israel's initiative in the battle against Palestinian terrorism.

Upgrading the defensive/security features of bus stops, restaurants, coffee shops, synagogues, kindergartens, schools and residential areas in the Kassam-plagued Sderot, Ashqelon and the West Negev Kibbutzim -- and tomorrow probably in Ashdod, Kfar Saba, Hadera and Ben Gurion Airport -- provides a short term false sense of security, but plays into the hands of terrorists.

The focus on defense, fortifications and retreat has signaled Israel's abandonment of the victory option. Rather than destroying the infrastructure and capabilities of Palestinian terrorism, the focus on defense has reflected co-existence with terrorism. The addiction to defense, the belief that "Restrain Is Strength", and the subordination of the war on terrorism to international public opinion, have been by-products of the false assumptions that "we've tried everything" and that "There's no military solution to terrorism". Such false assumptions mirror battle fatigue, which is non-existent among other countries fighting terrorism: India, Turkey, Thailand, Australia, Germany, Russia, France, Italy, Egypt, Algeria, etc.

Fourteen years of unprecedented terrorism -- since Oslo -- have made it clear that there is no political solution to Palestinian terrorism, that the Palestinian Authority is a non-compromising enemy and not a partner for peace, that "Disengagement/Separation" upgrades terrorist capabilities, that an effective military action must be comprehensive, decisive and disproportionate and that international public opinion is never saturated with Israeli concessions. Instead of relying on defense, deterrence, retaliation and on surgical, sporadic and limited offensive initiatives, Israel should adopt the tactics of pre-emption, prevention and comprehensive/sustained offense, aimed at uprooting terrorist infrastructure and capabilities (ideologically, educationally, politically, logistically and operationally). Rather than retreating toward the 1949 Green Lines, Israel should take charge of the breeding ground and the home-base of terrorism, which would enhance Israel's power of deterrence, human-intelligence and interception capabilities. It would reduce Palestinian capabilities to conduct hate-education, to incite, to recruit, to train, to manufacture and smuggle terrorist and military hardware, to plan, to maneuver and to perpetrate terrorist activities. Thus, it would chop Palestinian terrorism by 90%!

Rather than defend against Palestinian terrorists, Israel should decimate the potential and actual capabilities of Palestinian terrorists.

Will Israel's military operations in Gaza constitute another derivative of the suicidal Oslo State Of Mind, or will it be a milestone on the road to reclaim the pre-Oslo Israeli posture as the role-model of deterrence, defiance of odds, determination, gumption and counter-terrorism, which paved the road to the 1948 Declaration of Independence, the 1967 Six Day War, the 1976 Entebbe Jonathan Operation and the 1981 bombing of Saddam's nuclear reactor?

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 And visit his website: http://yoramettinger.newsnet.co.il.

To Go To Top

Posted by UCI, May 31, 2007.

This was written by Kathleen Parker. It was published on www.Townhall.com. She is a syndicated columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group.

What a relief to read in a new Pew Research Center study that Muslims in America are "largely assimilated, happy with their lives, and moderate with respect to many of the issues that have divided Muslims and Westerners around the world."

Phew. Praise Allah. No more worries.

On the other hand, the study's findings may depend on how you define "largely." Here's another way of putting the Pew results: While a majority of older U.S. Muslims have largely assimilated, more than a few younger Muslims think suicide bombings are justified.

Having trouble remembering where you put those pompoms? Stick around. Despite the upbeat treatment of the Pew study -- and headlines that conveyed a positive message -- the devil in the details is less reassuring.

In fact, the survey found that though a majority of the 1,050 surveyed (a fraction of the Pew's estimated 2.35 million Muslims in this country) are prospering, a significant minority are not assimilating and sympathize with radical Islam.

There is good news among the survey results, to be sure, especially if you're Muslim. In classically American fashion, 71 percent think that one can get ahead by working hard and 78 percent report being happy. In delightful news, those who report being happiest are young Muslims ages 18-29, who also comprise 30 percent of the total U.S. Muslim population.

In less happy news, these young Muslims are also more accepting of Islamist extremism. Add to that disconcerting note the following:

Sixty percent of the young group consider themselves Muslim first, American second. Among all young Muslims, 26 percent think that suicide bombings are justified often, sometimes or rarely. Another 5 percent said they "don't know" or refused to answer.

Don't know? To kill civilians or not to kill civilians is not a tricky question.

If 26 percent are fine with suicide bombing and another 5 percent probably are, then we may reasonably conclude that 31 percent of young American Muslims -- or roughly 219,000 -- support murdering innocents in the name of Islam. Peachy. Given that 9/11 was a supersized suicide bombing, it would seem we have a problem.

In another finding of Muslim American disconnect, fewer than half of all American Muslims believe that Arabs engineered the 9/11 attacks. Another third expressed no opinion or refused to answer.

That means that the vast majority of Muslims in America think ... what? That the U.S. attacked itself? That Israel did it?

While a majority of Muslims of all ages view al-Qaeda "very unfavorably" (58 percent), an alarming number seem to be ambivalent. A whopping 27 percent said they didn't know how they felt toward the terrorist organization or refused to answer the question. An immigrant population that does not recognize the enemy of its adopted country cannot be said to have assimilated.

Nevertheless, the Pew study authors tell us that compared to Europe, we're in good shape. Yes, sure, "there is somewhat more acceptance of Islamic extremism in some segments of the U.S. Muslim public than others," concede the authors." ... Nonetheless, absolute levels of support for Islamic extremism among Muslim Americans are quite low, especially when compared with Muslims around the world."

In other words, presumably, we should be grateful that only 200,000 or so local Muslims support terrorism. In Europe, where many young Muslims are unemployed and alienated, things are much worse. True, but seldom does America measure success according to a things-could-be-worse standard.

Not so great is bad enough for reasoned alarm.

All of the study's conclusions depend, meanwhile, on whether one trusts its population figures, which Pew warns should be interpreted with caution. Since this was a telephone survey using only landlines -- and given that 48 percent of Americans age 18-29 use cells phones exclusively -- the number of young Muslims could be much higher than estimated. The truth is, no one knows how many Muslims live in the U.S. because the Census Bureau doesn't ask about religious identity. Muslim organizations put the figure at closer to 7 million based on mosque attendance.

If there are 7 million Muslims in the U.S., 30 percent of whom are young, 31 percent of whom do not forswear suicide bombings, then that could mean that as many as 651,000 young Muslim Americans sympathize with radical Islam and terrorism.

All things considered, it may be too soon to celebrate Muslim assimilation. Let's do hold the fireworks.

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

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Aramy, May 31, 2007.
This article was written by Eugene Goodheart and it appeared in Dissent

Eugene Goodheart is Edythe Macy Professor of Humanities Emeritus at Brandeis University. He is the author of many books of literary and cultural criticism as well as a memoir, Confessions of a Secular Jew.

Critics, mostly though not exclusively European, who hammer away at Israeli misbehavior often show no concern about the dangers that beset Israel. Their one-sided animus verges on scandal. Criticism of Israeli behavior may be justified, but it loses credit when it is not balanced by an unequivocal repudiation of the rhetoric and actions of Islamic fundamentalists: Holocaust denial, fantasies of genocidal anti-Semitism, the elimination of the state of Israel, suicide bombings, and indiscriminate killing of civilians.

The London Review of Books is an egregious instance of this one-sidedness. Almost every issue contains several articles devoted to attacks on Israel, and the target is not simply the governing party, but the whole spectrum of Israeli political life. Absent from the columns of the Review are the injustices and cruelties of political Islam. In an article by Charles Glass, Lebanon's Hezbollah is eulogized for its capacity to learn from mistakes, its decency in treating prisoners, "its refusal to murder collaborators," its intelligent use of "car bombs, ambushes, small rockets and suicide bombers." Glass speaks of Hezbollah's uncompromising political program, of which he apparently approves, without mentioning that at its core is the destruction of Israel. Any two-state solution requires a capacity and willingness to compromise, but compromise is anathema to Hezbollah. He claims that the movement had "jettisoned its early rhetoric about making Lebanon an Islamic republic, and [now] spoke of Christians, Muslims and Druze living in harmony." Missing from this article (in the August 17, 2006, issue) is any reference to its anti-Semitism. In a letter to LRB printed in the September 7, 2006, issue, I pointed out that Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, is not simply a resistance fighter, he is also an anti-Semite with genocidal fantasies. I cited the following statements attributed to him: "If they [the Jews] all gather in Israel it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide." "They [the Jews] are a cancer which is liable to spread at any moment." I also noted that the name "Party of God," should worry anyone of enlightened, democratic persuasion, but does not seem to bother Glass. (Would he be equally indulgent of the religious fanatics in Israel who assert their divine right to Greater Israel?) Parties of God, wherever they are to be found, mean tyranny should they ever acquire power. In the article, Glass mentions the fact that he had been kidnapped by Hezbollah at a Syrian checkpoint. Wanting to prove that the movement was independent of Syrian control, he writes that when "Syria insisted that I be released to show that Syrian control of Lebanon could not be flouted [,] Hezbollah, unfortunately, ignored the request." What virtue! In my letter, I wondered whether he had not succumbed to Stockholm syndrome.

His response, printed in the October 5, 2006, issue, focused on the anti-Semitic statements attributed to Nasrallah, which he dismissed as fabrications, "circulated widely on neo-conservative web sites." Whatever the agenda of the Web sites, the original source of the statements, as Glass's letter makes clear, is "an article by Badih Chayban in Beirut's English-language Daily Star in 23 October 2002." The newspaper sympathizes with Palestinian aspirations and is critical of American neoconservatism. Glass reports that the managing editor of the Star has "faith in neither the accuracy of the translation (from Arabic to English) nor of the agenda of the translator [Chayban]." The editor in chief of the paper refers to Chayban as "a reporter and briefly local desk sub," who did not interview Nasrallah. Glass does not explain why, given its misgivings about the reporter, the Star would choose to publish Chayban's article, nor does he say what Chayban's agenda was, leaving it to the reader to assume that the agenda was somehow linked to neoconservatism, therefore discrediting the attribution of the statements to Nasrallah. The source of one of the quotations was a Web site of the Israeli government and therefore not to be trusted. To clinch the argument, Glass cites a spokeswoman for Hezbollah who denies that such statements were ever made.

I wrote back to the LRB, first noting that in invoking the nefarious neocons as the vehicles of fabrication, Glass reminded me of the apologists for the Soviet Union who denied the existence of anti-Semitism in their beloved country, because the reports of its existence came from the bourgeois press. I challenged the LRB to make a disinterested effort to determine whether these statements were fabrications. Its animus against Israel was clear and bad enough; a willingness to indulge anti-Semitism, a much more serious matter. If they are not fabrications, the journal has a moral obligation to say so and to repudiate the kind of article that Glass has written.

While waiting for a reply, I decided to look into the literature on Hezbollah, and what I found left no doubt about its view of the Jews. Here is Nasrallah in one of his diatribes against Israel: "If we searched the entire world for a person more cowardly, despicable, weak and feeble in psyche, mind, ideology and religion, we would not find anyone like the Jew. Notice I do not say the Israeli."[1]

Quoted in Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, Hizbu'llah: Politics and Religion, University of Michigan Press, 2001, p. 170. Original source, televised interview, Muhammad Fnayash. Wuhhat Nazar Future Television (FTV, July 2, 1997).

Naim Qassem, the deputy secretary general of Hezbollah, author of Inside Hezbollah, which Charles Glass cites for its humane view of how collaborators with Israel should be treated, has this to say: "The history of the Jews has proven that, regardless of the Zionist proposal, they are a people who are evil in their ideas" (Quoted in Saad-Ghorayeb, p. 174; original source, Abbas al-Mussawi, Amiru' l-Zakira, Dhu al-Hujja 1406). Hezbollah's denial of the existence of the Holocaust takes many forms. "The Jews have never been able to prove the existence of the infamous gas chambers." Only "160,000 civilians died [and this was] as a result of US bombing of Germany." Jews collaborated with the Nazis in killing their brethren: "From what we know about the Jews, their tricks and their deception, we do not think it unlikely that they partook in the planning of the Holocaust." Saad-Ghorayeb, the source of these quotes, is a Briton of Muslim Lebanese extraction, who is sympathetic to Hezbollah. "As a Lebanese, I was appalled by the apparent ease with which this movement was accused of sundry terrorist activities by Western journalists and policy-makers, and on their insistence on referring to its guerrilla fighters, who were practicing their legitimate right to resist a foreign occupation, as terrorists." She writes favorably of Hezbollah' s political evolution in Lebanese society, so there is no reason to doubt the scholarly accuracy of her representation of the movement's unreconstructed view of Israel and the Jews. (As I write this, I am pleased to see a letter to the LRB from the distinguished lawyer and literary scholar Anthony Julius, citing Saad-Ghorayeb as evidence for Hezbollah's anti-Judaism. Julius invited Glass to confirm the implication of his response to my letter that I am wrong in attributing anti-Semitism to Hezbollah and to comment on the "material assembled by Saad-Ghorayeb." So far there has been no reply from Glass, nor any statement from the editors on the matter.)

Unlike Bernard Lewis, Saad-Ghorayeb characterizes Hezbollah's view of the Jews as anti-Judaism rather than anti-Semitism. She contends that unlike Christian anti-Semitism, the radical Islamic animus against Jews, which has its source in the Koran, is not racialist. And yet she speaks of the "scriptural basis" of Hezbollah's depiction of the Jews as a people "whose blood [a racialist trope] is full of enmity towards mankind." In any event, it is not clear to me that the distinction between anti-Semitism and anti-Judaism makes any practical difference. What is interesting is that Saad-Ghorayeb sees Hezbollah' s animus against Jewry as not deriving from its anti-Zionism (Lewis's view), but from a deeper source: its inveterate hostility to Judaism. The enemies of the movement are Jews who adhere to Judaism and to Zionism, which, Hezbollah believes, has its source in Judaism, despite the existence of secular Zionists. Because they believe that Jews who have no commitment either to Judaism or Zionism are a negligible constituency, they have no inhibitions about demonizing Jewry as a whole. Saad-Ghorayeb cites passage after passage demonstrating Hezbollah's hatred of Judaism and its desire for its disappearance. The movement arose as a reaction to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, but its hostility is not confined to Israel and its supporters. Can we then take seriously Glass's benign view that the movement, in becoming "a sophisticated and successful political party . . . [has] jettisoned its early rhetoric about making Lebanon an Islamic Republic," and now speaks "of Christians, Muslims and Druze living in harmony"? Apparently the Jews, having no place in this harmony, will simply disappear.

Alas, Charles Glass appears to be either ignorant about his subject or writing in bad faith. He is an example of moral obtuseness or callousness (it is hard to find the right word for it) in what has become an influential view among a group of American and European intellectuals. The moral logic of this view goes something like this. Israel is militarily powerful, supported by the United States, the most powerful nation in the world. Its adversaries in the Islamic world are weak, and when one measures the relative devastations caused by confrontations between the powerful and the weak, the burden of guilt falls on the most powerful. Whatever violence or cruelties issue from the weak are then morally justified by weakness. Here is Glass again: "Like Israel's previous enemies, Hezbollah relies on the weapons of the weak: car bombs, ambushes, occasional flurries or small rockets and suicide bombers. The difference is that it uses them intelligently, in conjunction with an uncompromising programme." Glass says nothing about the devastation caused by weapons of the weak. He ignores the fact that the strength of "the weak" lies in elusiveness, in the capacity to hide behind the civilian population, and in the code of martyrdom. In placing a lower valuation on human life than does the adversary, Hezbollah and other terrorist groups have a distinct strategic advantage. How do you deter a person willing to die for his cause from committing an act of violence?

What, one might ask, is accomplished by the glib and unthinking support of the use of "the weapons of the weak"? Sympathy for terrorist groups only encourages war-perpetuating intransigence on both sides. Has Israel been guilty of the use of disproportionate use of military power? I believe it has and should be held to account. Israeli power has been a response to the provocations of "the weapons of the weak," and the response has too often been destructive and self-destructive in its excesses. In its recent incursion in Lebanon, it has achieved a result similar to our misadventure in Iraq: a large number of civilian casualties, widespread devastation of the land, burgeoning resentment from a large portion of the Lebanese population that had been angered by Hezbollah's provocations. Israel failed to achieve its aims at great cost to Lebanon and to itself.

But then the question arises, "What should be the appropriate response to suicide bombings and Katyusha rockets?" There is no easy answer to this. But it is a mark of callous indifference to the fate of a country, indeed of one's own country, when another contributor to the London Review of Books, Yitzhak Laor, chastises two of Israel's most prominent critics of their own government, Amos Oz and David Grossman, for asserting the right of Israel to respond to violence against it. Grossman, for example, writes, "There is no justification for the large-scale violence that Hezbollah unleashed this week, from Lebanese territory, on dozens of peaceful Israeli villages, towns and cities. No country in the world could remain silent and abandon its citizens when its neighbor strikes without provocation." To which Laor replies irrelevantly, "We can bomb, but if they respond they are responsible for both their suffering and ours" (LRB, August 17, 2006, p. 11). What would Laor advise as a response to such an attack? He does not say. Apparently, all that is required is for Israel to flagellate itself for what it has inflicted on others.

Let us say that Israel did not respond to provocations. Would that change Hezbollah's behavior toward Israel? Not if, as Glass tells us, its program is uncompromising. Nothing that Israel can offer the Palestinians short of its self-eradication will satisfy Hezbollah. Indeed, it has even expressed a preference for a hard-line, Likud-led government to that of the Labor Party -- for that would justify its intransigence. The movement has a long view. "Even if hundreds of years pass by, Israel's existence will continue to be an illegal existence" (Saad-Ghorayeb, p. 135). It is hard to fathom what sympathy for Hezbollah by critics of Israel like Glass and Laor can accomplish in the way of achieving a peaceful solution to the conflict. On the contrary, they would seem only to foster a hardening of attitudes on all sides. In all the talk about the asymmetry between powerful Israel and its weak adversaries, what is overlooked is the asymmetry that strongly favors its adversaries. Israel has only one war to lose for its existence to come to an end. Its adversaries, miserable as their condition is, can survive war after war. In its one-sided obsession with Israeli transgressions, the London Review of Books, offering no constructive advice for ending the conflict, contributes to its perpetuation by supporting one side of the intransigence. Its indulgence of a virulently anti-Semitic movement is simply shameful.

Footnotes 1.) Quoted in Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, Hizbu'llah: Politics and Religion, University of Michigan Press, 2001, p. 170. Original source, televised interview, Muhammad Fnayash. Wuhhat Nazar Future Television (FTV, July 2, 1997).

Contact Aramy by email at aramy964gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 31, 2007.

This was written by Jerusalem Post Staff and it is archived at
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1180527969679&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

The 11th victim of Kassam rocket fire died of wounds he received last week, Israel Radio revealed Thursday morning.

Thirteen-year-old Chai Shalom suffered from cerebral palsy, and was deaf, mute, and confined in a wheel-chair. He was hospitalized after a rocket landed next to a bus transporting him and three other disabled children.

According to the report, all four children were wounded by the force of the blast. The driver of the bus fainted and Shalom's caretaker alerted his father.

The boy died last week in Soroka Hospital after his condition worsened.

His father asked that Shalom be recognized as a terror victim and was denied because his particular incident had not been reported.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, May 31, 2007.

We, Israeli professors for justice and peace, do hereby appeal to researchers, academics, scholars, and teachers in Israel and throughout the world to take a firm and clear stand against continuing occupation and denial of rights. We are of course referring to the continuing occupation of territories by Britain in which Britain clearly has no right to be. We demand that all British universities be boycotted and all academics at those universities be boycotted until these same people and institutions come out clearly and openly in favor of immediate unconditional removal of all British occupation from these territories. We demand a moratorium on all funding of academic research in Britain by sources for funding everywhere and divestment from Britain in all its forms.

Unlike Israel's "occupation" of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the latter of which is not occupied any longer in any way, which has lasted a mere 40 years, but Britain's occupations of territories has lasted centuries. Take for example the clearly illegal British occupation of Gibraltar. There Britain maintains an illegal settlement in open defiance of all international accepted standards of legitimacy and concepts of national rights. Moreover, Britain has placed there an illegal security fence that prevents non-British nationals from entering Gibraltar. This apartheid fence is a human rights atrocity and must be torn down at once. And until it is, the entire world should divest from Britain and boycott British universities.

Then there are those clearly illegal British settlements constructed on occupied Argentinian territory in the Falkland Islands. What clearer example is there of the continuing colonial aggression of white European imperialism against the Third World?!

But Britain's illegal settlements have also been constructed elsewhere. Britain continues to maintain settlements on the Channel Islands that obviously belong to France. While it is true that Britain earlier ended its occupation of Hong Kong and India, that is no excuse for its settlements elsewhere. After all, Israel ended its occupation of Sinai but that has not stopped the British University and College Union, representing more than 120,000 college-level educators, from voting May 30 to pass a resolution calling for a boycott of Israeli academics and universities as well as a moratorium on European Union funding of Israeli research. And what about Britain's occupation forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. True, Afghanistan and Iraq were terrorist enclaves, but since when does THAT serve as legitimization of dispatch of occupation forces? British professors clearly do not think that Israel has any right to use force against terrorists attacking its population, so why should British forces do so!

Of course the very worst cases of illegal British occupation of the territories of The Other are in Wales, Scotland and Ireland. These are occupations imposed upon those oppressed population by force of arms. And in Ireland, the occupation produced genocidal levels of mortality. These occupations have lasted for centuries!

The moral indifference by British academics to these continued barbarous occupations and to the denial of self-determination for Scots, Welsh, and the Northern Irish is clearly as unforgivable as the failure of some academics in apartheid South Africa to speak out against abuses there. Moreover, Britain itself is a racist apartheid society. Not only the Welsh, but Moslems, blacks, and Asians suffer from discrimination and disadvantage inside Britain. Their wages are lower than those of white Englishmen and they face discrimination in housing! British universities have failed to redress these inequalities. If divestment from South Africa was justified, how much more so must it be in THIS case. In fact, 27 British professors have ENDORSED our calls for imposing an international boycott of their own universities! These courageous heroic souls must be supported!

We have sat in silence for much too long. The time has come. Please join us in calling for an open-ended boycott of British academics and universities until all these cases of occupation are ended!

Israeli Professors for Justice and Peace
Steven Plaut, Chairperson

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. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by David Frankfurter, May 31, 2007.

Dear Friends,

Finally, a way has been found to relieve Palestinian financial isolation and suffering. New arrangements, authorized by the US, have been found to pay Palestinian Authority salaries. Money is to be deposited with the PLO and channeled via "moderate" Palestinian leaders, represented by Fatah party leader President Mahmoud Abbas and the independent Finance Minister, Salam Fayyad. The mechanism is designed to avoid funding terrorism or dreaded "extremists" (represented by the Hamas government) who reject a two-State solution. Reuters reports that the US initiative is already bearing fruit, with over $80 million in international aid from Arab countries and Europe starting to flow. In fact, "Fayyad was expected to receive enough money through the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) account to pay government workers, including members of the security forces, at least half of their normal monthly wages later this week."

So let's do a double check. I invite you to read the following extracts from the Palestinian National Charter -- the official PLO doctrine. Decide for yourself if this seems to be a "moderate" organisation which accepts a two state solution and rejects violence and terrorism.

Article 2: Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.

Article 7: ... [the Palestinian] must be prepared for the armed struggle and ready to sacrifice his wealth and his life in order to win back his homeland and bring about its liberation.

Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. Thus it is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it....

Article 10: Commando action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution...

Article 20: ...Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history...

Article 21: The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by the armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine...

Article 22: Zionism is...racist and fanatic in its nature, aggressive, expansionist, and colonial in its aims, and fascist in its methods. Israel is the instrument of the Zionist movement, and geographical base for world imperialism...

Article 30: Fighters and carriers of arms in the war of liberation are the nucleus of the popular army which will be the protectiv e force for the gains of the Palestinian Arab people. And Article 3 of the General Principles (Chapter I) of the Constitution of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (which is annexed to and regulates the Charter): "...the armed Palestinian struggle shall be supported, and every possible effort shall be made to ensure that it continues and escalates..."

Moderate? Reject violence and terror? Accept a two state solution?

But the real test is not the theory of charters and of principles. The real test is practical. Who are the salary earners who benefit? Where does the money go?

The Funding for Peace Coalition has been issuing reports for years documenting the diversion of international aid to corruption and violence by the Palestinian Authority lead by the PLO -- and especially by Fatah leaders such as Abbas and his predecessor Yasser Arafat. Despite denials by European politicians and bureaucrats, Fatah's terrorist "military wing" the Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade were prime beneficiaries.

Have things changed? Who are the "government workers, including members of the security forces" who will benefit from this new funding mechanism? A little snippet of news from the Israeli Ha'aretz paper lets us in on the secret. Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades founder Khaled Shwish was arrested by the IDF two days ago, for murdering 8 Israeli civilians and injuring tens of others. This terrorist murderer is one of the many "government workers" with military rank that would be getting salary payments from the international aid channeled through "moderate" Fatah and the PLO.

Once again, the international community has found a way to fund terror and murder Jews.


David Frankfurter is a business consultant, corporate executive and writer who frequently comments on the Middle East. To subscribe to his 'Letter from Israel', email him at david.frankfurter@iname.com. Or go to http://www.livejournal.com/users/dfrankfurter/

To Go To Top

Posted by Robert Spencer, May 31, 2007.

"Israeli officials are unsure" whether Assad could actually "deliver a deal." And Rice says that a Palestinian state must come first.

Both the Israelis and the Secretary of State are, quite simply, not dealing with reality. The public discourse about Islamic jihad and the challenge we're facing has been dominated by fantasy since 9/11 and before that, and if anything, the fog is thicker now than ever. In reality, a Palestinian state won't bring peace, because it will not only not herald an end to Palestinian demands, but will only embolden the jihadists to continue to press for the destruction of Israel altogether -- and provide them a platform for doing so. Evidently no one takes the Hamas Charter seriously except Hamas.

But does Syria present a viable alternative for peace? As we have noted here many times, although Syria is a relatively secular state, and Assad is not an orthodox Muslim, it is a foremost base for jihad activities and the advancement of Islamic supremacism.

And now The Truth About Syria, an excellent new book by Barry Rubin of MERIA and the GLORIA Center, exposes the full scope of Syria's activities on behalf of the jihad. Rubin explains how Assad and his father have kept themselves in power by bringing together jihadism and Arab nationalism in Damascus -- and the hollowness of the arguments that contend that those two forces are and ever shall be irreconcilably opposed. Taking a long historical view, Rubin notes that the "window of opportunity" many have seen over the years for an accord between Israel and Syria -- and which Israeli officials seem to be seeing again today -- is actually for Damascus nothing more than a "window of weakness," Israeli weakness, which the Syrians will exploit for everything they can get. He lists fifteen cogent reasons why Syria will never make peace with Israel, and enters into peace talks never intending to complete them.

And of course there is much more involved than just Israel when it comes to Syria. The Assad regime is also deeply involved in jihad activities in Iraq, and is working closely with Iran and jihad terror groups such as Hizballah. As such, with or without Nancy Pelosi and her naive and counterproductive overtures, Syria cannot be ignored. Rubin explores all of this and more, not from the standpoint of fashionable politically correct fantasies, but from a realistic evaluation of Syria and the Assad regime on its own terms.

If Rice and the Israelis read this book -- and the Hamas Charter -- they might be able to embark on the road to policies that were actually viable to protect both Israel and the U.S. from the global jihadists, rather than embroiling us yet again in a round of futile and deceptive peace talks that will, ultimately, only advance the jihadist cause.

"Rice Cautions Israel on Syria: 'No Substitute' for Peace With Palestinians, Secretary Says" by Glenn Kessler in the Washington Post (thanks to Sr. Soph):

BERLIN, May 29 -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Tuesday cautioned against a growing sentiment in Israel to pursue peace with Syria instead of with warring Palestinian factions, saying there is "no substitute" for creating a Palestinian state.

Rice, who will discuss the stalled peace process with diplomats here Wednesday, has worked for months to lay the groundwork for Palestinians and Israelis to begin discussing what she calls a "political horizon" -- the parameters of a possible Palestinian state.

But with violence erupting between Palestinian factions -- and with Israel under constant attack from rockets launched from the Gaza Strip -- Rice has faced criticism from some outside experts for spending so much time on a diplomatic long shot, rather than seeking to quickly end the violence.

Israeli officials have confirmed Israeli news media reports that there is intense discussion about whether to pursue a peace agreement with Syria, which would in effect abandon the Palestinian track for now. Syrian President Bashir al-Assad has strongly suggested he is interested in reaching an agreement similar to one nearly concluded by his late father a decade ago, but Israeli officials are unsure whether he could actually deliver a deal.

This was posted May 30, 2007 on the Jihad Watch website and is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Janet Lehr, May 31, 2007.

By Ari Shavit

Every night, Sderot Mayor Eli Moyal tours his city, checking the number of houses with lights on. Last week the number of lights dropped each evening. On the eve of Shavuot it reached a nadir. Whole apartment blocks stood empty. On the street where Moyal himself lives only a few residents remained. At its height, Sderot had a population of 24,000, the exhausted mayor says. In recent years, when the Qassam attacks mounted, the number fell to about 20,000. But now, with the refugees whom Hamas chased out being scattered throughout the country, no more than 10,000 people remain in the city. And suddenly the feeling is that perhaps it has really happened: Perhaps Sderot has been broken.

But Sderot has still not been broken. If the rocket attacks cease, most people will return. Without security, without hope, without happiness - a depressing return to no-choice. So the basic fact remains: Sderot 2007 is a city that seems cursed. A frontier city with no home front. A frontier city with no aura of heroism. A frontier city that the government should protect, but isn't protecting. A frontier city that the nation should be standing behind, but is not. A frontier city abandoned by the center of the country.

It should not have been like this. Sderot is not Gush Katif. There is no debate. On the contrary: Sderot is a "Green Line" city. Sderot is a post-withdrawal city. Sderot is the righteous Israeli city after the occupation. Sderot is the future. Indeed, it is the litmus test that will teach us in real time what we can expect in the future when we withdraw completely. This being the case, Sderot should have been the apple of the eye of all those preaching withdrawal in the past, and of everyone who still believes in withdrawal. Sderot should have been the city of peace writers and peace singers and peace industrialists. A "peace now" city. A city of Israeli solidarity. A city of mutual responsibility. A city where strong Israelis stand together with Israelis who are less strong in the face of Islamic zealotry.

All this is not happening. Bank Hapoalim is funding the new emergency center there. But the large sum needed to renovate the city's shelters was raised by American evangelical Christians. The major community work in the city is being done by Hanan Porat. Yitzhak Mordechai is working in Sderot, and Arcadi Gaydamak is amusing himself there in the absence of the center of the country.

Enlightened, satiated Israel is not standing with all its strength behind Sderot.

The attack on Sderot is a strategic attack on peace. It is an attack on the two-state solution. If the attack succeeds, there will be no chance of any future withdrawal. If the attack succeeds, the occupation will be perpetuated. Therefore, before the great political decision is made on how to act in Gaza, a moral decision has to be made about Sderot. Sderot must become the national project of the current period. Its residents cannot be expected to confront the Qassams alone. In the face of buses removing people from the city, buses of supporters must set out for it. In the face of the economic collapse of Sderot should come an unprecedented economic embrace of it by government and nongovernment bodies alike.

At the same time, it should be made clear that there is one law for Sderot and Tzahala: A Qassam on Sderot is like a Qassam on Kikar Hamedina. The insensitivity has got to stop. Sderot has to be defined as the Israeli front line. The struggle for the city should be viewed as both a struggle for Israeli sovereignty and as a symbol of the responsibility of Israelis for each other.

Sderot is us, all of us. We rise and fall with Sderot.

2>No solutions to Qassams?
by Isi Leibler
May 30, 2007
http://www.leibler.com/article/165 and

Only tough military action can bring Palestinians to realization their lives will improve only if they rid themselves of leaders who believe terror will destroy us

One of the principal objectives of creating a Jewish state was to bring an end to 2000 years of Jewish powerlessness. Indeed, Israel today is recognized as a Middle East superpower. Yet our government stands impotent as missiles rain down on its territory and a border town is in the process of being evacuated, its inhabitants being transformed into refugees in their own land.

The die was cast when our government initially failed to take resolute deterrent action when the first Qassams were launched from the Gaza Strip. The world, and much of Israel too, became conditioned to the routine of missiles crashing down on Israeli citizens. In fact, until recently, our leaders had a habit of downplaying the Qassams as a "low-grade" threat, exemplified by the cynical Shimon Peres retort "Qassams Shmassam's" in response to appeals for action from Sderot residents.

Clearly the government would never have so casually dismissed complaints and displayed such restraint had the missiles had been targeted towards Ramat Aviv. Yet there is every probability that in the near future the range of the missiles will be extended, and Ashkelon and other more centrally located cities will become targets.

And who knows, Rabin Square might one day also be within range.

It is immoral and even obscene for our government to consciously delay tough responses against such aggression. What will it take to compel it to go over to the offensive - a missile strike on a kindergarten, on a hospital or a key infrastructure? Only a miracle has averted a calamity to date.

It is even more outrageous when we hear the mantra "There is no answer to Qassam attacks". The long-suffering citizens in Sderot are effectively being told by their government to stoically adjust their lifestyles to a regime of daily "Russian roulette" missile attacks or get out.

In the absence of a more potent pre emptive action, our emboldened enemies are gearing themselves to intensify their onslaughts as soon as they are satisfied that their offensive and defensive infrastructure has reached its peak. Last summer's Hezbollah imbroglio also demonstrated that the longer we wait, the worse the ultimate confrontation is likely to be, especially if future battles take place simultaneously on three fronts: Gaza, West Bank, South Lebanon (and possibly also Syria).

Painful questions

It is not surprising then, that for the first time, some Israelis have begun asking themselves painful questions about the long - term future of the country.

Before considering the various options that a responsible government should have implemented long ago, we should note that four axioms of classic Israeli strategy are currently being breached.

1. The IDF responsibility to protect its civilians, even at the price of painful casualties.
2. The strategy to confront the enemy on his own territory, not ours.
3. When necessary, defying America - even while seeking to maintain the alliance intact - when Israeli civilian lives are endangered or our security is compromised.
4. Never placating international public opinion when Israeli lives are endangered.

What should now be done?

Clearly a full-scale ground invasion of Gaza may ultimately be deemed necessary as a last option. But in the interim, there are calibrated responses that should be implemented immediately.

We must proclaim to the world that as of now we intend to respond as would any other nation whose citizens are under missile attack. We will endeavor to continue minimizing innocent civilian loss of life but we have resolved that if terrorists oblige us to choose between the lives of our citizens and those of Palestinians we will defend our own, irrespective of the consequences.

Netanyahu is correct in urging that in the wake of each individual missile attack, we should increasingly cut off electricity, fuel and water to the Palestinians and close border crossings. Will this harm innocent civilians? Yes. But it is surely high time for us to cease supplying services to neighbors whose leaders authorize missile attacks against us.

We may also be obliged to temporarily occupy slabs of Gaza territory to foil rocket attacks on border areas, including locations formerly inhabited by settlers before the disastrous unilateral disengagement.

In all likelihood we would also need to regain control of the Philadelphi corridor in order to contain the flow of lethal Iranian armaments pouring across the border.

Targeted assassinations should be intensified against those orchestrating the attacks including political leaders. We must even reconsider renewing artillery bombardment of locations from which missile attacks are initiated. As in all likelihood this will again incur civilian casualties and impact on the Palestinian infrastructure, we will undoubtedly be accused of responding "disproportionately". However proportionality is a philosophical concept and cannot be a prime consideration when endeavoring to create deterrence to offset unprovoked military attacks on civilians which are effectively acts of war.

As to morality, even setting aside comparisons to the behavior of other countries, there comes a point in a confrontation where one says "Enough is enough". That point has now been passed. In war a government must be motivated by one objective: to protect its civilians and minimize its military casualties. That must override public relations images. It would be consistent with international law, common sense, and morality.

The message to the Palestinians is neither brutal nor heartless. It is very simple and constructive: Stop directing missiles on our civilians or your civilians may also be harmed. In fact, a tough Israeli response could actually encourage Palestinians to bring pressure to bear on their leaders and may in the long run even save Palestinian lives.

We should avoid entering into any new fake truces which merely enable our enemies to regroup and prepare themselves for more intensive attacks at a time of their choosing. That applies especially when the Palestinian leaders openly boast that their non-negotiable objective remains to kill "the descendants of apes and pigs", and they constantly renew their irrevocable determination never to deviate from their commitment to destroy the Jewish state.

We must also dispel the illusion that negotiations with Jihadists can bear fruit. There has never been a single example of Islamic fundamentalists reaching an accord on the basis of negotiations or concessions. Likewise retreats and withdrawals under fire have consistently emboldened Jihadists into intensifying violence and have merely served as a prescription for greater future conflagrations.

Only tough military action can deter the terrorists and hopefully bring Palestinians to the realization that their bitter lives will only improve if they rid themselves of leaders who remain obsessed with the belief that violence and terror will destroy us.

The writer chairs the Diaspora-Israel relations committee of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and is a veteran international Jewish leader and can be reached on ileibler@netvison.net.il

Janet Lehr is editor/publisher of a daily e-mail called "Israel Lives." She can be contacted at israellives@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, May 31, 2007.
This was published in Ynet News.

During the past weeks, the relentless rocket fire on Sderot has made the lives of its residents insufferable. To ease their distress -- and show your support -- we invite you to volunteer in the town

"The reports in the media do not portray an accurate picture of the reality of life in Sderot," said Dror Marsha, the town's volunteer coordinator. "We deal with constant stress and anxiety, knowing that a rocket might fall on us at any given moment. Daily routine is at a standstill. Yet, the hardest thing we face is the feeling we were abandoned. We know people around the world care about us and follow the events, but the thing we need most is a feeling of solidarity, the human touch."

Since the situation in Sderot deteriorated, Marsha hasn't stopped running around town, trying to alleviate fears, support and help the elderly who are particularly vulnerable, hug the traumatized children and move the disabled to shelters away from the town. Yet, he is the first to admit that as time goes by, he too needs help. "Our job turned into 100 percent emergency care," he said. "All of us, social workers, education and welfare professionals, guides in the youth centers, and psychologists deal with nothing but emergencies. The continued attacks expose us to problems we were not aware of. We want to help but don't have the time."

To assist them, and to express solidarity and support the residents, Ynet and "Ruach Tova" organization invite you to volunteer. No need for professional experience or a long-term commitment. It's enough to visit a family, assist an elderly citizen with grocery shopping, or play with the children, to prove to the residents they are not alone. Following is a list of available volunteer projects in Sderot. Surely, you'll find one that fits you:

Home visits: Help those who fear leaving their house with grocery shopping, talk and listen to the people, show your support.

Elderly citizens: Help with chores, food and medicine shopping, support lonely people and alert the authorities in cases of emergency.

People with special needs and the disabled: There are about 1,500 people with special needs in Sderot. They need help with chores and would appreciate a visit.

Manning Sderot's 24 hours emergency center: Pinpointing needs, directing requests for assistance to the municipality and the welfare department.

Homes damaged by the rockets: Owners of homes that were hit by rockets have to clear the rubble themselves. Being there with them will help them deal with the situation and will be a great practical help.

Children: The children of Sderot suffer from anxiety and stress emphasized, in many instances, by their parents' distress. Distract them, even for an hour, by playing with them or reading a story to them.

Preparing shelters: There are 22 shelters in Sderot but only two are operational. The rest must be fixed and cleaned so they could be used.

Want to help? Email: info@ruachtova.org and "Ruach Tova " staff will contact you. For further information call: 1-700-505-202

Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 31, 2007.

As I've noted several times, Hillel Halkin starts most of his NY Sun Op.-Eds. on a agreeable level, but almost invariably turns it into a poor rationalization for ceding territory to the Arabs. On 5/15, he points out that much of the land annexed to Jerusalem has large numbers of Arabs and no particular historical value. Give those up, he suggests. He assuages concerns of religious and nationalist Jews by adding that such areas do not contain the historical areas in the Old City.

Then he comes up with a new argument for giving away the most historically and religiously significant area in the Old City, the Temple Mount. He admits it is 'a sacred Jewish site.' He should say it is the 'most sacred Jewish site.' It also is holy to Christianity, for which he expresses no consideration. He then contends that it is holiest to Muslims. 'If Israel is ever to arrive at an understanding with the Muslim world, this will have to be one that places the Temple Mount ' as in any case is de facto even today ' in Muslim hands.' He regrets the decision of several dozen Orthodox rabbis to permit Jews to ascend the Temple Mount.

To partly hang his case on the peg of de facto Muslim control is the old ploy of citing one improper appeasement as precedent and justification for another. Two wrongs do not make a right.

To argue that Jerusalem means more to Islam than to Judaism is to distort the history of Jerusalem, Judaism, and Islam that Mr. Halkin writes about elsewhere with familiarity. The city's history shows it central to Judaism, whose Bible mentions it hundreds of times, and peripheral to Islam, whose Koran does not mention it at all. If it weren't for the tendency of sentimental but strategically foolish people to try to equate differing religions in the hope of making them seem harmonious, we would not have been subject to years of false statements about the city being equally holy to the three faiths.

Halkin goes further, in claiming more interest on the part of Islam. Historically, the Muslims offered and sometimes gave Jerusalem it to people of other faiths. In periods not inflamed by active jihad, they have acknowledged the city and the whole country as properly that of the Jews. When the Muslims don't have Jerusalem, or are in a particularly active rivalry with the other faiths, then they want it. Hence, Arafat made a fuss over it. Was his fuss sincere or did he claim religious entitlement just as a tactic for cutting the sacred ground out from under the Jewish state. Without Jerusalem, there isn't as much justification for a Jewish state. Surely Halkin knows that! He also must know that the prospect of Judaism 'coming to an understanding with Islam,' whose central thesis is that once Islam conquered an area, it must retain it, etc., is practically nil. Rather, Islam forces us to fight back for survival. Since Israel manages the Temple

Mount considerately for Muslims, Muslims don't need to control it. They exert their de facto control to bar Jews. They wouldn't respect Jews who submit to Islamic dominance, which is to say, injustice.


The head of Hizbullah boasted that his organization now has tens of thousands of rockets, compared with the 12,000 before the last war. He also mocked Israel's claims that the war pushed them northward and the armistice has kept them there. He asserted that Hizbullah has its men in their villages on the border. That would deny the supposed wartime gains claimed by PM Olmert (IMRA, 5/14) and Foreign Min. Livni.


Al Awda is an Islamist organization whose events are co-sponsored by various groups that support Hamas and its terrorism, etc. Al Awda and the like have been using public universities' free or low-cost facilities and availability of student audiences to stage hate campaigns against the US and Israel as if an academic event. Most college administrations have gone along with it. Finally, Rutgers barred one such event and now UC Riverside set reasonable standards.

Although university facilities are public ones, previous Al Awda 'conventions' restricted entry to approved persons, had Islamist 'security guards' follow and harass reporters and whoever took notes or asked questions, and prohibited cameras and recorders that might show outsiders Islamist hatred. This time, UC Riverside did not allow religious or ideological grounds for refusing entry, provided campus guards, and allowed cameras and recorders. Unable to control the event totally, and faced with public scrutiny, Al Awda turned to private rental.

The latest convention was to train and set strategy for illegally boycotting US and Jewish Israeli businesses and to help Hamas destroy Israel. Al Awda's motto, 'from the river to the sea,' reflects its goal of Muslim control over Israel.

Al Awda attributed the change in venue to the university's setting new fees amounting to thousands of dollars (if so, the report above should have mentioned it), a requirement that Zionists be allowed to attend (what is this world coming to?), and permission for people to film the event which Al Awda calls 'intimidation' (IMRA, 5/15 from Stop the ISM Team).

They didn't say why it intimidates them. Could it be that public scrutiny would inhibit their usual exhortations to murder?


Al-Qaeda overplayed its hand. They no longer can bribe tribal leaders. All over Iraq, now, tribal leaders are turning on al-Qaeda and working with US forces to defeat it. This cooperation is in its early stages (Eli Lake, NY Sun, 5/14, p.1).

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 richardshulman5verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, May 31, 2007.

Portraying Israeli civilians as weak and cowardly is part of a pattern by Hamas and Fatah Palestinian Authority figures. As Qassam rocket strikes continue in the Israeli city of Sderot, Hamas gloats over the fear among the city's residents.

The front page of the Hamas-controlled official paper, Al-Risalah, flaunts a photo of Israeli civilians in Sderot hiding under a car during a rocket strike. A large caption over the photo reads "Fleeing from Qassam."

The related article includes another photo of a crying Israeli woman in shock after a rocket attack, with the caption, "A settler cries in Sderot moments after a rocket strike by the resistance." Note that all Israelis, even within the 1967 borders, are presented as "settlers" -- a term Palestinians use to denote illegitimacy of Israel's existence.

The following is an excerpt from the article:

Headline: "The resistance threatened for more: Al-Qassam rockets devastate settlements and force its residents to leave"

"...dozens of the residents of Sderot city barged into the office of the mayor, Eli Moyal, requesting to be evacuated from the city, exposed to Palestinian rocket strikes...

The Israeli ministry of war [sic] evacuated over a thousand people and transferred them from the city of Sderot to vacation resorts, which it [the ministry] rented for that purpose. This in spite of the government's official announcement of its refusal to evacuate the [residents of] the city..." [Al-Risalah, May 21, 2007]

The pride and the gloating expressed by Hamas, seeing Israeli civilians as weak and afraid, continue the pattern of similar sentiments expressed by previous Palestinian leaders.

Ahmad Yassin, founder and former head of Hamas, said in 2004: "Sharon said yesterday that 'Nezarim [Israeli town in Gaza Strip] is [like] Tel Aviv.' Today he says: 'The day is near when we will leave Gaza.' That's it, it's lost, Tel Aviv is gone. They are defeated, they have no words left... When this process will end, they will become a state with no ability, helpless. They established a state to protect the Jews from death and murder. If death and murder chase them in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Netanya and everywhere among them, then they will say: 'What am I doing here? I founded a state to protect me from death, and if death chases me, I want to flee and go back to Europe and America." [broadcast on Al-Aqsa TV, March 2007]

About 2,500 out of Sderot's 20,000 residents have left the city -- there was no official evacuation -- due to persistent rocket attacks. Palestinians have fired 1,600 rockets since Israel left the Gaza Strip in August 2005.

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.

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 31, 2007.

TO: webmaster@freemuslims.com

Dear Mr. Kamal,

Thank you for your very elicidating analysis of suicide bombings in the context of Muslim theology. I most sincerely hope that many Muslims world-wide read it and appreciate the insightfulness of your critique.

I do indeed think that it is an excellent idea to educate that 20% of American Muslims who are unclear as to the deeply evil and nihilistic nature of suicide bombings.

The questions that I must raise regarding your article, however, fall in to two categories:

1.) Just who will do this educating, how, where and when?

As I recall, the majority of mosques in the USA are funded and run by Wahhabi forces based in Saudi Arabia. These mosques and their associated madaras seem to have no intention of supporting the kind of education that you are recommending. Their leaders, and the leaders of other Muslim high-profile and very active organizations such as CAIR and WAMY and MSU are all very supportive of el-qaeda and Hamas and Hezbollah and Iran. They are not likely to take upon themselves the mantle of the enlightened education that you recommend.

Who then, are the '....Muslim leaders (who) must use theological arguments to discredit and condemn those who selectively justify suicide bombings...'?

And how many of these leaders are indeed willing to agree that '.....suicide bombings are wrong in all instances and (that).....they must include the 'I' word (Israel).'?

Sentiment against Israel is so strong, so vituprative, so extreme, in so much of Muslim society world-wide that I cannot help but wonder not only who will be willing to teach that suicide bombings in Israel are wrong...but also,who of that 20% in need of education will listen.

A good case in point is the anti-Israel hate-fest-week of hate-speech and hate-teach and hate-preach at the U. C. Irvine campus. Young, Muslim, seemingly Americanized and westernized and moderate students, intelligent enough to get in to college, enthusiastically buy in to the mindless and irrational (bordering on psychotic in my opinion) hatred that eternalizes the Arab-Israel conflict and nihilistically denies any possibility for peace, except the destruction of Israel and the genocide of its Jews.

So, where will these moderate Muslim teachers teach? Where will they preach? Who will pay them to do this teaching? How will they attract students to their classes? And how will they rebut, combat, and defeat the teachings of the more high-profile and seemingly main-stream (and apparently very well funded) more extremist Muslim associations and organizations which demand more suicide bombings and more terrorist jihad until the ''West is won'' and the long-awaited dream of Allah's supremacy over the entire world is finally realized?

Your idea sounds wonderful in theory, and I applaud you for publishig it. But how can it be put in to practise in the real American Muslim world where, while 80% may be nice loyal honest sincere law-abiding hard-working productive moderate Americans, the ruling and influencial and high-profile Muslim institutions are dominated by extremist terrorist jihadist Islamo-fascist forces?

2.) And speaking of putting your idea in to practise:

I have written before about the impact that serious social action against Muslim extremism and its state supporters is likely to make. Such actions as described below were taken in the 1970s by Jewish leaders on behalf of imprisoned Soviet Jewry, and had a very strong effect upon the Soviet Union, such that millions of Jews were allowed to leave. These types of actions do work.

Have you given any thought to such very pragmatic, and quite do-able, activities such as:

a.) dozens, scores, hundreds or maybe even thousands of Muslims demonstrating in front of the embassys of Libya, Syria, Arabia, Iran, or in front of the sub-consular office of the Palestinian Authority....demanding the end to terrorism...all terrorism, world wide....and thus, too, an end to jihad as it is currently practised by Muslim terrorists.

b.) Muslim religious leaders handcuffing themselves to these embassys' gates and doors, insisting that they will not be moved until these embassys' governments take steps to end their support for el-qaeda and other aspects of world-wide Muslim terror jihad...a jihad which is claiming now far more Muslim victims than non-Muslim ones.

c.) supportive Muslim donors taking out full-page ads in the NY Times, LA Times, Washington Post, Philadelphia Inquirer, Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune, San Franciso Chronicle, Baltimore Sun, as well as Canadian and UK newspapers (the Guardian and the Independent come to mind). These ads would have copy and photos decrying the evils of terrorism, the fundamentally evil and illegal nature of suicide bombings, and the need for Muslim leaders world-wide to speak out against Osama and Zawahiri and Hamas and Hezbollah and Iran (all such terror jihad sponsors being named by name).

d.) Muslim religious and social leaders requesting (and such requests would most likely be honored) air time on TV and Radio talk shows and news programs so that they could use the media of TV and Radio to send the same anti-terror-jihad and anti-terrorism and anti-suicide-bombing messages in 'c' to the entire Muslim world.

e.) And pursuant to 'c' and 'd', those same Muslim leaders in those same venues also sending the message to our federal and state governments that America's Muslims (or at least 80% of them) support our government's defensive measures against air-piracy and terrorist infiltration and against the Muslim terrorist rhetoric of terrorist jihad and diatribe of annihilation in mosquese and madaras and colleges and on the internet.

f.) And pursuant to 'c' and 'd', those same muslim leaders in those same venues also sending the message to Muslim students on all campuses nation-wide and in Canada and the UK that it is time to end the hate-speech and hate-preach and hate-teach; and instead start working with Jewish and Israeli groups on campuses to devise programs for peace and cooperation and co-existence for the benefit of both sides.

g.) And pursuant to 'e', those same Muslim leaders using the internet to sent the same anti-terrorist-jihad messages world-wide via viral emal and websites and e-newsletters and e-sermons and internet chat rooms and internet educational facilities.

and, finally, maybe...

h.) A million Muslim march (remember the African-American 'Million Man March'?) to the site of the Twin Towers, with placards and posters demanding an end to terrorism, an end to 'bin-Ladenism', an end to Hamas and Hezbollah and the scores of other Muslim terror armies that assault the world....in short, an end to terrorist jihad as it is practised by Muslim terrorists throughout the world for the past 30 years.

All of these ('a' through 'h') are consistent with the religious ideology that you adumbrate in your essay below. They would most certainly be a very effective pragmatic application of your idea to the real world of that misguided 20% of young American Muslims today, who desperately need guidance and education in to the humanitarian values of the west which are wholeheartedly embraced and shared by the radiant face of Islam.

Your thoughts?

David Meir-Levi

Subject: American Muslims, Israel, and Suicide Bombings
From: media@freemuslims.org
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 01:33:18 -0400

A recent survey by the Pew Research Center about American Muslims was received favorably by many Muslims and apprehensively by many non-Muslims.

The surveys revealed that more than 80% of American Muslims blend comfortably into American society and that they have a broad willingness to adopt American customs, work ethics and are generally optimistic about America. It also revealed an American Muslim population that is religious, diverse, socially conservative and politically liberal. Nearly eight in ten U.S. Muslims say they are either happy or 'very happy.' They believe Muslims coming to the United States should try to adopt American customs rather than separating from the larger society.

The study also revealed that two percent of young Muslims under 30 believe that suicide bombings to defend their religion can often be justified while 13 percent of those under 30 believe that suicide attacks to defend their religion can sometimes be justified. Moreover, the study revealed that five percent expressed 'even somewhat favorable' opinions of al-Qaida. Not surprisingly, some Muslims and many non-Muslims were concerned by this revelation. The New York Post went as far as editorializing 'TIME BOMBS IN OUR MIDST.'

So why do many American Muslims appear less concerned with the minority and instead are focusing on the 87% of Muslims who condemn suicide bombings? One reason is that many Muslim groups feel vindicated or affirmed since they have always asserted that the majority of American Muslims assimilate easily, are law abiding, and peace loving. Moreover, Muslim groups believe that those who recognize exceptions to Islam's prohibition against suicide do not pose an immanent threat because those young people were responding to a theoretical question about the emotional issue of protecting their religion. Muslim groups argue that those who justify suicide bombings are incorrectly interpreting Islam and that they can be reeducated about the issue of suicide bombings.

Assuming Muslim groups are correct in their analysis of the poll, and they maybe, one must ask why is it that there are any Muslims who would justify suicide bombings in the name of Islam when Islam has always had a clear prohibition against suicide?

The answer is that the minority of Muslims who justify suicide bombings evolved from a recent trend in which some Islamic political movements and leaders began sending mixed messages about the use of suicide military operations. Over the last 20 years, some Muslim leaders have sanctioned suicide military operations when they believed that a particular cause is just but rejected suicide as un-Islamic in other instances. To get around the Koran's prohibition against suicide some Islamic leaders repackaged suicide bombings by calling them martyrdom operations and argued that such tactics are similar to 'a mission impossible,' that has been used by modern militaries for centuries. Moreover, they argue that in a war where the 'oppressor' possesses superior military capabilities, martyrdom operations are essential. Further, they argue that since the goal of the Muslim soldier is not to kill himself but to defend himself against an enemy who is trying to kill him or steal his property, martyrdom operations do not constitute suicide.

These arguments were given prominence in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict by prominent Islamic personalities who provided moral cover for HAMAS in its use of suicide bombings against Israel based on Israel's alleged persecution of the Palestinians and Israel's military superiority.

So what to do now? For the benefit of the American Muslim communities and the world at large, Muslim leaders must use theological arguments to discredit and condemn those who selectively justify suicide bombings. It is dangerous to argue that suicide bombings are wrong in most instances and justify them when the intended target is seen as an oppressor. All evidence indicates that those who commit suicide military operations believe that they are fighting for a just cause. If societies made exceptions for the select use of suicide when the target is an 'oppressor' then other groups may want an exception for their 'just cause' or 'oppressor' who maybe a Muslim.

Muslim religious leaders must be making clear that suicide bombings are wrong in all instances and when they do they must include the 'I' word (Israel). This is important because most Muslims are passionate about the belief that Israel is an oppressor and it is because of these deep emotions about Israel that Muslim leaders must specifically mention Israel by name when condemning suicide bombings.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul Lademain, May 31, 2007.

... while Israeli civilians die at the hands of hostile forces.

Why does Olmert hesitate? Is it because he's a cocktail-swilling jet-setter? Or is it because the old boy cannot defend Israeli civilians because he is still searching for a magic word for the arab invaders?

Does he say they are Hamas? Or is this too narrow? Or not quite true? "Maybe al Qaeda is involved? So How can I say these arabs are Hamas? Maybe I should call them "hostile forces?"

O Dear! Now the poor old boy has to choose: "Let's see ... how do I choose? Right! Call a meeting. But first, gotta call and tell the Egyptians that I am going to first hold a meeting. Then maybe in the meanwhile the shelling will stop. Ooopsy, the Arabs just killed another Israeli. Now I gotta start all over again. What should I call them? I cannot order the IDF to retaliate unless I can find a name for these arabs ..."

Poor Israel. Their leadership. So talkative. So enfeebled by a compulsion to find just the right word to use for their enemy.

Jeez. Any Irishman would have destroyed every Gaza Arab the instant an Arab lobbed a rocket into Israel; an Irishman or a Turk wouldn't hesitate to make the arab civilians pay with their lives for harboring the treacherous Islamics. An Irishman would save his people reflexively--no talk, no babbling, no knishing, no groveling, no weeping, no analysis-paralysis.

And that is why the UN exploits Jews ... because Jews "exercise restraint" when bullied and humiliated and spit upon, and especially because the loudest fools amongst them aspire to be saviors of the very same people who are determined to exterminate them.

Contact Paul Lademain at lademain@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 31, 2007.

There seems to be a lot of momentum right now to negotiate our way out of war.
We sat down with Iran this week.
We are pressuring Israel to make more concessions to the Palestinians.
The White House recently completed a deal with North Korea.
The list goes on and on.

Today we got the reaction to all this talk from Adam Gadahn, a California-born convert to Islam who is the public face of Al Qaeda in the U.S.

He said on an Internet videotape that unless we meet Al Qaeda's demands we will "experience things which will make you forget about the horrors of September 11th, Afghanistan and Iraq, and Virginia Tech." He then listed Al Qaeda's demands that included removing every U.S. soldier from any Muslim land, ending all support for Israel, banning all American Jews from leaving the U.S. to live in Israel, the release of all Muslim prisoners held by us or anyone else, etc, etc, etc.

If anyone believes that answering these demands would end the war with Islamofascism, they are naïve.

Iran's "president" has already demanded that we convert to Islam or die. And how long would it be before they demanded we turn American Jews over to the jihadists?

If we think this challenge can be solved by diplomats instead of warriors, we have a dark future ahead.

Are We Prepared?

Two incidents have come to light that seriously question our post-9/11 level of preparation.

The first is dominating the news today: How did a man with an extremely virulent form of drug-resistant tuberculosis manage to get on two trans-Atlantic flights and enter the country by car from Canada?

The government has now issued its first quarantine order in more than 40 years, and health officials all over the world are rushing to track down and test more than 100 passengers and crew. The man reportedly had been ordered not to fly, but he disputes that. But this incident clearly has implications for the debate on border control and the war against Islamofascism, which leads to the second item.

An article in today's Washington Times follows up on the disturbing events that occurred on 2004 Northwest Airlines Flight 327 from Detroit to Los Angeles involving 13 Middle Eastern men traveling on expired visas, which were renewed in spite of background checks that turned up positive hits on eight of the men in the FBI's database.

After years of denying the events and even launching character attacks against the passengers who spoke up, there is now an official report stating that there was in fact a dry run on Flight 327 probing our security.

But why did the government try to deny it in the first place and impugn the character of its own citizens in the process?

As conservatives, we are skeptical of big government because it breeds bureaucracy, and bureaucracy inevitably makes things worse. But the one area where government is necessary is national defense, and here is more evidence of bureaucratic incompetence.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 31, 2007.
May 31, 2007


In Hebrew it's called shtuyote, and that is what I'm seeing. But it's hardly benign nonsense -- it's a patently ridiculous way of handling things that leads to risks for our nation.

Olmert is seeking a way to stop the launching of Kassams into Israeli territory without taking the strong defensive measures that are actually required to do this. His latest gambit is to suggest that there's interest in the Arab League "peace plan," but that we can't talk about it until the Kassams stop.

Said Olmert yesterday, in a meeting with four Congressmen: "We see a tangible change in the Arab position by virtue of the fact that 22 Arab countries are looking for a way to make peace with Israel, not war." But, he indicated, it was impossible to hold serious negotiations on this while the Kassams were flying.

Does he really believe that 22 Arab nations want to make peace with Israel? Does he not see that what they are offering is not "peace" but an agreement that would weaken Israel substantially -- that they are simply seeking to do us in without the war?

Remember, the Arab League plan calls for us to withdraw to the untenable pre-67 borders, which means surrendering Judea & Samaria and every community there, eastern Jerusalem with the Kotel and the Temple Mount, and the Golan Heights, and taking in Palestinian Arab "refugees" as well. Even if this were modified somewhat (something the Arabs said they wouldn't do: it was "take it or leave it"), it is unlikely that modifications would be sufficient to make this acceptable.

So that's the first thing wrong with what Olmert seems to be suggesting.


But it's only the first thing: There is also the issue of whether the Arab League could stop the Kassams even if they tried to. Egypt, which feels threatened by the Gaza unrest, has been remarkably unsuccessful in effecting changes. Those shooting the Kassams don't want to see peace with Israel. Why would they cooperate with something that ostensibly leads in that direction? The nations supporting the terrorists in Gaza -- Iran and Syria -- who would command some attention, don't want to see peace here either.


And lastly, and perhaps most importantly, is the tendency of the Olmert government to rely on the international community in one context or another, to do our defensive work for us. Time was when we defended ourselves. Anything less is a disaster. For we become a vulnerable vassal state, without independent deterrent power. I return time and again to the example of what happened in Lebanon: Instead of continuing with strength to seriously weaken or take out Hezbollah, we opted for "the diplomatic option" a la Tzipi Livni, and hoped that UNIFIL would prevent smuggling of arms from Syria, block return of Hezbollah to the south of Lebanon, etc. Ha! (See more on this below.)


Olmert is avoiding a ground operation, in spite of the fact that the Kassams are still coming and persons as knowledgeable as Gen. Moshe Ya'alon say it is essential -- that only ground forces can do what needs to be done in cleaning out the terrorist infrastructure. But even without doing that, there are a great many things that might be done to show additional toughness on our part.

MK Avigdor Lieberman (Yisrael Beitenu) has now made a few suggestions: Declare Gaza a hostile entity and isolate it, allowing it no contact with Judea and Samaria. Refuse all contact with Abbas. Deny all visitor rights to the Palestinians in prison in Israel (did you know that their families visit them regularly?) until Shalit is released. Refuse to use Ashdod as a port for receiving materials destined for Gaza or shipping out materials from Gaza. And so forth.

We won't do these things, because the world will scream "humanitarian crisis," blaming us rather than Hamas for the problems that would ensue. Last time we did a major operation into Gaza -- when Shalit was kidnapped -- we hit a major transformer there, so that the flow of electric power to the people was reduced (not stopped entirely). The carrying on by the Palestinians, as well as UNRWA, was considerable. I know from IDF contacts that the degree of emergency was considerable exaggerated. Olmert worries about being seen as the "bad guy." He does not withstand international pressure well.


So where does that leave us? Resembling sitting ducks.

In 1970, the Palestinians in Jordan, where the PLO was headquartered under Arafat, tried to take over the country. King Hussein massacred thousands and then drove many more from the country. No international uproar. This was only Arabs killing Arabs. The uproar is saved for every miniscule action that Israel takes against Arabs.

What country in the world would tolerate what we are dealing with now, without mounting a major action? This inability to forcefully defend ourselves is most worrisome -- indicative of a sick mentality, lacking in national self-esteem.

Are there innocent Palestinian Arabs in Gaza? Certainly. And we bend over backwards to avoid damaging them. But in war it happens that innocents are sometimes hurt. Preventing their produce from leaving via Ashdod to be sold elsewhere would be small potatoes compared, say, with carpet bombing of their villages or other wholesale aggressive actions we never take. Our innocents in Sderot and surrounding areas are certainly hurting, and it is our responsibility to protect them.


Ultimately, however, this is not just about stopping the Kassams. It's important to realize this. It's about deterrence power and the way our enemies perceive us. If we are weak here, they gear up to hit us in other ways, convinced that we are vulnerable and can be defeated. Weakness here puts us at further existential risk. We cannot afford weakness.


Here's what we face from the world: The Quartet -- the US, the UN, the EU, and Russia -- met in Berlin yesterday to discuss the situation in the Middle East. This morning they released a statement. Yes, they condemned the Kassam attacks and said Shalit should be released -- none of which makes a particle of difference to those launching Kassams and holding Shalit.

However, they said Israel must use restraint in responding to Kassam attacks, so that civilians are not hurt and there would not be "damage to civilian infrastructure." Now, I put it to you: The terrorists deliberately shoot from civilian areas. They don't care about civilian damage. How are we supposed to respond without ever damaging "civilian infrastructure"? The members of Hamas must be laughing their heads off at this.

And there's more: The Quartet registered concern about that fact that we have arrested several Hamas members of the PA government, whom our government says have terrorist connections. And they think we should be releasing customs tax funds we are holding, so that the Palestinian economy can improve. In other words, business as usual -- without even economic repercussions -- for the PA, even while the Kassams continue.


Putting it bluntly, Condoleezza Rice makes me sick to my stomach. My patience with putting it more politely has worn thin.

Speaking today in Vienna, she said that she sees hopeful signs for progress in forging peace here. The two-state solution, she said, was "one of the centerpieces" of our [i.e., US] policy. The way she sees it, this is a "time of opportunity." If she were an ordinary citizen, and not secretary of state, and made statements as out of touch with reality as this within a different context, her mental stability might be questioned.

Need I say it again? That the PA is growing ever more radical and intransigent, and wants Israel destroyed, and has no intention of genuinely forging peace with Israel?


Rice also recently made a comment about possible Israeli-Syrian negotiations, suggesting they were premature and saying that "There's no substitute for trying to get to the place where the Palestinians finally have their state."

But this leads to consideration of what's going on with the possibility of Israeli negotiations with Syria. The US -- with Rice at the forefront -- has sent out mixed signals in this regard. Syria was thoroughly ostracized by the US for a time, and the message was firm that they prefer we have nothing to do with this member of the axis of terrorist-supporting regimes; there was particular hostility to Syria in the US because of terrorists hitting US soldiers in Iraq who had come out of Syria. But of recent there's been a softening of this position on the part of the US, with some mixed messages being sent out. Earlier this month, Rice met with Syrian foreign minister, Wallid Mua'alem, in Egypt.

This subtle shift was followed by a hint of a possible policy shift here in Israel. Until very recently, Olmert was adamant that Syria wanted a peace process (to take the heat off ) and not peace, and that there would be no negotiations. But now, according to The Jerusalem Post, Olmert has sent a third party, who remains unidentified, to check out what Syria would offer, while Olmert's spokesperson, Miri Eisen, has now said that Olmert has always indicated that he is "in favor of peace with Syria." Reportedly, Olmert would require Syria to cut ties with Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran as a pre-condition to negotiations, so negotiations are not likely to start tomorrow.


When news of a possible shift in the Israeli position emerged, there were two suggestions as to why this might be happening. One, as mentioned above, was the reduced opposition by the US to contact with Syria, as evidenced by Rice's meeting with Mual'alem. And two was -- are you ready? -- the fact that the possibility for a negotiated settlement with the PA was dim now and we cannot stagnate, so we need to move on another front.

Here is a stunning example of dangerous shtuyote: The idea that even if neither party is genuinely interested in peace, we have to move ahead negotiating somewhere, so as to not be doing nothing.


Olmert just the other day explained to the Knesset that he doesn't have to resign over the Lebanon war because it wasn't really a failure, as Hezbollah was moved out of south Lebanon.

Well, Shaul Mofaz (Kadima), formerly defense minister and now minister of transportation, has countered the claims of the head of his party in an interview on Israel Radio. Hezbollah has essentially returned to the strength it had before the war, he says, and we should not be deceived by an apparent absence of positions in the south of Lebanon. They are digging underground, and are close to the Israeli border.


With all of the talk about maybe peace here, maybe peace there, we are in the midst of a schizoid situation. The Home Front command, it has been announced, is going to be preparing the public for all out war.


Norway has resume direct aid to the PA, and will be providing $10 million.


Britain is the worst. Because of the laxness of restrictions and a politically correct mind-set, it is the European country most infiltrated by radical Muslims.

Baroness Caroline Cox and Dr. John Marks, who co-authored The West, Islam, and Islamism, are currently attending a conference at Bar Ilan University, and were interviewed by Ynet.

According to Cox, "Britain has become a base for training and teaching militant Islam," and moderate Muslims who speak out face threats.

As evidence of the degree of radical Muslim infiltration in Britain, Cox shared the case of Salah Idris, whose Sudanese pharmaceutical factory was destroyed by the US in the late 1990s because it was linked with al-Qaeda. Idris is today a shareholder in two high-tech security firms that provide security for the British parliament, UK military bases, and 11 nuclear installations.

"When we brought this matter to the attention of the authorities, we were told there was no cause for concern."

According to Marks, textbooks being used in Saudi-funded Muslim schools in Britain utilize the "same anti-Semitic texts based on the Koran that you find in Palestinian Hamas schools."

Of particular concern is the assessment by Cox that British educational institutions have been infiltrated, and that college campuses are key sites for recruitment.

These experts believe that British citizens who are radical Muslims present a security threat to Israel, and, of course, also to Great Britain, where it is likely only a matter of time before there is another terrorist attack.

Time is running out. Will Britain wake up before it's too late? And will the rest of the western world, including the US, draw lessons from this situation?


Given the above, is it any wonder that every Monday and Thursday another group in Britain takes a stand against Israel?

On Wednesday, the University and College Union of Great Britain -- which represents 120,000 British college teachers -- asked members to "consider the moral implications of existing and proposed links with Israeli academic institutions" and endorsed the idea of a boycott. This was not an actual boycott, but rather a recommendation that individual members consider boycotting. The fallout from this has been considerable.

Now the largest labor union in Britain, UNISON, is threatening to boycott Israeli products, with a vote to take place in mid-June. Attempts are being made now to avert this, as it would also mean that British union pension funds would no longer invest in Israel.


The wheeling and dealing is considerable, but no word yet on who will support whom (Ayalon or Barak) in the Labor party run-off.


Oh joy. Olmert and Abbas will be meeting next week, somewhere in a PA area (presumably but not necessarily Ramallah). This is the first meeting they will have had since April, even though they were, in accordance with an agreement with Rice, supposed to meet every two weeks.

This is bad news because on June 19 Olmert is invited to the White House, where bi-lateral ties and other issues will be discussed. Guaranteed. Guaranteed. Olmert will be forthcoming with Abbas so as to come to Bush with evidence of his efforts for "peace." To show he's a good guy.

Remember that in a recent press conference Bush led with comments about Palestinian suffering because of roadblocks.

As I said, Oh joy.

Arlene Kushner is Senior Research Associate, Center for Near East Policy Research, Beit Agron International Press Center, Jerusalem, Israel. Contact her at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Simon McIlwaine, May 31, 2007.

This article is by Leo McKinstry; it appeared today in the Daily Express

ANTI-RACISM is supposed to be one of the guiding principles of our society, preventing discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin or nationality. Yet it is a bizarre paradox of modern Britain that there is now a climate of increasing hostility towards Jews, particularly in those Left-wing intellectual circles which otherwise make a fetish of their concern for racial sensitivities.

Dressed up as criticism of the state of Israel, anti-Semitism is becoming not just tolerated but even fashionable in some of our civic institutions, including the universities and parts of the media.

Thanks to the Left's neurotic hatred of Israel, we now have the extraordinary sight of self-styled liberal campaigners launching McCarthyite witch-hunts against anyone deemed to have Israeli connections, as in this week's debate at the University and College Union's annual conference at Bourne-mouth calling for a boycott of all Israeli academic institutions.

Respect for democracy, individual rights and freedom of speech are being crushed beneath the juggernaut of shrill indignation.

What is particularly disturbing is the way opposition to the Jewish state descends into vicious antagonism against Jews themselves, as shown by this sickening recent outburst from writer Pamela Hardyment, a member of the National Union of Journalists, which in April voted to boycott Israeli goods.

Explaining her support for the NUJ's stance, Ms Hardyment described Israel as "a wonderful Nazi-like killing machine backed by the world's richest Jews".

Then, like some lunatic from the far-Right, she referred to the "so-called Holocaust" before concluding: "Shame on all Jews, may your lives be cursed."

Such words could have come straight from Hitler or the most fervent supporter of Osama Bin Laden.

But Ms Hardyment is hardly unique.

This sort of seething resentment can be found throughout the Left, whether in demands that Israel be treated as a pariah state or in connivance at anti-Semitic propaganda. Typical of this approach was the opinion of Ulster poet and darling of the BBC Tom Paulin, who once argued that "Jewish settlers in Israel should be shot dead. They are Nazis, racists. I feel nothing but hatred for them."

Yet Paulin would no doubt be outraged if some English extremist uttered the same sentiments about radical Muslims settling in Britain.

One of the most nauseating rhetorical devices used by hysterical campaigners such as Paulin and Hardyment is to draw an analogy between the Nazi regime and the modern government of Israel.

Such a link is not only historically absurd, since Israel is by far the most democratic and liberal country in the Middle East, but it is also offensive because it demonises the Jews and devalues the horror of the Holocaust.

The pretence that Israel's actions in its own defence against Islamic terrorists are somehow the equivalent of Nazi Germany's gas chambers is a lie worthy of Dr Goebbels himself. And the tragedy is that this continual assault on Israel has led to a rise in anti-Semitism in Britain, much of it fuelled by Islamic radicals.

In 2006 there were 594 anti-Semitic race-hate incidents in this country, a 31 per cent rise on 2005 and the highest total since records began in 1984.

I should perhaps stress that I do not come from a Jewish family. Like Tom Paulin, I hail from the Belfast middle-class. But I have been repelled by the anti-Semitism - disguised as support for the Palestinians - of parts of the British Left.

I first became aware of this nasty phenomenon when, in 1985, I attended the annual conference of the National Union of Students at Blackpool. There I was appalled to hear delegates calling for a ban on student Jewish societies, on the grounds that because such groups supported the state of Israel they were essentially fascistic in nature.

Yet, more than 20 years later, this sort of intolerance is no longer confined to the student debating floor. It now exists in large swathes of education, the press and the arts.

The boycott of Israel by academics was started by Professor Stephen Rose of the Open University, like Paulin another BBC favourite, who told his colleagues that "you have no right to treat Israel as if it were a normal state".

The boycott is now so widespread that, in one grotesque incident, an Israeli PhD student had his application for Oxford initially rejected purely because he had served in his country's army.

The professor dealing with the case, Andrew Wilkie, said he had "a huge problem with Israelis taking the moral high ground from their appalling treatment in the Holocaust and then inflicting gross human rights abuses on Palestinians".

Professor Wilkie would not have dreamt of turning down a Zim-babwean because of Mugabe's tyranny, or a Chinese applicant because of his own opposition to the occupation of Tibet.

This is what is so contemptible about the intellectuals' fixation with Israel.

They are guilty of the most bizarre double standards.

While they scream about the Jewish state, they remain silent about human rights abuses carried out by brutal regimes across the world.

And it is ironic that, on the day the lecturers debated a boycott of Israel, they also voted to refuse to co-operate with any attempt to crack down on radical Islam on campuses, claiming such a move would be an infringement of free speech.

Given some of the lecturers' enthusiasm for silencing Israeli opinion such a position is laughable in its hypocrisy.

United by anti-Semitism, the bigots of the academic Left and Muslim fundamentalism are destroying freedom of thought in this country.

Contact Simon McIlwaine at Simon.McIlwaine@ormerods.co.uk or visit the website at: www.anglicansforisrael.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gerald M. Steinberg, May 31, 2007.

This appeared in Jewish News (UK) and is archived at http://faculty.biu.ac.il/~steing/occupation_myths.pdf

While Israel celebrates 40 years of a reunited Jerusalem and what many still see as a miraculous victory that reversed Nasser's threat to "push the Jews into the sea", the Palestinians are celebrating 40 years of "occupation" slogans. This rhetoric has provided them with a political victory that has significantly offset the defeat of the Arab armies on the battlefield. And by erasing everything that came before the 1967 war, including the years of warfare, terror following the violent Arab rejection of the 1947 UN partition resolution, Israel's enemies have managed to rewrite history.

This "victory" on the battlefront of narratives and public relations that fuels the various boycott campaigns that are being conducted, particularly by British trade unions. The obsessive anti-Israel and often anti-semitic leaders of this movement would have no doubt found other reasons to wave war against Israel, even if there were no occupation. But the distorted images of myths have also convinced uninformed journalists, academics, diplomats, etc. that Israel is to blame. And this is where the real damage is done.

The myth that the "occupation" is the cause of the conflict, rather than a symptom and consequence, is also spread by powerful political organizations that exploit the rhetoric of humanitarian assistance and human rights. As documented by NGO Monitor, the radicals that control Christian Aid, War on Want, Human Rights Watch, etc., have worked closely with their Palestinian counterparts to promote the false claim that the "occupation" is the cause of the conflict, rather than a symptom. Just last week, Amnesty International issued its annual report covering 2006, in which the biased and often false claims regarding Israel were repeated. Despite the rocket attacks from Gaza, the continuing terror, and the warfare between Hamas and Fatah, Palestinians are patronizingly portrayed as victims of Israel.

Furthermore, this political warfare is often justified through use of a small group of Israeli who also promote the myth that "if only we were better to the Palestinians, and ended the occupation, we would have peace". Funded generously by European taxpayers and churches, various political and quasi-academic nongovernmental groups are sponsoring one-sided conferences and symposia on these topics.

But for the vast majority of Israeli, the era of simplistic slogans and wishful thinking ended with the catastrophic collapse to the "Oslo peace process", and the terror campaign in which over 1000 people were murdered. Until the Palestinians and the world accept Israel as a Jewish state, with the "secure and recognized borders" pledged in UN Resolution 242 that followed the 1967 war, the options are limited.

Gerald M. Steinberg is a professor at Bar Ilan University and Executive Director, NGO Monitor.

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, May 31, 2007.
This was posted today by Ted Belman on the IsraPundit website.

McMaster U. in Hamilton is suing Dr.Paul Williams. Why?

Because he was investigating Islamic terrorists at McMaster.

  1. McMaster was harbouring known al Qaeda operatives.
  2. When the operatives left McMaster, 180 pounds of nuclear material was reported missing.
  3. The College of Engineering at McMaster contains an over-abundance of professors from terror-sponsoring countries
  4. Members of the Ontario Provincial Police have confirmed that McMaster has been under scrutiny for a long time; that many of the students have ties to radical Islam and terrorist organizations; and that Islamic members of the faculty have conducted clandestine meetings at an off-campus address in Hamilton.
  5. Hundreds of postings on the internet calling for the jihad and the nuclear destruction of America have been traced back to McMaster

For reporting these findings, Dr. Williams has been sued by McMaster University for $4 million plus punitive damages.

Dr. Williams refuses to be intimidated, and indeed welcomes the lawsuit because this will give him access to all of McMaster's records through the legal process of discovery and he will be able to expose what he believes could well be the nerve center for Osama's "American Hiroshima" project to blow up ten American cities with suitcase nukes.

Please contribute to The Dr Paul Williams Defense Fund.

This is called "Terror cell suspects in court" and it appeared May 29, 2007 in the Hamilton Spectator.

Two men, with ties to McMaster University who are accused of being part of a so-called homegrown terror cell, made a brief court appearance with their adult co-accused yesterday in Brampton.

Ahmad Ghany and Saad Gaya are among 14 adults and four youths arrested last year and alleged to be part of a group plotting to bomb several targets in southern Ontario.

The adults in the case were supposed to start a preliminary hearing, but it was put over until Monday, June 4. Ghany is out on bail but Gaya is in jail. The proceedings are covered by a publication ban.

A courtroom in the Brampton courthouse has been adapted to include space for more than a dozen lawyers and extra space for the accused.

Gaya, a first-year McMaster student when he was arrested, is accused of planning to cause an explosion which could cause bodily harm or death, and doing so in association with a terrorist group.

Ghany, who has been living under virtual house arrest, is charged with being a member of a terrorist group and receiving terrorist training. Ghany graduated from Health Sciences at McMaster.

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Naomi Ragen, May 31, 2007.


Many of you have asked for contact information for UCU (University and College Union) members who voted to boycott Israeli academics. Below, the names, telephone numbers and e-mail addresses of the regional and local heads of the union. Feel free to express your opinions to them, keeping in mind that not everyone on this list voted in favor of this resolution. Sally Hunt, joint general secretary, for example, has stated that she voted against it.

Israel's Minister of Immigration and Absorption has called upon Jews to refrain from making contributions to British institutions of higher learning. I say, why just Jews? I call upon all those who are committed to justice, freedom and truth to give their contributions to academic institutions which stand firmly behind academic freedom and cultural cooperation, and which are not tainted by racism and anti-Semitism.

Unfortunately, UCU members, and the institutions that employ and nuture them, are guilty until proven innocent. Let's hear something outloud from Cambridge and Oxford, etc. removing themselves from this shameful calumny. Until then, silence is acquiescence. Naomi

UCU head office

UCU head office: Britannia Street
Tel:020 7837 3636
Fax:020 7837 4403
Minicom:020 7278 0470

UCU head office: Egmont House
Tel:020 7670 9700
Fax:020 7670 9799



Sally Hunt
Joint general secretary
Tel:020 7670 9729
Fax:020 7670 9799

Paul Mackney
Joint general secretary
Tel:020 7520 3226
Fax:020 7837 3602

Joint presidents
Dr Dennis Hayes and Dr Steve Wharton

Barry Lovejoy
National head of further education
Tel:020 7520 3238
Fax:020 7278 9383

Malcolm Keight
National head of higher education
Tel:020 7670 9700
Fax:020 7670 9799

Matt Waddup
National head of campaigns, organising, recruitment and training
Tel:020 7670 9700
Fax:020 7670 9799

Roger Kline
National head of equality and employment rights
Tel:020 7520 3242
Fax:020 7833 8405

Paul Cottrell
National head of cross-sectoral professional policy
Tel:020 7670 9700
Fax:020 7670 9799

Paula Lanning
National head of communications and public affairs
Tel:020 7520 3205
Fax:020 7278 9383

Annette Dalchow
National head of personnel
Tel:020 7520 3206
Fax:020 7833 5648

Bernadette Newman
National head of finance
Tel:020 7670 9700
Fax:020 7670 9799

*David Bleiman
Tel:0131 226 6694
Fax:0131 226 2066

* Mary Cooper
London Britannia (FE)
Tel:020 7278 0256
Fax:020 7278 2440

* Sue Davis
Birmingham Alpha (HE)
Tel:0121 634 7384
Fax:0121 634 6648
Minicom:0121 665 6545

* Russell Escritt
Birmingham Alpha (FE)
Tel:0121 634 7384
Fax:0121 643 6648
Minicom:0121 665 6545

* Brian Everett
Manchester Hale (HE)
Tel:0161 929 7909
Fax:0161 929 7808

* Colin Gledhill
Manchester Talbot (FE)
Tel:0161 772 7010
Fax:0161 772 7013

* Jenny Golden
London Britannia (HE)
Tel:020 7520 3285
Fax:020 7837 9214

* Barry Johnson
Birmingham Newhall (HE)
Tel:0121 212 2713
Fax:0121 212 2714

* Adrian Jones
Manchester Talbot (HE)
Tel:0161 772 7011
Fax:0161 772 7014

* Barry Jones
London Egmont (HE)
Tel:020 7670 9716
Fax:020 7670 9799

* Jim McCracken
Tel:01392 412 525
Fax:01392 412 418

* Jim McKeown
Tel:028 9066 5501
Fax:028 9066 9225

* Martin Machon
Birmingham Newhall (HE)
Tel:0121 212 2713
Fax:0121 212 2714

* Elizabeth Martins
London Britannia (FE)
Tel:020 7520 1038
Fax:020 7837 4399

* Ben Monks
London (HE - Anglia and south-east England)
Tel:020 7670 9714
Fax:020 7670 9799

* Martyn Moss
Manchester Talbot (FE)
Tel:0161 772 7012
Fax:0161 772 7015

* Iain Owens
Tel:0191 487 7220
Fax:0191 487 7255

* John Perry
Tel:01656 721 951
Fax:01656 723 834

* Chris Powell
London Britannia (FE)
Tel:020 7833 3886
Fax:020 7278 2440

* Nick Varney
Birmingham Alpha (FE)
Tel:0121 634 7382
Fax:0121 643 6648
Minicom:0121 665 6545

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.

To Go To Top

Posted by Ezra Halevi, May 31, 2007.

A poll carried out by the Knesset channel found a majority of Israelis want no more withdrawals from parts of the Land of Israel -- not even for "real peace."

The poll, conducted by the Dahaf Institute for the Knesset Channel -- found that even in the case of a what was termed a "real peace deal," 68 percent of Israelis would not agree to withdraw from the Golan Heights, 53 percent from Judea and Samaria and 86 percent from the Western Wall.

Just two weeks ago, former coalition chairman MK Avigdor Yitzchaki (Kadima) brought a bill requiring a referendum prior to any withdrawals from Jerusalem or the Golan Heights through its first reading, despite the opposition of the government, Meretz and Arab parties.

The poll sought to examine how Israelis would vote in such a referendum. A minority of 46 percent favored surrendering most of Judea and Samaria for a "real peace." 65 percent oppose any unilateral withdrawals from Judea and Samaria. 28 percent said they would support it.

Only eight percent believe that the government is able to reach a peace agreement with Syria, opposed to 86 percent against.

Asked whether the lands conquered in the 1967 Six Day War improved Israel's security situation, 51 percent said it did and 29 percent said it worsened it.

A representative sample of five hundred Israeli adults took part in the survey.

Ezra HaLevi is a writer for Arutz Sheva

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 30, 2007.

When will a collective somnambulistic civilized world rub fairy dust from its eyes, then begin shutting down House of Saud, for one, financed Wahhabi madrassas, mosques, kindred spirit institutions and training camps, infecting the planetary landscape anywhere and everywhere, as plentiful as camel dung? If root causes are not attacked, there is no chance to vanquish an atavistic enemy weaned on horrific ideas and ideals. It boggles the mind that the world's one superpower, led by an administration joined at the hip to OPEC's head honcho regime, albeit guarantor of Uncle Sam's petrodollar, is yet to see the Arabic writing on the wall, thus not willing to assert itself, reading the riot act to Saudi royalty, insisting on a zero tolerance policy for bankrolling the education of infidel obsessed terrorists. Furthermore, might British academics, immersed in their anti-Semitic yearly ritual, again pondering whether to boycott Israeli colleagues, in solidarity with so-called Palestinians, instead do something useful by insisting their own government shut down Wahhabi spirited mosques, infecting Britain's shantytown landscape, offering advanced degrees in homicide/suicide martyrdom, or is a London bombing memory jogger needed?

It is easy for Western nations to disrespect Israel, labeling her an occupier, an apartheid state, even refusing to attend a ceremony commemorating the 40th anniversary of Jerusalem's unification. Israel, alas, does not supply the world with oil, dwarfing the fact she supplies the world disproportionately with advanced technology and Nobel laureates. But is doing what is easy wise? Is sucking up to Israel/Jew bashing Islamic oil pushers, predisposed to financing the education of as well as harboring terrorists, in the best interests of a civilized world? Might harder choices, perhaps imperiling the flow of fossil fuel, in the long term prove ever wiser? That answer should be obvious!

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 larose@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 30, 2007.

The article below is of great significance for our understanding of the true dynamics of the Arab-Israel conflict.

Since the advent of Zionism as a movement, c. 130 years ago, an estimated 60,000 Arabs have been killed by Jews and (since 1948) by Israelis. This number is an estimate of Arabs killed in Israel's defensive wars, as well as those killed when they mounted terror attacks, and civilian casualties. Almost all of these Arabs were armed Arabs engaged in armed conflict against Israel, where the Arab side was the aggressor.

Of that number, about 6,000 thousand were Palestinians, most of whom were armed terrorists killed in the process of committing, or preparing to commit, terror attacks against Israeli civilians, or in Israeli reprisals for such attacks.

Yet these 6,000 are the ''martyred heroes'' of Arab media (and some western media) whose deaths are considered proof of Israel's hatred of, and intent to genocide, the Palestinian people who number somewhere around 9,000,000 (c. 3,000,000 in Israel and c. 6,000,000 in the Palestinian Diaspora). And for the deaths of these 6,000, Israel is excoriated as the world's worst oppressor criminal terrorist state.


Since 1994, more Palestinians have been killed by Palestinians under the rule of Arafat and Hamas than have been killed by Israel. Both the media and the Arab world are silent.

Recently, the civil war in Gaza has claimed hundreds of civilians on both sides, including innocent children murdered as they sat in the back seat of their father's car. Both the media and the Arab world are silent.

And now, during the Hezbollah and Fatah-el-Islam fighting in Lebanon, the carnage of Arab against Arab is horrendous....and both the media and the Arab world are silent.


Since 1948, somewhere between 12 million to 20 million Muslims have been killed by Muslims, in endless wars between Muslim states and within Muslim states around the world.

The one single individual who can be credited with killing more Muslims than any other person in the entire world, and across all of world history.....is none other than Saddam Hussein, the Muslim Arab tyrannical dictator of Iraq (c. 1,300,000 Muslims killed during his 32-year reign of terror...including c. 800,000 on both sides in the 8-year Iran-Iraq war).

Yet, across the entire Muslim world, Saddam is adulated and mourned as a great Arab leader, a modern-day Saladin, a hero.

