HOME Featured Stories November 2006 Blog-Eds List Background Information News On the Web
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 30, 2006.

This comes from

Yesterday, around 5000 people gathered together outside the European Parliament to take part in a solidarity rally for the kidnapped IDF soldiers.

Family and friends of Guilad Schilat, Udi Goldwasser and Eldad Regev were present and were meeting European Union parliament members prior to the demonstration.

The families were asking the European Governement and their parliamentarians to use their influence in the Middle East and demand a sign of life from the captured soldiers, in exchange for aid to the Palestinian Authority and Lebanon.

N Green commented on this:

High Visibility Impact ($1/piece) Car-Decal Calling for Kidnapped Israeli Soldiers Release

The plight of the kidnapped Israeli soldiers, Gilad Shalit, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, seriously lacks a strong visible campaign. Israel went to war for these three Israeli soldiers but their faces appear to have been forgotten.

We are assaulted multiple times a day by anti-Jewish/anti-Israel propaganda all of which have become familiar mantras. These methods work and we should be using these methods for our purposes!

While we hope efforts for their release are ongoing behind the scenes, a massive public awareness campaign is essential to demonstrate to the world the urgency of our demands -- the release of the Israeli soldiers.

Until they are released, the decals will serve as constant reminders of these soldiers and their families.

Together we can make a difference. One decal on each car will send the message. The decal displayed on millions of cars' rear window will make it much more difficult for the world to ignore these soldiers' situation and our mission will not be ignored either. Do the right thing and do it now!

Contact Nurit Greenger at 4nuritg@bca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 30, 2006.

The Left wing of America with 80% radical Left media now dominates America; it undermines American and wants us to lose in Iraq, to lose to radical Islam! Nothing to say as we are our own worst enemy!

With nukes, the oil producing countries become an Iranian sphere of influence and Jim Baker will cut such a deal in a heartbeat and Bush will go along because, as former Israel PM Bibi Netanyahu said, "it is 1938 (all over again) and Iran is Germany."

Baker believing that Iran can give the USA assurances it won't develop nuclear weapons is as worthless assurances as all its other assurances!

The USA can only get Iran's help on Iraq if we let Tehran get the bomb!

The flip-flopping of America led by Bush and now assisted by Baker and his cadre of the not so round table and the cowardice free world is our demise in front of our eyes!

We shall see what transpires, more so, if Israel can stand on its two STRONG feet and defeat Baker's plan!

This article was written by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann and it appeared in Jewish World Review. It is called "Can Iran help us bail out of Iraq? Maybe -- but we'd better take a hard look at the price."

The idea has reportedly been floated via a draft report to the Iraq Study Group (headed by former Secretary of State James Baker), which calls for a "dialogue" with Iran as well as Syria. Along the same lines, British Prime Minister Tony Blair recently said Iran could be a "partner" with the West if it did not develop a bomb.

Presumably, we'd ask Iran to help stabilize the situation in Iraq, curb the Shiite militias and encourage the Iraqi government to make sufficient concessions to the Sunnis to end or at least reduce the violence.

Would it work? It could. Iran certainly has sought to arm and enflame the Shiites in Iraq. Maybe the mullahs can rein in their proxies, and let us withdraw in dignity -- not holding onto the skids of the helicopter as it lifts off our embassy this time.

But why would they play ball with Washington at the same time that Bush is threatening sanctions explicitly and a military strike implicitly if Iran proceeds to develop nuclear weapons? No chance.

So this proposal amounts to the de facto abandonment of any military or economic actions that could deter Iran from going nuclear.

Of course, Baker may seek and Iran may offer public assurances that it won't develop nuclear weapons -- the same worthless assurances it now passes out to the entire world. What will have changed is that America and Britain will be so engaged with Iran that they can't and won't bomb or even impose tough sanctions.

In short, we can only get Iran's help on Iraq if we let Tehran get the bomb.

Yet, with nukes, Iran gains the leverage to force Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and all the region's oil producers to move in its orbit. The Middle East will become an Iranian sphere of influence.

Such an under-the-table deal would amount to a total sellout of Israel and Saudi Arabia and America's other Arab allies.

The Jewish state would be left with no alternative but to take whatever military action it could to stop Iran from completing its nuclear program. American capitulation will have left it with no alternative.

Would Jim Baker cut such a deal? In a heartbeat. Never a friend of Israel, he wouldn't flinch at a realpolitik solution giving Iran power throughout the region.

But why would Bush go along? It would be "peace in our time" -- Munich, 1938 -- all over again.

Contact Nurit Greenger at 4nuritg@bca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Palestinian Media Watch, November 30, 2006.

As the world recoils from international terror, the PLO takes pride in the fact that it has been the source of world terror, and that terrorists around the world have copied their tactics and techniques.

It has already been noted by terror analysts that much of world terror was started by the Palestinian terrorists, and then copied by other terrorists in their own countries for their own purposes. Whereas the world views this with contempt, the PLO's Fatah faction acknowledges this and even takes pride in it.

The Secretary of Fatah in Gaza, Ahmed Hales Abu Maher, expressed pride on Palestinian TV that the Fatah "gives daily examples" that the world has "imitated," from the participation of children in combat to the widespread use of suicide terror, all of which started with the Fatah-PLO.

The following is the statement on PA TV by Ahmed Hales Abu Maher, Secretary of Fatah in Gaza:

"Oh warrior brothers, this is a nation that will never be broken, it is a revolution that will never be defeated. This is a nation that gives an example every day that is imitated across the world. We gave the world the children of the RPG [Rocket Propelled Grenades], we gave the world the children stone [-throwers], and we gave the world the male and female Martyrdom-Seekers [suicide bombers]." [Palestinian Authority TV, November 14, 2006]

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 Ruth Matar, November 30, 2006.

Dear Friends,

In the Jewish Passover Haggadah, it is written:

"And it is the same promise which helped our fathers and which aided us. For not only one tyrant has risen against us to destroy us, but in every generation wicked men have risen against us to destroy us. But the Holy One, Blessed be He, delivers us from their hands."

Also, in every generation, there were Jewish heroes with vision who were willing to sacrifice everything, even their very lives, in order to preserve G-d's promise to the Jewish people.

One such hero in our generation is Stanley Goldfoot. During his lifetime, Stanley witnessed the rise of tyrants such as Hitler and Ahmadinijad, who are bent on destroying the Jewish people.

Sadly, our friend Stanley passed away last week, November 24, 2006, at the age of 92. His family and all his many friends not only mourn his passing, but remember with gratitude his love and devotion for Israel and the Jewish people.

Stanley Goldfoot was born in Johannesburg, South Africa. At the age of 18 he heard a speech about the Zionist vision by Ze'ev Jabotinsky, which appealed very strongly to him. It was all he needed to hear before packing a bag, leaving a shocked family and heading for Palestine. He joined a HaShomer HaTzair kibbutz, picking eggplants in the fields, and making floor tiles, "balatot".

Since he arrived alone, without an entry permit, the British police soon shipped him out of the country together with another South African. In South Africa, he was drafted into the South African Army, where he learned to handle a rifle. Stanley joined the Revisionist Party (another name for Lehi).

At first opportunity, he returned to Tel Aviv to open the first "School of English" which gave him entry into the British High Society where he was privy to important information from the top echelon of the British Army. He was now able to pass this invaluable information on to other Lehi members.

Stanley Goldfoot did this with alacrity, under cover of legitimately representing English and French news. His valuable "press cards" gained him admittance everywhere!

He was active in many other activities against the British Mandatory Power, while working in Jerusalem as a respected journalist. Some of those activities were so sensitive that they were never made public.

After the rebirth of the Jewish State of Israel, he made aliyah legally in 1956. His main goal became his desire to establish a Zionist English newspaper "The Times of Israel", which eventually appeared on the streets of Israel, New York and the West Coast of the USA. For this purpose, he even spent a year in New York to raise funds to promote his newspaper.

In the first issue of the "Times of Israel", Stanley Goldfoot wrote his famous controversial "Letter to the World from Jerusalem", which at the time, caused a huge stir. His article is still relevant, and I am therefore, including it in this Letter from Jerusalem.


I am not a creature from another planet, as you seem to believe. I am a Jerusalemite -- like yourselves, a man of flesh and blood. I am a citizen of my city, an integral part of my people.

I have a few things to get off my chest. Because I am not a diplomat, I do not have to mince words. I do not have to please you, or even persuade you. I owe you nothing. You did not build this city; you do not live in it; you did not defend it when they came to destroy it. And we will be damned if we will let you take it away.

There was a Jerusalem before there was a New York. When Berlin, Moscow, London and Paris were miasmal forest and swamp, there was a thriving Jewish community here. It gave something to the world which you nations have rejected ever since you established yourselves -- a humane moral code. Here the prophets walked, their words flashing like forked lightning. Here a people who wanted nothing more than to be left alone, fought off waves of heathen would-be conquerors, bled and died on the battlements, hurled themselves into the flames of their burning Temple rather than surrender; and when finally overwhelmed by sheer numbers and led away into captivity, swore that before they forgot Jerusalem, they would see their tongues cleave to their palates, their right arm wither.

For two pain filled millennia, while we were your unwelcome guests, we prayed daily to return to this city. Three times a day we petitioned the Almighty: "Gather us from the four corners of the world, bring us upright to our land; return in mercy to Jerusalem, Thy city, and dwell in it as Thou promised."

On every Yom Kippur and Passover we fervently voiced the hope that next year would find us in Jerusalem. Your inquisitions, pogroms, expulsions, the ghettos into which you jammed us, your forced baptisms, your quota systems, your genteel anti-Semitism, and the final unspeakable horror, the Holocaust (and worse, your terrifying disinterest in it) -- all these have not broken us. They may have sapped what little moral strength you still possessed, but they forged us into steel. Do you think that you can break us now after all we have been through? Do you really believe that after Dachau and Auschwitz we are frightened by your threats of blockades and sanctions? We have been to Hell and back -- a Hell of your making. What more could you possibly have in your arsenal that could scare us?

I have watched this city bombarded twice by nations calling themselves civilized. In 1948, while you looked on apathetically, I saw women and children blown to smithereens, this after we had agreed to your request to internationalize the city. It was a deadly combination that did the job: British officers, Arab gunners and American-made cannon.

And then the savage sacking of the Old City: the willful slaughter, the wanton destruction of every synagogue and religious school; the desecration of Jewish cemeteries; the sale by a ghoulish government of tombstones for building materials for poultry runs, army camps -- even latrines.

And you never said a word.

You never breathed the slightest protest when the Jordanians shut off the holiest of our holy places, the Western Wall, in violation of the pledges they had made after the war -- a war they waged, incidentally, against a decision of the UN. Not a murmur came from you whenever the legionnaires in their spiked helmets casually opened fire upon our citizens from behind the walls.

Your hearts bled when Berlin came under siege. You rushed your airlift "to save the gallant Berliners." But you did not send one ounce of food when Jews starved in besieged Jerusalem. You thundered against the wall which the East Germans ran through the middle of the German capital -- but not one peep out of you about that other wall, the one that tore through the heart of Jerusalem.

And when the same thing happened 20 years later, and the Arabs unleashed a savage, unprovoked bombardment of the Holy City again, did any of you do anything? The only time you came to life was when the city was at last re-united. Then you wrung your hands and spoke loftily of "justice" and the need for the "Christian" quality of turning the other cheek.

The truth is -- and you know it deep inside your gut -- you would prefer the city to be destroyed rather than have it governed by Jews. No matter how diplomatically you phrase it, the age old prejudices seep out of every word.

If our return to the city has tied your theology in knots, perhaps you had better re-examine you catechisms. After what we have been through, we are not passively going to accommodate ourselves to the twisted idea that we are to suffer eternal homelessness until we accept your Savior.

For the first time since the year 70 there is now complete religious freedom for all in Jerusalem. For the first time since the Romans put the torch to the Temple everyone has equal rights. (You preferred to have some more equal than others.) We loathe the sword -- but it was you who forced us to take it up. We crave peace -- but we are not going back to the peace of 1948 as you would like us to.

We are home. It has a lovely sound for a nation you have willed to wonder over the face of the globe. We are not leaving. We have redeemed the pledge made by our forefathers: Jerusalem is being rebuilt. Next year -- and the year after, and after, and after, until the end of time -- in Jerusalem!

Stanley Goldfoot
Founder Editor
The Times of Israel
August 1969

Stanley's wife Helen was a real trooper and diligently worked alongside of him throughout their married life to make all his endeavors a success.

Stanley and Helen have been active members of Women for Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green) since its inception in 1993. Both of them have been a great inspiration to the efforts of our organization to educate the younger generation about the values and traditions of the Jewish people in our promised Land.

All the Women in Green will always remember Stanley Goldfoot with love and gratitude. His memory is a blessing, not just for us, but for the entire Jewish people.

With Blessings and Love for Israel,

Ruth Matar

P.S. Any messages for Helen Goldfoot can be sent to our email address, mailto:michaele@netvision.net.il Attn: Helen Goldfoot. I will be pleased to pass them on to her.

P.P.S. I want to remind my readers that former Prime Minister Yitzchak Shamir was an active member of Stanley Goldfoot's group, Lehi. Also, Israel Eldad, father of Knesset Member Aryeh Eldad, was an active member as well. Another important Lehi member is Ezra Yakhin, author of "Elnakam", Story of a Freedom Fighter, who lost an eye in the battle for Jerusalem. If you are interested in buying this book, get in touch with me.

Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, November 30, 2006.

Dear Mr. President,

I got a lot of flack three years ago when I first published my article on the invasion of the USA by thoussands of Arab and Iranian illegals via the Mexican border, disguised as south american hispanics. I asserted that Arabs and Iranians, who could othewise enter our country legally, are doing so illegally because they have some nefarious purpose in mind. Some of my email recipients thought it was highly insensitive of me to ascribe evil motives to Arabs and Iranains who snuck in to our country merely to find a better life for themselves and their families. Then the NY Times and a few other papers published articles mentioning the same facts, and expressing concern that some could be terrorits.