World wide, and across the entire Arab and Muslim world, there is no acrimony, not even any critique, for the tens of millions killed in Muslim vs. Muslim wars. There is no condemnation of Saddam as the butcher of Shi'ites, the mass-murderer of Kurds. There is not even a critical word to be heard anywhere in the Muslim world for the mind-bogglingly obscene child-abuse of the Iranian army's Basiji: the thousands of hapless helpless 10- to 14-year-old boys drafted into Iranian military service and deployed to clear minefields in the Iran-Iraq war, by walking through the mine-fields!(*); or the child-abuse raised to the level of public policy in the Palestinian Authority as a Mickey Mouse surrogate teaches 5-year olds that they must eternally hate Jews and kill Israels and fight for Islam's domination of the entire world.

But there is endless acrimony against Israel for its successful defensive actions; and there is endless acrimony against the USA for its retaliatory defensive and pre-emptive wars against Islamofascist terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Apparently, the death of Muslims matters to Muslim leaders only when caused by Jews or Americans. This appalling fact of history bespeaks an abysmal moral failure in Islamic society: an inability to challenge evil within the society, and an all too eager willingness to blame others, especially Jews (and in latter day times, Americans) for that evil.

The cause of the Arab-Israel conflict is not Israeli repression of Palestinians -- the Lebanese and Egyptians have done far worse to their Palestinians, and without the need to defend themselves against the endless terror war that Palestinian terrorists have waged against Israel.

The cause of the Arab-Israel conflict is not any fictional hatred that Israelis bear toward Palestinians -- the Lebanese and Iraqis harbor a truly frothing and fomenting hatred of Palestinians, as do Kuwaitis and Saudis, and without ever having been at the receiving end of a Palestinian suicide bomber.

The cause of the Arab-Israel conflict is this obvious, but unmentionable in polite society, abysmal moral failure of Muslim society. No matter what the cause, no matter how great the cost, no matter how horrible the Muslim suffering, never take responsibility for Muslim crimes. Never acknowledge the essentially apartheid nature of Islamic religious discrimination against Jews and Christians. And never allow a Jew to have authority.

This is religiously legislated apartheid, politically legitimized Jew-hatred. That apartheid, that hatred, is the cause of the conflict and the reason for its having become the longest war in world history.

The article below was written by Jonathan Kay and it appeared yesterday in the National Post (Canada)
www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=96c43ca9-ec26-470a-adda-93476ff79799 (*) The boys wore Plexiglas keys around their necks. These were the keys to paradise, and to the 72 virgins, to which the boys would ascend immediately and painlessly if they were killed by the land mines. The maimed, one-legged survivors of such mishaps still live in Iran today...still awaiting their virgins.

Last week, the Lebanese army attacked a squalid Palestinian refugee camp that's become infested with Islamist suicide terrorists and guerilla fighters. On May 20, government troops surrounded the camp, with tanks and artillery pieces shelling it at close range. Army snipers gunned down anything that moved. At least 18 civilians were killed, and dozens more injured. Water and electricity were cut off. By week's end, much of the camp had been turned into deserted rubble.

Thousands of terrified residents fleeing the camp reported harrowing stories of famished, parched families trapped in their basements.

How did the rest of the world react? The Arab League quickly condemned 'the criminal and terrorist acts carried out by the terrorist group known as Fatah al-Islam,' and vowed to 'give its full support to the efforts of the army and the Lebanese government.' EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana also condemned Fatah al-Islam, and declared Europe's 'support' for Lebanon. And the UN Security Council called the actions of Fatah al-Islam 'an unacceptable attack' on Lebanon's sovereignty. As for the Western media, most outlets ignored the story following the first flurry of news reports.

At this point, please indulge me by re-reading the first paragraph of this column -- except this time, substitute the world 'Israeli' for 'Lebanese' in the first sentence. Let's imagine what the world's reaction would be if the ongoing siege were taking place in Gaza or the West Bank instead of the Nahr al Bared refugee camp on the outskirts of Tripoli, Lebanon.

First of all, a flood of foreign journalists would descend on the camp to document Israel's cruelty and barbarism, and the story would remain front page news to this day. Al-Jazeera would be a 24/7 montage of grieving mothers swearing revenge on the Zionist butchers, and rumours would swirl of mass graves and poison gas.

The Arab League, EU and United Nations would condemn Israeli aggression -- as would the editorial board of The New York Times. The Independent would dispatch Robert Fisk to embed with Fatah al-Islam. And the newspaper's cartoonist, Dave Brown, would produce another award-winning rendition of his signature theme: Jews eating Palestinian babies.

Actually, we don't need to speculate: What I have just written is exactly what happened when the Israeli army invaded the Jenin refugee camp to root out terrorists in April, 2002, a battle that was similar in scale to this month's siege at Nahr al Bared. (At Jenin, 52 refugee camp residents were killed -- most of them gunmen, according to Human Rights Watch.

At Nahr al Bared, the figure is 45 and climbing.) The main difference between the two sieges is that Israel's army put its troops at far greater risk by invading Jenin with infantry -- whereas the less humane Lebanese army has simply pummelled Nahr al Bared with explosives from a distance. Jews apparently care a lot more about saving Palestinian civilians than do Lebanese soldiers.

For years, we have been told that Palestinian suffering and 'humiliation' is at the root of the Middle East conflict, as well as the Western-Muslim clash of civilizations more generally. This is nonsense: The 200,000-plus Palestinian refugees who live in Lebanese camps are treated worse than dogs -- with no access to decent schools or good jobs -- and no one in the Arab world cares a whit. In fact, many Arabs seem to embrace the same blind anti-Palestinian hatred of which Israel is typically accused. When Lebanese armoured personnel carriers rolled through Tripoli on May 20, they got a standing ovation from local residents. 'We wish the government would destroy the whole camp and the rest of the camps,' one local told The New York Times. 'Nothing good comes out of the Palestinians.'

Just as Lebanon's stew of eternally warring Sunnis, Shiites, Christians, Hezbollah terrorists and militarized clans serves as a Mediterranean microcosm for the political dysfunction of the Arab world, this month's events capture perfectly the utter cynicism of the Islamic world's trumped up vilification of Israel, and the West as a whole. As with the Muslim- on-Muslim slaughter in Darfur, Iraq, Pakistan, Gaza and a dozen other hot spots, the siege at Nahr al Bared shows that what inflames 'the Muslim street' (for lack of a better cliche) isn't Muslim suffering, but the relatively tiny fraction thereof that jihadi propagandists and their Western apologists can lay at the feet of Jews and Christians.

Muslim blood apparently comes cheap -- but only when it's drawn by other Muslims.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Daily Alert, May 30, 2007.

Six Day War had significant positive effects and is not a 'wasted victory' as The Economist argued

"Israel's Wasted Victory," this is the headline of The Economist's editorial marking 40 years since the Six Day War. The Economist boasts a circulation of more than one million copies and its readership comprises members of the world's financial, political and cultural elites. The articles written by its authors (the majority of which go unsigned) are perceived as God's words. "The Economist says" -- is a ruling that goes unchallenged in many circles.

Nonetheless, in describing the Six Day War as a "Pyrrhic victory" and "a calamity for the Jewish state no less than for its neighbors," The Economist is making a grave mistake. The Six Day War changed the course of history for the better, ensured Israel's existence and convinced the Arabs to come to terms with it. Thanks to Israel's full and shining victory, the rulers of the Arab states relinquished their vision of eliminating Israel, and by lack of choice engaged in dialogue based on the concept of "land for peace."

In his book The Six Day War, historian Michael Oren wrote that events in the Middle East, which until 1967 only culminated ahead of the conflict, could have moved towards peace even after the war. He added that diplomatic breakthroughs considered unrealistic became almost commonplace after the war.

In November of that year, the UN Security Council passed resolution 242, which since then has constituted a cornerstone for every diplomatic effort in the region including the recent Saudi Initiative.

Resolution 242 called for "just and lasting peace" between Arabs and Jews; Israel endorsed it immediately. It took Egypt another decade to internalize 242 and to sign a peace agreement with Israel in exchange for return of the Sinai.

The maturation process took Jordan an additional 20 years. Syria announced its willingness to sign a full normalization agreement with Israel in January 2000. Here is therefore, a basic fact: Due to Israel's military victory in June 1967, Israel was accepted by the Arab world as a legitimate "Jewish State" entitled to exist within peaceful borders, land that until then was deemed Zionist occupation.

Hubristic folly

Somehow, The Economist manages to ignore these developments and minimizes their significance. The editorial focuses on Israeli-Palestinian relations. Israel, wrote The Economist, "embarked on its hubristic folly of annexing the Arab half of Jerusalem and -- in defiance of law, demography and common sense -- planting Jewish settlements in all the occupied territories to secure a Greater Israel." And "When, decades later, Egypt and Jordan did make peace with Israel, the Palestinians did not recover Gaza and the West Bank."

The Palestinians did not recover Gaza and the West Bank? Until 1967, Gaza and the West Bank were territories administered by Egypt and Jordan. It may well be assumed that that the Jordanian regime would not have permitted Palestinian refugees, their children and grandchildren to realize their national sovereignty in Gaza and the West Bank and to establish the Palestinian state there.

As to criticism regarding Israel's acts of annexation and settlement since 1967, large parts of the Israeli population share these sentiments, including the author of this article. Under the charismatic and destructive influence of Moshe Dayan, at the end of the Six Day War the government chose to prevent Palestinian autonomy, oppressed Palestinian rights and subjugated the Palestinian workforce to the interests of Israeli employers. This is indeed "hubristic folly."

But is it only ours? The "Land for Peace" movement immediately challenged the Greater Israel movement, and they divided Israeli society from within. Not Palestinian society.

Palestinians prefer 'state of no state'

It should be said unabashedly: Had the Palestinians really wanted a state of their own it would have been established long ago; even Israel's excessive military might would not have sufficed in preventing its establishment within some type of border.

Yet the Palestinians prefer a state of "no state," no responsibility, no commitments and no solution, alongside ongoing terror. Generation after generation, Palestinian nationalism has excelled in denouncement. Had Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres not unwillingly dragged the PLO leadership to the Oslo Accords in 1993 it would not have initiated a thing by itself.

The Economist is very wrong. For Israel, the victory of 1967 was not wasted. Israel's population grew from 2.6 million to 7.1 million, 2 million of whom were new immigrants. The Gross National Product grew by 630 percent. Real per capita product, the benchmark for measuring economic development, grew by 163 percent and last year crossed the $21,000 mark. The average standard of living in Israel is only 22 percent lower than in Britain; on the eve of the Six Day War there was a 44 percent gap. And The Economist has often noted Israel's information technology achievements.

Among Palestinians, however, the situation has deteriorated drastically. Are we to blame? Yes, it is our fault as well as theirs. Two states for two peoples: If this vision was wasted, it was not so because of the Six Day War, but despite it. And if it is realized, it will be another outcome of the Arab plan's defeat in June 1967.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Jeff Epstein, May 30, 2007.

Our current state of affairs certainly begs the question as to whether we can really afford to ignore costly lessons from history. One would think that we learned something from the murderous attack launched against us during the predawn hours of December 7th, 1941.

The first wave of 181 warplanes departed from six Japanese carriers to strike our fleet at Pearl Harbor and surrounding military airfields. At 7:00AM, the incoming squadrons appeared on the screens of the Army radar station at Opana. News of the steady-bearing "contacts" was immediately relayed up through the chain of command. However, senior officers falsely attributed those sightings to the anticipated echoes of returning American planes and never sounded the appropriate alarms -- a costly assumption that contributed to the death toll of some 2400 servicemen.

Six decades later, three commercial airliners were commandeered by militant Islamist deviants and flown into their intended targets resulting in the deaths of 3000 innocent Americans. Once again, our nation was caught off-guard and paid a hefty price for underestimating an adversary's resolve and capacity to do us grievous harm.

One could reasonably argue that we haven't learned much from past mistakes and intelligence failures.

America is currently engaged in a deadly war that has the potential to last for decades and cost millions of innocent lives. Most experts agree that a far more deadly attack is imminent -- a catastrophic strike involving a combination of tactical nuclear and/or radiological "dirty" weapons. Yet, Washington refuses to take legitimate actions to secure our homeland -- that is, to properly identify the enemy, seal our borders and inoculate a number of terrorist-front groups that freely operate on our soil; subversive organizations that seek our destruction, spread seeds of hatred, fundraise for the enemy, support international acts of terrorism, recruit thousands of disgruntled "home-growns" and prepare scores of their followers to perpetrate acts of violence.

Of greater concern is the administration's failure to come clean with the American people regarding numerous terrorist hits that we have already suffered -- attacks both leading up to and following 9/11.

For unknown reasons, Federal law enforcement agencies continue to misrepresent barbaric acts of violence as being anything other than Islamist-inspired -- a reckless policy that, in the long run, will only cost more lives. There's no legitimate reason to hide the truth from our citizenry while blood hemorrhages in various locations across America. An educated, vigilant society will only make our shopping malls, highways, houses of worship, college campuses and federal buildings safer to visit. Additionally, surviving family members deserve to know what really happened to their loves ones.

While in a holding pattern awaiting the unthinkable -- news of simultaneous nuclear detonations occurring in major U.S Cities -- our State Department is reaching out to those same terrorist-host nations that are conspiring to exterminate us. If that isn't enough, the Department of Education is in the process of opening twenty Arabic-teaching schools for Muslim students across America, Kansas City International Airport recently installed foot baths to accommodate Muslim travelers and several federal agencies (including the FBI and TSA) have contracted with CAIR (a terror-friendly Islamic advocacy group) to provide sensitivity training to their field agents and employees.

For a variety of reasons, neither can we expect the truth to flow from mainstream media channels. In fact, issues concerning national security and terrorism are typically subordinated to far more important topics like the regeneration of Britney Spear's hair follicles, Rosie O'Donnell's personal self-destruction and paternity testing for Anna Nicole's orphaned infant child.

Just how many more innocent adults and children have to perish before America comes to its senses regarding this very "Real" and menacing threat?

According to our nation's leading counter-terrorism experts, it's far later in the game than most folks realize, for the enemy has accomplished much in terms of their infiltration and entrenchment on our soil. These radical Islamist barbarians truly believe that America is their's for the taking. They're convinced that their imperialistic drive to conquer our nation is far stronger than our willingness to fight for what's rightfully ours. Unfortunately, they're probably right since just a scant few of us are willing to make the necessary sacrifices to resist these cretins at any cost.

Their victory would mean the end of the United States and the end of the free world as we know it. To them, it is not about politics, it is about religion, a radical religion where the law allows for beheadings, stoning and maiming; a radical religion that uses terror as its tool of choice to keep the masses in line.

America's Truth Forum, a non-partisan, non-profit (501(c) 3) organization, is committed to bringing the truth about the threat of radical Islam to the American people. The government won't do it. The media won't do it. That leaves us.

There isn't a better time to draw a line in the sand, take a stand and be heard.

For three years, America's Truth Forum has been recognized as being on the very cutting edge -- a leader in this struggle to awaken our citizenry to militant Islam's menacing threat. Our ability to continue the fight and confront this evil in earnest greatly depends upon outside support. We need your generous help.

America's Truth Forum, in conjunction with Basics Project, will be hosting another educational symposium that will bring together the most important voices on the subject of Islamofascism. This critical event, the third in a national series, has been scheduled for October and will feature world-renown speakers with extensive knowledge and first-hand experience. If plans hold, the event will not only prove most provocative but will generate substantial media attention.

In order to make this most crucial event happen, we need your financial support. We are firmly committed to the task of bringing the truth about the threat that Islamofascism poses to the American people to the American people. Let's not allow Washington to continue ignoring history and repeating costly mistakes.

Please help us to help America and support this most righteous cause. Please either visit our site at http://www.americastruthforum.com/donations.htm and contribute via the Paypal link or forward your donation to:

America's Truth Forum
P.O. Box 802
Glastonbury, CT. 06033

Where the battle against the aggressive totalitarianism of Islamofascism is concerned, it is well past the time to act. If we allow politics to infiltrate the process of disseminating fact-based information -- the truth -- about the lethal foe we face we risk repeating the mistakes made in the waning days of Vietnam only this time the genocide may very well happen to us...on American soil.

Failure is not an option. To quote Winston Churchill:

"If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."


Jeffrey Epstein, President

Jeff Epstein is President of American Truth Forum, an organization committed to bringing the truth about the threat of radical Islam to the American people.

To Go To Top

Posted by Naomi Ragen, May 30, 2007.


The UCU, which represents Britain's university lecturers, has passed a resolution asking its members to weigh the moral consequences of a connection with Israel's academic insitutions in light of the situation in the territories. It also called upon the European Union to consider stopping the funding of all research and development projects in Israel. The vote of the 250 member organization was 158 in favor, 99 opposed, with 8 abstentions. It stopped short of calling for an outright boycott because that is illegal.

Although this resolution does not involve the insititutions of higher learning themselves, it nevertheless sets a precedent. For a long time, British journals have been quietly boycotting Israeli academics, insisting on removing the name of Israeli institutions from academic papers, for example, as a condition to publication.

I think the time has come for academics all over the world to consider a boycott of British lecturers. I'm sure there are many professors and lecturers on my list who would be able to help. We should publicize the names of the 158 lecturers who voted in favor of this, and make sure that they are not invited, their papers aren't published, and that the institutions of higher learning that employ them find it increasingly difficult to find funding for their research, academic cooperation and cultural exchanges.

Anti-semites in academia should not get a free pass.

Anyone on my list who can help with this, let me know.


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.

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 30, 2007.

Dear Mr. President,

Do you subscribe to DEBKA.com?

If not, you should. and so should the CIA.

Does the CIA know about this turn-around in the PA territories? If they subscribed to DEBKA.com they would.

I think that you had better tell Secretary Rice as well. This Fatah defection to Hamas means the utter and complete and dismal and irredeemable failure of her foreign policy in Israel. Fatah is just about destroyed, Abbas is powerless, and Hamas has won the hearts and minds of just about everyone in the PA territories.

So....there is absolutely no sense to pressuring Israel for more concessions, or more restraint. there is absolutely nothing to be gained by pressuring Olmert to meet with Abbas. Abbas was doomed after the Mecca accords....I told you that, way back when. Now he is just plain old dead meat.

Have you read the Hamas charter? It is clear...no treaties, no negotiations, no recognition, no nothing...just wipe out the Jews, and then start on the Christians ... and then...Islam uber Alles.

But don't forget the bigger picture. El-Qaeda groups and el-Qaeda spin-offs and el-Qaeda wannabbees are mulitplying like rabbits in the Middle East, from Algeria and Tunis and Morocco to Egypt and Sinai and Yemen and Jordan and Lebanon and, of course Syria and Iraq. As one Israeli secret service operative said just the other day...'every day there is a new terrorist movement popping up somewhere in the Middle East.'

Hamas is now funded by Iran. so Hezbollah and Hamas are now allies...and they probably coordinated their plans. they share the same goals and the same motivations.

Iran wants to lead the world in what President Akhmedi-Nejad thinks is the single most important thing that believing Muslims can do....kill Jews, destroy Israel. Iran used to work in tandem with el-qaeda. Now they are competitors....to see who can kill the most infidels....and they both want to start with Israel.

So I think we can take Hamas at its word....now that it has control of the west bank, we can expect terrorism and qassams and longer range rockets from there, just as we see coming from Gaza.

so, why did so many fatah terrorists, formerly loyal to Arafat and then to his heir Abbas, all of a sudden jump ship and join Hamas? Well, one cannot know the hearts and minds of others....but it seems to me that one very good reason might be that they are convinced that Hamas is going to win the civil war....and they are convinced that Iran is really able, and going, to take out Israel one way or another.

that is a really bad sign for us (a much worse sign for israel, but bad for us too).

Do you want to win the war we are currently fighting against Islamofascist terrorism?

First step....support your only ally in the middle east!!

David Meir-Levi
Menlo Park, CA USA

This below was posted by Ted Belman and it appeared today on the IsraPundit website:

DEBKAfile's counter-terror sources report exclusively

Palestinian Fatah-al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades group splits, with 40 percent defecting to Hamas

[US strategy is an abject failure]

The breakaway Fatah rebel group based in the West Bank has turned its back on Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) and his senior adviser Mohammed Dahlan and established a separate suicide terrorist militia. Called the Martyr Abu Amar (Yasser Arafat) Brigades, the rebel group's new commanders are Hamas Gaza operatives Hussein Hijaz and Abu Hilas (Abu Maher). They also take orders, as well as explosive supplies and funds, from the Lebanese Hizballah.

DEBKAfile quotes Israeli military and intelligence sources as rating this split as extremely dangerous. It affords Hamas a prime strategic asset for escalating its violent campaign against Israel.

Hamas managed in the middle of its factional war with Fatah to infiltrate the opposition's West Bank strongholds and persuade a large faction to secede from the Fatah group and establish a Hamas- controlled militia. Israel did not prevent this happening.

The result, our counter-terror experts report, is a Hamas launching pad on the West Bank, previously controlled by Fatah, for a mass suicide bombing offensive against central Israel, projected by the Iran-backed Hamas as the next stage of its missile campaign from Gaza. The new Martyr Abu Amar Brigades have been given orders to gear up to stage multiple suicide truck bombings, Iraq style, in Israel's main cities.

This week, Israeli military and undercover units fanned out across the West Bank to hunt down and capture Fatah defectors to the new Hamas-backed militia. Sunday, May 27, they captured Khaled Shawish, who was important enough in the Fatah terrorist hierarchy to hide for years in the Palestinian Authority compound in Ramallah, after engineering numerous terrorist attacks, including the Dec. 31, 2000 murder of Binyamin and Talia Kahane. Recently, he was involved in shooting attacks in the West Bank.

Monday, the brother of Zakariah Zubeidi, the notorious Fatah commander of Jenin, was picked up. He had been acting as intermediary between the al Aqsa Brigades and the rebels; a leading Fatah defector was killed in a village near Jenin. Tuesday, Israel forces detained Jamil Tirawi in Nablus. He is the son of Tawfiq Tirawi, Arafat's faithful lieutenant, who was a co-founder of the al Aqsa Brigades, Fatah's suicide strike force.

The revolt against Abu Mazen and Dahlan, instigated by Hamas and backed by Hizballah, is spreading.

The influential Fatah-Tanzim terrorist leader, Marwan Barghouti, has endorsed the defection from his Israel cell, where he is serving six life sentences for murdering Israeli civilians in terrorist attacks.

Another supporter is Jibril Rajoub, former preventive security chief on the West Bank, and rival of Dahlan.

The Fatah mutiny has awarded Hamas strike force and terrorist networks stretching from Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip to Jenin in the northern West Bank. It is described by Israeli security sources as the gravest terrorist threat Israel has faced since its 2002 Defensive Wall operation broke Arafat's terrorist infrastructure. Abu Mazen's rule has never been in greater peril.

Israeli prime minister could not have chosen a more unfortunate moment to yield to Washington's pressure and announce talks next week with Abbas. All the Palestinian leader needs now is a meeting with Ehud Olmert as he battles for authority over his increasingly radicalized and mutinous Fatah .

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Ezra HaLevi, May 30, 2007.

(IsraelNN.com) The Yesha Council of Judea, Samaria and Gaza communities has published a collection of statements by public figures who supported or helped implement the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and northern Samaria and have since expressed regret. The following are some of the statements:

Maj.-Gen (ret.) Yiftah Ron-Tal, IDF ground forces commander at the time of the Disengagement: In the year preceding the Disengagement, the army trained mostly for dismantling communities, and that prevented it from preparedness for the war in Lebanon. The training for the Disengagement not only prevented preparedness for such a war, but dragged it away from the consensus as a people's army. It is nearly certain that the excitement of those who led the decision and implementation of this is directly tied to the big failure in Lebanon...I still cannot understand how Israel gave up parts of its land willingly and with abandon, and how the residents connected to that land were turned into criminals, instead of raising their dedication as a banner of preserving the Jewish identity of the state of Israel.
-- Kfar Chabad weekly, October 6, 2006

Ilana Dayan, Journalist, Host of Popular 'Uvda' (Fact) Program on Channel 2: How come nobody is standing up and asking where this rain of Kassams is coming from? Why didn't we ask the deep questions? Why didn't we wonder whether this was the right way -- even for those of us who wanted to divide the land? Why did we only examine the Disengagement when 'orange' youth burned tires in the street? Why did [Sharon confidant and Disengagement architect] Dov Weisglas not tell us there would be a rain of Kassams on Sderot? Because this wasn't popular and because there was a strong prime minister [Ariel Sharon] with a firm hold on the central hubs of the media.
- address at B'nai Brith journalism prize ceremony, June 22, 2006

Maj.-Gen. (res.) Giora Eiland, Chairman of the National Security Council and one of the Disengagement's chief architects: There was no forward contemplation. The Disengagement contributed nothing to a solution to the conflict...There was no discussion of its merits. When I was tasked with planning it, all that existed was the word 'Disengagement' used by Sharon at the Herzliya Conference...I was given four months to plan, but Dov Weisglas was already committing to the Americans and leaking details of the withdrawal plans to the press...The paradigm of two states for two nations is not implementable. Perhaps the whole world agrees to it, but on the ground, it simply cannot be done.
- Haaretz, June 1, 2006

Avri Gilad, broadcaster and TV personality who supported Disengagement: I supported the Disengagement. I was mistaken. The way it was carried out was a crime.
-Maariv, January 23, 2007

From a practical perspective, pragmatic and seeing the situation for what it is -- the orange public was right...Large segments of the public supported the plan out of general ideological reasons.
-Army Radio, HaMilah Acharona, June 26, 2006

Brig.-Gen. (Res.) Moshe Ya'alon, IDF Chief of Staff at the time the government decided to carry out the Disengagement: "There is no escaping the fact that the background leading to the decision was a political crisis -- the decline in support for the prime minister, and added to that was a personal crisis -- the investigations into corruption...Examining the Disengagement in hindsight opposite Israel's interests, it was the worst possible...Israel withdrew from every millimeter, including evacuating settlements, received nothing in return, and thus created a very problematic precedent."
- Maariv, February 24, 2006

Ron Ben Yishai, senior journalist for military affairs: The fact that they mixed the IDF up with the Disengagement, that the army was forced to do the job of the police, was a heavy blow to motivation. Not to mention that the IDF didn't train for an entire year, during which it dealt only with evacuations. We have to put the IDF back in uniform.
-- Army Radio, Ma Boer, February 14, 2007

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, a major backer of the Disengagement: The more we take the army out of the territories, the more terror nests develop.
- Address to the Center For Local Government, January 4, 2007

Professor Aharon Tzachnover, 2004 Nobel Prize Laureate for Chemistry, vocal Disengagement advocate: I supported the idea of Disengagement last year, which seemed to me an act of unilateral volunteerism toward the Palestinians. I hoped our kindness would be returned, but I was mistaken. After our unilateral withdrawal we received only terrorism and more terrorism. The unilateral idea is bankrupt and along with it the party soap bubble of a party that was established on its basis.
- Yediot Acharonot, October 27, 2006

Yoel Marcus, left-wing commentator for Haaretz and ardent Disengagement supporter: To my great sorrow, it now seems that the extremist and pessimistic settlers were those who were right. The Palestinians do not wish to recognize Israel and have not accepted its existence. And now, with the election of Hamas, they again are not missing any opportunity to miss an opportunity...They turned the communities of Gush Katif into launch sites against residents of the Negev and particularly the town of Sderot. The warnings of Ariel Sharon and Dan Halutz that 'If they will fire Kassams after Gaza is evacuated, Israel's response will be harsh' has not really frightened them.
-Haaretz, November 21, 2006

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, the first to float Ariel Sharon's Disengagement plan to the media: It must be said that that the experience we had in Lebanon and Gaza are not encouraging. We completely withdrew from Gaza, and every day they fire Kassam rockets on Israelis.
- Interview with Chinese media, January 8, 2007

Yaron London, Ynet commentator and host of Channel 10 London & Kirshenbaum Show, supported Disengagement: Nothing was built on the rubble except for terrorist training camps...The wall does not guarantee quiet: Kassams fly over it and terrorists dig under it.
- Ynet, June 26, 2006

Meirav Michaeli, TV anchor and radio personality identified with left-wing and feminist activism: The Disengagement left thousands of families without a home, escalated the situation in Gaza and did not advance the security situation at all.
-- Ynet, February 19, 2007

Vice-Premier Shimon Peres, Oslo Accords architect and withdrawal proponent: The Disengagement idea is over. There will not be a repeat in Judea and Samaria of the Gaza withdrawal. There will not be a massive evacuation of settlements...Public opinion is against the idea of another unilateral Disengagement. Therefore, this won't occur, at least in the next five year, or even the next decade.
-- Yediot Acharonot, September 8, 2006

Yehoshua Sobol, author and prominent left-wing spokesperson and proponent of left-wing refusal to serve in the IDF: Nothing is being built there [in Gaza] these days. Nothing -- nothing but destructive activities. This assumption, that it is enough or us to leave territory in order for the other side to stop its attacks has proven false...I do not want to see a situation where we once again fold, in Judea and Samaria, and the next day Kassam rockets begin to be fired on Kfar Saba, Raanana and Herzliya.
- Reshet Bet, July 27, 2006

Shabak (General Security Service) chief Yuval Diskin: The Disengagement was first and foremost a process of uprooting. There is in Israel a Laundromat of words. They call it an evacuation or all sorts of other things, but there was an uprooting here.
-- Lecture at the pre-army academy in Eli, February 6, 2007

IDF Central Commander Maj.-Gen. Yair Naveh: I claimed from the beginning that there was not [a single] security consideration in the Disengagement. This was a purely political decision whose motivations will perhaps someday be investigated.
-- Maariv, April 19, 2007

Yair Lapid, popular TV personality and commentator: The Disengagement was not carried out despite the settlers but because of them. It never had anything to do with the Palestinians, with demographics, with a peace agreement, with the IDF or with any of the other explanations given and reviewed over and over. The drive was one thing: to teach the settlers a lesson in modesty. The Disengagement is now examined with other tools -- political, strategic and demographic -- and it doesn't stand up to the test, especially while Kassams are falling on Sderot and Ashkelon.
- Yediot Acharonot, October 13, 2006

We left Lebanon and the Hizbullah attack us from Lebanon. We left Gaza and the terror groups attack us from Gaza. The region that is most quiet right now is Judea and Samaria. Even the biggest leftists are faced with the creeping heretical though: perhaps it wasn't the occupation?
-Yediot Acharonot, column

MK Amira Dotan (Kadima), head of the Knesset committee for Gush Katif evacuees, supported the Disengagement: In hi-tech, when you do something, you examine it fully before you say it is OK. Here, we did something without examining what would happen afterward. There was no working model created beforehand.
-- HaTzofeh, August 6, 2006

Absorption Minister Ze'ev Boim, who supported the Disengagement as Deputy Defense Minister in the Sharon government and left the Likud to join Kadima: From the beginning, the plan had some question marks which, after the fact, became clear were serious defects in the plan. We lost the Philadelphi Corridor [between Gaza and Egypt, though which weapons and explosives are smuggled -- ed.]. It was a mistake to give up control of Philadelphi.
-Jerusalem Conference address, March 20, 2007

Senior TV newsanchor Dan Margalit, a strong supporter of Disengagement: Ehud Olmert has lost the mandate for a withdrawal from Judea and Samaria that he received when elected on the platform of such a withdrawal. When such a withdrawal is once again presented, I will think again before choosing it at the ballot box.
-- Maariv, July 28, 2006

Maj.-Gen. Gershon HaCohen, who commanded the Disengagement and expressed his public agreement with it prior to implementation: What happened last year was a crime, and I was part of this crime against the Jewish nation. What is happening now -- the Second Lebanon War -- is the punishment for what happened last year.
- on visit to bereaved family, August 24, 2006

Ezra HaLevi is a writer for Arutz Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com).

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Freund, May 30, 2007.

Next week marks 40 years since Israel's miraculous victory in the 1967 Six Day War.

Yet now, it seems, many Israelis are gripped by a failure to appreciate this astonishing triumph -- with some practically mourning the fact that we won the war rather than go down in defeat. As I suggest in the column below in the Jerusalem Post, this appears to be a case of "Battered Nation Syndrome" -- with the only possible cure that the Jewish state stop apologizing for its survival.

It was 40 years ago next week that tiny little Israel, facing destruction at the hands of its enemies, miraculously emerged triumphant from the 1967 Six Day War. Existential fear quickly dissolved into breathtaking joy as the Jewish state decisively vanquished its foes, reuniting Jerusalem and reclaiming large swathes of our ancient homeland.

Our adversaries, who had gleefully pledged to feed us to the fish in the Mediterranean Sea, were forced to look on as their troops beat a hasty and humiliating retreat.

The stunning victory of 1967 had all the markings of Divine intervention. It was a gift from Heaven to a besieged and beleaguered people. After nearly two millennia we were reunited at last with the cradle of Jewish civilization in Judea and Samaria, and with the heart of the nation, the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.

And yet, it seems, four decades later, many Israelis still just cannot forgive themselves for winning.

In what has become an annual ritual, a variety of media pundits, left-wing activists and even some officials launch into mournful sessions of hand-wringing and breast-beating. They bemoan the outcome of the Six Day War, grumble about Israel's success in reclaiming Judea, Samaria and Gaza, and sound as if they would have preferred going down in defeat.

Displaying an extraordinary lack of appreciation and an exceptional lack of historical perspective, these critics long to give up the hard-earned fruits of that war of self-defense, all in the vain hope of mollifying an incorrigible foe.

HOW COULD so many forget so much in so short a time? Even now, as Palestinians fire rockets daily at southern Israel from the very same Gaza Strip that we handed over to them two years ago, the proponents of appeasement still refuse to acknowledge the error of their ways.

It seems the only way to explain this phenomenon is to borrow a term from psychology: Certain parts of the Israeli public and its leadership are clearly suffering from what I refer to as "Battered Nation Syndrome." Like a victim of ongoing domestic abuse, the advocates of surrender to the Palestinians cannot muster the wherewithal to hit back at the abuser. All the hallmarks of the syndrome are there.

Naturally, this distorted world-view results in an almost obsessive focus on Israel's perceived faults as lying at the root of the conflict with our neighbors.

Consequently, the actions of the Palestinians are downplayed and minimized, excused and ignored, and Israel's policy-making process instead begins to resemble a good, ol'-fashioned. self-inflicted guilt trip.

But it is time to break out of this collective funk and start viewing the world the way it really is.

TO BEGIN with, Israel should stop apologizing for defeating the Arab states in 1967. Like any other nation, we have the right to defend ourselves, and we have the right not to be thrown in the sea.

What many of the defeatists conveniently choose to ignore is what led up to the 1967 war: increased Palestinian terror, massive Arab military buildups, and public threats by Arab leaders to annihilate the Jewish state.

They also forget that two years prior to 1967, back when Israel did not yet "occupy" the territories, prime minister Levi Eshkol put forward a proposal that could have resolved the Arab-Israeli conflict once and for all.

Speaking to the Knesset on May 17, 1965, Eshkol suggested turning the 1949 armistice agreements into peace treaties, and offered to hold direct talks with the Arab states in order to do so.

Pointing out that Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, combined, had 60 times the land area of the Jewish state, the premier noted that there was no logical reason for the Arabs to continue to pursue war. Instead, he offered a vision of peace that included open borders, bilateral trade, economic cooperation and freedom of access to the holy sites.

All he asked in return, said Eshkol, was "full respect for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of all the States in the region."

But Israel's offer of peace was met two years later with a clear and unequivocal Arab response. Egypt and Syria mobilized their armies and their people, and vowed to destroy the Jewish state.

Hence, Israel neither asked for war nor initiated it in 1967, so let's stop acting like we did. We do not owe the Arabs anything for defeating them, and we certainly do not need to give them any further territory from which to attack us.

They tried to kill us. We won. Get over it.

This appeared in the Jerusalem Post
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1180450948991&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Send comments and feedback to me at letters@jpost.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Ted Belman, May 30, 2007.

This was written by Moshe Yaalon, a former IDF chief of staff. It appeared as an opinion piece in Ynet News

It is not in vain that Michael Oren's book Six Days of War begins with Fatah's botched terror attack under the orders of Yasser Arafat on the night of December 31st, 1964.

The attack aimed to strike at the national water carrier and to ignite the region. Its failure didn't prevent the rising Fatah leader from publishing an official victory statement that glorified the "Jihad duty" and to set January 1st 1965 as the date marking the organization's establishment.

Indeed, the Six Day War changed the face of the Middle East. From a historic perspective it can be viewed as marking the beginning of the end of national-secular Arab ideology, which in turn encouraged the emergence of Islamic-Jihadist ideologies; it can also be viewed as marking the beginning of the end (temporarily?) of conventional wars between armies and the shifting of the threat on the State of Israel.

However, I am of the opinion that more than anything the Six Day War influenced the way Israelis perceived themselves, it also impacted internal discourse pertaining to border conflicts and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

On the one hand, Israeli self assurance, which was naturally emboldened by the shining military victory, led to complacency until the outcome of the Yom Kippur War, while on the other hand it led to the willingness for territorial concessions aimed at achieving peace.

The cornerstone of Israeli policy since the end of the war did not advocate annexation of territories nor a return to 1967 borders.

This perception, along with failed political conduct to date, has ultimately led to significant erosion in the achievements of the Six Day War and has vastly detracted from the Israeli position, while also adversely affecting the Zionist narrative and its achievements.

Israelis who sought to reach final-status agreement with the Palestinians through "land for peace" obscured the difference between resolving the conflict with Egypt via Israeli withdrawal from the Sinai and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Those same elements went even further by obscuring the Palestinian demand for all of the Land of Israel rather then territories occupied in 1967 only, and ignored the persistent Palestinian refusal -- which has been in place since the birth of Zionism -- to partition the nation.

These elements vastly contributed to the erosion of Israel's positions upon recognizing the Palestinian peoples' right for self determination without insisting on mutual Palestinian recognition for the Jewish people and an independent Jewish State.

The self assurance that came in wake of the Six Day War created a sense of being "strong enough to take risks" -- which is reminiscent of the time of the Oslo Accords. This self confidence led to the loss of the attitude associated with a society facing constant struggle.

Palestinian terror began before 1967

The sincere desire to achieve peace was interpreted as fatigue and led to public willingness to accept the "golden calves" presented as hope by politicians, spin doctors and the media, but which were quickly shattered.

Those striving to return to 1967 borders, from within Israel and abroad, are taking advantage of the Six Day War triumph to argue that the problem lies in the "occupation" and that Israeli relinquishment of these territories will bring the longed-for peace.

Yet the botched terror attack on December 31, 1964 reminds us that Palestinian terror began prior to the takeover of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Since then, additional proof accumulated over time attests to the Palestinian leadership's refusal to end the conflict based on such a solution.

Moreover, recent statements by leaders of the Israeli Arab community expressed their refusal to recognize the State of Israel's right to exist as an independent Jewish State.

Events of the past years, the Palestinian failure to adhere to agreements and obligations within the Oslo framework, the launching of a terror war in September 2000, and the situation in Gaza following disengagement -- could have served as opportunities to "reveal the true face" of the Palestinian leadership and its intentions to undermine the irrelevant concept of a "two state solution" within the ancient Land of Israel's western borders.

Grounding the "two-state solution" discourse to a halt among the Israeli public and in the international arena is a prerequisite for encouraging a new direction of thought with regards to the conflict and possible ways of resolving it.

The key to moving away from this concept is Israel's clear understanding of the problem, forging internal agreement around this understanding, and a willingness to struggle for it.

The shining victory of the Six Day war has paradoxically turned into the starting point of the "retrenchment and withdrawal battle" over the Zionist narrative we are currently engaged in -- until we make an about face.

Ted Belman is a Canadian and editor of the IsraPundit website

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 30, 2007.

B'Tselem and the Association for Human Rights In Israel (ACRI) have accused the 500 Jews of Hebron and the Army of terrorizing the 115,000 Arabs of Hebron. The report claims that about half of the Arab houses and shops in the city center have closed, as a result, and thousands of Arabs have left the city.

The report might have acknowledged that all of B'Tselem's researchers are Arabs and that both organizations receive extensive funding from foreign organizations that are anti-Zionist, uninformed, and unfair. A week earlier, an IDF official proved that ACRI had brought false data to the Knesset, and MKs rebuked ACRI and suggested its claims be greeted with skepticism.

'The report terms Hebron a 'Palestinian city.' The historical truth, however, is that Hebron is the world's oldest Jewish city, one of the four holy cities in Judaism, and the home of a Jewish community at all times until it was eradicated in the ghastly Arab massacre of 1929.' 'The restoration of Jewish life where it had been cut off by violent means is legal and historical justice. Objection to this kind of reclamation reflects a patently anti-Semitic approach.' Arafat obtained control over the rest of Hebron by signing an agreement recognizing the Jewish people's right to reside in the old Jewish Quarter. Contrary to international agreements, however, the report insists that the government expel the Jews.

The report claims that, due to Jewish residency, the center of the city and marketplace is closed. The main Jewish neighborhood isn't in the center but in the ancient Jewish Quarter. It comprises houses that Jews owned in 1929. For some years, the confiscated Jewish property had been used as a marketplace. Now there is a notably modern marketplace in the true urban center of the city, elsewhere. Jews have the legal right to enter the P.A. part of the city, but the IDF won't let them, lest they be murdered by the nice Palestinian Arabs there. The Arabs keep Jews from visiting neighboring holy sites, also the Jews' right under the agreement. Arab and government violations of Jewish rights are not covered in the report. (I can't recall those organizations ever covering the extensive violations of Jewish rights, such as the official but secret government policy of legal harassment of Hebron Jewry. That policy makes a mockery of the report's claims that the government does not enforce the law against the 'settlers.')

Yes, Arabs have more or less been kept from using the old marketplace commercially or residentially, but only because they used it to attack their neighbors. (Is that the 'side-by-side' living that Sec. Rice favors?) Thus Arabs are restricted from 3% of Hebron, and Jews are restricted from 97% of Hebron. The Supreme Court thought it unfair to restrict the Jews, who would be the victim of Arab attacks. Justice would be to restrict the population from which the predation emerges. When restrictions upon Arabs were eased, Arabs attacked and murdered Jews.

The report emphasizes Arab hardships -- they may be searched or arrested. It ignores Jewish hardships -- they may be killed. Indeed, the Arabs have been firing at the Jews for years, particularly in the past year and-a-half. The report claims that Jews attack Arabs, but excluded from the report that Israel's Deputy Attorney-General wrote to them that Jewish attacks on Arabs have declined significantly. (The NY Times would love to report such attacks, if there were any. I haven't seen such reports in decades.)

Another grievance reported is that Jews seize Arab property. To the contrary, Arabs have been living in houses seized from Jews. Jews have had to pay to get the property back! The self-proclaimed civil rights organizations ignore the Arab expropriation and call houses repurchased by the Jews, stolen.

The P.A. has a program to ''strangle the Jewish community in Hebron' by forcing Palestinian families to move into the Israeli area... When homeowners are not interested in living in the area, the Palestinian Authority takes action to populate the properties with problematic tenants including low-life and criminal types and released terrorists' families. The new tenants receive benefits such as exemptions from taxes, rent, water, and electricity; sometimes they even receive a regular monthly allowance... The authors of the report concealed this fact from the public.'

The report ignores P.A. violations of Arab rights when it compels Arab shopkeepers to operate in the unprofitable Jewish backwater of the city, on pain of losing their business franchise altogether (Arutz-7, 5/)14).

Yes, thousands of Arabs have left the city. Tens of thousands have left Yesha. Wouldn't you, if you lived in the P.A. subject to chaos, unemployment, and gunmen? How unfair to blame such an exodus on the Jews! It reminds one of the charge that the Jewish resistance expelled hundreds of thousands of Arabs, during the War for Independence. Thousands of the Arab higher class fled from terrorism and the expectation of war even before the Arab attempt at genocide began. That's the Arabs' fault. Since the Arabs attempted genocide, I think the Israelis would have been within their rights to have expelled the 140,000 who remained, and they were out of their minds not to have.

In my article 14,994, I document the flight of thousands of Arabs from the P.A. to Jerusalem. Arab homosexuals also flee from the P.A., to Tel Aviv.

The so-called Israeli human rights organizations are not interested in human rights, justice, or truth. They are extensions of Arab propaganda.

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 richardshulman5verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Gerald M. Steinberg, May 30, 2007.
This appeared today in the Jerusalem Post
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1180450949000&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

While Israelis are targeted by rockets from Gaza and officials from the "elected Palestinian government" threaten attacks by female suicide bombers, calls for anti-Israeli boycotts based on human rights claims would appear to be both immoral and absurd.

But the small group that controls Britain's trade unions has managed to combine both traits, and it is escalating its political warfare in parallel with Palestinian violence. A vote on yet another anti-Israel boycott proposal is scheduled to take place at the end of May, this time by the Universities and Colleges Union (UCU).

This is the third such academic boycott campaign in Britain in two years, coming after a divestment debate within the Anglican Church, a "boycott Israel" movement led by British activists in the World Medical Association, and the adoption of a similar program by the National Union of Journalists. Beyond the obvious violations of the academic process inherent in a political boycott, this effort is part of a carefully prepared strategy aimed at isolating the Jewish state.

The crucial difference, however, between the previous attempts and the current boycott battles, including the UCU effort, is the presence of a serious counterweight on the political battlefield to challenge the anti-Israel and often anti-Semitic slogans and myths.

Sober and morally-minded British academics on the Left, led by a group known as Engage, as well as the "Fair Play Campaign Group," are particularly active. And under the IAB (International Advisory Board for Academic Freedom), many Israeli academics have also become active in countering the pervasive propaganda and misinformation.

FOR THE radicals, including obsessive ideologues affiliated with the Socialist Workers Party, history, facts and details are irrelevant. While always invoking "the occupation," the decades of Arab warfare, terrorism, incitement and rejectionism are erased from the record. This is not the result of ignorance but of willful conviction, and nothing will change their anti-Israel, anti-US and anti-democracy agendas. They will continue to use terms such as "apartheid" and "racist" to demonize Israel.

As made clear in recent statements, it is Israel's existence that they reject, and not specific policies.

However, the main purpose of the confrontations between boycott opponents and advocates is not to convince the fanatics, but to address the much larger group that knows very little about Israel and the conflict. After many years of avoidance, in the false hope that the absurdity of these boycotts against Israel would become obvious, there is now a coherent strategy that has a chance of success.

Via vigorous debate, the goal is to encourage those who are not obsessed by Israel to break with the radicals. In trade union votes, these moderate voices will determine the outcome, and persuading many of the injustice inherent in the one-sided singling-out of Israel can defeat the boycott resolutions.

This is a formidable task. The impact of the radical fringe has been greatly magnified by powerful non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in Britain that have also been campaigning for years. Well-financed pressure groups such as War on Want, Christian Aid, World Vision, Pax Christi, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch take the lead in singling out and systematically condemning Israel. They repeat the same invented histories, claiming that Israel was "founded in sin," and use invented evidence to condemn Israeli responses to terrorism and aggression. Many journalists who share these prejudices repeat the claims at face value.

AS A result, those who know little about Israel or the Palestinians accept the agendas of the activists. Having heard so much about Israeli "disproportionate response" against attacks from Hizbullah and Hamas, and about the "apartheid wall" (as opposed to a security barrier that has prevented untold attacks by Palestinian suicide bombers), members of the union leadership who focus on other issues accept the attacks against Israel.

There is evidence that some members of this group are beginning to question the obsessive anti-Israel propaganda. In 2005, after the leaders of the Association of University Teachers voted to endorse the boycott, members forced a second vote, which resulted in a reversal. They realized that a partisan boycott was unjust and antithetical to the principles of academic freedom. (A similar re-vote in the case of a second union -- NATFHE -- was avoided when this group dissolved in a merger with the AUT to become the UCU).

In the Anglican Church, in which the politics resembles the trade union movement, a majority of the leaders overturned the attempt to become involved in a one-sided and counterproductive political attack. More recently, many members of the National Union of Journalists are demanding a revote after being embarrassed by the obvious pro-Palestinian bias formally adopted by their organization, which showed that British media coverage of the Middle East was systematically biased.

These changes, while relatively small, demonstrate that attempts to demonize and boycott Israel are not inevitable, and that the inherently immoral and absurd nature of such campaigns can be exposed.

Mr. Steinberg is the executive director of NGO Monitor and professor of political studies at Bar Ilan University. Contact him at steing@mail.biu.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Sergio Tessa (HaDaR), May 29, 2007.

The article below is entitled "Brains and Brawn." It was written by Yoel Marcus, the HaAretz columnist and Oslo and deportation MAIN INTELLECTUAL PUSHER. Sound like the one who throws a child from the balcony and then says: "OOHPS!" The article was published today in Ha'aretz
(http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/864484.html). Dr. Aaron Lerner say this about Yoel Marcus and this article:

Dr. Aaron Lerner -- IMRA: Yoel Marcus played an important role as key supporter and advocate of retreat from Gaza. He suggested on the pages of Haaretz that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon would be able to avoid his legal problems if he launched a withdrawal initiative and, voila!, soon thereafter Marcus was Sharon's confidant, enjoying scoops about Sharon's decision to launch -- what a coincidence -- a retreat plan. Marcus transformed into Sharon's biggest fan and leading cheerleader for retreat.

This column by Marcus sounds more like someone shooting his mouth off at a local pub than a serious piece (the idea that Israel could get away with destroying blocks of buildings as a form of collective punishment certainly sounds more logical after a couple of pints) but he made his way back to his "Oslo religion" with a traditional re-hash in paragraph 15 and a dangerous bout of wishful thinking in paragraph 16.

1. No country in the world would sit around and watch one of its cities being bombarded for six years, powerless to bring the violence to an end.

2. With all due respect to the Palestinians, they must be complete idiots to be fighting one another. As Abba Eban famously put it, the Palestinians have never missed an opportunity to miss every opportunity.

3. The dreams spun at Oslo have been shattered for good. All the stars of this show have died, become weaklings or disappeared from the stage. Challenged by Hamas and Islamic Jihad, Fatah has lost the reins of government and the confidence of its people. The handshakes on the White House lawn and the Nobel Peace Prize have faded away like a dream.

4. Ariel Sharon's unilateral disengagement turned out to be a serious mistake. It gave terror a boost, allowed the Iranians to call the shots in Gaza instead of the Egyptians, fueled anarchy in the Palestinian street and pushed the chances for an agreement even further away.

5. At the same time, our settlers have become more radical. The next evacuation, if there ever is one, could end in bloodshed. Extremists on both sides are nourishing one another: The Jews have gone back to their dream of not giving up an inch, and the Palestinians have gone back to their dream of a greater Palestine.

6. After six years of Qassam rockets, Sderot has become an item on the international news. At first, these weapons were pooh-poohed as primitive metal pipes. They could not be aimed; they did not always explode; and they could not hit Sharon's ranch. From there, they moved up to primitive but lethal. Israeli defense officials were so dismissive of Qassams that they would not spend money on an interception system. They were right: We need to be getting ready for intercontinental missiles.

7. Very few people in this country of soaring stocks and high-rolling officials have ever stopped to consider what their homes might look like and how their kids might grow up if Qassams were landing in Ramat Aviv and Herzliya Pituah.

8. We cannot wipe out the Qassam launchers because they are much too primitive for a sophisticated army like ours.

9. The people launching the Qassams are not exactly quaking in their boots. They do not give a hoot when we say: "If we don't have quiet, you won't have quiet." What we need to get rid of over there is their motivation.

10. Every time we evacuate Sderot rather than Beit Hanun, we have lost the battle.

11. All this grumbling about bomb shelters is a bunch of hot air. First of all, shelters signify weakness. Second of all, this is like giving an aspirin to a cancer patient and resigning ourselves to the fact that Palestinian terror will be with us forever. Are we going to let a primitive hunk of pipe dictate how we live? Jacob Perry is right when he says that spending on shelters, in our case, is like throwing in the towel and giving up on the war on terror.

12. Major General Yisrael Tal is in favor of the "hate for hate" approach: Set up guns facing the "sources of rocket fire," and for every Qassam launched at us, we give back double and triple. Citizens might be killed? And Israeli citizens aren't?

13. An improvement on the Tal approach is the ultimatum: Every time a Qassam is fired, Israel will issue an immediate announcement that within three hours buildings x, y and z, on this or that street, will be blown up. This will give the tenants time to leave and no one will accuse us of killing women and children.

14. Moshe Ya'alon and a few other old-time generals think that we should carry out a Defensive Shield-type operation in Gaza -- just mop up and leave. On the other hand, we would have to be idiots to go into teeming Gaza when we pretty much know that they have stashes of long-range Katyusha rockets capable of reaching Kiryat Gat and Ashkelon and knocking out power in half the country.

15. So what are we going to do with Gaza? Occupy it? We have already done that. What have we achieved by that, apart from occupation? Haven't we learned that occupation is like riding on a tiger's back? All the fleas go along for the ride. There are no overnight solutions. What we need are leaders endowed with both brains and brawn -- courageous leaders prepared to talk to Syria, Saudi Arabia and all the Sunni Islamic countries in order to reach a comprehensive agreement. Only that will put an end to Hamas.

16. The time has come to stop going into a panic every time Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatens to destroy Israel. He is just a show-off with a very big mouth. The ayatollahs are the ones who say what's what and make the decisions in Iran. They will cut off his hands before he ever reaches the red button.

Contact Sergio Tessa at HaDar-Israel@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by UCI, May 29, 2007.

Below is Caroline Glick's article in yesterday's Jerusalem Post. It is prefaced by a Dry Bones cartoon -- the cartoon was not part of the original article.

If life were a television show then the Labor Party primaries would be a Seinfeld episode. Like Seinfeld, yesterday's primaries for Labor's top-spot were about nothing but being on the air.

The frontrunners, former prime minister and IDF chief of staff Ehud Barak, and former Navy commandant and Shin Bet chief MK Ami Ayalon, had no positions to speak of on the issues of the day. They had nothing to say about the Iranian nuclear program. They had nothing to say about Syria's daily threats of war. They had nothing to say about Gaza's post-withdrawal transformation into a mini-Taliban ruled Afghanistan replete with training bases for all the major global terror networks.

Rather than relate to the threats that Israel faces, they showed Israel their faces. They preened before the Labor voters, regaling them with tales of their glory and wisdom. And then each assembled a star-studded array of retired generals and party intellectuals and reporters to tell us how wonderful each of them are and how shallow and corrupt all of the other candidates are.

They attributed the stature of strategy to bromides about their commitment to peace, and then spoke about how and at what price they will remain in Ehud Olmert's government.

THEIR WILLINGNESS to remain in the Olmert government was key. Because that was what this primary was all about: acquiring and preserving power -- for the candidates, for the Labor party and for the Israeli Left as a whole. The underlying theme of the five-month long Labor primary was that power must be maintained at all costs. The party must remain in the government because more frightening than Iran or Syria or Hamas or Hizbullah is the specter of Knesset elections.

Those elections, the candidates, their spinmeisters and media comrades all agree must be avoided because everyone knows what elections will bring. Allowing the nation to determine its government will bring Likud and Binyamin Netanyahu to power. Allowing the nation to choose it leaders means allowing the nation to reject them.

The fact that today the sole idea around which the Labor party stands united is the need to prevent Likud and Netanyahu from gaining power makes it indistinguishable from the ruling Kadima candidates list. The lengths that Kadima is willing to go to remain in power were made clear in a little item in Haaretz last week.

THE NEWSPAPER'S political commentator Yossi Verter reported on a meeting that took place at the home of a rabbi in the south who has gained a following of politicians for his ability to predict the future. A cabinet minister from Kadima was present at the meeting where the rabbi predicted that a terrible war will break out within the next month to three months. The rabbi then consoled his guests by claiming that the war will save Olmert's government.

As Verter put it, "The minister left the meeting feeling at once pessimistic and optimistic: Pessimistic because there will be war, optimistic because according to the rabbi, war means survival, that is, Olmert is sitting pretty." And unfortunately, on at least one count, the rabbi is certainly right. The probability of war in the near future is high. The fact that this is the case screams out from every quarter.

Speaking Saturday in Isfahan, one of the Iranian cities made famous in recent years for its illicit nuclear facilities, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad again threatened Israel with annihilation. "Sixty year of invasion and assassination is enough," he said. "If you do not cease invasion and massacre, soon the hand of power of the nations of the region will rub you criminals with earth."

For his part, Syria's dictator Bashar Assad, who was just resoundingly reelected by a national referendum which pitted him against no one, is busily threatening Israel with war while using his al-Qaida surrogates in Fatah al Islam to overthrow the Lebanese government. As the Syrian dissident Reform Syria Party revealed this week, Fatah al Islam's commander is Shakir Absi, an until recently jailed Syrian Air Force officer. Syrian intelligence released Absi from prison and sent him to Lebanon to foment the overthrow of the Lebanese government.

Then of course there are the Iranian and Syrian Palestinian proxies, Hamas, Fatah and Islamic Jihad which are fighting a mini-war against Israel in the south. Speaking at the cabinet meeting on Sunday, Shin Bet director Yuval Diskin explained that the IDF operations in Gaza have in no way diminished the Palestinians' military capabilities. Hamas, Diskin said can turn its missiles and mortars on Ashkelon any time it wishes.

AND NOT only is the Olmert government failing to degrade the Palestinians' military capacity through limited air strikes, its feckless diplomacy has also failed to prevent Hamas's acquisition of international legitimacy. Britain, for instance has reacted to the abduction of BBC reporter Alan Johnston in Gaza by embracing Hamas.

As British architects, physicians, vicars and professors line up to boycott Israel, the British glitterati and incoming prime minister Gordon Brown happily shared a stage with Hamas spokesman and terrorist Ghazi Hamad at a literary festival in Wales. Hamad wowed his audience by spreading lies about his non-existent efforts to free Johnston.

The British embrace of jihadists is being matched by the collapse of the US policy on the war. Over the weekend The Boston Globe reported that the US closed down the Iran Syria Policy and Operations Group, an interagency working group established last year to undermine the Syrian and Iranian regimes. The group was disbanded because the Bush administration has abandoned its policy of regime change in both countries. US Ambassador in Iraq Ryan Crocker's meeting yesterday with his Iranian counterpart in Baghdad is just the latest evidence of this US embrace of appeasement.

Speaking of the significance of the American move, Iraqi parliamentarian Mithal al Alousi said that by opening direct contacts with the Iranians, the US "gives Iran guardianship over the Middle East."

All of these developments bode ill for Israel. And there are voices in Israel who understand this and have clear visions for defending the country against the gathering storm. While Barak, Ayalon, Defense Minister Amir Peretz and the other Labor candidates spent last weekend attacking one another while committing themselves to preventing general elections, and Olmert and his political advisors mouthed talking points about the need for "stability" which can only be achieved by preventing elections, other voices eked out a message of resolve and wisdom.

IN AN interview with the Wall Street Journal's online Opinion Journal, Likud leader Binyamin Netanyahu cogently explained his strategy of using free markets to exert pressure on the Iranian regime that could lead to its overthrow. For the past six months, Netanyahu has been making frequent visits to the US to try to convince state and local governments to divest their public employee pension funds from companies that do business with Iran. Netanyahu explained that Americans across the political spectrum can agree to the principle that "a regime that promotes genocide cannot receive American taxpayers' savings . . . through European intermediaries."

In Netanyahu's view, squeezing the companies that invest in Iran's oil industries will reduce the companies' stock prices and force them to end their cooperation with Iran. The foreign pullout will paralyze the Iranian economy and force Iranian economic elites to pressure the government to end its nuclear weapons program, or perhaps bring down the government.

While it is far from clear that the divestment program, which was originally conceived by the Washington based Center for Security Policy, can in fact cause Iran to end its nuclear weapons program, it is absolutely clear that the initiative will make it more difficult for Iran to freely advance it. That is, even if it is only partially successful, the plan to end US investment in companies that enable the Iranian regime to function, will limit the regime's maneuver room.

While Netanyahu was promoting a plan to build financial coalitions against Iran, former IDF Chief of General Staff, Lt. Gen. (ret.) Moshe Ya'alon took to the airwaves back home to point to the dangers of the Olmert government's refusal to take action against Gaza.

"The problem in Gaza won't go away, and no one can solve it for us, not Egypt, or an international force," Ya'alon said in an interview with Channel 2.

While the Olmert government dithers and allows Sderot to be abandoned by residents it refuses to defend, Ya'alon said, "We have to get to the terrorists, get to their workshops and hit their infrastructure. We did it in Defensive Shield and we had our reservations before launching that operation too. You have to be blind to think entering Gaza in unnecessary."

What we see in Netanyahu and Ya'alon as well as in their colleagues is that Israel needn't be led by people who think that war is preferable to elections. We needn't be sitting by passively as US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice advances James Baker's policy of selling out Israel for a temporary lull in the carnage in Iraq that could allow the US to meekly retreat. We needn't be discussing surrender of territory to regimes that are actively preparing to attack us. We needn't be listening to men who think that leadership of a country at war is nothing but a popularity contest.

Many commentators have for months ignored Labor's symbiotic relationship with Kadima and argued wrongly that the fate of the Olmert government would be decided in the Labor primaries. Given the fact that Labor and Kadima have identical interests, there was never any chance that Labor would bolt the government.

If Israelis wish to be led by men intent on defending us in our hour of peril, we need to be pressuring Olmert's other coalition partners -- Shas and Yisrael Beitenu -- to abandon him. If we allow these empty-headed, self-obsessed incompetents in Kadima and Labor to remain in power unchallenged, we can trust not only the rabbi's prediction of war. We can also trust that that war will be led as incompetently as the last one.

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

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Boris Celser, May 29, 2007.

The only solution to Occupation is letting every one know that:
Fifty-one member countries -- the entire League of Nations -- unanimously declared on July 24, 1922:

"Recognition Has Been Given to the Historical Connection of the Jewish People with Palestine and to the Grounds for Reconstructing their National Home in that Country."

"Great piece of scholarship. Could be truly described as 'The Mandate for Palestine Bible.'" -- David Singer, Australian lawyer and convenor of Jordan is Palestine International.

"This document should be distributed to all media outlets and parliamentarians. The facts as laid out here knock the ground clean from under all deniers." -- Melanie Phillips, British journalist and author. Best known for her controversial column about political and social issues which currently appears in the Daily Mail. For more see:

Boris Celser lives in Canada. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, May 29, 2007.
This article was written by Nicholas Blanford and was published May 11, 2007 in the Christian Science Monitor

This article is archived at IMRA -- Independent Media Review and Analysis

Monitor reporter Nicholas Blanford provides an exclusive view inside one of the militant Shiite group's wartime hideouts.

RSHAF, Lebanon

After scrabbling up a slope in this desolate valley amid Lebanon's craggy southern hills, I found it: an ominous pitch-black hole partially blocked by a layer of rock.

It would be a tight squeeze to get in. And going farther was potentially risky.

Our discovery was so rare and revealing that it could have been booby-trapped with explosives. I checked for tripwire, but didn't see any. "Found it. It's open. We can get in," I called to my two colleagues, laboring up the hill.

We were about to enter the secret world of Hizbullah, the militant Shiite group that battled Israel from this perch, and dozens of other hidden positions, last summer. We weren't sure what we'd find below, but were certain it would tell us a great deal about the capabilities of the Lebanese guerrillas that fought from these steep limestone hills covered in a dense undergrowth of scrub oak and juniper bushes.

Pausing to catch my breath, I shrugged off my backpack and reached inside for a head lamp.

As we climbed in, air chilled by the deep subterranean passageways wafted out of the entrance, a refreshing contrast to the blazing heat of the valley.

Bunker hunting

I had been hunting for one of Hizbullah's bunkers since the end of the 34-day war.

It had been a frustrating exercise, to be sure. The bunkers and rocket-firing positions had been constructed in great secrecy, the entrances cunningly camouflaged, in remote valleys along the Lebanon-Israeli border.

In addition to possible booby traps, cluster bombs, and other unexploded ordnance litter many of Hizbullah's abandoned "security zones" in valleys and hilltops along the border.

In March, I was fortunate enough to have received map coordinates from a source that led me to a bunker, which could be accessed by a 20-foot shaft. A second series of map coordinates, which I tapped into a global-positioning system (GPS) device, led us to this spot about two miles north of the Israeli border near Rshaf, earlier this week.

As we followed the arrow on the GPS, we could hear the whine of an Israeli reconnaissance drone, invisible against the brilliant blue sky, as it slowly circled high above us. It was probably searching for signs of new Hizbullah activity.

Going in

Shining my head lamp into the entrance, I could see that the pile of boulders only ran for a few feet, after which the opening widened into a passageway.

The walls and ceiling were reinforced with steel plates and girders painted black to prevent stray reflections from the sun giving away the concealed entrance.

As I crawled in the tunnel, I watched carefully for scorpions and spiders. The passage ran horizontally for about 10 yards before doglegging to the right.

It was little more than shoulder-width, and we had to stoop slightly to avoid hitting the ceiling with our heads. Once around the corner, the steel plates were painted white, this time to better reflect the electric lighting.

Electric cables ran through white plastic tubes, fixed to the walls, leading to switches and glass-encased light sockets. A blue plastic hose running along the top of the wall carried the bunker's water supply.

The first room we encountered was a small bathroom complete with an Arab-style latrine, a shower, a basin with taps, and a hot water boiler. There was even a drainage system constructed beneath the concrete floor.

The air was blissfully cool after the sun-drenched heat of the valley. In two places along the main passage -- which must have been more than 60 yards long -- were vertical ventilation shafts covered by metal grills, ensuring a steady flow of fresh air.

We were perhaps 100 to 150 feet underground at this point, deep enough to withstand almost anything in Israel's arsenal. I let my colleagues walk on and then switched off my head lamp.

The sudden darkness and utter silence was unbearably oppressive.

What must it have been like for the dozen or so fighters housed in this bunker, awaiting the advancing Israeli troops?

There was a kitchen with storage shelves and an aluminum sink and taps. The white metal walls were mottled with brown rust. Every 10 yards or so along the passage was a heavy steel blast door that could be locked from the inside with a bolt.

As far as I know, this is the largest and most elaborate bunker discovered so far.

Just the effort that went into building it was extraordinary, and yet, it was constructed in complete secrecy.

Most likely, no one outside Hizbullah knew it existed until two weeks ago, even with peacekeepers from the UN force known as UNIFIL (UN Interim Forces in Lebanon) patrolling the ground and Israeli aircraft watching from the skies above.

Every piece of equipment, every steel plate, every girder, every door had to be carried by hand up the side of the valley and fitted into place inside the bunker.

And there was no clue as to what happened to the hundreds of tons of quarried rock during the excavation work.

Six years of building

While it was widely suspected that Hizbullah had been building underground facilities in the six years prior to the war, it was only after the Aug. 14 cease-fire that their scale and sophistication was understood.

Israel had seriously underestimated its foe and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and other top officials are fighting for their political survival as a result. "It was a combination of a monumental intelligence failure -- the Israelis only found these bunkers by stepping on them -- and extremely professional and efficient work by Hizbullah," says Timur Goksel, a Beirut-based consultant on Mideast security issues and a former senior adviser to UNIFIL.

Now, the bunkers are useless. Their locations having been compromised.

Hizbullah has abandoned all the bunkers in the UNIFIL-patrolled zone along the border, redeploying to a newly constructed line of defense farther north. In this bunker, only a green sleeping mat and a simple metal bed frame remained. At the far end of the bunker, the narrow steel-lined passage broadened out into a rock cavern.

In a niche to one side were four metal water tanks with the Arabic word for "sacrifice" painted across them. A twist of a tap at the bottom of one tank, and icy water gushed out. Several steep steps cut into the rock at the end of the cavern led to an access shaft about 15 feet high with a ladder soldered onto the lining of black metal plates.

Climbing up led us back outside into a thicket of stubby oak trees about 40 yards from the entrance and farther up the hill. The Israeli drone still prowled overhead, its cameras perhaps hunting for the three mysterious people who had suddenly disappeared into thin air on the hill.

Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Christopher Hitchens, May 29, 2007.
for those who have not seen them yet, note the street signs in the Muslim demonstrations in London.

Muslims at the French Embassy in London complain about cartoons, February 3, 2006. (Lefteris Pitarakis/AP Photo)

apparently the demonstrators are quite sure that they are going to win...and win big....otherwise they'd be worried that demanding genocide of all Danes for the 'crime' of insulting the Prophet (PBUH) might make some Brits and Danes angry.

Sad commentary on London today, with photos of arcane but lethal street theatre from the 2006 cartoon intifada.

The article below was written by Christopher Hitches and was published in Vanity Fair
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/06/hitchens200706? printable=true¤tPage=all

They say that the past is another country, but let me tell you that it's much more unsettling to find that the present has become another country, too. In my lost youth I lived in Finsbury Park, a shabby area of North London, roughly between the old Arsenal football ground and the Seven Sisters Road. It was a working-class neighborhood, with a good number of Irish and Cypriot immigrants. Your food choices were the inevitable fish-and-chips, plus the curry joint, plus a strong pitch from the Greek and Turkish kebab sellers. There was never much "bother," as the British say, in Finsbury Park. Greeks and Turks might be fighting in Cyprus, but they never lifted a hand to one another in London. Many of the Irish had republican allegiances, but they didn't take that out on the local Protestants. And, even though both Cyprus and Ireland had all the grievances of partitioned former British colonies, it would have seemed inconceivable -- unimaginable -- that any of their sons would put a bomb on the bus their neighbors used.

Returning to the old place after a long absence, I found that it was the scent of Algeria that now predominated along the main thoroughfare of Blackstock Road. This had had a good effect on the quality of the coffee and the spiciness of the grocery stores. But it felt odd, under the gray skies of London, to see women wearing the veil, and even swathed in the chador or the all-enveloping burka. Many of these Algerians, Bangladeshis, and others are also refugees from conflict in their own country. Indeed, they have often been the losers in battles against Middle Eastern and Asian regimes which they regard as insufficiently Islamic. Quite unlike the Irish and the Cypriots, they bring these far-off quarrels along with them. And they also bring a religion which is not ashamed to speak of conquest and violence.

Until he was jailed last year on charges of soliciting murder and inciting racial hatred, a man known to the police of several countries as Abu Hamza al-Masri was the imam of the Finsbury Park Mosque. He was a conspicuous figure because, having lost the use of an eye and both hands in an exchange of views in Afghanistan, he sported an opaque eye plus a hook to theatrical effect. Not as nice as he looked, Abu Hamza was nonetheless unfailingly generous with his hospitality. Overnight guests at his mosque's sleeping quarters have included Richard Reid, the man in whose honor we now all have to take off our shoes at the airport, and Zacarias Moussaoui, the missing team member of September 11, 2001. Other visitors included Ahmed Ressam, arrested for trying to blow up LAX for the millennium, and Nizar Trabelsi, a Tunisian who planned to don an explosive vest and penetrate the American Embassy in Paris. On July 7, 2005 ("7/7," as the British call it), a clutch of bombs exploded in London's transport system. It emerged that one of the suicide murderers had been influenced by the preachings of Abu Hamza, as had two of those attempting to replicate the mission two weeks later.

In fact, the British jihadist is becoming quite a feature on the international scene. In 1998, six British citizens of Pakistani and North African descent along with two other British residents were arrested by the government of Yemen and convicted of planning to kidnap a group of tourists and attack British targets in the port of Aden (scene of the near-sinking of the U.S.S. Cole two years later). One of the youths was the son of the tireless Abu Hamza, and another was his stepson. In December 2001, Richard Reid made his bid on the Paris-Miami flight. By then, two or three Britons had been killed in Afghanistan -- fighting on the side of the Taliban. The following year came the video butchering of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, whose abduction and murder were organized by another Briton -- a former student at the London School of Economics -- named Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh. And the year after that, two British-passport holders, Asif Mohammed Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif, took part in a suicide attack on Mike's Place, a Tel Aviv bar.

The British have always been proud of their tradition of hospitality and asylum, which has benefited Huguenots escaping persecution, European Jewry, and many political dissidents from Marx to Mazzini. But the appellation "Londonistan," which apparently originated with a sarcastic remark by a French intelligence officer, has come to describe a city which became home to people wanted for terrorist crimes as far afield as Cairo and Karachi. The capital of the United Kingdom is, in the words of Steven Simon, a former White House counterterrorism official, "the Star Wars bar scene," catering promiscuously to all manner of Islamist recruiters and fund-raisers for, and actual practitioners of, holy war.

In the aftermath of the 7/7 bombings, which killed 52 civilians (including a young Afghan, Atique Sharifi, who had fled to London to escape the Taliban) and injured hundreds more, I found that American television interviewers were all asking me the same question: How can this be? Britain is the country of warm beer and cricket and rain-lashed seaside resorts, not a place of arms for exotic and morbid cults. British press coverage struck the same plaintive note. One of the murderers, Shehzad Tanweer, was a cricket enthusiast from Leeds, in Yorkshire, whose family ran a fish-and-chips shop. You can't get much more assimilated than that. Yet Britain's former head of domestic intelligence, Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller (and you can't get much more British than that, either), said last year that there are more than "1,600 identified individuals" within the borders of the kingdom who are ready to follow Tanweer's example (including those in whose honor we now all have to part with our liquids and gels at the airport). And, according to Manningham-Buller, "over 100,000 of our citizens consider the July 2005 attacks in London justified."

I told those who were interviewing me to go back and review the 1997 film of Hanif Kureishi's brilliant short story "My Son the Fanatic," and then to reread Monica Ali's 2003 novel, Brick Lane. The film is set in a dilapidated Yorkshire mill town very like the ones that spawned the 7/7 bombers, and the book is named for an area of East London that is now mainly Bengali and Muslim but has been home to successive waves of Huguenot and Jewish immigration. I remember leaving the cinema after seeing My Son the Fanatic, and feeling a heavy sense of depression, along with a strong premonition of trouble to come. In the figures of Parvez, the Pakistani cabdriver, and his morose son, Farid, Kureishi had captured the generational essence of the problem. In the 1960s, many Asians moved to Britain in quest of employment and education. They worked hard, were law-abiding, and spent much of their time combating prejudice. Their mosques were more like social centers. But their children, now grown, are frequently contemptuous of what they see as their parents' passivity. Often stirred by Internet accounts of jihadists in faraway countries like Chechnya or Kashmir, they perhaps also feel the urge to prove that they have not "sold out" by living in the comfortable, consumerist West. A recent poll by the Policy Exchange think tank captures the problem in one finding: 59 percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under British law rather than Shari'a; 28 percent would choose Shari'a. But among those 55 and older, only 17 percent prefer Shari'a, whereas in the 16-to-24 age group the figure rises to 37 percent. Almost exactly the same proportions apply when the question is whether or not a Muslim who converts to another faith should be put to death ...

'They remind me of the 60s revolutionaries in some ways," said Hanif Kureishi as we sat in one of London's finest Indian restaurants. "A lot of romantic talk, but a hard-core faction who will actually volunteer to go to training camps." Making a rather sharp distinction between the new young fundamentalists and the 1960s rebels, he added that he had never met a jihadist who wasn't militantly anti-Semitic. Monica Ali, whose lovely novel also emphasizes the generational divide and captures the Third World-type pseudo-revolutionary rhetoric, independently told me the same thing. She had seen British television cave in to extremists who did not want her book made into a film, and who threatened trouble if the cameras were brought to the East End, but this did not alarm her as much as "the way that hatred of the Jews has become absolutely standard, all across the community."

It's interesting that it should be authors from Muslim backgrounds -- Salman Rushdie, Hanif Kureishi, Monica Ali, the broadcaster and co-author of the Policy Exchange report Munira Mirza -- who are issuing the warnings. For the British mainstream, multiculturalism has been the official civic religion for so long that any criticism of any minority group has become the equivalent of profanity. And Islamic extremists have long understood that they need only suggest a racial bias -- or a hint of the newly invented and meaningless term "Islamophobia" -- in order to make the British cough and shuffle with embarrassment. Prince Charles himself, the heir to the throne and thus the heir to the headship of the Church of England, has announced his sympathy for Islam and his wish to be the head of all faiths and not just one. This may sound good, if absurd (a chinless prince who becomes head of a church because his mother dies?), but only if you forget that it was Prince Charles who encouraged the late King Fahd, of Saudi Arabia, to contribute more than a million pounds to build ... the Finsbury Park Mosque! If you want my opinion, our old district was a lot better off when the crowned heads of the world were busy neglecting it.

Anyway, you can't be multicultural and preach murderous loathing of Jews, Britain's oldest and most successful (and most consistently anti-racist) minority. And you can't be multicultural and preach equally homicidal hatred of India, Britain's most important ally and friend after the United States. My colleague Henry Porter sat me down in his West London home and made me watch a documentary that he thought had received far too little attention when shown on Britain's Channel 4. It is entitled Undercover Mosque, and it shows film shot in quite mainstream Islamic centers in Birmingham and London (you can now find it easily on the Internet). And there it all is: foaming, bearded preachers calling for crucifixion of unbelievers, for homosexuals to be thrown off mountaintops, for disobedient and "deficient" women to be beaten into submission, and for Jewish and Indian property and life to be destroyed. "You have to bomb the Indian businesses, and as for the Jews, you kill them physically," as one sermonizer, calling himself Sheikh al-Faisal, so prettily puts it. This stuff is being inculcated in small children -- who are also informed that the age of consent should be nine years old, in honor of the prophet Muhammad's youngest spouse. Again, these were not tin-roof storefront mosques but well-appointed and well-attended places of worship, often the beneficiaries of Saudi Arabian largesse. It's not just the mosques, either. In West London there is a school named for Prince Charles's friend King Fahd, with 650 pupils, funded and run by the government of Saudi Arabia. According to Colin Cook, a British convert to Islam (initially inspired by the former crooner Cat Stevens) who taught there for 19 years, teaching materials said that Jews "engage in witchcraft and sorcery and obey Satan," and incited pupils to list the defects of worthless heresies such as Judaism and Christianity.

What this shows is the utter futility of the soft-centered explanations of the 7/7 bombings and other outrages. It was argued for a while that the 7/7 perpetrators were victims of unemployment and poverty, until their remains were identified and it became clear that most of them came from educated and reasonably well-off backgrounds. The excuses then abruptly switched, and we were asked to believe that it was Tony Blair's policy in Iraq and Afghanistan that motivated the killers. Suppose the latter to be true. It would still be the case that they belong to a movement that hates Jews and Indians and all kuffar, or "unbelievers": a fanatical sect that believes itself entitled to use deadly violence at any time. The roots of violence, that is to say, are in the preaching of it, and the sanctification of it.

If anything, Tony Blair is far too indulgent to this phenomenon. It is his policy of encouraging "faith schools" that has written sectarianism into the very fabric of British life. A non-Muslim child who lives in a Muslim-majority area may now find herself attending a school that requires headscarves. The idea of separate schools for separate faiths -- the idea that worked so beautifully in Northern Ireland -- has meant that children are encouraged to think of themselves as belonging to a distinct religious "community" rather than a nation. As Undercover Mosque also shows, Blair's government has appeased leading Muslim apologists by inviting them to join "commissions" to investigate the 7/7 attacks, and thus awarding them credibility well beyond their deserts. A preposterous and sinister individual named Inayat Bunglawala, assistant secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain and a man with a public record of support for Osama bin Laden, was made a convener of Blair's task force on extremism despite his stated belief that the BBC and the rest of the media are "Zionist controlled."

It's impossible to exaggerate how far and how fast this situation has deteriorated. Even at the time of the Satanic Verses affair, as long ago as 1989, Muslim demonstrations may have demanded Rushdie's death, but they did so, if you like, peacefully. And they confined their lurid rhetorical attacks to Muslims who had become apostate. But at least since the time of the Danish-cartoon furor, threats have been made against non-Muslims as well as ex-Muslims (see photograph), the killing of Shiite Muslim heretics has been applauded and justified, and the general resort to indiscriminate violence has been rationalized in the name of god. Traditional Islamic law says that Muslims who live in non-Muslim societies must obey the law of the majority. But this does not restrain those who now believe that they can proselytize Islam by force, and need not obey kuffar law in the meantime. I find myself haunted by a challenge that was offered on the BBC by a Muslim activist named Anjem Choudary: a man who has praised the 9/11 murders as "magnificent" and proclaimed that "Britain belongs to Allah." When asked if he might prefer to move to a country which practices Shari'a, he replied: "Who says you own Britain anyway?" A question that will have to be answered one way or another.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Sergio Tessa (HaDaR), May 29, 2007.

This is a news item from

The passport used by notorious Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann to enter Argentina in 1950 has been found by accident in an archive in Buenos Aires.

The passport, still in good condition, was issued by the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva.

Eichmann was one of the main executors of Adolf Hitler's 'final solution', the Nazi genocide of Jews during World War II.

A judge, Maria Servini de Cubria, stumbled upon the document in court archives.

The passport has been handed over to the Holocaust Museum in Buenos Aires, which confirmed the discovery.

After Nazi Germany was defeated by the Allies, Eichmann fled to Argentina where he was tracked down and kidnapped by the Israeli secret service.

He was sentenced to death in 1961 after a trial in Jerusalem and executed by hanging the following year.

Eichmann recommended improvements to the gas ovens used for mass murder in concentration camps where six million Jews were killed during World War II. -- AFP

Contact Sergio Tessa at HaDar-Israel@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 29, 2007.

In Israel and America the need for role models at the highest levels of government are desperately needed. I think back to the time when President John F. Kennedy said: "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." JFK was not a perfect man but the American nation took heart from his outstanding performance as a role model.

Comparatively, I think of men like Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert who said: "I'm tired of fighting; tired of being courageous; tired of winning, tired of defeating our enemies." That's a surprising comment since Olmert never served in combat.

Whatever is the antithesis of a role model, people like Olmert, FM Tzipi Livni, Defense Minister Amir Peretz, Deputy PM Shimon Peres are perceived as spiritual loners? What young person going into Israel's Army would rush to model himself after the corrupt, crooked and cowardly leaders who seem to despise being Jewish and hold as worthless the Land G-d gave to the Jewish people?

For a blink of time many considered Ariel Sharon, a valiant role model in courage when he creatively fought Israel's enemies. But, that was when he was a military man and focused his genius for combat against the enemy. Then he started to swim in the cesspool of Israeli politics as they have deteriorated in these later days, he turned his genius against his Jewish people. Arik was a fighting machine that didn't distinguish between the enemy and friends. So he became a role model for corruption like many preceding him and some of his contemporaries. Every nation needs her heroes to look up to and to emulate. The smaller the nation, the greater the need for role models of strong, ethical character.

Regrettably, nations and their peoples think they are choosing the right people to lead them -- only to be fooled once they control the seat of power. The people suddenly discover that the pre-election speeches were malicious lies and the control of government rests in the hands of powerful forces who funded the new leader(s). The corrupt elite then run a "Shadow Government" through the leaders they bought and paid for.

Ehud Olmert and his Kadima union of the most corrupt has led the nation into a swamp of risk. I wonder how many soldiers or school children would say: "I want to be like PM Olmert when I grow up."?

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon picked Menachem Mazuz as his Attorney General. Why? Perhaps (or for sure) he knew the State was likely to catch him in one (or more) of his illegal deals and he needed someone he could twist to cover up for him. (1)

Who is Mazuz? I don't know him personally (as I do several other Israelis mentioned here) -- but, several of his rulings have been very negative to the State and indicative of his true character. Just search Google at "Menachem Mazuz Attorney General rulings".

The JNF (Jewish National Fund), a 100+ year old charity collected money from Jews all over the world to buy land in Eretz Yisrael for Jews. Menachem Mazuz ruled May 24th, that the JNF could not "discriminate" against Arabs in selling Jewish-bought land for them to build on. "Today JNF owns 13% of Israel's land, home to 70% of her population. Land owned by the fund is designated as public land and leased by the government to homeowners." JNF's Chairman Yehiel Leket said, "The state is obliged to treat all its citizens equally but, we are not the state." (2) & (3)

Just a few of Mazuz's other rulings included: "Attorney General recommends that the barrier route be re-routed...because of the International Court of Justice (ICJ)'s non-binding ruling that parts of the barrier built on Palestinian land were illegal." (4)

Mazuz is in favor of 'small', 'modest' Gay parade in Jerusalem as of May 11, 2006. (5)

Attorney General's emphasis on the democratic character of the state as opposed to its Jewish character has opened the way for missionary groups such as Jehovah's Witnesses to operate in Israel, according to former justice minister Ya'akov Ne'eman. (6)

Mazuz ordered eviction of families from Peace House in Hebron on Jewish owned land, even if the house were legally acquired for $700,000 -- because the settlers still required permission from the Israeli Civil Administration to inhabit it -- (or so said Amir Peretz now resigned as incompetent). The IDF assisted them to move in and the Defense Minister said he didn't give permission?! (7)

Mazuz is merely another prototype of a party hack on call by those who hired him and kept him in office. But, that's all these low lifes want...to be kept in office, paid money, given perks, and to have friends at high levels to keep them out of jail.


As for President George W. Bush, he started out on a high note as he told the American people he was going to fight world terror. But, over time in order to please the Saudis we find he is funding the Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah who are called "moderates" but who are also in reality Muslim Arab Palestinians terrorists.

May 29th -- this just in: A 40% breakaway faction of Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah militant (read: terrorists) wing of Al Aksa Martyrs' Brigade has just announce that they are joining Hamas. No doubt, they will take with them the arms and ammunition given them by Olmert and Bush, including the CIA training in how to kill.

We watch in shock as Bush, his family, the cohorts of his oil world manipulate oil and gas prices so the world's oil magnates can post sensationally high, usurious profits. Bush could have won the war in Iraq but, his judgement and that of his advisors was too simplistic. They never understand the Middle East and the Muslim Islamists whose goal was simply world domination for Islam, a Global Caliphate run by Muslims.

Neither Bush nor the pro-Arab U.S. State Department took into account that every Arab Muslim State was run under a strong man dictatorship -- whatever it was called. They knew and understood the volatility of the people they ruled with an iron hand. Brutal suppression was the rule -- not the exception.

But, Bush and his oil supporters did not comprehend any of this. . Neither Bush, nor his father Bush, James Baker, Condi Rice, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld would be a role model for young Americans. But, America is a Super Power that will survive almost any assault, whereas Israel is a very small nation in a sea of hostile Arab Muslims who may not allow her to survive (G-d forbid) especially given her weak defeatist government. No Role Models here.

We hear stories of young Americans visiting Israel looking for ideological clarity and spiritual roots in a vibrant Judaism. What they find is many young Israelis asking them why they are volunteering, when they Israelis are looking for a way out? Once Israeli kids were anxious to join the elite Golani brigades to fight for their country. Now with accused and indicted criminals, self-serving leaders, leading the nation, there is a growing attitude of "What's the point?"

Role models like Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Yossi Beilin, Ehud Barak, Arik Sharon, Ehud Olmert, Tzipi Livni, 'et al', have demonstrated they have little or no use for being Jewish and that the Jewish Land is just a place they happen to live until they move out.

Israel needs decent leaders, role models of courage and ethics. To accomplish this the entire elitist political establishment must be driven out of office along with every institution dedicated to bring the State to her knees.

Here I include the current and past Prime Minister, the Cabinet, the Knesset, the Attorney General, the heads of the Court system, the politically-driven secret service, police, politically driven officers of the IDF (Israel Defense Forces). I could also add the Hebrew media, which has demonstrated their dedication to goals of the Left who have long ago became political parties under the guise of reporting the news.

All of the above are Israel's people current role models for defeat while teaching the public to have no honor for the Land or for Jewish national memory.

When Olmert blabs, gushes and threatens the terrorists, all know he is what Americans call a flannel mouth. He orders restraint and then has the Israeli Air Force blow up vacant buildings. Not surprisingly, there are few reported casualties of terrorists -- given that they have gone underground or melded into the civilian population. Olmert and his gang of Kadima are only role models for cowardice, treachery, betrayal and avoidance of responsibility.

Of course, they could be role models conveying a better lesson IF they were put in enclosed glass partitions before a Peoples' Court of Justice as was done with Saddam Hussein and his cohorts. That would be a powerful lesson to the Leftists, the selfish elitists who feed off of the nation like parasites and always the politically corrupt media. Indeed, negative role models forced to tell about their roles in subverting the Jewish nation can be significant lessons to the people.

But, not to worry. Even as your read, know that the Labor Party Hacks are voting to divide up the people pie: that's YOU! You probably didn't know that you (the public) are merely a commodity to be bought, sold and divided up like a bunch of carrots. Labor is bringing back Ehud Barak as their newest old Role Model for you to follow -- head of the Labor Party to again become Prime Minister, they hope. He was the schlepper who offered Yassir Arafat most of Israel and also ran like a rat from Israel's security zone in South Lebanon in the middle of the night. But, that's not all, that will be offered.

Shimon Peres is running for President of Israel. He should round out the re-runs of Party Hacks.


1. "Police rules out Sharon's bribery case complete before election"

2. "In Watershed, Israel Deems Land-use Rules of Zionist Icon 'Discriminatory' " JNF Scored Over 'Jews-only' Sales" by Nathaniel Popper Forward.com Feb. 4, 2005

3. "Israel: Land bought for Jews must be shared with Arabs: Despite hundreds of million s of dollars specifically designated by non-profit group" by Aaron Klein WorldNetDaily.com May 24, 2007

4. "Israel court orders barrier reply"
http://news/bbc/co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3583222.stm Aug. 20, 2004

5. "Mazuz's solution : 'Modest' Gay parade" by Efrat Weis

6. "A-G backs Jehovah's Witnesses' equal rights demand" Feb. 12, 2007

7. "Mazuz: Settlers have 30 days to challenge Hebron eviction order" by Mazal Mualem, Nadav Shargai & Amos Harel Ha'aretz April 12, 2007

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 winstonmedia@interaccess.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 29, 2007.