I got even more flack when I sent out emails saying that up to 5000 Arab and Iranian illegal aliens had entered the USA mostly via Mexico over the past few years and were sheltered in the broader Muslim community. The flack was because I asserted that Arab and Iranian illegals are entering illegally because they want to keep their presence under our immigration radar so they cannot be tracked once in the USA. They want that because they are here to carry out acts of terror. My critics felt I must be vastly exagerating. 5000!?

Now we learn from reports summed up in the article below, that we have about 45,000 illegal aliens released into our population over the past 5 years. Among those released are at least some of the Arab and Iranian illegals who were picked up by border patrols and INS forces. They snuck in to do us harm. They got caught. Now they are back out into our population, untraceable, undocumented, and free to do us harm. Add that number to the many many more who are not caught but succeed in getting in to our country clandestinely....and 5000 terrorists among us is not an unbelievable number.

Mr. President, when are you going to clamp down on the phenomenon of illegal aliens entering our country to do us harm? When one of them blows up Chicago with a suitcase bomb?

This article appeared yesterday on World Net Daily (www.wnd.com). It is archived at
(www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53151 ).

WASHINGTON -- 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, according to a report by the inspector general's office of the Department of Homeland Security.

The report, "Detention and Removal of Illegal Aliens," released earlier this year with little fanfare or attention, suggests about 85 percent of those aliens -- potentially the most dangerous -- would abscond and likely never be seen by authorities again.

Acknowledging the danger such aliens pose to the national security, the report cites a DHS official testifying that terrorist organizations "believe illegal entry into the U.S. is more advantageous than legal entry for operations reasons."

Budget shortfalls were the explanations for why some 45,008 potential terrorists were released by authorities over a period of nearly five years after Sept. 11, 2001. The budget crunches prompted immigration officials to place strict limits on detention bed space, recruitment, training, travel and expansion of enforcement programs, the report explained.

In addition to the release of these high-risk aliens, 27,947 known criminals were also released between 2001 and 2004 -- including 20, 967 "from countries where the notorious Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) gang members are know to be active."

Given that only one in four aliens attempting to enter the U.S. during this period was caught, that would suggest some 350,000 from high-risk nations entered the country through this five-year period. An additional 400,000 criminal aliens would also have made it into the country between 2001 and 2004, according to the report.

That's a total of 750,000 aliens who would be either known criminals before entering the country illegally or who originated from a terror-sponsoring nation or one in which terrorists are known to operate.

This news hits following WND's report yesterday that 12 Americans are murdered every day by illegal aliens, according to statistics released by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa. If those numbers are correct, it translates to 4,380 Americans murdered annually by illegal aliens. That's 21,900 since Sept. 11, 2001.

But the carnage wrought by illegal alien murderers represents only a fraction of the pool of blood spilled by American citizens as a result of an open border and un-enforced immigration laws.

While King reports 12 Americans are murdered daily by illegal aliens, he says 13 are killed by drunk illegal alien drivers -- for another annual death toll of 4,745. That's 23,725 since Sept. 11, 2001.

While no one -- in or out of government -- tracks all U.S. accidents caused by illegal aliens, the statistical and anecdotal evidence suggests many of last year's 42,636 road deaths involved illegal aliens.

A report by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Study found 20 percent of fatal accidents involve at least one driver who lacks a valid license. In California, another study showed that those who have never held a valid license are about five times more likely to be involved in a fatal road accident than licensed drivers.

Statistically, that makes them an even greater danger on the road than drivers whose licenses have been suspended or revoked -- and nearly as dangerous as drunk drivers.

King also reports eight American children are victims of sexual abuse by illegal aliens every day -- a total of 2,920 annually.

Based on a one-year in-depth study, Deborah Schurman-Kauflin of the Violent Crimes Institute of Atlanta estimates there are about 240,000 illegal immigrant sex offenders in the United States who have had an average of four victims each. She analyzed 1,500 cases from January 1999 through April 2006 that included serial rapes, serial murders, sexual homicides and child molestation committed by illegal immigrants.

As the number of illegal aliens in the U.S. increases, so does the number of American victims.

According to Edwin Rubenstien, president of ESR Research Economic Consultants, in Indianapolis in 1980, federal and state correctional facilities held fewer than 9,000 criminal aliens. But at the end of 2003, approximately 267,000 illegal aliens were incarcerated in all U.S. jails and prisons.

While the federal government doesn't track illegal alien murders, illegal alien rapes or illegal alien drunk driving deaths, it has studied illegal aliens incarcerated in U.S. prisons.

In April 2005, the Government Accountability Office released a report on a study of 55,322 illegal aliens incarcerated in federal, state, and local facilities during 2003. It found the following:

The 55,322 illegal aliens studied represented a total of 459,614 arrests -- some eight arrests per illegal alien;

Their arrests represented a total of about 700,000 criminal offenses -- some 13 offenses per illegal alien;

36 percent had been arrested at least five times before.

"While the vast majority of illegal aliens are decent people who work hard and are only trying to make a better life for themselves and their families, (something you or I would probably do if we were in their place), it is also a fact that a disproportionately high percentage of illegal aliens are criminals and sexual predators," states Peter Wagner, author of a new report called "The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration." "That is part of the dark side of illegal immigration and when we allow the 'good' in we get the 'bad' along with them. The question is, how much 'bad' is acceptable and at what price?"

But the terror threat posed by illegal aliens could make all those grisly numbers pale by comparison should a few succeed in conducting major operations in the U.S., say law enforcement officials.

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 Richard H. Shulman, November 30, 2006.


European media and parliaments condemn Israel as unfair to the Arabs (who are fair to nobody). Their media hardly reports Hizbullah for being a proxy for genocide, for waging terrorist war against Israel, and for using its own civilians as human shields. Lebanese admit that Hizbullah social work is to build schools atop arms depots. If Israel spares the schools, Hizbullah fires rockets into Israeli cities. If Israel destroys the depots, Europe denounces Israel for bombing schools. Either way, Israel is blamed, although Hizbullah carries out war crimes that gets its own civilians killed. The European media is unfair.

When Israel warned the civilians to leave Qana, from which 150 rockets had been fired at Israel, Europeans did not reinforce the warning. When Israel attacked that source of terrorism, and civilians were killed, Europeans called it a massacre, as if Israel intended to kill civilians and were not defending itself. European parliamentarians call for isolating Israel rather than the terrorists.

As part of Europe's willful blindness, the chief EU envoy claims that Syria will rein in Hizbullah. (Actually, Syria is rearming it.)

France claimed it wanted Hizbullah disarmed. But it called for a ceasefire that kept Israel from disarming it, and sent too few troops and without a mandate to disarm Hizbullah. France is insincere (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2006, p.47 from Daniel Schwammanthal, Wall. St. J., 8/7).

Europe should be more concerned about surviving its own, rising Muslims populations.


Although official attempts to boycott Israeli academia, to force Israel to obey UNO resolutions and to stop "occupying" Arab land failed, unofficial attempts continue. Certain British institutions won't sell books or buy articles from Israeli institutions or authors or attend an Israeli film festival (Arutz-7, 11/12).

Ironically, boycotted Israeli filmmakers and academics generally are anti-Zionist.

The UNO usually makes unfair or unworkable resolutions. Israel accepts and the Arabs usually defy the mandated resolutions. Israel does not occupy Arab land, but the Arabs try to take over Israel. British academics don't let those facts get in the way of their prejudices. Neither do their media.


"...a student's having a 'right' to wear the costume of a suicide bomber" is "the wrong point," like having "the 'right' to make a film ridiculing people with handicaps. "...it's not a matter of law; it's a matter of the tenor of a society in which civilized people wish to liveour society is increasingly defined by laws and politics rather than by an understanding of the pre-political, sub-legal morals and mores that promote virtuous behavior and good citizenship." (Prof. Steven Plaut, 11/12.)


Oil-bearing shale is a source of energy that could give some countries energy-independence. Problem was that one had to squeeze the oil out of the rock at high pressure and temperature. That took too much energy to extract. Israeli ingenuity has solved that problem, involving a lower temperature, less waste, more flexibility in output, and less refining. Israel has patents, and is a year ahead of other countries in preparing for production of natural gas, electricity, or liquid fuel from shale. Israel would reduce oil imports by a third.

Israel's shale is of poor quality. "The company estimates it will consume 6 million tons of oil shale and 2 million tons of refinery waste each year, for an annual production of 3 million tons of product." Israel's projected cost of $17 per barrel compares with crude oil prices of $47 -- $60 per barrel or more. Profits therefore would be high, and Israel has 15 billion tons of shale (IMRA, 11/11. They should have compared the $17 cost with the costs of oil production.


Even though Western European governments are not Islamic, Islam already is repressing the Europeans. Native Europeans who speak out against the separatism that fosters the hate-mongering and rioting get threatened and go into hiding in their own countries, leaving the Muslims triumphant.

A German lawyer, herself of Turkish descent, had opposed forced marriages, honor killings, and beatings of Muslim women and girls (you know, what Pres. Bush called fine Muslim family values). She said that terrorism will be committed by third-generation Muslim immigrants and their children who, "under the eyes of well-meaning politicians have been raised to hate Western society from birth." She requires police protection, as do others. It is a decline in democracy (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2006, p.47 from Wall St. J., Europe, Ed., 9/6).

Traditional Europe lacks the free speech with which to defend its rights and culture, while the Muslims are protected by political correctness and multiculturalism.


The new Deputy Defense Minister explained why the IDF fired at a site in Beit Hanoun -- it was used as for launching rockets at Israel. Why were some other Arabs killed by Israeli artillery? Misfire, but the basic responsibility was by the Arabs for committing terrorism. Deputy Defense Min. Sneh told an objecting Arab MK to take his moral preaching about it to the terrorists who bear moral responsibility for the casualties. After all, Israel had completely withdrawn from Gaza. But the terrorists attack the crossing points, and then, when Israel closes them to stop the attacks, complain of food shortage.

One Arab MK, interrupting and screaming, had to be removed. Another started screaming, too. He also was sarcastic, missing obvious points that Sneh explained again. The Arabs accused Israel of deliberate massacre. Sneh said that with Israel, it is accidental, but with the Arabs it was intentional and deliberate, that's the cultural difference between the two peoples (Arutz-7, 11/14).

I find Sneh too leftist, but he handled the Arab MKs well, upholding Israel's side.


Whenever momentum has built for Pollard to gain clemency, the same old, refuted lies are circulated about him. This time, as Israelis have become solidly in favor of clemency, an Israeli TV channel broadcast the usual propaganda against him (Arutz-7, 11/13).

Since the TV reporters have access to the story, they should refute the lies, not reiterate them. This is a conspiracy to keep Pollard incarcerated.


IMRA, 11/13, published a translation of the Arab Charter on Human Rights. Aside from calling Zionism (rather than jihad) evil, it was full of high-sounding principles. It also was full of exceptions. There were exceptions "according to law" or as |necessary to maintain order." There were qualifications, as for women's rights as defined "under Islamic law" (that subordinates women). The Arabs have issued a document of principles, whose exceptions cancel out the principles (just as in their "peace plans.") The Charter pledges freedom of the press, that most Arab states lack. The Charter is to impress outsiders.


In the wake of Israel's relatively poor showing in Lebanon, though Hizbullah did not defeat it, and it was grinding down Hizbullah, Israelis demand that the new and militarily inexperienced Defense Minister resign. Defense Min. Peretz said that when the issue is examined, he will be shown to have made a major contribution to Israel's effort.

He also praised the moral tone of the IDF:"I visited Gaza, and one of the soldiers there told me that in the middle of a battle he saw a terrorist with an RPG and a child standing in front of him. He tells me, 'I didn't shoot because I was afraid to hurt the child, but I knew I will meet the terrorist.'" What would that moral soldier tell the parents of a soldier killed by the terrorist?

"It should be noted that Mr. Peretz made a very important 'contribution' as Defense Minister before the war: his repeated empty threats to take action in Gaza against the Qassam attacks sent a clear message that Israel wasn't serious about responding to attacks." (IMRA, 11/13.)

That stated criticism is fair enough. Peretz shouldn't be blamed, however, for military lack of preparedness, which took years to unfold. He should be asked whether he inquired how ready the Army was. In my first assignment as a systems analyst, I was asked to go to a factory and give the "go-ahead" to start a new shipping system that I had nothing to do with and was not trained to check. I asked the factory supervisors whether they had procedures in place and whether their staff was ready for the changeover. The supervisors said no. I called my Vice-President back at the home office to tell him I had called the change off, for a couple of weeks. He started to lose his temper. I quieted him down by telling him that if the new procedure failed to ship the goods, he would lose customers. When the factory was ready, the system worked.


Equipped with the same US weapons as Israel, Egypt and Jordan narrow Israel's military "edge." The IDF is assessing the danger (IMRA, 11/14). What about EU forces in UNIFIL?

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Mordechai ben-Menachem, November 30, 2006.

Recent reports out of the Jewish Community in France are sounding very ominous. The Jewish people in France have had a long history, and events of the past few years have created an atmosphere of fear and danger for the 600,000 Jewish citizens who continue to reside there.

In a pattern that is reproducing itself throughout Europe and in some cases beyond Europe, France's Muslim populations are growing exponentially, (now estimated to number 5 to 6 million) and the younger members of the Muslim population are acting to promote extremism and anti-Semitism.

"Nowhere have the flames of anti-Semitism burned more furiously than in France" declared one member of the French Jewish Community anxiously in an e-mail he circulated amongst his peers, trying to raise awareness and take more of a proactive stance in combating the alarming trend.