Despite a much-touted internal ceasefire, the Mecca Agreement, Hamas and Fatah men still are shooting at each other. The Palestinian Center for Human Rights wrings its hands over the shooting of civilian bystanders (IMRA, 5/13).

Latest example is a child shot on 5/13. How does the world react to news of bystanders caught in the line of fire between clans and terrorists? The editorials are silent; diplomats are preoccupied; human rights organizations look away.

When Israeli troops accidentally shoot an Arab bystander, the editors come to life, the diplomats warn Israel, and the human rights organizations denounce it. They don't honor human rights, they oppose Jewish rights.

Muslims who can't keep peace agreements with each other cannot be relied upon to keep agreements with infidels.


Israeli defense officials unofficially criticize the US benchmarks for Israel for greatly facilitating terrorism. The government has yet to demand that the benchmarks be changed and to what (IMRA, 5/13).

Israel's government does not represent its people or doesn't know how to.


The government of Iraq's first contracts for oil (probably for development) went to non-American companies. The US is not, as accused, in Iraq to seize its oil (Victor Davis Hanson in Winston Mid East Analysis, 5/8).


The king's nephew, representing a different faction from the king, came up with the Saudi plan that Israel thinks it might adopt, if modified. Then the king degraded relations with the US and backed jihadists in Teheran and the P.A.. The Saudi King may not approve his nephew's plan (IMRA, 5/13).


Israel has devised several means of strengthening Jerusalem's function as the center of its government. It would move more government offices there, build a court complex, set up a school on Jerusalem affairs, and cancel an employers tax there (IMRA, 5/13). Meanwhile, the government wants to give away much of the city, including Judaism's holiest site, to the Arabs.


Different areas on the Temple Mount are of differing sanctity to the Jewish people, that built it. Centuries after the second Hebrew Temple was destroyed, Jews became unsure which areas were which. They felt it safer not to ascend the Mount at all, lest they violate its sanctity.

Taking advantage of reticence by observant Jews, Muslims tighten their grip on the Mount, illegally expanding their buildings on it, illegally excavating below it, and illegally destroying ancient Jewish artifacts found in it. The Muslims were helped in this by a government and police hostile to Judaism and fearful of Muslim rioting if Jews were allowed up and to pray there. What kind of law and order in Israel is that! Christians also are not allowed to pray there. Although defeated in their war to exterminate the Jews, the Muslims were allowed by Israel to manage the Mount, and do so in their usual intolerant manner ' they don't recognize the sovereignty of the Jewish state. Tolerance could not be expected from a faith that teaches the duty to humble or extirpate other religions and which in recent decades emphasizes its belief that other faiths are evil.

Now, Arutz-7 tells us, the religious Jews are coming to accept a scholar's designation of which areas are the holiest and which may be entered, with proper religious preparation. Forty rabbis ascended, under police protection, in a demonstration of this and in fulfillment of their faith (5/14).

Isn't it shameful of Islam that Jews ascending and praying on their Temple Mount need police protection from Muslims?


This year, the US is joining the EU in boycotting Jerusalem Independence Day. They are deferring to the Muslim claim for Jerusalem, and ignoring a Congressional Mandate that the birth certificate of any US citizen born in Jerusalem state the country of birth as Israel and that the US move its Israel embassy to that city (Arutz-7, 5/14). But it is in Israel now, future negotiation results notwithstanding.

Pres. Bush, thought pro-Israel lets the State Dept. run US foreign policy.


The government finally decided to explain to the world that Iran is turning Gaza into a terrorist enclave and center, heavily armed for war (Arutz-7, 5/14). It is too late for public relations and almost too late for a military solution. The government cowardly hopes to substitute P.R. for armed force.

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 richardshulman5verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, May 28, 2007.
This was written by Hana Levi Julian and appeared in Arutz-Sheva

(IsraelNN.com) A long-sought Palestinian Authority terrorist was taken into custody by a Special Forces team late Monday afternoon in a joint operation between the IDF, Police Counter-terrorism Unit and General Security Services (Shin Bet).

Khaled Shawish, a senior commander in the Al-Aksa Martyrs' Brigades terrorist organization, sponsored by PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah faction, was cornered in his car by Israeli forces in Ramallah.

The top terrorist has spent the past few years hiding out in Chairman Abbas' headquarters in the Muqata compound, where former PLO chairman Yasser Arafat lived out his last years trapped by the IDF. A gang of gunmen, including Shawish, was sheltered in Abbas' headquarters during Operation Defensive Shield in 2002.

Binyamin-Ze'ev Kahane, the son of the late Rabbi Meir Kahane, and his wife Talia were shot to death and their five daughters seriously wounded in a December 2000 terror attack in which Shawish played a key role.

The Fatah-linked murderer was responsible for the deaths of eighteen other people and the wounding of dozens in numerous attacks, including several in and around Jerusalem.

Among the attacks orchestrated by Shawish were:

- a 2002 suicide bombing on King George Street in Jerusalem
-- a 2002 suicide bombing by a female terrorist at a checkpoint just outside Jerusalem
-- a shooting attack in the French Hill neighborhood of Jerusalem

IDF soldiers shot the senior commander but didn't manage to catch him in 2001; they did, however, disable him to the point that PA officials tried to convince Israel to allow him to go abroad for surgical treatment. He never went.

Outspoken National Jewish Front leader Baruch Marzel, himself a close associate of the the terror victim Rabbi Binyamin Kahane, demanded that Shawish be turned over to supporters of Rabbi Meir and Binyamin Kahane. Marzel was quoted by the Kol Rinah news service as saying, "We can't rely on the justice system and [we] believe the murderer will be freed in a terrorist [exchange] deal. We'll know how to take care of him."

Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 28, 2007.

After you read the following, you will only have touched on the betrayal and treason of individuals within the Israeli government. The forced evacuation of 10,000 men, women and children from 21 communities of Gush Katif from Gaza and 4 more communities from North Samaria was only one indicator of a perfidious plan to drive good Jews out of many areas where they pioneered.

While the operational hand of this insidious plan are the politically compromised Police Force, the orders start at a higher level -- even beyond the corrupt government. Look for the hand of the Arabist U.S. State Department wired to the Saudis who mistakenly believe that driving the Jews from the Land will appease and pacify the Arab Islamic Terrorists.

To believe that the Terror will cease when the Jews are gone and the Palestinian Muslim Arabs are given the Land is naive and wishful thinking. Meanwhile, Gaza -- as predicted -- is turning into a global terror operational fire base, indicative of what could happen to Judea and Samaria IF Olmert has his way.

It no longer matters if the Police were ordered to attack Jews in the East Gush Etzion block south of Bethlehem because they are now like trained vicious attack dogs who cannot be de-programmed. Those who give the orders are so totally compromised, they can only be categorized as enemies of the Jewish people.

Christians would say they are possessed and cannot be exorcized of their demons.

Jews could say their souls were taken by a Dybbuk, deemed to be an evil spirit. Becoming a traitor or quisling can happen to ordinary men and women without the mystique of the devil's hand.

The Plan, however, to drive the Jews from the Land is personally evil and driven by the same monsters who choose to aid Hitler's Genocide by not lifting a hand to stop it.

I believe its planners, along with its enablers are a cursed lot and what they bring upon themselves and their nations is a choice they will regret.

They are already experiencing the results of their planning as a "Judenrein" (Jew-free) Gaza turns into a small bit of Hell. Iraq has already become a graveyard for American young soldiers while the "Mujahadin" (Muslim warriors for "Jihad" Holy War) are reported to be spreading into Europe, America and other parts of the world.

The Taliban in Afghanistan have re-energized all in sequence as the Jews are forced from a Land G-d gave them in perpetuity.

It takes either a fool or a brave fool to spit in the Eye of G-d.

This comes from Israeli & Global News and is entitled "Israeli Police Said To Ignore Arab Attacks In W. Bank". It was written by Elli Rodan of Hebron (www.Israeljustice.com).

On a recent Friday morning, about 15 Arabs from a village south of Bethlehem entered the tiny Jewish community of Sde Boaz, uprooted trees and destroyed equipment. When Jewish residents ran to the scene the Arabs began to fight them, swinging sticks and hoes.

Several Jews were injured. Israeli police were called. They refused to arrest the Arabs. The reason: Israel's military determined that Sde Boaz was established on what authorities termed "disputed land."

But Sde Boaz is not alone. Jewish residents and attorneys maintain that since the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and northern West Bank in 2005, authorities have prosecuted Jewish settlers in response to complaints by Palestinians. But Jewish complaints of Arab assaults, burglaries and vandalism have been ignored.

"This has been a phenomenon for years," Naftali Wurtzburger, an attorney who has defended many Jews in these cases, said. "But in past few years it has worsened. I'm not sure where the initiative comes from [to prosecute the Jews] or whether it is an independent initiative of the police. But I suspect they have specific guidelines from the prosecutor's office."

The police policy has not distinguished between unauthorized Jewish outposts and recognized Jewish communities. In early 2007, police refused to arrest or prosecute Arab suspects in a series of burglaries of the Jewish settlement of Bat Ayin in the Etzion Bloc south of Jerusalem.

In February, Bat Ayin resident Erez Levanon was assaulted and killed near Bat Ayin by who residents said were the people who had been burglarizing the community. This time, the police came out in force to surround mourners who came for the funeral and prevent them from retaliating.

In many cases, police have warned Jews not to submit complaints against Arabs. Those who have were subjected to raids on their homes, summons and searches.

"First of all, they arrest the Jews," Knesset member Arieh Eldad, a member of the State Audit Committee, said. "I don't think they have any written directives. But they receive oral instructions from the commanding officer."

The 30 residents of Sde Boaz, established in 2002 as part of plans by the Gush Etzion Regional Council, regard the police and Arab attackers as working together. The Arabs, guided by Israeli Jews funded by the European Union, have repeatedly vandalized Sde Boaz and threatened violence.

"It appears that in these cases Israeli authorities are collaborating with the same kind of group possessing the same kind of funding who are assaulting Israeli soldiers in Bilin [south of Ram'Allah]": Yitzhak Klein, director of the Jerusalem-based Israel Policy Center.

In February, 30 Palestinians, accompanied by 10 foreigners and several Israelis, arrived at Sde Boaz and uprooted 1,500 saplings from the community's orchard. The unarmed Jewish residents tried to stop the intruders but did not assault them.

Sde Boaz residents submitted a complaint to Hebron police against the Palestinians and foreigners from the International Solidarity Movement and the Israelis who belonged to the Israeli-based Taayush organization. Instead, police summoned all of the males of Sde Boaz and accused them of attacking the Arabs.

The police also declared the orchards a "closed zone," thus banning the Jews from tending to their trees. Officers raided Sde Boaz homes without a warrant in what residents said was a search for gardening tools that could cut olive trees.

"They [the police] just act like a group of criminals," H., a Sde Boaz resident under police investigation, said. "The police began to come around and investigate everyone in Sde Boaz they came into contact with. They opened criminal files and charged them with attacks [of Arabs]. They also conducted an illegal search in our home."

On May 4, the Palestinians returned to vandalize at Sde Boaz. This time, residents were ready and called for reinforcements at the neighboring community of Neve Daniel. Fights erupted between the Arabs and Jews and the intruders fled.

Again, Sde Boaz and Gush Etzion Council members who arrived at the scene demanded that police arrest the Arabs. Police, citing a dispute over the land, said three Arabs were detained and then released.

"Three Palestinians were detained for uprooting saplings," West Bank police spokesman Moshe Pinchi told Israeljustice.com. "Criminal proceedings were not initiated against the three because the police had to wait for a decision from the Civil Administration as to rightful ownership of the land. I don't know how long this will take. Depending on the report, criminal files can be opened."

Jewish residents believe that the police policy has been the result of government directives meant to undermine the settlement movement in the West Bank. Some of the residents said they were told by military officers that the Civil Administration was ordered to side with Arabs in all land disputes as part of a government policy to unilaterally withdraw from most of the West Bank.

"The police act as if they are the police that serve the enemy," said Yoram Sheftel, a leading Israeli trial attorney who has defended Jewish settlers. Sheftel said the policy has also been reflected in cases where Jews were attacked by Arabs unrelated to land disputes. He cited the conviction of two army-appointed security officers of the Jewish community of Maaleh Rehavam, south of Bethlehem, summoned to respond to Bedouin infiltrators. The officers, Dan and Yitzhak Halamish, were sentenced to eight months in jail after being convicted of aggravated assault. "This case is a catastrophe," Sheftel said. "They [the Halamish brothers] were certainly in true danger."

Yaakov Talia, a 49-year-old emigrant from South Africa, has been a farmer for the last 15 years in the south Hebron Hills. Talia has been repeatedly attacked by Palestinians and Israeli and foreign supporters and harassed by Hebron police.

A leading Israeli agitator has been Ezra Nawi, a 55-year-old Israeli plumber who heads Taayush. Nawi has led Palestinians in attacking Talia and his family.

On Sept. 15, 2006, Nawi led five Palestinians from the nearby village of Samoa to Talia's farm. The group threw stones and cursed the Jewish family and Nawi dropped his pants and exposed himself in front of Talia's wife. Talia photographed Nawi's act and submitted a complaint to Hebron police. Nawi, who maintains contact with police officials, was never prosecuted. Instead, on March 28, 2007, police closed the investigation for lack of evidence.

At the same time, police have arrived at Talia's farm 3 times in as many months and charged him with attacking Arabs. Talia said a police investigator, Superintendent Avi Rotenberg told him not to carry his army-issued weapon on his farm because it provoked Arabs. "We have lodged numerous complaints with the Hebron police," Talia wrote in a complaint to the police. "These include incitement, provocations, obscenities, trespassing, illegal ploughing on the Sabbath without Civil Administration supervision, disturbing the public order and more. To date, nothing has been done, and every week, they incite the area and occupy staffs of police, army and civilians."

Arab and Israeli agitators often spend Saturdays vandalizing Jewish settlements south of Hebron. In some cases, the Arabs vandalized or steal property and livestock from such fully-recognized communities as Maon, Beit Yatir and Susya. Police and army troops arrived but made no arrests.

The Justice Ministry, which in 2005 issued guidelines against right-wing opponents of the government, denied directives for police to ignore Arab vandalism and other crime against Jews. The ministry did not relate to the police decisions to close the files of Jewish complaints against Arabs.

"Decisions to serve an indictment or not in a criminal case are made, on the one hand, after the evidence is considered and on the other hand, after assessing the public interest in serving the indictment," Justice Ministry spokesperson Ganit Ben Moshe said. "All cases and their circumstances are examined thoroughly and professionally in this framework of judicial considerations. As to the question of how many defendants and their diversities according to ethnicity -- we don't have any data."

The Judean and Samarian regional police command would not provide data for arrests that stemmed from Jewish complaints against Arabs. But police officials did provide details of their arrests of Jewish residents of the West Bank to the European Union-funded Yesh Din, which monitors Arab rights.

"We have reciprocal relations with the police in the Shai [Judea and Samaria] region,'' Lior Yavne, Yesh Din research director told Israeljustice.com. "We also have professional working relations with them in the day-to-day affairs."

In June 2006, Yesh Din, quoting police data, reported a steady increase in criminal charges against Jewish residents of the West Bank. The report said the increase was detected in 2005 as police rounded up Jewish protesters of the government's plan to withdraw from the Gaza Strip and northern West Bank.

From January to September 2005, the report said, more than 800 Jewish residents of the West Bank were arrested resulting in 150 indictments. The report quoted police commander Cmdr. Yisrael Yitzhak as saying that most of the Jews were detained amid the destruction of four communities in the northern West Bank in August 2005.

The police said 43 Israelis were indicted on charges of assaulting Palestinians in 2005. The indictments stemmed from 299 Palestinian complaints against Israelis. "This means that 14.5 percent of the complainants were Palestinians," Pinchi, the West Bank police spokesman, said in a response to the Yesh Din report. "Eighteen out of the 43 indictments were for land disputes and this amounts to six percent of all the cases.

In the first quarter of 2006, 250 criminal cases were opened against Jews in the West Bank, police said. In all, 151 indictments were filed, eight of them on charges of injuring Palestinians.

"Fundamentally, the decision to tolerate and even collaborate with organizations that only mean ill to Israel is a policy decision made at the highest levels," Klein said. "The future of this policy depends on who in Jerusalem is making the decisions."

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 winstonmedia@interaccess.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 28, 2007.
May 28, 2007

As I send this out, there is not yet a clear winner in the Labor party primary. Barak and Ayalon are running so neck-in-neck that the exit poll of one TV channel declared one and winner and the poll of another TV channel declared another ahead. In due course we shall hear and the vast likelihood is that there will have to be a run-off after this in any event.


It has been formally announced that Shimon Peres is running for the presidency; he is the only candidate from Kadima. Olmert has expressed strong support for him, but I figure if Shimon wins that's a good way for Olmert to get him out of his hair. Not every member of Kadima is supporting him; some have already declared support either for Reuven Rivlin (Likud) or Colette Avital (Labor). There is still time for others to join the campaign, but it's not clear that anyone will. Election is June 13.


Eleven (count them: 11) Kassams landed in the western Negev today. One man was lightly wounded; two landed in a open wheat field causing a fire. Ironically, while Peretz was casting his vote in the Labor primary today in Sderot, where he lives, three rockets hit.

Olmert is saying that we have to dig in for an extended operation -- that this won't be over soon. But, I'm sorry, that is simply not good enough. Defense officials insist that Hamas is hurting and that we will see results. When precisely that will be, they won't predict.

All sorts of suggestions are being advanced -- from unofficial quarters -- on how to stop the barrage without actually doing a ground operation (the thought of which clearly makes Olmert nervous): Turn off their electricity; cut their water for three hours for each rocket; level any location from which rockets are launched, etc.

Meanwhile, it has been announced that Sderot buildings that have been reinforced in the last two years are vulnerable to rockets, because the reinforcement was based on calculations for smaller rockets -- the power of them has since been roughly doubled.

Still unclear is the gov't intention should Kassams stop: Do we let Hamas control our agenda, or do we keep going after Hamas in any event.


Every death of an innocent from violence is a source of great sadness. But sometimes a particular death hits harder in the gut. So was it with Oshri Oz, who was buried today. Stories made the news about how his wife, six-months pregnant, was watching the news on television and saw pictures of a rocket landing near a car -- and recognized that it was his car, and collapsed. She collapsed again today at the funeral. Does the world know? Does the world care?


The flip side of this pain, as always, is the enormous humanity of the people of Israel, who rally especially to help each other. In Sderot there is a Hesder yeshiva -- the hesder program combines religious study and army service. The students now have launched a yad-b'yad (hand in hand) campaign. They are going out in pairs to various neighborhoods of Sderot, lending help, offering words of encouragement. This is Israel at her finest.


So is this: A Magen David ambulance today transferred an 8-day old Palestinian baby from Gaza to the Sheba Medical Center in Tel Hashomer; the child has a congenital heart defect and would not live long without surgery. "We transfer patients from the Gaza Strip under fire on a daily basis," said Moshe Vaknin, of MDA. "Last week, our medics continued to treat a patient while shells were fired at the terminal at Erez. During the Shavuot holiday we evacuated another baby in an incubator, endangering our staff."

Dr. Dudu Mishali, head of the Department of Pediatric & Congenital Cardiothoracic Surgery at the hospital, said that on the average three Palestinian children arrive in his department every week. "We have daily communications by phone and fax with doctors in Gaza. There is no heart surgeon in the Strip, so they transfer all of these children, and there are many, to be operated on here."

The PA pays half the costs, and the other half is paid for by donations raised by the hospital.


Egypt is very worried about what's going on in Gaza because if the IDF goes in, there may be a flood of Palestinians trying to cross into Egypt. And so Egypt has called the major Palestinian factions to a meeting in Cairo, to discuss ways of bringing quiet to the region -- starting with quiet between the factions, which Egypt believes must come first. Yesterday I wrote that Fatah said that they wouldn't be meeting with Hamas at this meeting; but Hamas people have now changed their minds, and they will be participating.


Rashid Abu Shabak, who was Fatah top security chief in Gaza, has resigned. The word is that he feels he did not get sufficient support from Abbas for his plans to impose law and order on Hamas. This is likely so, but the fact that six of his body guards were killed recently may also have had something to do with it.

His resignation is being seen as a blow to Abbas and Fatah -- the "moderate" faction. But I never miss an opportunity to share information about these "moderates." Abu Shabak, who worked as a deputy to Muhammad Dahlan, was the one who personally supervised the preparation of the bomb when Dahlan gave the order for an attack on a school bus in 2000.


Meanwhile, with the approval of the US, donor funds are flowing, via the PLO, to an account controlled by PA Finance Minister Salam Fayyad. The money is expected to be sufficient to pay the PA government workers half their salaries.

However...15 anonymous gunmen have now abducted Hashim Abu Nada, the director general of the PA finance ministry.


The IDF, working with the Shin Bet, has arrested Khaled Shawish, one of the top leaders of Al Aksa Brigades in Ramallah. Wanted by Israel since 2000, he is responsible for the deaths of several Israelis, including Rabbi Binyamin Kahane, son of Rabbi Meir Kahane, and his wife; he has sent out suicide bombers on several occasions. Shawish spent considerable time hiding in the Mukatah, headquarters of the PA president, which Arafat used to shield many wanted terrorists.

Arlene Kushner is Senior Research Associate, Center for Near East Policy Research, Beit Agron International Press Center, Jerusalem, Israel. Contact her at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, May 28, 2007.

Part 1- Hamas TV continues promotion of Shahada (martyrdom) for children

Hamas TV continues active promotion of Shahada (martyrdom) directed at children. The new video clip, broadcast Sunday, follows the growth of a young Palestinian boy from a child into a Hamas Shahid -- Martyr for Allah. The video shows the young child going to the mosque, praying and reading from the Quran, and then holding an automatic rifle together with the Quran as he envisions future participation in violent acts.

View video on YouTube or on PMW website.

[See part 2 below for an overview of the history of this phenomenon including links to numerous videos encouraging children to be Shahid -- Martyrs]

The child then matures into a Hamas fighter, is shown participating in battle against Israel, and eventually dying as a Shahid as the choir sings, "The pure blood will produce honor and glory."

This video directs Palestinian children to aspire to Shahada, reiterating a recurring music video theme of seven years that Shahada is expected of children. "Honor and glory" and "Shahada is sweet" are some of these messages specifically packaged for children on Hamas TV and Fatah controlled PA TV.

PA schoolbooks likewise promote Shahada death among children. One example: "O heroes... Do not talk yourselves into flight. Your enemies seek life while you seek death. These drops of blood that gush from your bodies will be transformed tomorrow into blazing red meteors that will fall down upon the heads of your enemies." [Reading and Texts Part II, Grade 8 (2002), p. 16]

The following is an excerpt from the new clip on Hamas TV:

"We have come!
Machine-gun and Quran in our hands,
[visual: see child holding machine-gun and Quran]
We've grown and so has the right,
In the eyes of the wronged,
[visual: see child turn into adult and attack Israel] ...
We swore to retrieve the land,
The pure blood will produce
Honor and glory.
[visual: see him (child now turned adult) shot dead as Shahid -- Martyr]
[Al-Aqsa TV, May 27, 2007]

View video on YouTube or on PMW website.

Part 2: Overview of the history of promotion of children's Shahada (Martyrdom)

Shahada for children is a recurring message on both Fatah-controlled PA TV and Hamas-controlled Al Aqsa TV.

1. Hamas TV has been broadcasting regularly from March to May 2007 a video dramatization of the four-year-old daughter of female suicide bomber Reem Riyashi singing to her dead mother and vowing to follow in her footsteps. The video clip ends as the little girl picks up explosives from her mother's drawer.

View video on YouTube or on PMW website.

2. Another Hamas video encouraging the participation of children in terrorism focuses on Ahmed Yassin, the Hamas founder and religious leader killed by Israel. The video portrays young children as the continuation of Yassin's legacy. Children are shown in uniforms, holding rifles and participating in military training. The lyrics stress the children's connection to Yassin: "Even though they killed our [Ahmad] Yassin, the land will grow a thousand Ahmad."

View video on YouTube or on PMW website.

3. In another video, which was broadcast on Fatah-controlled Palestinian Authority TV hundreds of times from 2001 to 2004, a young boy leaves a farewell letter to his parents and goes off to seek Shahada, describing the death he aspires as "sweet." This PA clip is designed to offset a child's natural fear of death, by depicting Shahada as heroic and tranquil.

View video on YouTube or on PMW website.

4. From 2000 to 2003, PA TV broadcast a music video depicting the delightful Shahid paradise of Muhammad Al-Dura, who died in crossfire. The child actor is shown flying a kite, frolicking on the beach and even at an amusement park. The clip opens with an invitation to other children from Al-Dura to aspire to Shahada: "I am waving to you not in parting, but to say 'follow me'." This video directing children to follow Al Dura to paradise as Martyrs was suddenly broadcast again in June, 2006, after Israeli troops had gathered at the border of the Gaza Strip, following the kidnapping of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.

View video on YouTube or on PMW website.

5. The result of such virulent propaganda is apparent, when listening to the interview on PA TV with two 11-year-old Palestinian girls talking about Shahada and describing it as a primary ideal and personal goal. They explain that "all Palestinian children" view Shahada as more worthwhile than living because of its promised grand Afterlife.

View video on YouTube or on PMW website.

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.

To Go To Top

Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, May 28, 2007.
This was written by Avi Klar and it appeared May 16, 2007 in Hamodia.

There is an old story about the time a man asked his farmer neighbor whether he could borrow his donkey for a day.

"I'm sorry, but my donkey is out on a long journey and won't be back for another three days," the neighbor replied.

At that very moment, loud braying was heard from the barn located only a few feet from where they were standing.

"Your donkey is right here!" the would-be borrower said.

The neighbor was indignant. "Whom are you going to believe, your longtime neighbor or a dumb donkey?"

George Tenet's recently published memoirs prove that while his abilities as CIA director are highly questionable, he is eminently qualified at the art of distorting and manipulating facts.

He starts his book with a powerful anecdote that supposedly occurred early on the morning of September 12, 2001. Tenet claims he was walking beneath the awning that leads to the West Wing when he saw Richard Perle, described as one of the leaders of the neoconservative movement, exiting the building. Tenet writes, "Perle turned to me and said, ' Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday. They bear responsibility.'"

Great story. But it never happened. Perle revealed this week that he was in Europe on Sept. 12, 2001, unable to get a return flight to Washington, and that he "did not tell Tenet that Iraq was responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks, not then, not ever."

Tenet uses much of his book -- which runs more than five hundred pages -- to try to disassociate himself from the faulty intelligence that led to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. He tries his hardest to put the blame on virtually everyone but himself, with one of his favorite targets being Vice President Cheney. In fact, he is clearly determined to dissociate himself from any possible failures, while making it clear to all that modesty is not among his attributes.

After years of speculation, Tenet openly and defiantly acknowledges that he threatened Bill Clinton that he would resign if Clinton pardoned Pollard as part of the Wye River peace accord. He claims that if Pollard would have been pardoned he would have been "through as CIA director," for he would have "no moral capital left with my troops."

Somehow the irony of his statement eludes him. While he felt that for the president to pardon Pollard was enough reason for him to resign, for the United States to go to war over non-existent weapons of mass destructions wasn't.

No single event has so humiliated the United States' intelligence-gathering forces as the Iraqi WMD flap. While the CIA's abject failure -- on Tenet's watch -- to infiltrate Osama bin Ladin's inner circle prior to September 11 can possibly be defended, sending young men and women to war based on lies and misinformation is inexcusable and unforgivable.

So is Tenet's conduct towards Pollard. In one way, however, it is perhaps not surprising; for, elsewhere in his book, Tenet declares that he couldn't help but like Yassir Arafat.

What I did find surprising is Tenet's claim that then-Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich phoned Clinton to oppose Pollard's release. Tenet further says that it was Gingrich's call that "cemented the president's determination not to release Pollard."

With Tenet's record of skewing the truth, this may in fact be another figment of his over-active imagination. However, the onus is now on Gingrich to deny this accusation. In recent days Gingrich has indicated a "great possibility" of running for president.

He ought to be asked whether he made that call, and his answer should influence how much support he will get from our community.

In any case, the donkey has brayed, and those who had any doubts about the character and legacy of Mr. Tenet now know that their suspicions were correct all along.

See Also:

* Tenet accused of lying in his memoirs: Aaron Klein -- Worldnetdaily.com
* Tenet: Ross responsible for Pollard's continued imprisonment -- Judith Klinghoffer -- Mavens.com
* Former CIA Chief Changes Tune on Pollard http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2007/051807.htm
* The Wye Double-Cross Page
* Exerpts from "The Missing Peace" Dennis Ross
* Terror in The US and The Jonathan Pollard Case: Larry Dub Esq. -- Worldnetdaily.com

Contact Justice for Jonathan Pollard at justice4jp@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Uri Dromi, May 28, 2007.

An open letter to a Hamas supporter in Gaza:

So, over the last 40 years Israelis have been told constantly by the world to pull out of Gaza and the West Bank. Two years ago we did evacuate Gaza, but what did we get in return? A barrage of deadly missiles on our south and a Palestinian government led by the Hamas people you had elected, people who openly advocate the destruction of Israel.

Here is my prediction. You will most probably continue to launch those primitive Kassam missiles on our southern town of Sderot. You will surely get satisfaction from the sight of Sderot residents fleeing their shelled town. "After all," you will revel, "Israel, with all its aircraft and tanks, is not so mighty." Yet despite your efforts, many people will still remain in Sderot, and one of your Kassams might hit a kindergarten and -- God forbid -- might kill 10 children. What happens then?

As a matter of fact, a Harvard law professor, Alan Dershowitz, already addressed such a scenario. In a speech he gave in Israel a few years ago, he stunned his audience by suggesting a way to deal with Palestinian terrorism: If Palestinians intentionally attack Israeli civilians, he reasoned, then Israel, as an act of self-defense, should declare that the area from which the attack had been launched must be evacuated within a given time, after which it should be completely destroyed.

At the time I thought that the distinguished professor had simply lost his mind and that it was easy for him to give us such advice from his safe haven in Harvard. However, every Kassam you or your friends launch on our poor city of Sderot causes me to think again about the professor's idea. Because, you know, democracies might look weak, with all their sensitivity to human rights, but when you push them with their backs against the wall, they will eventually take their gloves off. And you're bringing it on yourself, pal, because there is no situation on Earth where a sovereign state should sit by idly while its citizens are relentlessly and mercilessly terrorized.

Do you insist on invoking upon yourself and your neighbors in Gaza the wrath of the Israel Defense Forces?

I have a better idea. You stop launching those Kassams, and we stop eliminating your leaders by air-strikes. (Believe me, we can nail down each and every one of them, and we will, if you force us to do so.) We work out a grand plan tat will alleviate the situation in Gaza, and will pave the way for the big money waiting to be invested in infrastructure and services. You declare a hudna (truce, in Arabic), for, say, 20 years, by which you suspend your plan to destroy Israel.

In 20 years you can build a state for your people, who long have deserved one, and believe me, if it works in Gaza, my fellow Israelis will be more than open to giving you most of the West Bank. Build schools, universities, hospitals, create jobs. You can do it with our cooperation -- a happy neighbor is a good neighbor -- or you can do it yourself. But instead of deceiving your children that Israel one day will just disappear, do something real for their future. And what happens after 20 years? Allah hu akbar, as we say in our region, God is Great. The ball is in your court, pal, and time is running out.

Uri Dromi is the director of international outreach at the Israel Democracy Institute, Jerusalem.

This article appeared May 25, 2007 in the Miami Herald

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, May 28, 2007.

The Hamas supporter at YouTube who goes by the name "engahmed" has now gotten YouTube to delete the second copy of his evil child abuse video; isn't it nice that YouTube is protecting the jihadis' copyrights, while allowing them to post videos glorifying terrorism and murder? So here it is again, with a local copy this time, because Hamas should not be allowed to hide this stuff, with or without YouTube's complicity.

Children in Gaza perform a monstrous "play," dressed as suicide bombers and terrorists, waving knives and guns, in front of a crowd of doting parents.

UPDATE at 5/28/07 10:22:46 am:

Here's the video in Quicktime format; I invite you to download it and spread it around as much as possible.

Hamas Kids At Play

Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Naomi Ragen, May 28, 2007.


Journalist Tom Gross in his recent mailing points out the following:

"There are dozens of "Palestinian Solidarity Campaigns" in Britain. Yet with more than 150 Palestinians killed in "internal violence" in Gaza since the beginning of the year, and over 50 others killed in the past week alone in "clashes" at the Nahr al-Bared Palestinian Refugee camp in Lebanon, there has been complete silence from these pro-Palestinian groups.

As the popular blog Harry's Place notes:

* The International Solidarity Movement, * The Palestinian Solidarity Campaign, * The Scottish Palestinian Solidarity Campaign, * The Exeter Palestinian Solidarity Campaign, * The York Palestinian Solidarity Campaign, * The Brighton Palestinian Solidarity Campaign, * The Stop the War Coalition, * George Galloway's "Respect" political party,

and many other pro-Palestinian groups "have nothing to say about these deaths at all."

All these groups tirelessly protest Palestinian deaths (including those of terrorists) if Israel is to blame.

One can only conclude that these so-called Palestinian Solidarity Campaigns are in fact merely groups that wish to single out Israel for attack. Given the fact that Israel's human rights record is far better than dozens of other states throughout the Middle East and the rest of the world, it is hard not to reach the conclusion that anti-Semitism, rather than concern about Palestinian civilians, is a strong motivating factor for these groups."

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.

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, May 28, 2007.
Olmert, go home!

There are rumors that the Jordanians are raising the possibility of forming a confederation with the Palestinian Arabs in Judea and Samaria. This plan is based on Jordan beginning to recognize that with Hamas in control of the Palestinian Authority, Israel has no Palestinian Arab partner to whom it could surrender Judea and Samaria. Therefore, Israel is incapable of adopting any so-called Arab "peace initiative" demanding that Israel withdraw its citizens and military forces to behind the 1949 armistice lines. Jordan is offering to fill the void by replacing the Palestinian Arabs. They say they want Israel to give Jordan Judea and Samaria as part of a Jordanian-Palestinian confederation under Hashemite control and with this in mind the Jordanians are resuscitating the view that Jordan is Palestine. For this purpose King Abdullah is using Abed Salam Majali, the Jordanian former prime minister, as his envoy to try convincing Israelis to accept this newest idea.

With the possibility that US forces will withdraw from Iraq without first stabilizing the country constitutes an existential threat to the Hashemites, who now understand that after defeating the Great Satan -- America -- Jordan will be next on Iranian-sponsored Syria insurgents' list.

Analyzing Jordan's interests here is based on the fact that the Hashemite monarchy finds itself firmly lodged between the Iraqi rock and the Palestinian Arabs' hard place and with that the King is in danger of being overthrown.

Since Hamas won the PA elections the jihadist group, and its sister organization the Muslim Brotherhood, are receiving increased popularity in Jordan, where more than 70% of the population are Palestinians. So what the Jordanians are offering to Israel is to take over Judea and Samaria as a bid to ride the Palestinian thus hoping to tame the beast before it devours Jordan.

In the event America pulls out from Iraq, Israel, like Jordan, will be imperiled by a resurgent on the eastern front. In all likelihood, Israel, too, will pay a steep price if the jihadist forces on both sides of the Jordan River unite.

Israel's national interests overlap those of Jordan. Though both countries will face dangers, it would be inexcusable for Israel to even consider transferring control over the Jordan Valley to the Jordanian military. Israeli withdrawal from its heartland in Judea and Samaria would undermine its ability to rally as a society against external enemies. In spite of the vast gap between what Jordan proposes and what Israel can accept, the fact remains that the two states shared interests are significant enough to form the basis for mutually beneficial discussions. There is a possibility Israel could offer Jordan functional sovereignty over the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria and at the same time, Israel could assert its sovereignty over what the Oslo accords refer to as 'Area C' that includes all of the Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria, the hinterlands and the Jordan Valley.

Asserting functional sovereignty by Jordan over the Palestinian Arabs in Judea and Samaria would include the return of their Jordanian citizenship, which, in 1988, the late King Hussein abrogated. Such functional Jordanian sovereignty would undermine the PA's political rationale and could act as a moderating force for Palestinian society as a whole -- both in Judea and Samaria, and in Jordan.

Asserting functional sovereignty by Israeli over Area C would give Israel the ability to defend itself against a resurgent eastern front. More so, it would also be able to continue to protect the Hashemite kingdom from violent overthrow.

Israel and Jordan's shared interests with the Jordanian talks' initiative can form the basis for discussions that could lead to the first ever agreement between Israel and its neighbors that could strengthen Israel and promote the chances of peaceful coexistence with the Palestinian Arabs, to the benefit of all.

Olmert, though, expressed talks with the wrong party, Syria. By opening talks with Syria Olmert is expressing his willingness to further imperil the security of the country that will only radicalize Damascus further. By this Olmert is demonstrating that he is lacking responsibility and is incapable of advancing Israel's interests. His willingness to engage in surrendering -- the Golan Heights -- talks with Damascus shows that he doesn't even understand what Israel's national interests are. This article was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared May 25, 2007 in the Jerusalem Post and is archived at
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1178708678548&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Over the past week, Ma'ariv has reported on two separate diplomatic initiatives that seem to be coming into line. First, there is the possibility that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will open negotiations with Syria on the surrender of the Golan Heights to Damascus. Second, the Jordanians are raising the possibility of forming a confederation with the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria.

Any analysis of the reasonableness of these initiatives must begin with two questions. First, do the relevant parties share enough common interests to enable them to reach an agreement that will be mutually beneficial? Second, do the sides have leaders who are competent to properly identify those interests and to work to advance them?

According to Ma'ariv, "The prime minister has... become convinced that negotiations with Syria and a possible peace agreement will significantly alter the regional strategic situation and facilitate the isolation of Iran and a solution to the problem with Hizbullah.

"This is especially the case," the newspaper reported, "against the backdrop of the collapse of Fatah and of [Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, aka] Abu Mazen, and the fact that there is no chance for a diplomatic initiative with the Palestinians in the near future."

The report added that the IDF's General Staff believes that Israel can avert war with Syria by negotiating the surrender of the Golan Heights to Damascus.

So Olmert sees three reasons to engage Damascus in negotiations about an Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights. He believes that doing so can prevent a war between the two countries. He believes that such negotiations will weaken Syria's protector, Iran. And he is interested in negotiations because he feels he needs to do something and he can't negotiate the surrender of Judea and Samaria with Hamas.

Unfortunately, all of Olmert's rationales for opening negotiations with Syria are based on false assumptions. A review of the results of the US's current, much-less radical bid to appease Syria in Iraq demonstrates this clearly.

The insurgency being waged against US-led coalition forces in Iraq today is directed by Syria and Iran. In an attempt to decrease the dimensions of the war, last month the Americans opened direct, high-level contacts with Damascus. First, Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi paid a visit to Syrian dictator Bashar Assad.

Pelosi, who supports a US retreat from Iraq, praised the Baathist regime and so ended the isolation Damascus has been relegated to since it ordered the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri in February 2005.

Although the Bush administration condemned Pelosi's visit, weeks later it followed her lead. At the beginning of the month, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice held a meeting with her Syrian counterpart, Walid Muallem, in Sharm e-Sheikh.

The Americans hoped that direct contacts with Syria would moderate its behavior. Unfortunately, the opposite has occurred. Far from moderating Syria, US moves to mollify it have served to embolden Syria to advance its hostile policies. In the aftermath of Pelosi's visit, the regime cracked down on internal opposition, rounding up dissidents and sentencing them to prolonged prison terms.

Rice's meeting with Muallem failed to put a damper on Syrian sponsorship of the insurgents. On Monday, a US official in Iraq said, "Our best estimate is that 85 to 90 percent of all the suicide bombers are foreign. Ninety percent plus come through Syria."

Beyond Iraq and internal dissent in Syria, the legitimacy Washington has conferred on Damascus is emboldening the Syrians to destabilize Lebanon. The Fatah Islam Palestinian jihadist group that is now leading the hostilities in northern Lebanon is a creation of Syrian intelligence. Today the Syrians are keen to destabilize Lebanon in a bid to intimidate Lebanese lawmakers into rejecting the UN tribunal which is set to try Syrian officials for their role in Hariri's assassination.

All of these Syrian actions point to the clear conclusion that the American appeasement efforts have backfired. Were Israel to similarly seek to appease Damascus, and to do so by far more radically offering to surrender the strategically vital Golan Heights to Syrian control, far from diminishing the prospects of war, Israel would likely exacerbate the likelihood of a Syrian or Syrian-sponsored strike against it.

Similarly, it is doubtful that opening negotiations on an Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights would weaken Syria's relations with Iran. Why would Syria consider distancing itself from Teheran when its close alliance with the ayatollahs is what is provoking the US and Israel to mollify it?

So if offering to discuss an Israeli surrender of the Golan Heights will increase the probability of war and embolden the Syrians to intensify their alliance with Iran, the only remaining rationale for speaking to them is Olmert's desire to have some sort of diplomatic platform to stand on.

Here the issue of a leader's competence to advance his nation's interests through diplomatic initiatives comes into play. By expressing a willingness to imperil the security of the country by opening talks with Syria that will only radicalize Damascus still further, Olmert is demonstrating that he is incapable of responsibly advancing Israel's interests. Indeed, his willingness to engage in surrender talks with Damascus shows that he doesn't even understand what Israel's national interests are.

If Olmert wishes to prevent the coming war, he should be preparing for it. This he must do by highlighting Syria's radicalism and by neutralizing Syria's terror networks in Gaza, which would be used against Israel in any war scenario.

SO WHILE there is no possibility of launching a diplomatic effort with Syria or the Palestinians, what about the Jordanian initiative?

According to the Ma'ariv report, the Jordanian plan is based on a recognition that with Hamas in control of the Palestinian Authority, Israel has no Palestinian partner to whom it could surrender Judea and Samaria. In light of this, Israel is incapable of adopting the so-called Arab peace initiative, which demands that Israel withdraw its citizens and military forces to behind the 1949 armistice lines.

The Jordanians are offering to fill the void by replacing the Palestinians. Israel, they say, should give Jordan Judea and Samaria as part of a Jordanian-Palestinian confederation under Hashemite control. In short, the Jordanians are resuscitating the view that Jordan is Palestine. King Abdullah is using former Jordanian prime minister Abed Salam Majali as his envoy to convince Israelis to accept this newest idea.

An assessment of the opportunities and threats inherent in this offer must begin with an analysis of Jordan's interests. Bluntly stated, the Hashemite monarchy finds itself firmly lodged between the Iraqi rock and the Palestinian hard place and so is in danger of being overthrown. The possibility that US forces will withdraw from Iraq without first stabilizing the country constitutes an existential threat to the Hashemites, who understand that after defeating the Great Satan, Jordan will be the next target on the Syrian-and Iranian-sponsored insurgents' list.

As to the Palestinians, since Hamas won the PA elections last year, the jihadist group, and its sister organization the Muslim Brotherhood, have seen a steep rise in their popularity in Jordan, where more than 70% of the population are Palestinians. The Jordanian offer to take over Judea and Samaria can therefore be seen as a bid to ride the Palestinian tiger in the hopes of taming the beast before it devours Jordan.

In contrast to the situation with Syria, Israel's national interests overlap those of Jordan. Israel, too, will be imperiled by a resurgent eastern front in the event of an American pullout from Iraq. Israel, too, will pay a steep price if the jihadist forces on both sides of the Jordan River unite.

Yet, given the dangers that both countries face, it would be inexcusable for Israel to even consider transferring control over the Jordan Valley to the Jordanian military. At the same time, the societal fragmentation that would ensue from an Israeli withdrawal from its heartland in Judea and Samaria would undermine Israel's ability to rally as a society against external enemies.

While the gulf between what Jordan proposes and what Israel can accept is large, the fact remains that the states' shared interests are significant enough to form the basis for mutually beneficial discussions. As MK Benny Elon has been arguing for years, Israel could offer Jordan functional sovereignty over the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria. At the same time, Israel could assert its sovereignty over what the Oslo accords refer to as Area C. Area C includes all of the Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria, the hinterlands and the Jordan Valley.

The assertion of functional sovereignty by Jordan over the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria would include the return of their Jordanian citizenship, which the late King Hussein abrogated in 1988. Such functional sovereignty would undermine the PA's political rationale and could act as a moderating force for Palestinian society as a whole -- both in Judea and Samaria, and in Jordan.

The assertion of Israeli sovereignty over Area C would preserve Israel's ability to defend itself against a resurgent eastern front. It would also be able to continue to protect the Hashemite kingdom from violent overthrow.

All in all, bearing in mind Israel's shared interests with Jordan, the Jordanian initiative can form the basis for discussions that could lead to the first agreement between Israel and its neighbors that could strengthen Israel and promote the chances of peaceful coexistence with the Palestinians, to the benefit of all.

BUT HERE we return to the question of leadership. Israel's ability to advance a confederative arrangement between the Palestinians and Jordan while ensuring Israel's continued control over Area C is wholly dependent on the skill of its leaders.

Sadly, it is impossible to believe that Olmert, who is willing to endanger the country by engaging Syria, would be capable of conceptualizing, let alone managing, such delicate discussions. Indeed, in all likelihood, were Olmert to begin such discussions, he would do so while running roughshod over Israel's security. And by doing so, he would cancel the possibility of reaching a mutually beneficial arrangement for years to come.

This, then, points to the greatest failure of the Olmert government. Not only is it incapable of recognizing dangers. It is also blind to opportunities.

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 28, 2007.

A critical continuation of my report on Lebanon, from a MEMRI special dispatch released yesterday: Al Hayat in London has just run an interview with Shihab Al-Qaddour, who is second in command of Fatah al-Islam. Al-Qaddour declared Al-Fatah ready to do battle with the Lebanese army and to sustain itself for two years.

Explaining that his organization comprises Palestinian activists from various countries, with rich battle experience [e.g., in Iraq], he said: "The Fatah Al-Islam organization is Palestinian, and includes 600 to 700 activists in all the Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, not only in the Nahr Al-Bared refuge camp. All the activists are on the highest battle alert....

"Fatah Al-Islam has bases and sleeper cells in all the Palestinian refugee camps in the various regions of Lebanon, and they...await only a sign from us."

He said that he wasn't worried about Palestinian residents of the Nahr Al-Bared refugee camp rebelling against Fatah Al-Islam: "Many of the members of the Palestinian factions that oppose us politically deviated from their leaders' orders, stood with us, and identified with us when the camp was recently bombed."

He denied that his organization is affiliated with Al-Qaida and said, "Our organization is an Islamic project aimed at liberating Palestine and Jerusalem." They did have connections with Hezbollah, he said, and bore no enmity to the Shiites in Lebanon.


Meanwhile, whether Al-Qaida has official connections with Fatah Al-Islam or not, it is, according to YNet, showing support for the organization. An A-Qaida mouthpiece on the Internet has released a message:

"Sons of Islam, o sons of the nation of Allah and Jihad, our brothers in the Nahr el-Bared camp in Lebanon are being subjected to the flagrant aggression of the army working for treason and apostasy, the Lebanese Army.

"(This) is a war on Islam... It is a war planned to eliminate those who think about, and act to eliminate the State of the Children of Zion. Sons of the nation Muhammad, peace be upon him, help... your brothers in Islam. They are fighting for the sake of God... They wanted a confrontation with the Zionist aggressors, and it is the duty of every Muslim to help these boys, this is one of the most important duties today."


Interesting... Fatah Al-Islam is claiming to want to liberate Palestine, but is doing battle against Muslims in Lebanon. The threat is that they can last for two years there and blow up Beirut. To what end?

This is both evil and crazy at the same time. Is the world waking up?

Both the US and Arab nations are providing military supplies to the Lebanese army.


We are stepping up our strikes in Gaza. Yesterday the Israeli Air Force hit 11 Hamas sites, killing seven (terrorists) and wounding 30.

But the Kassams keep coming. Today Oshri Oz was killed when a Kassam hit his car. He wasn't even from Sderot, but was there on business. He leaves a three-year old and a wife six months pregnant; she collapsed when receiving the news.

Two other Kassams hit Sderot today, one other person was lightly injured and damage was done to a new community center.


In a television interview yesterday, former chief of staff, Lt.-Gen. Moshe (Boogie) Ya'alon declared that we had no choice but to do an extensive military operation in Gaza.

"It means we have to get to the infrastructure of terror, to the terrorists and camps, and strike there. One has to be blind not to see the absolute necessity in entering Gaza."

Ya'alon also said he was opposed to evacuation of Sderot as this would be interpreted as a victory for terrorism.

He called a "two-state solution" a misguided concept.

Boogie's my kind of man.


The point about evacuation of Sderot being interpreted as a victory for terrorism should not be taken lightly. It is this that is most troublesome about the tent city erected by Gaydamak, where some 700 have gone, the vacations elsewhere provided by the gov't and Gaydamak, which some thousands have taken advantage of, and all the rest. Said Sderot's mayor Eli Moyal today, "if the government wants to strengthen the city, the way to do so is to fill it and not empty it....the fall of Sderot would be the fall of the entire Zionist enterprise."

One-thousand residents have now returned from vacations and the government has promised to build 200 fortified rooms each month, until the entire population has protection.


Shin Bet head Yuval Diskin says Hamas is preparing for a ground invasion by booby-trapping tunnels, putting snipers in place, and more. None of this is unexpected.

He reports that Hamas is also shooting more from highly populated areas and less from orchards -- to provoke increased civilian casualties as we respond. In spite of this, we are keeping collateral damage low.

Diskin further says that Hamas has the capacity to hit Ashkelon, but is refraining from doing so yet as this would further escalate matters.

Meanwhile Public Security Minister Avi Dichter says the response to the Kassams is still not strong enough, and that Israel must create a more serious deterrent.


Two Israeli security guards on patrol at the edge of Jerusalem were fired upon and wounded yesterday, one seriously. They returned fire and killed their assailants, who had Jerusalem IDs. Fatah's Al Aksa Brigades has claimed credit for the attack.


Hamas has threatened that if we harm their senior leaders, Shalit will not be released. The response coming from an Israeli official was appropriate: "Israel will pursue the return of Gilad Shalit as if there are not rocket attacks, and pursue terrorists as if there was no Gild Shalit." We certainly cannot stop defending our nation because of such threats.


Fatah and Hamas have been more or less honoring a truce between them for the last week. Tensions are still high however and Fatah officials, going to Cairo to discuss the situation with Egyptian authorities, said they would not be meeting with Hamas.

Meanwhile, Lt. Gen. Dayton has provided testimony to the House Subcommittee on the Middle East regarding US assistance to strengthen Fatah. A most futile effort, as I have explained on previous occasions, because Fatah factions don't all want to take on Hamas -- insufficient weaponry and training is not the problem.

According to a news report, when Congressman Mike Pence (R-Indiana) raised questions, the General assured him that "Nothing we do to strengthen the Palestinians' security capability will be targeted against Israel." What I would like to know -- since assistance provided to PA security forces in the past DID end up being used against Israel -- is how he can guarantee this now.

Arlene Kushner is Senior Research Associate, Center for Near East Policy Research, Beit Agron International Press Center, Jerusalem, Israel. Contact her at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Ted Belman, May 28, 2007.

Jonathan Pollard, sentenced to life in a US federal penitentiary, committed an unforgivable sin. He unmasked US foreign policy.

In a recent post on the American Ambassador to Israel saying that the US was merciful in not executing Pollard there was a link to a post by Robert Olive and a rebuttal (by Pollard attorneys, Lauer and Semmelman) "Don't be fooled by Ron Olive"
http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2006/112906.htm. The rebuttal quoted from a US Government court filing that described the damage Pollard caused to the US. It is very instructive:

"Mr. Pollard's unauthorized disclosures have threatened the US [sic] relations with numerous Middle East Arab allies, many of whom question the extent to which Mr. Pollard's disclosures of classified information have skewed the balance of power in the Middle East."

This is unbelievable; yet, it is believable.

In other words, the US didn't want anyone to know the true relationship between the US and its Arab allies. It suggests that the public face it puts on these relationships have nothing to do with reality. This is a matter of utmost importance to both the US and the Arabs. It also suggests that the US knew of Arab plans that were detrimental to Israel and the US was not willing to tell Israel about them.

"Moreover, because Mr. Pollard provided the Israelis virtually any classified document requested by Mr. Pollard's co-conspirators, the US has been deprived of the quid pro quo routinely received during authorized and official intelligence exchanges with Israel, and Israel has received information classified at a level far in excess of that ever contemplated by the National Security Council. The obvious result of Mr. Pollard's largess is that US bargaining leverage with the Israeli government in any further intelligence exchanges has been undermined."

The fact that the US, as a result of Pollard's actions, had fewer bargaining chips is of minor importance. Israel shares most of its intelligence without a specific quid pro quo. But this sentence supports the argument that the US has many secrets that it does not share with Israel. Why does the US keep Israel, ostensibly a friend and ally, in the dark? The US has no need for "bargaining leverage," but it does have a need to not share with Israel the many things it does which are not in Israel's favour.

"In short, Mr. Pollard's activities have adversely affected US relations with both its Middle East Arab allies and the government of Israel."

This sums it up. Pollard made Israel stronger because Israel had a clearer understanding of the true US-Arab relationship, and Arab intentions and plans.

The way I see it, the magnitude of Pollard's sentence reflects the magnitude of the American secrets. One must conclude that the US was duplicitous. It worked to shrink Israel while posturing as its friend.

So, in effect, Pollard was spying for an enemy, Israel, rather than for a friend. His life sentence proves it. I wonder if the US is being so hard-nosed about it in order to please the Saudis?

See Also:

The Victim Impact Statement: Why Pollard Got Life -- by David Zwiebel -- Middle East Quarterly

Don't be fooled by Ron Olive -- by Lauer and Semmelman -- Jerusalem Post

Ted Belman is an editor of the IsraPundit weblog.

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 27, 2007.
2:23PM: Today's Qassam attack victim has been identified as Oshri Oz, 35, from Hod Hasharon. The Jerusalem Post reports that Oz's wife found out about her husband's death on the Internet, where she saw the footage of the Kassam landing near his car.

More on Oshri Oz, the victim of Qassam fired into Sderot:

Oshri Oz (Photo: Ido Erez)

The man, 36-year-old Oshri Oz of Hod Hasharon, crashed into the wall with his car after it was hit. He managed to get out of the vehicle and take a number of steps before collapsing. He was evacuated to the Barzilay Medical Center in Ashkelon, where he died of his wounds.

Oz was a computer technician who used to visit Sderot often as part of his work. He was survived by his pregnant wife and a 2-year-old daughter.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, May 27, 2007.

The Palestinian Arabs live in "refugee cams" that could be easily compared to Soweto Township (Soweto is an urban area in the Gauteng, in the outskirts of the City of Johannesburg, South Africa. The English syllabic abbreviation, short for South Western Townships, subsequently referred to by relocating residents and other South Africans as "So Where To". Soweto is the most populous black urban residential area in the country, with Census 2001 putting its population at 896 995) or perhaps they are some sort of ghettos. It is not at all acceptable nor is it justified that for 59 years the Palestinian Arabs have been recognized as refugees, a status that should have legally expired years ago. (A refugee is a person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of their nationality, and is unable to or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail him/herself of the protection of that country. The major exception are the 4.3 million Palestinian refugees under the authority of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinians Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), who are the only group to be granted refugee status to the descendants of refugees. The great majority have remained refugees for generations as they were not permitted to return to their homes or to settle in the Arab countries where they lived. Palestinian refugees from 1948 and their descendants do not come under the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Stats of Refugees, but under UNRWA, which created its own criteria for refugee classification. As such they are the only refugee population legally defined to include descendants of refugees, as well as others who might otherwise be considered internally displace persons.)

Arab societies have a genius for self-destruction. The Arabs nations want the Palestinian Arabs to continue to suffer. They have about as much sympathy for the Palestinian Arabs living in refugee camps as all those "good" Germans had for the Jews whose real estate was suddenly available to them. The funding the Palestinian Arabs refugee camps, where poverty and destitute reigns and ignorance rules -- exactly the kind of situation in which Saudis, Syrians and Gulf Arabs like to keep Palestinian Arabs, the West, in particularly the United States, unjustly, but wickedly, have been promoting and prolonging their suffering.

No one pays attention to the warning; everyone waits for something terrible to happen and then it is way too late. The radical Islam terror and its cancerous chaos in Gaza is endless. Now it has spread to Lebanon where the bodies pile up as the buildings burn. Where is next?

This article was written by Ralph Peters and published in the New York Post, May 22, 2007.

Terror in Tripoli. Havoc in Gaza. Palestinians assassinating the innocent and blaming it on their own victimization. Sounds a lot like 1982? Yes, except that yesteryear's political hit-men are now fanatics. And the Palestinians have blown yet another chance -- to the relief of their fellow Arabs.

No Arab potentate wants the Palestinians to build a successful, rule-of-law state that co-exists with Israel. Nor does a single Arab ruler likes democracy in Lebanon.

The Lebanese army's siege of the Nahr el-Bared refugee camp in Tripoli is an act of desperation. Forced to accept the autonomy of Palestinian bastions on Lebanese soil, a succession of Beirut governments has had to watch the growth of Islamist radicalism as rich Arab states played up the Palestinian cause -- and ignored their flesh-and-blood Palestinians.

The camp under fire (by the way, the shelling isn't indiscriminate -- the Lebanese gunners just aren't very good shots) has 32,000 registered residents. The real number may be closer to 50,000, all crammed in a ghetto where poverty reigns and ignorance rules -- exactly the kind of situation in which Saudis, Syrians and Gulf Arabs like to keep Palestinians.

The destitute camp -- really, an urban slum -- would seem to be a perfect recruiting ground for fanatics. Yet most of the local refugees, who have lived in Lebanon for a full generation, are siding with the Lebanese government. They don't like being shelled, but they want the terrorists gone. For their part, the terrorists hope the fighting will spread to other camps.

And who are these terrorists whose actions brought the Lebanese army down on their heads? Fatah al-Islam is one of those countless splinter groups right out of Monty Python's "Life of Brian" -- except for its murderous bent. Aligned with al Qaeda and backed by Syria, its immediate mission is to make Lebanon ungovernable. So the bodies pile up as the buildings burn.

Meanwhile, the Palestinian try at self-government in Gaza is an even greater shambles. When Israel withdrew its forces in 2005, Palestinian leaders had an unprecedented chance to prove that they could govern competently. With aid in the pipeline (from the West, of course) and goodwill abounding, they could have given the people they ruled a chance. Instead, they gave them anarchy, economic collapse, rampant criminality, a return to "honor killings" and a society broken by blood feuds and internecine hatred.

Last week, the Gaza fighting spun out of control, and Fatah forces, whose leadership now quietly leans on Israel for support, proved tougher than the Hamas thugs expected. With newly trained security-forces in play, Fatah threatened to seize the local initiative. Hamas responded by launching waves of missiles against civilian targets in Israel. By week's end, the Hamas barbarism had become intolerable. Israel responded by killing dozens of Hamas terrorists.

The result? A fragile truce to which Fatah had to agree in the name of Palestinian solidarity. But the Pal-on-Pal fighting will resume soon enough. After winning the last election, Hamas outed itself as a pure-terrorist organization obsessed with killing Israelis and grabbing power for itself -- not a party dedicated to improving the lives of the people.

Average Palestinians would like to get on with the shabby lives left to them. And some are staging a quiet rebellion against Hamas: A significant number of the targets Israel struck over the past several days were identified via Palestinian tip-offs.

Arab societies have a genius for self-destruction (look at Iraq), but President Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah party may prove readier to deal sensibly with Israel than any Palestinian faction in the past. Abbas recognizes that, today, the greatest danger comes from within, not from Tel Aviv or Jerusalem.

As for the mess in Lebanon, Syria's inability to refrain from deadly mischief is a blessing in at least one respect: It makes it harder for the advocates of phony Realpolitik (such as former Secretary of State Jim "Have you hugged your dictator today?" Baker) to push us back into yesteryear's cozy relationships with genocidal Arab despots.

But who really are the victims here? Obviously, Israelis continue to suffer from Arab terror-as-self-actualization. But the global media hates Israel. So don't expect to hear much about the rockets raining on Sderot, beyond a perfunctory aside from a dismissive anchor-babe. Of course, the Lebanese have been the long-standing victims of meddling Arab powers and the refusal of larger and far richer Arab states to give Palestinians hope for better lives. If the Saudis love the Palestinians so much, why not build a model city in the Kingdom for the 400,000 or so stranded in Lebanon? (Actually, few Palestinians would choose to live in such an oppressive place.)

The truth is that other Arabs want the Palestinians to continue to suffer. It's useful as an excuse for all their failings. They have about as much sympathy for the refugees as all those good Germans had for the Jews whose real estate was suddenly available.

But the ultimate victims of this round of Palestinian violence are the Palestinians themselves. After passing up so many chances for peace and statehood, they can no longer be classed as victims of Zionism. Yet the Palestinians are victims -- of the other Arabs who exploit them and neglect them. And of the madmen spawned from their own kind. Forget the rage of the dispossessed and all that sanctimonious claptrap. For the Palestinians preying upon their brethren, terror's a business. And business is good. Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 27, 2007.
This was written by James Lewis and it appeared in the American Thinker
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/05/the_bbc_blames_israel_for_unst.html. James Lewis maintains a blog at http://www.dangeroustimes.wordpress.com/

In a shameless effort to rewrite history:

"The BBC News website is publishing a series of articles about the attempts to achieve peace in the Middle East and the main obstacles. Yesterday, Martin Asser looked at the question of Israel's borders and settlements."

Surprise! It turns out that Israel is to blame for its "unstable borders." By Gum, it's just as if Israel wasn't attacked by invading Arab armies from its first day of life in 1948, and again in 1967 and 1974, when it pushed back the invaders to achieve some measure of border stability.

Reading Martin Asser's wildly anti-Israel BBC "history" of the past sixty years, those events never happened.

So Israel's defensive push-back is twisted into offensive imperialism, and the Beeb manages to "confuse the fire with the fire brigade," in the apt words of Winston Churchill.

The BBC's dishonesty is beyond belief. But constant, relentless propaganda works. Most people can't resist the Big Lie when it is repeated over and over again. Naturally the Beeb's British and international audience hates Israel for making all the trouble in the world. Appeasers always look for scapegoats, and Israel is the natural choice. The BBC is run by the far Left in Britain, and once again, the extremes of fascism and the Left are allied, just as they were in the Hitler-Stalin Pact of 1938.

As the Beeb's favorite philosopher said, "history repeats, the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce."

The BBC's malevolence has unintended consequences, however --- such as the radicalization of thousands of domestic terrorists in Britain's own alienated cities. The men who suicide-bombed the London Underground on "7/7" were radicalized by Islamist imams peddling Wahhabi world conquest. British police and intelligence agencies have warned that thousands of homegrown Islamist extremists may be ready to place more bombs. But the ideological ground was laid for them by ... the BBC, which continues to pump out industrial-strength hatred for America and Israel.

The leftists who run BBC have naturally persuaded themselves that Islamist terrorism is not a real threat. Terrorism is all the fault of Bush and Blair. So today, an upside-down "history" of the Israel-Palestinian conflict is being peddled to push the incoming Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, into an anti-Israel stance. This is the message from the Labour Left, which controls the biggest tax-funded propaganda empire in the world --- more than six billion dollars per year.

Yet Islamist terrorism is a very real threat in Londonistan and Britanostan.

Islamists hate Britain and the West, as well as Israel, for being Christian, Jewish or atheist, for being pro-Gay and pro-women, for being richer and more productive than the Muslim world, and for a hundred other reasons.

So the BBC itself is radicalizing Britain's Muslim population, even while seeming to displace all blame on Israel. While the aim is to discredit and ultimately destroy Israel, the Islamist backlash will inevitably harm the people of Britain, just as the Underground Bombing did. The Beeb ends up cutting its own throat.

So the biter was bitten on 7/7, and has learned nothing in consequence. It may take more terror attacks to finally convince ordinary people that they have been systematically misled for decades. Unfortunately, Islamist terror bombs are far more likely to hurt innocent people than the sources of pernicious propaganda.

George Orwell worked for the BBC, and satirized it in his dystopian novel 1984 as the "Ministry of Truth" --- which is of course the Ministry of Lies. The BBC continues to reveal a shameful black mark against a once-great country. Orwell lives.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, May 27, 2007.

This warning comes from Julie Saltoun, Regional Director, Anti-Defamation League Santa Barbara, CA 93101. Contact her at jsaltoun@adl.org or go to www.adl.org

There are not ENOUGH or HARDLY ANY Jews in Nigeria! Same applies to West Africa!

A new email scam targeting the Jewish community is circulating on the Internet. The email message contains the subject heading: "There is a new anti-Semitism, please help the Jews," and uses the email address" helpthejews@gmail.com. The email claims to be from a Dr. Kane Andrew who is referred to as a "delegated representative of SAVE THE JEWS in Western African Region." The email claims that Jews are being killed and kidnapped in Nigeria, which is resulting in a "Holocaust caused by Antisemitism."

This poorly written email is typical of what is known as the "Nigerian scams." These email scams can originate in different countries but they are collectively referred to as "Nigerian scams" because individuals in that country are rumored to have started the practice and are still a leading source of the scams. The emails can take various forms: some try to entice a person to get involved in a plan to help recoup a large sum of money and share in the proceeds; others try to get people to give money for disaster relief or some other cause. The ultimate goal is to bilk money from an unsuspecting victim.

A copy of the "Help the Jews" email is below. It is unclear how widespread the email is at this point.

From: SAVE THE JEWS [mailto: helpthejews@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 7:21 PM
To whom it may concern,

I am Dr kane Andrew.I'm the delegated representative of SAVE THE JEWS in Western African Region.I writting you this message regarding the "Antisemitism" striving young and old jews in West Africa.We are living in danger here in Nigeria due to Holocaust caused by Antisemitism.Some black men have been killing jews in this country,1162 jews have been killed while 159 jews have been kidnapped here.The government here does not treat us like an fellow human being they rather plot death for us and support the Antisemitism to cause Holocaust in which only the jews were dying.We jews are suffering here.We need your help.We have contacted some International Fundamental Human Rigth Organisation for support and they promised to assist and support us to figth against Antisemitism.We URGENTLY need your help.Please and please,SAVE THE JEWS.We are living in dangerous enviroment here and we need to fight against Antisemitism to live a comfortable life and dwell on this land.We need your financial assistance to be able to face the chanllege and protect our lives and property.So many jews have been shot to dead without any offence commited.Please my brothers and sisters,this is Holocaust caused by Antisemitism in which only the jews were dying.Please help us.

For financial assistance,contact helpthejews@gmail.com.

May the holy one of Isreal[sic] be with you.
Please help the jews

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Ezra HaLevi, May 26, 2007.

(IsraelNN.com) Former IDF Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon said Saturday that the Disengagement is what led to the Second Lebanon War and brought southern Israel under fire from Gaza.

Ya'alon, who was replaced as Chief of Staff just before the 2005 Disengagement due to his semi-public disapproval of the plan, said on Channel 2's Meet the Press program that the only solution to Israel's current situation is a return of the IDF to Gaza.

"The unilateral approach that drove the Disengagement Plan has failed and Israel must abandon it," he said. "The Disengagement is seen by the other side as Israel fleeing,"

Ya'alon said that no solution other than reversing the IDF's departure from Gaza is tenable. "The problems in Gaza won't go away," he said. "Nobody can solve it for us -- not Egypt and not an international force... You have to be blind to think entering Gaza in unnecessary.

"In order to get the other side to recognize our right to exist as an independent Jewish State, we have to come off forceful...We have to strike the terrorists, hit their workshops and hit their infrastructure," Ya'alon continued. "We did it in [2002's] Operation Defensive Shield, although we had our reservations before launching that operation as well."

Ya'alon qualified his statements, saying he was not talking about staying in Gaza or reestablishing the Jewish towns there destroyed during the Disengagement. "I'm not talking about going in and staying there. I'm talking about cleaning the place up," he said. "I'm not talking about ruling the city, but if we do not go in now, when they are firing at Sderot -- we will soon find ourselves with rockets in Ashdod."

Ezra HaLevi writes for Arutz Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com).

To Go To Top

Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard (J4JP), May 26, 2007.

The essay was written by Yaacov Kirschen, the creator of the DRY BONES cartoons.

For years I've been at a loss to understand the irrational rage against Jonathan Pollard, but American Ambassador to Israel, Richard H. Jones, has just explained why Pollard has been subjected to such cruel and unusual punishment.

"This is a very emotional issue in the United States," Jones said. "I know he was helping a friend but that's what makes it even more emotional for Americans, if a friend would cooperate in aiding and abetting someone who is committing treason against his own country."

The ambassador is saying that the anger is at the "friend" who "aided and abetted" Pollard. The "friend" Jones refers to is either "the Jews" or the Jewish State.

There's no need for Jones to apologize. We should be thankful to the ambassador for having set the record straight at last. Jonathan Pollard is not being punished. We are.

Contact Justice for Jonathan Pollard at justice4jp@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, May 26, 2007.

There are legends about her origins. Some say she is the very snake from the Garden of Eden itself. She reappears in different forms and under different names throughout human history. Many regard her as a she-demon from the netherworld. Everywhere, she has the same Modus Operandi: Come and show me your true vulnerability, she cried, and I promise we will live in peace forever, trust me. If you doubt my sincerity then YOU are the villain!

But she is best known to us as Delilah, the harlot of Gaza. It was then that Samson went to her and lay with her. Reveal to me your true vulnerability, she insisted. I will not use it against you. Trust me. We will dwell together in peace.

But he was shrewd. Piece of cake, he teased, all you have to do is bind me up with seven vines that were never dried. And no sooner did he offer her this goodwill gesture for peace than her Tanzim descended upon him and bound him with the very same vines. Death to the Occupier, she screamed. In fire and spirit we will redeem thee, oh Gaza. But he broke those bindings like thread and launched a reprisal raid for which the entire world condemned him as aggressor.

You colonialist imperialist, she sneered. Make fun of my Peace of the Brave, will you? But Samson was under pressure from the entire world, including the White Pyramid, to smooth things over with the harlot. Reveal to me your true vulnerability, she insisted. So what if last time I used it to entrap you? This time I am sincere.

Oh, alright, he agreed. Anything for some shut-eye. If you bind me with brand new ropes from Sears that have never been used before, I will be as weak as a newborn kitten.

Rapid-eye-movement sleep had barely set in when the Tanzim leaped into the boudoir. Death to the Occupier, screamed the harlot, and her militia men attacked the sleeping paratrooper. But he arose and implemented a campaign of targeted assassinations against his tormentors.

What, again you mock me? Where is your sense of trust?, sighed the harlot. And now the White Pyramid was getting impatient. It wanted the Philistines pacified so that it could pursue its campaign against the Chaldeans.

I was just testing you, said Samson all goo-goo eyed. Now that I know you are my sincere sweet turtle dove, I will let you in on my true secret. Just weave seven locks of my hair into a Valentine's card, and I will be as Silly Putty in your hands. She did, but he just tore them off, got up and walked out.

You cad, she wailed. You demon! The White Pyramid was really getting irritated now with the obstinacy of the guy and Belgium was going to try him for war crimes having to do with the foxes with burning tails ruining the fields of the Philistines. She is sincere this time, insisted the Secretary of State, you must put her good will to the test. That is true, insisted the Euro eunuchs.

The Council of Kingdoms denounced the warrior as an aggressor. Professors from the tribe of Dan insisted that the Philistines were sincerely interested in making Peace Now. The Post-Zionist followers of Bilaam were calling for international sanctions against him. Human rights activists were demanding that he stop taunting the harlot.

Oh alright, sighed the warrior in appeasement, if not in utter exhaustion. If you give me a Marine crew cut, then I will be as helpless as a chad gadya. But you gotta cross your heart and promise this time, and no more of your tricks! This time, you better be sincere.

We know what followed. Samson eventually did get his revenge, but at the cost of his own Oslo-like self-destruction.

But what ever became of the harlot of Gaza? The Bible is silent about that. Was she in that pagan temple brought down upon the heads of the savage in his feat of targeted assassination? Apparently not, or it would have been so noted.

The she-demon wandered the world, showing up in unexpected places. She married King Ahab and sent out her shaheeds to murder the prophets of God. She tried to lure Odysseus to his destruction. She was almost captured in Salem, Massachusetts. She possessed the souls of the world leaders in the 1930s, as they submitted themselves to her charms. Show me your true vulnerability, she cooed. And after each round, her terror Tanzim stormed in and carried out atrocities, only to be followed by new flirtations and new peace programs based on the same old theme: Trust me, so what if I lied to you in the past, this time I am sincere.

She went into hiding again until 1992. It was then that she crept out from her grotto beneath the fever swamp and once again painted her harlot face. Stepping upon the shore in her old Gaza stomping grounds, she sighed and taunted. Show me your true vulnerability, she said. Trust me, I only want to know out of curiosity. I would never use it against you. This is my sincere peace offer.

And like Delilah of old, and like Delilah's love-struck gargantuan paramour, time after time she repeats the same strategy and he responds with the same tributes of puppy love. Her suitor never learns from her past behavior, never wises up, never tires of self-delusion. After each betrayal, she returns with the same siren call.

Just expose your vulnerability to me. Just place your neck in this friendly noose. It is for peace, you see.

So what if I lied to you every single time in the past. It was all because YOU did not truly trust me, she responds with melodramatically hurt feelings. You never went all the way, placing your very existence in my hands. And until you abandon your suspicions and obstinacy, until you show me your true love, by accepting my Road Map and placing your neck in my noose, we have nothing to talk about and the rockets will continue to fly.

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. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, May 25, 2007.

This was written by Arieh Eldad.

"Your people is my people and your G-d is my G-d," said Ruth the Moabite to Naomi her mother-in-law, and she joined the Jewish people, and "Boaz redeemed her and she begat Obed and Obed begat Jesse and Jesse begat David." Thus ends the Megilla of Ruth which we read on the holiday of Shavuot.

Did not the elders of Bethlehem, who sat at the city gate and ruled that Boaz was permitted -- even obligated -- to redeem and marry Ruth, remember what is written in Deuteronomy: "An Amonite and a Moabite shall not come unto the community of G-d, even unto the tenth generation shall they not come into the community of G-d, forever"? Did not Rabbi Berachiya and Rabbi Simon, who conclude the Midrash Rabba commentary on the Megilla of Ruth by stating that all the generations up until King David were merely a divine sifting and selection until G-d found David, remember that King David is the great-grandson of a Moabite? How would the history of Israel look if the elders of Bethlehem had been picky about the descent from Ruth? Even assuming that Ruth was converted according to halacha, we can only be thankful that a miracle occurred and there was no rabbinical court in that generation that abrogated her conversion, as recently happened with a rabbinical court in Ashdod, which abrogated the conversion of a woman that took place 15 years ago. The court retroactively abrogated her marriage after she admitted she had not been careful in observing the commandments and ruled that her children were not Jews, and this because the rabbi (Orthodox, not Reform) who converted her, Rabbi Chaim Druckman, is a "sinner" supposedly bringing pure gentiles into the nation of Israel. Another recent news item is that rabbinical courts are opposing those who wish to convert if their spouse (Jewish from birth) refuses to observe a religious lifestyle or is not willing to leave his place of work where immodestly dressed women also work.

A week ago, the news also included a story about a major offensive by important rabbis against 30 Zionist rabbis who ascended the Temple Mount. And a torrent of curses descended upon those who -- with rabbinical support -- proposed legislation to formalize the character of the Sabbath in the State of Israel in the light of an accord written by Rabbi Jacob Meidan and Professor Ruth Gabison.

The common denominator of these three phenomena -- the fight against conversion, against ascending Temple Mount, and against a Sabbath law -- as well as the refusal to address the needs of women whose husbands refuse to grant them divorce papers (a get), or permit enlistment in the Israeli army, is that they are attempts to be disconnected from history, to ignore the reality of our lives while burying one's head in holy ground.

Hundreds of thousands of citizens who made aliya to Israel under the Law of Return cannot marry, hundreds of thousands of Arabs do as they wish on Temple Mount while only Jews are forbidden to ascend in order to avoid contaminating the holy mountain, millions of Israelis have turned the Sabbath into a day of shopping and work, thousands of women cannot marry because they are waiting for a get their husbands refuse to grant, tens of thousands of Haredi youth are not serving in the army and not doing any alternate national service because "their Torah is their livelihood," and super-models walk semi-naked in fashion shows after they win exemptions from military service claiming to be deeply religious.

And the rabbinic establishment of Israel is convinced that they are thus saving the Eternal One of Israel.

This week the Knesset marked Herzl Day. Herzl gave us political Zionism, but only a small portion of the nation accepted it. Most of Orthodox Judaism fervently fought Herzl. Detached from the history swirling around them, deaf to the hammering that was building the gas chambers, most of the rabbis in Europe preferred the ancient oath which came after the Bar Kochba rebellion "not to go up as a wall" to the oath of the Kabbalists Joseph Caro and Solomon Elkabatz to go up to Israel in order to redeem the Divine Presence and be redeemed. Thus the State of Israel was established mostly by secular Zionists who, even though they actualized with their bodies the Jewish souls beating within -- failed to bequeath this beating Jewish soul to their grandchildren.

Trying to live outside of history in the last century brought about the destruction of millions in Europe. Trying to live outside of history today may bring about and maybe already has brought about the division of our people into two peoples, the ceding of the Temple Mount to the Arabs, the separation of religion from the state, and the abandonment of the Jewish character of the State of Israel.

At the time of the first return to Zion from Babylonian Exile, the people were led by Ezra the Scribe and Nehemiah the statesman. After they built the walls of Jerusalem, they read the Torah to the whole people and renewed the covenant between Israel and its G-d. They wrote a new contract to be signed by all the leaders of the people. Today, too, the State of Israel is not enough, the Israel Defense Forces and military campaigns are not enough; we cannot hide behind ancient walls in a sort of Karaite-ism of the Oral Torah.

We need a new contract.

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 25, 2007.

As Joshua circled the ancient city of Jericho seven times, blowing the Shofar until the walls tumbled down, let the Israeli people similarly go up to Jerusalem and bring down Ehud Olmert and the currently useless Knesset. Let them also bring Shofrot and staffs to thump the ground until the buildings that house the political scoundrels shake with the righteous fury of the people. Today the weak, corrupt government that claims primacy over the people of Israel are putting on a false show of force, pretending that they are hitting a few of those infamous empty buildings at the orders of Olmert. Why does it seem that all the buildings they hit are invariably empty of Terrorists -- reminiscent of the Rabin and Peres days where they called ahead to warn the PLO terrorists to get out before the attacks?!

It's all for show as the IDF fires at empty fields in anticipation, they say, that Kassam rocket launching teams may set up in that empty field. I do not necessarily wholly blame the military officers, given that they were selected for their PC (Political Correctness) in the anticipation of becoming a ranking politician after their military service. Most want to clear out Gaza and rectify the Sharon-Olmert decision to give up the Southern Front -- along with the Northern Front which Ehud Barak abandoned when he fled south Lebanon in the middle of the night in 2000.

This isn't merely an incompetent, cowardly government but it is acting in a manner to invite attack by the Muslim Islamists.

If ever that was sufficient reason to grab Olmert, Peretz, Peres and others of the Left and plant their behinds as hood ornaments on the fronts of tanks as they go into battle, it is now. Let the tanks sweep into Gaza, using the example of the bombing of Dresden, leaving nothing but ashes. Then let the good pioneering Jews of Gush Katif return and remake the paradise that was theirs.

Let the nation rise up against these later-day Herods who was loyal to Rome as Olmert seems loyal to the interests of the Arabists in Washington. These corrupt and evil people have found a home and operating base in the heart of Israel. They deserve no pity, no mercy as they act as the enablers for Israel to be under assault by the insidious pagans who have dubbed themselves Muslim Arab Palestinians.

As for America, the people of this great nation should not be named in the same breath as the Arabists in Washington who have supported Palestinian Terrorists for decades. But, those chickens have come to roost as everything the U.S. tries to do now to stem the tide of killer Islamists fails. It's only a matter of time before the Islamic friends of the Arabist State Department start their campaign of using dirty bombs against American cities.

For years fellow traveling Arabist of the State Department and oil companies have been assisting Arab Muslim Terrorists, invariably calling such nations or terror organizations "moderates".

How in Hell, and I do mean Hell, did the State Department qualify first Arafat and now Abbas as moderates to be paid, trained and armed?

How did they manage to recruit Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres and Yossi Beilin then Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert, Amir Peretz and Tzippi Livni as surrogates to weaken the Jewish State of Israel to Palestinian aggression?

Was it merely the military grants or did they receive more personal gratuities?

Did blackmail play a role, given that Israeli leaders were ripe for blackmail, for their thievery while in office, which is presently under serious investigation by a crooked police force and a political Attorney General Menachem Mazuz?

If ever there was a time for a nation to revolt and drive the thieves out of government, that time is now. Let the people come in droves to Jerusalem with their Shofrot and staffs, making such a great noise that the hideouts of these perfidious gangs come tumbling down. Let the ground shake beneath their feet. Let the screams, this time, come from Olmert, the thugs in his Cabinet and the Knesset.

The people have been screaming from a daily bombardment of Kassam Rockets from Gaza while Hezb'Allah has rearmed in South Lebanon with 20,000 Katyusha Missiles. Every time the Kassams land in Sderot, Ashkelon or those close-in kibbutzim, this ambulatory cancer named Olmert and his lackeys say: "We will know what to do if the missiles don't stop." What he means is that the Olmert gang, at the behest of the Bush Road Map Makers, will evacuate southern Israel as demanded by the Arabists in the Washington State Department.

Treason is a hanging offense so let's get on with the trials while such action may yet do some good in defending the country. If the French people could rid themselves of the predator elite aristocracy, even the passive Jews could aspire to clean out their corrupt leadership if the Jewish nation is to survive.

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 winstonmedia@interaccess.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 25, 2007.

Israel has for decades crept in against attacking terrorists with little mouse steps called "restraint". Most of Israel's governments have meekly waited for an attack and then they respond with meaningless little mouse steps that do NOT crush their enemies decisively. Rather they encourage more terror by turning the meek cheek and teaching the Muslim Palestinians (both terrorists and the civilian population) that there is no price to pay for killing Jews.

We must all recall the Rabin-Peres years where the little mouse steps against terror were air or artillery strikes against empty buildings -- usually with a prior warning call from Shimon Peres to the PLO to abandon the intended targeted then emptied buildings before the incoming IDF strike.

It was a way to trick and pacify the angry Israeli people but, not crush the Palestinian Terrorists.

It was a partnership made in Hell along with the pro-Arab U.S. State Department leading the orchestration. First the collusion was with Yassir Arafat; now it with Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) -- Arafat's 40 year companion and financier in terror. The U.S. and Israel also armed Fatah with weapons and ammunition and the CIA trained the Palestinian Authority's Police Force, many of whom were also terrorists -- especially during the various "intifadas".

Each time the weak response generated a greater confidence among the terrorists leadership that they could successfully mount greater operations against Israeli citizens -- with impunity. They had not so secret partners at the highest levels of Israeli government and they thought they could count on that protection.

It's happening again as Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert together planned and carried out a coup d'etat against the 10,000 Israeli people who made their homes in Gush Katif/Gaza. Sharon was advised time and again that a "judenrein" (Jew-free) Gaza would become an operational Global Terror Base for not only the Muslim Arab Palestinians but also dozens of other terror organizations such as Islam al Jihadi, Hamas, Fatah, Al Aksa Martyrs' Brigades and, of course, Al Qaeda. Which, of course, is exactly what happened.

Clearly, Olmert, among others, should be indicted, tried and jailed for treason, for crimes against the Jewish people. As for Sharon, he too should be tried, in modified absentia, given that he lies as a semi-rotting corpse kept alive by machines. The once unthinkable crimes of this once great hero continue to affect the lives of Israelis and he should be put on trial as a betrayer of his nation's trust.

(Note! I say this as a once great admirer and friend of Ariel Sharon.)

Whatever he once did for the nation as a charging General has long since been erased by choice. It is said that a man can achieve or lose Olam HaBa (the world to come) in a split second and Arik Sharon has clearly lost passage into Olam HaBa for all time.

The horrible Leftists playing the role of subversive Fifth Columnists, having invariably restrained the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) from executing a crushing response to Terror have always wound up pleading with the Terrorists for forgiveness and to cease and desist their dastardly acts of Terror. Thus, we have Oslo, Barak's retreat for Lebanon's security buffer zone, and Gaza -- with more to come IF Olmert and the eminence gris, Shimon Peres, assist the terrorists by surrendering more Jewish Land, more weapons and more money to the P.A.

Each time the expectations among the Arab Muslims grew exponentially, as they saw the pacifistic Israeli Left tremble, apologize for winning and demanding nothing from the vanquished. The Islamic creature fed on this weakness of the Jewish Left and grew to a point that it could well overwhelm Israel's defenses.

If I were in charge, I would strip the so-called authorities of their powers, sentence them to something like 50 lashes and send them out into the wilderness to live out their days. These are the lepers of Jewish society and should be treated as dangerous untouchables.

Islamists/Arabs/Muslims cannot be treated with kindness -- which they perceive as weakness, vulnerability and the invitation to attack -- again. Treat them as they treat each other -- with unyielding cruelty -- much the same as the Muslim Turks treated the Arab and Muslim population of the Turkish Ottoman Empire for 400 years. The Allies liberated the Ottoman Empire in WW1, creating a bunch of new free Muslim countries out of the former Ottoman Empire -- all of which became radicalized under new dictators.

Treating the Muslims with respect and kindness only causes them to have contempt for the weak-kneed Leftist Jews. This leads to their accelerated hatred and visions of avidly contemplated Genocide as soon as they have the power to do so. Clearly, they have the same plans for American Arabists and the Europeans.

Apologetic little mouse steps do not civilize Islamists but, rather only increase their vicious expectations of enslaving others.

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 winstonmedia@interaccess.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 25, 2007.

I would like to look northward in this posting. Ultimately all of this affects Israel.


In the last several days world attention has been drawn to the Nahr al Bared UNRWA refugee camp in northern Lebanon, where Lebanese Armed Forces have entered and are doing battle in order to drive out a militant Sunni group associated with al-Qaida, called Fatah al-Islam.

The group, which has Syrian support, is led by a Palestinian, Shaker Abssi, and consists, according to reports, mostly of Palestinians, but includes others such as Syrians and Jordanians.

The Lebanese army has encountered stiff resistance in the camp -- where they were fired upon by machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades. That a militant group would headquarter in a Palestinian refugee camp, and that violence would ensue, should not come as a surprise.

There are presently close to 400,000 Palestinian Arabs in Lebanon who are registered with UNRWA as refugees. Of these, some 225,000 live in the 12 official UNRWA refugee camps that currently exist in Lebanon -- all but one of these camps (the exception being one adjacent to Ba'albek) are situated near the Mediterranean coast. The remainder of the registered refugee population lives in close proximity to the camps.

The situation of the Palestinian refugees inside of Lebanon is -- by any one of a number of measures -- worse than that of Palestinian Arab refugees living in other areas in which UNRWA functions: Jordan, Syria, Gaza, and Judea and Samaria.

They endure greater poverty, a higher infant mortality rate, and poorer housing. Lebanon affords the Palestinians little in the way of social and civil rights and actually prevents them from working in dozens of professions. In a word, the Lebanese are hostile to the Palestinians and have no intention of making life easy for them or integrating them.

There have been UNRWA refugees camps in Lebanon since 1950, and the Palestinians situated there were never welcomed or integrated. But current Lebanese hostility to the Palestinians was generated in good part by historical events of thirty years ago.

When the PLO was thrown out of Jordan in 1970, Arafat moved his cadres to south Lebanon, and took over the refugee camps there, establishing a political, economic and military presence so considerable that it was referred to as a "state within a state."

Ultimately the Lebanese paid an enormous price for this situation. The PLO financial empire, called SAMED, established farming and manufacturing industries and, utilizing cheap Palestinian refugee labor, became one of Lebanon's largest employers; they harvested poppies in the Bekaa Valley for an extensive drug trade, as well. The balance of Lebanon's fragile multi-factional society was upset in part by the presence of the Palestinians, who numbered some 300,000 by 1975 and had developed into a primary military force in Southern Lebanon. They established a law unto themselves that undermined Lebanese sovereignty, and they played a role in Lebanon's civil war.

Perhaps bitterest of all to the Lebanese was the PLO use of Lebanese soil as the base for attacks into northern Israel. This provoked Israeli bombardment of Palestinian targets in south Lebanon, and then, in 1982, Israeli military movement into southern Lebanon to drive out the Palestinians.

The PLO infrastructure was driven out and moved to Tunis.

The Palestinian presence in the camps remained, however. To a considerable degree the residents of the camps continued to be a law unto themselves: By long standing agreement -- dating from the time of the PLO -- the Lebanese army has no authority to enter the camps, which are controlled by armed Palestinian militias. The entrance now of the Lebanese army into this camp marks a departure from what has been the norm. Lebanese from the area of Tripoli, near Nahr al Bared, cheered as the LAF entered.

The Palestinian residents of the UNRWA refugee camps in Lebanon, as described above, are seen as a beleaguered population -- and there is clearly a way in which this is so.