Here are a few examples of some of the most recent occurrences that have created such uneasiness for our Jewish brethren living in France:

* In Lyon, a car was rammed into the Synagogue and set on fire.
* In Montpellier, the Jewish religious center was firebombed.
* Also firebombed, all recently, were the Synagogues in Strasbourg and Marseilles, and a Yeshiva in Creteil.
* A Jewish sports club in Toulouse was attacked with Molotov cocktails.
* On the Statue of Alfred Dreyfus in Paris, the words "Dirty Jew" were painted.
* In Bondy, 15 men beat up members of a Jewish football (soccer) team with sticks and metal bars.
* Appallingly, the bus that takes Jewish children to school in Aubervilliers has been attacked three times in the past 14 months.
* Parisian Police are reporting 10 to 12 anti-Jewish incidents per day over the past 30 days.
* Graffiti is defacing Jewish neighborhoods with slogans proclaiming "Jews to the gas chamber" and "Death to the Jews."
* A crazed gunman opened fire on a kosher butcher shop and butcher, in Toulouse.
* In Villeurbanne a Jewish couple in their twenties were beaten by five men. The woman was pregnant.
* The Yeshiva was broken into and vandalized in Sarcelles during the past week, suffering heavy damage.

Help us to send a message about the unacceptability that we feel towards the inactions or lack of sufficient actions by the French Government to protect its Jewish citizens from being terrorized by these hate mongers and criminals.

This is a serious problem that is spreading worldwide, so please help fight back and make a statement by spreading this message to those you feel need to be informed of the problem and the above listing of companies.

Following is a list of French Owned Companies and their products and services, and we are at this time calling upon the readership and all who share our values to boycott these brands.

* Air France
* Air Liquide
* Airbus
* Alcatel
* Allegra
* Aqualung (Including: Spirotechnique, Technisub, US Divers, and SeaQuest)
* AXA Advisors
* Bank of the West
* Beneteau (boats)
* Biotherm (Cosmetics)
* Black Bus
* Bollinger (Champagne)
* Car & Driver Magazine
* Cartier
* Chanel
* Christian Dior
* Club Med (Vacations)
* Culligan (owned by Vivendi)
* Dannon (Yogurt & Dairy Foods)
* DKNY - LVMH acquired 100% in 2001.
* Dom Perignon
* Durand Crystal
* Elle Magazine
* Evian
* Fina Oil - Billions invested in Iraqi Oil fields
* First Hawaiian Bank
* George Magazine
* Givenchy
* Hennessy
* International Herald Tribune
* Jacobs Creek - Owned by Pernod Ricard since 1989
* Jameson (whiskey) - Owned by Penrod Ricard, France
* Jerry Springer (talk show)
* Krups (coffee and cappuccino makers)
* Lancome
* Le Creuset (Cookware)
* Louis Vuitton
* Marie Claire
* Martel Cognac
* Maybelline
* Mephisto (Footwear & Apparel)
* Michelin (Tires & Auto Parts)
* Mikasa Crystal and Glass
* Moet (Champagne)
* Motel 6
* Motown Records
* MP3.com
* Mumms (Champagne)
* Normany Butter
* Parents Magazine
* Peugeot (Automobiles)
* Pierre Cardin
* Playstation Magazine
* ProScan - Owned by Thomson Electronics, France
* Publicis Group (Including: Saatchi & Saatchi Advertising)
* RCA (televisions & electronics) - Owned by Thomson Electronics, France
* Red Magazine
* Red Roof Inns - Owned by the Accor group based in France
* Renault (Automobiles)
* Road & Track Magazine
* Roquefort Cheese - All Roquefort cheese is made in France
* Rowenta (Toasters, Irons, Coffee makers, etc)
* Royal Canadian & Seagram's Gin
* Sierra Software and Computer Games
* Smart & Final
* Sofitel (Hotels)
* Sparkletts (Water)
* Spencer Gifts
* Sundance Channel
* T-Fal (Kitchenware)
* UbiSoft (Computer Games)
* Uniroyal Tires Owned by Michelin
* Varilux Lenses (Essilor Optical)
* Veritas Group
* Veuve Clicquot Champagne
* Vittel
* Woman's Day Magazine
* Yves Saint Laurent
* Zodiac - Inflatable Boats

Mordechai Ben-Menachem is at Ben-Gurion University. He can be reached by email at quality@computer.org

To Go To Top

Posted by ZOA, November 30, 2006.

The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has condemned former President Jimmy Carter's latest book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid as inaccurate, shallow and vicious. The book is but the latest in decades of attacks upon Israel by the former President.

Examples of Carter's distortions, inaccuracies and hostility in this book include:

Carter: "The overriding problem is that for more than a quarter of a century, the actions of some Israeli leaders have been in direct conflict the official positions of the United States, the international community, and their own negotiated agreements. ... Israel's continued control and colonization of Palestinian land have been the primary obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement in the Holy Land."

Fact: Judea and Samaria are historically, legally and religiously Jewish land and form part of territory originally earmarked for a Jewish state by the League of Nations. There has never been a Palestinian Arab state in these areas, despite offers to establish one in 1937, 1948 and 2000 and Israel won Judea and Samaria in the 1967 war of self-defense. This land was no-one's sovereign territory and had been illegally occupied and annexed by Jordan in 1948. When under Arab control, no Palestinian state was set up there. Jews have more right to live in Judea and Samaria than any other people.

Carter: Palestinian Arabs have long supported a two-state solution and the Israelis have always opposed it.

Fact: The 1937 Peel Commission partition plan, the 1947 UN partition plan and the 2000 peace plan all proposed a Palestinian state alongside a Jewish state. Palestinians rejected all three.

Carter: In 1967 Israel launched a preemptive attack against Jordan.

Fact: Jordan commenced hostilities against Israel by shelling Jerusalem and opening fire on Israeli lines, despite Israeli calls for Jordan not to intervene in the Israeli-Egyptian fighting. Israel then counter-attacked and captured east Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria.

Carter: UN Security Council Resolution (UNSC) 242 calls for Israel to withdraw from all the territories conquered by Israel in the 1967 war.

Fact: UNSC 242 does not call for immediate, total and unconditional withdrawal by Israel. Rather, it calls for Israel to withdraw "from territories occupied" (not "the territories") to "secure and recognized boundaries" produced by negotiation with the Arab belligerents of that war.

Carter: Arab-Jewish violence began when "Jewish militants" attacked Arabs in 1939.

Fact: Arabs launched attacks upon unarmed Jews in 1920, 1921, 1929 and 1936-39, murdering hundreds of Jewish civilians long before Jewish armed units were formed to defend themselves.

Carter: Blames Israel while exonerating Arafat, for the Palestinian refusal to accept a Palestinian state as provided for in the 2000 Barak-Clinton peace proposals.

Fact: Arafat rejected these proposals and made no counter-offer according to Clinton and chief U.S. negotiator Dennis Ross. Instead, Arafat launched a terror war against Israel that still endures. Clinton said in his memoirs that Arafat's rejection made his Middle East policy a big failure. These proposals, contrary to what Arafat said and Carter chooses to believe, would have resulted in a fully contiguous Palestinian state on more than 95% of Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

Carter: Confessions extracted through torture are admissible in Israeli courts.

Fact: The Israel Supreme Court has explicitly outlawed the use of torture to even extract information of impending terror attacks, let alone confessions.

Carter: Israel is to blame for the "exodus of Christians from the Holy Land."

Fact: The Christian population of Jerusalem and other cities controlled by Jordan dropped steeply under Jordanian rule (1948-67) and is doing so again under Arafat's PA (1994 onwards), but did not under Israel rule. 70% of east Jerusalem's Christians left during Jordanian rule and since Arafat's PA took over Bethlehem in 1994, most of its Christians have left as well.

Some important facts omitted from Carter's book:

* The long history of Palestinian and Arab-state sponsored terrorism against Israel before 1967.

* Arafat's efforts to import offensive weaponry and bomb making materials from Iran via the Karine-A ship in 2002, about which Arafat lied to the U.S. government, saying he had nothing to do with it

* The persecution, expulsion and expropriation of the property of hundreds of thousands of Jews from Arab countries since 1948.

* The desecration and destruction of Jewish synagogues, graveyards and homes in east Jerusalem and prevention of Jewish worship at Jewish sacred sites after Jordan captured that part of the city in 1948.

* The 1972 Munich massacre of Israeli athletes in an operation funded by current Palestinian authority president and co-founder with Yasser Arafat of the Fatah terror group, Mahmoud Abbas.

Critical commentary of the Carter book:

* Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Professor: "Whatever Mr. Carter's motives may be, his authorship of this, a historical, one-sided, and simplistic brief against Israel forever disqualifies him from playing any positive role in fairly resolving the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians" ( New York Sun, November 22).

* Martin Peretz, Editor-in-Chief of The New Republic: a "tendentious, dishonest and stupid book" (New Republic, November 11).

* Rich Richman, Editor, Jewish Current Issues: "The anqti-Israel bias is so clear, the credulous description of Arab positions so cringe-producing, the key facts' on which Carter relies so easily refuted by public documents, that the book is an embarrassment to Carter, the Democrats, the presidency and Americans" ( American Thinker, November 14).

* Michael Jacobs, Managing Editor, Atlanta Jewish Times: "A poorly written, poorly argued, nonsensical little book" ( Altanta Journal Constitution, November 20).

ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said,

"Jimmy Carter's inaccurate, shallow and vicious book is unfortunately what we have come to expect from this most mediocre of modern presidents. The book is not only riddled with factual errors and distortions fully in keeping with Carter's long-standing bias against Israel and preference for neighboring Arab dictatorships, but even manages to malign Israel in its title, as Israel is a democracy that extends full civil rights to its non-Jewish citizens, not a minority, racist regime that like apartheid South Africa. The title seems to have been maliciously chosen to harm Israel's reputation in the minds of anyone who merely sees the book's cover, because even Carter admits in the book that the situation in Israel 'is unlike that in South Africa.'

"Carter's animus against Israel has been confirmed from many reliable quarters. His Secretary of State, Cyrus Vance, once revealed that if Carter had won a second term, he intended to sell Israel down the river. In The Unfinished Presidency, Douglas Brinkley writes, There was no world leader Jimmy Carter was more eager to know than Yasir Arafat,' whom he befriended already in 1990, three years before Arafat supposedly accepted Israel's right to exist and signed the Oslo Accords. But what would you expect from someone who won a prize from Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan of the United Arab Emirates whose Zayed Center for Coordination and Follow-Up has promoted Holocaust denial?

"The ZOA, however, agrees with Jimmy Carter on one matter. On a recent visit to Israel, he said, "I condemn very deeply any teaching of Palestinian children or college students that they should despise Israel, not recognize the legitimacy of Israel's existence, [and] not work with Israel side-by-side in peace.' It's a pity that Carter fails in his book to enlarge on this and related issues of incitement to hatred and murder and failure to arrest and jail terrorists in the PA which stems from Palestinian Arab non-acceptance of Israel's righ to exist as a Jewish state. This was and remains the actual reason for the Arab war on Israel, not Israel's self-defensive measures, none of which would be necessary if Arabs truly accepted Israel's existence."

The Zionist Organization of America (www.zoa.org), founded in 1897, is the oldest pro-Israel organization in the United States. The ZOA works to strengthen U.S.-Israel relations, educates the American public and Congress about the dangers that Israel faces, and combats anti-Israel bias in the media and on college campuses. Its past presidents have included Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis and Rabbi Dr. Abba Hillel Silver.

To Go To Top

Posted by Israel Zwick, November 30, 2006.
An interchange between Zwick and Reify of the reify.blog.
Dear Fred:

The biggest enemy of the State of Israel is not Iran, Hezbollah, or Hamas. It is the group of secular left-wing Israelis who have no attachment to the history and culture of the Jewish people in our ancient homeland. They keep writing about the "poor, oppressed Palestinians who are suffering from the harsh Israeli occupation." They claim that if the Palestinian Arabs had their own independent micro-state carved out of Israel then they would have no reason to continue their "resistance" and there would be peace and tranquility for both Arabs and Jews. Some of these secular Jewish writers even favor the concept of establishing one united state for Arabs and Jews where there would be equal rights for all based on demography and democracy. That is more of a threat to the Jewish State than Iran's nuclear weapons. It would mean the end of the blue and white flag, the end of Hatikvah as the national anthem, the end of streets with Jewish names, the end of Jewish national holidays, and most important, the end of religious freedom for Jews in the Middle East. The Jews now living in Israel would meet the same fate as the Jews who have lived in Yemen, Tunisia, Morocco, Syria, Iraq, and Iran. Most have had to leave, and the few remaining there are in fear for their lives. Israeli Jews would have to seek safe haven in isolated communities in Montana or Wyoming. Perhaps they would return to Germany or Poland, which are now eager to reestablish Jewish communities.

I don't claim to understand Ehud Olmert's strategy and, like you, I am deeply troubled by the recent ominous developments in Israel. I'm assuming that Olmert is following the strategy of Ehud Barak in July, 2000 when he offered Arafat 95% of what he wanted but Arafat still refused to end the conflict or relinquish the |right of return." Perhaps, Olmert needs to show the opposition that Israel is willing to make major sacrifices to achieve a real peace but the Arabs will accept nothing less than the dissolution of the Jewish State and expulsion of Jews from their historical homeland.

If my assumption is wrong and you're right, then the Jewish people are in for some very difficult times, and we can only pray that "Hashem oz l'amo yiten, Hashem y'vorech es amo basholom."

Kol tuv

Israel Zwick is Managing Editor, www.cnpublications.net. Contaact him at israel.zwick@earthlink.net

To Go To Top

Posted by David Bedein, November 30, 2006.

Jerusalem - It can now be confirmed that Israel's failure to respond to Palestinian missile attacks on Israel's western Negev region was the result of pressure placed on the Israeli government by the Bush administration. The pressure succeeded only days before Israeli armed forces were to launch an incursion into Gaza, following more than 1200 missile attacks emanating from that area in a little more than 14 months.

An Israeli government official told the Middle East News Line that the White House and State Department demanded that Prime Minister Olmert suspend all operations in, and withdraw from, the Gaza Strip in exchange for a Palestinian Authority agreement to a cease-fire.