But they are also a radicalized population, often working against the best interests of a stable, independent Lebanon. In 2005, after the withdrawal from Lebanon of Syrian forces, both Syrian weapons and agents were moved into the Palestinian camps.

Last summer, during the Lebanese War, the Palestinians in the UNRWA camps provided support for Hezbollah and a secure hiding place for some of its weaponry.

At present close to one-half of the 30,000 residents of Nahr al Bared have fled, many to the UNRWA camp at Beddawi or to Tripoli. Meanwhile, Richard Cook, Director of UNRWA Affairs in Lebanon, is expressing outrage that a UNRWA relief convoy that entered the camp on Tuesday was fired upon.

UNRWA officials now concede that they knew months ago about the presence of a heavily armed Fatah al-Islam group in the camp in Lebanon but were helpless to do anything about it. "Somebody hasn't been doing their job," said Commissioner-General Karen AbuZayd, referring to the Palestinian militias who patrol the camps. According to her the Palestinians refugees in the camp are unhappy about the presence of Fatah al-Islam.

AbuZayd's statement opens the door to many questions:

In early 1998, Kofi Annan, then secretary-general of the UN, stated in a report that, "Refugee camps and settlements must be kept free of any military presence or equipment, including arms and ammunition...the neutrality and humanitarian character of the camps and settlements must be scrupulously maintained."

The Security Council, reflecting the spirit of Annan's words, subsequently adopted Resolution 1208, acknowledging that "the maintenance of the civilian and humanitarian character of refugee camps and settlements is an integral part of the national, regional and international response to refugee situations, and underlining "the unacceptability of using refugees and other persons in refugee camps and settlements to achieve military purposes."

In light of this, how is it that armed Palestinian militias have been permitted to continue to control the UNRWA camps in Lebanon?

Further how is it that UNRWA officials kept quiet for months when in possession of the knowledge that a heavily armed Fatah al-Islam group was in an UNRWA camp?

The inability of UNRWA officials to "do anything" about the situation directly -- because UNRWA possess no armed forces -- does not absolve them of responsibility to call the situation to the attention of the Security Council or the international community more broadly.

Lastly, AbuZayd's statement regarding the fact that the Palestinian militias in the camp "weren't doing their job" shines a spotlight on the very serious matter of possible complicity of Palestinians in the camps with the radical Islamic group.

Arlene Kushner is Senior Research Associate, Center for Near East Policy Research, Beit Agron International Press Center, Jerusalem, Israel. Contact her at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Israel Christian Nexus, May 25, 2007.

Contact Evan Miller by email at icnexus.info@gmail.com The role of the Israel-Christian Nexus is to bring together (connect) Christians and Jews in support of Israel and of our shared Judeo-Christian heritage and values.

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 25, 2007.

Does anyone find it odd that Fath el-Islam (Palestinian terrorist group in Lebanon) can:

kill civilians with impunity,

threaten the total destruction of Lebanon with impunity,

promise a terror war that will specifically target more and more civilians....with impunity.....

....and can do all of this with absolutely no provocation from any other force or government.

Their's is a war of pure aggression....but no one utters a word of protest (except their victims).

And, conversely, Israel's defensive retaliation in Lebanon brought calumny and criticism and great power intervention and UN intervention.

This below comes from The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), an independent, non-profit organization that translates and analyzes the media of the Middle East.

This is a Special Dispatch -- Jihad and Terrorism Studies Project/Lebanon, May 25, 2007, No. 1599.

In an interview with the London daily Al-Hayat, the military commander of the Fath Al-Islam organization, Shihab Al-Qaddour, also known as Abu Hurieira, threatened that if attacks by the Lebanese military against his organization continued, 'all fronts will be opened' and that Fath Al-Islam would be 'ready to blow up every place in Lebanon.' He also noted that his organization's activists were prepared for a battle lasting two years or more.

Al-Qaddour, 36, from the village of Mishmish in the sub-district of Akkar in northern Lebanon, is considered the No. 2 man in Fath Al-Islam, after the leader Shaker Al-'Absi. According to Al-Qaddour, who spent five and a half years in a Syrian prison, he has fought for 21 years in various areas, including Iraq.

The following are excerpts from the interview:

'We Have Sleeper Cells On Alert In All Palestinian Refuge Camps'

During the interview, Al-Qaddour told Al-Hayat that the Fath Al-Islam organization 'would respond against the Lebanese military if the attacks on it were to continue,' and added that '[our response] will not be limited [solely] to the Palestinian refugee camps or to Beirut, but all fronts will be opened.' Referring to the battles in Tripoli and the bombings in the neighborhoods of Beirut during the past week, he said: 'This is only the beginning... We are ready to blow up Beirut and every other place in Lebanon.'

Al-Qaddour stated that 'in addition to the supporters of the organization, Fath Al-Islam has bases and sleeper cells in all the Palestinian refugee camps in the various regions of Lebanon, and they are on alert [to launch] a harsh response -- they await only a sign from us.' He said, 'Fath Al-Islam's threat to open the fire of hell against Lebanon is a serious one. As long as we are under attack, we will [defend ourselves] by any and all means. The organization has the full capability to bring the battle to every place in Lebanon. We can easily do this...'

Fath Al-Islam -- A Palestinian Organization, Not Al-Qaeda Affiliated

Al-Qaddour, who spent five and a half years in a Syrian prison, also said in the interview that some accuse the Fath Al-Islam activists of being 'Syrian agents inside Lebanon.' However, he said, his organization comprises Palestinian activists from various countries, with rich battle experience: 'The Fath Al-Islam organization is Palestinian, and includes 600 to 700 activists in all the Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, not only in the Nahr Al-Bared refuge camp. All the activists are on the highest battle alert.' He added, 'The number of Fath Al-Islam [members who were] killed in the first three days of the battles with the Lebanese military was only 10, and all the killed were Palestinians from Lebanon, Syria, or Jordan. This is in spite of that we expected to have many more killed.'(1)

Al-Qaddour said: 'Many Fath Al-Islam members have very rich battle experience outside Lebanon. I personally have 21 years of experience in fighting in various regions -- the most recent of which was Iraq. '

Al-Qaddour noted that he was not worried about a possible scenario in which the residents of the Nahr Al-Bared refugee camp rebelled against Fath Al-Islam. He said, 'Many of the members of the Palestinian factions that oppose us politically deviated from their leaders' orders, stood with us, and identified with us when the camp was recently bombed.'

Al-Qaddour denied that Fath Al-Islam was affiliated with Al-Qaeda, and added: 'Our organization is an Islamic project aimed at liberating Palestine and Jerusalem. Our fire [will strike] at every obstacle that stands against our achieving our goal.' He continued, 'If the right to defend our land [Palestine] is stripped from us, the responsibility will be borne by all those who stand in our way and who carry out the American and Jewish plan and the Western [plan] in general.'

'We Are Prepared for a Battle That Will Last Two Years Or More'

Al-Qaddour stated that in his organization there were 'people who are prepared for martyrdom and to carry out [such] operations,' and refused to call them suicide bombers. He added, 'If the noose tightens around our neck, we will not exclude any means [of response].' Al-Qaddour likewise noted that Fath Al-Islam has shelters and underground fortifications in the Nahr Al-Bared camp, and added: 'We have nothing to lose. We are prepared for a battle that will last two years or more.'

On the warfare methods of Fath Al-Islam, Al-Qaddour said: 'We adopt guerilla warfare, which no army can vanquish as demonstrated in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.'

Fath Al-Islam is Not Against the Shi'ites and Has Connections With Hizbullah

Al-Qaddour added, 'We have no intention of attacking UNIFIL in the south [of Lebanon] as long as those forces do not attack us.' He further noted that his organization had 'connections with Hizbullah and also that it bore no enmity towards Hizbullah, or towards the Shi'ites in Lebanon,' and that therefore they had no 'intention to carry out operations against the Shi'ites in Lebanon.'(2)

Fath Al-Islam Leader: We Have Hundreds of People Ready for Martyrdom

Two months before the outbreak of hostilities between the Lebanese army and Fath Al-Islam, Fath Al-Islam leader Shaker Al-'Absi threatened, in an interview with the Lebanese daily Al-Nahar, to set the region on fire: 'We are now monitoring the movements of the military around the [Nahr Al-Bared] refugee camp. If we sense [that there is about] to be a real attack against us, our reaction will be very harsh, and it will not stop. We have hundreds of people who are willing to martyr themselves [istishhad], who have prepared themselves to strike at the entity state [i.e. Israel], and they are ready to defend [the banner of Islam] 'There is no God but Allah' everywhere in the world.' Al-'Absi further added that the organization had activists not only in the refuge camps but throughout Lebanon, Palestine, and the surrounding region.

Al-'Absi, who has spent time in Syrian prison, denied Syrian claims that he had been jailed on charges of belonging to Al-Qaeda. He said that he had been arrested for attempting to carry out an operation in the Golan, and that he was accused of possessing weapons and transferring weapons to Palestine.(3)


(1) In an Al-Jazeera TV interview on May 25, 2007, PLO spokesman As'ad Abd Al-Rahman defied reports that Fath Al-Islam is a Palestinian organization, asserting that there are no Palestinians nor are the casualties in the battles with the Lebanese Army Palestinian, and hinted that the organization is operated by the Syrian regime.
(2) Al-Hayat (London), May 25, 2007
(3)Al-Nahar (Lebanon), March 16, 2007.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz, May 25, 2007.

This was published today in Arutz Sheva

The IDF has publicly informed all Hamas terrorists how to activate an anti-IDF force field that is more powerful even than the one around the starship Enterprise. That force field would inevitably fail in every other episode of the Star Trek television show, only to be repaired in the nick of time by Chief Engineer Scott.

But the force field that the IDF spokesperson granted to the Hamastanian enemy is infinitely more reliable and effective.

As reported by my colleagues at Israel National News.com: "Following a missile hit in the vicinity of Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh's home in the Shati neighborhood of Gaza City, an IDF spokeswoman said that 'Haniyeh's home definitely was not the target.'"

"Definitely." That little word says so much. It says, "Oh no. We would never even think of harming Haniyeh or his lovely house! Oh, no, no, no. Don't be silly."

So now, much like in the story of the Biblical Noah, any animal will know that he or she can find refuge in the "ark" of Haniyeh's home.

They "cloak themselves"? Like the Romulans?

I understand that Haniyeh's wife is to start renting beds on the second floor of her house to wanted terrorists seeking a rest from a hard day of shelling Sderot schools. Maybe it will become the new Arafat-style Mukata. Remember that? It was the "headquarters" where wanted PA terrorists hid out with their PLO Godfather, enjoying his beta-version anti-IDF force field.

But if a Palestinian Authority terrorist is not fortunate enough to live near Ismail Haniyeh or the Mukata, he can always grab any child within reach and go on with his business appointments completely unmolested (which is generally less than can be said for the child). This method apparently works wonders for keeping those pesky IDF helicopter gunships away.

As reported in the Jerusalem Post last year, the PA terrorists "'cloak' themselves in women and children and families. There can be a situation where for days we know a terrorist is in a certain place and we don't attack him... We feel that he's in a place that could be problematic. There are at least 10 operations we don't carry out for every one that we do," [Israeli Air Force Chief Eliezer Shkedy] said.

They "cloak themselves"? Like the Romulans, also from Star Trek?

The difference between Star Trek and life in the Middle East, of course, is that one is filled with bizarre creatures in outlandish costumes who are constantly threatening the future of the universe, and the other is a TV show.

Nissan Ratzlav-Katz writes for Arutz-Sheva.

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, May 25, 2007.

The Labor Party primaries are coming up. At the moment there are only three contenders left running to head what is Left of the once dominant party in what had been a One-Party Israeli State.

The three who remain include Amir Peretz, whose chances of getting elected are about the same as those of Dennis Kucinich. After last summer's fiascos, the public understands that Peretz is incapable of properly managing a felafel stand or of tying his own shoes.

The other two contenders are Ehud Barak, who was Prime Minister of Israel from 1999 to 2001, and Ami Ayalon. Ayalon is slightly ahead in the polls. Ayalon is basically a bald Yossi Beilin and his preferred policies and platform are simply Uri-Avnery-Lite.

So from the point of view of Israel's survival, which of the three is the contender whose victory in the primaries would be the most beneficial?

The answer is clearly Ehud Barak.

Huh, you say! How can that be? After all, Ehud Barak personally dropped 4000 katyusha rockets on northern Israel this past summer!

Well, if you are going to answer your own questions, you don't need me.

Of course, Barak dropped 4000 rockets on northern Israel this past summer, some not very far from me. That is why it would be good if he were to win the Labor primaries! The public KNOWS that those missiles landed in northern Israel all because of Barak's cowardly unilateral capitulation to the Hizbollah in 2000. So with Barak as head of the rump Labor Party, any leader of the Likud or of a post-Olmert Kadima could easily defeat the Labor Party! Labor would pass into history as a curious anachronism, sort of like the Whig Party.

In contrast, Ayalon would be the new boy on the block and that might protect him from the public's contempt for the Labor Party. Of course, Amir Peretz is hated even more so than Barak and is regarded as much stupider than Barak. So his winning the primaries would also be good for Israel, by producing the demolition of the Labor Party. But that seems unlikely to happen.

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. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, May 25, 2007.

This article was written by Tawfik Hamid and was published in the Wall Street Journal as an Opinion piece. Dr. Hamid, a onetime member of Jemaah Islamiya, an Islamist terrorist group, is a medical doctor and Muslim reformer living in the West. It is archived at

Not many years ago the brilliant Orientalist, Bernard Lewis, published a short history of the Islamic world's decline, entitled "What Went Wrong?" Astonishingly, there was, among many Western "progressives," a vocal dislike for the title. It is a false premise, these critics protested. They ignored Mr. Lewis's implicit statement that things have been, or could be, right.

But indeed, there is much that is clearly wrong with the Islamic world. Women are stoned to death and undergo clitorectomies. Gays hang from the gallows under the approving eyes of the proponents of Shariah, the legal code of Islam. Sunni and Shia massacre each other daily in Iraq. Palestinian mothers teach 3-year-old boys and girls the ideal of martyrdom. One would expect the orthodox Islamic establishment to evade or dismiss these complaints, but less happily, the non-Muslim priests of enlightenment in the West have come, actively and passively, to the Islamists' defense.

These "progressives" frequently cite the need to examine "root causes." In this they are correct: Terrorism is only the manifestation of a disease and not the disease itself. But the root-causes are quite different from what they think. As a former member of Jemaah Islamiya, a group led by al Qaeda's second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, I know firsthand that the inhumane teaching in Islamist ideology can transform a young, benevolent mind into that of a terrorist. Without confronting the ideological roots of radical Islam it will be impossible to combat it. While there are many ideological "rootlets" of Islamism, the main tap root has a name -- Salafism, or Salafi Islam, a violent, ultra-conservative version of the religion.

It is vital to grasp that traditional and even mainstream Islamic teaching accepts and promotes violence. Shariah, for example, allows apostates to be killed, permits beating women to discipline them, seeks to subjugate non-Muslims to Islam as dhimmis and justifies declaring war to do so. It exhorts good Muslims to exterminate the Jews before the "end of days." The near deafening silence of the Muslim majority against these barbaric practices is evidence enough that there is something fundamentally wrong.

The grave predicament we face in the Islamic world is the virtual lack of approved, theologically rigorous interpretations of Islam that clearly challenge the abusive aspects of Shariah. Unlike Salafism, more liberal branches of Islam, such as Sufism, typically do not provide the essential theological base to nullify the cruel proclamations of their Salafist counterparts. And so, for more than 20 years I have been developing and working to establish a theologically-rigorous Islam that teaches peace.

Yet it is ironic and discouraging that many non-Muslim, Western intellectuals -- who unceasingly claim to support human rights -- have become obstacles to reforming Islam. Political correctness among Westerners obstructs unambiguous criticism of Shariah's inhumanity. They find socioeconomic or political excuses for Islamist terrorism such as poverty, colonialism, discrimination or the existence of Israel. What incentive is there for Muslims to demand reform when Western "progressives" pave the way for Islamist barbarity? Indeed, if the problem is not one of religious beliefs, it leaves one to wonder why Christians who live among Muslims under identical circumstances refrain from contributing to wide-scale, systematic campaigns of terror.

Politicians and scholars in the West have taken up the chant that Islamic extremism is caused by the Arab-Israeli conflict. This analysis cannot convince any rational person that the Islamist murder of over 150,000 innocent people in Algeria -- which happened in the last few decades -- or their slaying of hundreds of Buddhists in Thailand, or the brutal violence between Sunni and Shia in Iraq could have anything to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Western feminists duly fight in their home countries for equal pay and opportunity, but seemingly ignore, under a façade of cultural relativism, that large numbers of women in the Islamic world live under threat of beating, execution and genital mutilation, or cannot vote, drive cars and dress as they please.

The tendency of many Westerners to restrict themselves to self-criticism further obstructs reformation in Islam. Americans demonstrate against the war in Iraq, yet decline to demonstrate against the terrorists who kidnap innocent people and behead them. Similarly, after the Madrid train bombings, millions of Spanish citizens demonstrated against their separatist organization, ETA. But once the demonstrators realized that Muslims were behind the terror attacks they suspended the demonstrations. This example sent a message to radical Islamists to continue their violent methods.

Western appeasement of their Muslim communities has exacerbated the problem. During the four-month period after the publication of the Muhammad cartoons in a Danish magazine, there were comparatively few violent demonstrations by Muslims. Within a few days of the Danish magazine's formal apology, riots erupted throughout the world. The apology had been perceived by Islamists as weakness and concession.

Worst of all, perhaps, is the anti-Americanism among many Westerners. It is a resentment so strong, so deep-seated, so rooted in personal identity, that it has led many, consciously or unconsciously, to morally support America's enemies.

Progressives need to realize that radical Islam is based on an antiliberal system. They need to awaken to the inhumane policies and practices of Islamists around the world. They need to realize that Islamism spells the death of liberal values. And they must not take for granted the respect for human rights and dignity that we experience in America, and indeed, the West, today.

Well-meaning interfaith dialogues with Muslims have largely been fruitless. Participants must demand -- but so far haven't -- that Muslim organizations and scholars specifically and unambiguously denounce violent Salafi components in their mosques and in the media. Muslims who do not vocally oppose brutal Shariah decrees should not be considered "moderates."

All of this makes the efforts of Muslim reformers more difficult. When Westerners make politically-correct excuses for Islamism, it actually endangers the lives of reformers and in many cases has the effect of suppressing their voices.

Tolerance does not mean toleration of atrocities under the umbrella of relativism. It is time for all of us in the free world to face the reality of Salafi Islam or the reality of radical Islam will continue to face us. [Editor's Note: Several readers made this point: "How can one have 'a theologically-rigorous Islam that teaches peace' when Islam holds the Koran to be the direct word of God, and the Koran commands Moslems to wage war on the entire rest of humanity for its forcible conversion? Islam, like Marxism and Nazism, is abhorrent in essence, not merely in some interpretation, and the only re-interpretation that will detoxify it, is one which pretends to be Moslem but isn't."]

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. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 25, 2007.

This was written by Joe Kaufman, of the Americans Against Hate Organization. To learn more about JI's and ICNA's financing of Hamas, read Kaufman's FrontPage Magazine piece, 'Helping Hand to Hamas.' Joe Kaufman is available for interview; email him at info@americansagainsthate.org. This press release is archived at

(Coral Springs, FL) Americans Against Hate (AAH), the terrorist watchdog group, is calling on the United States government to shut down the offices and freeze the assets of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) for its role in the financing of Hamas.

As well, AAH is calling on the U.S. government to place the Muslim Brotherhood of Pakistan, Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), on the State Department list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) for the same.

In August of 2006, just nine short months ago, JI announced on its website that it had presented, via its charity Al-Khidmat Foundation (AKF), a check for $99 thousand (six million rupees) to the head of Hamas, Khaled Mashaal. Mashaal thanked JI and stated that Hamas would continue to wage Jihad (war) against Israel.

ICNA was founded in 1971 as the American arm of JI. On AKF's website, ICNA is listed as the charity's two top donors, ICNA Relief USA and ICNA Relief Canada. Another of the listed donors is ICNA's charity, Helping Hand.

AAH Chairman Joe Kaufman stated, "We have incontrovertible evidence that ICNA is part of JI and that JI is funding Hamas through a charity that ICNA is the top donor for. Given this proof, there is no reason whatsoever for the future existence of ICNA. In addition, given JI's financing of Hamas and given JI's communiqués with the leader of Hamas, there are clear grounds for the placement of JI on the State Department list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. We call on the United States government to take immediate action, with respect to both of these organizations."

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Aramy, May 25, 2007.

This was written by Carol Gould, who is a former ITV Drama Executive and author of 'Spitfire Girls,' about the British women pilots of WWII. She is now Editor of 'Current Viewpoint.com' This article is archived at

("Battle for the Holy Land: Jerusalem" -- Channel Four Television primetime Great Britain broadcast May 19 2007; Love thy Neighbour 21 May)

Had I known nothing or even very little about Jewish, Zionist and Israeli history I would have come away from former MP Paddy Ashdown's two-hour documentary on British Channel Four's primetime Saturday 19 May slot thinking the Jews are just about the most disagreeable race on this planet. Were I an Arab or Muslim I would believe the Jews of the Holy City are the scum of the earth. The following Monday evening, Channel Four presented another film by Rod Liddle about those wicked, pesky Jews of the West Bank and Hebron.

In his film Ashdown managed to label the Jewish authorities of Jerusalem 'racism masquerading as bureaucracy', 'discriminatory and inhumane' and 'waging a forty-year war over the Haram al Sharif.' In Liddle's film he did what every British journalist does: hang around waiting for settlers and soldiers to lose their cool as Palestinians are revealed to be hungry, penniless, stomped-on victims of 'apartheid.' Liddle also makes a factual error: he fails to mention the heroic victory by the Israeli army in Sinai, driving back the mighty Egyptian forces. He does not tell the audience that Menachem Begin -- whom every Briton loves to tell me was a lifelong terrorist -- handed the Sinai back to Anwar Sadat at Camp David. The peace-seeking Arabs thanked Israel for its generous gesture by assassinating Sadat. Liddle, Ashdown and Carter, who brokered the Sinai deal, never mention the fact that Sadat was murdered because the Muslim Brotherhood want all of Israel in Arab hands and the Jews driven into the sea or worse.

Once again a British television programme has taken the complex and tragic story of Israel and turned it into a polemic about the endlessly victimised Palestinians and those brutal, hate-filled, despicable Jews.

This is not just a British phenomenon. In the United States former President Jimmy Carter has been castigating Israel for everything under the sun. For those of us with family and friends -- Jewish and Christian -- in Israel, the picture painted by the Carters and Ashdowns of this world is virtually unrecognisable. Since 1948 the State of Israel has not known a day's peace due to the intransigence and violence of its hostile neighbours. This very weekend innocent Israelis are being bombarded with rockets and some are having to be evacuated from their towns and cities. The rockets come from Gaza, which 'brutal occupier' Israel left last year.

It is common to have breakfast with an Israeli chum and be attending his or her funeral the same afternoon. It is possible to meet cheerful, optimistic Israeli women who have lost husbands, fathers, sons and brothers in perpetual wars but who still have hopes for peace with their Muslim neighbours. The image of violent and ruthless Jewish immigrants who want to kill and starve Palestinians is a calumny that is becoming a disturbingly frequent one. Israel is far from angelic but the distorted and deeply unjust image projected in the British media of this tiny but vibrant nation makes me sick to the core of my being.

During the Second World War the Grand Mufti sided with Hitler and many Arabs sought to join the SS. When this fact was raised by Alan Dershowitz at SOAS (University of London) last year, the young Muslims sitting near me in the audience were genuinely stunned. Afterwards we stood outside, the young people smoked and reflected, and we agreed we had much to learn from each other and not from TV pundits, rabbis or Imams. It is this sort of fact-telling that is painfully absent from television programmes like Ashdown's.

In the documentary he asserted that after 1967 and the rise of Zionism things went from bad to worse for the Arabs of Jerusalem. Mr Ashdown needs reminding that the birth of the Zionist movement took place in the 1890s after centuries of brutal and relentless European and British anti-Semitism, culminating in the trial of Alfred Dreyfus and the publication of 'J'Accuse' by Emile Zola. Why are these facts never offered in British programming or articles? The original Zionist movement was a noble enterprise led by Jewish Socialists hoping to establish co-operative farms alongside their Arab neighbours. Furthermore Jews have lived in the Holy Land for thousands of years and are not new, irritating arrivals, as is so widely promulgated by the mass media and the anti-Zionist New Left.

Jews have lived in the Arab village of Piqu'in since the time of Jesus and only recently, when a female failed to have a child was the ancient local synagogue handed over to new caretakers. Why are broadcasters willing to provide young and impressionable audiences in an increasingly multicultural Britain with utter nonsense about the Jews, whom they portray as rapacious, avaricious invaders determined to make Arabia a giant Jewish Empire? All Paddy Ashdown need do is read 'Days of Our Years' by Pierre van Paassen and learn about the valiant efforts of the early European Jewish settlers to create peaceful and productive agricultural and scientific endeavours with local Arab Christians and Muslims.

Frankly, I consider this kind of programming bordering on the criminal because the extreme bias against Israel and Jews could very easily incite young Muslims to attack Jewish targets after watching two hours of 'bad Jews, racist Jews, violent Jews' and their relentless campaign of pillage against helpless Palestinians. It needs to be mentioned here that I started life as a passionate advocate of Shalom Achshav (Peace Now) in the Rabin years but am not able to stomach the recent demonisation of the Jewish State, which remains a bastion of freedom and advancement in a woefully backward region.

Ashdown did, to his credit, mention that in 1967, before the Six Day War, Israel faced annihilation. He did mention massacres of Jews, but his programme spent the rest of its duration finding every possible way to show how Arabs are victimised from all sides -- even by the tiny Greek Orthodox community!

Another element that is never discussed in programmes like these is the absence of leadership in the Arab world. Where are their Mandelas, Kings, ben Gurions, Churchills, Roosevelts or Lincolns? Scenes of utter squalor and deprivation are shown, but where are the leaders and infrastructure in the Palestinian and Arab sectors? Billions in aid have poured in for decades; where has it all gone? It was explained in the programme that Palestinians' garbage is left uncollected for weeks at a time by the Jerusalem authorities, and that one man needs a permit to enter his house. Where is the leadership in their community to put this right? That Sheikh Maktoum of Dubai has today offered a staggering $10 billion to the region to put the Arab world in tandem with the West is an indication that oppression, poverty and primitive public services are not the fault of Israel but a grave problem in the wider Muslim world. The BBC reported in the story about Sheikh Makhtoum that more books are published in Turkey per annum than in the entire Arab world.

When Jewish aid agencies have sent money to Israel over the decades it is put into remarkable enterprises like the Weizmann Institute, the Nervous Disease Centre in Herzliya, the multi-cultural Hebrew University and the Hadassah Hospital, where Arabs are treated as equals with anyone else; are Jews treated in Pakistani, Libyan or Saudi hospitals? ORT, the generous Jewish charity, helps all peoples across the globe, whatever their faith or colour. Why does Paddy Ashdown never examine this aspect of the progress of the two peoples?

The constant complaining about the Arabs being second-class citizens in the Jewish State I answer thus: for twenty-eight years I lived in the UK as a non-EU citizen. I had no rights whatsoever although I paid tax, National Insurance, Council Tax and VAT. I could not vote in any election, belong to a political party or hold office. As a non-Anglican I could not hope to marry a Royal or any distantly-related gentry. It was an unwritten rule that I knew I could not aspire to certain clubs or sectors of society because of my background. Yes, it is different for Arabs in Israel because they were born there and they should have full citizenship rights, but we all have our crosses to bear. Their life in Israel is far better than that in corrupt Palestine. Again, if they have a valid grievance, where are their leaders?

Conversely, nearly a million Jews were expelled from or fled hostile Arab countries in the past sixty years, and yet they are not asking for their homes back, or having Paddy Ashdown holding their hands and sobbing with them about their homes being taken, as he did with Arabs on this programme. Daniel Pearl went to Pakistan and promptly got beheaded for being a Jew.

Ashdown seemed particularly incensed throughout the programme about the 'Jewish immigration' to the Jerusalem area and kept repeating phrases about 'more Jews' moving in. He referred to ' huge waves of Jewish immigration' in the time leading up to the 1948 War, but never once mentioned the genocide of the Nazi Holocaust and the remnant of European Jewry trickling into Palestine. He never told the story of British forces beating Jewish refugees as they tried to disembark. He never mentioned the quotas imposed. The 'huge waves' he describes ( estimated to be 850,000) included Jews from seven Muslim countries who fled persecution, not to mention the thousands who fled the West Bank and Gaza after the 1948 War.

What is so infuriating about the iniquitous way the history of the Jewish State is depicted in every media form in the United Kingdom is the lack of context and the constant mantra of the millions of hostile Arabs being entirely innocent of any wrongdoing.

I have always been of the contention that it would have been so nice if the Arabs had said 'Welcome, Jews -- come help us make a garden out of a wasteland.'

That is exactly what the Jews did, and with no help -- only violence and fury -- from the surrounding Arab nations. Israel is a technological marvel and an oasis in the desert of staggering agricultural development, scientific advancement and cultural wealth. Take, for example, the Golan Heights, captured by Israel in the Six Day War for her survival. A Syrian wasteland was turned into a world-class wine-producing region, with Israeli Yarden wines winning prizes at the Bordeaux Festival.

There are more symphony orchestras in Israel -- the size of Wales -- than in the whole of Africa and the Arab world. Did Paddy Ashdown mention this? No. He even had the audacity to accuse the world-revered Israel Antiquities Authority of refusing to consult with the Arabs about works being conducted a good distance from the al Aqsa compound. Anyone who knows about Israel will be aware of the esteem with which the Israel Antiquities Authority is held worldwide and of the excellence of its work for sixty years.

Watching a programme like this, one does wonder if some in the white Christian world, deep down inside, do not have a gene that just hates Jews and everything to which they aspire. Paddy Ashdown made a point that he abhors any thought of Israel's destruction but spent an entire programme cherry-picking situations that put Jewish nationhood in a bad light. He interviewed Geula Cohen and Effi Eitan, both of whom do not by the wildest stretches of anyone's imagination represent mainstream Israeli opinion. His cameras kept focussing on religious Jews in long coats and hats. When he interviewed David Rubinger and less militant Jews they had only dire visions of doom. He never interviewed cool secular Jewish kids in Jerusalem's cafes, theatre and concertgoers, students or musicians.

Channel Four ought to be ashamed of having allowed the broadcast of a programme with such obvious bias and lack of research. One suspects even al-Jazeera would have presented a more balanced view of the Holy City!

Now, here is a radical view: after having been intimidated and insulted to the core of my being last Monday by my fellow NUJ ( National Union of Journalists) members about the evils of Jews, Zionists, Americans and Israel, I suggest it is time for it is time for well-meaning liberal Guardianistas to get their obsessed minds off the wicked Hebrews and devote their energies to the crises in Sudan and Zimbabwe.

Enough is enough of the demonising of the Jews, who have given the world more Nobel Prize winners, Broadway composers, playwrights and lyricists, symphony musicians, solo virtuosi and conductors than any other minority group in the history of mankind.

And as it is a state with a conurbation of six million such brilliant, enterprising, enlightened, sober and hard-working Jews, the message to Channel Four, Jimmy Carter, Paddy Ashdown and those who choose to demonise its every action is: get a life, and whilst you are at it, hands off Israel.

And may peace reign over all the peoples of the Holy City.

Contact Aramy by email at aramy964gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Professor Eugene Narrett, May 25, 2007.

Early on Thursday May 24 a Kassam rocket landed on the access road to a gas station in Sderot. It missed a gasoline tanker truck that had just passed by about three seconds. See the one minute video at www.honestreporting.com

This follows by a few days the murder of Shirel Freedman as she drove her car through the center of the small city. When residents who have been under attack for six months gathered to jeer and demand help from the drive through of Foreign Minister Tzippi Livni and her sidekick, EU diplomat Javier Solana, police beat and kicked the protesters. The expulsion government of Ehud Olmert and former State Labor boss (now posing as Defense Minister), Amir Peretz apparently believes that the citizens of Sderot require further pounding.

Still, this government is not without its solutions to the problem. The Foreign Ministry, whose guiding hand continues to be Shimon Peres fronted by Livni has decided that "diplomacy, advocacy and public relations" will be used to awaken the conscience of Europe and its sense of fair play [sic]. This is how the expulsion-regime diffuses and smothers public demands for action while it proceeds with its plans to truncate Israel and encourage western-funded Arabs to grind into Jews the feeling that their lives are worth nothing.

In other words, the holocaust continues with major assistance from Israeli enablers and puppets. This is something like the scandal Ben Hecht described in his book Perfidy (1960; 1977 re-printed Milah).

While the Lebanese army uses artillery and tanks to pound away at "Islamists" and "terrorists" in a "Palestinian refugee camp" in Tripoli, the IDF finally responded to the months-long bombardment of Sderot and the western Negev by a few pinpoint strikes on terrorist leaders in the Gaza area. Papers from London and Paris to Australia blared the news that "Israel continues to pound Gaza" while the text mentions "several rocket attacks" without any details about the situation in Sderot.

This is the conscience to which Labor-Kadima pretends to appeal; they run to the EU and Saxe-Coburg dynasty in Brussels (and London, look it up) for sympathy and "help." You can also read about this "running to Egypt" in Jeremiah or more horribly in Deuteronomy 28.

A recent report from Aaron Klein on World Net Daily (www.wnd.com) details, with aerial photos from 1967 to the present how the Jewish bought and owned land purchased via the JNF for Jewish settlement has been transferred to the Israel Land Authority which has allowed massive and illegal Arab building on the areas, mostly in Jerusalem and around Bethlehem. The report exposes how the JNF has since about 1990 been dominated by rich leftish Jews from New Jersey that support the partition plans of Shimon Peres.

The same FM Livni that did a drive by in Sderot and who boasted that she began demanding a ceasefire from day four of the summer 2006 conflict with Hezbollah (preemptive surrender) on May 23 begged the "international community to do something" about Iran and its growing nuclear capabilities.

We have noted that Iran does not need to attach nuclear bombs to its rockets to decimate Israel. But the main point here is as above: instead of sovereign and vigorous preemptive self-defense (which is mandated by Torah and international law, for what the latter is worth) the FM bleats and whimpers to her Jew-hating pals in the world community to come and save Israel.

As noted above, this is to diffuse, distract, confuse and disempower the Jews of Israel the better to turn it into a NATO and/or EU occupied "security zone" from which Judaism will be steadily laundered out.

Add up these terrible events and one realizes that the time for Israel to regain the independence it just celebrated, to be sovereign and live is growing very short. The appointed time has come...

Eugene Narrett's new book, WW III: the War on the Jews and the Rise of the World Security State 2007 www.lightcatcherbooks.com explains the geopolitics and cultural history of this nightmare and points toward the dawn. Visit his website at www.israelendtimes.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, May 25, 2007.

This was written by Melanie Phillips. It was published on her website

People assume Israel itself was an artificial creation resulting from Holocaust guilt, when a load of European Jews were transplanted into a land owned for millennia by Palestinian Arabs. That itself is false. Israel was the nation state of the Jews centuries before the Arabs took it by force, and an unbroken Jewish presence remained in Jerusalem and other cities, some of which, indeed, had a Jewish majority. It is not surprising that people with perfectly decent instincts are enraged by the continued "occupation" of the West Bank. But they have been led to believe something that is not true.

For a start, Israel's occupation of this territory is perfectly legal and legitimate as an act of self-defense, after a war of aggression against it in 1967. But at a deeper level still, the idea that Israel had no locus in this territory until 1967 is simply false. This West Bank land was never owned by the Palestinians. Following the war of extermination waged by the Arabs against the fledgling Israel at its creation in 1948, Judea and Samaria -- as they then were -- were illegally occupied by Jordan, and became "the West Bank" as a result. Furthermore, and even more significant, Judea and Samaria were part of Mandatory Palestine, within which Britain was enjoined to re-establish a Jewish national home. Hebron, for example, is one of the four most sacred Jewish cities. Jews lived there continuously for some 38 centuries -- Abraham settled there some 1800 years before Christ - until they were driven out by an Arab pogrom in 1929. To be told that Hebron is a place where Jews have no claim is therefore nauseating beyond belief.

It is very important that people come to understand that Israel's core claim is one of justice, and the way this has been misrepresented is profoundly unjust. Indeed, it is monstrous. There are those who believe that the vilification of Israel is a prejudice which is not susceptible to reason. I beg to differ. Much of this madness is based on profound ignorance. Only when people are taught the truth will the big lie finally be nailed. (melaniephillips.com)

Contact Avodah at avodah15aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 25, 2007.


The State Dept. acts as if the primary interest of the Palestinian Arabs is in getting a state, which Israel may not allow while the PA. is devoted to terrorism. The State Dept. wants the P.A. to make a show of repressing terrorism, just a show of it, but considers Abbas' forces too weak to do even that. (Hence it sets benchmarks for Abbas' forces to make plans to repress terrorism, not to act.)

What do those Arabs think? Polls show that their foremost concern is internal security. They want to stop being shoot, kidnapped, and robbed.

Dr. Aaron Lerner draws a novel conclusion from the polls. Abbas has the major share of armed force in the P.A.. He would enjoy popular support if he deployed his forces to take the illicit guns off the streets and then out of the closet. He could restore order, if he wanted to (IMRA, 5/10).

Apparently, he does not want to tangle with Hamas, because his primary interest is not statehood but jihad, which Hamas can help with (and not being assassinated). His other interest is graft. If he restored order, I think that then the primary popular interest there would be in conquering Israel.


Acknowledging unnamed discriminatory and bureaucratic hurdles for Israeli Arabs, PM Olmert offers more quotas in their behalf and a program for more integration of Arabs (IMRA, 5/10) but not citizenship duties equivalent to the Jews'.

Integration with a religious community that attacks Jews, does not make sense. Neither does giving preference to the Arabs, who seek to take over the country.

Meanwhile, the government, including the Supreme Court, discriminates against religious Jews and in favor of the Arabs. It condones wholesale theft and rioting by the Muslims and denial of equal rights to Jews on the Temple Mount.


Nasrallah boasted in Arabic of his war plan. It includes having his newly built shore batteries fire at the Israeli ships and his troops forcibly expelling the UNO peacekeepers. The IDF urges the government to release it to crush Hizbullah and Hamas before they can take to the attack. PM Olmert holds the Army back (IMRA, 5/8). There will be another Commission of Inquiry into the disastrous start Israel will have made. Perhaps some wag will publish it in advance, to shake the country out of its lethargy. And the UNO waits to be attacked?

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 richardshulman5verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, May 25, 2007.

This was written by Marty Peretz, editor of The New Republic.

We've been reading for the last few days about the fury in what's really a poor Palestinian refugee neighborhood abutting Tripoli but what's been branded for decades and decades as a refugee camp. Nahr al Bared is its name. I do not know what the Arabic words mean. Still, the popular designation as a "refugee camp" brings a certain aura of victimhood and, more than that, an aura of innocence, to its inhabitants. In the fourth generation of their institutionalized helplessness, they do not --it is true--seem to have a future, and, multiplied many times over since 1948, they are never going to go "back" to Israel where, as Palestine, it was imagined that they had left fertile fields and orchards like in California and Florida. There were 100,000 of them, almost all from northern Galilee, in the contiguous natural terrain of Lebanon after the Arab war against the Partition Plan for Palestine which sanctioned the establishment of Israel. Now there are four times that many.

Indeed, the very nomenclature of refugee is politically false. Yes, some of them were forced out of their towns and villages or left in the midst of heavy fighting now 60 years ago. They all expected, anticipating an Arab victory by the invading armies, to come back and some hoped to kill their Jewish neighbors on their return. Whatever! As it happens, they found themselves in the great and neighborly Arab homeland of what they called "the one Arab nation," not as tens of other millions cast far away into a hostile environment. A crossing of maybe 25 miles into an abutting province where people speak the same tongue, practice the same religion and purport to be of one ethnic seed is not truly an exile. Forgive me, I am not being harsh.

Now, it is a fact that the Palestinians were not over time truly made welcome. This shows something of the sham of the one Arab nation. The sham of the fraternity of their Arab brothers. But the Palestinians--many thinking themselves South Syrians, others Jordanians, and still others in some way Egyptians--were not exactly thankful guests. In Iraq, they aligned themselves with the tyrant. In Jordan, they stirred up a revolution that brought "Black September" on their heads. In Kuwait, they cheered when Saddam invaded. In Lebanon or, to be more precise, in southern Lebanon they set up a brutal mini-state run by Yassir Arafat and his minions that over-lorded their hosts. The Saudis were canny: they did not allow them in in the first place.

Sixty years on the international dole, with additional cash from the always so-loving Scandinavians, has actually castrated them. I use this masculine metaphor because it seems to illumine the contrast between the bravado of the Palestinians in Lebanon (but not just in Lebanon) and their powerlessness in any other way but to wreak havoc. This is not exactly power.

So what is happening now in Nahr al Bared is actually no surprise to me. I'd first heard about this settlement of 40,000 Palestinians a quarter of a century ago. Of course, it was then more like 15,000. In recent years, friends who know about militant Islam, especially among the Palestinians, told me that jihad had taken root there, with all its fanaticism--Koran and guns--and its self-deception. Two weeks ago, I read a book by the French scholar Bernard Rougier. It is called Everyday Jihad: The Rise of Militant Islam Among Palestinians in Lebanon. The study is really about Ain al-Helweh which I visited several times in 1982, yes, behind the skirts of the Israelis. But the camps of Tal al-Za'tar and Quarantine had in 1976 been razed by the Maronite forces associated with the Syrian army--but not before hundreds had been slaughtered. In 1982, the Phalange massacred more hundreds at Sabra and Shatilla, while the Israeli army looked away. Then, three years later, the Shi'a Amal bombarded the Beirut camps, maybe just for good measure.

But Nahr al Bared figures in the narrative and the nutty logic of Salafism among the wretched Palestinians of Lebanon. Here's a message to many of my faithful readers who respond by foaming at the mouth: read something before you write. Your "talkbacks" might be a little less ugly and maybe even a bit more informed.

Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Andras Bereny, May 25, 2007.

This letter was written by Dina Moscowitz.

Jeff Seath (Hebrew name: Shmuel Zetham), a new immigrant from North Carolina, a Ger Tzedek age 40, has been sitting in jail almost a year (as of this writing, still without a sentence) for smuggling (since he didn't have the proper papers) a sophisticated rifle and ammunition in his lift which he intended to pass on to the IDF. He was arrested when he went to claim his lift in the Haifa port last June, and has been in jail ever since. He was recently found guilty of smuggling, but the judge also ruled that there is no proof that he is a "Jewish terrorist" who intended to kill Arabs with the rifle (as the prosecution tried to prove). He lost an appeal to be released on parole or house arrest, and the Supreme Court judge ruled that he is to be incarcerated until the end of proceedings against him.

After being in telephone contact with him for the better part of the year, along with visiting him and organizing visits and fundraising for him, I am convinced of the truth of his intentions, notwithstanding his naiveté and lapse of good judgment. He was raised with guns in N. Carolina and they have become a natural part of his life. He honestly thought he was contributing to the country (in particular to the IDF) when he brought in the rifle.

His own family, who lives in the hills of N. Carolina, is poor and cannot contribute to his legal expenses, which are considerable. His lawyer has demanded another (at least) 2000 shekels by June 1; despite numerous appeals, only NIS 3000 has been raised. The total cost of defense amounts to approx. $3-4,000. As you can see, we have a long way to go!

I urge all generous souls out there, good Jews who are looking to do a mitzva to help out a young, sincere and idealistic man who only seeks to help out his country and his people: Please send desperately needed funds to the following defense fund:

Mishalot Yisrael,
P.O. Box 5692
Jerusalem, Israel.

Please note (on the check or separately) that these funds are for Shmuel Zetham's/Jeffrey Seath's defense.

In the merit of this tremendous mitzvah, may you and yours know only blessings from The One Above.

Tizku l'mitzvot,
Dina Moskowitz

Contact Andras Bereny by email at bereny@tin.it

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 24, 2007.

This comes from the Media Line (TML), which describes itself as "an American non-profit news organization established to enhance and balance media coverage in the Middle East, promote independent reporting in the region, and break down barriers to understanding in the Arab and Israeli journalism communities."

The UK's BG Group is poised to close a deal in which it will sell $4 billion worth of natural gas discovered off the Gaza Strip coastline to Israel. According to the Times, negotiators will meet next week to work out terms of what is said to be a 15-year commitment. If the deal goes through, Israel will meet 10 percent of its annual energy needs, while the Palestinians will receive a commission estimated at $1 billion. Media reports in Israel say the Foreign Ministry is pressing for the deal to be concluded as soon as possible. The Gaza Marine field was discovered by BG in 2000 and is said to be equal in size to a 'large North Sea field.' Three weeks ago, the Israeli cabinet approved a request by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to purchase natural gas from the Palestinian Authority, reversing former prime minister Ariel Sharon's declaration of six years ago that Israel would 'never' buy fuel from the Palestinians.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Aramy, May 24, 2007.
This article was written by Michael Young,, opinion editor of the Daily Star. It appeared in the Daily Star, Lebanon.

There are few pleasures these days as Lebanon descends into the kind of violence that Syria seems to manufacture so effortlessly. However, one of them is discovering how easy it was for a gaggle of pro-Syrian Lebanese operators to manipulate investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, before he wrote a much-discussed article recently implying that the Lebanese government was financing Islamist groups, including Fatah al-Islam.

In his article for The New Yorker, Hersh faithfully channeled what sources in Lebanon told him, lending legitimacy to statements he otherwise failed to prove. Most prominently, for being so specific, he wrote that "representatives of the Lebanese government" had supplied weapons and money to Fatah al-Islam. But Hersh's only evidence for this claim was a quote attributed to one Alistair Crooke, a former MI6 agent who is co-director of Conflicts Forum, an institution advocating dialogue with Islamist movements. Nor did Crooke have direct knowledge of what he was saying. In fact, he "was told" the weapons were offered to the group, "presumably to take on Hizbullah." The argument is now being picked up by media belonging to senior members of the Syrian regime to affirm that the Lebanese Army is fighting an Islamist group in the Nahr al-Bared camp that is effectively on the payroll of Saad Hariri.

Lately, we've had more ricochets from that story. Writing in The Independent on May 22, journalist Robert Fisk, who we might forget lives in Beirut, picked up on Hersh, citing him uncritically to again make the case that Hariri was financing Islamists. So we have Fisk quoting Hersh quoting Crooke quoting someone nameless in a throwaway comment making a serious charge. Yet not one of these somnolent luminaries has bothered to actually verify if the story is true, even as everything about the fighting in Nahr al-Bared virtually confirms it is not true. The lie about the government financing of Fatah al-Islam has been given legitimacy thanks to a spectacular blunder by the Hariri camp, in particular Bahiyya al-Hariri. A few months ago she helped resolve a crisis that had resulted from the presence of Islamists located in the Taamir district of Sidon, abutting the Ain al-Hilweh Palestinian refugee camp, by paying compensation money to Jund al-Sham militants so they would leave the area. From the narrow perspective of Sidon, which Bahiyya al-Hariri represents in Parliament, this made sense. Taamir was a running sore in relations between the state and inhabitants of the area on the one side and the Islamists and camp residents on the other. However, instead of disbanding, a number of the militants went to Nahr al-Bared, according to Palestinian sources. There, they joined Fatah al-Islam. Now the Hariris look like they financed Islamists, when they were really only doing what they usually do when facing a problem: trying to buy it away.

The relationship between Fatah al-Islam and Syria is not absolutely clear. While the movement is undeniably doing Syria's bidding today and has received Syrian logistical assistance (after all, its militants who weren't inside Lebanon had to enter from somewhere), Fatah al-Islam may be operating in collaboration with, rather than as a direct extension of, Syria's security services. This gives Syria deniability. Shaker Absy, who is wanted by the Jordanian authorities for the killing of an American diplomat in Amman in 2003, fought in Iraq and was briefly arrested by the Syrians before being sent to Lebanon, according to two Palestinian officials. Fatah al-Islam's sources of funding are also difficult to establish. The group has been supplied with up-to-date weaponry and the means to distribute patronage. But it might be a mistake to assume the money is Syrian, even though Damascus can turn the tap to the group on and off.

Between the fighting in the North and the bombings in Beirut, Syria is sending a very plain message, one that the foreign minister, Walid al-Moallem, and the ambassador to the United Nations, Bashar Jaafari, brazenly echoed on Monday. It is that passage of the Hariri tribunal under Chapter VII of the UN Charter will mean a Lebanon in flames. The threat is clear, and the Verdun bombing on Monday evening seemed partly destined to send a message to the Russians, whose cultural center is located at the blast scene. Both Russia and China are the weak links in any Security Council vote on the tribunal.

However, Syria wants more than merely to undermine the tribunal. It wants to have a decisive say in who becomes president of Lebanon at the end of summer. The bloodshed in the North as well as the bomb attacks have another destination: the United States, which has indicated that Syria would not be consulted on Emile Lahoud's replacement.

The Assad regime never reconciled itself with its forced withdrawal from Lebanon, and is now actively seeking to reimpose its hegemony over its neighbor through a network of allies and agents. A return of tens of thousands of Syrian soldiers may not be achievable in the short term, particularly as the main barrier to such a return would, this time, be an outraged Sunni community. This could have severe implications for President Bashar Assad at home. However, the Syrians often operate according to an obsolete template -- that of Hafez al-Assad. While it may be easy for them to provoke conflict in Lebanon, as they did throughout the war years between 1975 and 1990, the Syrian leadership might not be able to resist the blowback this time around if new hostilities break out.

Another Syrian objective, and this one will be far easier to achieve, is to increase Lebanese antipathy for the Hariri tribunal. It won't take many more bombs for people to begin wondering whether passage of the tribunal by the UN is worth Lebanon's destruction. Perhaps the tribunal is not worth it, but the question that both the international community and the Arab states must ask, and convincingly answer, is whether Syria will agree to surrender Lebanon if the tribunal's statutes are watered down. Up to now, Assad has shown no willingness to consider this quid pro quo.

Those who insist that Syria must be "engaged" have thought very little about how to safeguard Lebanese sovereignty. Yet unless the Security Council, the Europeans, and the Arab states show that Syria will pay a heavy price for what it is doing in Lebanon, things will only get worse in the country. Every day, Assad feels more confident that he can prevail. And when prominent Western journalists so gullibly write what the Syrians want them to, there is no reason for him to feel any other way.

Contact Aramy by email at aramy964@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by UCI, May 24, 2007.
The article was written by Caroline Glick and was published in the Jerusalem Post May 21, 2007.

The cartoon was Dry Bones for May 20, 1997. It was not part of the Glick article.

The Olmert-Livni-Peretz government is incapable of learning. This is the only possible explanation for its handling of the Palestinian assault on southern Israel which has seen some 200 rockets and missiles fall on Sderot, southern Ashkelon and the surrounding areas in the past week alone.

On Sunday, the security cabinet met and discussed options for contending with the situation. At the outset, it nixed launching a large-scale assault on Gaza in favor of continuing pinpoint air strikes against Hamas leaders.

The security cabinet defined Hamas as Israel's enemy in the current campaign. The government discussed the option of transferring more arms and money to Fatah, which serves as a junior partner in the Hamas "unity" government. Such a move would simply follow the government's move last week to allow up to 500 Egyptian-trained Fatah fighters to enter the Gaza Strip.

The security cabinet's discussion took for granted that it is not Israel's responsibility to secure Gaza's border with Egypt. As opponents of the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza warned, that border has served as a terror thoroughfare since the IDF withdrew its forces from the area in September 2005. Through the border, Gaza has been inundated with advanced weaponry. Terrorists from abroad have entered Gaza at will. Terrorist from Gaza freely leave the area for terror training in Iran, Syria and Lebanon and then return.

Rather than ordering the IDF to reassert control over the border, the security cabinet considered two other options. The Foreign Ministry recommends that an international force be deployed to the area, much like the UNIFIL forces in Lebanon. Defense officials think it would be better to have Egypt secure the border much as the Lebanese army now sits on Israel's northern border.

Unfortunately, all of the security cabinet's strategic assumptions are either wholly or partially incorrect. As a result, the options it adopted or continues to consider will either have no strategic impact on Israel's security predicament vis-a-vis Gaza or will adversely affect Israel's national security.

IN ITS definition of the parameters of its debate and policy options, the government displayed clearly that it has learned nothing from its defeat at the hands of Iran's proxy army in Lebanon -- Hizbullah -- in last summer's war.

In the first instance, by limiting its definition of Israel's enemy in Gaza to Hamas, the government obfuscates the true strategic reality which confronts it. Hamas does not fight Israel alone. It fights in full partnership with the Fatah terror group. Indeed, Fatah has carried out more terrorist attacks against Israel over the past seven years of the Palestinian jihad than Hamas. Throughout the now 7-year-old war, Fatah and Hamas have willingly collaborated in terrorist attacks against Israelis.

Fatah members, including thousands of gunmen of the official PA security forces, often also serve in Hamas. Weapons that Israel has transferred to Fatah through various PA security forces over the past 13 years have been used to murder Israelis by Fatah as well as Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists. And of course, Fatah now serves as Hamas's junior partner in the Palestinian "government." The Olmert-Livni-Peretz government does not merely refuse to acknowledge that Fatah is also Israel's enemy. It actively supports Fatah and upholds it as Israel's ally. In this it is repeating and indeed aggravating its strategically disastrous treatment of the Lebanese government last summer.

IN THE immediate aftermath of Hizbullah's strike against the IDF position in northern Israel last July 12 which led to the abduction of reservists Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser and precipitated the war, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert rightly stated that the Lebanese government is responsible for everything that occurs in Lebanon. Yet after receiving orders from US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government did an about face and became a vocal supporter of the Lebanese government.

Israel upheld Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora's government even though Hizbullah is a partner in his governing coalition and its representatives serve as ministers in his cabinet. Israel supported the Lebanese government even as Lebanese military forces actively collaborated with Hizbullah units by identifying Israeli targets for Hizbullah rocket and missile units, transferring intelligence about IDF troop movements to Hizbullah, and paying pensions to the families of Hizbullah fighters killed in the war. Israel supported the Lebanese government even as it acted as Hizbullah's agent in the cease-fire negotiations.

During the cease-fire talks, Israel demanded that the Lebanese military be deployed to the border even though some 40 percent of its soldiers are Shi'ite and known for their sympathy and frequent collaboration with Hizbullah. Now deployed along the border, Lebanese forces have opened fire on IDF border patrols and have done nothing to prevent Hizbullah's rearming and reassertion of control over southern Lebanon.

It is certainly true that to some degree the Lebanese government's support for Hizbullah is the consequence of its weakness. Were it strong enough, perhaps it would not be so tolerant of Iran's army in Lebanon. But be that as it may, Israel's strategic analysis should be informed not by what the Lebanese government might wish to do, but by what it actually does.

IN STARK contrast to the Lebanese government, Fatah is far from an unwilling collaborator with Hamas. Like Hamas, Fatah leaders openly call for Israel's destruction. Fatah uses the same techniques as Hamas to indoctrinate Palestinian society to seek the genocide of the Jewish people. And yet, Israel's support for Fatah is far greater than its support for the Siniora government.

Israeli officials travel the globe ratcheting up support for Fatah. The Olmert-Livni-Peretz government bases its national policies of land giveaways on Fatah's fictional moderation. The government raises money for Fatah more energetically than it raises money for the Israeli economy. And it allows the US and the Egyptians to arm and train Fatah terrorists.

Equally alarming is the security cabinet's discussion of how to secure Gaza's border with Egypt. Rejecting offhand the notion that the IDF should secure the border, the government limited debate to finding someone else to secure southern Israel.

For the past decade, the only policy that the Foreign Ministry has had for dealing with sub-national terror campaigns against Israel is for the IDF to perform a sound-and-light show for a few days that ends with the entry of the deus ex machina in the form of a foreign force which will save the day. In advancing this policy, the Foreign Ministry willfully ignores the fact that for the past 59 years, Israel has had only negative experience with foreign forces.

These forces consistently serve as a buffer force behind which Israel's enemies arm, train and launch attacks against Israel. When Israel is forced to respond, it is roundly condemned for doing so by the same international forces behind which its enemies built their forces and launched their attacks.

By recommending the deployment of international forces in Gaza, the Foreign Ministry demonstrates that it remains in denial of the plain fact that it was the government's willingness to listen to the Foreign Ministry's prescriptive advice to conduct limited, ineffective air assaults on Hizbullah and sue for a cease-fire with international forces in last summer's war which led to Israel's defeat.

Then of course there is the issue of Egyptian forces. Here too, the comparison with Lebanon is instructive. For the past seven years, the Egyptians have been for the Palestinians what Syria is for Hizbullah. Namely, the Egyptians enable the Palestinians to conduct their war against Israel by arming them and providing them with international support. Just as the Syrians will not stop weapons shipments to Hizbullah, so Egypt will not stop shipments to Palestinian terror forces in Gaza.

FINALLY OF course, there is the issue of the goal of the current campaign. As was the case last summer towards Hizbullah, today the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government has not set for itself the goal of defeating Hamas. Rather the goal of the current operations in Gaza is to send Hamas a message. Like last summer, today the government hopes that by killing a sufficient number of Hamas terrorists, it will induce the organization to stop attacking Israel.

But of course, by limiting its goal in such a way, the message that Israel is sending is not that Hamas should stop attacking Israel. By refusing to fight to victory, Israel is telling Hamas that it cannot lose, which is to say, it can go on fighting forever.

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the government's refusal to understand the lessons of the last war and to apply them in the current battle is that Israel has far more options for defeating its enemies in Gaza than it had in Lebanon.

Gaza is a small territory and in contrast to Lebanon, Israel has the ability to take control of ingress and egress from the area. So too, Israel's intelligence capabilities are far greater in Gaza than in Lebanon. Then too, in Gaza, the enemy Israel confronts is not as well-armed or well-trained as Hizbullah.

Aside from all that, Israel controls Gaza's economy. Israel sells Gaza its water and electricity. Were Israel to decide to stop selling water or electricity to Gaza, its enemies would be hard-pressed to function.

All of these relative advantages that Israel can bring to bear in Gaza would enable Israel to cause long lasting damage to all of its enemies operating in the area while minimizing losses to its forces and civilians. But to take proper advantage of any of its strategic and operational assets, the government must first learn the proper lessons of the last war. Its refusal to do so bodes ill for the future.

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

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, May 24, 2007.
This article is archived at

New French President Nicolas Sarkozy made immigration a central issue of his campaign. Now, his new minister for immigration and national identity says its time to start paying immigrants to leave the country.

France's new Immigration, Integration and National Identity Minister, Brice Hortefeux toured Charles de Gaulle airport on his first day on the job. He has said he intends to pay more immigrants to return home.

France is home to over 5 million immigrants -- and the new conservative-led government doesn't plan on making things any more comfortable for them. While the new regime in Paris is determined to curb illegal immigration, it is also looking to encourage legal migrants to reconsider their decision to stay in France -- by paying them to go back home. ...

Under the scheme, Paris will provide each family with a nest egg of €6,000 ($8,000) for when they go back to their country of origin. A similar scheme, which was introduced in 2005 and 2006, was taken up by around 3,000 families.

Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 24, 2007.

This is archived at

Southern kibbutzim lose dozens of acres of wheat in fires caused by Qassams; seek to expedite harvest in order to avoid further damage

The recent Shavuot holiday will not be soon forgotten across kibbutzim in the western Negev, where dozens of acres of wheat went up in flames in the past week, just when it was time to begin the harvest.

The Qassam rockets that have been raining on the area and setting the fields on fire caused substantial damage to the farmers, and the kibbutzim are now making efforts to salvage the remaining crops.

Burnt down wheat field in Nir Am (Photo: AFP)

Kibbutz Nir Am has lost some 65 acres in the last week alone, and the local farmers are trying to reap what was left in the fields before the next Qassam lands. Kibbutz Be'eri has also lost about eight acres of wheat, and according to estimates, other kibbutzim and rural communities in the area have lost several dozen acres in the fires.

Kibbutz Nir Am recently asked the government to help fund the leasing of combines from other communities, in order to expedite the harvest.

According to Haim Yalin from Kibbutz Be'eri, the fires caused more than just financial damage. "It needs to be made clear that the profit on wheat is very small, and that we cultivate it mostly for Zionist purposes.

"We don't want to be dependent on import from other countries, and therefore despite the hard work and the meager profit, we continue to grow wheat here. This is the Zionist principle on which we were raised, and we will continue doing so, as a message to our children that life here goes on."

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 24, 2007.

This was written by Betsy Pisik and published May 24, 2007 in The Washington Times.

A fighter from the Fatah Islam group shouts anti-Lebanese army slogans yesterday at the Palestinian refugee camp of Nahr el-Bared, in the north city of Tripoli, Lebanon. A fighter from the Fatah Islam group shouts anti-Lebanese army slogans yesterday at the Palestinian refugee camp of Nahr el-Bared, in the north city of Tripoli, Lebanon. (AP)

NEW YORK -- The U.N. agency that oversees the Nahr el-Bared refugee camp in northern Lebanon, the scene of three days of battles between Lebanese troops and Muslim militants, said yesterday it had been aware for months that heavily armed foreigners were moving into the Palestinian enclave but were helpless to stop them.

The extremists of Fatah Islam, who local reports say hail from Syria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Bangladesh, apparently entered the camp, just north of Tripoli, several months ago. They are thought to have arrived in a group, not individually.

Officials of the U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) could not say how a large band of foreigners carrying what has been described as mortars, rockets, explosive belts and other heavy weapons were able get past the Lebanese army soldiers stationed outside the camp.

They also could not explain why militias of young Palestinian men who provide security and gather intelligence throughout Nahr el-Bared and other Palestinian areas allowed foreign fighters to settle there.

"Somebody hasn't been doing their job," said Karen Koning AbuZayd, commissioner-general of UNRWA. "The problem with refugee camps in Lebanon is that they are self-policed. ... This group showed up a few months ago. As far as we know, it is mainly a foreign group.

"The Palestinian refugees themselves have been very unhappy about it and have been trying to persuade them to leave," Mrs. AbuZayd told reporters.

Yesterday, Lebanon's defense minister issued an ultimatum to Islamic militants barricaded in the camp to surrender or face a military onslaught.

Also yesterday, refugees continued to leave Nahr el-Bared as a tense cease-fire held. Some piled onto the backs of pickup trucks or stuffed themselves into battered sedans.

Many joined relatives in the nearby Badawi refugee camp, while others made their way to nearby Tripoli.

UNRWA has 200 Palestinian employees inside the camp, mostly teachers, medical staff and aid workers who help distribute supplies.

Mrs. AbuZayd said she was surprised that many of the camp's 30,000 inhabitants didn't leave before fighting erupted Sunday.

On Tuesday, thousands of refugees took advantage of a pause in fighting to escape.

"UNRWA couldn't do anything because the United Nations is not responsible for policing or administering the camps, only their own installations inside them," Mrs. AbuZayd said.

Security inside Lebanon's 12 Palestinian refugee camps has always been a sensitive issue.

Lebanese police and soldiers are not permitted to enter the camps but maintain a perimeter, as much to protect the Lebanese as to protect the Palestinians from outside threat.

UNRWA says it does not administer the camps, nor does it maintain a roster of legal occupants.

The U.N. agency is responsible only for registering refugees who want to use UNRWA facilities such as schools and clinics as well as assistance programs.

About 400,000 Palestinians live in Lebanon, most of them in severely crowded camps with little fresh water, sanitation or jobs. They camps originally held those displaced by the 1948 creation of Israel, although the refugee numbers have multiplied in later generations.

The chief U.N. coordinator for humanitarian affairs, John Holmes, yesterday condemned as "unacceptable and outrageous" a Tuesday mortar attack on a U.N. relief convoy that had just arrived inside the Nahr el-Bared camp. Baby formula, milk powder, bread and water supplies eventually were unloaded.

"I simply don't know who is responsible for starting that exchange of fire," said Mr. Holmes, adding that the number of casualties in that and other attacks still cannot be gauged.

He said the camp has been without running water or electricity since Sunday. UNRWA is working with other agencies and private humanitarian groups to obtain shelter and services to those who have left.


UNWRA accepted millions of dollars FROM TERROR GROUPS

Mortar Attacks on Israelis from UN Safe Haven

UNRWA Summer Killing School

SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT: A Rigorous Review of UNWRA Practices

Inside UNRWA: Special Investigative Report

Background to UNRWA Conference in Geneva

How Can the UN Address the Subject of Palestinian Refugees and Not Allow Israel

Congressman Eric Cantor (R- Va).Analyzes UNRWA Palestinian Refugee Camps by Gordon Robertson Archive:

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lee Caplan, May 24, 2007.

Please bombard the White House with calls (202-456-1414 and/or 202-456-1111) and with faxes and letters. Ask the President to free Jonathan Pollard and let the President know how angry you are at the comments made by Ambassador Jones! As Rabbi Lerner says below, "we cannot be silent. it is up to the jewish community to let the president know that this issue is important to us."

Also, don't hesitate to let the Israeli government know that it is about time that it finally do the right thing with respect to Jonathan Pollard, and that is to sincerely ask President Bush to release him! Tizku lemitzvos.

Rabbi Pesach Lerner can be contacted by email at plerner@YoungIsrael.org

i believe the case cannot be closed. the apology, as is, is still missing a correction of his comments. his facts were wrong, he needs to admit that.

if similar comments were made against an arab moslem or others, not of the jewish religion, or perhaps not of the Caucasian race, such an apology would not be accepted and there could be rioting in the streets. we need to demand a full retraction, correction and perhaps an official inquiry into the sources of his information, from where his directive to respond with such lies originated from, etc.

at the same time, it is incumbent on the israeli government to call in the ambassador and have him deliver a message to the white house, 22 years is enough. as james woolsey, former head of the cia, has been saying for months -- he knows the pollard file and still he says 22 years is enough. jonathan spied for an ally, a fellow democratic country and it is time, on humanitarian grounds, to let jonathan free and go to israel to live out his life. jonathan has been remorseful for his crime, is quite ill and 22 years is enough.

we cannot be silent. it is up to the jewish community to let the president know that this issue is important to us.
thank you.

Contact Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Rosally Saltsman, May 24, 2007.

Grains Of Sand: The Fall Of Neve Dekalim
by Shifra Shomron

We are approaching the two-year anniversary of the tragedy of the Disengagement and the exile of the residents of Gush Katif from their beautiful communities. Gush Katif became a political movement and so we tended to forget that what we were dealing with were families, idealistic families who had settled the Gush and were now being uprooted along with the acacia trees. The battle was lost and has faded into the bittersweet and turbulent history of the fledgling Jewish State in its ancient land.

Shifra Shomron has written a book, part personal diary, part historical third person narrative, about the transformation of Gush Katif from a Garden of Eden existence to a defensive outpost and finally to the site of the Jewish nation's newest exile. Peppered with appropriate Biblical quotes, it reminds us that being exiled from our land is not a new story.

Shifra describes the last years in Gush Katif for the Yefet family, Yoram, Miri, Efrat and Yair and their dogs tending their garden, wandering on the sand dunes, a religious family who are a microcosm of the Gush and the archetypal wandering Jews.

There is no one who could read this book and not be moved. It is an important book as a testimony to the short-lived life of the Settlers' dream and the not yet fulfilled vision of the final redemption. It is the chronicle of a teenage girl who had grown up in the idyllic world of the Gush who must leave it and her childhood behind both literally and figuratively. It is lyrically, poetically and innocently recounted.

The Gush has returned to the dunes from which it sprang up but, as the parents of our heroine remind us, we will one day, God willing return to build upon the rubble of Neve Dekalim, the palm tree oasis which was one of the flourishing plantations of promised redemption.

On this, the anniversary of the fall of Neve Dekalim, Katif, and the other communities that are no more, we must remember the many residents who have not yet managed to put down new roots, the yet unemployed, the youth still struggling with shattered dreams and disillusionment, the need to petition the Israeli Government for solutions and to remind them that the sacrifice of these people did not bring the hoped-for peace and the need for all of us to still pray for the final redemption.

Shifra Shomron is now studying to be an English and Bible teacher at an accelerated college program in Israel. Her parents have still been unable to find work. The family lives in one of the Caravillas set up by the government before the expulsion.

Shifra's website is: www.geocities.com/nevedekalim

The book is available through Mazo Publishers, Amazon.com, select bookstores in Jerusalem and Barnes and Noble in the USA.

Rosally Saltsman is a journalist and has written numerous magazine articles. She is author of several books, including "Finding the Right Words," "Parenting by the Book," and "A Portion of Kindness." You can read excerpts from them on her website:

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 24, 2007.

This was written by Ulrike Putz in Tripoli, Lebanon.

The Islamist militants from Fatah Islam have vowed to fight to the end. The Lebanese military has promised to annhiliate them. On day five of the crisis at the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp, the stand-off continues.

A Lebanese soldier stands guard at the edge of the Palestinian refugee camp Nahr al-Bared.

"During the next 48 hours, we will eradicate them," says the elite Lebanese soldier, lying behind a freshly raised mound of red earth. "They," of course, are the militants of the radical Palestinian group Fatah Islam. And the effort to eradicate them has virtually destroyed the Palestinian refugee camp Nahr al-Bared where they are holed up.

The ground is strewn with the empty casings of high-caliber bullets; the soot-blackened ruins of the camp north of the Lebanese seaport of Tripoli stand about 200 meters (650 feet) away. Fatah Islam snipers on the roofs take aim at the Lebanese rangers who have dug in east of the camp. "I hope they will attack us soon. Then we'll strike back and finish them off," says the officer, who wants only to be called Spiro.

Spiro's merciless prediction is certainly not improbable. A massacre seems inevitable on the fifth day of the stand-off between fundamentalist Muslim militants and the Lebanese military. The militia, which has entrenched itself in Nahr al-Bared, is surrounded by a large contingent of soldiers -- including at least 700 elite troops. Even as a cease-fire appears to be holding on Thursday, with only sporadic gunfire, they are waiting for the decisive battle. It's a battle the Fatah Islam militants cannot win and don't intend to survive: Spokesmen for the group, which Western intelligence agencies consider close to al-Qaida, have warned that it will fight to the end, and take as many soldiers down with it as possible.

Smoke billows from the Palestinian refugee camp of Nahr al-Bared in northern Lebanon on Monday. Lebanese troops are attempting to root out the Islamist group Fatah Islam, a Palestinian group accused of links to Al-Qaida and Syrian intelligence services.

'Prepared to Commit Suicide'

The Lebanese side seems just as unwilling to back down. Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora said in a television address on Thursday that his military remains committed to eliminating Fatah Islam. Calling the group a terrorist organization, he said it was "attempting to ride on the suffering and the struggle of the Palestinian people." He continued: "We will work to root out and strike at terrorism but we will embrace and protect our brothers in the camps."

Just how many radicals are still alive and willing to fight is unclear. A high-ranking officer said on Wednesday that more than 750 had barricaded themselves in the camp. The Fatah Islam militants are just as well equipped and trained as the military, the officer says. "But they are prepared to commit suicide, and that could be described as their advantage."

The militia and the military have been engaged in heavy fighting since Sunday, leaving about 70 militiamen and soldiers dead, according to news agency reports. At least 20 civilians are also said to have been killed during the skirmishes before a cease-fire negotiated on Tuesday enabled many of the 31,000 inhabitants of the densely populated Nahr al-Bared camp to flee.

The Lebanese government accuses the militia of having planned and executed terrorist attacks, with the Nahr al-Bared camp serving as a hideout and command center. About 400,000 Palestinian refugees, forced by the wars in the Middle East to leave their homes, live in 12 camps inside Lebanon -- camps to which the Lebanese police have no access due to a 40-year-old agreement with the Palestinians.

'They Are Prepared to Commit Suicide'

The terrain on the edge of the camp where Spiro's soldiers have dug in was still in the hands of the Fatah Islam militants on Tuesday. The rangers moved in at dawn on Wednesday, flattening the reeds that grew there and raising protective mounds of earth among the cypress trees. Ranger Rommel can't say how many people he has killed in the past few days. "It must have been a lot," says the 27-year-old, whose parents named him after the German Field Marshal who commanded the Nazi Afrikakorps. "At first it was a shock to be in a real battle after all the training," Rommel says. Later, he adds, it was like being in a movie. "A drunk state in which you don't care whether you're shooting at children, the elderly or militants."

It looks like the movie will play again soon, he says: "We have precise indications that our position will be a target for suicide attacks." The information he has indicates that the attackers will be old women.

It's the first time since the fighting started that Spiros's and Rommel's units have had a chance to rest. The men smoke, eat fresh plums and make bawdy jokes about each other's girlfriends. One soldier hands out plastic bags with pita bread, tins of tuna and tomatoes. Most answer questions in flawless English, having received, they say, part of their training in the United States. Some of them are even citizens of both the US and Lebanon.

The men have repeatedly raided the camp during the past 72 hours and are markedly shaken by the house-to-house fighting they have experienced. "These militants are not religious people; they're sadists," says Husam, whose voice is hoarse from shouting over the noise of battle. "They decapitated some of our people." He and his fellow soldiers found Egyptian, Sudanese and Bangladeshi passports on the bodies of dead Fatah Islam militants, he says. "Most of them are not from here. They're fanatics from outside who have rallied here."

Nothing Good to Say about Fatah Islam

A few kilometers to the south, a caravan of refugees is leaving the camp behind, moving slowly. Everyone's ID is checked to ensure no militants escape by mingling with the refugees. From neighbors shot while fetching bread to one farmer's economic ruin -- caused by a grenade that killed eleven of his cows -- the refugees have gone through days of horror. Now they are fleeing into a nearby Palestinian camp, where an uncertain future awaits them. Even though it was the Lebanese military that opened fire on the camp, nobody has anything good to say about Fatah Islam.

Mahmud Darwish, an IT student who lives in the camp, also says that the problems were started by foreigners who began moving into the camp one or two years ago. The men, he says, married into Palestinian families and spent lavishly to buy apartments in Nahr al-Bared. A pharmacist reports that the fundamentalist Muslims disclosed their identity increasingly openly in recent months. "They were impossible to overlook, riding mopeds with their long beards and dressed in ostentatiously chaste clothing," he says. As time went by, the fundamentalists became increasingly self-confident. "When a man cursed in their presence, they surrounded and scolded him," the pharmacist says.

The Palestinians didn't just stand idly by as Fatah Islam moved in. The Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) in Nahr al-Bared tried for months to isolate the fundamentalists. The current intervention by the Lebanese army is -- over and above the suffering it has caused the refugees inside the camp -- unwelcome by the Palestinian powers that be.

After the cease-fire went into effect on Tuesday, the PLO announced it wants to get rid of the radicals itself. The PLO's authority in the camp would be substantially weakened were the Lebanese military to find success where they have not. Most observers, though, have little faith that the PLO would have much chance of victory.

Meanwhile, the Lebanese forces are considering storming the camp as the Islamic militants have refused an ultimatum to surrender. Some Islamists have allegedly tried to escape -- the Lebanese military announced on Thursday that it had destroyed two small boats full of militants trying to escape into the nearby Mediterranean Sea.

Palestinian boys in a Palestinian refugee camp in southern Lebanon take part in a demonstration organized by Islamist militants to protest against the Lebanese army shelling of Nahr al-Bared refugee camp (Reuters).

At the camp, the soldiers are busy preparing for more fighting. Some, though, are also reflective after the four-day orgy of violence. Spiro, standing next to the wreck of a vehicle that is missing all of its windows, says: "People sought safety in this bus." Large puddles of blood have dried on the pavement below. "They drove towards us. They could have been militants," Spiro says.

His troops were the ones who opened fire on the bus -- before retrieving three corpses and several injured from the wreck. "Terrible, but that's just what war is like."

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 24, 2007.

This comes from The Guardian.

The Guardian reports that a Nobel laureate cancelled plans to visit a British university in part because of the National Union of Journalists' boycott of Israel. Professor Steven Weinberg was to give a talk on particle physics at the Imperial College this July:

In the letter, the professor said his decision was triggered by an agreement by the National Union of Journalists at its national conference to boycott Israeli products.

He wrote: "I know that some will say that these boycotts are directed only against Israel, rather than generally against Jews.

"But given the history of the attacks on Israel and the oppressiveness and aggressiveness of other countries in the Middle East and elsewhere, boycotting Israel indicated a moral blindness for which it is hard to find any explanation other than anti-semitism."

Professor Weinberg, who currently teaches at the University of Texas, received the 1979 Nobel Prize for his research on electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Canadian Coalition for Democracies, May 24, 2007.

Violence rages in Palestinian refugee camps: Canadian support for UNRWA must not be part of the problem

Ottawa, Canada -- As the Lebanese government attempts to bring Palestinian terrorist and their foreign allies based in UN refugee camps under control, serious questions must be asked about the United Nations Relief Works Agency (UNRWA) and its role in supporting and sustaining these armed gangs and their expensive infrastructures. For its part, the Canadian Government must investigate the way its own money and support for UNRWA have been misused to fuel extremism in the region.

"Canada is one of the most active financial supporters of UNRWA. Since 2000, the Canadian International Development Agency has provided over $75 million to support the UN agency, ignoring serious concerns about terrorism and terrorist incitement in the camps, " said Naresh Raghubeer, Executive Director, Canadian Coalition for Democracies (CCD). "Now that Palestinian terrorists are again undermining Lebanon, as they have been doing with Israel, will Canada finally end its blind support for UNRWA?"

UNRWA has 2,629 staff members in Lebanon who operate 12 refugee camps, including Nahr el-Bared where the current violence is taking place. Since the outbreak of fighting between the Lebanese army and Palestinian gangs on Sunday, over 79 have been killed, making it Lebanon's worst violence since the 1975-1990 civil war.

"UNRWA's camps have been used for generations to indoctrinate hatred. UNRWA employs Palestinian terrorists from Fatah and Hamas, yet Canada, under both Liberal and now Conservative governments, has been silent," said Raghubeer.

CCD calls on the Harper government to impose an immediate moratorium on funding to UNRWA until an independent, Canadian-led forensic audit is completed and controls are implemented to assure Canadian taxpayers that (1) armed gangs are no longer operating within the camps, (2) members of terrorist groups are not receiving Canadian aid or employment, and (3) incitement to violence and teaching of hatred have ended.

"Prime Minister Harper has spoken both about the threat posed by terrorism and the need for accountability in spending taxpayers' money, and has pledged to make these principles part of his 2007 budget," said Raghubeer. "If the Prime Minister is serious, CIDA's unconditional funding of UNRWA would be an excellent place to act on these commitments."

The Canadian Coalition for Democracies (CCD) is a non-partisan, multi-ethnic, multi-denominational organization of concerned Canadians dedicated to national security and the protection and promotion of democracy at home and abroad. Visit their website at their website: http://canadiancoalition.com

For more information, please contact: Naresh Raghubeer Executive Director, Canadian Coalition for Democracies 416-452-6957, Mobile 613-216-2095, Ottawa Office.

To Go To Top

Posted by Rachel Ehrenfeld, May 24, 2007.
This appeared yesterday on the Terror Finance Blog
http://www.terrorfinance.org/the_terror_finance_blog/, to which I am a contributor.

In retaliation to the intensifying Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel from Gaza, the IDF conducted aerial attacks on businesses involved in transferring funds to terror organizations.

According to the IDF's spokesperson, "The IDF carried out aerial attacks against money changers' offices and businesses in the Gaza Strip which have been transferring funds from Iran, Syria and Lebanon for the funding of the terrorist activities of Hamas and other organization."

As effective as this bombing campaign my be, destroying the physical structures used for the transfers, may delay further transactions for a very short time, until new arrangements are made. As long as the sources of these funds, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and their likes, and their financial institutions and businesses are safe, the funds will continue to fuel Hamas and the many other Palestinian terror organizations.

The same paymasters, who fund Palestinian terrorists to kill Israelis, are also funding the terrorists that kill American and coalition forces in Iraq. U.S.-led forces frequently discover caches of Iranian money and bomb-making equipment during raids on Shiite neighborhoods, especially in Sadr City that resembles Gaza. The U.S., like Israel, "accused Iran of providing weapons and training to Shiite militant groups in Iraq." Yet, the U.S. is persistent in its refrain of connecting the dots; the radical Muslims fighting the U.S. and Israel are the same. Moreover, the U.S. is reluctant -- in some instances -- to identify them -- Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, to name but a few. It clearly lacks the political will to act against them. And the closer we get to the Presidential election, the less likely it is that the situation will change. If anything, Israel would most likely be harshly criticized by the U.N. for trying desperately to stop the terrorist attacks on its citizens.

Funds will continue to reach radical Muslim terrorist in the Palestinian Authority, Iraq and elsewhere as long as their paymasters remain free to fund them.

Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld is the Director of the American Center for Democracy (www.acdemocracy.org); she writes on terrorism and corruption-related topics. She is author of "Funding Evil; How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It."

To Go To Top

Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, May 24, 2007.

The Hamas Ideology of Hatred and Genocide: Islamic supremacy over the world, destroying Israel and Jews, promoting terror and violence


In light of the escalating conflict between Hamas and Israel, it's important to review the Hamas ideology and understand how Hamas views the conflict.

Hamas ideology, as expressed in the Hamas Charter, sees Hamas as part of the worldwide Muslim Brotherhood (Article 2) that seeks world Islamic domination. Israel is said to exist on territory that is Islamic Waqf (Article 11) and therefore Islam demands that Israel be destroyed. Accepting Israel's existence is a violation of Islamic law (Article 13).

The Hamas charter presents the killing of Jews as God's will, and the inevitable extermination of Jews as coinciding with the "Hour of Resurrection" (Article 7). The charter expresses eagerness to participate in and promote this killing of Jews: "Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah's promise [killing Jews] whatever time it might take" (Article 7). Finally, violence and terror (called "resistance") are presented as legitimate tools.

All of these principles continue to be stated regularly by Hamas leadership and in the official Hamas media throughout May 2007.

Part 1: Islamic supremacy over the world
Part 2: Destruction of Israel
Part 3: Demonization and extermination of Jews
Part 4: Promoting terror, suicide terror, and violence

Part 1: Islamic supremacy over the world

Former Foreign Minister and Hamas leader Mahmoud Al-Zahhar:

"The prophetic foundation is the message of the prophet Muhammad, that Islam will enter every house and will spread over the entire world." [Al-Ayyam, March 25, 2007]

Dr. Ahmad Bahar, Hamas (acting Speaker, Palestinian Legislative Council):

"This is Islam, that was ahead of its time with regards to human rights in the treatment of prisoners, but our people was afflicted by the cancerous lump, that is the Jews, in the heart of the Arab nation. Make us victorious over the infidels. Allah, take hold of the Jews and their allies, Allah, take hold of the Americans and their allies Allah, count them and kill them to the last one and don't leave even one." [PA TV, April 20, 2007]

Deputy Director of Al-Aqsa [Hamas] TV, Hazem Al-Sha'arawi, discussing the children's program Tomorrow Pioneers:

"Let's ask history: ...which time period was good to all communities? The Jews lived in the time of Islam [under Islamic rule] and were happy. The Christians lived in the time of Islam [under Islamic rule] and were happy. Look at the history, the prophet [Muhammad]... ordered the army: 'Do not kill a monk in his prayer room.' Even the Caliph Umar Bin Al-Khattab, [Islamic conqueror of Jerusalem in 638] when he came into the Al-Aqsa Mosque, he secured the churches and the prayer rooms. Therefore, when we talk about the mission of the restoration of Islam to its natural place [of world rule], we [are] calling for justice, and for goodness, and for world love... so that the Christians will live in peace, and that even the Jews will live in peace and security." [Al-Aqsa TV, May 13, 2007]

Text from children's program on Hamas TV, Tomorrow Pioneers:

Hazim (Adult): "Islam will spread to all parts of the earth from one end to the other and justice and good and kindness will spread. Did history witness a time period better than that when Islam ruled?... Every day do you remember Andalus (Spain)? This dear Andalus will return [to Islam] one day." [Al-Aqsa TV, May 11, 2007]

Part 2: Destruction of Israel

Dr. Khalil Al-Hayyah, member of the Hamas political leadership and the Palestinian Legislative Council:

"The Hamas movement bases its strategy and its policy on that the option of resistance is the only option that can liberate Palestine from its [Mediterranean] sea to its [Jordan] river [ie destroy Israel]." [Al-Risalah, Hamas newspaper, April 19, 2007]

Hamas spokesman, Dr. Ismail Radwan, confirmed ...that his movement will not recognize any existence of the Israeli enemy on an inch of Palestinian land and said, "We will liberate Palestine, all of Palestine...Palestine will not be liberated by negotiations, committees and decisions, it will only be liberated by the rifle and the "Al-Qassam" [rocket]. Therefore, prepare yourselves." [Al-Risalah, Hamas newspaper, April 9, 2007]

Video of Ahmad Yassin, founder and former head of Hamas, about future destruction of Israel, broadcast regularly March -- May 2007:

"Tel Aviv is gone. They are defeated, they have no words left. ... When this process will end, they will become a state with no ability, helpless. They established a state to protect the Jews from death and murder. If death and murder chase them in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Netanya and everywhere among them, then they will say: 'What am I doing here? I founded a state to protect me from death, and if death chases me, I want to flee and go back to Europe and America.'" [Al Aqsa TV, regularly, March- May 2007]

Former Foreign Minister and Hamas leader Mahmoud Al-Zahhar:

"Our position is the liberation of Palestine, all of Palestine. This is the final and strategic solution for us. There is a Quranic message for us, that we will enter the Al-Aqsa mosque, and the entrance to the mosque means the entrance into all of Palestine. This is the message, no one can deny it. Anyone who denies it must check his faith and his Islam." [Al-Ayyam, March 25, 2007]

"The representative of the Legislative Council, Dr. Yussuf Al-Sharafi, of the 'Change and Reform' faction [Hamas], emphasized the option of Jihad and resistance to banish the thieves of the occupation, who longed to drink the blood of our massacred people... because the Jewish faith does not wish for peace nor stability, since it is a faith that is based on murder: 'I kill, therefore I am' ... Israel is based only on blood and murder in order to exist, and it will disappear, with Allah's will, through blood and Shahids [martyrs]." [Al-Risalah, Hamas newspaper, April 12, 2007]

Part 3: Demonization and extermination of Jews

The Hamas spokesman, Dr. Ismail Radwan:

"The Hour [Resurrection] will not take place until the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill them, and the rock and the tree will say: 'Oh, Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, kill him!'... We must remind our Arab and Muslim nation, its leaders and people, its scholars and students, remind them that Palestine and the Al-Aqsa mosque will not be liberated through summits nor by international resolutions, but it will be liberated through the rifle. It will not be liberated through negotiations, but through the rifle, since this occupation knows no language but the language of force... O Allah, strengthen Islam and Muslims, and bring victory to your Jihad-fighting worshipers, in Palestine and everywhere... Allah take the oppressor Jews and Americans and their supporters!" [PA TV, March 30, 2007]

"We find more than once condemnation and denunciation to the resistance operations and bombings [suicide attacks], carried out by Hamas and the Palestinian resistance branches... everyone will know, that we did this [suicide terror] only because our lord commanded so, I did it not of my own accord [*] and so that people will know that the extermination of Jews is good for the inhabitants of the worlds ..." [Al-Risalah, Hamas newspaper, April 23, 2007]
[*] Translation of Quranic verse taken from USC Compendium of Muslim Texts.

Sheikh Dr. Ahmad Bahar (acting Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council):

"Oh warrior brothers, who stay put and withstand the [patience] test on the land of beloved Palestine. Do you know these Zionists, why they kill the children, the women and the men? This is the policy of the Zionist entity, this is a planned and organized policy. Their false Talmud, their false Torah, and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, call for the murder of children, women and men, ..." [PA TV, August 4, 2006]

Hamas Web site: video of Hamas suicide terrorist, February 2006-April 2007:

"My message to the loathed Jews is that there is no god but Allah, we will chase you everywhere! We are a nation that drinks blood, and we know that there is no blood better than the blood of Jews. We will not leave you alone until we have quenched our thirst with your blood, and our children's thirst with your blood. We will not leave until you leave the Muslim countries." "In the name of Allah, we will destroy you, blow you up, take revenge against you, purify the land of you, pigs that have defiled our country... This operation is revenge against the sons of monkeys and pigs." [Hamas website, February 2006-April 2007]

Part 4: Promoting terror, suicide terror, and violence

Hamas TV dramatization of woman suicide terrorist Reem Riyashi's four-year-old daughter vowing to be a suicide terrorist like her mother -- March 21, 2007 and repeatedly through May 2007.

[Background: Reem Riyashi killed four Israelis and wounded seven in 2004.] The following is the Hamas TV dramatization of the song in which Duha, Reem's daughter, sings to her mother:

[Daughter sees mother preparing explosives sticks]
"Mommy, what are you carrying
in your arms instead of me?
[Mother turns to hide bomb]
A toy or a present for me?...
Mommy Reem!
Why did you put on your veil?
Are you going out, Mommy?...
Come back quickly, Mommy
I can't sleep without you,...
[Daughter sees mother's picture and news story about bombing on PA TV]
My mother, my mother,...
Instead of me you carried a bomb in your hands.
Only now, I know what was more precious than us...

[Images of her mother's grave and the graves of other terrorists,
including Aayat Al-Akhras, 17-year-old female suicide terrorist]
Send greetings to our Messenger [Muhammad] and tell him:
'Duha loves you.'
My love will not be [merely] words.
I am following Mommy in her steps.
[Finds explosives that mother left in her drawer,
picks up stick of explosives]
Oh Mommy, oh Mommy."

Repeated calls for kidnapping Israeli soldiers

"Fathi Hamad, Hamas member of Palestinian Legislative Council, demanded the kidnapping of more Israeli soldiers in order to force Israel to free the [Palestinian] prisoners... Hamad said this at a gathering of the "Wa'ed" organization for prisoners and released [prisoners] in Khan Yunis ... Hamad stressed it was the responsibility of the government, the Legislative Council, the [armed] factions and military arms to dedicate all the efforts at their disposal to free the prisoners. He argued that the kidnapping of the soldier Gilad Shalit hit Israel very hard." [Al Ayyam, March 10, 2007]

Transcript of Hamas broadcast:

Member of the Legislative Council Um-Nasser Farachat:
"With no connection to my being a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council and my involvement in the leadership, as a Palestinian citizen, by God, I don't believe in any solution other than one: kidnapping Zionist soldiers."

The newscaster:

"The kidnapping of more Zionist soldiers [is required]... 10 Zionist soldiers -- maybe less -- will guarantee the release of thousands of Palestinian prisoners."

Sa'id Siam, former interior minister:

"There were suggestions to repeat the operations of kidnapping other Israeli soldiers, because we know that the occupation understands no other language. Second, the capture of the [single] soldier will not be enough cause for the release of [the] over 10,000 prisoners... There are many suggestions, but what's important is what will actually be done."

Member of the Legislative Council Um-Nasser Farachat:

"We hope that with the help of Allah, praise and extol him, the kidnappers will stick with their demands and will not lower their demands in any way... until they [the Israelis] will surrender to our conditions."

The newscaster's summation:

"A number of suggestions were brought up during the meeting of the Legislative Council, and the most prominent was the call for further kidnappings of Zionist soldiers as a solution to end the prisoners' suffering." [Al Aqsa TV, Hamas, April 18, 2007]

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.

To Go To Top

Posted by Bryna Berch, May 24, 2007.

RE: The Legacy Of Islamic Antisemitism
by Andrew Bostom

Steven T. Katz, Director, Elie Wiesel Center for Judaic Studies, Boston University, and author of Post-Holocaust Dialogues (1984), and The Holocaust in Historical Context (1994).

Publication of the present anthology is a ground breaking event of major scholarly, cultural, and political significance.

The publication of the present anthology of primary sources and secondary studies on the theme of Muslim antisemitism is a ground breaking event of major scholarly, cultural, and political significance. Editor Andrew Bostom has mined the relevant literature to produce the fullest record on this subject in existence. After the publication of his, work all the oft-repeated, but erroneous misunderstandings of a tolerant Islam, and of a medieval Jewish-Muslim "golden age" will need to be permanently retired. Everyone interested in Jewish and Islamic history, as well as current events in the Middle East should read this book -- and soon.

Victor Davis Hanson, Senior Fellow, The Hoover Institution, Stanford University, author of Carnage and Culture (2001), and A War Like No Other (2005)

Critics may be as surprised at Bostom's conclusions as they are unable to refute his carefully compiled corpus of evidence

The antisemitism of the Muslim Middle East that we hear, see, and experience daily-from the racist cartoons to the constant chorus of "pigs and apes" -- is often attributed to European origins, as if the radical Muslim world learned this endemic hatred through the tragedy of imperialism and colonialism. In fact, a deep suspicion and frequent loathing of Jews is deeply rooted in the Middle East, antedating European rule and sometimes evidenced in passages in the Koran and early holy Islamic texts, the systematic Jewish dhimmitude under the Ottomans, and, since the 7th century, a Muslim popular culture of envy and oppression fueled by religious leaders. Andrew Bostom produces a vast literature of Middle Eastern Islamic antisemitism, and critics may be as surprised at his conclusions as they are unable to refute his carefully compiled corpus of evidence.

Martin Gilbert, official biographer of Winston Churchill, and author of Never Again: A History of the Holocaust, (2000), and The Jews of Arab Lands: Their History in Maps, (1976)

Stimulating and informative: a fascinating and disturbing voyage of historical discovery...It is magnificent.

Ilan Stavans, Lewis-Sebring Professor in Latin American and Latino Culture & Five-College 40th Anniversary Professor, Amherst College, author of The Disappearance: A Novella and Stories, and editor of The Schocken Book of Modern Sephardic Literature and The Scroll and the Cross: 1,000 Years of Jewish-Hispanic Literature.

Eye-opening anthology should become an essential resource.

For years scholars focused almost exclusively on the roots of Christian and secular antisemitism to understand the animosity targeted toward Jews in Western civilization during more than two millennia. But there's a parallel tradition, one far more explosive today: Islamic antisemitism and anti-Zionism. September 11, 2001 fostered a new age of conflict based on it. It's crucial that we don't shy away from analyzing its misconceptions, its history and strategies. Postponing such exploration is not only foolish but dangerous. Andrew Bostom offers a wide-ranging sampler of readings to start the task, from the Qur'an itself and the early biographers of Muhammad to the pre-modern theologians and jurists, and onwards to the major articulators of discontent in the modern era. His eye-opening anthology should become an essential resource.

Richard L Rubenstein, President Emeritus University of Bridgeport; Lawton Distinguished Professor of Religion Emeritus, Florida State University; Author, After Auschwitz, The Cunning of History, and Jihad and Genocide: The Nuclear Dimension (forthcoming).

A priceless, indispensable, and authoritative resource which is being made available when it is most needed.

Dr. Andrew Bostom has written and edited the definitive book on Muslim antisemitism. Bostom demolishes, once and for all, the myth that Muslim antisemitism is a twentieth-century European import, conclusively demonstrating that its grim history is as old as Islam itself. He does so by compiling historical documents from many of Islam's most important authorities, as well as the testimony of those who witnessed or fell victim to Muslim aggression and contempt. Bostom also brings together, often for the first time in English, authoritative essays on the subject by some of the most important modern scholars. This is a priceless, indispensable, and authoritative resource which is being made available when it is most needed.

Lee Harris is author of Civilization and Its Enemies: The Next Stage of History (2004), and The Suicide of Reason: Radical Islam's Challenge to the West (2007)

Bostom has rendered an invaluable service to those who are interested in understanding the historical realities of Islam

Andrew Bostom's new book, The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism, demolishes the fashionable but dangerous myth that there was no antisemitism in the Muslim world until the Middle East became "infected" with it by Nazi propaganda in the 1930's. Marshalling a board array of historical sources, Dr. Bostom demonstrates conclusively that Jew hatred was present at the creation of Islam, and that the fate of ordinary Jews was harsh and grim even during the so called Golden Age of Islamic tolerance. As in his earlier work, The Legacy of Jihad, Dr. Bostom has rendered an invaluable service to those who are interested in understanding the historical realities of Islam, free from the distortions of political correctness. Both books should be mandatory reading for those who wish to grasp the enormous challenge that Islam poses to the free and open societies of the West.

Nonie Darwish, author of Now They Call Me Infidel

Facing truths to end the denial

Andrew Bostom's brilliant and extensive research and documentation put an end to the myth of Muslim tolerance of Jews often expressed when we say. "We don't hate Jews, we hate Israel." The question now is, are we going to face uncomfortable truths and end our denial or continue the unspeakable hatred.

Brigitte Gabriel, author of Because They Hate

Most comprehensive analysis of the anti-Jewish hatred in Islam

The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism is the most comprehensive analysis of the anti-Jewish hatred that has been entrenched in Islamic culture and politics since the advent of Islam under Muhammad. This book is a must read for anyone who wants to understand what underlies the incessant Muslim animus against Jews and the Jewish State of Israel, in particular.

Martin Peretz, Editor-in-Chief, The New Republic

Bostom sheds incandescent light on a subject that the easily-forgiving hearts would prefer to ignore

All of us who study and write about the Muslim world and its Arab orbit are by now so indebted to Andrew Bostom that it is almost embarrassing to have to admit another debt to him. But so it is. Bostom has now produced a majestic volume of religious and historical Muslim texts, with learned and soundly interpretive essays illuming those texts, that is almost like a concentration in Islamic Studies at a great university. Actually, the book rivets on the ugly and long-ignored (perhaps long-concealed is a more apt phrase) record of rabid antisemitism among Muslims from the time of Mohammed until, well, today. Bostom sheds incandescent light on a subject that the easily-forgiving hearts would prefer to ignore.

Phyllis Chesler, Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women's Studies, and author of The New Antisemitism and The Death of Feminism

No library, Department of Religious Studies, or Department of State should be without this definitive volume.

This landmark, learned, original, and monumental resource work should lay to rest, forever, the false myths that Muslims once tolerated Jews and that Jews fared better in Muslim than in Christian countries. Dr. Bostom's work documents Islam's absolute hatred and systematic and barbaric persecution of Jews beginning with Mohammed and lasting right through the twenty-first century. Islam did not have to rely upon Christian or Nazi myths about the Jews; they had their own indigenous blood libels about the Jews which prevail to this day and explain why the Muslims won't make peace with Israel, the only Jewish state. Bostom's work is dramatic, devastating, chilling, comprehensive, and utterly, heartbreakingly, persuasive. It should be required reading for journalists and scholars the world over -- especially those who believe that historical and theological Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance and that to say otherwise is to engage in "Islamophobia." No library, Department of Religious Studies, or Department of State should be without this definitive volume.

Ron Rosenbaum, author of Explaining Hitler; editor of Those Who Forget the Past: The Question of Antisemitism

Exhaustively researched, powerfully argued study

No one who wishes to assess the future -- not just of Jews but of Enlightenment values -- can neglect Andrew Bostom's exhaustively researched, powerfully argued study of the past in The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism.

To Go To Top

Posted by Sorge L. Diaz, May 24, 2007.

It is truly disheartening to see the pursuit of the impossible elevated to the status of moral duty.

I published this essay on May 9, 2007 on the Western Resistance website

In a recent piece for the Wall Street Journal
(www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010030), Israeli academic Fania Oz-Salzberger quotes Israeli politician Tzipi Livni parroting a "vision for peace" that may well be called "the conventional wisdom", if not in Israel, at least amongst the bien-pensant intelligentsia all over the world: "Unlike her former Likud friends, she chose to face reality: A very large Palestinian minority within Israel's final borders would kill off either its Jewish or its democratic character. A generous territorial compromise is her way to square the ensuing circle. This was Kadima's initial raison d'etre, before it slalomed into Lebanon and corruption charges."

This is exactly wrong. Israel is in no position to choose between its Jewish and its democratic character. It cannot solve this dilemma through "a generous territorial compromise." Israel must, before engaging in daydreaming, win the fight for its very existence.

But that is what is truly maddening about the political scene in Israel and elsewhere; only political fantasies are politically acceptable. Israel must save its democratic character at any price -- if that price is military and political security, well, though. Democracy is the new golden calf before which all of Israel must bow.

Ms. Livni's plan, over which Mrs. Oz-Sulzberger fawns, is the pinnacle of political stupidity, one of the finest achievements of human self-delusion. She wants to trade land for peace, but pays no attention to whether the plan can succeed at all. To achieve peace, you must first check whether peace is possible.

All "land-for-peace" deals are dangerous by their very nature. After they are consummated, there are no guarantees the party getting the land will honor its political commitments. Words are cheap, while land is expensive. The trustworthiness of your political opponent is crucial if peace -- or even "peace" -- is to be achieved. You don't give diamonds to a thief.

And you don't give diamonds to Islam, period -- Islam commands Muslims to be political caravan robbers. Islam is not merely a religion, but a way of life and ideology of conquest. Trusting an Islamic country is pointless, since Islamic Law demands perpetual warfare against the unbeliever.

This is no mere rhetoric; Islamic Law does not allow for perpetual peace treaties, only for truces up to a maximum of ten years. A good Muslim ruler, after the treaty has lapsed, must then renew Jihad warfare in order to "bring the gift of Islam" to the unbelievers.

Notice it doesn't help to sign the treaty with a "bad" Muslim ruler: he might "get Allah" later and fulfill his religious duty, or he may be replaced by a different leader who takes the religion seriously and you'll have warfare in your hands anyway. Ironically, the only thing that can bring peace in the short term is the internal strength of the infidel -- Islamic Law does allow the renewal of truces when the infidel is militarily strong. Giving up land for a false peace, to the extent that it makes Israel weaker, not stronger, makes war more likely, not less.

Ms. Livni, of course, wouldn't listen to any of this. She does not want to listen to reality at all. Listen to her on the nature of the "Arab-Israeli" conflict:

"... [Ms. Livni] lashes out against what she calls "attempts to theologize the conflict. I cannot solve a religious strife," she says, "but I can solve a conflict between nations."

This assumes, of course, that perceptions can always and everywhere trump reality. To be blunt, there is no need to "theologize" the conflict; the conflict is already as theological as it can be. Islamic Law demands that all of Israel be returned to the bosom of Islam, and there is nothing Ms. Livni can do about this theological reality. She does not want to deal with the political and practical consequences of accepting it. Her so-called moral vision is more important to her than the future of her people.

So, I must ask our Israeli readers -- don't listen to this woman, don't listen to those who want "peace, peace!" when there is no peace to be had. Severe, grievous consequences usually follow the pursuit of the impossible. The future of your nation is at stake.

Contact Sorge Diaz at sld1776@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard Shulman, May 24, 2007.


Abbas is uniting all the factions' militias and the official armed forces into a single army. Thus the faction that the US armed and the factions that Iran armed will have a common purpose (IMRA, 5/7).

The US had proposed unification. Now it is coming about. Who supposes that its purpose is for Abbas to fight the others and protect the Israel he has spent his whole life trying to destroy for being infidel? Isn't it devilishly ironic how the US gets the Israelis to help arm some of the Arabs who are fighting them, and does so in the name of improving Israeli security!


He praised S. Arabia and other Arab states for willingness to make peace. He complained about continued attacks on Israel from Gaza, to which Israel barely responds. He said, 'Israel cannot show restraint forever.' Dr. Aaron Lerner remarked that PM Olmert thus has set a deadline for an end to Gaza attacks sometime between 'now and forever.' (IMRA, 5/7).

S. Arabia is interested not in peace but in jihad. Hence its conditions for a treaty would make Israel easy to conquer. Some peace! Olmert doesn't understand that. Government officials there and in the US still haven't figured out what the Muslims want and that it behooves our officials to study enemy positions and ways of thinking.


The US military has acknowledged that its ground forces are stretched too far. They all are either on active duty or about to deploy. There are few reserves capable of handling another front on the ground, though there are the forces to handle one from air and sea. Marine artillery units may not have had practice in artillery, having been sent, instead, to fight as infantry (IMRA, 5/7).

This is the same way that Egypt and Iran, by prompting terrorist attacks on Israel, have gotten the IDF to curtail training for warfare against the massed armies that Egypt and Iran are capable of mounting.

Is the US military lament fitting for a supposed super power? How is it that there still is no cry for more recruitment? Too pacifistic, here? Want too much butter and so we won't have the guns to defend our butter?

The US waged WWII with a military force of ten million. What do we have now, 1.5 million? Okay, there are more civilian employees, but still!


1. Multi-party systems are a luxury for Ivory Coast' Africa is not ready for democracy;

2. (Repressive) Tunisia has an advanced human rights record, because the most important human rights are the rights to food, housing, education, and health;

3. Gave France's highest honor to Russia's President Putin, crushing freedom;

4. For his birthday party in Latvia, invited Putin, dis-invited Bush, snubbed the President of Latvia, and the embarrassed diplomats refused to go;

5. Called Saddam a personal friend;

6. The E. Europeans who support the US in the UNO should 'shut up;'

7. While negotiating with Iran to stop developing nuclear energy, said one or two bombs are not very dangerous. (No? And who says Iran would stop at two?);

8. Walked out when a French business executive addressed a European summit in English (Anne Applebaum, NY Sun, 5/7, Op.-Ed.).

Which world leader is stupid, a liar, and can make his country a laughing stock?


Upon conquering Judea-Samaria in 1948, Jordan barred Jews from their holy sites (and destroyed the synagogues). Under Oslo, Israel let Arafat control much of Judea-Samaria, and he promised to let Jews access their holy sites. He broke that (and every other) promise. Terrorists again threaten Jews who visit Josephs' Tomb. An Islamist leader is arranging for Jerusalem's mosques to close on Fridays so Muslims attend the one on the Mount, until they sweep away the Jewish presence there (Arutz-7, 5/11).

They sweep away Jewish artifacts in the Temple Mount, mostly destroyed Joseph's Tomb, and attack Rachel's Tomb. Nevertheless, for propaganda, the Muslims constantly complain that Israel damages the mosque on the Mount. World leaders do not denounce this libel, murderous, because it incites the easily aroused Muslims to violence. Neither the State Dept. nor the Pope, always asking Israel or 'both sides' for 'restraint,' call upon Muslims to stop potentially violent defamation. Where is the world leadership against jihad that declares such Muslims oppressive and without credibility? This oppression is not new but age-old and pronounced in the 1920s.

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@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul Lademain, May 23, 2007.

What can be better than to have as one's enemy a clown who says:
"If attacks don't stop IDF will be obligated to defend Israeli civilians"
-- DM Peretz

"DM" must stand for "Dumbest Moron".

Sheesh! Somebody please clue this idiot to the fact that a sovereign nation, a real nation, is obliged to retaliate and defend its civilians the very instant they are attacked.

Notice how easy it is to bully Jewish ponces like Peretz into doing nothing ... all it takes is patronizing praise for "Israel's restraint". O, such flattery makes Peretz glow. Then watch Peretz talk, talk, talk ...and then do nothing whilst the Islamics insult Israel by continuing to slaughter and bomb helpless Israeli women and children.

Peretz should spin in hell. Get rid of these idiots! And arrest O-so-tired Olmert. Throw these bums into a dark hole where rots Arafat and toss Shimon Peres and Kofi Annan in after them.

Contact Paul Lademain at lademain@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Judy Lash Balint, May 23, 2007.

It's 5:00 a.m on Shavuot morning and I'm having trouble finding an empty seat in any shul in Jerusalem's Old City. Every synagogue is already packed as I make the mistake of lingering a few minutes too long at the Kotel amongst the tens of thousands who have made their way there after a night of learning.

After dropping in at three shuls, I finally find a spot on a bench under an outer archway of the women's section of the tiny synagogue inside the Old Yishuv Court Museum on Or Hahayim Street. After Hallel and the reading of the Ten Commandments, a swift Haftarah reading brings us to the Yizkor memorial prayer. Only three women are left inside as the young girls who filled the place and have not yet lost parents file out. It's about the same proportion down at the Kotel -- it seems that at least two thirds of the masses thronging the Kotel plaza are under 30.

Coming barely a week after Jerusalem Day, when similar crowds filled the area to celebrate the reunification of the city, the Shavuot early morning spectacle is an affirmation of the strength of the connection of the people to its roots.

In the cool air of the pre-dawn, it's as if the Old City is a giant magnet pulling the multitudes in from every direction. Flooding down Agron Street in front of the U.S Consulate building and its sleepy guards, the crowd gathers force and takes over the Mamilla area where freshly-planted olive trees soften the concrete steps of the Karta parking garage. The Tower of David and Jaffa Gate rise in front of us, outlined in the slightly garish bright blue lighting trim that was turned on last week for the 40th anniversary of the reunification.

It's 4:45 a.m as we surge forward and down the steps of the David Street shuk only to encounter a human traffic jam as we make the turn onto the Street of the Chain and the approach to the Kotel. A few groups of Arabs heading to work are walking up in the opposite direction. No one bothers them as they make their way toward Jaffa Gate.

There are only four entryways into the Kotel plaza, and they're all completely overwhelmed by the numbers of people pressing to get in. With a few friends, I veer off to the left to double around and join the crowd coming in from the direction of Damascus Gate, via the tunnel. We manage to squeeze our way into the back of the plaza and start to move toward the women's section, passing a group of nuns from Holland earnestly reading from their bibles by flashlight. There's barely room to move as more and more people surge in from each of the four entry points.

The bright green lights adorning the two mosques behind the Temple Mount shine in the semi-darkness. As the sky begins to change color and turn slowly from dark grey to light blue, the garish lights vanish. Exactly at sunrise, chattering starlings swoop down, and the voices of the throng rise in prayer.

On this holiday of Shavuot that commemorates the giving of the Torah, the symbolic wedding between God and the Jewish people, most of the women are wearing white and the centuries-old Kabbalistic custom of Tikkun Leil Shavuot, a night dedicated to Torah study is observed by hundreds of thousands of Israelis. On the eve of the holiday, commentators on Israel Radio remark on the phenomenon of secular Jews eager to take part in some kind of Torah learning on Shavuot. Shiri Lev-Ari writing in Haaretz observes: "The streets of Tel Aviv are full of life all night long, with wide-awake people circulating and exchanging tips that focus on the big question: Which lecture is worth going to now?" "People walk around with Bibles under their arms looking for interesting lectures, " says Iyun Academy Rabbi Roberto Arbiv.

In Jerusalem, many places, like the Menachem Begin Heritage Center and Congregation Shira Hadasha are forced to turn people away for lack of space at their study sessions.

On Palmach Street, the center of the English-speaking community in Jerusalem, the spacious open-plan apartment of Rabbi Ian and Rachel Pear of Shir Hadash is packed and abuzz with discussion at 1.a.m. Rav Ian has just delivered a stimulating hour-long session on Bikurim, the first in a series of lectures by different scholars that will go on until 4 a.m.

In another example of the widening gap between Jewish observance in Israel and the Diaspora, a May 18 editorial in the American Jewish weekly newspaper, The Forward, notes, "...the proportion of Jews that turns out for the festival (Shavuot) will not be great...Shavuot simply hasn't caught on with recent generations of Jews."

Judy Lash Balint is an award-winner investigative journalist and author of "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" (Gefen). Her latest is Jerusalem Diaries II: What's Really Happening in Israel (Xulon Press).

To Go To Top

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, May 23, 2007.

This was written by David Harris and it was published in the Jerusalem Post and is available on the Aish website:

Here's my list. I invite readers to suggest other examples that particularly irk them.

First, Israel is the only UN member state whose very right to exist is under constant challenge. Notwithstanding the fact that Israel was created with the imprimatur of the UN and has been a member of the world body since 1949, there is a relentless chorus of nations, institutions and individuals denying Israel's very political legitimacy. No one would dare question the right to exist of Libya, Saudi Arabia or Syria. Why is it open hunting season on Israel, as if we didn't know the answer?

Second, Israel is the only UN member state that's been publicly targeted for annihilation by another UN member state. Think about it. The Iranian president calls for wiping Israel off the map. Is there any other country that faces such an open call for genocidal destruction?

Third, Israel is the only nation whose capital city, Jerusalem, is not recognized by other nations. Imagine the absurdity of this. Foreign diplomats live in Tel Aviv while conducting virtually all their business in Jerusalem. Though no Western nation questions Israel's presence in the city's western half, where the prime minister's office, Knesset and Ministry of Foreign Affairs are located, there are no embassies there. In fact, look at listings of world cities, including places of birth in passports, and you'll often see something striking -- Paris, France; Tokyo, Japan; Pretoria, South Africa; Lima, Peru; and Jerusalem, sans country -- orphaned, if you will.

Fourth, the UN has two agencies that deal with refugees. One, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), focuses on all the world's refugee populations, save one. The other, the United Nations Refugee and Works Administration (UNRWA), handles only the Palestinians. But the oddity goes further than two structures and two bureaucracies. They have two different mandates. UNHCR seeks to resettle refugees; UNRWA does not. When, in 1951, John Blanford, UNRWA's director, proposed resettling up to 250,000 refugees in Arab countries, those countries refused, leading to his resignation. The message got through. No UN official since has pushed for resettlement.

Moreover, the UNRWA and UNHCR definitions of a refugee differ markedly. Whereas the UNHCR targets those who have fled their homelands, the UNRWA definition covers "the descendants of persons who became refugees in 1948," without any generational limitations.

Fifth, Israel is the only country that has won all its major wars for survival and self-defense, yet it's confronted by defeated adversaries who insist on dictating the terms of peace. In doing so, ironically, they've found support from many countries who, victorious in war, demanded -- and got -- border adjustments.

Sixth, Israel is the only country that has been censured by name -- not once, but nine times -- since the new UN Human Rights Council was established in June 2006. Astonishingly, or maybe not, this UN body has failed to adopt a single resolution critical of any real human rights abuser. When finally discussing the Darfur situation, the Council shamefully balked at pointing a finger at Sudan.

Seventh, Israel is the only country that, in violation of the spirit of the UN Charter, isn't a full member of one of the five regional blocs -- Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, and West Europe and Others (WEOG) -- that determine eligibility for candidacy for key UN posts. While Israel achieved a breakthrough in 2000 and joined WEOG, its membership is limited to New York, not other UN centers, and is both conditional and temporary.

Eighth, Israel is the only country that's the daily target of three UN bodies established solely to advance the Palestinian cause and to bash Israel -- the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People, and the Division for Palestinian Rights in the UN's Department of Political Affairs.

Ninth, Israel is the only country that is the target of a boycott by the British-based National Union of Journalists. An earlier British boycott against Israeli academic institutions was voided on a technicality because the union that adopted the measure merged with another. There is now an incipient call by some in the British Medical Association to exclude its Israeli counterpart from the World Medical Association.

And tenth, Israel is the only country where some associated with its majority population, i.e., Jews, openly call, for political or religious reasons, to dismantle the state. Is there a comparable situation to those religious voices of Neturei Karta, for example, who traveled to Teheran to join publicly with a leader seeking Israel's destruction, as well as those political extremists who seek to delegitimize the State of Israel and call for a "one-state" solution? Speaking of our own worst enemies... Tackling any one of these ten, much less all of them, is a daunting challenge, to state the painfully obvious. And, as I suggested, this list is far from complete. But it gives a sense of what's going on beyond the daily headlines.

The old ad used to say that you don't have to be Jewish to love Levy's Jewish rye bread. Well, surely, you don't have to be an ardent pro-Israel activist to be troubled by the unjust treatment of Israel. All it takes is a capacity for outrage that things like this are going on before our very eyes.

Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Fred Reifenberg, May 23, 2007.

This report is by Alan Dershowitz, delivered at the Florida Society for Middle East Studies, Florida Atlantic U., Boca Raton, FL.

I just returned from a visit from several university campuses during which I spoke about the Israeli-Palestine conflict. On these and other campuses anti-Israel students commemorate the Palestinian Naqba. They call this the Day of Catastrophe on which the Palestinians were deprived of their homeland and were made refugees from their birthplace. They compare their catastrophe to the Holocaust.

Perhaps out of deference to the suffering of the Palestinian people, pro-Israel students generally say nothing in response to these Naqba commemorations. The impression is thus created that everyone agrees that this was indeed a catastrophe inflicted by Israel on the Palestinians. The time has come to reply to this canard and to place it in its historical context.

The Naqba was indeed a catastrophe, but it was a self-inflicted wound. The Palestinian Naqba was a direct result of the refusal of the Palestinian and Arab leadership to accept the two state solution offered by the United Nations in 1947-48. The UN divided what remained of Palestine, after Trans-Jordan was carved out of it, into two states of roughly equal size (the Israelis got slightly more actual land, but the Palestinians got considerably more arable land).

Israel would control territories in which Jews were a majority, while the Palestinians would control territories in which Arabs were a majority. Israel accepted the partition and declared statehood. Palestinians rejected statehood and attacked Israel with the help of all the surrounding Arab countries.

In the process of defending their new state, Israel lost 1% of its population (1 out of every 100 Israelis were killed). In the ensuing war -- a war declared to be genocidal by Israel's enemies - 700,000 Palestinians left their homes, some voluntarily, some at the urging of Palestinian leaders and some forced out by the Israeli military.

None of these people would have had to leave Israel had the Palestinians and other Arabs been willing to accept the two-state solution. It was indeed a catastrophe for all sides, but the catastrophe was caused by the Palestinians and Arabs.

In the aftermath of the war, Jordan occupied the West Bank and Egypt occupied the Gaza Strip. There were no United Nations condemnations of these occupations though they were brutal and denied the Palestinians autonomy and sovereignty. Only when Israel occupied these lands, following a defensive war against Egypt and Jordan, did the occupation become a source of international concern.

This is the reality. This is the historical truth. And the world should understand that this particular catastrophe, as distinguished from others like the Holocaust, could easily have been prevented had the Palestinians wanted their own state more than they wanted to see the destruction of the Jewish state of Israel.

The Germans don't celebrate the catastrophe resulting from their invasion of Poland. Japanese do not celebrate their catastrophe resulting from the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

Why do Palestinians celebrate their catastrophe resulting from the Arab attack against Israel?

See Fred Reifenberg's photo art on his website:

To Go To Top

Posted by Rachel Neuwirth, May 23, 2007.

Steven A. Emerson is Executive Director The Investigative Project on Terrorism. Tel: 202-363-8602. email: transcripts@%ctnews.org

This is a transcript of his remarks on the Glenn Beck show on CNN.

To watch the video, go here: http://www.investigativeproject.org/SAE-CNN-5-22-07.wmv"

GLENN BECK: Let's turn to Al Qaeda here for a second. This is according to a British newspaper now, The Guardian, U.S. officials are now finally admitting that Iran has been secretly forging ties with Al Qaeda, elements in the Sunni-Arab militias in Iraq. Who would have seen this one coming? Well, "Real Story" is, if you're a regular viewer of this program, you saw this coming! Iran is at war with the U.S. They're only fighting it by proxy right now. They're sending weapons and Iranian-backed Al Qaeda operatives into Iraq to help the insurgents kill our brothers, sisters, sons and daughters. This is all in preparation for a summer showdown with coalition forces. The sole intent is to get the United States Congress to vote for full military withdrawal from Iraq. Remember, this isn't what crazy Glenn is saying on his crazy show. This is what, according to The Guardian, a senior U.S. official is now finally confirming. Well, hallelujah. Now that somebody in Washington is telling us what many of us have believed for a long time, maybe we can take the steps to save ourselves and finally address the fact that Iran is the head of the snake and always has been.Iran and Al Qaeda want us out of Iraq so they can set up shop. They'll set up terrorist training camps, and they'll start popping up all across Iraq and the entire Middle East, just like Starbucks. And meanwhile, us here in the West, we're going to be in for a double shot of trouble. Osama bin Laden and Iran's ayatollah have both called the war in Iraq World War III, the battle for ancient Babylon.Check your Bible, gang. They are willing to kill for a worldwide Islamic state, a global, one-world government in their coveted Babylon, and that coveted Babylon is modern day Iraq. Steven Emerson, the executive director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, author of "Jihad Inc.," Steve, how frustrating is this to you that you see it -- you've seen this coming for years, and you keep saying it over and over and over and over again, and you keep being dismissed as a nut job?

STEVEN EMERSON: Look, Glenn, I remember when I pointed out the relationship between Hezbollah and Al Qaeda and people said, "No, Al Qaeda is Sunni; Hezbollah is Shiite. They would never talk to each other." Well, they actually conducted an agreement for training and for explosives transfer. I remember when they said that Saddam Hussein, who's Sunni, would never conduct an arrangement with Al Qaeda because he was religious and Saddam Hussein was secular. Of course, they embraced each other. The fact is that these people are very pragmatic. They're pragmatic terrorists. They hate the United States. They'll do anything. Iran has been harboring top Al Qaeda leaders. They've been providing weapons to both Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq in order to kill Americans. And suddenly we have Democratic Party officials running to both Iraq and Syria, saying, "Let's negotiate." And I find that absolutely scandalous, because what are they going to negotiate about? And if they do negotiate, they're only going to be giving them paper words that they want to hear and then continue to go about blindly blowing up Americans.

BECK: You know, it is amazing. It is absolutely amazing. These people are so bright; they're doing the opposite of what we're doing right now. We're feasting on each other. We're making enemies of each other while our enemy comes and gets us. Meanwhile, these guys, they're all going to kill each other eventually. I mean, Iran is going to kill the Sunnis or the Shias, and the Shias are going to kill the other ones. And Al Qaeda doesn't agree with Iran. It's all going to go into a bloody mess, but they're uniting to kill us first.

EMERSON: Well, that's what usually happens, because, in their world, each one -- each existence contests the other's existence, and they have to kill each other in the end. And that's why ultimately we stand a chance. If they ever got together and really unified themselves, and didn't view each other's existence as a challenge to one another, then we wouldn't stand a chance.

BECK: Give me the one thing that you just wish you could grab people by the collar and say, "Would you please wake up?" Give me the one fact that might wake up one person in this audience.

EMERSON: Look, what I suggest to people is that our way of life is changing right now and that that was demonstrated by the reaction to the Danish cartoons, when not one American newspaper published the cartoons, with the exception of "The Philadelphia Inquirer." That was more important to me, just as important to me, just as significant as the 9/11 bombings, because that demonstrated the appeasement of the American newspaper, the American media, which was the fourth estate. That's the way we're changing our lives, due to the incredible demands made by Muslim radicals all over the world. That's a very serious, dangerous problem that we're not taking cognizance of.

BECK: Steve, I only have time for a two-word answer on this: 25 percent of American Muslims under 30 now say, you know, it's OK to use suicide bombings. Scary or very scary?

EMERSON: I would say that number is probably underestimated. I would say that this has been coming on for a long time, and it's definitely very worrisome.

BECK: OK. Thanks, Steven. That's "The Real Story" tonight.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism
202-966-5191 -- fax

Contact Rachel Neuwirth at rachterry@sbcglobal.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, May 23, 2007.

This was written by Hillel Halkin and was published in the New York Sun.

As if last summer's war in Lebanon were not bad enough, Israel now has the ignominy of Sderot: A reasonably prosperous city of some 20,000 inhabitants, an hour's drive from Tel Aviv, reduced to a state of shell-shocked panic by scattershot Kassam attacks from the Gaza Strip, its life paralyzed, and a large part of its population fled or wanting to flee, while the country's government and army seem powerless to do anything about it.

And who is creating this pandemonium? Several hundred Palestinian irregulars, who may or may not be taking orders from a central command, firing homemade rockets from backyards and empty fields.

For years now they have been shooting on and off at Sderot, sometimes more and sometimes less, with no effective way, it would seem, of stopping them. A few hundred men in backyards bringing a city of 20,000 to its knees. And what will happen when those same men, or others like them, slightly enlarge their rockets' range and regularly begin to hit Ashkelon, slightly further to the north, with 100,000 residents, or Ashdod, a bit further still, with 200,000 residents? One quails to mention Tel Aviv.

From the Israeli point of view, this is no longer simply a failure in fighting terror. It is a disgrace and a terrible danger. Apart from the havoc wreaked to the lives of the inhabitants of Sderot itself, it is demoralizing to all Israelis and immensely encouraging to Israel's enemies...

What is Israel to do? Of the solutions proposed so far, one is unlikely to work and one would be likely to work, but is at too great a cost. Although partially successful in the past, destroying rocket launchers and their operators from the air, or even killing the higher-ups in command of them by means of "targeted assassinations," will probably not be very effective this time. The anarchy in Palestinian society has reached the point that not even the heads of Hamas or Islamic jihad, were they to seek to stop the Kassam attacks because they feared for their own lives, would necessarily be able to do so.

What probably would work would be an Israeli military re-occupation of Gaza. But the price Israel would pay for this in terms of military casualties would be high -- and once back in Gaza, how would it ever get out again? The last thing it needs is once again to have to police this tiny, overpopulated strip of human misery that is an ideal place for urban guerrilla warfare.

Is there no other solution? Of course there is. It is the obvious one -- and the ugly one. And it may be the best one. Suppose Israel were to announce, clearly and unequivocally:

"Starting exactly one week from today, any rocket attack from the Gaza Strip on any Israeli city, town, or village will be met with answering artillery fire aimed at Palestinian cities, towns, and villages in the Gaza Strip. This will of course cause civilian casualties far higher than those caused by Palestinian Kassams, since the weaponry at the Israel's disposal is far more accurate and destructive.

These casualties will be innocent people, which is why we implore the world, the Arab states, and the Palestinian public to avoid them by putting every possible pressure on those who are firing rockets at Israel. Israel has no desire to see a single innocent Palestinian die -- but if it has to choose between innocent Palestinians and innocent Israelis, it will choose to protect its own citizens first."

Brutal? Inhuman? Playing into the Palestinians' hands by turning Israel into a country of "eye for an eye" and "tooth for a tooth" morality? Doomed to failure in any case, since it would only lead to increasing spirals of violence? But it probably wouldn't. In fact, it might put an end to violence very quickly, once Palestinians in Gaza became as panicky as Israelis in Sderot and screamed at their leaders to put an end to it...

Ultimately, deterrence only works when you are able and willing to harm your enemy more than he is willing to be harmed or able to harm you. This is not only true of backyard rockets from Gaza. It is also true of Syrian missiles tipped with chemical warheads or of a possible Iranian atomic bomb.

As unpleasant as the thought may be, the only way to deter a Syrian or Iranian strike against Israeli civilian targets, with the huge numbers of deaths this would cause, is to make it clear to such countries that their own civilian targets would be hit in return, causing an even huger number of deaths.

An Israel that is not prepared to be so "immoral" as to let the Palestinians of Gaza know that is a question not of an eye for an eye, but of ten or twenty or a hundred eyes for an eye, can certainly never deliver such a message to Iran or Syria. And that's the most worrisome part of what has been so far the losing battle for Sderot.

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Bryna Berch, May 23, 2007.

This comes from the May 21, 2007 Jerusalem Post. It does give a whole new meaning to 'taking a break at the office and having a snack'.

Al-Azhar University, one of Sunni Islam's most prestigious institutions, ordered one of its clerics Monday to face a disciplinary panel after he issued a controversial decree allowing adults to breast-feed.

Ezzat Attiya had issued a fatwa, or religious edict, saying adult men could breast-feed from female work colleagues as a way to avoid breaking Islamic rules that forbid men and women from being alone together.

In Islamic tradition, breast-feeding establishes a degree of maternal relation, even if a woman nurses a child who is not biologically hers. It means the child could not marry the nursing woman's biological children.

Attiya -- the head of Al-Azhar's Department of Hadith, or teachings of the Prophet Muhammad -- insisted the same would apply with adults. He argued that if a man nursed from a co-worker, it would establish a family bond between them and allow the two to work side-by-side without raising suspicion of an illicit sexual relation.

To Go To Top

Posted by Barry Shaw, May 23, 2007.

Take a look at the new Fatah version of WIZO...

The latest hot fashion for Islamic women. Hey, it's just a religion like any other. This comes from yesterday's Little Green Footballs website (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=

It's another death cult press conference, featuring the women's wing of the militant wing of the "moderate" Fatah party. Notice the camera in the lower right corner.

Female Palestinian militants from the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, who claim they are willing to be suicide bombers, hold weapons during a news conference in Jebaliya, northern Gaza Strip, Monday, May 21, 2007. The women, who are part of the militant group with ties to the Fatah Movement, vowed to 'be human bombs' in the way of the Israeli army if it decides to invade Gaza. The arabic on headband reads 'Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. ' (AP Photo/Hatem Moussa)

Barry Shaw and his family made aliyah from Manchester, England, 25 years ago. He writes the "View from Here" columns from Israel. To sign up to receive his emails, contact him at netre@matav.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Gerald Steinberg, May 23, 2007.

This appeared in the New York Sun and is archived at

For many journalists, diplomats, and political activists, Amnesty International is considered to be a highly reliable and objective source of information and analysis on human rights around the world. But the halo that surrounds its reports and campaigns is beginning to fray, as the evidence of political bias and inaccuracy mounts.

Recently, the Economist, published in Britain, noted that "an organisation which devotes more pages in its annual report to human-rights abuses in Britain and America than those in Belarus and Saudi Arabia cannot expect to escape doubters' scrutiny." Other critics, including law professor at Harvard, Alan Dershowitz, and the U.S.-based Capital Research Center, have been more pointed, providing evidence of Amnesty's systematic bias and reports based largely on claims by carefully selected "eyewitnesses" in Colombia, Gaza, and Lebanon.

As Amnesty releases its annual report on human rights for 2006, amid highly choreographed public relations events, and repeating the familiar condemnations of Israel and America, NGO Monitor has also published a report on Amnesty's activities in the Middle East. The result is not a pretty picture for those clinging to the "halo effect."

Using a detailed and sophisticated qualitative model for comparing relative resources devoted to the different countries, this report clearly shows that in 2006, Amnesty singled out Israel for condemnation of human rights to a far greater extent than Iran, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Syria, Egypt, and other chronic abusers of human rights.

During the year, Amnesty issued 48 publications critical of Israel, compared to 35 for Iran, 2 for Saudi Arabia, and only 7 for Syria. Many of the attacks directed at Israel took place during the war with Hezbollah, but this terror group and state-within-a-state also got relatively little attention from Amnesty.

Furthermore, as Amnesty has almost no professional researchers, many of the "factual" claims in these reports were provided by "eyewitnesses," whose political affiliations and credibility can be only guessed. And the language used in these reports also reflects an obsessive and unjustified singling out of Israel, with frequent use of terms such "disproportionate attacks," "war crimes," and "violations of international humanitarian law."

And while Amnesty International was founded to fight for the freedom of political prisoners, the officials in charge of this organization failed to issue a single statement calling for the release of the Israeli soldiers that were kidnapped by Hezbollah and Hamas, and who have not been heard from since their illegal capture.

These and many other details published in NGO Monitor's report on Amnesty provide further evidence that this powerful NGO has lost its way, and is no longer a "respectable" or credible human rights organization.

These fundamental defects extend beyond the Middle East. Researchers from a Bogota-based conflict think tank, the University of London and the Conflict Analysis Resource Center, reached similar conclusions about reports on the conflict in Colombia.

In their report, "The Work of Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch: Evidence from Colombia," the authors state that both groups follow a "non-systematic approach that includes opaque sourcing and frequent changes in the objects they measure." In other words, these reports are biased and lack credibility.

Moreover, they note the "failure to specify sources, unclear definitions, an erratic reporting template and a distorted portrayal of conflict dynamics" among the methodological problems with Amnesty International's publications, adding to evidence of "bias against the government relative to the guerrillas."

These problems are compounded by the absence of transparency and any system of checks and balances among these powerful political actors. In contrast to the democratic governments that Amnesty officials frequently denounce and condemn, including Israel, NGOs are not subject to independent accountability.

No one outside the inner circle knows how or why they choose their particular "targets," or how they assess the "evidence," or write their reports. And officials such as Amnesty's Irene Khan are often in power and in control of massive budgets for many years, without significant challenges or competition.

Given this situation, the time is long past due for ending the "halo effect" that surrounds powerful groups such as Amnesty and Human Rights Watch. Their reports should not be given automatic credibility by journalists, diplomats, academics, and individuals genuinely committed to the universality of human rights principles.

Rather than publicizing their reports and endorsing their campaigns, the publications of Amnesty and similar groups need to be subjected to the same type of independent questioning as is done for reports issued by governments and other political organizations.

Mr. Steinberg is the executive director of NGO Monitor and professor of political studies at Bar Ilan University. Contact him at steing@mail.biu.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, May 23, 2007.

Western hypocrisy is now in full force in Lebanon, where the Lebanese army is taking action against Palestinians Arabs.

It is clear that it is alright with the United States White House when the Lebanese Government shells a Palestinian Arab refugee camp, is an indiscriminate and disproportionate manner, with impunity!

But when the Government of Israel authorizes pinpoint strikes against the Palestinian Arab on going intolerable provocations against its civilian population, the State Department immediately rises up to the occasion with its righteous indignation.

Where is the UN Security Council resolution condemning the Saniora Government for its use of force?

Where is the UN Human Rights Council, or Committee to shout to high heavens the way they do each time Israel is forced to simply defend herself?

Why isn't Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice endlessly shuttling between the fighting parties in an effort to bring about peace or at least ceasefire?

Where is the E.U? We all know that if it was about Israel and the Palestinian Arab their voice would have been heard loud and clear!

Where is Russia? Where is Egypt? After all, don't they care about the well-being of the Palestinians Arabs?

Where is UNRWA? Was UNRWA aware of the apparent Palestinian Arabs arms build-up in the camps in Lebanon? Isn't just what they were deployed to do there on Lebanon soil? Perhaps they were the enablers?!

Many of us took the time to write and speak up. We warned in our speeches and writing that the withdrawal from the Gaza strip would lead to a Hamas/al-Qaeda controlled areas. (See second article below). And so, this is exactly what has happened. And although we wrote clear and truthful messages and even pointed direct fingers at the propaganda and the lies, Israel is roundly condemned for taking action when scores of rockets land in its cities and towns. The hypocrisy of the world is beyond comprehension. The hypocrisy of the United States is beyond comprehension and totally unacceptable.

This article is called "Lebanese army shells refugee camp: Country sees worst internal violence since end of 1975-90 civil war" and was written by Bassem Mroue of The Associated Press. It was published in the Baltimore Sun
(http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/ bal-lebanon0521,0,2158202.story?page=1&track=rss).
Associated Press Writer Hussein Dakroub in Beirut contributed.

TRIPOLI, Lebanon / Lebanese troops pounded a Palestinian refugee camp with artillery and tank fire for a second day today, raising huge columns of smoke as they battled a militant group suspected of ties to al-Qaida in the worst violence since the end of the 1975-1990 civil war.

Nearly 50 combatants were killed in the first day of fighting Sunday, but it was not known how many civilians have been killed inside the Nahr el-Bared camp on the outskirts of the northern port city of Tripoli.

Palestinian officials in the camp reported at least nine civilians were killed today, along with 40 wounded. The figures could not be confirmed because emergency workers or security officials have not been able to get in.

The White House said it supports Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora's efforts to deal with fighting, and the State Department defended the Lebanese army, saying it was working in a "legitimate manner" against "provocations by violent extremists" operating in the camp.

Black smoke filled the sky over Nahr el-Bared as fires raged for hours and heavy gunfire and explosions rang out constantly. Shells could be seen thudding into buildings in the seaside camp.

Fighting paused briefly in the afternoon to allow the evacuation of 18 wounded civilians, according to Saleh Badran of the Palestinian Red Crescent Society. But the fighting quickly resumed. Ambulances raced through the streets of nearby Tripoli, where many shops were closed and many residents stayed inside.

"There are many wounded. We're under siege. There is a shortage of bread, medicine and electricity. There are children under the rubble," Sana Abu Faraj, a refugee, told Al-Jazeera television by cell phone from the camp.

Late today, residents reported an explosion in a Muslim neighborhood of Beirut, the capital. The Future TV station said the blast occurred in the Verdun shopping area, while Hezbollah's Al-Manar television said it took place in a parking lot in the posh district. Television footage showed a burning car and at least one injured man. On Sunday night, a bomb near a mall in the Christian sector of the capital killed a woman and wounded 12 other people.

Lebanon was already in the midst of its worst political crisis between the Western-backed government and Hezbollah-led opposition since the end of the civil war.

The battle was an unprecedented showdown between the Lebanese army and militant groups that have arisen in Lebanon's Palestinian refugee camps, which are home to tens of thousands of people living amid poverty and crime and which Lebanese troops are not allowed to enter.

The troops were fighting a group called Fatah Islam, whose leader has said he is inspired by al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden and was training militants for attacks in other countries. Lebanese officials have also accused Syria of using Fatah Islam to stir up trouble in Lebanon, a charge Damascus has denied.

Lebanese officials said one of the men killed Sunday was a suspect in a failed German train bombing -- another indication the camp had become a refuge for Fatah Islam militants planning attacks outside of Lebanon. In the past, others affiliated with the group in the camp have said they were aiming to send trained fighters into Iraq and the group's leader has been linked to al-Qaida in Iraq.

Hundreds of Lebanese troops, backed by tanks and armored carriers, surrounded the refugee camp today. M-48 battle tanks unleashed their cannon fire on the camp, home to 30,000 Palestinian refugees. The militants fired mortars toward the troops at daybreak.

An army officer at the front line said troops directed concentrated fire at buildings known to house militants. He said troops also had orders to strike hard at any target that returned fire.

"Everything we know that they were present in has been targeted," he told the Associated Press, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media.

A spokesman for Fatah Islam, Abu Salim, warned that if the army bombardment did not stop, the militants would step up attacks by rockets and artillery "and would take the battle outside Tripoli."

He did not elaborate.

"It is a life-or-death battle. Their aim is to wipe out Fatah Islam. We will respond and we know how to respond," he told the AP.

Earlier in the day, another refugee camp, Ein el-Hilweh in southern Lebanon, was tense after Lebanese troops surrounded it and armed militants went on alert.

At least 27 soldiers and 20 militants were killed Sunday, Lebanese security officials said. But they did not know how many civilians had been killed in the camp because it is off-limits to their authority.

Lebanon says it has no authority to enter the camps under understandings with the Palestinians that give the PLO the authority in the camps. But Lebanon also is believed to be leery of entering for fear that any such actions would cause widespread unrest, be very costly and could spark pan-Arab sympathy for the Palestinian refugees that would trigger a backlash against the country.

The clashes were triggered Sunday when police raided suspected Fatah Islam hideouts in several buildings in Tripoli, searching for men wanted in a recent bank robbery. A gunbattle erupted at one of the buildings between the group's fighters, and troops were called in to help the police.

Militants then burst out of the nearby refugee camp, seizing Lebanese army positions, capturing two armored vehicles and ambushing troops. Lebanese troops later laid siege to the camp, where Fatah Islam militants were believed to be hiding.

Fatah Islam is led by a Palestinian named Shaker al-Absi, who is wanted in three countries. He is believed to have fought in Afghanistan and Iraq. He told The New York Times in March that he was trying to spread al-Qaida's ideology and was training fighters inside the camp for attacks on other countries.

He would not specify which countries but expressed anger toward the United States. And he was sentenced to death earlier in absentia along with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq killed last summer by U.S. forces in Iraq, for the 2002 assassination of an American diplomat in Jordan.

In a news conference in March, al-Absi denied he was sending fighters to Iraq.

"Fighting in our homeland (Palestine) is more important," he said then. "We have no connection with any regime or organization on this earth. Our connection is with 'There is no God but God' (the slogan of Islam). We have come to raise it over the skies of Jerusalem."

Al-Absi had been in custody in Syria until last fall but was released and set up his group in the camp, where he apparently found recruits, Lebanese officials said.

Lebanon's national police commander, Maj. Gen. Ashraf Rifi, said Damascus was using Fatah Islam as a covert way to wreak havoc in the country. He denied Fatah Islam's al-Qaida links, saying it was a Syrian-bred group.

"Perhaps there are some deluded people among them but they are not al-Qaida. This is imitation al-Qaida, a 'Made in Syria' one," he told the AP.

Lebanese security officials said Fatah Islam has up to 100 members who come from Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia and Syria, as well as local sympathizers who belong to the conservative Salafi branch of Islam.

The Lebanese Broadcasting Corp. TV station reported the dead militants included men from Bangladesh, Yemen and other Arab countries. Some wore explosive belts, security officials said.

Officials identified the suspect in the failed German train bombing as Saddam El-Hajdib, the fourth-highest ranking official in the Fatah Islam group, an official said. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media. El-Hajdib had been on trial in absentia in Lebanon in the failed German plot.

It was unclear whether Lebanese authorities had known the whereabouts of El-Hajdib or al-Absi before the gunbattle first broke Sunday out in Tripoli.

White House deputy press secretary Tony Fratto said the Bush administration is concerned about the fighting. "We believe the parties should take a step back from violence," he said.

The State Department gave its support to the Lebanese army's battle with Fatah Islam.

"This is a group that has been involved in violence to achieve whatever their stated objective may be," spokesman Sean McCormack said.

McCormack declined to discuss whether the group may be tied to al-Qaida or other groups outside Lebanon. Asked about a possible Syrian link, McCormack said, "At this point I wouldn't draw that connection."

In Monday's fighting, a driver for the AP, working with journalists at the scene, was injured when he was hit in the thigh by a bullet or shrapnel. He was being treated at a hospital and was expected to recover.

Ahmed Methqal, a Muslim cleric in the camp, told Al-Jazeera that five civilians had been killed.

"You can say there is a massacre going on in the camp of children and women who have nothing to do with Fatah Islam," he said. "They are targeting buildings, with people in them."

Lebanon has struggled to defeat armed groups that control pockets of the country -- especially inside the 12 Palestinian refugee camps housing 350,000 people.

Some camps have become havens for Islamic militants accused of carrying out attacks in the country and of sending recruits to fight U.S.-led coalition forces in Iraq.

Palestinian officials from the moderate Fatah faction in the West Bank sought to distance themselves from Fatah Islam and urged Palestinian refugees in the camp to isolate the militant group.

Khaled Mashaal, exiled political leader of the Palestinian militant group Hamas, asked Saniora to take "necessary procedures" to ensure refugees in the camp are not harmed.

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 22, 2007.

Foreign governments and corporations pay for lobbyists to expedite their demands upon the US. Some of their interests clash with America's.

Congress found out that Saudi officials gave some financial and other backing to the 9/11 terrorists (largely from S. Arabia). The President had that part of the Congressional documentation blacked out. The White House and the FBI blocked an investigation of Saudi participation in the terrorist plot. Government censorship was not to protect US security but that of alleged 'allies.' The state-sponsored terrorist network largely still exists in the US. Sen. Graham remarked that the President acts as if more loyal to S. Arabia than to the US.

'In covering up Saudi Arabia's direct role in supporting Al Qaeda, the 9/11 Commission goes even a few steps further than the Congress and the Executive Branch. The report claims 'there is no convincing evidence that any government financially supported al-Qaeda before 9/11.' Their report ignores all the information provided by government officials to Congress, as well as volumes of published reports and investigations by other nations, regarding Muslim and Arab regimes that have supported al Qaeda. It completely disregards the terrorist lists of the Treasury and State Departments, which have catalogued the Saudi government's decades of support for Bin Laden and al-Qaeda.'

S. Arabia supported Pakistan's development of nuclear weaponry and gave Saddam $5 billion to develop it in Iraq. S. Arabia sought Chinese nuclear weapons. It already has long-range missiles. Usually, the US frowns on such activities. S. Arabia, however, buys tens of billions of dollars of US weapons annually. The sellers lobby to keep the facts about Saudi terrorist involvement classified. They spend hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying and tens of millions of dollars on campaign donations. Among their lobbyists or influence peddlers are Bush Sr. and James Baker. Yet Baker was invited officially to come up with alternative policies on Iraq!

Some coddled countries trade in narcotics and the nuclear black market. Turkey does, and one of its lobbyists is Brent Scowcroft (who presents policy proposals as objective).

Pakistan also is a military customer of the US. It would have been barred from such purchases, if its work on nuclear weaponry had been made public. The US official who figured out 20 years ago that Pakistan had an a-bomb was fired and silenced. Pakistan went on to proliferate its knowledge, sharing it with N. Korea and Iran, among other threats to the US. Thus the US military-industrial complex jeopardizes American national security (Miriam Gardner of American Yated Neeman, 1/4/07).


The Red Cross accuses Israel of violating the law of occupation, in linking annexed territory surrounding Jerusalem to Jerusalem. Israel denies occupying areas it legally annexed, offering Israeli citizenship to the residents (Steven Erlanger, NY Times, 5/15, A8). There was no country there to occupy, so Israel's acquisition in self-defense of unallocated land of the Mandate for a Jewish national home hardly is occupation.

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@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul Lademain, May 22, 2007.

Where did the Islamics get this idea, that Jews "run".

Well, we can tell you that Israel's leadership, besotted with their 1967 victory against the Islamics, foolishly reasoned, like self-righteous and patronizing "Lady Bountifuls," that being "generous" to the Islamics would purchase the Muslim world's love and respect.

These old Jews were fatally wrong. Instead of purchasing "love and respect" from those who will always despise Jews for being Jews, these old Jews bought themselves and their hapless nation a whole load of disrespect and ridicule. And that was because the leadership of Israel, proclaiming themselves Jews, then picked up their skirts and ran.

Jews run ... Or so these old Jews thereby gave the Islamics every reason to believe.

The Old Jews found an excuse to run from the Sinai: they bowed and scraped and tugged on their forelocks and returned valuable land seized from their vicious enemies ... in exchange for empty kisses blown into their ears.

And then these Old Jews began to quarrel amongst themselves as if they were Shiite and Sunni. The Old Jews, egged on by the glib Polish fantasist, Peres, ran from Lebanon, like rats deserting a sinking ship -- thereby earning the disrespect of the Christians and the ridicule of the Islamics. And the free but silent world.

And then the Old Jews found the most stupifyingly dumb excuse to flee from Gaza. And that was when the entire world began to believe that one need only threaten any Jew and he will cringe and cower and weep, and blabber, and pontificate ... and in the end, after huffing-and-puffing ... pick up his skirts, pack his bags, and run.

And then came the worse Jew of all: the Oinking Olmert. He Is So Tire ... so very tired. So tired of fighting and winning. So tied and soiled, he is eager to roll over and surrender the shirts from the backs of Israeli civilians so that he might save his own. (Sure ... Olmert thought people would assume he was cleverly using the stylish lies of the Islamic enemy against the enemy, but the Islamics didn't see it that way. The Islamics, like the Brits who support them, took Olmert's foolish words at face value.)

Now the Islamics think all Jews are like Olmert: Weepy, tired, used-up, and ready to flee -- the way Jews have historically fled their homes in Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Poland, Germany, etc. Olmert and his shabby predecessors convinced the Islamics that Islamics and their oil-soiled friends can threaten the Jews, murder them with impunity, and then the Jews will prattled about what they "may do" while they turn and run from their homeland into a watery grave.

It is now clear that the Patriots of and for Israel must rise up and use all their might to totally destroy not only the enemy without but also the defeated, miserly, self-aggrandizing, pompous and blindly greedy enemy within.

Viva Israel from the NON-evangelical Christians for Zion. We say: Restore JEWISH Palestine from the ocean to the sea the way the world originally intended it to be.

Contact Paul Lademain at lademain@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Barry Rubin, May 22, 2007.

In the Middle East, violence is not the result of poor communication but a tool for political gain. Nothing proves that point better than Syria's successful use of violence and terrorism to promote its interests. No amount of dialogue is going to change that reality.

Now Syria is using a Palestinian front group to start a war inside Lebanon, just as it employed another Lebanese client organization, Hizballah, to battle Israel last year. The Syrian government's message is simple: Lebanon will know no peace until it again becomes our satellite.

In two years, 15 major terrorist attacks targeted Lebanon's independent-minded leaders. Most notorious was the assassination of popular former prime minister Rafiq Hariri in February 2005, which also killed 22 bystanders.

In response, the UN set up an international investigation whose interim reports pointed the finger at Syria and even, in unpublished drafts, at Bashar's closest relatives for the killing. Last week, the United States, Britain, and France introduced a resolution in the UN to set up a tribunal to try the murderers.

Since the tribunal is in cooperation with Lebanon, Syria must ensure that country's parliament vetoes the plan. Suddenly, bombs start exploding in Beirut and a Syrian-backed Islamist group stages an uprising against the government.

People get the hint. Cross Syria and you get hurt. To hold the tribunal given events in Lebanon, says South African diplomat Dumisani Kumalo, "We would need to have our heads examined. We were for going very slow to start with. Now we are even slower."

What is less understood is how the regime's radical strategy is used at home and why this makes it impossible to gain anything from engaging with Syria. Like other Middle Eastern dictatorships, Syria's rulers face a paradox. How to stay in power after failing so completely? The economy is a mess, there is little freedom, and the regime is dominated by a small Alawite minority which is both non-Muslim and historically secular.

Since taking power in 2000 on his father's death, Bashar has met this challenge. He sends terrorists against Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, and even the U.S. military but nobody retaliates in kind against him. At home, the regime sounds increasingly Islamist; abroad it is the biggest sponsor of radical Islamist groups in the region.

As a result of their interests and as a matter of survival, Syria's rulers need anti-Americanism and the Arab-Israeli conflict to mobilize support and distract from their failings. For example, when Syrians demanded reforms after Bashar took power, then Vice-President Abd Halim Khaddam told a meeting that nothing could change as long as Israel controlled the Golan Heights. But actually getting back this land would be disastrous for the regime since making peace with Israel would dissolve that excuse but also because it would open massive demands by its own citizens for democracy, prosperity, and reform.

Bashar has even declared a new doctrine he calls "Resistance" which combines Arab nationalism and Islamism. The West's goal, he claims, is to enslave the Arabs. The mistake made by other Arabs was to abandon war. "The world will not be concerned with us and our interests, feelings, and rights unless we are powerful" and victory requires "adventure and recklessness." Any who disagree are mere "political mercenaries" and "parasites."

This mandatory radicalism ensures that Syria interprets Western concessions and confidence-building measures as acts of surrender, proving its strategy is working. Years of dialogue and numerous visits by secretaries of state could not even get Syria to close the terrorist offices in Damascus, much less make any policy changes.

Anwar al-Bunni, a democratic dissident, explained in 2003 that the only thing that held back the regime was fear of America. Only due to "the fright it gave our rulers, that we reformers stand a chance here."

But once U.S. members of Congress flocked to Damascus, offering words of praise and advocating détente, Bunni was proven right. He was sentenced on trumped-up charges to five years' imprisonment.

Being nice to Syria will lead nowhere because the regime thrives on conflict and its demands -- including a recolonized Lebanon -- are too much against Western interests to meet. U.S. policy should treat Syria's regime as a determined adversary whose interests are diametrically opposed to those of America, no matter who sits in the White House.

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press, August 2007). His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 22, 2007.

Israel is at war with Hamas! Nizar Riyah, a spokesman for the missile launching terrorist organization asserts, "Hamas is determined to wipe Israel off the map and replace it with the state of Palestine", emphatically reiterating anti-Semite Iranian madman Mahmoud AhMADinejad's perilous pronouncement, kindred spirits in their ultimate quest to Islamisize the planet. Riyah continues his war declaration, promising Hamas will fight "...until the last Jew is expelled." His jihad, for now against Israel, is supported by some 150 deadly missiles propelled into Israel, murdering, wounding, and spreading fear throughout a besieged citizenry. Enough! If the 'up till now' pusillanimous Prime Minister Olmert, allowing his state to absorb indignities no sovereign nation should bear with but a few retaliatory measures, will not immediately command his troops, backed by air support, to enter in force the hell-hole of a stupidly abandoned Gaza, indeed Sharon's folly, and pummel Hamas psychopathic savages into submission, he must resign his stewardship, allowing an intrepid Israeli leader, perhaps Bibi Netanyahu, to take over. Period! You must not pull your punches in a war initiated by your enemy, especially one that yearns to obliterate you. Furthermore, there are no political solutions when you deal with obsessed criminals with little regard for human life. Indeed, Hamas strategists shroud not only vulnerable adults but even Arab children with explosives, converting human beings, many of which have not yet experienced life, into weapons of mass destruction. Can any rational person deal with such an immoral cadre of fiends?

Hamas Jihadists justify their depraved behavior by reciting malevolently interpreted Koranic verse. Such interpretations reflect an atavistic anti-secular faith based violent culture, today characterized by an unwillingness to compromise one core belief that the perceived' infidel' nation 'Jewish' Israel must be annihilated, as its very existence taints holy Muslim ground. In effect, per that mindset, Jews have evicted Palestinians from their rightful territory hence must be eliminated from it. If indeed that was attainable, Western Europe could be the next quest for Hamas and kindred spirit jihad junkies, but such an ambitious agenda must be accomplished one step at a time. A prescient Europe logically should align in common cause with Israel, but that would require an abandonment of its own pro-Palestinian anti-Israel agenda. An astute Israeli leader would fervently begin educating European movers and shakers of such a likely scenario, alert Washington's somnambulistic leaders with a two by four steel wake up call, while preparing for all out war. The United Nations buffer along Israel's Lebanese border will need to be bolstered, perhaps by NATO troops, in order to prevent Hizbullah from entering the fray. U.S battleships in range of Iran will need to be on heightened alert while the White House reads AhMADinejad and his crew of contemptuous mullahs the riot act, dissuading them from getting involved while Israel destroys Hamas. Innocent Arabs will need to seek refuge perhaps in arm-twisted King Abdullah's Jordan, their true homeland. Forestalling a forceful response to Hamas' declaration of war will exacerbate Israel's future security as her mortal enemy gains strength. A smoldering brushfire must be extinguished before morphing to an inferno, perhaps of the Dr. Strangelove variety. What in fact will prevent Hamas, with delusions of invincibility, from someday launching a nuke made in Iran toward Tel Aviv, or attaching a WMD to one of its lunatic martyrs, perhaps able to penetrate a check point; one never knows! Any response by Israel at that point would be too late. If Prime Minister Olmert will not rise to the occasion, someone else must. To reitterate an ever appropriate phrase, this is no time to go wobbly Ehud!

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 larose@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Daily Alert, May 22, 2007.
This editorial was published yesterday in the New York Daily News and is archived

What, after all, is the point of being a terrorist if you can't wreak terror?

And so the soldiers of Hamas, who transparently never had the slightest intention of making a go of their end of that fledgling Palestinian power-sharing government, are once more having themselves a fine old time blowing up everything in sight. Armed militiamen of the rival Fatah faction. Innocent civilians. And, of course, any southern Israeli town within rocket range.

And thus, of course, Israel is launching air strikes into Gaza, by way of defending itself against the rocket attacks.

And thus, of course, such self-defense measures immediately make Israel the bad guy here, and thus, of course, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas telephones Washington and pleads with Secretary of State Rice to make Israel stop its "military escalation."

If that's what Condi does, then once again she will have made a bad choice in what is now a long string of bad choices. Her peacemaking initiatives have once too many times now bordered on the absurdly naive, premised as they are on the supposition that Hamas might at some point decide to conduct itself in reasonably civilized fashion. This is a dreadful joke. Hamas will decide no such thing. Hamas will bomb and shoot and kidnap and slaughter. That is what Hamas does. It must be obvious by now, musn't it?

Fundamentally, the secretary is pressing for a peace agreement when no one on the Palestinian side has both the interest and the capability of entering one. Gaza is on the verge of civil war. Abbas is at sea. And the Arab world is worse than useless. Rice should give it up.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 22, 2007.
This article is by Mimin Salih and it was published yesterday on the Islam Watch website. It is archived at

We should never underestimate the power of religious beliefs in obtunding senses of its followers. A person's mind becomes moulded to fit only with his/her set of religious beliefs. Under the effect of such 'opium', the person becomes disillusioned and disorientated to the perception of what is morally right or wrong. I wonder how, as a Muslim, could I easily gulp such Islamic insanities for so many years. Now that I am free from Islam, I really find no reason for my acceptance of much of the Quranic nonsense as moral or logical, having read the Quran for many years.

It is evident from the Quran that, just like an angry rude Arab, Allah often loses His temper and uses obscene and vulgar words against His creations! Allah sides with Mohamed against his adversaries and treats them as His personal opponents. He swears at them with offensive remarks and threatens them with severe torture and promises that He and His prophet will prevail.

To prove this misdemeanour of Allah, I am going to discuss the cases of only two Arabs who, through their rejection to Mohamed's claims, caused Allah to lose His temper and refer to them by using some strong language in the Quran:

Abul Uzza Ibn Abdulmuttalib

Abul Uzza Ibn Abdul Muttalib was Mohamed's uncle. He was wealthy and influential, but did not believe his nephew's claims of being a prophet. However, that did not stop him from providing some protection to his nephew purely based on tribal kinship. Once he was told that Mohamed claimed that the late Abdul Muttalib, who was Abul Uzza's father, would be burnt in hellfire because he died as a non-Muslim (although there was no Islam at the time of Abdul Muttalib who had died when Mohamed was still a child). This is laughable; nevertheless, that is the logic of Mohamed. Hearing that, Abul Uzza was disgusted at Mohamed's utter lack of respect for his own grandfather, who had looked after Mohamed when he was a child. Abul Uzza then became openly hostile to Mohamed and denied him any protection or financial support.

Sura Al Masad is a short chapter that is solely dedicated to swear at Abdul Uzza, later known as Abu Lahab, and his wife.

Let us read this sura, Q.111
1. Perish the hands of Abu Lahab! Perish he!
2. No profit to him from all his wealth, and all his gains!
3. Burnt soon will he be in a Fire of Blazing Flame!
4. His wife shall carry the (crackling) wood -- As fuel!-
5. A twisted rope of palm-leaf fibre round her (own) neck!

In an average street in an average Arab town, it is usual to hear few people shouting and swearing at one another using words like yukassir ideek. This is generally considered to be rude and is only used by bad-mannered people in times of anger. Yet it is exactly the modern equivalent of 'perish the hands of ...' used in the Quran fourteen hundreds years ago. What is more disturbing is that, every one of the above verses is actually a swearing verse! The above sura is one of the most commonly recited suras in the Quran, Nearly all Muslims know this sura by heart, even though it serves no religious function whatsoever. One would wonder why Allah, with all his greatness, could be so angry with one man and dedicate an entire chapter of his only book to swear at him and at his wife. Why Allah did not try to punish them during their lives? There is no evidence from Islamic history that Abu Lahab or his wife had ever suffered of any harm when they lived in Mecca. Sura Almasad is another proof that the Quran is a reflection of a sick man's thoughts. This sura should alarm the reader to the falsity of this book. But do Muslims see it that way? Not at all! Muslims can only see miracles in the Quran, and this sura is no exception. Muslim scholars strategy is always to go on the offensive by converting the Quranic errors into miracles! In this case they say that Abu Lahab died as a non-believer and he could have converted to Islam just to prove that the verse is not accurate. But he did not. By making such a claim, Muslim scholars deliberately ignore the principle of abrogation in the Quran in which newer Quranic verses cancel the older verses. If desired, Mohamed could have easily 'revealed' other verses in praise of his uncle, or even could have asserted that Allah had ordered him to remove the sura completely.

Al waleed Ibn Almugheera, the son of a bitch!

Alwaleed Ibn Almugheera was one of the chiefs of Quraysh. It is claimed that he was one of the most eloquent Arabs. Muslims frequently quote him that once he had praised the Quran. It is the remarks allegedly made by this man that are frequently quoted as evidence of what Muslims claim to be a language miracle of the Quran. The reality however, is that there is no valid historical evidence that Alwaleed had ever praised the Quran. In reality, the contrary is true, because Alwaleed never believed in Mohamed or accepted the Quran. Mohamed must have harboured a deep hatred for Alwaleed. The obscene verses in sura Alqalam (also known as sura Nun) reveals Mohamed's intense disdain for AlWaleed's rejection of the Quran.

Let us read the following verses from sura Alqalm, Q. 68; Verses 10-13:

But yield not to the man of oaths, a despicable person,
Defamer, going about with slander,
Hinderer of the good, transgressor, criminal,
Harsh--beside this, impure by birth,

All the verses quoted above are severely offending. As an example, let us focus on verse 13 where the Arabic word zaneem has been politely translated to 'impure by birth'. The exact meaning is the son of the woman who commits zina (unlawful sex). To those who know Arabic it means the 'son of Manyuka', which is the most vulgar and most offending words that can be said in the Arabic language. The nearest English translation is 'son of a bitch!'

The Quran, especially the Meccan verses, like those quoted above, uses an old language. The style and many of its words are now obsolete. This lack of clarity provides a protective shell to a book, which is otherwise no more than a collection of ancient myths. The Quran becomes even more sanitized when translated in to English because of the PC and apologist approach adopted by the translators. These translators soften the harshness of the Qurnic obscenity by unabashedly adding decency to the vulgar words.

Let us assume that Alwaleed's mother had indeed committed zina and that alwaleed was the product of that zina. Is that the fault of Alwaleed? Why should Allah blame Alwaleed who even did not exist during the act? After all it was Allah's wish that Alwaleed should be born in this manner.

How do Muslims defend such a vulgar language? Again, Muslims can only see a miracle! Muslims claim that Alwaleed questioned his mother and she admitted he was indeed the product of zina, so it must be a miracle! Otherwise how did the Quran know?

This is typical Islamic nonsense, because there is no way to believe that an Arab woman will admit to her son that she committed adultery. This is simply unbelievable. Besides, Alwaleed did not change his treatment to his mother or convert to Islam, but continued to reject and expose Mohammed's claims. Mohamed's Allah had to interfere again to reassure his beloved prophet that He will torture Alwaleed. Allah asks the readers of the Quran to just leave Him alone with Alwaleed and watch what happens! This is how Allah describes his plans in dealing with Alwaleed:

11. Leave Me alone, (to deal) with the (creature) whom I created (bare and) alone!
12. To whom I granted resources in abundance,
13. And sons to be by his side!
14. To whom I made (life) smooth and comfortable!

26. Soon will I cast him into Hell-Fire!
27. And what will explain to thee what Hell-Fire is?
28. Naught doth it permit to endure, and naught doth it leave alone

Every time I read the above verses, it conjures my mind the image of a common scenario when two bad-mannered Arabs engage in a street quarrel but held back from each other by the crowd, and each party shouts 'leave me alone with him'

The Quran consistently uses offending remarks whenever it mentions non-Muslims. It describes non-Muslims as animals (Q.7: 179, Q.25: 44, Q.47: 12). Then it describes the Jews as donkeys Q. 62:5 then as apes and pigs (Q.2: 65, Q. 5:60, Q. 7:166). To be described as an animal is a bad insult in Arabic culture, but pigs, apes and donkeys are particularly bad.

The extensive uses of swearing language in the Quran have escaped criticism for many years, although the use of similar language by other books or articles would make them un-publishable.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 22, 2007.


Prof. Steven Plaut lectured to high school students about Jews who are antisemitic, hate Israel, and deny the Holocaust. The students hardly could believe that some Jews are antisemites. After Prof. Plaut cited enough examples and recited enough of their statements, the students accepted it but numbly.

Those antisemites don't admit to hating Israel; they pretend to want justice for the (unjust) Arabs. This 'antisemitism denial' is the equivalent of Holocaust denial. They are avidly quoted by antisemites of the Left, Right, and Islam. The quoters contend that surely Israel is evil, because even (a few neurotic) Jews find it such. This makes powerful propaganda.

Some of the worst offenders are university professors such as Noam Chomsky. They favor terrorism and want Israel destroyed. Their polemics are just defamatory.

The Jewish people have been naïve about this. Their enlightenment may come from Jewish Divide over Israel by Edward Alexander and Paul Bogdanor, Transaction Books, 2006. The book explains ethnic self-hatred as a uniquely Jewish phenomenon, spreading but still infecting only a small percentage. Prof. Plaut thinks Israeli Jews have different motives for it from non-Israeli Jews.

Some non-Israeli Jews, indifferent to their heritage (or not wanting to be identified with it), seek to please gentiles who like to hear their posturing against Israel or want them to prove their non-identification with fellow Jews.

The Israeli anti-Zionists really hate their people and want to see the Jewish state destroyed. They are like the American Far Left in its anti-Americanism, except that the US Far Left is more harmless, whereas the Israeli Far Left collaborates in many matters with the country's enemies and in time of war. There seems to be a psychological aberration behind the Far Left (Plaut, 5/7).

Plaut thus provides a rationale for Barry Chamish to find that leftist generals sabotaged the first Lebanon war and Peres sabotaged the home front, though Peres then did it to deny a military victory to the Likud Party, then in power.

I think the US Far Left is dangerous, too. It spreads defeatism in the world war.


'If a nuclear bomb ever exploded in the Middle East, even if it wiped out Israel, the main victims eventually would be all the Muslims around it who would be killed in the nuclear fallout,' said the former President (Seth Gitell, NY Sun, 5/7, p.5). That is in addition to the million Muslims within Israel, he didn't mention.

What was his point? It should have been that the President of Iran doesn't care about Muslim fatalities, so long as infidels are eradicated. Why didn't he make it? He still fails to understand the world war he led us into facing backward.


The IDF proposed measures to stop terrorism from Gaza, short of major invasion and searching for arms (that Sharon once did successfully):

1. Make a buffer zone in the Arab side of the separation fence, to keep terrorists at a distance and from which to move against the enemy as needed;

2. Retaliate harder, so rocket launching against Israel is counter-productive;

3. Renew aerial assassination of top terrorists and those in rocket warfare;

4. Find better ways to detect and destroy arms smuggling tunnels;

5. Improve intelligence capability.

All PM Olmert would approve is a slightly wider area within Gaza that the IDF may operate in. He will be briefed, again, on IDF plans to counter terrorism (plans that he rejected?). Dr. Aaron Lerner wonders if this delay is a ruse to stay in power longer while the public thinks he is working out a way to win this war (IMRA, 5/8).

How could he object to aerial assassination, destroying more arms tunnels, and improving intelligence? It does seem as if he doesn't care what happens to his country, only to himself, that he is afraid to fight when the US doesn't want him to, and that he doesn't know how to tell the US to stop undermining Israel.


Syria is arming for war and calling for peace negotiations. How can talks hurt?

'Well, considering that many think Israel should withdraw to the Kinneret in return for a piece of paper and a house-of-cards-based security arrangement that relies on a combination of foreign observers, gizmos and the bizarre faith that Syria's military capabilities are permanently frozen in time there may very well be a lot to lose.'

'Today a Syrian attack is a brazen act of aggression. But what if Syria attacks after talks fail, to the frustration of Dennis Ross and others who are insulted that Israel was not willing to stake its future on empty assurances?' (IMRA, 5/8).

Talks with the PLO led to disastrous Olso. At talks, the US presses Israel to make damaging concessions to the Arabs. Israeli leaders don't know how to negotiate and have unwarranted faith in Arab goodwill. Talks are dangerous.

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@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 22, 2007.

A Lebanese youth is seen behind shattered glass of his car Monday night at the site where a bomb exploded just near the Russian cultural centre in an upmarket district of Beirut.

(Ousama Ayoub, AFP/Getty Images)

TRIPOLI, Lebanon -- Artillery and machine gun fire echoed around a crowded Palestinian refugee camp Tuesday as the Lebanese government ordered the army to finish off the Fatah Islam militants holed up inside the refugee camp in the country's north.

Artillery and machine gun fire echoed around a crowded Palestinian refugee camp Tuesday as the Lebanese government ordered the army to finish off the Fatah Islam militants holed up inside the refugee camp in the country's north.

The fighting -- which resumed for a third straight day after a brief nighttime lull -- reflected the government's determination to pursue the Islamic militants who staged attacks on Lebanese troops on Sunday and Monday, killing 29 soldiers. Some 20 militants have also been killed, as well as an undetermined number of civilians.

The Cabinet late Monday authorized the army to step up its campaign and "end the terrorist phenomenon that is alien to the values and nature of the Palestinian people," Information Minister Ghazi Aridi said.

Hours after the decision, fighting flared up again Tuesday morning around the Nahr el-Bared camp, with black smoke billowing from the area after artillery and machine gun exchanges.

A spokesman for Fatah Islam, Abu Salim Taha, said fighters of the group repulsed several attempts by Lebanese troops to advance on their positions inside the camp. "The shelling is heavy, not only on our positions, but also on children and women. Destruction is all over," he said Tuesday.

Lebanese artillery has pounded the suspected positions of the Fatah Islam militants, seeking to destroy the group with al-Qaeda ties or force them out of the camp on the outskirts of this northern port, Lebanon's second-largest city.

The fighting has also raised fears that Lebanon's worst internal violence since the 1975-1990 civil war could spread in a country with an uneasy balancing act among various sects and factions.

Fighting paused briefly Monday afternoon to allow the evacuation of 18 wounded civilians, according to Saleh Badran, an official with the Palestinian Red Crescent Society.

Palestinian refugees have been hiding in their homes inside the camp and Palestinian officials there said nine civilians were killed Monday. Reports from the camp of food and medical supplies running out could not be confirmed because officials and reporters could not enter.

The camp is home to more than 31,000 people living in two- or three-story white buildings on densely packed narrow streets. It is one of more than 12 impoverished camps housing more than 215,000 refugees, out of a total of 400,000 Palestinians here. Lebanese authorities do not enter the camps, according to a nearly 40-year-old agreement with the Palestinians.

Major Palestinian factions have distanced themselves from Fatah Islam, which arose here last year and touts itself as a Palestinian liberation movement. But many view it as a nascent branch of al-Qaeda-style terrorism with ambitions of carrying out attacks around the region.

The military assault adds yet another layer of instability to Lebanon's potentially explosive politics. Prime Minister Fuad Saniora's government already faces a domestic political crisis, with the opposition led by Iranian- and Syrian-backed Hezbollah demanding its removal.

Raising fears of spreading violence, an explosion went off in a shopping area in a Sunni Muslim sector of Beirut late Monday, wrecking parked cars and injuring seven people -- a day after a bomb blast in a Christian part of the capital killed a woman. Although there were no claims of responsibility, the confluence of two bombings in as many days while the fighting was going on in Tripoli was highly unusual.

Saniora now risks sparking a backlash among Palestinians in Lebanon's other refugee camps, where armed groups and Islamic extremists have been growing in influence -- and, in at least one case, have been sending recruits to fight U.S. troops in Iraq.

The White House said it supports Saniora's efforts to deal with the fighting, and the State Department defended the Lebanese army, saying it was working in a "legitimate manner" against "provocations by violent extremists" operating in the camp.

The leader of Fatah Islam, Palestinian Shaker al-Absi, has been linked to the former head of al-Qaeda in Iraq and is accused in the 2002 assassination of a U.S. diplomat in Jordan. He moved into Nahr el-Bared last fall after being expelled from Syria, where he was in custody.

Since then, he is believed to have recruited about 100 fighters, including militants from Saudi Arabia, Yemen and other Arab countries, and he has said he follows the ideology of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. Among the militants killed in the fighting Sunday was a man suspected in a plot to bomb trains in Germany last year, according to Lebanese security officials.

Lebanese security officials accuse Syria of backing Fatah Islam as a tool to disrupt the country, charges that are denied by Damascus, which controlled Lebanon until 2005 when its troops were forced to withdraw from the country following the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Professor Ernest Narrett, May 22, 2007.

[Contrast the] world's and US's response to the Lebanese army's shelling of the Nahr al-Bedar "refugee camp" and the striking difference of this response to the Christian revenge at Sabra and Shatila in 1982: [blame the Jews]...

An editorial in the Jerusalem Post May 21 soberly notes the obvious point (a nationally circulated Israeli paper accessible to the anglophone world published it, at least) that it is insane and/or treacherous for Israel to arm Fatah so that this gang of 'moderate' holocaust-deniers and Jew-killers can defeat Hamas.

The editorial noted briefly that any arms or funds sent to Fatah (and America's government, funded by the poor American people -- field beasts of their tax-masters) filter through to Hamas. One may peruse the archives of memri.org or imra.org.il among others for analyses detailing the interconnectedness of all the jihadist groups within and around Israel.

The leader of Fatah, Mr. Abu Mazen-Abbas is a holocaust denier and planner of murders of Jewish civilians. He and his subordinates often have stated that any arms they receive will "be raised against the occupation," that is, against Jews in Israel. See the archives of Aaron Klein on wnd.com or type in Fatah to the search engine on israelnationalnews.com for many examples.

Remember that Fatah ("Conquest") is the parent organization of the PLO and an outgrowth of the Arab High Command formed during WW II to facilitate extermination of Jews. For these cadres and their millions of middle-eastern supporters it's not about Judea and Samaria... it's about destroying Jewish sovereignty, murdering Jews and erasing most traces of Jewish history from the Promised Land.

Like Hamas, Fatah is committed to the destruction of Israel in its entirety, in phases. Only the rhetoric and middlement for distributing western (and Israeli) weapons, cash and other perks distinguishes the two interlocked groups of neo-Nazis. Both are fans of and networked with today's brown shirts, Hizballah.

The policy of the NSC's client regime (Kadima-Labor) and their affiliated media and judicial supremacists is that the Jewish areas west of the Jordan "must never become a Jewish state." Since it did, despite all Anglo-American, German, Islamic, Bundist efforts to prevent it now it must be destroyed, slowly and tastefully, by negotiations (mostly) the way Chamberlain wanted Hitler to take Poland.

If only the Arabs would behave! But they never will... read the Scriptures. These writings also mention the surging staff coming through the land because of the covenant of death and pact of lies (Isaiah 28). It long has been urged that Israel open the Aswan damn to create a modern correlative of this scourging flood. This would sweep away the lies of the "peace" with Egypt so beloved by proponents of the New Middle East (the Arab Federation, aka, MEFTA) and uncover Elephantine isle for more historic excavations...

Anyone who is serious about fighting and winning the war on terror and terror-states will ARM the GOOD GUYS: the Jews of Israel and will support and encourage them to win a decisive victory. Peace comes only via Victory which is the true integrity and wholeness, shlaimut. From shaleim comes shalom as readers of Hebrew now.

Arm the good guys: arm the Jews. Restore the word, the desire and the means for total victory. Then there will be genuine peace.

Shalom and chag sameach Shavuot.......

Professor Eugene Narrett is the author of hundreds of articles, columns and reviews on politics, American culture and the arts. He writes often on subjects relating to Israel and Judaism. His new book is WW III: the War on the Jews and the Rise of the World Security State, (www.lightcatcherbooks.com 2007). Contact him by email at culturtalk@aol.com and visit his website at www.israelendtimes.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul Lademain, May 21, 2007.
May 20, 2007 A/P reports: "Palestinian refugee groups in Lebanon have called on an Islamist splinter group to stop its battle with the Lebanese Army."

Which Palestinians? The Jewish Palestininans? Or the Muslim Palestinians? Or the Islamic Palestinians?

Bigger question: Where are the hundreds of thousands Jewish citizens who were driven by the Arabs from Old Palestine and Syria and Iraq and Iran and Egypt and Medina (Saudi Arabia) etc. etc?? Why has the Associated Press deceived the entire world by pretending these refugees don't exist?

And while we are at it ... explain why the Associated Press censors and hides the reports of Islamic butchery and murder in Darfur and the Sudan? Decent People want to know why the Associated Press serves the Saudi colonialists?

Contact Paul Lademain at lademain@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Barry Shaw, May 21, 2007.

The Western news media would have you believe that the Israeli air strikes in Gaza are simply a recent tit-for tat exchange due to recent rockets fired into Israel.

Here are two facts that they are keeping from you.

  1. Palestinians have been launching rockets into the tiny southern town of Sderot for the last six and a half years!

  2. 169 Kassam rockets have landed in Sderot and the surrounding area in the last week alone.

Tonight, the European Foreign Minister, Javier Solano, escorted by Israeli Foreign Minister, Tzipi Livni, had their convoy stopped at the entrance of Sderot as a fatal Kassam slammed into a car, killing a 40 year old woman and injuring others.

A total of fourteen rockets fell on this town today.

With the increasing damage, both physical and psychological, to the citizens of Sderot they are justifiably angry at the inactivity and inability of the Israeli political and military leadership to stop the attacks.

It is apparent that the inactivity of the Israeli Government over the last year to take measures to stop the rocket attacks of the last year has caused Israel to lose the deterrent factor, and to embolden Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists in increase their missile launchings in proportion to the massive amounts of explosives and weaponry that have been smuggled into the Gaza Strip from Egypt.

The stockpile of arms that have been tunneled into Gaza, under the eyes of the Egyptians patrolling the Philadephi border, have fallen mainly in the hands of Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

About a thousand Palestinian fighters have used these tunnels to make their way to Iran to be trained by the Republican Guard. Many have now returned to recruit and train others in a future war against Israel. That future is not far off.

The Palestinians may cry poverty, but the death industry of missile production and arms training are keeping many Palestinians gainfully employed.

What are, if any, the solutions for Israel?

For every decision there is a price. Here are a series of options.

  1. A deep and prolonged ground incursion.

    The Israeli Cabinet has regularly discussed the option of sending in large amounts of foot soldiers, backed by armoured vehicles, in a detailed search of rockets, missile factories, storage facilities, and Hamas fighters and leaders.

    Unlike last year's war against Hizbollah, Israeli elite forces have regularly trained and are equipped for such an incursion. They are ready and know what to do.

    There is another reason to take the strike into Gaza now, without delay. The massive arms smuggling mentioned above, together with the sophisticated Iranian-sponsored training, is enabling Hamas terrorists to be molded into a formidable fighting force akin to Hizbollah.

    Israeli military thinking is that it is preferable to take them on today rather than wait another year when they would be even better armed and trained.

    A driving factor behind this proposal is the fact that intelligence report that much more sophisticated anti-tank And anti-aircraft weaponry has been introduced into the Gaza Strip, and it is better to search and destroy now, rather than wait until they are used against us.

    Such action has been deferred as, inevitably, it would involve close combat against heavily armed terrorists in the fortified alleyways and houses in densely populated areas of Gaza.

    There would be a heavy toll to be paid by the IDF soldiers and, at the end of it all, there will still be a hotbed of terrorists among the local population, ready to continue their attacks against the Israeli civilian population.

    Those against such a massive incursion into Gaza include the head of Shin Bet and Shaul Mofaz who was a Chief of Staff and a Defense Minister, and now sits as a member of the Security Cabinet.

  2. Create a controlled buffer zone.

    The I.D.F. has presented to the Israeli cabinet a plan to create a buffer zone in the Gaza Strip, beyond the Israeli border that would be totally and solely controlled by the I.D.F.

    The logic behind this proposal is that it would lengthen the range of the Kassam rockets and reduce the effect of missiles falling into populated areas inside Israel.

    The military presence would reduce, if not stop, terrorist activities close to the border with Israel. It would prevent tunnels being constructed through which terrorists and weapons have been brought into Israel.

    There is a thought that such a plan should extend to returning to the controversial Philadephi Route which is the border between the Gaza Strip and Sinai and Egypt, as it is felt that the Egyptian, deliberately or inadvertently, have failed to stop the smuggling of weapons, explosives, money, and people into Gaza.