The visit by President George W. Bush to Jordan yesterday, where he met with Jordanian leaders, was the primary factor for this pressure.

"Olmert was first told of the cease-fire proposal when he came to Washington earlier this month," the official said. "Last week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called Olmert and said she expected an end to Israeli military operations."

U.S. Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams is expected to meet Abbas in Amman. Officials said Abrams would then issue a recommendation regarding the feasibility of a meeting between Bush and Abbas. They said the U.S. president was not expected to meet Olmert.

The cease-fire, which the PA was to produce in exchange for Israel's agreement to refrain from taking defensive action, has already failed.

Palestinian gunners have fired Kassam-class, short-range missiles from the northern Gaza Strip into Israel earlier in the week.

"The cease-fire is still very fresh," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said on Monday. "We hope that those security forces, as they get in place, would stop any such rocket attacks or any terrorist attacks that might be emanating from Gaza."

McCormack said the United States would seek to extend the cease-fire to the West Bank. But he said this depended on an effective cease-fire in the Gaza Strip.

The State Department has also pressed Israel to ease restrictions on Palestinian travel and offer to free Palestinian convicts.

The Department expressed satisfaction with Olmert's speech on Monday that offered Israel's withdrawal from large portions of Judea and Samaria on the west bank of the Jordan River in exchange for peace with the Palestinians.

Olmert also expressed readiness to release a large number of Palestinian convicts in the context of a real peace agreement.

The official said Rice spoke to leaders in Egypt, Qatar and Saudi Arabia to persuade Hamas to accept the cease-fire as the first step toward a U.S. peace initiative. Apart from Iran, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have been leading financiers of Hamas. Both Egypt and Qatar have invited the Hamas leader, now the Palestinian Authority Prime Minister, Ismail Haniya for a state visit.

Rice has been in nearly daily contact with Israeli leaders to ensure that the military refrains from operations in the Gaza Strip, officials said. On Monday, they said, the U.S. secretary discussed the ceasefire with Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz.

"Condi plans to arrange to meet Olmert and Abbas and seeks to reinforce the ceasefire and discuss the next step," the official said.

David Bedein is Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency. (http://Israelbehindthenews.com). He is president of Center for Near East Policy Research. Contact him by email at media@actcom.co.il This article appeared in the Evening Bulletin
(www.theeveningbulletin.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17527800&BRD=2737&PAG= 461&dept_id=576361&rfi=6).

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 30, 2006.

In Haaretz (and maybe other papers) today, there is debate about several "privatized degrees" that operate at Tel Aviv University. These are degrees in business and law that are conducted on campus for high tuition, not directly budgeted by the Israeli government budget and planning committee for higher education (VATAT). The head of VATAT, Prof. Shlomo Grossman, is quoted in the paper today as saying that even though these programs are not directed funded by VATAT, they operate on Israeli campuses, which are paid for by the taxpayer, and so require VATAT permission and approval.

That is very interesting, but the fact of the matter is that for the past few years the campus of Tel Aviv University and some other universities have been misused by allowing the "Socioeconomic College" programs to operate on campus grounds. The "Socioeconomic College" is a front for the Israeli Communist Party, and the "College" teaches boilerplate Marxism and anti-Israel propaganda, using public campus facilities.

In addition, of course, in-classroom leftist and anti-Israel political indoctrination is routinely conducted on these same taxpayer-financed campuses (see http://www.israel-academia-monitor.com).

So perhaps Prof. Grossman and VATAT should also have something to say about that?

Why not write Prof. Grossman and ask him why the communist party is allowed to operate its propaganda "college" on public facilities paid for by the Israeli taxpayer!

You can FAX Prof. Shlomo Grossman, director of VATAT, at 972 2-5679969

or write POB 4037, Jerusalem 91040

Prof. Grossman's email is grossms@mail.biu.ac.il 2. "Haifa U. Arab Student Calendar Honors Bin-Laden, Nasrallah"
Wednesday, November 29, 2006 / 8 Kislev 5767

An Arab student calendar distributed at Haifa University marks the dates of major terrorist attacks, as well as significant dates in the lives of Arab terrorists such as Osama Bin-Laden.

The calendar, sponsored by the Islamic Movement - based in the Israeli city Um El-Fahm - marks the birthday of Al-Qaeda founder Bin-Laden, the date of PLO leader Yasser Arafat's death, and significant dates in the lives of Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah and jailed Fatah arch-terrorist Marwan Barghouti.

Also noted in the calendar are the anniversaries of the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers in New York and of recent kidnappings of IDF soldiers.

Students belonging to the Islamic Movement rejected criticism by many that the material constituted incitement. Mouad Hatib, the university student who was responsible for distribution of the calendars, said, "I don't understand the big fuss. It's a calendar for Arab students at the university... We mention Nasrallah and the date of the kidnapping of the two soldiers and the killing of eight others as a brave operation that led to the Lebanon war."

Regarding the marking of dates in the lives of Nasrallah, Bin-Laden and others, Hatib said, "It's important that the Arab public remembers its leaders."

University officials initially did not object to the journals when the written contents were brought before the administration for review. "Once it was brought to the attention of the dean that the calendar contains sympathetic pictures of people such as Nasrallah and of the attack on the Twin Towers, the permission [to distribute the material] was not renewed," a university administration statement said. "We have learned lessons as a result of this incident, and full attention will be given hereafter also to pictures in material to be distributed at the university."

A statement released by the Haifa University Student Union said, "We are shocked, and we see as very serious the fact that, on the university campus, calendars were distributed including pictures of terrorists who publicly call for the liquidation of the State of Israel."

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. Contact him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Daily Alert, November 30, 2006.

This was written by Eli Lake, Staff Reporter of the New York Sun November 29, 2006 and is archived at URL:

WASHINGTON -- An expert adviser to the Baker-Hamilton commission expects the 10-person panel to recommend that the Bush administration pressure Israel to make concessions in a gambit to entice Syria and Iran to a regional conference on Iraq.

The assessment was shared in a confidential memorandum -- obtained yesterday by The New York Sun -- to expert advisers to the commission from a former CIA station chief for Saudi Arabia, Raymond Close. Mr. Close is a member of the expert group advising the commission and was a strong advocate throughout the panel's deliberations for renewed American diplomacy with Iran and Syria. In the memo, Mr. Close shares his "personal predictions and expectations" for what the Iraq Study Group will recommend in its final report next month.

Mr. Close writes that he expects the study group to urge President Bush to convene a regional conference "to enlist the support of neighboring states in establishing stability in Iraq." Among the participants in the regional conference should be "all principal states of the region," including Iran, Syria, and Israel. The inclusion of Israel, according to Mr. Close, is crucial because it will provide the only leverage by which Iran and Syria can be enticed to help stabilize Iraq.

"To have any realistic chance of success, I believe that the process would have to start with the announcement of a major initiative, promoted and vigorously supported by the United States, to reach a comprehensive resolution to the Israel-Arab crisis through a process of reasonable compromise and accommodation between Israel and its Arab neighbors," he writes.