    The opinion against this option is based on past experience that such actions have the result of increasing rocket attacks, and not reducing them.

    One of those against this notion is Yuval Steinitz, head of the Security and Foreign Relationship Committee, who feels that such limited actions would repeat the mistakes of Lebanon where limited actions against certain parts of Lebanon did not address the danger of an increasing missiles arsenal.

  3. Wipe out the 'engineers'.

    Israel is morally obligated to do everything to prevent the manufacture and launching of missiles against Israeli civilian targets, especially the Kassam rocket production.

    To this end it is proposed to seek out and kill the Hamas and Islamic Jihad operatives involved in the development, production, Operating, training, and launching of these rockets.

    It is impossible to send a policeman into the Gaza Strip to identify and arrest such terrorists. There is no option but to use intelligence to pinpoint their locations and take them out.

    Against this proposal is the knowledge that an attempt to destroy the rocket production permanently is doomed to failure.

    Such attempts, such as air strikes, will inevitably result in collateral damage that will rebound against Israel in world opinion.

  4. Wipe out the leaders of Hamas.

    There is a belief in Israeli security circles that targeted killings of the heads of the Hamas terrorist organization will have an effect of deterring Hamas and Islamic Jihad from future rocket attacks against Israel.

    Such targeted killings will not require ground forces and, therefore, not put Israeli soldiers at risk. Such attacks depend on intelligence and planning and can be surgically executed.

    Hamas leaders have learned by past experience and many have gone underground. A good example is the rising radical terrorist Ahmed Jabari, featured in an earlier email. He is the one behind the sudden increase in rocket attacks against Sderot which have caused so much damage and death.

    It is not known what effect such targeted strikes would have on the fate of Gilad Shalit, held captive for a year by Hamas-supporting Gaza clans. Attacks against Hamas heads could result in a reprisal against the life of Gilad Shalit.

    Despite the rocket attacks, and despite a number of unsuccessful attempts to infiltrate suicide bombers into Israel, Hamas has not sent out large numbers of suicide terrorists against Israel. This may be revised should Israel be successful in taking out prominent Hamas leaders.

  5. Pinpoint policy.

    This is the policy that Israel employed against Hizbollah in the years 2000-2006. This is the policy that Israel is employing today against Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

    In face of the growing anarchy in Gaza, Hamas would love to pull Israel into the mire of Gaza. It would enable them to unite the Palestinian warring factions against the common enemy. Hitting a Hamas command and control centre last week, killing five of their key operators, is one such action undertaken by this policy.

    As there seems to be no better option to create peace and quiet in the Western Negev and Sderot, it is possible to hope that such strikes will have a deterrent effect on Hamas, and weaken them sufficiently in the Gaza Strip to enable Fatah to assert control over the Palestinian population. This would strengthen Mahmoud Abbas, with whom Israel hopes to reach a peace settlement.

    Against this policy is the consideration that this policy, at the end of the day, failed against Hizboolah in Lebanon and will, therefore, fail against Hamas In Gaza. As with Hizbollah, Hamas is gaining in strength and Fatah has no chance of overpowering them.

  6. Arming Fatah.

    In the past America has had a policy to intervene in most crisis points around the world and to supply arms to the parties that they identify as being 'on their side'. Currently, it is perceived that it is in their/our interest to side with Fatah against Hamas and to arm them in their power struggle against the Palestinian Islamic influences led by Hamas.

    It is thought that Israel should do everything to assist any party that rivals Hamas. This includes providing them with arms so that they can assert control of the Palestinian street and create a more stable environment for future peace talks.

    The current Israeli Chief of Staff, Gadi Ashkenazi, is one of those opposed to this option. Head of the Security Ministry, Amos Gilad, also objects to this policy.

    Their reasoning is that any weapon imported into the Gaza Strip will, one day, be used against Israel. The Israeli Shin Bet were once in favour of this policy, but have recently changed their minds. They came to the conclusion that such weapons would fall into the hands of Hamas and Islamic Jihad and be used against Israel.

  7. A diplomatic approach.

    The current violence caused by the Hamas rocket attacks against Israel has appalled many of the regions Arab governments who are fearful of the threat of destabilization of the region. It is thought that there is a window of opportunity that the Arab League, or other multi-Arab bodies could play an influential role in defusing the current crisis.

    Although the Israeli Foreign Ministry invited the European Foreign Minister to visit Israel and Sderot, and he saw first hand the horrific effect of Kassam rockets failing close to his convoy, it is not thought in Israel that Mr. Solano would have any positive effect. In many Israeli eyes, he has proven himself useless in previous crises.

    However, there is nothing to lose by an Israeli diplomatic initiative.

    Against this notion is the reality that Mahmoud Abbas is a horse that is not worth betting on. He has no proven ability to impose a relaxation of the current rocket crisis. Hamas has forged a pact with Iran and Damascus, and they thumb their nose at their President, even against the desire of surrounding Arab leaders.

  8. A technological solution.

    Yizchak Mordechai, a past Defense Minister and well respected military expert recently disclosed from Sderot that, as Defense Ministry, he proposed the research, development, and deployment of the Nautilus laser-guided anti-missile system in Israel. He claimed that he has raised the financing for this project which would seek and destroy incoming missiles. He was shocked to discover that subsequent defense heads had abandoned this important project, a project that could have been used against Hizbollah rockets in last years war.

    Such technology would make Kassam rockets an ineffective weapon against Israel.

    Raphael, the Israeli military industrial giant, is developing an anti-missile system to defend civilians against future rocket attacks. This project is just months old and will take time to develop.

    Against this solution there are those who claim it is not cost effective. The huge cost of developing such systems would outweigh the destruction of a primitive rocket such as the Kassam.

    Israel is now paying the price for losing last years war against the Hizbollah rockets. It has emboldened Hamas and their supporters who are merrily launching masses of rapidly manufactured hand-made rockets against Israeli civilians. Some of the rockets have the capability of reaching larger towns, such as Ashkelon.

    It is far from certain whether the shadow of the recent Vinograd Committee findings into the political and military decisions that failed Israel during the last fight against Hizbollah in Lebanon will improve the decision-making process against the current rain of Hamas rockets on Sderot.

    Perhaps it may have the reverse effect and freeze the current Israeli Administration into impotence.

    Barry Shaw and his family made aliyah from Manchester, England, 25 years ago. He writes the "View from Here" columns from Israel. To sign up to receive his emails, contact him at netre@matav.net.il

    To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, May 21, 2007.

Can We Afford To Have Doctors In America Whose Allegiance To Their Patients Is Far Less Than Their Allegiance To An Extreme Observance Of A Religion Of Hate?

This is a letter written by Gail Tenzer to David Horowitz (DHorowitz@earthlink.net) It was printed May 17, 2007 in Front Page Magazine:

Dear David,

In 2001 or 2002 my husband was a patient in Cedars-Sinai in Los Angeles. He is diabetic and his chart read that he was to get his medication in Saline solution, not glucose, only. All of a sudden, I noticed a nurse coming in to give him Insulin shots. My husband is on oral medication for diabetes. His case is not severe enough to require insulin. When I checked his I.V, it was in Glucose.

I called this to the staff and doctor's attention. One of the nurses was from Syrian and the other was Pilipino, both of Islamic nation's background. Despite first "incident," a repeat occurred. This time, the nurse turned the I.V bag around so that I wouldn't see it and then she denied that it was Glucose. Luckily I caught it again as she lied to me and said that it was Saline. I can only suspect that they were probably going to get my husband sugar up for high readings, which with an excess of insulin, could have easily killed him, but would have seemed to be medical error at worst, if it even went detected.

My husband is an Israeli, so these nurses might have been targeting him for that. Who knows, but my vigilance worked. Hospitals like Cedars-Sinai are staffed with Muslims and they need to be aware and pay attention to their practice. When the staffer is Muslim and the patient is a Jew, they need to be much more alert. Then one cannot call it discrimination, rather preempted caution.

I had to get these two nurses kicked off my husband's case. The only reason I had some clout in the hospital with administration and staff is because I dropped Congressman Bill Thomas' name. At the time I was working very closely with him but never used his name before.

In hospitals, all Jews must be vigilant, not only when it comes to Doctors and nursing staff.

Gail Tenzer

The article below is called "When Your Doctor is a Muslim: Medical Terrorism Comes to America." It was written by Debbie Schlussel and it appeared on her website

Sometimes -- so many times -- diversity is not what it's cracked up to be. Just ask Joseph Applebaum. Well, you could ask him. But you won't get an answer. He's dead. And he's dead because he was a Jew, and his doctor is a Muslim and grad of "Ayman Al-Zawahiri" Medical School.

But Applebaum wasn't denied treatment for being a Jew in Egypt. Or elsewhere in the Muslim world. It happened right here on U.S soil; In Chicago.

As Muslim doctors continue to flood into the country under lax immigration laws, hospitals around the country have acquired their fair share of them. Many hospitals in the Detroit area are now dominated by Muslim doctors and have been for some time. But even in hospitals where they do not predominate, Muslim doctors are starting to demonstrate behavior toward non-Muslim patients that is beyond alarming.

On December 1, 2003, Joe Applebaum was admitted to Rush North Shore Medical Center, a major hospital in Chicago. He was stricken with an acute (or distended) abdomen -- a swelling of the stomach that is easily diagnosed and treated. But it was never treated by anyone at the hospital. For 12 hours, Joe Applebaum was left alone -- left to die, which he did the next day.

A Jewish man, he was identified as a Jew on the front page of his medical chart. The chief resident doctor assigned to treat Mr. Applebaum, Osama Ahmed Ibrahim, MD, sure noticed the religious notation on Applebaum's chart. And it appears that this is why he never once checked or examined this emergency patient, Mr. Applebaum, and left him to die. When another doctor at the hospital finally examined Mr. Applebaum -- not his assigned doctor, Dr. Ibrahim, he told Applebaum's son, Michael, to say good-bye to his father because he was about to die.

Dr. Ibrahim, is a Muslim from Birmingham, England -- a hotbed of Islamic radicalism and terror planning. It is breeding ground for anti-Semitic hate. He is a graduate of Ain Shams University Medical School in Egypt. This extremist school is also the alma mater of Al-Qaeda mastermind and number two, Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri. Zawahiri's father -- a Muslim Brotherhood enthusiast -- also taught at the University.

Other Ain Shams grads and faculty members include:

* Late HAMAS leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin;
* Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Mahdi Akef;
* LAX terrorist shooter Hesham Mohamed Hedayet;
* Extremist Canadian Imam, Aly Hindy; and
* Co-leader of Yemen's extremist Al-Islah Party, Abdul Majeed Al-Zindani.

Why did Dr. Ibrahim neglect a patient who came in with an easily treatable condition and leave him to die, 12 hours later? It appears it can only be because he did not want to treat a Jewish patient and let him live. There can be no other reason.

Mr. Applebaum's son, Michael, is a medical doctor and an attorney. While he was waiting for Dr. Ibrahim to see his father, he called Dr. Ibrahim and alerted him to the growingly severe condition his father was in and that his father was suffering from an acute abdomen. Dr. Ibrahim claimed he examined Mr. Applebaum. But that was a lie. He'd never seen him. And he essentially murdered him by denying treatment. It's a case of extreme negligence and medical malpractice for the apparent purpose of anti-Semitic murder. Joseph Applebaum's son Michael is now suing Dr. Ibrahim, the hospital -- Rush North Shore Medical Center, and others involved in his father's murder. The case is filed in Illinois, and he is looking for a good attorney to pursue the case he has filed. If you are interested or can help, please contact him at the website he set up to document this ongoing tragedy. This isn't the only case where a Muslim doctor deliberately let his Jewish patient die; it is just the first that we know of. And it likely won't be the last.

Muslim doctors -- especially those from foreign medical schools deep in the world of anti-Semitic, anti-American hate; but many from here, too -- have backgrounds that are incompatible with the basic level of care that is required and expected in America. Sadly, no-one is vetting them out of our healthcare system. And no-one will.

But we know that there are many doctors who've been at the forefront of taking lives -- not saving them -- in the name of the "Religion of Peace":

* Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri--Al-Qaeda mastermind and number two man, reportedly a surgeon and/or psychiatrist;

* Dr. Mohammad Rabi Al-Zawahiri--Ayman's father and a Muslim Brotherhood enthusiast, pharmacologist and professor at Ain Shams Medical School;

* Dr. "Abu Hafiza"--Al-Qaeda master planner who was the brains and commander of the Moroccan cell that provided logistics for the 9/11 attacks, and he recruited Qaeda insurgents for battles in Fallujah, Moroccan psychiatrist;

* Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi--Late HAMAS leader, pediatrician;

* Dr. Mahmoud Al-Zahar--HAMAS co-founder and leader, surgeon and lecturer at the Islamic University in Gaza;

* Dr. Fathi Abd Al-Aziz Shiqaqi--Late founder of Islamic Jihad and active in Fatah, physician.

And there are other issues, such as infectious disease. We are no seeing cases in Britain in which some Muslim doctors refuse to wash their hands with alcohol-based disinfectant, per the Muslim prohibition on alcohol consumption.

In New Jersey, Dr. Ahmed Rashed, a Muslim Arab resident, severed and stole the hand of a cadaver as a gift for a stripper. Such little respect for life from a religion now very much participating in a profession that takes an oath to do no harm and to preserve patient's lives. Not only did he get a slap on the hand -- no jail time and, likely, no criminal record -- but he currently has a job practicing medicine at Maimonides Medical Center in New York. The real Maimonides -- a legendary, brilliant Jewish doctor, rabbi, and religious scholar -- is turning over in his grave.

Perhaps, Dr. Applebaum's suit against Rush North Shore Medical Center will make hospitals think twice before they hire Muslim doctors inclined to practice Medical terrorism against their patients. Today, the victim is a Jew, solely because he is Jewish. But tomorrow, it will be a Christian, solely because he/she is a Christian. Or some other non-Muslim victim, solely because he/she is a non-Muslim victim.

Can we afford to have doctors in America whose allegiance to their patients is far less than their allegiance to an extreme observance of a religion of hate? If they cannot and will not tender care, they should not be licensed to practice medicine in the United States.

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by Family Security Matters (FSM), May 21, 2007.

As Rep. Edward Royce says, "Perhaps the most staggering issue is the cost. Amnesty will cost the American taxpayer two-and-a-half trillion dollars." Not only that, it contains provisions that will create a North American Union of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. Not only did the politicians sell us out, as FSM Contributing Editor Andy Selepak points out, so did the media.

This article is archived at

In order to counteract Big Media support for the amnesty-for-illegals bill, Congress needs to hear from the American people.

The Washington Post, in an editorial, calls the Bush-Kennedy bill a "breakthrough." Yet, by the admission of the White House, it commits the U.S. to finishing only 370 miles of the border fence.

Rep. Duncan Hunter declared, "The Senate's decision to blatantly ignore the Secure Fence Act signed into law last year and only require construction of 370 miles of fence, as opposed to the 854 miles mandated by the law, is a dramatic failure of this legislation. The San Diego border fence has proven that fencing works. The time has come to quickly implement the Secure Fence Act, not retreat from its mandates."

In the Republican debate, Hunter revealed, "I called up the other day, and they've done two miles of border fence."

Roy Beck, President of Numbers USA, warns, "Many Senators are telling staffers and other Senators that they are inclined to vote for the giant Kennedy/Bush amnesty bill (S. 1348)...because they say they have been surprised at how few phone calls of protest they've gotten during the last two months of highly-publicized negotiations to create the amnesty."

Beck continues that senators "are concluding that the citizens of their states just aren't all that worked up about granting an amnesty. And they're interpreting that as a green light to give corporations the huge new supplies of legal foreign labor they desire."

Beck believes that senators are counting the number of phone calls they receive to decide if they will approve the amnesty bill.

The phone number for the Capitol Hill Operator is 202-224-3121. You can ask to be connected to your senators or congressman.

Beck says the bill includes:

  • An immediate amnesty for nearly all 12-20 million illegal aliens who will get legal status for residence and jobs (with assurance of green cards no later than 13 years);

  • An increase in the number of green cards (for permanent settlement) by 20 million over the next 13 years. This means 30-35 million green cards in just the next 13 years!

  • Raising the number of green card holders in our communities from 25 million to 60 million in just the next 13 years!

  • Supposed "mandatory workplace verification" and extra enforcement (with a lot of typical Kennedy loopholes) to try to slow the flow of the next 12 million illegal aliens enticed by the amnesty;

  • A tripling of the rate of chain migration of extended family members from around 250,000 a year to around 750,000 a year for about a decade;

  • 400,000 temporary foreign workers each year, bringing their families and having "anchor babies" who will be given U.S. citizenship.

Although the majority of Republican senators last year voted against the amnesty bill that passed, at the moment, according to Beck, the only Republican senators who can be counted on to oppose the new amnesty bill are DeMint (SC), Enzi (WY), Crapo (ID), Vitter (LA), Allard (CO), Sessions (AL), Chambliss (GA), and Grassley (IA).

It will take 41 senators to block a vote on the bill. Right now there are only eight.

On the House side, there is more reason for hope. Rep. Edward Royce, who has drawn attention to provisions in a House version of the bill that creates a North American Union of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, has denounced it as amnesty.

Royce declared, "The Senate bill will provide amnesty to those here illegally, no matter how the senators 'spin' the issue. Amnesty failed in 1986, as it prompted a massive increase in illegal immigration with the anticipation of future clemency. Amnesty says that individuals need not respect our laws, it awards people who break the law and flout our sovereignty."

In terms of the financial costs, Royce says, "Perhaps the most staggering issue is the cost. Amnesty will cost the American taxpayer two-and-a-half trillion dollars. The true costs of this amnesty will slam taxpayers and endanger this country's economy at a time when social security will face insolvency. When all the senators who played politics and passed this bill are gone, our Social Security system will be bankrupt. The Heritage Foundation recently released a report that analyzes what low-skilled households cost the U.S. taxpayer. For every dollar they pay in taxes they get three dollars in benefits. The drain on the U.S. economy will be unsustainable."

Rep. Hunter adds, "Amnesty is not the answer. Border enforcement must be first and it must be comprehensive. To do otherwise is to repeat the mistakes of the past. This Senate bill is bad for Americans, bad for our workers, bad for law enforcement and, most importantly, bad for national security. I will fight it."

We know which side the media are on. What will the American people have to say about this?

The Family Security Matters (FSM) website provides essays on matters of concern to our homeland security. Contact them at www.FamilySecurityMatters.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard (J4JP), May 21, 2007.

Background: as reported today in the Jerusalem Post by Etgar Lefkovits:

Ambassador says US merciful in not executing Pollard; Wife says ambassador's claims are "malicious" "lies and slander"

The US ambassador to Israel on Monday said it is unlikely that convicted Pentagon spy Jonathan Pollard will ever be released, saying the fact that he has not been executed should be seen as an act of clemency by Washington.

Responding to audience questions during an academic conference, Ambassador Richard Jones said Pollard's crimes appear especially heinous to many Americans because he was caught spying for a friendly power.

"It came out in the trial very clearly, Jonathan Pollard took money for what he did, he sold out his country," Jones said in comments at Bar Ilan University, near Tel Aviv. "The fact that he wasn't executed is the mercy that Jonathan Pollard will receive."

"This is a very emotional issue in the United States," Jones said. "I know he was helping a friend, but that's what makes it even more emotional for Americans -- if a friend would cooperate in aiding and abetting someone who is committing treason against his own country." The wife of the imprisoned spy decried the Ambassador's remarks against her husband as "malicious incitement" and "gross slander," and urged the premier to send the US Ambassador home for his "lies and slander."

"Jones's declaration that Pollard 'got off easy' because he deserved to be shot is wantonly malicious, especially since he know that Jonathan did not commit treason which is the only crime which carries a death penalty," Esther Pollard said in a written response. "In point of fact, Jonathan was charged with the least serious of the espionage statues: one count of passing classified information to an ally. The median sentence for this offense is 2 to 4 years," she added.

Pollard said that Jones's claim that her husband took money and sold out his country is also baseless. "Jonathan's indictment specifies that he was not charged with harming the United States, and his sentencing transcript clearly shows that the court recognized this fact. Consequently the court did not impose a monetary fine as it would have if he had spied for money. Most important of all, Israel formally admitted in 1998 that Jonathan Pollard was a bona fide Israeli agent. The formal recognition of Jonathan as an Israeli agent puts the lie to any claims that Jonathan spied out of mercenary motives," she said.

Pollard's wife said that Jones's claim that the US is acting within standard international norms with regard to the Pollard case is "laughable," noting that no one in the history of the United States has ever gotten a life sentence for spying for an ally.

She added that former US special envoy to the Middle East Dennis Ross states in his book 'The Missing Peace' that Pollard continues to be held by the US as a bargaining chip against Israel.

Pollard, a civilian intelligence analyst for the US Navy, gave military secrets to Israel while working at the Pentagon. He was arrested in 1985 and pleaded guilty at his trial [J4JP: Pollard was sentenced without trial, on the basis of a plea agreement which he honored and the US abrogated.] He is serving a life sentence in a US federal prison.

Refuting US Ambassador's Brazen Lies About Jonathan Pollard -- by J4JP

What is behind the gross slander of an Israeli agent by the US Ambassador? Why is a foreign diplomat violating all norms of international diplomacy by slandering Jonathan Pollard? Is this smear "new" US policy towards Israel, or towards the American Jews? Or is this an attempt to inflate Jonathan Pollard's value as a bargaining chip against Israel? What is really going on here?

According to Ha'aretz, AP and other media sources, Richard Jones, the US Ambassador to Israel, speaking at a conference on US - Israel relations at Bar Ilan University this morning responded to a question about Jonathan Pollard with malicious slander and lies. Jones declared that Pollard got off easy because he deserved to be executed. He falsely accused Jonathan of being a mercenary and of selling out the US. Jones claimed that the fact that he spied for an ally made Pollard's crime even more egregious. He stated that the US is dealing with Pollard according to international norms. He accused Jonathan of treason, and claimed that all the facts allegedly came out at Jonathan's 'trial". All of these blatant lies are easily refuted:


Jones declaration that Pollard got off easy because he deserved to be executed is wantonly malicious, especially since he know that Jonathan DID NOT commit treason which is the only crime which carries a death penalty. In point of fact, Jonathan was charged with the least serious of the espionage statues: one count of passing classified information to an ally. The median sentence for this offense is 2 to 4 years.

Jones' claim that Jonathan took money and sold out his country is also baseless. Jonathan's indictment specifies that he was not charged with harming the United States, and his sentencing transcript clearly shows that the court recognized this fact. Consequently the court did not impose a monetary fine as it would have if he he had spied for money. Most important of all, Israel formally admitted in 1998 that Jonathan Pollard was a bona fide Israeli agent.The formal recognition of Jonathan as an Israeli agent puts the lie to any claims that Jonathan spied out of mercenary motives.


When Jonathan was originally sentenced, then-Secretary of Defense expressed a false charge of treason against Jonathan in a last-minute memorandum to the sentencing judge. This was the cue to the judge to ignore the plea agreement and sentence Pollard to the maximum sentence of life, as if he had committed the far more serious crime of treason. It should be noted that contrary to Jones' claims, Jonathan never had a trial. He gave up his right to a trial in a plea agreement with the US, which Jonathan honored and the US violated on all counts.

Jones' claims against Pollard repeat Weinberger's false charge of treason by giving the impression that Jonathan was charged with treason. Treason, unlike espionage, does carry a death sentence, and does entail selling out one's country to the enemy. The US constitution defines Treason as aiding and abetting an enemy in time of war. Jones knows that Jonathan was never accused, indicted or or convicted of treason!


Jones' vicious comments fly in the face of the facts and contradict statements made recently by other US officials who are far more knowledgeable about the case, such as James Woolsey, Caspar Weinberger, and Dennis Ross, who all say that Pollard has more than served his time.

Indeed, Caspar Weinberger, in a 2002 interview before he died, clearly stated that the case against Jonathan Pollard was in fact "a minor matter" and that it had been blown up out of all proportion to serve another agenda.

In his book, "The Missing Peace", Dennis Ross is on record that Pollard deserved to be free long ago, but that he continues to be held by the US as a bargaining chip against Israel. Ross has repeated his call for Jonathan's release in public forums and in the media a number of times in recent days. The same is true of former CIA head, James Woolsey, who has repeatedly declared that it is time to let Pollard go.

It is a well-known fact that when you blacken an agent, you blacken his cause. Jonathan Pollard is an Israeli agent, who served the security of the State of Israel, and who has served 22 years in prison on behalf of the State. By slandering Jonathan with malicious lies, Jones is slandering his principals, the State of Israel. If Jonathan's actions as an agent of Israel are so heinous and can never be forgiven, what does that say about the true state of relations between Israel and the US?

Jones' claim that the US is acting within standard international norms with regard to the Pollard case is laughable. NO ONE in the history of the United States has every gotten a life sentence for spying for an ally. The median sentence is two to four years. Those who have committed far more serious crimes than Jonathan by spying for enemies of the US have for the most part received lighter sentences than Pollard. A recent example is the case of Ronald Montaperto, a Pentagon analyst who spied for the Chinese for at least 10 years. Montaperto was sentenced to 3 months in prison!


Even more compelling, no other spy has been held by the United States under such harsh conditions, serving a grossly disproportionate sentence for more than 2 decades, with the open admission by top officials such as Dennis Ross, that his continued incarceration is intended to inflate his value as a bargaining chip. Has it now become US policy to inflate Jonathan's value even more, by having the US Ambassador falsely accuse Jonathan of heinous crimes which he did not commit?

It is up to the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Israel to respond to Ambassador Richard Jones. It is their duty to call him to account for his lies and slander against Israel's agent, and as a consequence against the State. It is incumbent upon the Government of Israel to set the record straight and then to send Richard Jones home. Now!

J4JP Post Script: Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA News Agency offers the following comment as background:

"It should be noted that Ambassador Jones made his remarks during the Q&A segment of his presentation in reply to a written question. It was the last question he answered in the session. Ambassador Jones had literally a pile of questions to choose from to answer (most were of course not answered). In the case of another question (relating to AIPAC) he simply read it and explained that it was not his place to comment. People present observed that he seemed to switch from a diplomatic demeanor to a very emotional one when he answered the written question relating to Pollard."

For an excellent summary of the facts in the Jonathan Pollard case, click here.

To call the White House: 1 202 456 1414.

Aftermath: Ambassador Apologizes, But Storm Just Increases (Hillel Fendel in Arutz-Sheva May 22, 2007)

US Ambassador Richard Jones has apologized for his statements about Jonathan Pollard. Pollard supporters, however, have a series of demands: They want a full retraction from Jones, as well as immediate action by Prime Minister Olmert to demand a pardon from US President Bush. They also say they won't let Israel get away with low-level Foreign Ministry talk of a release on "humanitarian" grounds.

The story began at Bar Ilan University on Monday morning, when Ambassador Jones told an audience that Pollard "took money for what he did [and] sold out his country." Even more controversial was his comment, "The fact that [Pollard] wasn't executed is the mercy that Jonathan Pollard will receive."

Pollard's wife Esther called the remarks "malicious incitement" in that they implied that Jonathan had committed treason. Later in the day, Jones apologized, saying his words reflected neither his personal views nor those of the Bush administration. Saying his remarks were "misinformed and misleading," Jones added, "I certainly do not personally believe that Mr. Pollard should have received capital punishment and I was appalled to learn that I had given that impression."

The statement of apology was emailed by Stewart Tuttle, the press attaché of the US Embassy in Tel Aviv to, among others, Malcolm Hoenlein, Vice-Chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations. The email included the comment, "I personally thank you for helping us through this difficulty."

Esther Pollard said that without a full retraction, Jones's apology is inadequate: "Ambassador Jones falsely accused my husband of treason, falsely accused my husband of spying for money, and falsely accused him of harming the United States. He suggested that Jonathan ought to have been executed, reinforcing the false charge of treason. All of these false charges made by Richard Jones against Jonathan Pollard are still out in the public domain and doing damage. Unless and until Jones retracts these egregious lies and corrects the record, his apology is at best incomplete, and at worst insincere."

MK Uri Ariel, head of the Knesset Lobby for Pollard, said, "It's nice that [Jones] said he's sorry, but now the time has come to release Pollard, not just to apologize. The Prime Minister must turn immediately to US President Bush, demand an end to this disgrace, and have Pollard freed immediately."

Esther Pollard on Foreign Ministry Position

It was widely reported that after Jones's original speech, the Foreign Ministry had asked him for Pollard's release for "humanitarian reasons." Arutz-7 has learned, however, that what actually occurred was that Foreign Ministry official Yoram Ben-Ze'ev spoke with Jones and "reiterated the Ministry's well-known position on Pollard." Asked to explain what this "well-known" position actually includes, Foreign Ministry Spokesman Mark Regev told Arutz-7, "Israel has apologized for its mistakes in the Pollard affair and believes that he should be released on humanitarian grounds."

It could not be ascertained what Ben-Ze'ev actually told Jones -- but Mrs. Pollard said it doesn't matter: "The whole thing just shows how not seriously Israel is taking this issue. It is not the place of a minor Foreign Ministry official to tell the Ambassador that it 'believes Pollard should be released'; this is something the Prime Minister of Israel must bring up directly with the President of the United States, who is the only one who can sign the paper to release Jonathan. The Prime Minister is in constant contact with the White House. Official agents are not released as a 'favor' on humanitarian grounds."

Contact Justice for Jonathan Pollard at justice4jp@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Daniel Mandel, May 21, 2007.

When I recently published a piece* debunking the recent crop of revisionism (including his attitude to Jews) surrounding Winston Churchill in the American Spectator, a number of familiar and important questions came in from readers expressing doubt as to Churchill's partiality for Zionism and Jews. Their objections can be split into three:

1. Since Churchill in 1922 excised Transjordan from Palestine, thus denying to Zionism more than half of the territory earmarked for the Jewish National Home, is Churchill perhaps not overrated as a friend of the Jews?

3. If Churchill was such a good friend to the Jews, why did the restrictive provisions of the 1939 White Paper, which limited Jewish immigration into Palestine to 15,000 annually for the period 1939-1944 after which any further immigration would be dependent on Arab approval, remain in force under his leadership?

3. Since the failure of the RAF to bomb Auschwitz and of the British Army to stop the farhud (pogrom) against the Jews in Baghdad in 1941 have been attributed respectively to the RAF and the British Foreign Office, are we to surmise that Churchill lacked control of his own government and armed forces?

These are my answers:

1. The excision of Transjordan in 1922 from the territory in which the development of the Jewish National Home was to proceed was one of a number of decisions that was made during Churchill's visit to the region as Colonial Secretary, which included the creation of Iraq. Transjordan was then, as now, a largely arid tract of territory with no Jewish settlements. As such it was established as emirate for Abdullah, son of Sherif Hussein of Mecca and a British ally, by way of payment for services rendered during the First World War.

It was said by his deeply pro-Zionist political adviser, Richard Meinertzhagen, that Churchill saw the force of his argument that this decision deprived Zionism of room for development, but by then the decision had been made and could not be undone. Undoubtedly to Zionism's loss, the decision was not aimed at harming the movement, support for which was in fact reaffirmed as being unchangeable British policy in the 1922 White Paper. Nonetheless, it is a justified point that Churchill's decision caused a major part of Palestine to be lost to Zionism.

2. It is perfectly true that upon becoming Prime Minister in May 1940, Churchill did not overturn the 1939 White Paper, whose terms he had so eloquently denounced at the time in the Commons. The White Paper was retained because such was then the weakness of the British position that disowning it at that point was thought likely to precipitate a calamitous Arab revolt. This was probably a mistaken calculation, but in the circumstances of May 1940, it prevailed.

However, the question remains as to why Churchill did not discard it later and it was one I put to the Churchill biographer, Martin Gilbert, when I interviewed him in 1987. He responded that, from the outset, Churchill fought a Cabinet almost uniformly hostile to permitting Jewish refugees into Palestine. When Churchill was effectively overruled on this point by the Cabinet in March 1942, he and his Colonial Secretary, Lord Cranborne, bypassed its decision by devising a new policy that, contrary to the White Paper, permitted all Jews who might arrive in Palestine to stay there. The arrival of so few Jews and the failure to fill even the existing 15,000 annual quota was attributed by Gilbert to the virtual impossibility that by then existed for Jews to escape from Europe, which, he noted, the Mufti of Jerusalem, a Nazi collaborator, worked hard to achieve.

When the White Paper's absolute ban on Jewish immigration was due to come into effect in May 1944, Churchill refused to sign it into law. Gilbert's 1993 address, "Churchill and the Holocaust: The Possible and the Impossible," concisely elaborates this and other matters which, viewed in combination, provides a different picture to that of unfulfilled friendship and sympathy.

To name some further significant facts: as First Lord of the Admiralty (1939-40) Churchill ended the practice of Royal Navy vessels intercepting refugee ships bound for Palestine when he discovered the Foreign Office and Colonial Office had initiated this policy without his knowledge. When the British Commander in the Middle East, General Archibald Wavell, sought to have deported from Palestine a group of Jewish refugees who had entered the country aboard the Patria, Churchill intervened to prevent it. He also pressured a BBC that was then reluctant to report on the Nazi targeting of Jews for murder, to do so.

In January 1944, Churchill's Cabinet approved in principle a new partition plan for Palestine, which was due for adoption in the very week in November 1944 that the British Minister of State in the Middle East and Churchill's friend, Lord Moyne, was assassinated by Lehi (Stern Gang) members. Churchill's support of Zionism thereafter became subdued but endured and he withstood demands at home for a military crackdown on the Jewish community in Palestine. The Cabinet however shelved partition.

The same year, in the face of persistent opposition from the British military establishment, Churchill pushed through the creation of a Jewish military force. Indeed, such was the perception of his concern for Jewish causes that, on two occasions, callous members of his own inner staff withheld from him Jewish requests out of fear that he would respond positively to them. In short, Churchill, virtually singled-handedly, fought an indifferent and hostile bureaucracy to help the Jews and Zionism.

3. Gilbert has explained in Auschwitz and the Allies that the failure of the RAF to bomb Auschwitz et al. was the result of its commanders overriding Churchill's directives on sometimes spurious logistical grounds. The farhud in Baghdad was permitted to occur due largely to the defective judgement of the British ambassador, Sir Kinahan Cornwallis and Wavell, not Churchill, who at one stage even had to prod the latter to use the forces at his disposal to establish British authority in Iraq. Elie Kedourie has a typically authoritative account of these matters in the last two chapters of his Arabic Political Memoirs and Other Studies.

Therefore, we are not to conclude that Churchill was a poor friend of the Jews or that he had lost control of his own government. Rather, even the most formidable of democratic war leaders have to contend with contrarily-minded bureaucracies and must perforce delegate important decisions to diplomats and commanders in the field. So much of the tragedy (and glory) of history is the role played by individuals in the situations they find themselves.

* Read it below by clicking here.

Daniel Mandel is a Fellow in History at Melbourne University and author of H. V. Evatt and the Establishment of Israel: The Undercover Zionist(Routledge, London, 2004). His blog can be found on the History News Network.

This article was published today on the History News Network website (HNN) and is archived at http://hnn.us/articles/39017.html

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 21, 2007.

This comes from World Net Daily and is archived at

pitch to African-Americans invokes 'martyr' Malcolm X

Al-Qaida is aggressively recruiting black Americans for suicide operations against the homeland, say FBI analysts who have reviewed recent videotaped messages from the terror group's leaders.

A speech released May 5 by Osama bin Laden's deputy confirms earlier fears that African-Americans are the No. 1 recruiting target for the next generation of attacks. Al-Qaida has been trying to lower its Arab profile to reduce the odds that its terror cells will be subjected to security scrutiny.

"Federal and local law enforcement authorities should be aware that al-Qaida terrorists may not appear Arab," warns a recent Homeland Security intelligence report obtained by WND. "Non-Arab al-Qaida operatives could find it easier to avoid unwanted scrutiny since they may not fit typical profiles."

In the latest message, al-Qaida No. 2 Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri clearly seeks to sow political and racial discontent among African-Americans. He makes frequent references to what he calls the "martyr" Malcolm X, and says "I want blacks in America to know that we are waging jihad to lift oppression from all mankind."

Zawahiri encourages African-Americans to follow the example of Malcolm X, a.k.a. al-Hajj Malik al-Shabaaz, who he says was not afraid to sacrifice his life to fight American "oppression."

According to a transcript of the hour-long screed, Zawahiri said this is "the culture which the struggler and martyr Malcom X (may Allah have mercy upon him) fought against when he told his repressed black brothers in America, 'If you're not ready to die for it, take the word "freedom" out of your vocabulary.'"

"Freedom is something that you have to do for yourself," he quotes Malcolm X as as saying. "The price of freedom is death."

Zawahiri, again citing the teachings of Malcolm X, suggests that black Muslims who do not rise up against America are no better than "house slaves."

It's the first time al-Qaida has identified Malcolm X as a fellow Islamic "struggler and martyr," analysts say.

"Zawahiri's focus on race relations may be benefiting from the input of a U.S. citizen named Adam Yahiye Gadahn -- a.k.a Azaam al-Amriki -- who is a senior member of al-Qaida's media committee," said former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer, now an analyst for the Jamestown Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank specializing in national security.

"Indeed," he added, "the deftness and political timeliness of Zawahiri's statements suggest that al-Qaida may have more than a single American advising it."

Last year, in another nearly hour-long videotaped speech, al-Qaida propaganda chief Gadahn invited blacks to convert to Islam and take revenge against a nation that enslaved their ancestors.

Gadahn, a white convert from California thought to be operating out of al-Qaida's new base in Pakistan, slammed his native America, which he said "shamelessly brought us lynch laws, Jim Crow, and a death row where only convicts of certain races are sent."

In courting African-Americans, he also encouraged them to forsake Christianity, which he claims whites have used as an excuse to abuse blacks.

"Islam rejects the Judeo-Christian doctrines concerning Eve and Ham, which the West has used to justify all manner of abuse and ill treatment of women and blacks," Gadahn said. "Islam is for everyone."

Gadahn, who is wanted by the FBI for treason, also claims that America "enslaved Africa."

Islamic terrorism analysts point out that al-Qaida's racial history lessons conveniently leave out the fact that Arab Muslim slave traders sold Africans into bondage.

"The Arab is the true master of the African," said Bill Warner, director of the Center for Study of Political Islam. "Blacks like to imagine Islam is their counterweight to white power, not that Islam has ruled them for 1,400 years."

Blacks account for the largest share of Muslims in America. A great many of them are converts to Islam. And remarkably, the religion is flourishing among African-Americans since 9/11. Analysts fear the trend plays right into bin Laden's hands.

Black converts say Islam has more in common with their African heritage than Christianity. In fact, black Muslim leaders often refer to such conversions as "reversions," claiming black "reverts" are merely returning to the Islamic faith prominent among their African forebears who were forced into slavery.

"You have African-American men seeking liberation," explained black Muslim leader Eric Erfan Vickers, "and many see Christianity as a white man's religion that continues to oppress."

Vickers, a convert to Islam, does not consider al-Qaida a terrorism group. "They are involved in a resistance movement," he contended.

Prisons have already proven to be a fertile recruiting ground for al-Qaida, spawning the likes of shoebomber Richard Reid and alleged dirty bomber Jose Padilla.

Christian prison chaplains say Islam is so popular with inmates they are having a hard time competing with Muslim chaplains for their souls. Blacks are being converted by the cell block. The FBI worries blacks could be the next face of terror in America.

Since 9/11, the agency has already disrupted several homegrown terror plots involving black Muslim converts, including:

# A group of black Muslim converts in Miami who allegedly conspired to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago (some had rap sheets).

# A Chicago black Muslim, Derrick Shareef, who allegedly plotted to blow up a local shopping mall.

# A black U.S. soldier, Hassan Abujihaad, who allegedly fed terrorists classified information about U.S. battleship movements in the Strait of Hormuz.

# Black ex-con Muslims in Torrance, Calif., who allegedly planned to attack military recruiting stations and synagogues in the state. The plot was initially hatched in prison.

Still, some analysts doubt al-Qaida's pitch will resonate in today's black community beyond a handful of malcontents. They point out that African-Americans are no longer held back by institutional racism, and are growing wealthier as evidenced by the expanding black middle class.

Indeed, Zawahiri does not paint a very enticing picture in describing the sacrifices required along the path of jihad, especially for those used to the material comforts of America.

"If we continue to aspire to nothing more than diplomas, positions, salaries, pensions and the raising of our children, there will be nothing but humiliation in store for us, our children and our grandchildren," he argued. "If, on the other hand, we are happy with killing, captivity, emigration, losing one's spouse, orphanage, and losing one's wealth, homeland and beloved in the path of Allah, then with Allah's help, no power on the face of the earth can defeat us."

Zawahiri in his latest speech also made fresh threats about coming attacks on America.

He warns that a new "squadron of martyrdom-seekers" is lined up behind "hundreds" of new leaders who are following in the footsteps of captured 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

"They shall achieve more than he achieved," Zawahiri vowed. "The Americans shall pay dearly."

He says American voters had a chance to fire Bush in the last presidential election for invading Iraq, but they chose instead to reelect him. He suggests they forfeited their chance for protection from terrorism, and deserve punishment.

"The Americans deserve what they're getting," he said. "They chose this liar two times, so let them pay the price for their choice."

Gadahn has said "the streets of America shall run red with blood," later singling out Los Angeles as a target of attack.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Milton Fried, May 21, 2007.

It is nice to read about Bulgaria's humnitarisnism iduring WWII.

The French Vichy government did all it could do to see that as many Jews as possible would be killed. So did the British government during WWII. The latter sentence will probably sound wild or absurd to most people. Sadly, it is true. Elements of the Mussolini Fascist government tried to save Jews. The Italians allowed a Jewish Underground organization to use Naval facilities in Italy to help Jews run the British blockade which was intercepting any ships heading to British occupied Palestine during WWII. The British government informed Hiltler that the Italians were helping Jews to escape in the hope that Hitler would put a stop to it.

The British opposed bombing the rail lines leading to Nazi death camps which were, at the time, exterminating over 12,000 Jews a day.

Roosevelt did not override British objections to impeding the death camp's operations. Roosevelt agreed with the British.The USA Air Force was not allowed to bomb the rails to the death camps because Roosevelt acceded to the British.

Roosevelt was part of those who looked the other way during WWII genocide. Roosevelt deserves condemnation, Instead, he is viewed as a friend by most Jews.

Francisco Franco ordered his generals to save any Jew who claimed descent from Spanish Jews.

Bulgaria's and Denmark's humanitarian actions towards Jews in WWII were all the more remarkable, because their actions were so out of line with the rest of the European's actions.

We should remember that the Finns,while fighting on the side of Germany during WWII, would not allow the Germans to as much as touch a Finnish Jew.

Marshal Mannheim, the Finnish commander, successfully opposed the German's plan to massacre the Jews of Finland.. Compare Mannheim's actions with those of Pope Pius the XIIth.

I think it was the XIIth, who was Hitler's pope.

During most of WWII, the Nazi's were allowing any Jew to leave Nazi controlled territories, even to leave concentration Camps, if they had a visa to go anywhere, Sadly, there were very few visas for Jews, for whom a visa meant life. The visas were not even given for Jewish children in the camps.

The world's governments all knew what was happening in the camps. There were two large world conference's about the problem. One in Evian, and one in Bermuda. The world chose to allow the eradication of theJews.

That is an unpleasant fact.

Today, the world is ganging up on the children of the survivors of Hiltler's death camp. Anti Israelism is the current main manifestation of Jew hating.

This comes from Bob Windhotz who can be reached at rswindholz@lawyerserve.com

A great many Jews know the story of how the Danes rescued 8,000 Jews from the Nazi's by smuggling them to Sweden in fishing boats.

Very few Jews, know the story of how all 50,000 Bulgarian Jews were saved. Not a single Bulgarian Jew was deported to the death camps, due to the heroism of many Bulgarians of every walk of life, up to and including the King and the Patriarch of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church.

In 1999, Abraham Foxman, the National Director of the Anti Defamation League flew with a delegation to Sophia to meet the Bulgarian Prime Minister. He gave the Prime Minister the first Bulgarian language copy of a remarkable book, Beyond Hitler's Grasp, written in 1998, by Michael Bar Oar, a professor at Emory University. (A Bulgarian Jew who had migrated to Israel and then to the USA).

This book documents the rescue effort in detail. The ADL paid for and shipped 30,000 copies to Bulgaria, so that the population could partake in the joy of learning about this heroic facet of their history.

This story is clearly the last great secret of the Holocaust era. The story was buried by the Bulgarian Communists, until their downfall in 1991. All records were sealed, since they didn't wish to glorify the King, or the Church, or the non Communist parliamentarians, who at great personal risk, stood up to the Germans. And the Bulgarian Jewish Community, 45,000 of whom went to Israel after the War, were busy building new lives, and somehow the story remained untold.

Bulgaria is a small country and at the outset of the War they had 8 million people. They aligned themselves with the Nazi's in hopes of recapturing Macedonia from Yugoslavia and Thrace from Greece. Both provinces were stripped from them, after W.W.I.

In late 1942 the Jews of Selonica were shipped north through Bulgaria, on the way to the death camps, in sealed box cars. The news of this inhumanity was a hot topic of conversation. Then, at the beginning of 1943, the pro Nazi Bulgarian government was informed that all 50,000 Bulgarian Jews would be deported in March. The Jews had been made to wear yellow stars and were highly visible.

As the date for the deportation got closer, the agitation got greater. Forty-three ruling party members of Parliament walked out in protest. Newspapers denounced what was about to happen. In addition, the Patriarch of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church, Archbishop Krill, threatened to lie down on the railroad tracks.

Finally, King Boris III forbid the deportation. Since Bulgaria was an ally of Germany, and the Germans were stretched militarily, they had to wrestle with the problem of how much pressure they could afford to apply. They decided to pass.

Several points are noteworthy. The Bulgarian Jews were relatively unreligious and did not stand apart from the local populace by virtue of garb, or rites. They were relatively poor by comparison to Jews in other countries, and they lived in integrated neighborhoods. Additionally, the Bulgarians had many minorities, Armenians, Turks, Greeks, and Gypsies, in addition to Jews.

There was no concept of racism in that culture. The bottom line here is that Bulgarians saw Bulgarian-Jews as Bulgarians, and not as Jews.

And, being a small country, like Denmark, where there was a closeness of community, that is often missing in larger countries. So, here was a bright spot that we can point to as example of what should have been. The most famous of those saved was a young graduate of the Bulgarian Military Academy. When he arrived in Israel, he changed his name to Moshe Dayan.....

What a great story to pass on to your e-mail list....

Contact Milton Fried by email at docmiltfried@mindspring.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Yoram Ettinger, May 21, 2007.

1. Shavou'ot 2007 is celebrated upon the 40th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem, the Heart of the Jewish Nation and the Jewish State. Shavou'ot-Jerusalem-Torah represents the Cradle of Jewish History, the core of historical-religious-political-spiritual-physical Jewish existence. The root of Jerusalem is Shalem (Salem), wholesomeness, never to be repartitioned.

2. SHAVOU'OT is celebrated on the 6th day of the Jewish month of Sivan, 50 days following Passover. It commemorates a critical event, which has shaped the nature of the world in general and Western democracies in particular: the receipt of the Torah 26 generations since Adam (Adam-Noah-Abraham-Amram, Moses' father). The Hebrew words for Jehovah equal 26 in numerology, as is the number of Hebrew letters of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs: Abraham, Yitzhak, Yaakov, Sarah, Rivka, Rachel and Leah.

3. SEVEN. The word SHAVOU'OT is derived from the Hebrew word SHVOUA' (vow), referring to the exchange of vows between G-D and the Jewish People. The root of Shvoua' -- and Shavou'ot -- is the Hebrew word Seven-SHEVA. Shavou'ot is celebrated 7 weeks following Passover, reflecting the qualities of 7 key Jewish leaders: Abaraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Aharon, Joseph and David. Number 7 represents wholesomeness in Judaism -- 7 days of Creation. The Sabbath is the 7th day, there are 7 directions (No., So., West, East, Up, Down, one's own position), Moses' birth/death was on the 7th day of Adar, Jethro had 7 names and 7 daughters, Passover and Sukkot last for 7 days each, the first Hebrew verse in Genesis consists of 7 words, The Menorah has 7 branches, Jubilee follows seven 7-year cycles, each Plague lasted for 7 days, 7 Continents, 7 notes in a musical scale, 7 days of mourning, 7 Jewish Prophetesses, etc. Pentecost is celebrated -- by Christians -- on the 7th Sunday after Easter.

4. SHARED ISRAEL-US (JUDEO-CHRISTIAN) VALUES. The Holiday of Shavou' ot sheds light on the foundation of the special relations between the Jewish State and the USA -- the high regard for the Torah. The Five Books of Moses have shaped the morality of Western Democracies, and have impacted the US Constitution, Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances and Bill of Rights. John Locke aspired for the "613 Laws of Moses" to become the legal foundation of the new society established in America.

5. HOLIDAY OF UNITY -- KING DAVID. Shavou'ot is the day of birth/death of KING DAVID (as well as the day that Moses was saved by Pharaoh's daughter), who united the Jewish People, elevating them to a most powerful position. David -- along with Moses and Abraham -- was a role model of humility, hence the Hebrew acronym for ADAM (human-being in Hebrew): Abraham, David and Moses. 150 candles are lit at King David's tomb on Mt. Zion in Jerusalem, consistent with the 150 chapters of Psalms mostly attributed to David. 150 is the numerical value of NEST (KEN in Hebrew), the warm environment of the Torah. David's personal history (from shepherd to king) provides a lesson for individuals and nations: There's an opportunity for everyone, the road to success is paved with difficulties and ups & downs, human beings are fallible but they must repent for their errors.

6. SCROLL OF RUTH -- KING DAVID -- HONOR THY MOTHER IN-LAW. Shavou'ot is highlighted by the studying of the Scroll of RUTH, the FIRST of Old Testament's five scrolls: Ruth (read on Shavou'ot), Song of Songs (Passover), Ecclesiastes (Sukkot), Book of Lamentations (Ninth of Av), Esther (Purim). Ruth was the great grandmother of King David. She stuck by her mother-in-law, NAOMI, for more than 10 years during Naomi's most difficult times, financially and socially. Ruth, the daughter of Eglon and the granddaughter of Balak, kings of the Moabites, had the option to be reunited with her own People, and be assured of affluence. RUTH chose PRINCIPLES (LOYALTY, CONCERN, MODESTY and LOVE) OVER CONVENIENCE. Boaz -- the chief of the Sanhedrin (Jewish Legislature) -- attributes his initial affection for Ruth, whom he married, to "I am informed of your support of your Mother-In-Law." The total sum of the Hebrew letters of Ruth - in Numerology -- produce the number of laws granted at Mt. Sinai (606), in addition to the 7 laws of Noah.

7. HOLIDAY OF MODESTY AND HUMILITY. The Torah was granted on a small mountain -- to a small People -- in the desert. The Torah was delivered by Moses, "the humblest of all human beings" ("Ha'Anav Ba'Adam"). The content of the Torah doesn't require an impressive stage. Humility -- a prerequisite for absorbing the lessons of the Torah -- is essential for learning and for constructive relationships and leadership.

8. HOLIDAY OF LIBERTY/HARVEST/OPTIMISM. The Torah was granted in the desert, a platform of Liberty, away from physical and spiritual constraints. Celebrated fifty day following the Exodus (physical deliverance) from Egypt, Shavou'ot signifies spiritual liberation. Shavou'ot celebrates the culmination of the agricultural, physical and spiritual HARVEST season of optimism, which starts on the second day of Passover.

9. THE SECOND OF THREE PILGRIMAGES. Shavou'ot is one of the THREE Jewish Pilgrimages (Sukkot-Tabernacles, Passover and Shavou'ot), celebrated in the THIRD Jewish month, Sivan. It highlights Jewish Unity, compared (by King Solomon) to a TRIANGULAR cord, which cannot be broken. The Torah -- the first of the THREE books of the Old Testament -- was granted to the Jewish People (which consists of THREE components: Priests, Levites and Israel), by Moses (who was a THIRD son, brother of Aharon and Miriam), a successor to the THREE Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob). Shavou'ot highlights Ruth, who lived THREE generations before King David, son of Jesse, grandson of Ovad, the son of Ruth. The Torah was forged in THREE WAYS: Fire (commitment to principles), Water (lucidity and purity) and Desert (humility and principle-driven tenacity).

10. DAIRY DISHES REINFORCE HUMILITY. Dairy dishes are consumed during Shavou'ot, commemorating the most common food -- of shepherds like King David -- during the 40 years in the desert. Unlike wine, milk is poured into simple glasses. The total sum of MILK (Chalav in Hebrew) is 40 in Jewish numerology, which is equal to the number of days and nights spent by Moses on Mt. Sinai and the number of years spent by the Jewish People in the Desert. 40 is also the value of the first Hebrew letters of Moses, Miriam, Manna, Egypt, Desert, Menorah, Tabernacle, Mitzvah (commandment), etc.

Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is a consultant on US-Israel relations as well as the Chairman of Special Projects at the Ariel Center for Policy Research. Formerly the Minister for Congressional Affairs to Israel's Embassy in Washington, DC, Ettinger also served as Consul General of Israel to the Southwestern US. He is a former editor of Contemporary Mideast Backgrounder, and is the author of the Jerusalem Cloakroom series of reports. Contact him at yoramtex@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by UCI, May 21, 2007.

This was written by Aaron Klein and it appeared today in World Net Daily.

JERUSALEM -- The United States last week sent diplomatic messages to the Palestinians that if aid were requested, America would bolster Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas Fatah organization in clashes against Hamas, including providing Fatah with U.S. weapons, according to senior Israeli and Palestinian diplomatic sources.

The sources said Maj. Gen. Keith Dayton, the U.S. security coordinator for the Gaza Strip and West Bank, passed messages to Abbas that America would aid Fatah with assault rifles and ammunition if the assistance is needed. The sources also said Dayton urged Israel to provide assistance to bolster Abbas' security forces in Gaza, particularly Force 17, Abbas' security detail which also serve as de facto police officers.

Many members of Force 17 are openly members of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group, Fatah's declared "military wing" which took responsibility for every suicide bombing in Israel the past two years. The Jewish state regularly arrests Force 17 members accused of carrying out shooting attacks against Israelis.

After forging a unity government in February that ended several rounds of deadly factional Palestinian infighting, Fatah and Hamas last week engaged in heated gun battles killing 53 Palestinians in some of the deadliest internal clashes in Gaza in months. Abbas' decision to station thousands of loyalist security forces on the streets of Gaza without consulting Hamas touched off the violence.

Yesterday, Fatah and Hamas attempted a fifth cease-fire in seven days, but the truce got off to a shaky start after a gun battle erupted outside the home of a senior Fatah official and both Hamas and Fatah abducted rival members.

U.S. policy largely considers Fatah "moderate," while the State Department labels Hamas a terror group.

The reported U.S. willingness to send weapons to Fatah comes after WND reported Hamas last week obtained a shipment of American rifles sent in recent months.

Last Sunday, after a Fatah gunman shot a Hamas member, a Fatah convoy of three trucks was stopped by Hamas at a makeshift checkpoint at Dabit Circle, a northern Gaza town, according to Hamas sources. Hamas abducted 18 Fatah gunmen and seized stockpiles of American weapons that were in the vans, the sources said.

According to Israeli and Palestinian security officials and Hamas sources, Hamas militias in recent months have taken almost complete control of the northern Gaza Strip, including areas from which rockets are launched regularly into nearby Jewish communities. The officials said Fatah, which is backed by the U.S., is restricted to acting within a half-mile radius of a major Fatah military compound. Hamas has set up roadblocks and checkpoints throughout northern Gaza to ensure Fatah militias remain near their compound.

The U.S. in recent months reportedly transferred large quantities of weapons to Fatah, purportedly to back Abbas' military organizations against Hamas.

The last confirmed U.S. weapons transfer to the Palestinians took place last May and consisted of 3,000 assault rifles, but WND reported multiple other transfers later were delivered to Fatah, including a cache of 7,000 rifles last January and about 8,000 assault rifles in February.

While the weapons were meant to bolster Fatah in Gaza, Hamas has reportedly won most battles against the U.S.-backed militias. WND reported last month a Fatah militia in Beit Lehiya, a major city in the northern Gaza Strip, surrendered to Hamas forces after reaching an agreement in which the Fatah militants stated they will evacuate the city and depart the Gaza Strip.

The Fatah force in Beit Lehiya consisted of about 40 senior officers from Force 17, the Palestinian Preventative Security Services and the General Security Services. The leader of the Force was Samih El- Madhun, who is also openly a senior leader of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group.

Last weekend, according to Palestinian security sources, Baha Abu Jarad, a Fatah strongman in Gaza, surrendered a large swath of territory to Hamas, nearly completing Hamas' grasp on the northern Gaza Strip.

In February, after a shipment of U.S. weapons reached Fatah, Hamas spokesman Abu Oubaida told WND his terror group would obtain any American weapons transferred to Fatah militias or purchased by Fatah using U.S. aid.

Congress last month approved $59 million in aid to Fatah's militias after an earlier Bush administration pledge of $86.4 million was blocked for fear the money might reach terrorists. The aid package contains a new qualification stipulating the money must not be used to purchase weapons.

The vast majority of the U.S. aid is slated to bolster Abbas' Force 17 security forces.

Israel has raided Force 17 compounds on multiple occasions and arrested wanted terrorists from the units. WND reported Israel earlier this month arrested 18 Fatah fighters in the West Bank wanted for shootings against Israeli civilians. Seventeen of those arrested also were members of the Brigades, Israeli and Palestinian security officials said. Israel this weekend conducted a raid of a Fatah complex in Ramallah and arrested a Force 17 fighter wanted for anti-Israeli shootings.

Abbas last June appointed senior Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades leader Mahmoud Damra as commander of Force 17. Damra, who was arrested by Israel in November, was on the Jewish state's most-wanted list of terrorists.

WND last month quoted Israeli and Palestinian security officials stating intelligence and security organizations associated with Fatah, including Force 17, are infiltrated by Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other terrorist organizations.

A top Palestinian intelligence official admitted to WND: "We are leading a large number of investigations and some of the results prove that such an infiltration by Hamas (of Fatah's security and intelligence forces) exists."

The official oversees intelligence for Fatah's police forces in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

"I can say that in some cases we diagnosed a deep infiltration to high posts in some Fatah security services," the high-ranking Palestinian intelligence officer told WND. "In some cases we believe there are officers that are exposed to very sensitive information."

He said since the U.S. announced it is providing Abbas' forces with additional funds, Fatah intelligence officials at the direction of American security coordinators here have been attempting to expel Hamas infiltrators. He said in the past month "dozens" of members of Hamas, the Popular Resistance Committees and Islamic Jihad were found operating in the Fatah forces.

The U.S. has been attempting to isolate Hamas, which it labels a terrorist group. The Popular Resistance Committees regularly carries out rocket and shooting attacks and took credit for a 2003 bombing in Gaza that killed three American contractors.

Terrorists: We infiltrated U.S.-funded militias

Terror leaders and spokesmen for terror groups told WND their militants are "well-placed" within Fatah's militias.

Muhammad Abdel El, spokesman for the Committees, told WND last week Fatah's attempts to discover militants from his group "have not even scratched the surface of our infiltration."

"We are very well-placed within Fatah's units and their little investigations made no difference," he said.

Abu Abdullah, a leader of Hamas' military wing in the Gaza Strip, told WND, "It doesn't seem Fatah's campaign to oust Hamas from inside their organizations has made a difference for us as far as our penetration of Fatah."

Fatah attempts to expel Hamas members from its midst might be in vain since the two factions last month agreed to forge their militias together and incorporate Hamas militias and terror cells into a unified security force under the authority Abbas.

The PA cabinet yesterday approved a comprehensive security plan that incorporates Fatah and Hamas militias into one central organization. According to the plan, Hamas' so-called military wing, responsible for scores of anti-Israel terror attacks, will be allowed to continue operating under the aegis of the PA's Interior Ministry. The plan calls for all armed organizations, including the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group, to maintain a single operations center under the authority of Abbas.

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

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, May 20, 2007.

The Security Cabinet today approved attacks against Islamic Jihad and Hamas commanders responsible for the current Kassam escalation. There will be both air and ground operations, with attacks on arms supplies as well.

And, indeed, that is what we're seeing: stepped up attacks. Among other actions today, a cell was hit in Gaza City, and at least six members of Hamas were killed. (Along with this, we can see the inevitably stepped up PR effort by Hamas, letting the world know that we are merciless in attacking civilians.)

In a statement made after the meeting, Olmert said that if the present level of attacks does not bring quiet (it won't), the activity will be escalated further.

There are, however, no plans to halt smuggling at the Philadelphi Corridor. Instead this will be approached via diplomatic efforts. Please keep in mind how successful the diplomatic effort -- known as Security Council Resolution 1701 -- has been in stopping the smuggling of arms across the border from Syria to Hezbollah.


The Cabinet will be considering a request from the US that we permit either Jordan or Egypt to transfer weapons, ammunition and other military supplies to forces loyal to Abbas. This is something of a joke already, except that it's a lethal. joke. The notion that the situation can be fixed by an infusion of additional weapons in an area already awash in weapons is close to ridiculous. But even more ridiculous is the hope, sustained in the face of the evidence to the contrary, that Fatah is going to take on Hamas sufficiently to defeat them.


Eleven more Kassams were launched at the western Negev today; since the barrage of rockets began last Tuesday, a total of 132 rockets have been launched. Sderot, of course, continues to bear the brunt of this, and while precise numbers are not available, reportedly some 4,000 - 8,000 Sderot residents have fled the city already.

The entire issue of the government's failure to protect the homefront in Sderot is getting hotter along with the broader situation. Considerable debate has ensued as to who is responsible for shelters, and the government has tried its utmost to cover itself and rationalize its failings. The issue is not money, but rather stagnation and politicking.

Today Defense Minister Peretz declared the area to be in a state of emergency, which means schools can be closed and other actions deemed appropriate can be taken. "Too little, too late," say the residents.

On Friday, Russian billionaire Arkady Gaydamak visited Sderot and volunteered to reinforce homes of residents at his own expense. To a person, government officials expressed outrage, declaring that this is not within his jurisdiction, but the government's. As commentator Nahum Barnea put it, "Gaydamak is the cruel mirror through which the terrible weakness of the government is reflected." It has happened repeatedly now that the government responds in the face of Gaydamak's offers.


The Central Committee of Labor was supposed to have made a decision on Friday with regard to remaining in the government. Chair Amir Peretz, however, requested that because of the current situation the decision be postponed. The issue will be raised again after the Labor primary on May 28, or the subsequent run-off on June 11.


Head of Yisrael Beitenu, Avigdor Lieberman, who serves as strategic affairs minister, today made a no-nonsense statement: "It's time for tough action. I am not talking about a small operation, but a very specific one that will destroy Hamas completely and absolutely. One that will create a new situation on the ground. This is not an ultimatum, in that I am not demanding a certain time-frame -- but the choice is clear, either Hamas is dismantled or this government will be dismantled."

Does this mean he will leave the government if action isn't taken on Hamas? Sounds like it, but my inside information is that it does not. Mr. Lieberman, once again, is mostly hot air. More's the pity, because he might have the ability to take down the government.


Good old Shimon Peres. In Jordan today for a meeting of the World Economic Forum, he said that Israel was drafting an alternative to the proposed Arab League peace plan. Representatives of Olmert's office are denying that a counterproposal is being drawn up. Head of the Arab League, Amr Moussa, said that a counteroffer would be considered if it were "reasonable." You can guess what that means.

Palestinian Saeb Erekat didn't even go that far. "Mr. Peres," he said, "our negotiations (what negotiations?) have finished... Today, it's time for decisions. Stop the bombardment of Gaza immediately and restart the truce between us immediately. We are willing to engage now in sustaining the cease-fire." What does one respond to such nonsense?

Arlene Kushner is Senior Research Associate, Center for Near East Policy Research, Beit Agron International Press Center, Jerusalem, Israel. Contact her at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, May 20, 2007.

What the hell.

Here goes anyway...

A friend sent me an article the other day from the May 18th Jewish Daily Forward, "Foxman, Wiesel Upbraid Israel For Pace of Peace Effort."

Elie Wiesel co-hosted the third annual Petra Conference ("for improving the world") of Nobel Laureates and others in Jordan. Abraham Foxman participated in a panel discussion at Bar-Ilan University in Israel. Both men are Holocaust survivors and have made a lucrative career out of Jewish victimization. Indeed, besides Moses in the bulrushes and Jesus on the cross, Wiesel has become the Gentile's favorite Jewish victim.

Wiesel's writings have no doubt served an important purpose...and perhaps, in the Eternal Plan, he was spared for this. Both he and Foxman have sired much good in a post-Auschwitz world.

But human both are...

Now please bear with me for a moment.

Oprah Winfrey has been listed as one of Time Magazine's "100 Most Influential People in the World." On both her April 25, 2005 widely-viewed television show and in her almost three million readers a month June 2005 edition of O Magazine, she showcased alleged Arab victimization at the hands of Israelis. Both were blatantly one-sided depictions of reality.

In case you haven't heard yet from the Arabs and their assorted derriere kissers, the Jews have become the new Nazis. A favorite theme...victims now victimizers.

That someone as influential as Oprah lends support to this nauseating lie is tragic. But it gets worse...

To shut the Jews up afterwards, she soon dragged out guess who?

The world's third most famous Jew victim!

On her May 24th and 25th 2006 shows, she strolled arm-in-arm with Wiesel to Auschwitz.

So, the Jews were victimized too. Oprah says so...How 'bout that!

But Wiesel's return to Auschwitz did nothing to counter Oprah's anti-Israel endeavors.

Some things need to be spelled out very clearly.

The differences between what happened to stateless Jews for millennia and what is happening to Arabs in their attempt to create their 22nd state on the ashes of -- not along side -- the Jews' sole, resurrected nation were definitely not.

As both Foxman and Wiesel know, time after time Arabs have shown that they seek to replace the Jew of the Nations with a purely Arab one. So-called Arab moderates themselves have repeatedly stated that their "moderation" was/is simply a Trojan Horse. Arafat called it "the Peace of the Quraysh," the pagan tribe Muhammad temporarily made a hudna with until he felt strong enough to deal the final blow.

The State Department and the West's darling, Mahmoud Abbas, is Arafat in a suit. He ran on a platform for Israel's destruction...but by more acceptable means. As I like to point out, blown buses bring bad press. He still holds to this...no matter what Foggy Bottom says. The latter needs an Arab good cop to present along side the Hamas bad cop to shove virtual suicide and/or total dependence upon others' support down the Jews' collective throat.

Despite the periodic infighting, the difference between Fatah and Hamas, when it comes to a Jewish Israel, is tactical, not strategic. Any real Arab moderates on this issue go the way of Isam Sartawi...they're dispatched from this world. Others, like Wiesel's conference colleague, Yasser Abed Rabbo -- whether serious or (probably) not -- are temporarily tolerated for the assorted mileage they achieve in Western eyes. For such sweet talk, the Jews are expected to bare the necks of their kids and give away the store.

Withdraw, Jew, from (disputed) territories and the conflict will end. Agree to return to your pre-'67 nine-mile wide armistice line (not border) existence as a rump state and the Arabs will grant you peace (of the grave).

Like in Gaza...

And I'm Santa Claus.

Keep in mind that Wiesel knowingly played right into all of this.

At the conference, he even made Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert (arguably the Arabs' best buddy), the brunt of mockery and laughter. The latter deserves this...but not for the reasons Wiesel & Co. charge.

Think about it...

While placing blame for the lack of real progress towards peace on the Jews themselves for not caving in to all that Arabs demand, elsewhere both he and Oprah speak of Darfur and the Sudan and never mention the word Arab. I guess the Martians are responsible...

Again, some things need to be spelled out very clearly.

Had those "oppressive Jews" used Arab techniques against black Africans in the Sudan, against Kurds in Iraq and Syria, and so forth, their Arab headache could have largely been resolved long ago. Millions of black Africans have been killed, maimed, raped, enslaved, murdered, and so forth on behalf of purely Arab patrimony.

Decades ago, President Nimeiry's stated during the earlier Arab slaughter of blacks in the Sudan in the 1960s and 1970s (and now several times more ever since) that...

"...the Sudan is the basis of the Arab thrust into...black Africa, the Arab civilizing mission " (Arabism and Pan-Arabism in Sudanese Politics, Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 11, #2, 1973, pp. 177-78).

Why is it that, for Oprah and far too many others, the Arab Man's Burden is acceptable, but the White Man's Burden isn't?

Back to Wiesel's virtual anti-Israel pandering and, to a lesser extent, Foxman's more vague statements about Israel's "seriousness."

While there's always room for improvement, and mistakes are surely made by both sides in any conflict, surely both men -- one of whom I know personally, worked with for years, and so forth -- understand the real facts of life here.

Given real and even not-so-real peace partners, Israel has repeatedly bent over backwards, forwards, and sideways to reach honorable compromise and accommodation...certainly far more than Arabs have ever done with their own ethno-nationalist competitors. So, indulging in such things as pointing the finger at Israel during a conference like that in Petra (very likely filled with Israel bashers) is nothing short of self-serving and cowardly.

Both Foxman and Wiesel know that the root cause of this conflict has always been an Arab refusal to accept that anyone but themselves be granted political rights in "their" region. Again, scores of millions of Kurds, Copts, Assyrians, black Africans, Berbers, Semitic but non-Arab Lebanese, native and whom the Arabs call kilab yahud -- Jew dogs -- have been murdered, gassed, subjugated, enslaved, turned into refugees, and so forth for daring to disagree.

The conflict Israel was criticized for at Petra could have been solved long ago had Arabs been willing to grant Jews a mere microscopic slice of the very rights they demand for themselves. And, again, both men know this very well.

So, given such an enemy, it is hard to conceive of what they were thinking when they willingly participated in shifting the spotlight onto Israel.

Will either take up permanent residence in Israel's Sderot, blasted daily by Arab rockets and adjacent to Arab-controlled and now Judenrein Gaza, or in Israel's narrow waist (where most of its population and industry are located) after it's forced to return to its 1949 Auschwitz, er armistice, lines and next agrees to accept millions of allegedly "returning" jihadist Arab refugees?


But if the answer to my question just happens -- by some small chance -- to be in the negative, then perhaps its time to put the period of perpetual Jewish victimization behind us...despite what these two famous Holocaust survivors now assert.

Their approach will, no doubt, only perpetuate this further. Maybe afterwards Wiesel can then get the world to weep for yet millions of more dead Jews.


But while this may be good for the Jewish victimization business, it's not good for Jews.

I'll demand empathy over sympathy any time...

And Israel better do likewise.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz, May 20, 2007.
This article was written by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz. It was published in Arutz-Sheva

According to our own Gil Ronen
(www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/122507), Defense Minister Amir Peretz told Israel Radio that responding to Palestinian Authority artillery attacks on Sderot and other Negev towns by cutting off fuel, water, electricity and communications in Gaza, "would cause the entire Palestinian population to unite around Hamas."

I have four brief comments on this latest insane statement by our venerated and mustachioed leader:

  1. Maybe I missed something, but wasn't Hamas freely elected in a landslide election by the PA Arabs? Haven't all polls shown that the PA Arabs deeply desire continued murderous attacks against Israeli Jews? The PA Arabs are already united around Hamas....

  2. ...except for those united around PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah, which is, of course, much better. After all, Fatah members murder Jews while releasing communiques from the Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigades; whereas, Hamas members murder Jews while releasing communiques from the Izz A-Din Al-Kassam Brigades.

  3. How long exactly would the PA Arabs be "united" around Hamas without water, electricity, fuel and communications? And what good does that "uniting" do for Hamas if the organization is crippled -- without electricity for their rocket manufacturing, without fuel for their rocket-bearing vehicles, without water for their thirsty militiamen, and without phone The PA can't continue to fire rockets at Israeli schoolchildren using their "unity." service to order their minions around? Not to mention the justice of cutting off their continuing broadcasts of the Mickey Mouse Mullah.... In other words, the PA can't continue to fire rockets at Israeli schoolchildren using their "unity" -- they need electricity, water, fuel and communications.

  4. And why does Peretz think that Arab psychology works differently than in Israeli society? Has the ongoing siege of Sderot caused 'the entire Israeli population to unite around Olmert and Peretz,' or has the effect been exactly the opposite? Aderabeh, the Arabs unite around that force that proves (or boasts of being) effective in reaching their murderous goals. Deny them that victory.

I'd also like to point out what Peretz did not say in response to the suggestion that cutting off the Palestinian Authority's fuel and electricity would end the Kassam rocket barrages.

He never argued that it wouldn't work.

To Go To Top

Posted by Yehuda Poch, May 20, 2007.

A very disturbing interview was aired on Israel Radio this morning with former IDF Chief of Staff Amnon Lipkin Shahak. Shahak succeeded Ehud Barak as Chief of Staff in 1995, after serving as Barak's Deputy Chief of Staff. Following his retirement from the army, he served one term in the Knesset, and served as Minister of Tourism and of Transportation in Barak's government.

Shahak's interview came against a background of several recent events. At the end of last week, he came out in support of Barak in the upcoming Labor party leadership primary, with the belief that Barak was best suited to assume the role of Defense Minister, and later of Prime Minister. More seriously, though, the Palestinians in the Gaza strip last week resumed firing Kassam missiles at the Israeli city of Sderot and surrounding towns and villages. An average of 25-30 rockets are being fired every day at these communities. An estimated 6000 Sderot residents have left the city -- out of a total population of only about 27,000. Through luck and miracle alone, no one has yet been killed in the latest wave of missile attacks, but several dozen have been injured, some quite seriously.

In this morning's interview, Shahak opined that right now the situation is not serious enough to justify occupying Gaza but that if rocket attacks extend to include Ashkelon then there might be no choice but to occupy Gaza.

In that one statement, Shahak exposed what is so terribly wrong with the mindset currently gripping Israel's military and political decision-makers. The idea that some of Israel's population -- those in larger cities or with more money -- are more important to Israel's security doctrine than others, is an idea that has been eating away at Israel's moral imperative for decades. It is one that cuts across security, economic and educational realms, and across political lines of all colors. And it is a rot that threatens to physically destroy the entire country, causing our entire reason for being here to erode, and arguably preventing Jews from other countries from considering the idea of moving to Israel.

And in all the hype generated by the Winograd Commission's interim findings, it is the one principal cause of last summer's war that went almost completely unnoticed.

Winograd correctly slammed the Prime Minister, Defense Minister and then-Chief of Staff for their conceptual and tactical failures that led to the war and its unsuccessful conclusion. They called into question the decision-making abilities of the three principal leaders as well as the information with which each was provided or not provided. Winograd stopped short of making recommendations as to the futures of these three men, preferring to let the people of Israel make that determination.

But without a fundamental change in the ideas and opinions that motivate our nation's leaders, without leaders who are prepared to deal with a situation from a position of strength and awareness of our own purpose here, all is lost.

In the final analysis, the failures of the Second Lebanon War and the Kassam barrages that have been plaguing Sderot for the past five years can both be traced to the same major problem. It is a problem when Israeli leaders can say with a straight face that attacks on certain populations don't warrant a response. Whether it is Kassams in Sderot, Katyushas in Acco, terrorist shootings in Gush Katif or Judea and Samaria, or bombs in the markets and busses of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, those populations have all been told in recent years that they don't matter to Israeli decision-makers. But if they ever come to the 'next' community, the terrorists better watch out.

Soon after the interview with Amnon Lipkin Shahak, the radio broadcast a report that Hamas had issued a warning that they were preparing to launch missiles at Ashkelon as well, and that they would cause a situation in which Ashkelon residents would also be forced to flee. So it seems that Hamas is perfectly willing to put Shahak's words to the test.

The failures examined by the Winograd Commission, and those continuing to take place regarding the Gaza Strip, did not begin in 2000. They did not begin when the rockets started raining down on Israeli homes and schools. These failures were sown years earlier by political and military leaders -- people like Shahak and Barak -- who think that we owe the Palestinians anything and that we should be negotiating with the very same people who are currently blowing up our kindergartens.

It is the careless, cowardly attitudes of a succession of Israeli leaders that have allowed our enemies to rain these missiles down on our heads safe in the knowledge that if we do respond, it will be only half-heartedly and not in a way that is likely to cause them much damage. Amnon Lipkin Shahak and Ehud Barak, as well as Sharon, Olmert, Peretz and Halutz, have worked tirelessly to turn Israel's military, political and technological might into the laughingstock of the middle east, and have turned our tiny country into a vast training ground for the next generation of terrorists and their newest weapons.

The time has come for Israel's voters to get rid of all putative 'leaders' like Shahak who have instilled in our national consciousness the idea that military or terrorist attacks on some people are acceptable. The blood that has flowed in Israeli streets for the past seven years -- or hundred and seven -- continues to cry out for real Jewish justice and not the ignorant cowardice of our leaders.

Yehuda Poch is a journalist living in Israel. His article appeared on his website:

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, May 20, 2007.

Waiting For Death

For sixty years the Bad Arolsen's Shoah bottomless well of 16 miles (25 kilometers) of information filling was off limit to the Holocaust victims' families. Except for identification purposes, millions, yes, millions of documents were concealed for what seemed infinite. As of this writing this information is being released. The documents are being finally released so we can further learn "what happened." We now know that the suffering did not end with the war ending; death and suffering went for so much longer. More importantly we must try keeping the memory alive and HOPEFULLY learn some more from the awful mistakes of decades ago so we can ensure that nothing like the Shoah, ever, yes, ever happens again. Wake Up America blogger wrote: The Holocaust was not about one sick man, Hitler...it was his dream, yes, but it took a large group of sick, sadistic people...

Unfortunately, it also took an apathetic, to what was going on, world to enable Hitler to execute his dream. Hitler wrote a book explaining what he was going to do and no one took him seriously. No one actually waned to believe that a human being could ever be so heinous and act on his heinous dream. So the world went on about life like nothing is happening; the world sat back and watched Hitler execute his Final Solution -- Judenreit or "Jew free" world. Because of their apathy and passivity, those who were complacent are just as guilty as those who executed Hitler's plan.

Rounding up Jews. This became an iconic image.

In today's world we are regrettably living the past. The world of today is just as apathetic as the 1920s and 1930s. We read way too many commentaries and we hear the same imams and clerics' speeches over and over again. They all preach death, destruction and the apocalypse. We expect Islamic "religious" leaders to teach their flock about peace, love and harmony, but they do not. Instead they are teaching the masses about the command of God to join martyrdom so they can meet 72 virgins waiting them in heaven. Really, go argue with God' s command! But none of the evidence that a disaster is at our door step is being taken seriously enough. Once again the world's nations remain skeptical to the signs these despots give us and that they actually mean what they say. Undoubtedly they will perpetuate their terrorizing -- holy war -- jihad. Just like Hitler did then, these Islamo-fascists monsters are telling us exactly what they want to do to us. If we don't wake up to take them seriously and soon, the millions of pages of testimonies from the Shoah-Holocaust and its aftermath, as told in the report below, will be our future not only our past.

Like defenseless cattle on the way to the slaughter house, the Nazis and their cronies packed in windowless train cars innocent people who happed to be Jews, and took them away form their families, homes, livelihood, and all they were familiar with. They then locked them in death and labor camps and tested them endlessly how to maintain sanity in the most cruel and insane conditions ever known to the mankind!

As if for 40 or 50 years no one wanted to remember or face reality so no one opened any of Bad Arolsen's history files. Now that the information is finally distributed to Yad Va'shem in Jerusalem and the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, it will refresh our mind to what happened. Don't let history repeat itself!

This comes from May 18, 2007 CNN and is entitled "German archive reveals a panorama of misery"
(www.cnn.com:80/2007/WORLD/europe/05/18/nazi.archive.ap/archives/oldindex.html). The photographs are not part of the original article.

BAD AROLSEN, Germany (AP)--Looking back at the first weeks after World War II, a French lieutenant named Henri Francois-Poncet despaired at ever fulfilling his mission to establish the fate of French inmates of the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp.

For the living skeletons who survived the Nazi terror, the Displaced Persons camp set up two miles (three kilometers) away offered little relief from misery.

People still died at the rate of 1,000 to 1,500 a day. Corpses were stacked in front of barracks, to be carted away by captured SS guards. "Bodies frequently remained for several days in the huts, the other inmates being too weak to carry them out," Francois-Poncet wrote in a report for the Allied Military Government.


"As most of the survivors could not even give their own names, it was useless trying to obtain information as to the identity of the dead," he wrote. He reported a meager 25 percent success rate.

When the Third Reich surrendered in May 1945, 8 million people were left uprooted around Europe. Millions drifted through the 2,500 hastily arranged DP camps before they were repatriated.

A bleak picture springs with stark immediacy from typewritten reports by the Allied officers, found in the massive archive of the International Tracing Service in the central German town of Bad Arolsen. The Associated Press has been given extensive access to the archive on condition that identities of victims and refugees are protected.

Far from scenes of joyful liberation that should have greeted the end of Nazi oppression, the files reveal desperation, loss and confusion, and overwhelmed and often insensitive military authorities.

Many had nowhere to go, their families among the 6 million Jews consumed in the Holocaust, their homes destroyed or handed out to new occupants. Those who wanted to get to Palestine were shut out by a British ban on Jewish immigration to the Israeli state-in-waiting.

"Owing to ill treatment by the Germans, most DPs have a distrust and fear of the Allied authorities," said a September 1945 report signed by British Lt. Col. C.C. Allan. "Many DPs have sunk into complete apathy regarding their future."

Liberated concentration camps were transformed into DP camps. Food was still scarce -- often just coffee and wet black bread -- and medical care was insufficient, said a report written for President Harry Truman.

Inmates were kept under armed guard to maintain order. They still wore their old striped, pajama-like concentration-camp-issue uniforms and slept in the same drafty barracks through a bitter winter.

Compounding their misery, they could watch through barbed wire fences and see German villagers living normal lives. In some places, those villagers were forced to tour the camps and help with the burials or at least face up to what their Fuehrer had wrought. But it was scant comfort to the victims.

"As things stand now, we appear to be treating the Jews as the Nazis treated them, except that we do not exterminate them," wrote presidential envoy Earl G. Harrison in his famously quoted report to Truman after visiting that summer.

Known for its unparalleled collection of original concentration camp papers, the ITS, a branch of the International Committee of the Red Cross, also safeguards the world's largest documentation on postwar DP camps. It has nearly 3.4 million names on its card index of those who sought designation as refugees eligible for aid.

Until now, the documents have been used only to trace missing people and verify restitution claims. But now the full breadth of the archive, filling 16 miles (25 kilometers) of shelf space, is to be opened to historians for the first time. At a meeting last week in Amsterdam, Netherlands, the archive's 11-nation supervisory commission agreed to begin transferring electronic copies this autumn to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington and to Yad Vashem in Jerusalem.

Within weeks after the war, U.N. agencies and volunteer charities took over the DP camps, processing applications for relief and emigration. By 1947, a quarter million Jews -- a piteous remnant of European Jewry -- shared space with displaced Eastern Europeans fearful of return to what was now the Soviet bloc.

Also among the DPs were ex-Nazis.

Adam Friedrich's 1949 application to the International Refugee Organization to join relatives in St. Louis, acknowledges that for three years he belonged to the Waffen SS, the combat arm of Hitler's dreaded paramilitary organization. He also noted he had been imprisoned for 20 months after the war.

An IRO official scribbled on his form, "The applicant was forced to report to the SS in Jan. '42. Served in the infantry and took part in fighting."

Friedrich was rejected.

But U.S. authorities did not have that information four years later when he applied again through the U.S. Refugee Relief Act. Then, Friedrich reported he had been in the German army but said nothing about his SS service.

Decades after he obtained citizenship, the U.S. Justice Department uncovered Friedrich's past. He was stripped of his citizenship in 2004, lost a Supreme Court appeal, and was due to be deported when he died last July.

At Bad Arolsen, questionnaires and affidavits are stuffed into 400,000 envelopes which, including families, refer to 850,000 displaced people, and fill binders spreading over several rooms of floor-to-ceiling shelves.

The last DP camps were closed in 1953, so "When you feel the paper tug as you try to pull it out, that means no one has opened it for 40 or 50 years," said Rudolf Michalke, head of the archive's postwar section.

Accounts of camp survivors and their tormentors

Some files contain detailed histories of survivors and the tortures they endured. Refugees relate their futile struggle to resettle after the war, and their hopes of rebuilding their lives far from Europe.

An Austrian pastry chef recounts the hostility he found when he returned to Vienna. "Given the large and increasingly negative climate against Jews, I have not been able to get a job and am forced to emigrate," he testified, seeking passage to Australia.

Others describe their tormentors, hoping they will be prosecuted.

A Polish Jew writes about "Workmaster Batenszlajer," one of about a dozen guards he named as particularly cruel.

"He made selections. Those who lost their strength because they were exhausted and looked bad were picked out and shot down," he wrote. Batenszlajer would pick four girls at a time and hold them for several days. "He raped them and afterward he took them into a wood and shot them down."

In a world where racism was rampant, finding a new home was not easy, as one Yugoslav-born man with Asian features learned. "Being a Kalmyk of Mongolian race, [he] is ineligible for most Anglo-Saxon countries," authorities scrawled on his form.

"The doors are closed to unmarried mothers," said a note from strongly Catholic Ireland.

Lining up employment in a new country was critical for obtaining a visa. Yugoslav-born Nikolai Davidovic, a mathematics professor who spoke seven languages and authored two textbooks, left for America in 1950 with his wife Larissa -- but only after she had been promised a job as a maid.

Friedrich was not the only war criminal to slip through the screening process. Dieter Pohl, of the Institute for Contemporary History in Munich, estimates that up to 250,000 Germans and Austrians had participated in the Holocaust, but only 5 to 10 percent were ever punished -- most of them in the Soviet zone. Altogether, an estimated 500,000 to 1 million people committed crimes against humanity, he said.

But no one knew who the perpetrators were. "More than 90 percent of files on Nazi war crimes were destroyed," Pohl said in a telephone interview.

The U.S. zeal in pursuing former Nazis came late. In the war's aftermath, the Americans were more concerned about the looming threat from Stalin's Soviet Union.

In 1979, the Justice Department created the Office of Special Investigations to pursue ex-Nazis who committed visa fraud by lying about their past. Since then, it has won 104 prosecutions and denied entry at the U.S. border to 175 people from its watch list of 70,000 suspected persecutors.

"We are still very busy with World War II cases," said OSI director Eli Rosenbaum. "We have always routinely checked Arolsen's DP holdings when we've been investigating someone," he told the AP.

But the ITS files are far from complete, and unlike Friedrich, most former SS members concealed their crimes with lies or half-truths.

John Demjanjuk, a Ukranian-born camp guard who became an auto worker in Cleveland, reported in his refugee papers, seen in Bad Arolsen, that he had been a "worker" in Sobibor. Although Sobibor later became infamous as a death camp in occupied Poland, few people had heard of it after the war because it had been dismantled in 1943. Demjanjuk was awarded DP status.

In 1977, the U.S. government moved to revoke his citizenship, misidentifying him as "Ivan the Terrible," a notorious guard at Treblinka extermination camp. He was extradited to Israel, tried and sentenced to death in 1988. The sentence was overturned on appeal and Demjanjuk returned to the U.S., where his citizenship was restored -- only to be taken from him again for concealing his work for the Nazis. He is now fighting deportation.

The file on Valerian Trifa, who became the U.S. archbishop of the Romanian Orthodox church and who once gave the opening prayer for the U.S. Senate, sheds light on the deceptions he deployed to win a ticket to the U.S.

Trifa, a leader of Romania's fascist Iron Guard, told refugee officials he had been interned in Dachau and Buchenwald, but he said nothing about the privileges or protection he received from the Germans, according to Paul Shapiro, who investigated the Trifa case in the late 1970s for the Justice Department. Shapiro is now director of the Center for Advanced Holocaust Studies at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.

Shapiro saw Trifa's file at ITS for the first time when he visited Bad Arolsen last year with an AP reporter. "I knew the facts that are in here, except for the manner in which he was treated in terms of his Displaced Persons status," he said, flipping through aging pages in the manila folder. "It's quite shocking when you actually see it."

Trifa relinquished his citizenship in 1980 after it was discovered he gave a speech in 1941 in Bucharest that unleashed a pogrom in which more than 150 Romanian Jews were killed. He left the United States in 1984 for Portugal, where he died three years later.

"To see someone receiving citizenship based on lies is not a great thing," Shapiro said. "If this stuff had been available then [in the 1970s], his case would have been resolved earlier. He would have lived fewer years in the United States."

Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:

To Go To Top

Posted by David Wilder, May 20, 2007.

Last week was Hebron Liberation Day, celebrating the 40th anniversary of the return to the City of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs during the 1967 Six-day War.

This is always a momentous event, and this year even more so, considering all that's been happening in Israel over the past months and years.

When the Israel Defense Forces entered Hebron in June of 1967 they found white sheets hanging from the rooftops and windows. In actuality, the city was captured by one man, Rabbi General Shlomo Goren, then Chief Rabbi of the IDF, who liberated the city single-handedly. He was one of the first Jews to gain access to the second holiest site to the Jewish people in the all the world, Ma'arat HaMachpela -- the Tomb of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs, in 700 hundred years. In 1267, following the capture of Hebron by the Mameluks, who expelled the occupied Crusaders, that holy site was declared a Mosque, off-limits to anyone not of the Islamic faith. And so it remained until the first week of June, 1967.

However, Rabbi Goren was in for a surprise. Defense Minister Moshe Dayan ordered that the Israeli flag, hanging on the side of the Ma'ara's outside wall, be removed and that all visitors entering the building remove their shoes 'because it's a mosque.' Those orders were later rescinded, but the policy was set and, in many respects, hasn't changed to this very day.

Despite the odds, Hebron remained in Jewish hands, and slowly developed. But when the Hebron accords were signed and implemented ten years ago, it seemed that the survival of Hebron's Jewish community was in jeopardy. With the advent of the Oslo War, otherwise known and the second intifada, and the daily shooting attacks from the surrounding hills into the Jewish neighborhoods, it looked like the blackest predictions might materialize. But they didn't. Hebron's Jewish community continues to thrive and prosper in spite of the problems. Our purchase and entrance into Beit HaShalom -- the peace house, between Hebron and Kiryat Arba, proves the point.

How does one celebrate such a momentous occasion? Hebron Day itself, was Thursday, and I was privileged to spend most of the day with an old friend and partner to 'the cause,' Nachum Segal, host of the popular morning radio show in the New York metropolitan area, JM in the AM. On Thursday Nachum broadcast live from Hebron his entire show, which was a lot of fun. Using a make-shift studio in the Gutnick Center, just outside Ma'arat HaMachpela, Nachum, together with Hebron Fund director Yossi Baumol, interviewed numerous Hebron residents and personalities, giving listeners a real feel for the joy of the day. In addition the show was broadcast live on internet (audio and video). (Pictures and the sound track can be heard via the Hebron web site.)

This wasn't the first time Nachum broadcast live from Hebron. Over eleven years ago he broadcast via a cell phone and toured the city with Noam Arnon and myself. That too was a show I'll never forget. Nachum Segal is a true friend and associate in everything we do here, bringing Hebron to tens of thousands of people.

However, in reality, I didn't really feel Hebron Day until Friday afternoon, in a very round-about, yet somewhat direct fashion.

One of my friends called earlier in the week and asked if a Shabbat guest could sleep at our apartment on Friday night and I agreed. Friday afternoon a pleasant-looking middle-aged gentleman, dressed in a suit and tie and speaking with an accent appeared at our door. He introduced himself as Mordechai and came in. After a cup of tea and some introductory small talk, he asked if he could use my computer to check some email. Sitting him down next to the computer, I continued about my business, preparing for Shabbat.

A little while later I came back into the living room and found him staring, somewhat blurry-eyed, at a picture on the screen. The photograph, obviously taken decades ago, was of an attractive young woman, with a fur-collared coat and a white blouse. Her eyes stared at me as if she was standing in front of me, at that very moment. Mordechai turned and looked at me and said, 'this is a picture of my aunt. It is the first time in my life that I've ever seen her." And he turned back to screen to continue gazing at her. A little later he told us the story.

'Rosa was born and lived somewhere in Czechoslovakia. In the 1930s she managed to flee and immigrated to Belgium. In the late 1930s she married a widower and gave birth to three childen, living in Antwerp. She and her husband tried to obtain documents allowing them to escape Belgium also, but failed. During the last days of August, 1942, Rosa and her three young children were arrested by Nazis and transported to Auschwitz, where they arrived on September 3, after a three day train journey. Of the 555 women on the transport, only 88 were left alive for slave labor in the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. The other 469 were killed immediately. Being that my Aunt Rosa, my father's sister, was with three young children, she must have been gassed that same day. This is the first time I've ever seen her picture.'

'The Belgians saves all the immigration records and transport documents from that era, but they were classified as secret, and no one was allowed access to them. A few years ago, the documents were made public and over a period of time, computerized. I made contact with various officials who assisted me to locate my aunt, and a few days ago received an email containing documentary information and a picture. I was on my way to the airport and for some reason wasn't able to open the attached picture. But here, sitting at your computer, here she is, my Aunt Rosa.'

'My father was the only one of his family who survived the holocaust. We knew that he had a wife and children, all of whom were lost, together with his parents and brothers and sisters. But he never spoke to us about them. We found, written in his books, lists of names and their relationship to him. But he never talked about them. He died 27 years ago. But now, as least, I can see one of his sisters, my Aunt Rosa, who was killed with her three children, in 1942. She was 30 years old.'

Rosa, hy"d ended her life in the gas and flames of Auschwitz. But I have her picture here, next to me, and in a little while I'm going to take it over to Ma'arat HaMachpela. Maybe Rosa never made it to Hebron in body, but she sure did in spirit. We are here to keep that spirit and the spirits of millions and million of others, from the past, and in the future, alive. Hebron, the roots of our existence, continues to provide nourishment to our people. We are here to keep those roots from being destroyed. That's our privilege and our responsibility. This is why I can celebrate Hebron Liberation Day. If we are here, one way or another, all Am Yisrael is here.

Aunt Rosa, welcome home.

David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Barry Rubin, May 20, 2007.

Last month, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and other members of Congress visited Damascus, flattered their hosts, and called for talks with the Syrian dictatorship. Last week Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice broke the previous boycott by meeting her Syrian counterpart.

What has happened since then shows this approach to be totally wrong.

As demonstrated in the state-controlled Syrian media, the regime took all the calls in America for U.S. concessions as a victory proving that it could continue its policies. There is nothing subtle about it.

Mamoun Homsi is a courageous pro-democracy activist who had been one of the few independent members of Syria's puppet parliament. In March 2002 he was thrown out of the legislature and sentences to five years in prison. As he was dragged off to jail, Homsi shouted, "This is a badge of honor to me and others like me. Long live the people!"

Released after four years in 2006, Homsi immediately left the country, saying there was no possibility of changing the regime by reform and that any criticism would bring more imprisonment. He wrote Pelosi a letter urging her not to visit Syria as such a step would only strengthen the regime. Last week, the government seized all of his assets in the country, leaving his family destitute.

Kamal Labwani, head of the Liberal Democratic Gathering, visited the United States in 2005, including meetings with human rights' groups and a trip to the White House. He told the Americans he saw that he would be arrested once he got back home. Sure enough, the Syrian police grabbed him at Damascus airport in November 2005.

But he was not tried. After all, the regime reasoned, perhaps the United States might get even tougher with Syria if they repressed a man who had just been a White House guest. Last week, confident that the current administration and its presumed Democratic successors were caving in, the government sentenced Labwani to life imprisonment, "kindly" commuted to 12 years with hard labor. The charge? "Inciting a foreign state to attack Syria."

That's not all. Anwar al-Bunni, a lawyer and another brave dissident, knew what held back Syria from crushing any dissent. Back in 2003 he explained, "The government's fear that it will be next on America's `regime change' list may make it wary of committing gross violations of human rights....Some of us say that it is only because of what America did in Iraq, the fright it gave our rulers, that we reformers stand a chance here."

Bunni was proven right. Once Syria no longer had any fear, the regime sentenced him to five years' imprisonment. Two more democratic activists, one of them Michel Kilo, an articulate journalist who most clearly expressed the hope of peaceful change in Syria, will be sentenced soon.

The White House condemned the sentencing of Labwani and Bunni, including credible information that they were tortured in prison, in an eight-line-long press release. No doubt, Syria is not intimidated.

Damascus knows that it can continue helping insurgents next door kill Americans and murder Iraqis. The regime understands it can continue to sponsor terrorism against Israel and Lebanon. It has a good hope of escaping indictment in the international investigation of Syrian involvement in the murder of popular former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri in February 2005.

Those who call for engaging Syria and giving it concessions are contributing, however unintentionally, to helping the worst dictatorship in the Arab world and the leading Arab sponsor of terrorism in a post-September 11 world.

And by the way, Syria is the main partner of radical Islamist Iran. Least publicized of all is the apparent holding of former FBI agent Robert Levinson as a hostage in Iran, where he was visiting in March.

Last week, Iran also arrested on trumped-up spying charged Haleh Esfandiari, director of Middle East programs for the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars in Washington DC and an American citizen. Her boss is former Congressman Lee Hamilton, co-sponsor of the Iraq Study Group report calling for engagement with Syria and Iran.

The lessons about these regimes' extremist behavior should be clear by now. When someone extends its hand in offered friendship, they interpret this as hands raised in surrender.

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press, August 2007). His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, May 20, 2007.

DEBKAfile's military experts: Unorthodox tactics needed to rout Gaza-based Palestinian terror and halt Qassam offensive against Israel. Conventional warfare will no longer serve

As the Palestinian missile offensive enters its second week, military experts recommend dosing Hamas and its allies with their own medicine: harassment behind the lines by small undercover Israeli units on hit-and-run missions to blow up Palestinian infrastructure, weapons workshops and commands centers and around-the clock ambushes of their fighters and chiefs. Palestinian operatives must be kept on the run in fear of their lives.

They say the moment has passed for a conventional invasion, such as the 2002 Defense Wall operation that cleansed the West Bank of its effective suicide cell structures, such as some opposition leaders and ministers propose. It would have been logical after Israel's 2005 evacuation of the Gaza Strip. But today, Gaza is swarming with a hodgepodge of Hamas, Jihad Islami, Fatah-al Aqsa Brigades, Popular Resistance Committees and al Qaeda terrorists and militias.

According to DEBKAfile's intelligence sources, Iranian and Hizballah advisers are telling them how to combat a substantial Israeli ground-tank incursion. They must go underground and wage a guerrilla-terrorist war equivalent to the Iraqi insurgent campaign against US troops.

Israel is strongly advised to avoid that trap.

Unorthodox strategic and tactical thinking is needed, say the experts, not an effort to fight the Lebanon War anew in Gaza. The clock cannot be turned back to the days before 2005, when former PM Ariel Sharon supported by Olmert pulled Israel out of the Gaza Strip and the strategic Philadelphi border route -- or when Olmert after becoming prime minister let Hamas win the Palestinian general election in 2006 with FM Tzipi Livni's support.

Israelis have defeated Arab terror before. In the 1930s, The English military genius Orde Wingate taught Jewish paramilitary defenders his Special Night Squads tactics for turning Arab guerrilla methods against them. Nothing much has changed in 71 years, except for the fact that today, Israel has a strong army of its own, and does not need British or other international force to defend its sovereign territory. All that is needed is a government with resolve that lets the military do its job.

Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Avodah, May 20, 2007.

This below is an excerpt from Obadiah Shoher's book Samson Blinded: a Machiavellian Perspective Much of the book is devoted to the Arab-Israeli conflict. The index to the book can be found at

Judaism is a practical religion for individual people. It has no requirements or conditions that make normal life impossible or cannot be fulfilled in reality. Minute regulation developed only in Levitical and especially in late rabbinic interpretation; the law of the Torah is not oppressive.

Judaism is not a religion in traditional sense. Jews need not believe in supernatural events like eternal nirvana or someone's resurrection. Even ostensible miracles in Judaic epos may be explained according to the laws of nature. Judaism is a system of ethics which can be understood, evaluated, and consciously accepted. Atheists are uncomfortable with the Creation' strikingly similar to the Big Bang -- but the issue is practically unimportant. Some critical people doubt that God dictated Moses the commandments, but what changes if Moses already knew the laws and wrote them down for the judges to apply, as Jethro told him?

In the end, Judaism is the law; all events in Tanakh only demonstrate validity of the law. Any other view makes Judaism a pagan religion whose tribal deity favors one ethnic group above others. Jews are chosen to observe the law, and remain chosen insofar as they are expected to observe it. Unlike sectarian radicalism, Judaism is not maximalist.

The world is not divided between good and evil. According to Talmudic tradition, it is enough for men to be one-thousandth good and enter the heavenly realm. The commandments do not require absolute obedience in the sense that transgression does not preclude righteousness. The more a man keeps, the better, the easier is the Way. Transgression is cause for repentance, aimed at not repeating the mistake.

There is no anger. God is as indifferent to people's behavior as he is immutable. Commandments are instructions for living in this world. One can disregard them and constantly stumble upon obstacles. Those are not God's anger, not blows of fate, but simply laws of nature which we do not yet understand. The commandments tell us how to live comfortably in the field of those laws; obeying them keeps the Way free of hindrance.

No one complains of the warning on an electrical appliance. That caution is a consequence of the law of nature, not an arbitrary rule. One may ignore it and touch the wire. Shock is not a result of rage, but the effect of natural phenomena. Commandments are the same kind of advice. People are free to observe the commandments or refuse Judaism.

People endowed with free will need not follow arbitrary, incomprehensible laws, if choice exists (it does not exist for the law of gravitation). But the commandments are not arbitrary. The Ten Commandments establish just and efficient society; other rules more or less plausibly interpret the Ten.

A person who encounters interpretation he disagree with is entitled to reject it, though not without large benefit of doubt: if many other rules are correct, perhaps the one in question is only misunderstood.

The original Judaism did not even threaten afterlife punishment: souls of good and evil alike abode in the eternal sleep, returning to the primordial unity where no such distinctions exist. Judaism was conceived as a religion of free will without the coercion of afterlife threat or subornation of earthly privilege. Not incidentally, Hebrews were promised neither dominance, nor riches, but the priesthood of serving God.

The values of freedom and individualism, features of the modern political landscape since the American War of Independence and the French Revolution, were declared three thousand years ago from Sinai. The social dimensions of the Ten Commandments characterize any free society. Jewish theology stipulates free will and responsibility as the bases of human actions. Do not put the Lord your God to the test implies that people should rely on their actions, not prayer or rituals.

Judaism, unlike other religions, is orthopraxy, a way of deeds. A Christian can cross himself before or after a murder; his only maxim, "you should love your neighbor" is sufficiently flexible -- perhaps he even murdered a Jew out of love to Christ. Jews have clear commandments, and minimally religious Jew cannot murder. In family life, good deeds are more important than cheerful repetition of "I love you"; similarly in religion. Observing the Judaic ethics is the all-important end; the path matters, not goals like salvation or nirvana. Jews are taught to enjoy the process of life, made comfortable by their ethics, not strive for otherworldly aims.

Judaism is based on two principles: love to God and not harming others.

The Ten Commandments develop these principles into actionable rules.

The Ten Commandments include four minimal, commonsense religious rules, but theories, including political theories, are also based on axioms. The axioms undergirding democracy, egalitarianism and state authority, called self-evident, are more ambiguous than the commandments. Other commandments are deduced from the Ten, and rabbis later deduced more rules from the commandments. Thus, kashrut interprets You shall not murder, and the rules against homosexuality elaborate You shall not commit adultery.

This is a classic three-tier legislation: constitution, laws, and government decrees. The last are open to doubt, correction, and modernization. The second might be reinterpreted or sometimes changed, though the burden of proof that changes are necessary lies on the challengers. The first tier is immutable, and forms the cultural basis of the nation. Likewise, the Ten Commandments are divine, but derivative commandments could be questioned and rabbinical law modernized.

The first two commandments, to love God and to eschew idolatry, are the axioms that assure acceptance of the Torah's social system. Socialists require us to love egalitarianism and to eschew self-interest. Philosophical schools refer usually to an authoritative founder or rationalize their features. Jewish laws rest on divine authority.

Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 19, 2007.

An open letter to President Bush

Dear Mr. President,

Please connect the dots.

Per article #1 [1], we learn from none other than the FBI that el-Qaeda is likely to have nuclear weapons soon, and has no compunctions about using them against us.

Per article #2 [2], there can be no compromise, no negotiated truce, with an enemy whose commitment is the destruction of our civilization. There can be only complete victory for our side and unconditional surrender for theirs.

Just as Eisenhower and Roosevelt were clear that Germany needed to agree to unconditional surrender, and they were clear that the war needed to procede to that end even though Germany was willing to discuss a negotiated truce a year before the war's end; so too you, today, must have the perspicacity to see that a negotiated truce with Iran and/or el-Qaeda will merely pave the way for more war and more destruction later.

By crushing Nazism completely, and by replacing it with a post-war German government that outlawed Nazism, arrested Nazi leaders, disarmed Nazi supporters, dispersed Nazi activists, jailed Nazi sympathizers, and supported actively the Neuremberg trials in which Nazi criminals were tried and executed, the victors of world war 2 were able to create a new world order in Europe -- a world order that brought us peace and cooperation for the past 60 years. It is not likely that such an outcome would have been the case had the Nazi German government been allowed a respite, to regroup, re-arm, re-deploy, regain its support within the German populace, and re-establish Nazism as a legitimate national ideology.

Per article #3 [3], Australia shows us one important aspect of this war which we can employ to our benefit, to our victory....starve them of their money. Terrorism is expensive. It is time to start dealing with Saudi Arabia as an enemy in this war; because they use their galactic oil wealth to finance the terrorists who want to destroy us. Stop the sham. Stop the charade. Start strangling terrorists by cutting off their funding.

If Australia can do it, we can do it.

Per article #4 [4], you can be reminded that the Islamofascist terrorist forces that we face in this world war 4 are alive and well and active in our own country, with dozens of attacks, most of which, happily, were intercepted by our law enforcement or Homeland Security forces before they could be successfully carried out.

And per article #5 [5], we learn that some of the Muslim organiziations operating in the USA are clearly in cahoots with the terrorists, and are quite willing to lie for them, to whitewash or legitimize their operations, and to try to lull you and our government and our media and our intellectual leaders in to the mistaken belief that we have nothing to fear from the purveyors of islamofascist extremism.

When I connect these dots, it seems to me that we have only four options in this war, Mr. President.

  1. We can defeat the Jihad now, before it gets WMDs.

    To do this we need to follow Australia's leadership and crack down on the money and the madrasas and the mosques and the 'charitable organizations' that sponsor and support and incite and organize the terrorists in our midsts; and we must achieve total victory in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we must prevent Iran from achieving nuclear capabilities. And we must do that ASAP!!

  2. We can fight the Jihad later, after it gets nuclear weapons (which may be as early as later this year, if Iran 's progress on nuclear weapons is what Israeli and FBI information says it is).

    To do that, we can withdraw from Iraq per (for example) a Democratic leadership's time-table, cede the field to el-Qaeda and Iran, and hunker down for the next round which will probably be fought most directly on our own soil (thanks in part to the thousands of terrorist operatives who have been smuggled in to our country from Mexico and who are now safe and well and invisible within our American Muslim community).

  3. We can surrender to the Jihad and accept its dominance in the Middle East now; in Europe in the next few years or decades, and ultimately in America.

    To do that, all we need to do is follow Nancy Pelosi's lead, and make nice with Islam's worst terrorist leaders, like young Bashir in Syria, and Ahkmedi-Nejad. By legitimizing these leaders, we strengthen them, hand them Iraq on a silver platter, and allow them and their proxies (Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad) freedom of operation in their theatres of war (Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel).

  4. We can stand down now, and pick up the fight later when the Jihad is more widespread and better armed, perhaps after the Jihad has dominated France and Germany and possibly most of the rest of Europe, but before its leaders have deployable WMDs at their disposal.

    It will, of course, be more dangerous, more expensive, and much bloodier at that future time; but we will have saved ourselves the trouble of the kind of victory today that will prevent that war tomorrow.

The stakes are high, Mr. President: ... A world dominated by representative governments with civil rights, human rights, and personal freedoms ... or a world dominated by a radical Islamic Wahhabi movement, by the Jihad, under the Mullahs and the Sharia (Islamic law).

We live in a society that took almost 4,000 years to create (from the time of Abraham). Our society supports democracy, human rights, civil rights, liberty, freedom, multi-culturalism, diversity, freedom of information, freedom of assembly, freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, and equality before the law without regard to race or religion or gender or national origin or sexual preference. And that was a long time in the making.

But if the terrorists win ... it will be, overnight, the end of our civil rights, human rights, democracy, and all the freedoms that we cherish.....except for the males among us who choose to become Muslim. Just look at what life is like under Wahhabi rule in Arabia, or how it was in Afghanistan under the Taliban.

Any option other than '1.' means support for the ultimate victory of the Islamofascist Jihadist Terrorist Tyrannical Totalitarian Theocratic Triumphalist Supremacist Imperialist leaders of the Muslim world today.

I vote for '1'.

End Notes

[1.] "FBI's Mueller: Bin Laden Wants to Strike U.S. Cities With Nuclear Weapons"
Ronald Kessler
Tuesday, May 15, 2007

Osama bin Laden and his terrorist group desperately want to obtain nuclear devices and explode them in American cities, especially New York and Washington, D.C., FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III tells NewsMax.

In an exclusive interview, Mueller also acknowledged that bin Laden is still active, though isolated. The director revealed that the Bureau believes the terrorist leader continues to communicate with al-Qaida cells, some of which remain in the U.S.

Mueller declined to say how often bin Laden communicates or to elaborate on the substance of his communications.

Other intelligence sources tell NewsMax that U.S. security efforts have forced bin Laden to return to 'horse-and-buggy days' -- avoiding electronic communications in favor of using trusted couriers.

But Mueller says though hemmed in, al-Qaida's paramount goal is clear: to detonate a nuclear device that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans.

In contrast to homegrown terrorists, al-Qaida is far more likely to be able to pull off such an attack.

Mueller admits the nuclear threat is so real he sometimes wakes up in the middle of the night worrying about that possibility.

'I think it would be very difficult to wipe out the United States, but you'd have hundreds of thousands of casualties from a nuclear device, depending on the size of that nuclear device,' Mueller tells NewsMax.

A Lust for Destruction

Al-Qaida could obtain such a device in one of two ways.

'One is to obtain a nuclear device that's already been constructed from one of the former Iron Curtain countries, and the other way is to put together the fissile material and the expertise and do an improvised nuclear device,' Mueller says.

'And there's no doubt that al-Qaida, if it had the capability, would go down either route to get a nuclear device.'

Mueller also has little doubt as to al-Qaida's likely targets.

'It would be someplace in the United States, in most likely Washington and or New York, depending on how many devices they have. Or both cities,' Mueller says.

Because the U.S. has not been attacked in almost six years, Mueller worries that 'we are in danger of becoming complacent.'

'Al-Qaida is tremendously patient and thinks nothing about taking years to infiltrate persons in and finding the right personnel and opportunity to undertake an attack.

'And we cannot become complacent, because you look around the world, and whether it's London or Madrid or Bali or recently Casablanca or Algiers, attacks are taking place.'

Mueller adds the U.S. must remain vigilant. He says our security efforts must 'adapt to the new threat landscape.'



"Can There Be Peace Without Victory?"
by Rachel Neuwirth
John Landau contributed to this article.
American Thinker
May 18, 2007


...Sometimes peace can only be achieved by a decisive military victory. A 'peace' that leaves in place a serious threat to the national security or even worse, a threat to the very survival of the nation, is not a true or genuine peace. It can only lead to more war on terms very unfavorable to the national interest. Neither can peace be achieved by yielding to the use of force by those who are pursuing an agenda hostile to the national interest.

'Peace' settlements that left in place a dictatorial regime with aggressive tendencies have not led to a stable or secure peace. The negotiated truce that ended the Korean War, while leaving in power the Kim Il Sung regime in North Korea, is a case in point. The Gulf war cease-fire that left Saddam Hussein in power is another example.

Speaking in the context of another war, eighty years after the American Civil War, one that also could not be resolved through negotiations or troop withdrawals, Winston Churchill wisely pointed out that 'without victory, there can be no survival.


Cameron Stewart,
"Financing World Caliphate"
May 17, 2007
'The Australian'

ISLAMIC extremists in Australia are being starved of money by an unprecedented crackdown on the secret flow of funds from Saudi Arabia. ASIO [Australian spy agency] and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade have quietly spearheaded the disruption of funding from Saudi charities and Saudi nationals, reducing it to only a trickle after concerns the money could be used to fund terror plots in Australia.

The Government's push has robbed local extremists of a traditional source of funding from a country that has invested more than $120 million into Australia's Islamic community since the 1970s. Saudi Arabian money has been used to build mosques and schools in Australia but it has also helped to promote extreme Wahabist interpretations of Islam (world domination of Islam).

Saudi Arabia has been accused by the US Government of tacitly funding extremism via quasi-government charities that promote Wahabism. Washington says Saudi government-sanctioned charities have secretly bankrolled the Indonesian terrorist group Jemaah Islamiah, responsible for killing 92 Australians in the two Bali bombings.


"A trail of plots since 9/11"
LA Times
May 9, 2007 article on fort Dix attempted attack.

Here are some of the plots or alleged plots cited by U.S. authorities in recent years:

  • September 2002: The 'Lackawanna Six,' American citizens of Yemeni descent living near Buffalo, N.Y., are arrested for allegedly having attended an Al Qaeda camp in Afghanistan in the months before the Sept. 11 attacks. The six plead guilty in 2003 to providing material support to a terrorist organization.

  • May 2003: Iyman Faris of Columbus, Ohio, a naturalized U.S. citizen from Pakistan, pleads guilty to supporting Al Qaeda. He is accused of planning to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge. He is sentenced to 20 years.

  • June 2003: In Virginia, the FBI charges a group of men with being part of a conspiracy to support a holy war overseas. In all, 11 men are convicted in what the government describes as a 'jihad network' that used paintball games as a form of training.

  • August 2004: U.S. authorities say they have evidence of a years-long plot to attack the New York Stock Exchange and other financial institutions in New York, Washington and Newark, N.J. They also accuse the plotters of planning attacks in England. Eventually, five men plead guilty in London. The alleged ringleader, Dhiren Barot, is convicted. At least one other man awaits trial.

  • August 2004: Two men are arrested on the eve of the Republican National Convention in New York for allegedly plotting to blow up a busy subway station. James Elshafay, a U.S. citizen, pleads guilty and testifies against the other man, Shahawar Matin Siraj, a Pakistani. Siraj is sentenced to 30 years in prison; Elshafay receives five years.

  • August 2004: Authorities arrest two leaders of a mosque in Albany, N.Y., and charge them with aiding in a purported plot to buy a shoulder-fired grenade launcher to assassinate a Pakistani diplomat. The former imam of the Masjid As-Salam mosque, Kurdish refugee Yassin Aref, and Mohammed Hossain, a mosque founder, are found guilty of counts relating to money laundering and conspiracy.

  • June 2005: A Pakistani immigrant and his American-born son in Lodi, Calif., are arrested for allegedly lying to the FBI about the younger man's training at a camp in Pakistan. Hamid Hayat, the son, is found guilty of supporting terrorism and lying to the FBI. He is seeking a new trial. The case against Umer Hayat, the father, ends in a mistrial; he later pleads guilty to lying to a customs agent about trying to carry $28,000 into Pakistan.

  • August 2005: Four California men, one the founder of a radical Islamic prison group, are indicted for allegedly conspiring to attack Los Angeles-area military bases, synagogues and other targets. The men have pleaded not guilty and await trial.

  • February 2006: Three men are arrested in Toledo, Ohio, for allegedly providing material support to terrorists. One of the men is accused of downloading videos on the use of suicide-bomb vests.

  • April 2006: Two Georgia men are charged with material support of terrorism after allegedly videotaping buildings in the Washington area, including the Capitol and the World Bank, and sending the video to a London extremist.

  • June 2006: The FBI announces the arrests of seven men in Miami and Atlanta in what officials call the early stages of a plot to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago and to destroy FBI offices and other buildings. All of the men plead not guilty and are awaiting trial.

  • and now, May, 2007 the fort Dix attempted attack.

To which list may be added (just off the top of my head)

  • The millennium plot, foiled when terrorists were captured at the Canadian border, who planned to attack LAX
  • The suicide attack on the El Al station at LAX by an Egyptian American.
  • The Brooklyn terror group apprehended with bombs and chemicals in their kitchen.
  • The suicide assault on the JCF in Seattle, killing one and wounding 5
  • The drive-over jihad attack w large SUV (sudden jihad syndrome) in North Carolina
  • The drive-over jihad attack with large SUV in east bay and SF Cal near the JCC
  • The group running a tax-evasion cigarette smuggling ring for Hamas in Florida
  • Sami el-Aryan,
  • The CAIR leaders convicted for support of Hamas
  • Several Muslim "charities" shut down, with leaders deported, for funding Hamas and Hezbollah and el-Qaeda

So...the USA is the target of attempted terror attacks, on-going, inside the USA; and USA civil-rights laws and charity regulations are exploited by these local or even home-grown Islamofascist terrorists for assistance to international terrorist enemies. (as of 5.11.07)


Patrick Poole
"Cover-up and Deny"
May 16, 2007

In December 2005, the Dallas Morning News published an exchange between counterterrorism researcher Daveed Gartenstein-Ross ("Extremists among Us?") and Mahdi Bray ("We're proud of our Muslim 'face'"), head of the Muslim American Society's (MAS) Freedom Foundation. At issue was an announcement by MAS, subsequent to the 7/7 terrorist attack in London, that the group would be launching a campaign to combat terrorism.

In response to this announcement, Gartenstein-Ross noted that MAS had been equivocal on the terrorism issue, and stated that "a look beneath MAS' current rhetoric into the organization's connections, teachings and prior public statements reveals that extremists founded MAS and that, despite efforts to clean up its public image, the core of its teachings remain unchanged".

In support of his argument, Gartenstein-Ross observed that even post-9/11, MAS had expressed support for terrorist activities in its magazine, The American Muslim:

Indeed, The American Muslim provides a snapshot of where MAS really stands on terrorism. The March 2002 issue includes a fatwa endorsing suicide bombings against Israelis, which states that 'martyr operations are not suicide and should not be deemed as unjustifiable means of endangering one's life.' The fatwa goes on to say that in suicide bombings, 'the Muslim sacrifices his own life for the sake of performing a religious duty, which is jihad against the enemy.'

But in his published defense of his organization, Mahdi Bray categorically denied that such a fatwa endorsing suicide attacks in Israel even existed:

Additionally, Mr. Ross asserts that a fatwa (religious opinion) in our March 2002 American Muslim magazine supports suicide bombing. There is absolutely no such fatwa in the March 2002 edition of the American Muslim magazine.

Just weeks after this exchange, the American Muslim website went dark, or more appropriately, white. A common practice for those who want to eliminate items from the web cache of search engines, such as Google, is to remove the page and replace it with a blank white screen to clear the information out of web cache. This is what happened to the American Muslim magazine website.

But one area that website owners cannot control is the various Internet archive sites that regularly catalogue the contents of the World Wide Web. It is here that the evidence supporting Mr. Gartenstein-Ross' claims about the missing MAS martyrdom fatwa resides. In fact, the Internet Archive houses the past issues of American Muslim, and preserves intact a copy of the missing fatwa that Mahdi Bray vigorously denied existed.

The fatwa was issued by Faysal Mawlawi, deputy chairman of the European Council for Fatwa and Research, headed by the "Theologian of Terror", Youssef al-Qaradawi (who also has a fatwa reprinted in the same issue), and is reproduced here in its entirety from the American Muslim archives:


Some people say that the operations carried out by Palestinians are considered suicidal acts and not a kind of Jihad, is that true? Please tell me whether these acts are martyr operations and a kind of striving in Allah's Cause or not?

Answer: Sheikh Faysal Mawlawi:

Martyr operations are not suicide and should not be deemed as unjustifiable means of endangering one's life. Allah says in the Glorious Qura'n: "And spend of your substance in the cause of Allah, and make not your own hands contribute to (your) destruction; but do good; for Allah loveth those who do good." (Al-Baqara:195).

The verse obviously indicates that failing to spend in Allah's Cause is like casting oneself into ruin. That is the reason behind the revelation of the noble verse. Reviewing the Islamic rule: "Words should be construed as imparting general meanings regardless of their specific occasions", the meaning of the afore-mentioned verse is bound to extend to include any negligence of a religious duty; i.e. forsaking a religious duty entails casting oneself into ruin. The same applies to committing sins.

Therefore, it's quite an abysmal analysis for someone to focus on the afore-mentioned verse through a narrow a perspective, without taking into consideration all relevant points.

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) strictly forbade suicide and made it clear that anyone who commits suicide would be cast into hell. But in such case suicide means Muslim's killing himself without any lawfully accepted reason or killing himself to escape pain or social problems.

On the other hand, in martyr operations, the Muslim sacrifices his own life for the Sake of performing a religious duty, which is Jihad against the enemy as scholars say.

Accordingly, a Muslim's intention when committing suicide is certainly different from his intention when performing a military operation and dying in the Cause of Almighty Allah. So it is natural that the religious legal status would differ in each case, as Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him says in a Hadith: "Actions are but by intention, and every man shall have but that which he intended."

This means that martyr operations are totally different from the forbidden suicide. Concerning the Palestinians, the enemy has occupied their land, their houses and their sacred places and has driven about four million of them out of their houses replacing them with even larger numbers of Jewish settlements. The enemy relies on sophisticated military equipments while, at the same time, denies the Palestinians their basic human rights, killing their women, children and men mercilessly, and rendering the Palestinians powerless and incapable of defending themselves -- even all the Arab countries face the same fate, lacking necessary weapons.

So the Palestinians have nothing but throwing stones at their enemy in order to defend their country. This, despite its indication of a high morale, cannot deter the enemy this way. So the Palestinians resort to martyr operations, in which the martyr seriously harms the enemy meanwhile sacrifices his own life.

From the historical record of the American Muslim, we find that the fatwa is precisely how Gartenstein-Ross represented it. He said that

The March 2002 issue includes a fatwa endorsing suicide bombings against Israelis, which states that 'martyr operations are not suicide and should not be deemed as unjustifiable means of endangering one's life.'

And we find that the fatwa says exactly that in the opening sentence:

Martyr operations are not suicide and should not be deemed as unjustifiable means of endangering one's life.

Thus, Mahdi Bray was either ignorant of the contents of his organization's own publication and did not fact-check his claims (presumably he would have had ready access to confirm or deny the claims before publicly calling Mr. Gartenstein-Ross a liar), or his published denials were part of a deliberate campaign by the MAS to cover-up its advocacy of terrorism. Only Mahdi Bray can answer which is true.


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

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 19, 2007.

David Brooks Op Ed piece in the 05/18/2007 edition of the New York Times, 'The Insurgent Advantage', is a must read for those who wish to acquaint themselves with an uncomfortable realization. He discusses, 'Brave New War', a book by John Robb, a graduate of Yale University and the Air Force Academy, an insightful recently released work drawing little fanfare, whose premise should smash any caring individual upside his sheltered head with the clout of a steel two by four. The essence of Robb's contention is insurgents exist in many loosely connected cadres, maintain a feudal mentality, yet are quite adaptable, technologically advanced, and wish to weaken but not destroy states. Clearly, they cannot be defeated as long as civil nations maintain centralized bureaucratic military mindsets unwilling to recognize the crux of their dilemma. Indeed, 'nation-states are inefficient learning organizations, at least compared to their feudal and postnational foes.' In effect, a comparatively lumbering tortoise, even one with ample resources, patriotic fervor, and a shock and awe strategy cannot defeat a swifter hare, with access to sufficient resources, learned in manipulating vulnerable minds, and obsessed with jihadist aspirations.

Logic dictates the most efficient perhaps only way to deal with such an insidious organism, extremely agile, ever metastasizing through the bowels of civilized and not so civilized nations spreading terror, is to starve the malignancy; cut off its funding. The direct source of such funding is rogue oil-rich Islamic regimes, most notably Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Sudan. Although these loosely linked cadres may espouse different brands of hate-filled Koranic gospel, they are kindred spirit jihad junkies. Bizarrely, the indirect financers of these jihadists are industrial oil-dependent nations, the very targets of their murderous activity. Indeed, petrodollars flow from non-Muslim industrial nations to oil-rich Islamic regimes that finance insurgents who terrorize non-Muslim industrial nations that provide petro-dollars to oil-rich Islamic regimes that finance insurgents and on and on; a never ending surreal circle born of stupidity and greed.

Military incursions, deploying ground forces into neighborhoods infested with insurgent/terrorist cells, attempting to root out that enemy, no doubt would result in heavy casualties to those invading forces as well as civilians, acting willingly or unwillingly as human shields for the terror mongers, ever willing to sacrifice even their own brethren in the name of their perverted god. Furthermore, the home field advantage is enormous, making it virtually impossible to ultimately vanquish resident malignant well-armed continually funded jihadist slime oozing into each and every nook and cranny of inhabited tenements strewn about the malevolent landscape. Moral imperatives prevent civil warriors from leveling such neighborhoods with missiles, launched from air, land, or sea. Surely, those who value human life are at a distinct disadvantage over those who do not. As a result of such military failure, insurgents could leave their hideouts and penetrate into civil states, easily wrecking havoc by planting bombs or blowing themselves up, murdering and disabling proximate victims. No doubt, insurgents/terrorists pose enormous threats to civil nations, eluding the broadest of military campaigns, thus potentially able to slither into targeted nations and inflict carnage.

John Robb, per David Brooks critique, suggests 'democratic nations need to build their own decentralized counterinsurgency networks....imagining local squads of grass-roots terror fighters.' Indeed, imagine a world where nimble squads of well-trained good guys go after ever adapting groups of bad guys. What civilian would feel safe in such a scenario, trying to make it through a day without becoming a victim of some jihadist massacre? What mother would let her child go to school? What economy, heretofore mostly immune to the ravages perpetrated by violent Islam, would survive in the wake of abandoned shopping malls, stadiums, office buildings, factories, and any other venues where ordinary citizens normally gather, now unwilling to risk an explosive laden martyr that might go undetected despite a superior police force, if say even a few homicide/suicide bombers successfully detonated? Is there but one such relatively inexperienced democratic nation, not so hardened like an experienced Israel that could withstand the impact of terrorism unleashed within their local communities?

There is only one sensible way to attempt to preemptively prevent such a potentially worldwide catastrophe. Cut off the funding cycle now and hope it is not too late!

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 larose@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, May 19, 2007.

This essay was written by Frank Salvato, Managing Editor of The New Media Journal U.S. and it was published yesterday at

It is difficult to value something when its worth is unknown. The adage of one child being given a toy only to leave it out in the rain to rust, never understanding the toys worth, while another child made to earn the same toy is found to take care of it, valuing its worth, is a fitting analogy. This basic truth applies to our American heritage and the continued welfare of our nation. Most of us have never had to take up arms to protect our freedoms, our liberties, our rights as guaranteed under The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and The Bill of Rights, our Charters of Freedom. In most cases these gifts have been bequeathed to us from those of generations past who did have to serve, to protect and defend our nation and by those who valiantly volunteer to serve today. What is asked of us in return for this legacy of freedom is loyalty to the covenant between citizen and government, loyalty to our nation. Today, our country faces both a threat from abroad and a threat, in the form of ideological conflict, from within. Some among us choose to accentuate the imperfections of our nation. Some condemn our culture. And still others literally champion our nation's defeat and demise. Those who choose to diminish the significance of the United States' contributions to the world, do so in ignorance of the intent of the documents that charted the course for this great nation and the ideologies and principles that provided the foundation for the creation of our governmental covenant. September 11, 2001 signaled to the world that radical Islamofascists were serious in their declaration of war against the United States and her Western allies. As we move further away from Osama bin Laden's 1996 fatwa -- his declaration of war -- and as we progress in our examination of the inner-workings of this macabre ideology, it becomes increasingly evident that this conflict is a generational conflict and a confrontation as we have never experienced before. Those who criticize the use of the term Global War on Terror have a point but their point is a matter of semantics and all who argue this point are not genuine in their dissent. Many of those who argue this point do so from an ideological standpoint, using the linguistic argument to divert from the intended meaning of the phrase. The fact of the matter is that fundamentalist Islamofascism is being fought in countries around the world. From Iraq and Afghanistan to Somalia and Sudan, Indonesia and India to Paraguay, China, Russia, the UK, France and the United States, radical Islamists are training, planning and engaging in activities meant to cause harm to the west in general and particularly the United States and those who stand in her defense. In the United States al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Muslim Brotherhood -- to name but a few terrorist organizations -- have set up regional headquarters in Boston, Chicago, New York, Dallas, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Tampa, Washington DC and over 38 other cities around the country. They are not only raising, laundering and funneling money back to the Middle East to support their terrorist organizations, they are setting up jihadi training camps right here in the United States.

Dr. Paul Williams' recent exposé on the Islamist jihadi training compound at Islamberg, New York [Editor's Note: see this below. and the followup.] stands as a clarion call to the American people -- and the US Government -- to awaken from their politically correct stupor to the reality that radical Islamist jihadis are here, now, and training among us for future attacks on our nation.

Compounds (or hamaats) identical to the one found by Dr. Williams in Islamberg can be found in Hyattsville, Maryland; Red House and Falls Church, Virginia; Macon, Georgia; York, South Carolina; Dover, Tennessee; Buena Vista, Colorado; Talihina, Oklahoma; Tulare County and Commerce, California; and Onalaska, Washington. Dr. Williams points out that others are being built, including an expansive facility in Sherman, Pennsylvania.

At the same time, here in the United States we are engaged in what some experts are calling a culture war. Some would go as far as to call it a second Civil War for the fact that several elected officials, along with myriad activists, have acted to the detriment of our military and the well-being of our nation, cavorting with world leaders who actively call for our country's ruin.

This "second Civil War" is being fought on the ideological and political battlegrounds. The catalysts for this conflict are drastically opposing ideologies, very different visions for the future of our country and an ever-widening disparity between those who value our country and the principles on which it was founded and those who are unable to value them because they do not understand their worth.

One faction is invested in the ideology of one-world globalism, an ideology that draws heavily from the Socialist/Communist dogma in that they are inclined to embrace the idea of the global village or the "its takes a village" philosophy of governmental authority. They champion government as a vehicle for change over the idea that rights exist independently from government. This ideology rebukes much of the libertarian and classically liberal philosophies of those who influenced our Framers and Founders to create the great American experiment.

Another faction entrenches itself so thoroughly in the Laissez Faire segment of classical liberalism that they refuse to acknowledge there are many times when government involvement in societal affairs is beneficial, not only to the masses but also to the individual.

And the largest group among the United States' citizenry has been swayed over the past several decades, through the promotion of multiculturalism and political correctness, to identify more with their genealogical "roots" and with the suggestion that they are more members of an overriding global community than members of a cohesive American culture, thus facilitating the Balkanization of American society. This, in part, results in a great number of Americans being not only less concerned with the preservation of our American heritage, but thoroughly apathetic toward the American governmental process.

These three major groups identified, we are faced with the stark reality that 55.3% of our population is engaging in the governmental process, this percentage comprised almost evenly of those identifying with the active but opposing ideologies now battling this uniquely American culture war, while an alarming and potentially potent number ignore their civic responsibility of constitutional stewardship by being apathetic to the process altogether. In essence, all it takes to win a national election is to garner the support of a little over twenty-eight percent of those eligible to vote, as the majority of Americans stand hypnotized by a limited societal vision cultivated by the malady of civic apathy prevalent throughout the "Me Generation."

It is a difficult thing for any nation to endure deep rooted and defined ideological divisions. Add to that the external threat of an aggressive and militant ideology in the form of radical Islamofascism and what presents is a "perfect storm" for an effective deterioration and/or cessation of our unique society, our American heritage and our constitutional form of government.

What is desperately needed for our country to survive this unprecedented challenge, this "perfect storm," is an adequate understanding of the principles, ideologies and history that moved the Framers and our Founding Fathers to risk freedom, liberty, property and ultimately life, so that their dream of the great American experiment could come to fruition. We, the American people one and all, need to understand why they found so much worth in our nation's creation and why they valued this endeavor enough to risk dying for it.

The only way to achieve this much needed infusion of ideological enlightenment is for each American to invest some time in the accurate, first-source, fact-based examination of not only the Charters of Freedom, but the principles and ideologies embraced by our Framers and Founders in the creation of these remarkable documents along with the history that brought them to their fates. We must acquaint ourselves, even if briefly, with the works that moved them to action, the philosophies of Locke, Hobbes, Burke and even Cicero and Aristotle.

To exercise this very basic loyalty to our country is to move toward understanding the meaning behind the words of our Founding Documents. To understand the meaning behind the documents is to understand the worth of our nation. And understanding the worth of our nation allows us to value it, to want to defend it; it allows us to be uniquely American and proud to be so.

In an era when so few can be so devastating to this country, the greatest hope for freedom and liberty in the world, it can be considered our duty to embrace this civic responsibility.

Out of respect for all those who braved the creation of our nation and to honor all those who fought and died fighting for our continued freedoms we need to satisfy this very basic civic responsibility. There are no excuses for not doing so, regardless of your ideological bent, especially when our very survival is at stake. To refuse to do so can only be seen as stand against the principles on which country was founded. To refuse to do so is being unpatriotic and un-American.

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 19, 2007.

This was written by Jeff Jacoby and it appeared in the Jewish World Review

The war between Fatah and Hamas was raging a few months ago when Palestinian authority leader Mahmoud Abbas addressed a Fatah rally in Ramallah. "The priority for me is preserving national unity and preventing internal fighting," he told the crowd on Jan. 11. "Shooting at your brother is forbidden." But Abbas made clear it was only intra-Palestinian bloodshed he opposed. Attacking Jews was still OK.....

"We should put our internal fighting aside and raise our rifles only against the Israeli occupation," he said, according to a World Net Daily report. In a nod to his Arab rivals, he praised arch-terrorist Ahmed Yassin, the co-founder of Hamas who was killed by Israel in 2004. For good measure, he threw in some anti-Semitic boilerplate: "The sons of Israel are mentioned as those who are corrupting humanity on earth."

Most media accounts of the Fatah rally mentioned only Abbas's "unity" remarks, leaving out the gamier stuff about raising rifles against the humanity-corrupters (AP headline: "Abbas calls for respect at Fatah rally"). In similar fashion, news reports have rarely pointed out that in the Gaza Strip, where the Fatah-Hamas street battles have taken place, the "occupation" ended in August 2005, when Israel razed 21 Jewish settlements and expelled every Jew from the territory. For all intents and purposes, there has been a sovereign Palestinian state in Gaza for the past 18 months. The anarchy and violence, the kidnappings, the myriad of armed gangs -- that is the authentic face of Palestinian statehood. Take a good look.

"In the State of Palestine," writes columnist Caroline Glick in the Jan. 30 JWR, "two-year-olds are killed and no one cares. Children are woken up in the middle of the night and murdered in front of their parents. Worshipers in mosques are gunned down by terrorists who attend competing mosques. ... In the State of Palestine, women are stripped naked and forced to march in the streets to humiliate their husbands. Ambulances are stopped on the way to hospitals and the wounded are shot in cold blood."

The wonder is not that the Palestinian Authority seethes with violence and instability; there are other places too where bloodshed is the daily fare. The wonder is not that the Palestinians, who receive copious amounts of international aid -- more than $1.2 billion last year from Western governments alone -- channel so much of their resources and energy into weapons and warfare. The wonder is that so many voices still push for a Palestinian state. But has any population ever been less suited for statehood than the Palestinians? From the terrorists they choose as leaders to the jihad promoted in their schools, their culture is drenched in violence and hatred. Each time the world has offered them sovereignty -- an offer that the Kurds or the Chechens or the Tibetans would leap at -- the Palestinians have opted instead for bloodshed and rejectionism.

"What do you want more," a frustrated Shimon Peres once asked Yasser Arafat, "a Palestinian state or a Palestinian struggle?" Over and over, Palestinians have chosen the "struggle." The very essence of Palestinian national identity is a hunger for Israel's destruction. Both the Fatah and Hamas charters call for the obliteration of the Jewish state through bloodshed. A two-state solution -- Israel and Palestine living peacefully side-by-side -- is emphatically not what the Palestinians seek. No amount of Israeli concessions or American wheedling or Quartet cajoling is likely to change that. So why does the Bush administration continue to pretend otherwise?

"There is simply no reason to avoid the subject of how we get to a Palestinian state," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice blithely asserted Feb. 2, even as the best reason to do so -- the Palestinians' unfitness for self-government -- was on display in Gaza's streets. Last week Abbas agreed to form a "unity" government with Hamas, making any prospect of peace with Israel more remote. Yet next week Rice will host a summit meeting with Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, and there will be a fresh flood of empty words about peace and statehood.

James Woolsey, who served as director of central intelligence under President Clinton, said recently that it would take "many decades" before Palestinian society is civilized enough for statehood. Even some Palestinians might agree. "Everyone here is disgusted by what's happening in the Gaza Strip," Shireen Atiyeh, 30, a Palestinian Authority government worker, told the Jerusalem Post. "We are telling the world that we don't deserve a state... Today I'm ashamed to say that I'm a Palestinian."

When will it be time to consider statehood for Palestine? When it is led by people like her.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, May 19, 2007.

An interesting New Ally against the Academic Fifth Column in Israel

One segment of the Israeli population is generally unaware of the mischief and dangers related to Israel's academic fifth column. namely, the Orthodox. By and large these folks do not take advanced university degrees, and when they do it is usually at Bar Ilan University, which is a relatively minor arena of Post-Zionist agitation. Over the weekend a major article was published that may signal a change in this.

"Besheva" is a free weekly distributed mainly through synagogues over Shabbat in Israel, dealing partly with religious issues and partly with politics, in Hebrew only. It is nominally connected with the Israel National News (Arutz 7) web site but seems to be produced independently.

This past weekend, May 17, it carried a full page article by Rabbi Eliezer Melamed about Israeli universities. Rabbi Melamed is one of the best known and most respected Rabbis among the Orthodox religious Zionist movement. He is a respected "posek" or issuer of Rabbinic rulings regarding religious questions (see
http://www.yeshiva.org.il/midrash/Hmidrash.asp?cat=149 ). He sometimes also speaks about politics (as an example, see
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/489 ). He heads a yeshiva at Har Bracha in the West Bank. (Here is a short bio:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/126266 )

In the weekend column, part of his article was devoted to questions regarding college tuition and the ongoing current student strike in Israel, which has lasted now for about 2 months. Melamed denounced the strike and the strike leaders, and declared it unjust and immoral. But then he went on to write a broadside attack on the leftwing "Post-Zionist" faculty members at Israeli universities, who devote their energies to demonizing Israel and denouncing Israel's legitimacy. He notes that these are a particularly common plague in the Schools of Social Sciences and the Humanities.

He writes (page 40):

"We cannot support Israeli academia without reservation. Too many things going on there are not in accordance with our values. From the schools of social sciences and the humanities there are emerging numerous voices that abhor Jewish tradition and values and are the worst anti-Zionists, people who denounce Israel for almost every conceivable and imaginary evil.

"The academic establishment does nothing to rein these people in. To the contrary, these people enjoy every defense in the name of academic freedom. But these are the very schools and departments from which we should expect efforts to strengthen the Israeli spirit rather than vicious attacks against it. Why should Israeli citizens finance the salaries of such people?! To the contrary. let's have some REAL freedom of choice. Those who wish to study with such people should pay for this out of their own pockets, while those who don't wish to - will not. Why should these people earn the same salaries as those in the natural sciences who actually make contributions of priceless value to Israel?

"It will be entirely unsurprising if it turns out that forces from the Radical Left are actually behind the long ongoing student strike, the same Radical Left whose power base is in the departments of social sciences and humanities at the universities. Have the students even investigated for whom these people are working? Which hostile or foreign interests are they serving? Perhaps tuition is nothing more than a misleading banner to recruit students for their real agenda. For all these reasons, the students should not participate in the strike."

From out of Jerusalem shall Torah Go Forth, but from out of Israel Academia Monitor (www.israel-academia-monitor.com) is going the news about the mischief of Israel's academic fifth column, and it is reaching important new audiences!

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. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 19, 2007.


Headline: 'Syrian Arrests Signal Narrowing Freedoms.' Syria has done it again. After allowing critics of the regime latitude to agitate and organize, the government arrested a leading critic, and sentenced him to five years in prison. The crime was defaming the country. (Defamation of Syria, that's a good one!)

Why the expensive (and harsh) means of signaling? Why not call in the leading critic and tell him he must stop, now, or else the regime will make an example of him? Perhaps such agitators don't get the message unless it is cruel.


At a press briefing, the State Dept. representative said the US goal is to get Israel to see that it has a neighbor devoted to fighting terrorism, so that Israel would permit it sovereignty.

The representative did not explain, and the State Dept. and President has not explained why a neighbor devoted for decades to terrorism deserves any consideration and at the expense of its victims. It never discussed the consequences of sovereignty if those Arabs retain terrorism ' sovereignty means independence to promote terrorism. It never explained how a culture dedicated exclusively to predation can be expected to reverse itself just as jihad is moving into high gear and high expectations.

Why doesn't the State Dept. discuss those problems? I think that it is because to raise them is to show that its avowed goal has no merit nor sense. Its real goal probably is not to make peace or help the Arabs but stifle the Jews.

Unfortunately for America, the State Dept. needs Israel's help in combating jihad, but instead helps the jihadists combat Israel. Few Americans realize how anti-American the State Dept. biases work out to be.

When will an Israeli Prime Minister explain to Congress and on US television that the Arab-Israel conflict is jihad same as against the US, and that the State Dept. makes matters worse for both countries. Instead they come with undeserved praise and perpetuate the myth of US friendship for Israel.


S. Arabia receives many pilgrims but few tourists. A tourism program might feature: (1) Madrassas, where hatred is engendered; (2) Wife-beatings, as an example for men; (3) Proper apparel for proper women; (4) Amputation as punishment; and (5) Arab hospitality to persuade Westerners how nice they are.


Muslims have taken refuge in the West. Most Muslim mosques, schools, and rallies, however, emphasize hatred of the West and sympathy for jihadist attacks on it. The West is reluctant to respond by warfare to a movement that is subversive internally and belligerent externally. Whatever mere police action the West takes in self-defense, Muslim representatives depict as Islamophobic. They exploit Western tolerance and fear of offending the proponents of multiculturalism.

Multiculturalism can work only with mature and tolerant cultures. Islam has not evolved beyond its primitive origins of intolerance, violence, repression of speech and of women, and deceit about it and in its tactics.

P.A. Muslim society probably is devoted more to jihad than any other Muslim society. The whole people give priority to jihad over normal governance. The whole culture is devoted to indoctrination in it. All that the people resent about it is the resulting random violence by unrestrained thugs. They want their dictators to make the streets safe.

Preoccupation with jihad has impoverished the people but not altered their priority. Many would like to move to some more prosperous country, but unfortunately they would bring in their destructive values. If the West continues offering 'humanitarian' aid to the P.A., then the Muslims there can continue to war on innocent people and eat their pita, too.

The western Palestinian Arabs are aggressors driven by bigotry and lacking scruples or mercy. In all the world, they deserve the least sympathy. Unfortunately, many well-meaning Westerners, who don't know Islamic history or Muslim values pity 'the poor Palestinians' and would support their victory.

Destroy Israel, and those Westerners are next. It is a sad reflection upon Western education that sympathizers with the Palestinian Arabs can't differentiate between violators and victims. Many Western Christians fail to realize that those Arabs and Muslims generally persecute Christians.


On my way to visit the Cloisters in Manhattan, I briefly heard rap music. It exhorted to narcotics and sex. At the museum, I was impressed by Christianity's lengthy tenure and the evolution of its rules and outlook. Europeans are abandoning that religion in favor of a degrading hedonism, and are letting themselves slide under the feet of the Muslim religion that emphasizes the very elements that the Europeans abhor and surpass.

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@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Kaustav Chakrabarti, May 19, 2007.

Israel's membership in the OECD comes as a welcome step in the organization's recognition of the Jewish state's economic viability. The recognition, in fact, had been long overdue. To most of the international community, and to the economic pundits of our times, Israel has been a subsidized state, depending for the most part, on American aid. There was no such thing as an independent Israeli economy in their mental horizons. This has been a biased notion owing to several interplaying factors, namely: anti-Semitism, leftism, Arab propaganda and so on and so forth.

Israel has long been touted as a propped up state by Western powers, militarily and economically. Israel has been derisively described as the "fifty first state" of the US. But if we take a hard look, we shall find that all such comments are guided by prejudice rather than by facts.

The following statistical data would suffice to put Israel on the world economic map: IMF projects a 4.8% GDP growth for 2007, one of the highest in the industrialized world, trailing Hong Kong and Singapore at 5.5% and Ireland's 5%, ahead of So. Korea's 4.4%, UK's 2.3%, Japan's 2.3%, US' 2.2% and Germany's 1.8%. Inflation is projected to be at 0.1% deflation (!), while the average industrialized countries' average is 1.8%. Unemployment is projected to decrease to 7.5% from 9% in 2005 and 8.4% in 2006, still one of the highest among industrialized countries, trailing Germany, France, Belgium, Spain and Greece (Globes, April 11). Way back in 1995, the IMF had taken Israel off the list of developing countries.

BANK OF ISRAEL ON 2006 INDICATORS: GDP growth -- 5.1%, compared with 3.1% in the EEC and 3.3% in the US. GDP per capita rose by 3.3%, compared with 2.3% in the US and EEC. GDP per capita -- $19,900 ($18,700 in 2005, $18,000 in 2004, $17,200 in 2003, $16,600 in 2002 and $19,200 in 2000 before the burst of "The NASDAQ Bubble"), compared with $34,000 in the EEC and $43,000 in the US. Inflation -- minus 0.1%, compared with 2.1% in the US and 2.3% in the EEC. Unemployment -- 7.7% (trending downward), compared with 7.4% and 4.6% in the EEC and the US. Public Debt -- trending downward to 88% of GDP, compared with 73% and 61% in the EEC and the US. $4.4BN all-time record sales by ISRAEL's DEFENSE INDUSTRIES, 75% to foreign markets. Previous record was achieved in 2002 -- $4BN (Jerusalem Post, Jan. 2, 2007). Israel happens to be the fourth largest arms manufacturer in the world. (Courtesy: Sanda Abramovici Lam) If the above-mentioned data are any indicator, then Israel could be said to have out-performed the world's leading economies.

This has actually happened in spite of all adversities that the Jewish State has had to face in the last 60 years of its existence. Moreover, Israel is the only country in the Middle East with minimal or no oil reserves. So unlike the oil-based economies of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran or Oman with their huge petro-dollar reserves, Israel had to depend mostly on its ingenious and enterprising population for maintaining a sustainable economic growth. In this respect brainpower has definitely stolen a match over oil power.

Another interesting thing about the Israeli economy is that it produces not only for feeding and sustaining its population, but also gives substantial aid to developing countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America in terms of financial aid and technical assistance. With this end in view was born the MASHAV, which provides vocational skills to people from developing countries. In terms of providing humanitarian assistance, Israel has done a great job. From soil cultivation programs in Kenya to computer education in Ethiopia, from medical programs in Jordan to seminars on cattle husbandry in India, Israel has helped alleviate hunger, disease and poverty in many developing countries
(Courtesy: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/160430_ourplace13.html, visited on 19.5.07). For instance, when India was struck by a tremendous earthquake in the State of Gujarat in the 90s, it was Israel that promptly dispatched medical relief.

More than 140 countries have benefited from Israel's international humanitarian aid. Thus it is evident that Israel's economic performance has not only enabled its citizens to lead a happy and prosperous existence, but has also provided healing touch to most of the world. This has happened despite the world taking an opposite, even hostile stand, on issues related to Israel. This deep humanitarian commitment surely credits Israel to have a place in world organizations, including the prestigious OECD.

Contact Kaustav Chakrabarti at kaustav12000@yahoo.co.in

To Go To Top

Posted by Paul Lademain, May 18, 2007.

This article was written by Caroline Glick and was published yesterday in the Jerusalem Post

Monday, The New York Times reported that in just a few weeks, Iran will be capable of building nuclear bombs. The Times report, which was largely substantiated by the Chairman of the International Atomic Energy Agency Muhammad el-Baradei, means that in just a matter of months, Israel is liable to find itself in danger of being wiped off the map.

This grave development was barely noted by the Israeli media. They were busy with other matters.

There was the State Cup soccer championship this week. And that sudden rainstorm in Jerusalem that forced the government to cancel the celebrations of the 40th anniversary of the capital's liberation was a very big deal. Then, of course there is the Palestinian onslaught against southern Israel which has turned Sderot into a ghost town.

But the primary reason that the Israeli media are ignoring the rapidly gathering mushroom cloud is because Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is a master politician.

Two weeks after the Winograd Committee's interim report found Olmert responsible for Israel's defeat at the hands of Iran's army in Lebanon last summer, almost no one seems to remember there was a report. Olmert has removed his incompetence from the pubic agenda.

With no support from any quarter of the country, Olmert clings to power through his successful use of the political art of distraction. His response to the public outcry that the Winograd Committee's report unleashed was to change the subject.

Rather than contend with the calls for his resignation, Olmert turned his guns on his deputy, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. After he successfully outmaneuvered his not terribly bright and politically unsavvy colleague, the media completely forgot about the issue of his incompetence to lead and placed their spotlights on Livni's pathetic political implosion.

Last week, Olmert used the Supreme Court-ordered publication of his testimony before the Winograd Committee as an opportunity to attack the panel that he himself appointed. And again, rather than report on the dangers besetting Israel as a result of Olmert's incompetence, the media gave extensive coverage to Olmert's request to reappear before the committee.

In his most recent gambit, this week Olmert turned his guns on State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss. As UN nuclear inspectors discovered Sunday that Iran is currently operating 1,300 centrifuges at its nuclear facility at Natanz, Olmert -- the seasoned attorney - had his personal attorneys send a 58-page letter to Attorney-General Menachem Mazuz requesting that he open a criminal probe against Lindenstrauss.

From the outset, Olmert and his lawyers knew that Mazuz would reject their request to investigate the comptroller for his investigation of Olmert's below market price purchase of his luxury home in Jerusalem. But that was beside the point.

As far as they were concerned, the maneuver was an out and out success. The prime minister of Israel achieved his goal: for two days, his fight with Lindenstrauss and not his unfitness to lead the country was the story of the day.

There is little correlation between Olmert's failure as a national leader and his success as a party politician. Two weeks after 150,000 people crowded into Rabin Square in Tel Aviv demanding his resignation for his failed leadership during last summer's war, the protest is all but forgotten and Olmert is sitting pretty. His governing coalition, and particularly his partnership with Shas and Yisrael Beiteinu, is rock solid.

The consequences of the disparity between his professional and political capabilities couldn't be worse for the country. Olmert, the major league politician, sits securely on his perch while Olmert, the little league leader, is plunging us into a new war, which like the last one, he is incapable of winning.

The decision to deploy a few tanks in northern Gaza on Thursday, like the decision to send a few planes to bomb a few targets over Gaza, is not part of an overall strategy aimed at defending southern Israel from rocket and mortar fire. Olmert, like his friend former prime minister Ehud Barak at the start of the Palestinian terror war seven years ago, is cynically exploiting the IDF.

Rather than give the military an order to defeat our enemies, Olmert, like Barak before him, has ordered the IDF to perform a sound and light show for the public which demands that the government defend it.

Olmert's refusal to order a serious strike in Gaza has brought about the effective abrogation of Israeli sovereignty over Sderot and the Western Negev. It is impossible to speak of Israel as a properly functioning, sovereign state when its citizens are forced to flee their homes because their government refuses to protect their lives and property.

And Sderot is not alone. Just as the opponents of the 2005 withdrawal from Gaza warned, Israel's absence from the area enabled Gaza's transformation into a new nexus of global jihad. As a result of the incompetence and paralysis of the government in contending with this foreseen development, the fate of Sderot will soon become the fate of Ashkelon and Kiryat Gat.

Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad, Hizbullah, al-Qaida, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, the Popular Resistance Committees and their friends are not all sitting in Gaza, armed to the teeth with anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles and tons of explosives just to kill one another. For nearly two years, the open border between Gaza and Egypt has enabled terrorists and their weaponry to flood Gaza. The increased capacity has placed an additional 200,000 Israeli citizens within range of their rockets and missiles.

The horrific images of the mothers and fathers of Sderot hiding beneath their cars with their children during rocket barrages, and jumping through the windows of buses bound for the relative safety of Beersheba -- as if missing the bus would mean certain death -- and then the eerie silence as a town is Israel is abandoned are impossible to abide. So too, the foreseeable prospect that these images will soon plague Ashkelon and Kiryat Gat bespeak an unbearable future.

But these are small potatoes when compared to the danger of national annihilation approaching us from Iran's nuclear installations.

While Olmert hunkers down in his office and alternatively wrecks our relations with the US; dispenses empty promises to secure the South and rebuild the North; blames everyone and anyone for his personal failures; and speaks of "the peace process" as Palestinian society self-destructs, Iran is sprinting to the doorway of the Nuclear Club. And with the government of Israel in the hands of knaves, no one is placing obstacles in Iran's path as it acquires the means to annihilate the Jewish state.

As the Times reported, when UN nuclear inspectors visited the Natanz nuclear facility on Sunday, they saw 1,300 centrifuges buzzing along, producing nuclear fuel. Another 300 are poised to begin operating next week and another 300 centrifuges are now under construction. The diplomatic source who spoke to the Times said that if it maintains its current pace, Iran will be operating 3,000 centrifuges by next month and 8,000 by the end of the year. With just 3,000 centrifuges in operation, Iran will be capable of enriching sufficient bomb-grade uranium to produce one atomic bomb per year.

Daily, the Iranians and their Hizbullah and Palestinian proxies threaten that if Iran's nuclear installations are attacked, they will retaliate by attacking Israel with tens of thousands of rockets and missiles. There is no doubt that this threat should be taken seriously.

But what will become of Israel if we do not attack Iran's nuclear installations? Can anyone believe that the same Olmert who was incapable of defending northern Israel from Hizbullah last summer, and who today is incapable of defending southern Israel from the Palestinians, will be able to defend central Israel from a nuclear-armed Iran?

Olmert tells us that we have nothing to worry about because the Americans will deal with the Iranians for us. But the US's actual policies towards the ayatollahs tell a different tale. This week, the Americans reacted with indifference to Iran's swift nuclear progress. R. Nicholas Burns, the Undersecretary of State for Policy who directs US policy towards Iran, told the Times that the newest revelations from Natanz will not affect American policy.

"We're proceeding under the assumption that there is still time for diplomacy to work," Burns said, adding that if the Iranians maintain their refusal to suspend their uranium enrichment activities, "We will move ahead toward a third set of sanctions." And while Burns declared the US's resolve to impose a third set of sanctions on Iran after the first two failed completely to affect Iran's behavior, on Wednesday, the State Department announced that it would begin direct negotiations with the Iranians on May 28.

The only voices in Washington these days calling for military action against Iran's nuclear facilities belong to people, like former US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton, who were forced from their positions after the Democratic victory in last November's Congressional elections.

And this brings us back to Israel -- and to the prime minister who is unfit for his position but uses his stunning political acumen to cling to office. Two weeks after the Winograd Committee's report, and 10 months after the last war, it is clear that Olmert will take neither his own incompetence nor the public's rejection of his leadership into consideration.

He will not resign from his position even if 300,000 people demonstrate in Kikar Rabin. He will not resign from office even if Ashkelon's 90,000 residents are forced to flee just as Sderot's 20,000 residents are fleeing today. He will not quit even if Iran conducts a nuclear test.

Rather than go home, he will pick a fight with Livni over how best to divide Jerusalem or surrender Hebron, or with Mazuz over his right to give millions of shekels of government subsidies to industrialists who are represented by his former law partner.

Given this most disturbing reality, one must conclude that public and political pressure for Olmert to resign is futile. He doesn't care.

Rather than direct our attention at Olmert, Israelis must turn our attention to his enablers. Yisrael Beiteinu head and Minister of Non-Existent Strategy Avigdor Lieberman and his buddy, Shas leader and Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Something or Other Eli Yishai, as well as Shas's religious leader Rabbi Ovadia Yosef should become the objects of public pressure. They must be made to understand that if they desire a political future of any kind, they must abandon Olmert and allow the nation to elect a new government.

The enormous gap between the threats that Israel faces and the agenda of the Israeli government has become a threat to our national security. The only way to turn the tide is to hold new elections.

Contact Paul Lademain at lademain@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by NGO Monitor, May 18, 2007.

This report was published May 16, 2007 on the NGO Monitor website
(http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/_world_bank_report_on_palestinians_ based_on_false_ngo_reports_and_anti_israel_bias_) The original report has live links to additional material.

Summary: On May 9, 2007, the World Bank published a report entitled "Movement and Access Restrictions in the West Bank: Uncertainty and Inefficiency in the Palestinian Economy." As the following analysis demonstrates, the claims made by the so-called "technical team" of the World Bank's report lack credibility, and are based entirely on the publications of a variety of highly politicized groups and NGOs, including B'Tselem, Peace Now, HaMoked, Bimkom, Amnesty International, and UN OCHA. Furthermore, this report only focuses on one dimension of the complex issues that are involved. The authors briefly note that "Israel had legitimate reasons to take steps to protect its citizens from violence", but then dismiss the implications of this central point. As a result, the allegations and analysis contained in this report cannot reliably be used by policy makers attempting to deal with the challenges posed by the combination of ongoing Palestinian violence and economic crisis. In addition, this report is inconsistent with the World Bank's apolitical humanitarian mission, and reflects negatively on this institution.

This report purporting to examine economic conditions of Palestinian in the West Bank is composed entirely of claims and allegations from various other sources, primarily politicized NGOs and OCHA (the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs), with the addition of some newspaper reports and partial quotes from Israeli government documents. This report contains no original research by the World Bank. Of the 71 footnotes, 22 cite B'tselem claims; 6 are based on Peace Now's political publications; with many others based on Hamoked, OCHA, Yesh Din, Bimkom, and Amnesty International. In addition, the journalistic publications cited in this report are themselves based on the allegations made by these NGOs and by OCHA.

These organizations all have a long history of one-sided and inaccurate reporting, reflecting political and ideological bias. B'Tselem and Hamoked, which are repeatedly cited in the World Bank publication, have issued a number of reports with allegations that were shown to be invalid. For example, the jointly published report of May 6, 2007, entitled "Utterly forbidden: The Torture and Ill-Treatment of Palestinian Detainees" used misleading methodology and had no verifiable sources. As shown in a detailed rebuttal published by the Israeli Ministry of Justice, the B'Tselem/HaMoked report is "fraught with mistakes, groundless claims, and inaccuracies." The MOJ notes that the report

refers to a group which is named in the report as 'ordinary' detainees, concerning interogatees which were arrested between 13-17 of July 2005 when on the day of July 12, 2005, there was a terrorist attack in the city of Netanya, that caused the death of five people and the injury of many others ... as a result of the interrogations, the perpetrators of the attack ... were exposed. In addition, more terrorist units were exposed and weapons that were to be put to use in future terrorist attacks were handed over.

Thus, in basing its reports entirely on the claims of these NGOs, the World Bank has also produced a report that lacks credibility.

One of many examples of the faulty methodology and lack of credibility in this World Bank report can be seen in Section 27 (pp.9-10) which asserts claims: "These findings are reinforced by another recent study funded by the New Israel Fund and the British Embassy in Tel Aviv and conducted by the Israeli organization, Bimkom... " However, the World Bank's "technical team" did not directly cite and may not have read this report. Instead, the quote is taken from a newspaper article (The Independent -UK) which reflected a politically biased presentation. The Bimkom report makes the ideological allegation that the separation barrier is "focused almost exclusively on the desire to maintain the fabric of life of Israeli settlers," which is not a fact and source based analysis.

In addition to such politicized NGOs, the World Bank publication also relies heavily on OCHA (the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs) for many of its allegations. However, an examination of OCHA staff and reports suggest that this organization is also highly politicized and its reports lack credibility. For example, the World Bank report repeats OCHA's claim that there are 546 "non-fixed Israeli barriers in the West Bank." In contrast, according to Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh, the actual number is far less. "The World Bank report uses data of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs [OCHA], which is inclined to count every opening in the separation fence, checkpoints on the Green Line, and every two rocks on the road as roadblocks in the West Bank." (Avi Issacharoff "Sneh: World Bank report slamming Israel is one-sided", Haaretz, 13 May 2007.)

OCHA's biases and inherent lack of credibility reflect those of its employees, including Allegra Pacheco, who heads the Information and Advocacy unit at the UNOCHA in Jerusalem. Before taking this position, Ms. Pacheco was deeply involved in radical anti-Israel campaigning, and this ideology and core bias is reflected in OCHA's publications, including ReliefWeb, which helps give additional publicity to claims by politicized NGOs, (as documented by NGO Monitor). Many of Pacheco's speeches and writings including oped articles use the rhetoric of demonization to refer to Israel, such as "apartheid", "collective punishment", etc., while blatantly erasing the context of Palestinian terror. In September 2000, Pacheco addressed a pro-Palestinian political rally in Washington DC, whose official slogan was "No Return = No Peace" and urged the dismantling of the Jewish state. Pacheco called for the abolition of Israel, declaring "The solution is Awda, complete and unrestricted return to Palestine, all of it from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. [1]

The Israeli political organization known as "Peace Now" (and funded by various European governments and other donors) is another source used by the World Bank. In October 2006, this NGO published "Breaking the Law -- One Violation Leads to Another," falsely asserting that "a large proportion of the settlements built on the West Bank are built on privately owned Palestinian land." As initially pointed out by media accountability organization CAMERA, this report is based not on research regarding land ownership, but relies only on Palestinian claims to such rights. Many of the claims, such as those made by the Jahalin Bedouin on Ma'ale Adumim, were examined and rejected by Israeli courts long ago. As a result, Peace Now's allegation that Ma'ale Adumim sits on 86.4% Palestine land stands in stark contrast to the revised information indicating that only 0.54% of the land is Palestinian. Peace Now admitted these core errors, but also claimed credit for the resulting "media whirlwind". Similarly, in repeating such false reports, officials at the World Bank are also primarily seeking to create publicity, at the expense of credibility.

In summary, this report published by the World Bank is a political document which is based entirely on claims and allegations published by NGOs and other groups that lack credibility. The allegations and analysis provided by the World Bank cannot reliably be used by policy makers attempting to deal with the challenges posed by the combination of ongoing Palestinian violence and economic crisis. In addition, this report is inconsistent with the World Bank's apolitical humanitarian mission, and reflects negatively on this institution.

End Note:

The authors of this report are identified only in terms of a "World Bank Technical Team", the content is highly political, reflecting references to events, negotiations and agreements going back to 1949. Much of this content is incomplete and/or misleading, reflecting the absence of detailed knowledge or deliberate bias on the part of the members of this "technical team". For example, this report cites various agreements out of context, and many of the details are inaccurate. The so-called "Oslo Accords" are in fact a series of agreements beginning with the 1993 Declaration of Principles and followed by a series of interim documents which were predicated on negotiations towards a permanent status agreement and a cessation of violence and incitement by the Palestinians, none of which were implemented. Similarly, the terms of the November 2005 "Agreement on Movement and Access" were violated within a few days of the signing ceremony. The references to the 2003 "Mitchell report" ("Report of the Sharm el-Sheikh Fact Finding Committee") and the "Road Map" proposals remove both the context of the ongoing mass terror attacks and the failure of the Palestinian side to implement any of its security obligations.


1. From al-Majdal, (quarterly magazine of the BADIL Resource Center), September 2000, and cited in

The NGO Monitor organization (www.ngo-monitor.org) promotes critical debate and accountability of human rights NGOs in the Arab Israeli Conflict. Contact the NGO Monitor by email at mail@ngo.monitor.org. Their website address is

To Go To Top

Posted by UCI, May 18, 2007.

This was written by Hana Levi Julian and it appeared Arutz Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com).

(IsraelNN.com) The Hamas terror organization has been increasing the number and efficiency of attacks on Israel, while engaged in its militia war with rival PA terror faction Fatah. New reports suggest that Hamas' capabilities are improving, particularly with the influence and assistance of Al Qaeda.

IDF Maj.-Gen. Giora Eiland said in an interview with Israel Radio on Friday that the Gaza terrorist group's military capability and the range of its rockets are improving. He also expressed doubt that Fatah could prevail in the militia war against Hamas for control of the government.

"Gaza is a clear and hostile Hamas state in every sense of the term," Eiland said. "The Palestinian Authority and [PA Chairman Mahmoud] Abbas are pathetic and irrelevant," he added.

Al Qaeda's Fingerprints Increasing in Gaza

A new report indicates that Al Qaeda has begun active efforts to strengthen the Hamas terror organization in the battle for control of the Palestinian Authority.

As the Palestinian Authority (PA) continues to weaken, the Al Qaeda terrorist network has strengthened ties with Hamas, according to a report written by Army reserve Lt. Col. Jonathan HaLevi for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.

Following the expulsion of Jewish residents from the Gaza area and the destruction of their communities, Al Qaeda already had begun to fill the vacuum in security, HaLevi wrote.

Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman and Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas last year said, "We have signs of the presence of Al Qaeda in Gaza and the West Bank."

Further evidence of the al Qaeda presence was produced earlier this month when the terrorist group Army of Islam, identified with Al Qaeda, took responsibility for the March kidnapping of British Broadcasting Corp. (BBC) reporter Alan Johnston, whose whereabouts and condition are unknown.

The same group teamed up with two Hamas-sponsored terror groups to carry out last year's abduction of IDF soldier Gilad Shalit in a cross-border attack which killed two other soldiers and wounded a third.

"Even external appearances show Al Qaeda's growing influence as members of its affiliate movements in the Gaza Strip will often wear the same black head covering that was a trademark of the late Al Qaeda leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi," noted HaLevi.

"All the evidence indicates that rather than challenge Al Qaeda's bid to expand its presence in the Gaza Strip, Hamas prefers to collaborate with these new militant groups," he added.

Fatah May Pay the Price for Al Qaeda Presence

The Fatah faction led by the PA chairman has been warring with Hamas for control of the government for more than a year. Despite numerous efforts by local and international leaders to end the internecine clashes between the two factions, the fight has continued.

Fresh shootouts and kidnappings resumed in Gaza a week ago; two broken ceasefires attempts, 44 dead civilians and terrorists and more than a hundred other wounded have not yet stemmed the flow of blood in the streets.

For its part, Fatah has spent the past year cultivating cozy relations with Jordan and the United States, which pledged millions of dollars and munitions to help shore up the PA Chairman's personal security force.

Fatah, which is seen by most western nations as a moderate force in the terrorist-led PA government, was promised -- and received -- thousands of weapons from Jordan in a deal approved by the Olmert government.

Hamas has similarly boosted its weapons cache, by smuggling through elaborate tunnels across the Egyptian border. At the moment, Fatah and Hamas guns are being aimed at each other. But longer-range weapons have been reserved for use against Israel.

Hamas Receiving Upgraded Weapons and Training

Hamas has worked hard with other groups to develop and refine the Kassam rockets they use in their attacks on the western Negev, focusing especially on improving their aiming capability and range. The short-range Kassam rockets can be pointed in a general direction, but are incapable of pinpoint targeting. Improvements in the past year have created what is considered by weapons experts to have been the final product in the Kassam line, a rocket which they say cannot be refined further.

Intelligence reports indicate that Hamas terrorists this year acquired Russian-made 22 kilometer-range Grad missiles, more versatile and lethal than the primitive, short-range Kassams.

In addition, Hamas operatives have been bolstered by advance terror training programs, financial support and gifts of Katyusha rockets from the Iranian-backed Hizbullah terrorists in Lebanon. Hizbullah used several different Iranian and Syrian-made missiles against Israel in last summer's Second Lebanon War; most were short and medium-range Katyushas.

According to one military source that requested anonymity, PA terrorists used Katyushas in three attacks within the past year, reaching the outskirts of Ashkelon each time. A number of strategic installations exist in the Mediterranean coastal city, making it an inviting target. Police said Friday they are preparing for the possibility that long-range rockets may be fired at Ashkelon.

Regardless of who received guns and from where, at the end, a Hamas official commented to a World Net Daily reporter, the weapons will eventually all be distributed among the other terrorist groups anyway, and all will ultimately be pointed at Israel.

Al Qaeda Urged Hamas to Escalate Against Israel

While the two factions continue their renewed militia war, the Hamas organization simultaneously launched an intensive attack against the Jewish State on Tuesday, aiming at communities in the western Negev. Sderot, closest to the border, has taken the brunt of the rocket fire, although other communities have been attacked, including the large coastal city of Ashkelon.

The attacks have come less than a month after a senior member of Al Qaeda called on Hamas to show a little more energy in its war against Israel. In a video that appeared on Al Qaeda's website, Abu Yaha al Libi asked Hamas, "Where is the revenge? Where are the bombs? Where is the fire?"

The senior Al Qaeda terrorist urged Hamas to step up its attacks. "Your loyalty will be measured only through your commitment to the path of Jihad," chided al Libi.

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

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Sommer, May 18, 2007.

This comes from Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA and was reported in Yediot Ahronot 18 May 2007. Contact Dr. Lerner by email at imra@netvision.net.il or go to his website: http://www.imra.org.il

The Results

This was a telephone poll of a representative sample of 709 adult Israeli Jews carried out by INSS (previously the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies) in the month of March, 2007. Statistical error +/- 3.7 percentage points.

Is it possible to reach peace with the Palestinians?
Yes 31% No 69%

Do you support the :land for peace" formula?
Yes 28% No 58%

Do you support the evacuation of settlements within the framework of a unilateral withdrawal?
Yes 28% No 72%

Who won the Second Lebanon War?
Israel 24% Hezbollah 24% Neither 51%

Do you expect another war in the next three years?
Yes 76% No 23%

What are the real goals of the Palestinians?
[IMRA: A cynic would say that these are a set of optimistic goals. The goal of destroying Israel and killing most of the Jews is not included as an option]
42% Destroy Israel and expel most of the Jews
29% Destroy Israel
21% Get the territory captured in '67
07% Get part of the territory captured in '67

Do you count on the IDF?
Yes 82% No 17%

Is the Government capable to make the right decisions on security matters?
Yes 33% No 66%

Contact Barbara Sommer at sommer_1_98@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 182007.

Sec. Rice bars US commanders in Iraq from mentioning that Iran and Syria help the war against the US, because she is seeking to surrender Iraq to Iran and Syria. She opposes helping dissidents overthrow the Iranian regime or bombing its nuclear factories. Her only policy is diplomacy. She offers money to N. Korea but lets it keep nuclear arms.

The US continues to arm P.A. terrorists and lower Israel's defenses.

Rice supports a Somalia coalition that includes a party backed by al-Qaeda.

Representing the appeasement-minded Establishment, Rice won control of foreign policy over Pres. Bush, who represents the tough neo-conservatives. She gained ground when Israel, which could have showed its value as an ally of the US, by defeating Hizbullah, didn't try to.

(N. Korea proliferates nuclear arms development. It must be taken down, if possible. Diplomacy without military backup is useless against evil regimes. Why didn't Pres. Bush replace Rice? She courts disaster.)

The appointment of a commission to investigate Israel's wartime performance suspended protests needed to force the incompetent regime to resign. The commission didn't tell the public anything new. It blames an ideology of complacency, but failed to blame the cause of complacency, the leftist ideology of appeasement that denies Israel has enemies. Thus the Chief of Staff proposed not victory but fending off Hizbullah until international forces would separate them; Foreign Min. Livni set that policy into motion. It legitimized Hizbullah and protected its rearmament from IDF interference (and makes likely another war). The report falsely credits that policy with improving Israel's position. If Israel improved its position, then the war and its strategy were not mismanaged, contrary to the report's other findings.

The report placed the blame on three officials, and not on the Establishment they represented and that endorsed them. That leaves the Establishment free to replace those officials with others of the same mentality. Shimon Peres is seeking to become the country's leader in appeasement, again. (So is Min. Livni.) The Winograd Report ignored the 'fact that the Second Lebanon War was a war of ideas no less than a war on the battlefield. Last summer Israel had the opportunity to expose the truth about the nature of the war being fought against it. It had the opportunity to assert itself as a vital ally of the US. It had the chance to defeat the leftist narrative of peace which claims that there is no difference between the IDF and the terror forces attacking Israeli society and so there is no reason to seek to defeat them; and which claims that the war against Israel is not connected to the global jihad (Caroline Glick, IMRA, 5/5).


A journal of higher education lamented the woes of college students in Gaza. They can't easily study in Judea-Samaria. Either courses are not available in Gaza or they take them by TV hookup to Judea-Samaria. They couldn't get to colleges in Israel, either, until the Supreme Court overruled the government. Some students don't even attend college, because they are afraid that they will be stopped at a checkpoint and arrested. Oh the 'poor Palestinians!' And it's all Israel's fault, the tone implies, because Israel has restrictions.

IMRA notes that the Gaza Arabs should direct their frustrations at their own government, whose terrorism requires those restrictions (5/7).

In other words, the article is a false sob story, propaganda against Israel. The restrictions are due to terrorism that the P.A. foments especially among youths. Don't pity lesser access to colleges ' P.A. colleges are used to recruit terrorists.

But there is more. The article failed to note that it was the former Israeli administration of the Territories that built the colleges ' Jordanian, Egyptian, British, and Turkish rulers didn't. Then the Arabs received autonomy and increased their population, without building more colleges. Instead, they discouraged business growth, embezzled from their budget, and diverted more than half of it to jihad. And then they want the country against which they are making jihad to provide college opportunities for youth that make war on it?

Israel's Supreme Court apparently thinks that is a fine idea. That Court overturns many security measures, as it helps in the effort to turn Israel from being a Jewish state protecting its people into a state for its Arabs to despoil the Jews. When will the Jews clean out that Court, curb its power, and help turn Israel into a real democracy instead of a make-believe one?


Abbas' forces sealed up an arms smuggling tunnel, amid US applause. The US touted that action as evidence that the P.A. will meet the benchmarks set by the US to lead to final status negotiations.

Dr. Aaron Lerner calls this a photo-opportunity instead of 'destroying '¦training camps, specifically identified fortifications, etc.. Require also closing down the rocket factories, and confiscation of rockets, weapons, explosives, etc. and transfer of the contraband over for removal/destruction.' The huge quantities of munitions invite numerical goals (5/7). Instead, the US brings arms in! That tunnel could be unsealed. Abbas' TV promote suicide bombing. The US always treats P.A. fakery as positive.

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@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, May 17, 2007.

This essay was written by Masha Rifkin and it appeared today in the Jerusalem Post. Cornell University junior Masha Rifkin of Newton, Massachusetts, is a volunteer at the Mishol social work office in Sderot.

Sderot residents react to another rocket landing

The first Tzeva Adom (Color Red) Kassam rocket warning siren went off while I was across the street from my office, using a friend's computer on the fourth floor.

As usual, we stepped into the corridor -- the safest place in the apartment building -- and waited.

I counted: 15, 14, 13... I had gotten to 12 when I heard the screams. It was a type of scream I couldn't recognize, half laughter, half terror, complete madness: 11, 10... it hit. A block away at most.

Everyone else raced outside; it wasn't until 30 seconds later -- when I woke from my daze -- that I realized the screaming hadn't stopped.

I was about to join everyone outside when, once more, Tzeva Adom: 15, 14... I had barely reached 13 when it crashed, shaking my entire body -- half a block away.

My phone rang: It was my boss, Natasha, telling me to immediately come back to the office, as the fourth floor of any building was not safe.

My roommate in Tel Aviv, Jackie, was with me for the day, curious about my work in Sderot, and we ran back across the street to my office, as quickly as we could.

Natasha looked us over, then asked if we had heard the scream. She said a young mother was pushing her child in a stroller when the first siren went off.

She should have had enough time to pick up her son and rush into a nearby basement. Instead, she knocked the stroller over, child inside, and fell to the ground -- screaming. She didn't stop until Natasha and others carried her and her child to a neighbor's apartment.

What do you picture when you read about Sderot's "anxiety victims?" It's this woman, convulsing, flailing. It's her inability to think rationally -- to protect her child. She was only able to collapse, beating the ground.

Natasha, Jackie and I sat in the social work office, trying to work. That's what you do in Sderot. Stop. Go. Stop. Go. We didn't get much done as every few minutes we received phone calls from hysterical parents. It was 7 p.m., parents were still at work and their children alone at home.

All I could hear was Natasha screaming on the phone: "Calm down... calm down. listen to me, breathe! I won't talk to you until you breathe. Listen, your children are fine. No, I don't know why they're not picking up the phone. They probably ran downstairs. I said calm down."

Then Purim Yaakobov walked in; I will be taking her son to a summer camp in the States in June, and we had set this meeting last week. She had walked amid the Kassams to keep the meeting.

Yaakobov was still dressed in black, mourning her husband, who was killed by a Kassam six months ago. She lowered herself slowly onto a chair, her face absolutely white.

She was reliving her husband's death. She took my hands and, tears rolling down her cheeks, pleaded, "Please, I have nothing. I have no one. My sons are everything. Promise me he will be happy. I need to hear it from you, please, they are all I have."

Jackie -- experiencing her first Kassams -- threw her arms around her. Yaakobov left the office, and then... Tzeva Adom.

We ran into the corridor; there were many of us now, as the student volunteers were holding a meeting. I tried to count down from 15 again, but was interrupted by a student. She was laughing: "Hamas and Fatah finally made up, and in celebration, they're firing a nice salute to us!" she said.

We all burst out into fits of painful laughter... Boom.

The laughter stopped, and someone said what was on all of our minds: "That one was really close."

Again I heard screaming; I looked around and realized that Natasha was no longer there. Suddenly I heard her voice, "Masha, water! Hurry!"

I ran outside and found a circle of women, Natasha at the center, trying to comfort a young girl. Hyperventilating, choking on her tears, yelling for her mother, over and over again. Another "anxiety victim."

Natasha quickly poured cold water on the girls face, and embraced her. The girl clawed Natasha's back and shoulders, leaving deep scratches. Eventually her breathing returned to normal, when it came again: Tzeva adom, tzeva adom.

The girl fell to the ground screaming, "No, no, no, no, no!"

As I write this, Kassams are hitting Sderot. Children are screaming, mothers are collapsing in despair, and doctors are pulling shrapnel out of the bodies of Jews.

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Rabbi Aryeh Spero, May 17, 2007.

A recently released study by an Israeli Commission finds, among other things, that Ehud Olmert acted indecisively during the recent war in Lebanon. Olmert, Israel's weak-minded and liberal Prime Minister, stood in the way of his army winning a decisive victory over the Hezbollah terrorist group. Let this be a lesson for us here in America.

Instead of perceiving this as a major turning point Battle in the war against Islamic terrorism, timid Olmert treated this as a skirmish. Sure, he talked big, but we now see that he did so hoping his rhetoric would unnerve the Hezbollah enemy. From the get-go, he never inhered the resolve to do what had to be done. Hezbollah was not frightened of his words and did not blink. Olmert blinked.

Olmert still does not see Islamic terrorism as part of a greater Jihad to conquer the West. He thinks this whole scenario is just about Moslem desires for just a little bit more land. As he said and continues to say: "I was elected to orchestrate the process of giving up the West Bank (Judea and Samaria ) ' for peace' ". Yes, no one is more blind than he who refuses to see what he doesn't want to see if it is contrary to his foolish hopes.

For liberals like Olmert, peace comes not through strength but compromise and concession. "Victory" has been replaced by "peace-process". Western liberal leaders crave negotiated settlements for to them it means that the enemy now accepts us. They crave their enemies' approval.

But why should someone crave the approval of those who represent a barbaric and devilish system? That, my friends, is the disease of moral relativism, which afflicts the liberal West.

Olmert had an opportunity to protect his country and be part of saving the world from a strain of Nazism infecting much of Islam and endangering our world. He could have been a Churchill, instead he remains an Olmert.

Olmert is the affirmation of the truth of " The Peter Principle". Many men are equipped to go only so far as leaders. When they venture beyond their abilities and are elevated to positons requiring greatness, they fail and are a disaster for those relying on their leadership. Olmert is a pol. Someone good for the horse-trading that constitutes local governance. He should have remained a mayor or an unimportant member of Knesset (parliament). He is not Prime Minister material -- especially in a jihadist era that requires great leaders.

Like many kings in the First and Second Commonwealth of ancient Israel, Olmert has chosen the acceptance of foreign leaders over what is necessary to ensure victory for his own people. How seductive it must be to feel that one can become a card-carrying member of the international fraternity of leaders. The European Union, the U.N, the left wing NGOs, the "beautiful people" in the halls of power and celebrity. Olmert could not abide their continued condemnation, their displeasure. Olmert is Israel's Jacque Chirac.

Some say that Israel needed just ten more days -- 30 days was not enough, Israel needed 40. In otherwords, the ceasefire was 10 days too soon. Not so. Had Israel wanted, it could have destroyed Hezbollah during the first ten days. The Israeli people were willing, more united about this issue than any other in the last 33 years. It was Olmert and his socialist Defense Minister Peretz -- only recently a radical leftist labor Union leader -- who didn't want it. It was obvious from the very beginning. We waited, the world waited -- but the resolve never came. The politicians overruled the army -- and the people.

What blocked Israel from achieving its military goal is the new "higher morality" the Israelis have placed upon their soldiers: spare "the innocents" even if it means getting yourself killed to save them. Many Israeli soldiers were killed that did not have to be. Instead of bombing terrorist houses from above, soldiers went house-to-house -- and were ambushed. At least a couple of dozen died to spare the "innocents" who, if given the chance, would slit their throat in a heartbeat. The unnecessary deaths of these soldiers was demoralizing and further weakened the tepid resolve of the Israeli Prime Minister.

Some servicemen were reluctant to bomb specific strategic targets out of fear of court-martial if their pinpoint shooting ended up killing "the innocents". So some targets remained untouched. Olmert was afraid to unleash a comprehensive ground war for, in his mind, the deaths of "innocents" constituted a greater failure than allowing Hezbollah to remain intact. One gets the sense that the Israelis wage these wars not to win but to show how moral they are in war.

But there is no one to blame for this conclusion than the silly and insecure Israeli political establishment that instituted these rules of war conduct to begin with. They boast how "proud" they are of their "higher morality in war". Well, I'm not! To save one's countrymen, a soldier must risk his life. He should not be forced to die to save the enemy. Would you want your son to die for such a "cause"? Why do the Israelis feel that their soldiers are somehow guilty, expendable, in relation to the enemy's "innocents"? Why do they continue to feel a need to prove how moral they are?

We in America should take heed. Liberals are not to be relied on for our national defense. They have too many hang-ups. They lack a moral clarity and the guts necessary to defeat the enemy. They don't belive in victory. It goes against their grain, their belief system. They believe in "peace processes", i.e., appeasement, torturous, bit-by-bit concessions: attrition. They crave international approval more than that of their countrymen. They'll never deliver the necessary military knock-out-punch.

But most dangerously, they have fashioned a set of war rules that makes it impossible to defeat the enemy. Worse, our enemy knows it and exploits it. And we seem unable to stomach nor to stand up to the enemy's well rehearsed, professional whining. They will terrorize us, blow us up and defeat us with their most effective weapon yet: the propaganda of guilt and tears.

Rabbi Aryeh Spero is a columnist for Human Events, writing about both Israeli/Middle East and American issues. In addition his articles have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, National Review, New York Sun, Newsmax, Front Page Magazine, N.Y. Daily News, Policy Review, American Conservative Union, Atlanta Journal and Constitution, Judaism, Tradition, Midstream, Free Congress Foundation, Response, Jewish Spectator, Post and Opinion, Sh'ma, Free Republic, Viewpoint, Jewish Press, and many other publications.

To Go To Top

Posted by Eytan Gilboa, May 17, 2007.

Israelis Overwhelmingly Appreciate US Support for Israel and Believe that Mutual Strategic Interests are a Key Factor in the Special Relationship

The Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies ("The BESA Center") and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today released results of a comprehensive poll which surveyed Israeli opinion on a range of issues relating to US-Israel and Israel-Diaspora relations. The poll is the first comprehensive survey on these issues in more than 30 years, and was carried-out as part of a broad-ranging BESA-ADL international conference on "US-Israel Relations in a New Era," to take place Sunday-Monday, May 20-21, 2007 at the BESA Center.

Summary of Key Survey Results

Conducted by the Ma'gar Mochot polling agency for the BESA Center/ADL, between May 1-4, 2007. 505 adult Israelis were surveyed. Margin of error: 4.7%

On US-Israel Relations

  • 65% "agree" and "definitely agree" with the statement that the US is a loyal ally of Israel; 11% disagree.

  • 64% describe their attitude, as an Israeli, towards the US, as good or very good; only 8% say their attitude is negative.

  • 80% believe that if Israel reaches a point of serious crisis where its very existence is threatened -- a "moment of truth" -- the US will come to Israel's assistance.

  • 48% say that the main reason why the US will continue to maintain close ties with Israel in the future is Israel's critical role as a strategic partner of the US; 30% say the reason is the political role of US Jewry; and 17% say the reason is democratic tradition and shared values.

  • 91% believe that close relations between the US and Israel are essential for the security of Israel.

  • 73% say that President Bush's attitude towards Israel is friendly.

  • 60% say that US and Israeli interests in the Middle East are similar; 36% say that the two countries have different regional interests.

  • 51% of Israelis think that in the near future the US might impose a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, while 43% do not believe this will happen.

  • 71% of Israelis surveyed believe that if the international diplomatic effort and economic sanctions fail to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, the US "should use force" to destroy the Iranian nuclear facilities.

  • 59% believe that in retrospect the US was correct in going to war in Iraq; 36% disagree.

On American Jewry

  • 52% believe that the level of American Jewish support for Israel is sufficient; 33% say the support is insufficient.

  • 62% say that American Jews have a right to freely and publicly criticize Israel and Israeli policies; which is more than double the number of Israelis who feel otherwise.

  • 49% believe that US Jews are assimilating rapidly and are in danger of disappearing.

  • 69% believe that every American Jew should visit Israel.

  • 57% think it possible that American Jews might vote for a presidential or congressional candidate who is anti-Israel; while 38% reject this notion.

  • 54% believe that there is anti-Semitism in the US, but that it is not significant; 36% believe that anti-Semitism is a significant problem in the US.

How Israelis View America

Poll respondents were asked for their views on the strength, reliability and character of the US-Israel relationship. Two-thirds of Israelis have a positive perception of the US (64%), versus only eight percent (8%) with a negative view of the US. Most Israelis view the US as a loyal ally of Israel (65%).

The vast majority of those surveyed (91%), believe that close relations between the US and Israel are vital for the security of Israel. Eighty percent (80%) believe that the US will come to Israel's assistance should Israel's existence be threatened. Seventy-three percent (73%) consider President George W. Bush as friendly to Israel.

A majority of Israelis (59%) believe that in retrospect the US was correct in going to war in Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein, in contrast to the majority of Americans (including American Jews). Thirty-six percent (36%) disagree.

Seventy-one percent (71%) of Israelis surveyed believe that if the international diplomatic effort and economic sanctions fail to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, the US "should use force" to destroy the Iranian nuclear facilities.

"This poll clearly demonstrates the strength of the special relationship that binds Israel and America together," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. "Israelis view the US as their closest and most important ally. Similarly, US public support for Israel is based on the perception of Israel as a strategic and value-based ally. The two countries share a truly remarkable, unique alliance."

Poll director Prof. Eytan Gilboa of the BESA Center, an expert on American-Israeli relations, added that "Israelis overwhelmingly appreciate US support for Israel and believe that mutual strategic interests are a key factor in the special relationship."

BESA Center Director Prof. Efraim Inbar said that "Israelis have a strategic prism on regional affairs. They supported the deposing of Saddam Hussein and clearly expect the US to deal with the much greater threat posed by Iran."

Prof. Gilboa noted that this survey of Israeli opinion on US-Israel relations is the first comprehensive survey of its kind since 1983; and that the BESA Center and the ADL jointly intend to conduct follow-up polling on a regular basis.

How Israelis View American Jews

The poll also surveyed Israeli opinion of American Jews and their connection to Israel. Fifty-two percent (52%) of Israelis believe that the level of American Jewish support for Israel is sufficient, but one-third believes the opposite. Forty-nine percent (49%) believe that US Jews are assimilating rapidly and they fear that American Judaism eventually will disappear. A majority (57%) think that American Jews might vote for a presidential or congressional candidate who is anti-Israel, while 38 percent (38%) reject this possibility.

"These results suggest that Israelis are concerned about American Jewish support for Israel over the long term," said Prof. Gilboa of the BESA Center. "They fear that US Jewry does not place Israel high-up enough on its scale of priorities."

505 adult Israelis were surveyed between May 1-4, 2007 by the "Ma'gar Mochot" polling agency. The survey has a margin of error of 4.7 percent.

The Conference

"US-Israel Relations in a New Era," a two-day international conference will take place Sunday-Monday, May 20-21, 2007 at the BESA Center. Among the conference foci: domestic influences on U.S. Mideast policy (including the Walt/Mearsheimer accusation that the pro-Israel lobby holds undue influence), American policy dilemmas regarding Iran and Iraq, the new Congress and Israel, American Christian support for Israel, U.S.-Israel defense and security cooperation, changing American Jewish demography and its impact on Israel-Diaspora relations, and more.

U.S. Ambassador Richard Jones will deliver a central address on U.S.-Israel security cooperation (Monday, May 21 at 9:00 am).

Among the major figures arriving from abroad for the conference are Prof. Steven David of Johns Hopkins U, Prof. Dov Waxman of CUNY, Ken Jacobson, deputy national director of the ADL, Prof. Ira Sheskin of U of Miami, Prof. Chaim Waxman of Rutgers U, Prof. Jonathan Stevenson of the U.S. Naval War College, Dr. Emanuele Ottolenghi of the Transatlantic Institute in Brussels, and Steven Simon of the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations.

The full conference program is at
http://www.biu.ac.il/SOC/besa/docs/20-21.5.2007.pdf The conference is open to the public and media, and will be held in the Senate Hall, Feldman Conference Center, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan. Registration is not required. English/Hebrew simultaneous translation will be available throughout the conference.

Eytan Gilboa, Ph.D. is a professor in the Political Studies Department and Senior Research Associate, BESA Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University in Israel. He is also Visiting Professor of Public Diplomacy, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Southern California in Los Angeles. Contact him at egilboa@mail.biu.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Rachel Kapen, May 17, 2007.

One of my most treasured childhood memories was my first journey to Jerusalem which took place in the summer 1945. My parents Sarah and Yosef Garber Z"L were staunch supporters of Hebrew University since its inception in 1925 and charters members of Friends of Hebrew University and to show its appreciation, they were invited, with a group of other supporters from the Tel Aviv vicinity, to an organized tour of the university.

And being that the now so prevalent institution of baby-sitting wasn't then even in its infancy and there was no extended family of aunts and uncles -- both my parents made aliyah in the early 1920's leaving their families behind -- my older sister Shula and I accompanied our parents anywhere and this included -- thank G-d, also that Jerusalem journey, and a journey actually it was.

The road to Jerusalem was more than twice longer then and quite narrow and of the worst quality, nothing like the modern highway of today, and as fir the old Egged buses of yesteryear, they were much smaller, their seats often worn out and they bore no resemblance to the comfortable, air-conditioned buses of today, and thus our bus made its uphill and circuitous way leading to Jerusalem.

The journey didn'[t last more than two hours at the most yet to me it seemed like an eternity. Yet we finally arrived at Har HaTzOfim -- Mount Scopus and as our parents joined the other members of the group in touring the whitewashed building of Hebrew University, my sister Shula and myself were left to spend the time in a small pine grove situated across the road from the university. There we collected armsful of pine cones which covered the ground in order to take them home with us. We really didn't know what we going to do with them but toys were then few and those seemed like a good thing fir our rich and creative imagination. After a short picnic with our parents following the university tour we boarded the bus to go back to Tel Aviv but the clean mountain wind, as clear a water as Naomi Shemer so beautiful described it in Yerushalayim shel Zahav and the pine aroma which was simply intoxication remained etched in my memory for years to come, until my return to that grove of my childhood.

The year was 1968, a year following the miraculous vistory of the Six Day War and the reunification of Yerusalayim. During the period stretching between the the War of Liberation in 1948 till the vistory of 1967 the road leading to Mount Scopus was in enemy hands and thus not accessible only a once a month convoy brought necessary supplies and reinforcement to the people who stayed put there so as not to abandon the now desolate Hebrew University and Hadassah Hospital. Finally, it became necessary to replace the Hadassah Hospital with another abode and it acquired old buildings on Haneviim Street in downtown Jerusalem and it was there there I gave birth in 1961 to my son Alon.

When I saw again this grove of my childhood as was as if nothing had changed in these much eventful years, the same clean, invigorating mountain air, the same simply intoxicating pine aroma. Except, there building everywhere, Mount Scopus and Hadassa returning to life.

Some years back when celebrating the 3,000 Birthday of our capital, I asked myself what kind of wish is appropriate when the usual ad 120 -- to 120 -- won't quite do? Of course Ad Netzah -- To Eternity popped right into my mind. So now, as we celebrate 40 years to the reunification of Jerusalem, this will be my heartfelt wish to her, to my Jerusalem.

Contact Rachel Kapen by email at skapen285466MI@comcast.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Judy Lash Balint, May 17, 2007.

Visit http://flickr.com/photos/jerusalemdiaries/ for more photos of Yom Yerushalayim 2007.

After a day of rain, thunder and lightening that was more reminiscent of mid-winter than mid-May, the skies clear and tens of thousands of people flock to the Kotel in the late afternoon of Jerusalem Day.

All roads in and around the Old City are closed as buses from every part of the country disgorge Israelis of all ages dressed in blue and white. Many who march in the Flag Parade are soaked to the skin by the time they arrive at Jaffa Gate.

Walking down the wet, slippery stones of the Old City shuk where almost all the Arab-owned shops are shuttered tight, many youth groups sing at the top of their lungs. One favorite that resounds off the ancient stone alleyways is: "Heshiveynu Hashem aylecha, venashuva, Chadeysh Yameynu Kekedem" -- Turn us to you, Hashem, and we'll return: Renew our days as of old.

Soldiers and border police are stationed every few feet along the way down to the Kotel plaza. Two soldiers are standing in ankle-deep water on a balcony overlooking the northern side of the plaza where I plant myself every year to get the best view of the crowd.

Despite the weather, the plaza is completely full by the time dusk begins to fall. Whirling circles of dancers jubilantly waving flags jostle for space on the men's side, while throngs of teenage girls kick up a storm a few yards away.

Jerusalem songs blast out over the sound system as more and more people pour into the plaza from every direction. I'm standing just above the tunnel into the Moslem quarter, which is spotlighted, so I have a great view of the crowds arriving from the direction of Damascus Gate.

Everyone is trying to tell their friends where they are, so the cellphone networks go down periodically.

As well-known singer Chaim Dovid starts to play, the dancing circles intensify and the feeling in the air of gratitude and jubilation that we are here to witness the 40th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem is palpable,

Sephardi Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar steps up to speak and start the evening prayers with a request that everyone join together to recite the Shema and the traditional prayer for God's help -- Ana Hashem Hoshiana.

With Jews under Kassam attack just an hour and a half away in Sderot, we need all the help we can get. Looking at the mostly young crowd of Israelis celebrating at the Kotel who are so deeply committed to their country at least gives a glimmer of optimism that we'll soon be able to overcome our inept leadership and embark on the right path.

Judy Lash Balint is an award-winner investigative journalist and author of "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" (Gefen). It is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, May 17, 2007.

This news item is from Norway's Aftenposten
(http://www.aftenposten.no/) and was written by Aftenposten's Norwegian reporter, Randi Johannessen, and Aftenposten's English Web Desk, Jonathan Tisdall.

Mamand Mamandy is still receiving treatment for the public lashing he received

Norwegian-Iranian Mamand Mamandy had a brutal meeting with police after drinking two beers while on holiday in Iran.

"It's getting better now, but I am still in great pain," Mamandy, 35, told Aftenposten.no. "My brother is a doctor, and treated me after the whipping. I was in great pain and could not sleep."

Mamandy, a Kurd, explained that he was visiting his mother in Baneh, Iran in April when he was arrested by police.

"We were on an outing with family and friends, six or seven in the evening, and were having a barbecue and enjoying ourselves. Altogether I drank two beers. The police happened to drive by," Mamandy said.

He said that he was immediately arrested and taken to the police station where he was sentenced to 130 lashes. This sentence, for beer drinking, was carried out publicly according to news agency Iran Focus.

"I received 130 lashes on the back of my body. Police whipped me," Mamandy said. He came to Norway as an asylum seeker in 1999. He lives in Drammen with his wife and they are awaiting Norwegian citizenship.

Mamandy traveled home to Norway shortly after his punishment and has been since treated by his family doctor here.

Aftenposten.no has been in contact with the Foreign Ministry, who said that they had not been contacted by Mamandy or his family in connection with the matter.

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 17, 2007.

Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon vows to be an even better lapdog. The OIC is already the single largest voting bloc at the UN. It's hard to imagine how the UN could become more compliant to its wishes than it is now.

This below is from www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/016461.php

From AKI:

New York, 16 May (AKI) -- Praising the cooperative relationship between the United Nations and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has anticipated strengthening these ties in the years ahead. In a message to the OIC Ministerial Conference meeting in Islamabad, Ban said Tuesday the gathering comes at a crucial juncture. "Instability in Islamic States -- from Afghanistan and Iraq to Sudan and Somalia -- carries profound implications for international peace and security,"he said.

"The OIC, as a leading multilateral institution, is well placed to play a leading role in addressing all these challenges," said Ban. "I would especially like to commend the excellent cooperation between the Untied Nations and the OIC."

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Fishbein Associates, May 17, 2007.

Is this America's future.....?

Chilling undercover investigation into the influence of Saudi Arabian religious extremism throughout the UK. Despite being considered ... Britain's principal ally in the Middle East, this disturbing report reveals Saudi Arabian Islam -- Wahabism -- is spreading a message of bigotry and hatred to a section of Muslims and predicting an imminent jihad. An undercover reporter joins Islamic worshippers..."

CLICK HERE or Paste into URL tool bar

Contact Fishbein Associates by email at fishnet@pipeline.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 17, 2007.

It must be noted that Egypt played a central role in preserving and maintaining Hamas and other radical forces.

Every step of the way Cairo pressed for a series of arrangements and agreements under which they were able to retain their illegal armed forces in the field. Add to that what at best has been a gross blind eye (excepting periodic photo ops) towards massive smuggling from Egypt to Gaza of weapons, ammunition, explosives, etc.

At the end of the day, Egypt has consistently followed a policy of giving preference to the development and encouragement of forces in the Gaza Strip who could hurt Israel over its concern over the impact such forces could have over the stability of the neighborhood

This news item is called "Mubarak expresses concern over growing strength of Hamas," and was written by Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondent. It is from today's Haaretz

Haaretz has learned that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak expressed great concern over the increasing strength of Hamas in talks with senior diplomatic officials on Wednesday.

He said that the Egyptian government is at a loss regarding the future of the Gaza Strip. However, he also proclaimed that Egypt is making great efforts to end the Hamas government and support Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

"With Hamas no way," he reportedly said.

Mubarak painted a dark picture of the situation with Hamas and said there was no chance for peace with the organization. "Hamas will never sign a peace agreement with Israel if it stays in power," the Egyptian president said.

Mubarak also said that Egypt did not accept Hamas in power, especially in light of its growing ties with the Muslim Brotherhood, which leads the opposition in Egypt. Mubarak sees the Brotherhood, which gained considerable power in Egypt's last parliamentary elections, as a threat to secular power.

Egypt has begun barring senior Hamas leaders from entering Egypt due to concerns over their contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Since Hamas rose to power and in view of the continuing strife between Hamas and Fatah, Egypt has been working through its security delegation in Gaza to reach a cease-fire among the factions. At the same time, Egypt has continuously held talks with Hamas, the Popular Resistance Committees and the Islamic Army over the release of kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, May 17, 2007.

Islamic Fatah and Hamas murder each other in Gaza, Islamic Sunnis and Shiites murder each other in Iraq, one weapon of choice being homicide/suicide bombers, as well as a more than occasional beheading or ten to up the terror quotient. Indeed, homicide/suicide bombing is now all the rage in war torn Taliban infested Islamic Afghanistan. The genocide in Darfur, a western region of oil rich Sudan, continues unabated, perpetrated by janjaweed Arab murders, at the behest of bejeweled Islamic tyrants squatting in Khartoum. Islamic jihadist murderers are responsible for the dominant share of worldwide violence, beginning even before the catastrophic events of 9/11 in America, including the more recent bombings in London, Madrid, Indonesia, Israel, Egypt, as well as homicide in the Netherlands, to name but a few of the more noteworthy catastrophic incidences. Yet, Israel is accused by an ex-U.S. President of committing apartheid in the so-called West Bank, and the International Red Cross leaks a document suggesting Israel is being inhumane to Arabs residing in the eastern sector of Jerusalem. These accusations are not only bogus, considering Israel must defend its citizens thus inconvenience Arabs, some of whom wander about wrapped in explosives, but in the grand scheme of things, receive far more attention than they deserve, when juxtaposed to all the Muslim violence raging throughout the Middle East.

We are all products of our cultures, thus when cultural infrastructures devolve, become more isolated from surrounding influences i.e. more incestuous, the mindsets of respective adherents devolve as well. Indeed, Koranic interpretations skewed towards hatred of outsiders, crafted by narrowly focused individuals, is culturally symptomatic rather than a cause of devolved fundamentalist Islam. Tolerant Judeo-Christian culture, for one, has not so devolved, thus peaceful resolutions of disputes, peaceful interpretations of gospel, are more the norm, with but a few exceptions such as until now a seemingly never ending dispute in Northern Ireland. Somehow, Muslim culture, spread throughout the Middle East and East, has become less worldly, more introverted, less tolerant, more violent, except for several small Gulf States and perhaps Turkey. (Lebanon, once secular, now writhes in chaos influenced by outside fundamentalist forces.) This consequence could be in part indicative of having lost an Islamic Ottoman empire in the early twentieth century to culturally different non-Muslim nations, shrouding the losers under a cloud of humiliation, causing them to devolve into a defensive war-like state of existence, blaming the collective infidel for all misery, especially the Jewish infidel.

None of this would matter to calculating non-Muslim industrial nations, indeed, Israel would not be in many mindsets a virtual pariah state, if particular dysfunctional Middle East Muslim regimes were not both blessed and cursed by fossil fuel wealth, the energy addictive substance truly out of place in time yet ever necessary to fuel the sophisticated technologically advanced engines of sophisticated culturally diverse century twenty-one tribes, led by Armani clad tribal chiefs, throughout this globally warming planet. Furthermore, such Islamic oil producers are perilously enabled, thus advance their weapons technology, because the despised 'infidel' feeds their coffers with petrodollars in exchange for the Arabic and Farsi tea beneath their scorpion infested desert. If industrial movers and shakers worldwide would stop buying Middle East oil, perhaps such oil producing regimes would be forced to morph their raw material dependent economies into economies able to compete in a secular global economy, funneling erstwhile accumulated oil profits into educational institutions worthy of century twenty-one, training future generations in math, science, economics, real history, cultural diversity, and other subjects far removed from hate filled misogynist Koranic verse. The best way to remove a cloud of humiliation is to turn out productive citizens. Cultural traits are not etched in stone.

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 larose@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Louis Gordon, May 17, 2007.

This article was written by Bernard Lewis and it appeared yesterday in Opinion Journal
(http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010080). Mr. Lewis, professor emeritus at Princeton, is the author, most recently, of "From Babel to Dragomans: Interpreting the Middle East" (Oxford University Press, 2004).

Islamists always believed the U.S. was weak. Recent political trends won't change their view.

During the Cold War, two things came to be known and generally recognized in the Middle East concerning the two rival superpowers. If you did anything to annoy the Russians, punishment would be swift and dire. If you said or did anything against the Americans, not only would there be no punishment; there might even be some possibility of reward, as the usual anxious procession of diplomats and politicians, journalists and scholars and miscellaneous others came with their usual pleading inquiries: "What have we done to offend you? What can we do to put it right?"

A few examples may suffice. During the troubles in Lebanon in the 1970s and '80s, there were many attacks on American installations and individuals -- notably the attack on the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983, followed by a prompt withdrawal, and a whole series of kidnappings of Americans, both official and private, as well as of Europeans. There was only one attack on Soviet citizens, when one diplomat was killed and several others kidnapped. The Soviet response through their local agents was swift, and directed against the family of the leader of the kidnappers. The kidnapped Russians were promptly released, and after that there were no attacks on Soviet citizens or installations throughout the period of the Lebanese troubles.

These different responses evoked different treatment. While American policies, institutions and individuals were subject to unremitting criticism and sometimes deadly attack, the Soviets were immune. Their retention of the vast, largely Muslim colonial empire accumulated by the czars in Asia passed unnoticed, as did their propaganda and sometimes action against Muslim beliefs and institutions.

Most remarkable of all was the response of the Arab and other Muslim countries to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979. Washington's handling of the Tehran hostage crisis assured the Soviets that they had nothing to fear from the U.S. They already knew that they need not worry about the Arab and other Muslim governments. The Soviets already ruled -- or misruled -- half a dozen Muslim countries in Asia, without arousing any opposition or criticism. Initially, their decision and action to invade and conquer Afghanistan and install a puppet regime in Kabul went almost unresisted. After weeks of debate, the U.N. General Assembly finally was persuaded to pass a resolution "strongly deploring the recent armed intervention in Afghanistan." The words "condemn" and "aggression" were not used, and the source of the "intervention" was not named. Even this anodyne resolution was too much for some of the Arab states. South Yemen voted no; Algeria and Syria abstained; Libya was absent; the nonvoting PLO observer to the Assembly even made a speech defending the Soviets.

One might have expected that the recently established Organization of the Islamic Conference would take a tougher line. It did not. After a month of negotiation and manipulation, the organization finally held a meeting in Pakistan to discuss the Afghan question. Two of the Arab states, South Yemen and Syria, boycotted the meeting. The representative of the PLO, a full member of this organization, was present, but abstained from voting on a resolution critical of the Soviet action; the Libyan delegate went further, and used this occasion to denounce the U.S.

The Muslim willingness to submit to Soviet authority, though widespread, was not unanimous. The Afghan people, who had successfully defied the British Empire in its prime, found a way to resist the Soviet invaders. An organization known as the Taliban (literally, "the students") began to organize resistance and even guerilla warfare against the Soviet occupiers and their puppets. For this, they were able to attract some support from the Muslim world -- some grants of money, and growing numbers of volunteers to fight in the Holy War against the infidel conqueror. Notable among these was a group led by a Saudi of Yemeni origin called Osama bin Laden.

To accomplish their purpose, they did not disdain to turn to the U.S. for help, which they got. In the Muslim perception there has been, since the time of the Prophet, an ongoing struggle between the two world religions, Christendom and Islam, for the privilege and opportunity to bring salvation to the rest of humankind, removing whatever obstacles there might be in their path. For a long time, the main enemy was seen, with some plausibility, as being the West, and some Muslims were, naturally enough, willing to accept what help they could get against that enemy. This explains the widespread support in the Arab countries and in some other places first for the Third Reich and, after its collapse, for the Soviet Union. These were the main enemies of the West, and therefore natural allies.

Now the situation had changed. The more immediate, more dangerous enemy was the Soviet Union, already ruling a number of Muslim countries, and daily increasing its influence and presence in others. It was therefore natural to seek and accept American help. As Osama bin Laden explained, in this final phase of the millennial struggle, the world of the unbelievers was divided between two superpowers. The first task was to deal with the more deadly and more dangerous of the two, the Soviet Union. After that, dealing with the pampered and degenerate Americans would be easy.

We in the Western world see the defeat and collapse of the Soviet Union as a Western, more specifically an American, victory in the Cold War. For Osama bin Laden and his followers, it was a Muslim victory in a jihad, and, given the circumstances, this perception does not lack plausibility.

From the writings and the speeches of Osama bin Laden and his colleagues, it is clear that they expected this second task, dealing with America, would be comparatively simple and easy. This perception was certainly encouraged and so it seemed, confirmed by the American response to a whole series of attacks -- on the World Trade Center in New York and on U.S. troops in Mogadishu in 1993, on the U.S. military office in Riyadh in 1995, on the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, on the USS Cole in Yemen in 2000 -- all of which evoked only angry words, sometimes accompanied by the dispatch of expensive missiles to remote and uninhabited places.

Stage One of the jihad was to drive the infidels from the lands of Islam; Stage Two -- to bring the war into the enemy camp, and the attacks of 9/11 were clearly intended to be the opening salvo of this stage. The response to 9/11, so completely out of accord with previous American practice, came as a shock, and it is noteworthy that there has been no successful attack on American soil since then. The U.S. actions in Afghanistan and in Iraq indicated that there had been a major change in the U.S., and that some revision of their assessment, and of the policies based on that assessment, was necessary.

More recent developments, and notably the public discourse inside the U.S., are persuading increasing numbers of Islamist radicals that their first assessment was correct after all, and that they need only to press a little harder to achieve final victory. It is not yet clear whether they are right or wrong in this view. If they are right, the consequences -- both for Islam and for America -- will be deep, wide and lasting.

Contact Louis Gordon at louis3105@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Frankfurter, May 17, 2007.
Dear Friends,

It is rare that one of the so-called "human rights" NGOs that support Palestinian terror are openly exposed. Watchdog NGO Monitor has reported the tendency of Medicines sans Frontieres (Doctors without Borders) "members [to] exploit this NGO for political goals including unsupported attacks on Israel in contradiction to the pledge to maintain independence from political powers." Of particular concern to NGO Monitor is the specialist's diagnosis: Israeli actions degrade Palestinian healthcare. Of course, Palestinian violence and terror that make the protective actions necessary do not form part of the medical record. It seems that the mental and physical health of Israeli civilians does not even get an appointment.

Today, Albawaba Middle East news service reports: Medicines sans Frontieres has been infected by the terror virus.

"Palestinian charged with plan to kill Olmert"
17-05-2007, 09:12 GMT

Note: Text in quotes is from the Jerusalem Post article "Doctors Without Borders staffer plotted to kill Olmert" written by Yaakov Katz and Jerusalem Post Staff.

A Palestinian man was charged Thursday in Jerusalem District Court with gathering intelligence as part of a plan to assassinate Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) activists in Dir el-Balah allegedly recruited Masa'b Bashir, and dispatched him to gather intelligence on the security arrangements at the Prime Minister's Residence in Jerusalem. He visited the site several times, and informed his PFLP handlers that the tight security would not permit the successful assassination of Olmert.

Masa'b Bashir, a 25-year-old resident of Dir el-Balah in the Gaza Strip, has a valid entry permit into Israel due to his work with the organization Doctors without Borders, the Tel Aviv-based Haaretz newspaper reported. "According to officials, after the doctor realized that the security surrounding Olmert was impenetrable, Bashir decided in December 2006 to kill David Be'eri, head of the Elad organization, a group involved in purchasing Arab homes in Jerusalem's Old City."

As part of that plan, Bashir allegedly underwent training in martial arts and firing a handgun. "In December 2006, he underwent combat training in the Gaza Strip in order to learn to kill without using weapons. In January 2007, Bashir again entered Israel again on behalf of Doctors Without Borders, and began collecting information on Be'eri. He made additional trips to Jerusalem in February and March, and on April 18. He was arrested on April 19."

Instead of their ongoing negative prognosis, Medicines sans Frontiers would be better giving a second opinion on the free medical treatment Israeli hospitals and doctors so frequently provide our Palestinian Arab neighbours.

David Frankfurter is a business consultant, corporate executive and writer who frequently comments on the Middle East. To subscribe to his 'Letter from Israel', email him at david.frankfurter@iname.com. Or go to http://www.livejournal.com/users/dfrankfurter/

To Go To Top

Posted by Family Security Matters FSN), May 17, 2007.

This article was written by Alan Caruba and published on FSM's website. It is archived at
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/homeland.php?id=985983. Alan Caruba writes a weekly column, "Warning Signs", posted on the Internet site of The National Anxiety Center, www.anxietycenter.com. His book, "Right Answers: Separating Fact from Fantasy", is published by Merrill Press.

How many millions of illegals streaming into the United States would constitute a foreign invasion? FSM Contributing Editor Alan Caruba's latest commentary paints one of the most grimly realistic pictures you will ever see on the subject of when enough should be enough!

Here's one of those statistics that sums up everything you need to know about America's immigration crisis. The May 14 edition of US News & World Report had a small item noting that, "Mexico has lost more people to migration to the United States than to death since 2000."

"An average of 577,000 people moved to the United States annually during the 2000-2005 period, while 495,000 people died in Mexico." The U.S. agency providing this data estimates that about 11 million Mexicans are living, legally or not, in the United States.

This is not about disliking Mexicans. Many have come here legally, become citizens, and have risen in our society to contribute in business, academics, and government. This is about saving America from a wholesale and entirely illegal invasion, and its consequences.

Mexico has an entirely different view of people who would move there. The Center for Security Policy points out that Mexico prohibits foreigners from owning land within 100 kilometers of the Mexico border and within 50 kilometers of the Mexican coastland, prime real estate. Mexican law permits the government to revoke the naturalized citizenship of anyone who chooses to live in his country of origin more than five years.

Foreigners are admitted only after proving they have "the necessary funds for their sustenance" and they can be fined or jailed if they show false papers. Any Mexican who helps an illegal alien is breaking the law there. On the average, annually Mexico grants citizenship to just 3,000 people, compared to the U.S. rate of almost 500,000.

Compare this with the insidious and stupid immigration law, S. 1348, that Majority Leader, Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and other members of the U.S. Senate are trying to fast-track to passage with the support of President Bush. Co-sponsored by Senators Edward Kennedy (D-MA), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Ken Salazar (D-CO), this bill would provide amnesty to those who are here illegally and invite a whole new rush to the border by more Mexicans and others.

By way of illustrating why the virtually uncontrolled flow of Mexican and other aliens represents a problem that cannot and must not be ignored, let me share some facts about its impact on just one State, New Jersey, where I live.

In a recent study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform on the "Cost of Illegal Immigration to New Jerseyites", the executive summary notes that, "The illegal alien population residing in New Jersey is costing the state's taxpayers nearly $2.1 billion per year for education, medical care, and incarceration."

Bear in mind that New Jersey is essentially broke thanks to the huge debt it has been incurred under several governors. When you add in the costs of an estimated 372,000 illegal aliens, you just exacerbate a bad situation. In sum, the "annual tax burden amounts to about $800 per New Jersey household headed by a native-born resident." Even if you subtract the sales, income, and property taxes that might be collected from illegal aliens, you still have net costs of $1.6 billion per year.

New Jersey is small, but when one extrapolates such costs to a State like California, you begin to see why illegal aliens pose an enormous cost to educational, medical, and other institutions and agencies trying to cope with people who have absolutely no right to be here. It is estimated that 40% of all workers in Los Angeles County are working for cash and not paying taxes. In Los Angeles, 95% of warrants for murder are for illegal aliens and more than two-thirds of all births in LA County are illegal aliens. And that's just for one county.

Then there's the issue of national security. In November, a report from the inspector general's office of the Department of Homeland Security revealed that half of the 91,516 illegal aliens from terror-sponsoring countries and those of 'special interest' apprehended at the border between 2001 and 2005 were released into the U.S. population. I grant you that Mexico is not a sponsor of terror, but it provides an avenue for access to America from nations where the drug industry rivals all others.

In addition to the high-risk aliens who were released, the report notes that authorities also released 27,947 known criminals over a period of five years between 2001 and 2004. When you consider that only one in four aliens attempting to enter the U.S. during this period were caught, the actual numbers of those who were not are some 350,000 from high-risk nations and an estimated 400,000 criminal aliens.

A 2006 study by Edwin S. Rubenstein, a former contributing editor for Forbes, commissioned by the National Policy Institute last year stated that, "Illegal aliens cost the American taxpayer $25 billion more than they pay in taxes." Titled "The Economics of Immigration Enforcement", the study concluded that they cost U.S. citizens an estimated $81 billion per year. "Amnesty would make things worse," stated the study, "by adding another $44 billion to government spending for services."

Something is very wrong when, given just these few facts, there are members in Congress seriously considering the granting of amnesty -- no matter how they mask the true intent of the legislation -- and that the President of the United States is one of its leading advocates.

The tyranny of numbers is that they cannot be ignored. The U.S. faces a new torrent of illegal aliens; seeking to absorb them despite ample evidence we are endangering and burdening current native-born and naturalized citizens. The proposed legislation is a demographic time bomb.

The Family Security Matters (FSM) website provides essays on matters of concern to our homeland security. Contact them at www.FamilySecurityMatters.org

To Go To Top

Posted by David Ben Ariel, May 17, 2007.

Israel must make concessions, Israel must do this, Israel must do that, while the Arabs continue to get away with mass murder and terrorism (while promising peace and feigning ignorance), aided and abetted by the international community.

The Atlantic Times repeats the list of delusional demands upon the Jewish homeland in "The Only Way Out: A Stringent Policy of Peace" that completely ignores history and the facts on the ground: Israel has no peace partners; Israel has no peace but only an ongoing war of attrition; the entire lying "peace process" is all part of the phased destruction of Israel that the Israelis have insanely enabled to continue. This harsh reality will soon blow up in the faces of those who have chosen to remain in a state of denial, repeating the big lie of Palestine as the proffered solution.

"Israel must reach an understanding with Syria," drones the asinine article written by a German Jew in a self-imposed exile from the Promised Land of Israel (contrary to Judaism), and then exposes such an "understanding" amounts to total Israeli surrender of the biblical territories of the Golan Heights (inheritance of Manasseh, son of Joseph) for more worthless promises and toilet paper agreements.

"The Jewish state must completely pull out of the occupied territories, abandon the settlements there and recognize East Jerusalem as the future Palestinian capital."

If Rafael Seligmann, the suicidal author, wants to slit his own throat or offer his head to the Nazi-Muslims, so be it. However, such murderous slander against biblical Judea and Samaria (occupied by covetous Arabs), such hateful incitement against Jewish pioneering communities (let RS take an armed stroll through the destroyed Jewish towns near Gaza, victims of Judenrein policies), and such treacherous talk against Jerusalem, the eternal capital of Israel, must not be tolerated! A self-respecting Jewish country would rebuke such nonsense (whether its from writers or world leaders) and unequivocally reject such an invitation for disaster.

Shame on Seligmann for his defeatist bile that spewed, "Now that the military option has been exhausted, Israel must safeguard its future through a brave policy of peace." What a schizophrenic statement! Israel has never truly utilized their military option but have always been restrained by world opinion and lucrative bribes.

If the Israelis won't properly defend themselves, they can never enjoy peace but will suffer open season against Israeli men, women, children and babies in strollers with further calls for appeasement and surrender. The German-Jesuit EU knows this full well, and wait in the wings to occupy Jerusalem as "peacekeepers." However, the EU is not a savior but a destroyer. The Vatican purposely exploits the Arab-Jewish conflict to breach Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem and will soon influence agents to invoke the accursed UN Resolution 181.

The aforementioned "Seligmann Column" of Jewish self-loathing, deliberate deceit and shameful collaboration with hostile elements, crumbles when examined in the brilliant light of history and the Bible: The Israelis were offered the only way out when Meir Kahane, rabbi and former Knesset Member, reminded them of the Law of Moses that teaches peace through strength, treating sworn enemies like sworn enemies and restoring the Temple Mount (Judaism's holiest site) as the Temple Mount without apology or hesitation (Malachi 4:4).

It's past time the Israelis come to their senses and acknowledge Kahane was right and succeed, following the direction of the Torah, or the Jews will continue to suffer escalating consequences for disobedience and Jerusalem will suffer defeat (Daniel 9:11).

David Ben Ariel is a Christian-Zionist writer and author of Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall. With a focus on the Middle East and Jerusalem, his analytical articles help others improve their understanding of that troubled region. Check out his Beyond Babylon blog:
(http://beyondbabylon.blogspot.com/), where this article initially was published. The original has live links to additional material.

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, May 16, 2007.

It is said that dogs biting men are not news but when a man bites a dog, THAT makes the headlines!

Newspapers love reversal of roles and stereotypes. When Arabs murder Jews simply because they are Jews, it is hardly news. THAT happens all the time. Boring!

Haaretz, Israel's leftwing Post-Zionist daily, sometimes called the Palestinian newspaper printed in Hebrew, has never been very interested in Arabs murdering Jews because they are Jews. Following the lead of the overseas Bash-Israel media, Haaretz always refers to such perps as "activists" and "militants". The "T" word (terrorism) is never used to refer to Arab murders of Jews in stories at Haaretz.

But let a Jew go and murder an Arab, and Haaretz runs banner headlines about "Jewish terrorism". In 2005 when Eden Natan-Zada, a mentally ill 19-year-old AWOL Israeli soldier, killed four Arabs on a bus in Shfaram (and was then himself murdered by the mob there), Haaretz headlines screamed about the Jewish "terrorist who murdered Arabs because they are Arabs."

This week Julian Soufir, a French Jew living in Israel, murdered an Arab, claiming he did so because he just wanted to kill an Arab. He was arrested and is pleading not guilty by reasons or mental illness, and he may well be mentally ill. He has been under psychiatric care since some domestic violence incidents. Justice Muki Landman wrote in his judgment that the investigation material indicated that the suspect suffered from a mental illness. "Under these circumstances, and due to the fact that in the best interest of the investigation and reaching the truth it is imperative that his mental condition be evaluated."

But Haaretz has yet another example of the worldwide scourge of "Jewish terrorism."

Pluralism at Haaretz resembles that in Pravda back in the days of Brezhnev. There is only one correct opinion, that of the ultra-Left, and it is repeated ad nauseum by almost all writers in the paper. Today Haaretz runs an Op-Ed by one of its countless leftists, Goel Pinto, demanding that Jews collectively apologize to Arabs for "Jewish terrorism". We can't seem to recall many cases when Arabs apologized for mass murders of Jews because they are Jews.

Pinto in Haaretz blasts Jews, especially French Jews, for being "racist". His evidence? Many of them voted for Sarkozy! Of course most French citizens voted for Sarkozy. Pinto adds:

'The Jewish murderer Soufir immigrated to Israel before he murdered an Arab -- and not because of any shortage of Muslims in France. Rather, it was because in France many Jews prefer to wrap themselves in the tallit of victimhood -- and the anti-Jewish incidents there give them sufficient ammunition to do so....Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Acting President Dalia Itzik should pay a visit to the family of the murder victim and ask for forgiveness in the name of the state and the Jewish people....This is also the appropriate time for the heads of France's Jewish community, led by Chief Rabbi Yosef Sitruk, to visit the Great Mosque of Paris and to ask for forgiveness. Forgiveness for the murder, but also for the anti-Muslim racism that is rooted in their community, which is one of the main causes for the deterioration in relations between Jews and Muslims in France.'

Now here is a thought. Since reversal of stereotype is so newsworthy, maybe Haaretz should try an experiment in it and reverse its own role playing and stereotype. All it need do to create the biggest Man Bites Dog story in decades is come out clearly in favor of Israel's right to defend itself against Arab terrorism and Islamofascist aggression, including by means of assassinating terrorists, and also come out clearly in opposition to Palestinian demands, including the "right of return."

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. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Simon McIlwaine, May 16, 2007.

"We mourn death of great Christian leader and friend of Israel -- Reverend Jerry Falwell"
by Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein

It is with great sorrow that I come to you to tell you of the death of a true friend of Israel and the Jewish people -- and a man that I was honored to call a personal friend as well.

The Rev. Jerry Falwell passed away today suddenly at the age of 73. When I started The Fellowship 25 years ago, he was among the first Christians to step forward and express interest in being involved in our bridge-building work. And, over the years, he proved his solidarity repeatedly. His involvement helped break down the barriers of mistrust that characterized the relationship between Jews and evangelical Christians at the time.

There were those who remained skeptical of Rev. Falwell's support. I recall on one occasion nearly 30 years ago, I invited him to speak at my synagogue and was criticized by many in the Jewish community who questioned his motives. But this did not deter him one bit in his unfailing support for Israel and the Jewish people. Very directly, but always graciously and lovingly -- I never saw him behave otherwise towards people -- he would remind those who questioned him that, as a Christian, his support of Israel was based on eternal biblical truths and, because of that, it would not falter. I am happy to say that he managed to win over many of his skeptics through the consistency and obviously genuine quality of his love for Israel and the Jewish people.

The Rev. Falwell once said that "the Bible Belt is Israel's safety belt." Over the years, he helped me realize the truth of that saying. Wherever there are faithful, Bible-believing Christians, I can be assured of finding true friends and supporters of Israel. And the Rev. Falwell himself did much to ensure that "safety belt" remained strong as ever.

Please take a moment today to join with me and Fellowship staff to pray for the many friends and family of Rev. Falwell, and all the staff and students at his school, Liberty University, who mourn the loss of their leader and are now left to carry on his great legacy. He will be sorely missed. I also invite you to share your thoughts and memories of Reverend Falwell with us.

With prayers for shalom, peace,
Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein,
President, International Fellowship of Christians and Jews

"Hamas Hits Israeli School"
Honest Reporting (www.honestreporting.com).

Hamas, the elected governing party of the Palestinian Authority, is claiming credit for hitting an Israeli school with Qassam rockets. In twenty-four hours, thirty rockets have been fired at civilian targets in Sderot. Numerous children have been injured in these attacks. These children were not injured because they happened to be close to a military target at the time of an attack. These children (along with other civilians) were the target of Hamas' Qassams. As the following account makes clear: Hamas is a terrorist organization whose aim is to kill and injure inncocent people. From Ynet News:

One of the victims of yesterday's rocket attacks on Sderot was a woman who celebrated her daughter's birthday in her garden.

"When the Red Alert siren was sounded she rushed the kids home but she realized that one was missing. She went out and found the kid lying on the ground terrified. Then the boom was heard. She brought the child in and she also suffered from shock," said Dr Rosa Schneider, a trauma specialist at the Barzilai Hospital in Ashkelon.

"We had 14 victims who suffered from shock and I heard hair-raising stories," she said. "I can't remember an event with so many victims....It is a feeling of hopelessness. You do nothing bad and suddenly your life is destroyed," Schneider said.

Another victim was a pregnant woman who fell as she ran to seek shelter and injured her stomach.

We have previously written that Radhika Coomaraswamy, the U.N. Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, has visited the region and been very vocal in her criticism of Israeli security policies. We ask all TeachKidsPeace subscribers to contact her and demand that she release a statement unequivocally condemning this attack on innocent children.

Demand that Israeli children be protected equally.

Stop Child Abuse. Teach Kids Peace.

Please forward this e-mail to whomever you feel might be interested.

Thank you for your involvement in TeachKidsPeace.

TeachKidsPeace, a project of HonestReporting, works to bring attention to the abuse of children through indoctrination and exploitation.

In the midst of the battles taking place between Hamas and Fatah terrorists, over 30 Qassam missiles have been fired with intent at the residents of Sderot in a 24 hour period and continue to fall even as we write. This, despite Israel's 2006 withdrawal from Gaza and Palestinian claims to be adhering to a "ceasefire".

If anyone still doubts the dangers and lethal potential of Qassam missiles, we invite you to view this short video of a missile strike in Sderot that knocked the videographer to the ground as a Qassam hit a neighbor's house, injuring a member of the family.
Click here.

Contact Simon McIlwaine at Simon.McIlwaine@ormerods.co.uk or visit the website at: www.anglicansforisrael.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Stand With Us, May 16, 2007.
This is an article written by Yaakov Lappin that was published yesterday in Ynet News

The subway system in America's capital city is set to be the scene of a poster campaign war between a pro-Palestinian organization seeking to harm Israel's image and a pro-Israel group which has decided to fight back.

Last month, the 'US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation' (ETO) placed 20 poster ads showing "an imposing tank pointing its main firing turret at a child with a schoolbag walking along a dirt road," the Canadian Jewish News (CJN) reported.

"'Imagine if this were your child's path to school. Palestinians don't have to imagine,' the poster states, before continuing to call for an end to US aid for 'Israel's brutal military occupation, paid for by US taxpayers like you,'" the report added.

But a response to the anti-Israel campaign was not long in coming, after the Los Angeles-based StandWithUs (SWU) decided to launch its own pro-Israel poster ads.

Describing the ETO posters as "deceptive and emotionally manipulative," SWU's International Director, Roz Rothstein, said: "Israel is not fighting children. It is defending itself against extremists like Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad whose charters call for Israel's obliteration and whose terrorist attacks target civilians, including school children and toddlers."

A press release sent by SWU said the group "will launch a month-long ad campaign in mid-May through June 11, urging Palestinians to teach their children peace instead of hate, and urging Palestinian extremists to reform."

"SWU's ads will appear in 20 downtown Washington DC metro stations to counter the misinformation in an anti-Israel ad campaign scheduled to run in the stations concurrently," SWU added.

"The anti-Israel ads misinform the public about occupation, funding, and responsibility for violence," the statement said, adding: "Israel withdrew completely from Gaza in 2005 and from over 40% of the West Bank almost nine years ago. The land was turned over to the Palestinian Authority and 98% of Palestinians are self-governing under its rule. Unfortunately, the 2005 withdrawal did not promote peace. Instead, rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel rose four-fold."

"America has also given billions of dollars in aid to the Palestinians either directly or through the United Nations over the years," SWU said.

Speaking to Ynetnews, Rothstein said SWU may expand its poster campaigns to other cities, and possibly to other countries too.

"Other communities have expressed interest in our metro ad campaign. With their support, we could expand it as part of our ongoing effort to raise public awareness about the obstacles to peace. We are already preparing an online campaign to amplify this critical message," he said.

Rothstein added that Israel's supporters in US and Europe should take an assertive stance in the information battle. "Have confidence in the justness of your position and remember that you are fighting not just for Israel and Jews, but for all people who believe in fairness and human rights. Build coalitions for strength and mutual support, and to brainstorm about the most creative and effective ways to combat anti-Israel propaganda," Rothstein said.

"We know Europeans face an especially difficult challenge. We are opening a StandWithUs branch in Europe to partner with local activist organizations. We are looking forward to developing responses that will resonate with European audiences," he added.

Contact Stand With Us by email at activistnews@standwithus.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gil Ronen, May 16, 2007.

A reporter for Al Manar TV operated freely in Israel during the Second Lebanon War despite the fact that the station is a propaganda and intelligence gathering arm of Hizbullah -- Israel's enemy in the war. Additional TV stations from enemy countries had reporters in Israel during the war: Iranian TV, Saudi Arabian TV, and the Al Jazeera news channel.

Omedia reports that Al Manar is not a media network in the regular sense of the word. In the USA it is considered a terror organization and its operation within the USA has been banned by presidential decree since the 9/11 terror attacks. When reporters for a station like Al Manar transmit information about the locations hit by missiles in real time, they are for all intents and purposes enemy spies.

Al Manar's television broadcasts -- including those aimed at children -- encourage suicide terror attacks and call for the conquest of the world by Islam and jihad. The network also transmits anti-Semitic messages, which have caused European countries, including France, to ban its broadcasts.

The matter was investigated by the committee of inquiry, headed by retired judge Dalia Dorner, that was established to review journalistic coverage during the war. The protocols of the committee's work include an exchange between Haaretz's veteran military affairs analyst, Ze'ev Schiff, who was a member of the committee, and IDF Spokesman Miri Regev, in which Regev confirms that "Al Manar broadcast from the ground all of the time."

A senior official in the Government Press Bureau said that freelance Arab reporters from Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Dubai and other countries operated in Israel during the war and reported for Al Jazeera, NBC Dubai and Al Manar. During the war itself they were allowed to report from Haifa, even though they did not have government press cards.

The reporter for Al Manar, said the Press Bureau official, is an Israeli Arab. And Israeli citizens are allowed to report for news organizations that operate from enemy states.

When asked whether reporters for Al Manar and Iranian TV submitted their reports to the censor before transmitting them, the IDF Spokesman replied laconically: "the foreign TV stations operating in the territory of Israel are required to submit reports to the censor before broadcasting, and this was true in the Second Lebanon War as well."

Gl Ronen writes for Arutz Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). This article appeared today.

To Go To Top

Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, May 16, 2007.

This article was written by Etgar Lefkovits and it is archived at
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1178708610196&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

A prominent Jerusalem-based evangelical organization slammed on Tuesday the decision of much of the international community to boycott celebrations marking the 40th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem, calling the move a "perverse and immoral act."

"The Jewish restoration to Jerusalem in modern times is one of the clearest cases of historic justice ever, whereby a people longing to return to a land and a holy city from which they were violently uprooted millennia ago finally realized that sustaining dream. Yet due to Arab pressures and threats, the Jewish return to Jerusalem has been perversely turned into an immoral act," Rev. Malcolm Hedding, Executive Director of the International Christian Embassy, wrote to Jerusalem Mayor Uri Lupolianski.

The unabashedly pro-Israel Jerusalem-based evangelical ICE was established in the city in 1980 at a time when foreign embassies were leaving the city to relocate in Tel Aviv.

There are currently no foreign embassies in Jerusalem due to the city's disputed status.

The letter came just one day after US Ambassador to Israel Richard Jones, as well as EU representatives, boycotted the official Knesset ceremony marking Jerusalem Day.

"Jerusalem remains a 'burdensome stone' among the nations, as borne out by the decision of much of the international community to boycott this year's Jerusalem Day observances," Hedding wrote in his letter.

Earlier this week, Lupolianski blasted foreign government for planning to boycott this week's events.

"Whoever does not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of the state of Israel does not recognize the state of Israel," Lupolianski said. (End)

Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 16, 2007.

When the flagship journals start to fill their pages with "friendly" recommendations of how to appease the Arab Muslims then the "Hustle" is on -- again!

I will start with the OpEd purportedly written by Fuad Siniora, Prime Minister of Lebanon but strangely, it has the fingerprints of State Department propagandists doing their job.(1) Siniora tells us that military action does not give the people of Israel security. This from Siniora who neglected to put Lebanese troops in the South where he promised to keep Hezb'Allah terrorists away from Israel. Instead, he also allowed Hezb'Allah to establish a six square block compound in the middle of Beirut.

Siniora advises Israel that the only way to achieve a comprehensive peace settlement is to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Reams have already been written by objective Middle East experts to the effect that, while the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is said to be the reason for Arab uprisings all over the world, there is no truth for this claim.

I wonder if Siniora is prepared to defend his disinformation when Islamists are blowing up the world in places where there are no connections to Israel. There are over 70 Terrorist organizations operating in Iraq, supported, supplied and funded by Iran, Syria, Russia, China and North Korea as weapons' suppliers.

Siniora tells us that the 22 members of the Arab League will recognize Israel if she withdraws to the 1949 Armistice cease-fire lines. (Those lines were the vulnerable positions that invited the Arab Muslim aggression leading to the 1967 Six Days War -- that Abba Eban called "Auschwitz borders"). Siniora agrees that giving Israel recognition and a promised peace is (get this) a "high price" the Arabs are willing to pay.

But, Israel must give up 22% of her very tiny territory. Israel is now only some 22% of the land that was set aside to become a Jewish State when the map of the Middle East was redrawn after World War 1. Siniora wants the "Palestinians to establish a viable independent state in Yesha (Gaza, Samaria and Judea), which is roughly 22% of Israel" and .22X.22 (=5%) of Mandated Palestine. What Siniora leaves out is that Jordan is already 78% of historic Palestine. Do the math! Jordan is 78% of historic Palestine. Now add 5% of historic Palestine for another state in Palestine. That adds up to 83% of historic Palestine which was reserved by the League of Nations, "to establish a Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine. Article 4" "... shall facilitate Jewish immigration...while assuring the close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes. Article 6." (2)

In the parlance of Middle East code-words, that statement tells all that Israel will get the equivalent of a Mohammed-type "Hudna" (Arabic for temporary cease-fire) which is a false, short-term agreement to be abrogated when the Islamists are strong enough to mount a full offensive.** This was the trick, the Hudabaiya Treaty, mentioned by Yassir Arafat when speaking in Arabic to explain any short-term cease fire he negotiated with the Israelis would be abrogated -- like the first Oslo Accords.

But, Siniora, who himself is a Muslim, knows the history of Mohammed who was a clever arch-killer who taught that any trick may be used against the infidel (non-Muslim) in a Jihad (holy war for Islam).

Siniora blathers on the talk of "Peace and Security" which obscures his position supporting the Saudi Plan to flood Israel with three to five million (3,000,000-5,000,000) descendants of the original 480,000 fellaheen Arab Muslims who were urged to leave by the incoming six Arab armies. The Arab leaders said: "Clear the roads so we can eliminate the Zionist Jews and then you can come back to claim your homes and those of the Jews."

Siniora complains of the damage done to Lebanon as a result of the 2006 Lebanon war July 12 to August 14, 2006. Of course, he neglects to mention that Hezb'Allah killed 8 Israeli soldiers and kidnapped 2 whom they still hold. (Plus the soldier that Hamas kidnapped) Siniora also neglects to mention that Hezb'Allah started firing long range Katyusha missiles into Israel without provocation and he made no effort to send in Lebanese troops to stop the missile launchings. (3)

Siniora uses the buzz words of disinformation such as "injustice, oppression, illegal occupation of Arab lands". He speaks of extremism (meaning terror) as a reluctant response to Israel, ignoring of over 50 years of uninterrupted aggression through war and terror -- all with the intent of eliminating Israel and her people. He forgot the illegal occupation and illegal building by Arabs on Jewish-owned land and Arab Muslim desecration of Jewish holy places whenever the Muslims were in control.

When Arabs under Islam cannot achieve in the short term the utter conquest of their intended victim, they fall back on screeching for fairness, understanding and a cessation of their victims' efforts to defend themselves. They generally seek allies among intended future victims. In this case, it would be America, Europe and Russia to whom the Islamists appeal for support, planning that one day soon, through infiltration, nuclear threats or simply outbreeding their adversaries, they will dominate the world by Islam with a Global Muslim Caliphate. They don't hide their goals; they proclaim them loudly and often. Why don't we listen? They say what they mean and they mean what they say!

Siniora also tells us that the Arabs like the Israelis have security concerns. What he fails to mention that well-documented history plainly states that it's those "peaceful" Arabs who plan, arm and restart the conflicts. When Israel responds in self-defense, the Muslim Arabs put their propaganda machine in high gear, bleating about how unfair it is for Israel to respond.

For example, Israel gave up Gush Katif in Gaza and now receives daily launchings of Kassam Rockets. Israel under Ehud Barak foolishly left the security buffer zone in Lebanon and Hezb'Allah moved in and established firing bases with the benign neglect of Siniora and the Lebanese Army. After the War, Hezb'Allah was re-stocked by Iran through Syria and now has 20,000 Missiles ready to assault Israel -- again. Why does "Never Again" never mean "Never Again"?

Babbling about a "Just and Lasting Peace" is merely the cover Arabs need to seduce the world at large or Israeli Leftists who live in an illusory world where words are treated like things. Things being solid irrefutable reality where, in fact, words are merely transitory sounds which fade in moments. Only the intentions can be considered viable and those are tested each day for accuracy.

Siniora bleats about International Law as if any Arab/Muslim/Islamic nation considered International Law binding on Muslims.

In brief, Siniora is a typical Muslim liar who conjures up words. In his enthusiasm to hoodwink his audience, he actually believes his own voice -- for the moment.


1. "Give the Arab Peace Initiative a Chance" by Fuad Siniora New York Times, May 11, 2007

2. "Palestine Mandate of the League of Nations: 1922"

3. "2006 Lebanon War" Wikipedia

** This is the true meaning of what Yassir Arafat told his people in Arabic when he signed the Oslo Accords September 13, 1993. He called it a Hudaybiya treaty. This is how Mohammed treated the 10 year treaty he signed with the Jews of the Quarish tribe, which he broke in 2 years when he was militarily stronger. Then he came back, massacred the men, sold the women and children into slavery.

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 winstonmedia@interaccess.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Daily Alert, May 16, 2007.
This was the May 14, 2007 editorial in the Washington Times

Don't be surprised if you wake up one morning and learn that the Gaza Strip has become a lot like Lebanon was last summer. Gaza looms as a major battleground in the larger global struggle with jihadism, with the Israeli military squaring off against terrorist proxies of Iran and Syria in addition to al Qaeda factions burrowing into the region. Hamas has built in essence a 12,000-man militia -- two to three times the size of the Hezbollah force in last summer's Lebanon war. Gaza is crawling with hundreds of terrorists affiliated with the al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, part of Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah organization; Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and the Popular Resistance Committees, an amalgamation of terror groups in Gaza.

The buildup of Gaza's jihadist network has proven to be a largely cost-free exercise for Tehran and Damascus, which provide funding and weaponry but remain largely immune from substantial Israeli military retaliation. Many of the terrorists in Gaza have trained with Hezbollah, Iran's proxy, and much of their funding and weaponry is smuggled from Egypt into Gaza through tunnels under civilian homes. Israeli intelligence agents estimate that more than 50 tons of TNT have been smuggled into Gaza during the past year or two -- enough to build and produce tens of thousands of rockets in the small arms shops in Gaza.

Palestinian and Israeli security officials said last week that there are 15 active tunnels in the Rafah area of Gaza being used to move arms, drugs and agents between Gaza and Egypt. The tunnels are controlled by powerful family clans who operate independently of the PA. Almost every day there are rocket firings into Israel, and/or gun battles involving the clans, terrorist factions and Palestinian security services. Over the past few months Islamists, some apparently affiliated with al Qaeda, have attacked video stores, Internet cafes and an elementary school in Gaza to protest "un-Islamic" behavior.

As Gaza descends into chaos reminiscent of Afghanistan under the Taliban, Israel, which withdrew all of its soldiers and civilians from there two years ago in the hope that the Palestinians would respond by building a viable independent state), has difficult decisions ahead. The government must decide whether to conduct major military operations against Gaza-based terrorists who are expanding their capability to attack neighboring Israeli towns. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's center-left government wants desperately to avoid a large anti-terror ground operation that could include reoccupying parts of Gaza, but the Israel Defense Force chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, says bluntly that the only solution to the continuing problem of Palestinian rocket fire into Israel is an army ground operation.

In November, Israel agreed to a "cease-fire" in which it would refrain from any large-scale campaign against Gaza-based terrorists, while the Hamas-dominated PA government would halt the rocket fire from Gaza into Israel. But since November more than 250 Qassam rockets and mortars have been fired from Gaza -- some by Hamas, with others by various Palestinian factions, all with the tacit approval of Hamas. While Mr. Olmert and the country's civilian leadership hope to avoid a ground operation, officials say privately that their hand will likely be forced on the issue -- particularly if the terrorists firing from Gaza hit a school or a day-care center.

That almost happened a week ago in Sderot, an Israeli town of 20,000 less than a mile from Gaza, which has been the target of hundreds of rockets from Gaza during the past two years. In Sderot, nine- and ten-year-old children in day-care centers routinely practice what to do in the event of rocket strikes, and a week ago a rocket fired from Gaza struck a Sderot house close to a kindergarten. The PIJ -- which is based in Damascus and gets most of its funding from Iran -- claimed "credit" for it. But miracles are scarce, and the first school or day-care center that takes a hit will provoke an irresistible demand for military retaliation. When the Jewish state withdrew from Gaza almost two years ago, tens of thousands of Israeli civilians were within range of Palestinian rockets in Gaza; today, that figure is 200,000 and growing.

The situation is likely to become more dire. The rockets smuggled into Gaza, like those produced inside Gaza, are of much higher quality than the rockets of a year ago, enabling terrorists to create a stockpile. This poses a dilemma for Israeli officials who understand that delay creates ever more peril on their southern border.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, May 16, 2007.


Sec. Rice does not rule out working with Iran to stabilize Iraq. Surely she knows that everything Iran does about Iraq is to destabilize and dominate it. Then she must be preparing to pretend Iran will help, in return for an excuse to withdraw US troops (Eli Lake, NY Sun, 5/1, Op.-Ed.). Iran would take over. What then?

Iran does shift its arrangements, but regardless of arrangements, it remains our unscrupulous enemy. We need to change its regime. Any deal she is thinking of would be a sell out. Unfortunately, the US sells out some allies.


More than egotism drives politicians. They refuse to pay the price for failure. They insist on staying in office to correct the mistakes they already made. They won't admit that their being in office is the chief mistake. Olmert and coterie would continue to blunder (IMRA, 5/3 from Yossi Beilin & Effie Eitam in Maariv).

Olmert cannot correct his own incompetence. He is likely to be incompetent in making corrections. He may not even want to follow through on corrections, if his priority is stealing and surrendering. He has other disastrous policies in the making. Nor is he in control of himself, being subject to indictment.

The focus on Olmert should not let escape scrutiny of those who supported him. This would include the opportunists who were in his coalition and their Cabinet Members who voted for his policies. Organs of the media that supported his mistakes should be shamed. If the Army were run down because of economies instituted by MK Netanyahu, Netanyahu would deserve a share of the blame for the wartime inadequacies, not the mantle of premiership.


Israel's Foreign Min. Livni is 'preparing' for a trip to Cairo. Dr. Aaron Lerner asks what she means by 'preparing.' Is she preparing photo-ops? Is she preparing the usual compliments Egypt doesn't deserve, in return for the usual Egyptian criticism Israel doesn't warrant? Is she preparing suggestions for exactly what Egypt should and could (but won't) do to end the arms smuggling into Gaza? Is she preparing suggestions that could be agreed to at the meeting so something would be accomplished by it? (IMRA, 5/4.)

These meetings serve no useful purpose, humiliate Israel, and dig Egypt deeper into its position of dominance. If Israel only had a pro-Israel foreign policy to begin with, there would be some point in preparing for it.


These statistics are not about jihad, but they show a way by which government misleads people, which it might do about jihad.

In New York State, 67% of New York City high school students graduate with Regents diplomas, but elsewhere 87% of the students do. In past years, the rate of City students was half the current rate. The Chancellor is pleased with the improvement and its catching up to the rest of the State.

What the Chancellor neglected to say was that the City's improvement came after the tests for that diploma were eased! (Sarah Garland, NY Sun, 5/4, p.1.)

'Regents exam' sounded ominous to my Freshman classmates in Brooklyn. My father reassured me by telling me that the exam's purpose was to help the farm boys upstate pass. The City schools did much better than they. Now people should ask how come the City lost its lead in the first place?


The crime is purveying classified information. An accused spy for China 'saw nothing wrong with sending the papers to China, because they had been presented at public conference attended by foreigners.' (Josh Gerstein, NY Sun, 5/4, p.6.) What about classified documents whose data is public knowledge?

I think the criteria are not realistic. They do not address traditional espionage methods that China carries further. Traditionally, espionage agencies cull through civilian, non-classified sources for useful intelligence. China gets many people to contribute small pieces of the puzzle. That way, few people do enough to fall under suspicion. If they didn't put in that effort, aided by overseas Chinese, China would not get enough data from filching secrets, alone.

What did the accused think he was doing? I see something wrong, if not yet illegal, with helping foreign countries gain a military or industrial advantage over us. A new definition should embody this concept, with suitable qualification.


Apparently like Mr. Libby, Karl Rove is not suspected of any crime, but he is being investigated and asked to testify in the hope that some question will trick him into what can be called perjury. Then he can be prosecuted (Emmet Tyrrell Jr., NY Sun, 5/4, Op.-Ed.) This assault on civil liberties is by anti-Bush people. Are they the same ones who accuse Bush of attacking civil liberties? Will haters of Bush because his war efforts impinge on civil liberties object in these cases?

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@verizon.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, May 16, 2007.

We are grateful to DEBKAfile, that excellent news organization, for several alerts regarding Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert traveling to Arab countries, while he prepares to abandon more of Israel to accommodate the Saudi evacuation Plan. In addition, what is the role of Jordan's King Abdullah II in the following scheme? (1) Now it is up to us to connect the traveling dots and see where this Faustian Bargain between the U.S., Israel, Saudi Arabia, Hamas, Fatah, Egypt and Jordan is going. Many such meetings are scheduled as the scoundrels get together to see how much Land and how many concessions they can wring out of Olmert aimed at Israel's demise.

Earlier I wrote that Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni's meeting with President of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak -- followed by a planned meeting with the King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, portends a double-cross (which should be prosecuted as treason for Olmert and Livni). The Machiavellian arranger of this meeting can be laid at the doorsteps of the Bush Administration, with the strings being pulled by the Arabist State Department and James Baker directing the players.

It is imperative to all of the above schemers that Olmert and the Kadima Party stay in office long enough to commit Israel formally to the evacuation of Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights, Jordan Valley, and all of Jerusalem occupied and desecrated by Jordan for 19 years from 1948 to 1967 (that is, all the especially holy Jewish sites and the new Jewish neighborhoods encompassing Jerusalem and protecting her from attack).

Concurrent to that, DEBKAfile kindly informs us that King Abdullah II of Jordan may fly to Ram'Allah to visit with Fatah's leader (and its military wing the Al Aksa Martyrs' Brigade) Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen).

However, before Abdullah meets with Abbas, as I write this May 15th Olmert is meeting with King Abdullah in Petra, Jordan where Abdullah is to commit to Jordan's participation in Israel's abandonment of her precious Lands. King Abdullah of Jordan will thereby give "cover" to Hamas.

The purposes of the meeting is to offer Jordanian Linkage to Fatah and Hamas so Olmert can finesse the surrender of Judea and Samaria to Fatah and Hamas under the cover of the Jordanian Linkage. (These secret negotiations -- without approval from the Knesset or a referendum of the people are a re-run of the failed Oslo Syndrome -- also planned in secret by Shimon Peres, Yossi Beilin and signed by then PM Yitzhak Rabin, hosted by President Bill Clinton on the White House lawn September 13, 1993.)

According to U.S. State Department planning, this would create the false image of a legitimate Palestinian Unity Government, enabling the U.S. and Europeans to release donor monies currently withheld because Hamas is still rightly considered a Terror Organization to whom it is illegal to give American and European tax-payers' money. Of the Billions of dollars awaiting transfer, Abdullah II of Jordan could expect his "cut" for participation in this scheme. Abdullah has a certain personal interest in offering cover to Hamas, namely to defend against his own probable assassination as Hamas grows more dominant. Abdullah is most likely expecting to receive a greater allocation of the fresh water resources flowing from the Golan Heights and mountains of Samaria than Jordan now receives from Israel as part of the Jordan-Israel Peace Agreement. Naturally Olmert, Livni, Peres and Kadima are in on the same scam of transferring the Lands to Fatah/Hamas with Jordan's likely control over Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem.

As you might expect from the usual faulty planning of a virtual Leftist Government, all others will gain while Israel and her people will lose. In brief, this will be like the brutal "ethnic cleansing" of the 10,000 Jewish men, women and children from the 21 communities in Gush Katif/Gaza and the 4 strategic communities in Northern Samaria which overlooked and protected the towns and cities of the coastal plain below. The Gush Katif Committee reports that 97% of the 1,667 uprooted families still live in temporary housing, mostly in the Israeli Negev desert in small, government-built prefabricated "trailer villas" (euphemistically called "cara-villas" in Hebrew). They have yet to receive full compensation promised by the Israeli government.

In a normal country, Olmert, Livni, Peres and Peretz would already be indicted for treason and awaiting sentencing for betraying the Jewish nation and her people to foreign Islamic nations who have declared often that they intend to take over ALL of Israel and make ALL of Jerusalem their capital. Those nations and their leaders are Israel's self-declared most vicious enemies. Why do the E.U., U.N., Russia and the U.S. State Department support them? Anti-Semitism mixed with oil is a powerful narcotic.

As for Olmert and the Winograd "ploy", keep in mind that the investigating committee dragged its feet in issuing its first report which only covered the events leading up to the 2006 War in Lebanon and the first 5 days of its debacle. The full report will only be issued sometime in mid or late summer despite the fact that the investigation is complete now and should be ready for publication almost a year after this War.

This manipulation of information is already obvious to all (or most). Delay of publication and the Winograd Commission's conclusions that Olmert and his cohorts should be retired, has allowed Olmert and his corrupt government to stay in power long enough for Olmert to conclude his Faustian Bargain with the Devil. Olmert plans to abandon all the Jewish Land in Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights and those parts of Jerusalem which Jordan occupied for 19 years. That 22% of Israel, west of the Jordan river now houses close to a million good Jews, guards the rest of Israel from attack by her avaricious and spitefully hostile neighbors, mentioned earlier and protects 60-65% of Israel's fresh water sources.

During this "grace" period, Olmert, at the behest of the U.S. State Department, is negotiating with Bashar Assad to re-take the Golan Heights. Recall that the Golan is a key defensive position on Israel's North-Eastern borders. And remember that at least 30% of Israel's fresh water comes from these Heights which Syria tried to dam up earlier in the 20th century. As long as Israel is stationed there on the high ground, she can observe any military actions starting up in Syria and prepare to defend her citizens. Without that defensive territory, the ability and need to mobilize Israel's mostly civilian army increases to days instead of hours. The U.N., however, is pushing to take Sheba Farms and Mt. Dov, both key military observation posts on the Heights. They want to put a U.N. Peacekeeping Force there, effectively blinding Israel to Syrian maneuvers and preventing the IDF from moving in self-defense and/or preemptively.

Note that if Israel surrenders either the Golan Heights and/or Judea and Samaria, the Muslim Arabs will be in control of 65% of Israel's fresh water resources (30% from the Golan and 35% from the Samarian mountains). If the Golan and Samaria is under Muslim/Arab control, they will be able to pollute those waters with sewage, contaminated industrial waste and other poisons. Under Israeli control, these waters are kept clean and rationed by Israeli technology today so the water can serve both the Jews and the Arabs who live in Israel and Jordan.

While Syria held the Golan Heights (part of the original territory of the ancient Jewish people), Syria continually shot down on the farmers in the valley. Remember that there are some 20,000 good Jewish men, women and children living peaceably in their homes on the Heights, gainfully employed in some outstanding industries, including a magnificent winery. Where would Olmert put those Jews if he expropriates their lands and evicts them? How would he pay for their re-settlement? He still has not re-settled the Jews from Gush Katif and Samaria -- nor have the majority of them yet found gainful employment. Prior to the August 2005 evacuation, unemployment in Gush Katif was less than one percent. Now some 37% of the evacuees are unemployed. 400 adults aged 50 and over have lost the opportunity for gainful employment. (2)

Underlying all of the aforementioned is the so-called Saudi Initiative of February 2002 (most likely written by ghost writers in the U.S. State Department and hand delivered by Thomas Friedman to the Saudis). This PR ploy by then Crown Prince, now King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia was needed to restore Saudi-U.S. relations after 9/11/01 when 15 of the 19 hijacker/bombers were Saudis (4 were Egyptian). During the months that followed that act of war, the media exposed Saudi Arabia's massive role in financing Global Jihad through direct aid to terror organizations, the establishment of jihadist mosques and schools from Pakistan to Peoria to Paris. (3)

The Saudi Plan for Israel's Destruction was only that the Arab League would consider normalizing relations with Israel (NOT recognizing Israel's right to exist) IF Israel retreated to her indefensible 1949-1967 Armistice Lines. These cease fire lines were so vulnerable they caused the 1967 Six Days War, in which Israel's IDF liberated Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, Golan Heights and those parts of Jerusalem (north, east and south) Jordan had occupied from 1948 to 1967. This vulnerability to attack is why Abba Eban called them the "Auschwitz Borders".

Even the most radical Jewish Leftists must be suspicious of an offer which the Islamic Wahabbi religion cannot allow. What is allowed, according to the present interpretation of Koranic Law is that Muslims may sign any agreement with an infidel (non-Muslim believer), but is ordered to break that agreement as soon as he is militarily strong enough to defeat that peace partner. This is in line with the Muslim Haditha (Oral Law), as practiced by Mohammed in the 7th Century, particularly using the custom he originated in the Hudabaiya Treaty which Mohammed signed for 10 years of peace with the Jewish Quarish tribes. Instead of keeping the peace treaty, Mohammed returned in 2 years when he was militarily stronger, slaughtered the Quarish men, selling the women and children into slavery.

Back to King Abdullah Hussein of Jordan: Clearly, it is just a matter of short time before the dominant numbers of Palestinian Arab Muslims in Jordan (now approximately 80%) will stage a coup d'etat and Jordan will revert to being wholly Palestinian Arab Muslim, controlled by radical Terrorist organizations. Then Israel and America will have another dedicated enemy endangering their lives and even dominating the Saudi oil fields -- unless Iran gets there first. You might argue that Iran has plenty of its own oil but, to put a choke hold on the Free West, they would be happy to deny the West access to oil -- especially America who they call the "Great Satan". The Saudis and Egyptians would assist Iran in attacking the U.S.

Double crossing Israel may seem to buy only a bit of time but, the schemers plan that in the end Jordan will become wholly radical Palestinian Muslim, controlling Judea, Samaria, Gaza, the Golan Heights, the Jordan Valley and most of Jerusalem. After the death of Hosni Mubarak (by natural means or assassination by the Muslim Brotherhood), Egypt will probably be taken over by its insidious Muslim Brotherhood.

Recall that the U.S. State Department planned and has armed Egypt to occupy the Saudi oilfields to bolster America's interests. But the Muslim Brotherhood will become heir to the American arms, paid for with some $60 Billion in American taxpayers' money, then move on to the Saudi oilfields and their enormous weapons' depots.

If Olmert succeeds in completing his duplicitous marching orders as issued by the Bush Administration and the U.S. State Department, Israel will be hard pressed to defend herself. Given that everyone but the Israeli people will receive their cut and benefit from this nefarious scheme, I wonder what Olmert and his cohorts expect as their benefits for betraying their nation and their own people? Perhaps he merely gets to keep such illegal profits already made but now under investigation by the Police and Attorney-General Menachem Mazuz.

This is my conclusion as I see Olmert wandering the Arab Muslim capitals of the world (or, at least those who would allow a "fallen" Jew to set foot in their countries). Otherwise, while he is en route to complete his betrayal, he would be allowed into only some neutral, out-of-the-way places like Petra, Sharm el Sheik, etc.

The concept of selling one's soul to the Devil for riches and success in this world has become well known as a "Faustian Bargain. Clearly, many (not all) of Israel's erstwhile leaders have chosen to sell their souls, as Faust did, for the short-term benefits they may have received on earth. Many are already paying their just retribution for betraying their nation and her people. They have lost their elected or appointed offices and whatever was left of their contaminated soul. The Devil always collects his due.

I must point out the fiction of Vice President Dick Cheney's visit to Saudi Arabia wherein he claims he wants America to double the Saudi Air Force to contend with Iran's Air Force -- possibly loaded with missiles carrying WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction) whose warheads may contain NBC (Nuclear, Biological and/or Chemical) poisons. First, the Saudis already have the largest and best equipped Air Force. But, they have lousy combat pilots and poor maintenance. Secondly, Iran has no Air Force to speak of and they are limping along with old F14 Tomcats for which they are constantly scrounging for parts.

However, for huge profits, the U.S. aircraft manufacturers wish to sell more aircraft to the Saudis who are flush with American oil dollars. The simple fact is that America would have to go in and fight to keep access to the Saudi oil fields for the U.S., Europe, and Japan.

Besides, once Iran is nuclear-capable, all the nations in the Middle East region will have to accept Iran's dominance, knowing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is crazy enough to use his new nukes on any nation that refuses his Islamic leadership.

Regrettably, we already see President George W. Bush in a mode of caving in, with his legacy being the virtual godfather of a nuclear radically Islamist state of Iran. Bush could have taken Iran's nuclear capability out with all the sea and air power now gathered off the Iranian coast. Instead, it seems he has caved in. It is tragic to see the world's greatest hope for peace and security for all on earth to allow the world's greatest Islamic Terrorist nations to grow and eventually threaten the whole world in order to dominate the world with a Global Caliphate gained by "Jihadi" Terrorism.


1. DEBKAfile reports: "Israeli PM OLmert and FM Livni bound for Arab capitals to seek modifications of the Saudi Peace Plan." DEBKAfile May 9, 2007

2. "Quick Takes: News from Israel You May Have Missed" by Aaron Klein Jewish Press Mar. 30, 2007

3. "The Saudi Plan for Israel's Destruction" by Caroline B. Glick Jewish Press March 30, 2007

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 winstonmedia@interaccess.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Talya Lapidott, May 15, 2007.

The State of Israel-The Government of Jerusalem: Jerusalem -- A daily average of 20 Kasam rockets fall on The State of Israel from the town of Gaza, who harbor Arab murderers.

Hamas, the so called murderers -- worshipers of Sadam Hussein -- made threats and declared: If Israel will come and destroy the Kasam rockets in Gaza they will kill the Israeli soldier Shalit.

We asked Jacob Gurewich,* the author of The Enemy Within and Fear Factors, a former Yeshiva scholar and a commander in the Irgun, to comment on Hamas threats.

Here is what he said:

"Where there is no vision, the people perish! To stop the rain of terror and murder upon the land of Israel, knowing clearly the whereabouts the murderers hide, Israel should urge the Gaza civilian-collaborators to evacuate Gaza within 7 days, and enable them to seek refuge in Israel -- providing shelter, food and medical aid, and unequivocally declare:

We are about blotting out the murderers and their Kasam rockets from Gaza and they will burn and be devoured by the fire along with Hamas murderers, and expel the rest of the Arab murderers from the Land of Israel! "And the Land will rest 40 years."

*Aftermath: the 1973 Yom Kippur Shoah, and the Oslo fiasco 20 years later, which our own enemy within our nation inflicted on the Israel, Gurewich clearly envisioned the present dire Israel's state of affairs, as he scrupulously detailed in his books: The Enemy Within and Fear Factors, in his essays, letters, and speeches.

Talya Lapidott is Professor Emeritus, Charlottesville VA.

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, May 15, 2007.

To the Editor,

Patricia Boyle's letter in today's Palo Alto Daily News (5/15/07) is deeply touching and poignantly insightful. Indeed, as she says, 'Forgiveness is the only place where peace can flourish.'

What she may not know, however, is that in the Israel-Arab conflict Israel has offered forgiveness and peace, resolution and reconciliation, reparation and negotiation, cooperation and co-existence, many times over.

Fifteen times since 1937, Israel or the UN or the UK or the USA, or some combination of these, have offered Palestinian leadership their state, de facto and de iure, alongside of Israel. Israel has accepted all 15 offers, recognizing the right of the Palestinian people to political self-determination and national self-fulfillment. The Palestinan and other Arab states' leadership have rejected all fifteen, with violence, murder, terrorism, war....and the endlessly and vociferously and shamelessly repeated commitment to the destruction of Israel and genocide of its Jews.

The past and current cadre of Arab leaders do not want a Palestinian state, nor have they ever wanted this state, alongside of Israel. They want this state instead of Israel, and on the corpses of Israel's 6,000,000 Jews. Their leaders promote this goal endlessly...and their deeds match their words. They do not recognize Israel's right to political self-determination. They do not even recognize Israel's right to exist.

Forgiveness is indeed a necessary ingredient for peace....but it is not, by itself, an adequate ingredient. As former Hezbollah leader Abbas Massawi told the world almost 15 years ago, 'we are not fighting you (Israel), because we want something from you. We are fighting you because we want to destroy you.' Palestinian leaders have echoed his words many times over since then.

When the Arab terrorists put down their weapons, there will be no more violence.
If Israel were to put down her weapons, there would be no more Israel.

Below is Patricia Boyle's letter.

Dear Editor: One group blows up a bus that kills 20 shoppers at the market plus the 30 bus riders and maims 60 more. The next day, another group sends a suicide bomber to the mosque and kills 35 souls at prayer and maims another 30 as revenge. All this tragedy is based on revenge. There is no understanding of forgiveness, which is heartbreaking. Forgiveness is the only place where peace can flourish.

Forgiveness allows the wronged to begin healing while revenge keeps wounds as open, gaping holes, infected by hate. To forgive those who commit the most evil of crimes, is the most difficult of all kindnesses. But, the forgiver eliminates hate from his soul, leaving room for love to develop and close the wound. It doesn't eliminate the sorrow connected to the loss, but it does make living life without the loved one possible. The one with revenge in his soul has no chance of happiness. He will live and die with hate in his heart.

As a woman who lived through some of the worst years of 'the troubles' as they are known in Ireland, I have a slight bit of hope that peace can be found in the Middle East. Sectarian violence has devastated my little corner of the world. But, with agreements made just this past March, there is now light at the end of the tunnel. I pray the same for the Middle East.

Patricia Boyle, Foster City

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Sommer, May 15, 2007.
This was written by Caroline Glick and it was published on the Jerusalem Post
(www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1178708600 683&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull).

Last week the EU-financed Peace Now organization held an "Alternative Jerusalem Day" ceremony in which it called for Israel to renounce its sovereignty over half of the city in the interests of peace.

Why anyone would believe that an Israeli surrender of the eternal capital of the Jewish people to Hamas will lead to peace is anyone's guess. It seems particularly fatuous in light of the blatantly unpeaceful results of Israel's 2005 Peace Now-supported surrender of Gaza to Hamas, its 2000 Peace Now-supported surrender of south Lebanon to Hizbullah, and the Peace Now-supported Barak government's offer to surrender the Temple Mount and other parts of Jerusalem to Yasser Arafat in 2000.

Also last week, the EU-financed Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies published a survey claiming that if current trends continue, the prevailing two-thirds Jewish majority in Israel's capital city will be reduced to a 60-percent majority by 2020.

Why there is any reason to believe the doom and gloom numbers is also anyone's guess. It seems a particularly hard sell given that the Jewish and Arab fertility rates in the city (3.8 and 4.1 respectively) are nearly identical, and economic trends that now stifle Jewish population growth are reversible.

This week, the EU supplemented its NGOs' work to divide the capital by announcing its boycott of Wednesday's Knesset ceremony celebrating Jerusalem's liberation. The US also loudly absented itself from the ceremony.

For its part, the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government could not hide its befuddlement. After Jerusalem mayor Uri Lupolianski attacked the US and EU boycott, arguing, "Whoever does not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of the State of Israel also does not recognize the State of Israel," the government stammered out a couple of bromides.

With her characteristic weakness, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni stuttered that Israel's connection to Jerusalem is "indivisible." Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said nothing.

IN THEIR attack against Israeli sovereignty over the eternal capital of the Jewish people in the name of peace, the Left, the EU and the Americans were nothing if not consistent. So too was the government consistent in its stuttered response to the onslaught against Jerusalem.

Over the past 14 years the policies of Israel's governments, the Israeli Left, the EU and the US have consistently been predicated on hypocrisy. The Left claims to be working for the civil rights of Arabs, whom it claims are being discriminated against by Israel and the Jerusalem municipality. The EU claims to seek a repartition of the city along the 1949 armistice lines to advance the cause of peace. The US claims to oppose any action that would prejudice the outcome of final status negotiations toward peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Israel's governments claim that they are committed to Israeli sovereignty throughout the city and to the upholding of the rule of law.

The fact that all of these purported objectives are false was copiously documented in a report published last year by the Office for Public Inquiries for East Jerusalem. The organization, headed by Arieh King, is funded by private Jewish donors.

Entitled "Illegal building in East Jerusalem as a strategic tool of the Palestinian Authority in its struggle for the future of Jerusalem," the 61-page report and its several hundred pages of attached documents provide a neighborhood-by-neighborhood survey of illegal Arab building in the city. Contrary to the Left's repeated contention that Jerusalem's Arabs are forced to build illegally because the municipality refuses to grant them construction permits, the city approved a planning scheme that provides for the construction of 32,500 new housing units in Arab neighborhoods. This is on top of 24,000 units already in various stages of the licensing process, and another 20,000 illegal structures built by Jerusalem Arabs in the past 20 years.

The political aim of the illegal construction is made clear by its financing sources. Since the establishment of the Palestinian Authority in 1994, the PA,