While it is widely expected that the Baker-Hamilton commission will recommend renewed diplomacy with Iran and Syria in an effort to share the burden in stabilizing the country, the content of such negotiations has until now been a mystery. According to Mr. Close, the talks will center around a resolution of the conflict between the Jewish state and the Arab and Islamic world.

Other members of the expert working groups yesterday, when asked about the memo, confirmed it was authentic. Mr. Close did not return an email seeking comment. But two members cautioned that the views of Mr. Close were his own and that in the last three weeks the commission and team of staffers at the U.S. Institute of Peace have not formally sought the opinions of the expert working groups. That said, some of the individual experts have provided private counsel and analysis to individual members.

Mr. Close believes a regional conference centering on Israel's conflict is so likely that "If the ISG suggests a regional conference to which would not be invited, that could only be because Israel and its supporters in the United States intervened to protect Israel from involvement in a process in which it would inevitably have to make significant concessions and compromises."

Mr. Close does not specify what those compromises would be. He does however write that America and Israel will need to make "significant modifications" to their current positions. He also writes that America should not offer Syria an opportunity to restore its semi-sovereignty over Lebanon. But in lieu of that, "perhaps the US will have to put pressure on Israel to make territorial concessions in the Golan." The reference is to the Golan Heights, which Israel annexed after winning from Syria in the Six Day War of 1967.

The memo from Mr. Close is deeply pessimistic about any chance that Mr. Bush will achieve a victory in Iraq on his original terms as a beacon of democracy for the Middle East. He derides what he expects will be conclusions from an internal government review that "will continue to promote the delusion that success' is still a realistic objective in Iraq." He describes Iraq as a "looming catastrophe," ending his thoughts with this terse summary: "No simple or convenient solutions. Very little hope of success. But no better ideas to work with."

Mr. Close has been an outspoken critic of the war for which he was tasked to advise a strategy. On June 10, 2003 he penned an article for the newsletter "Counterpunch" in which he concluded that the Bush administration's alleged manipulation of pre-war intelligence "was a crime against those values for which America stands most proud."

Mr. Close has also been an ally of Saudi Arabia. In 1977, on the day of his retirement from the CIA, while still in Jedda, Mr. Close began working with Saudi Arabia's then intelligence chief, Kamal Adham, according to one of his former bosses at the agency's directorate of operations.

"On the day he retired from the CIA, Ray walked across the street and joined Kamal Adham in a business relationship," Duane Clarridge said yesterday in an interview. "To many officers in the CIA this seemed untoward because as a government official, he had an official relationship with Kamal Adham. Now he was in a commercial relationship which over the years reportedly made Close a very wealthy man."

Mr. Adham later went on to play a key role in the BCCI banking scandal, where the bank was accused of bribing senior government officials in a variety of countries as well as graft.

Mr. Close's son, Kenneth, is a registered foreign agent for Saudi Arabia.


Fasten your seat belts, as Bette Davis would say, because it's going to be a bumpy ride.

... Baker and Hamilton will soon announce a set of recommendations of which the following is, in my opinion at least, the most important and potentially the most controversial: Encourage the holding of a regional conference to enlist the support of neighboring states in establishing stability in Iraq... All principal states of the region would be invited, particularly including Iran and Syria -- and Israel. ... This initiative could succeed only if the United States and Israel were to convey to prospective attendees in advance their readiness in principle to make significant concessions and accommodations in return for comparable concessions and accommodations from Iran and Syria, by themselves and on behalf of their allies in Lebanon and Palestine...

The strongest and most forward-looking members if [sic] the Baker-Hamilton Commission, ... are prepared to recommend that effort. ... There is ... no simple or easy way to escape the looming catastrophe that was set in motion by the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 ... The ISG is also obviously going to address the question of when and under what conditions the United States will start withdrawing troops from Iraq. Some kind of withdrawal plan is a minimum insisted upon by the majority of Democratic members of the Commission and some of the Republicans, as well. ...

A new and comprehensive "regional policy makeover" is a grand idea, but presents many serious complications. ... To have any realistic chance of success, I believe that the process would have to start with the announcement of a major initiative, promoted and vigorously supported by the United States, to reach a comprehensive resolution to the Israel-Arab crisis through a process of reasonable compromise and accommodation between Israel and its Arab neighbors....

The proposal to call a regional conference sounds good, but does not stand up very well to hard analysis. With George W. Bush in the White House, I cannot see a single prospective participant in a regional conference of this kind (particularly the United States and Israel) coming to the table prepared to make the compromises and concessions that will be essential to reaching a constructive outcome of US policy in Iraq. ...

However ...I believe that the ISG will nevertheless recommend the convocation of a regional conference. ...Tragically, I think George W. Bush will not agree even to give it a sporting chance.

To Go To Top

Posted by Ian Fletcher, November 29, 2006.

To Go To Top

Posted by Buddy Macy, November 29, 2006.

Last month I had a telephone conversation with Howard Rieger, President of United Jewish Communities (UJC), the Jewish Federation network in North America. I had phoned Mr. Rieger earlier in the day, and he promptly returned my call. It had been a rough week for the colossal Jewish fundraising organization. On October 13th, a front-page article appeared in The New York Jewish Week criticizing UJC for disbursing a significant amount of funds from its Israel Emergency Campaign (IEC) to non-Jews in Israel. Howard Rieger responded to the article by stating that 3 percent of all IEC monies raised to-date had gone to non-Jewish Israelis in the north. Yet, according to an October 5, 2006 UJC Communications Department email containing an IEC ALLOCATIONS UPDATE, nearly $9,000,000 of the first $50,000,000 SPENT had been distributed to non-Jews. In his calculation, Rieger used the amount of PLEDGES ($300 million) as the denominator, not the actual dollars SPENT, thus intentionally creating the illusion of a much lower percentage of the funds going to non-Jews.

During the phone call, I proposed to Mr. Rieger that he meet with me and several other ardent supporters of Israel. We wished to discuss the organization's lack of support for the expellees from Gush Katif and northern Samaria, its "post-war" financial support of non-Jews (without the knowledge of many of the contributors to the IEC) and UJC's silence with regard to Ehud Olmert's existence-threatening decisions regarding Israel since assuming the position of Prime Minister. Mr. Rieger's reply was short and callous: "I don't need another meeting," he said.

Mr. Rieger: I am writing this email on Sunday evening and do not expect nor wish any compensation for it. You, on the other hand, receive a salary (that is paid out of contributions to needy Jews) in excess of $700,000 annually for your work on behalf of our fellow Jews - fundraising and advocacy that should be regarded by you as a tremendous privilege -- yet, you refuse to meet with me and other pro-Israel activists during working hours because you don't "need" another meeting.

The Jewish People deserve and NEED much more. And, certainly, 16 months after being expelled from their homes and communities, 10,000 Jewish refugees deserve and NEED the Jewish community's concern, compassion and FINANCIAL GENEROSITY .

Most sincerely,
Buddy Macy
Little Falls, NJ

Buddy Macy was formerly an active volunteer with UJC. Read about his story at by clicking here.Contact him at VegiBud@aol.com.

To Go To Top

Posted by Barry Rubin, November 29, 2006.

The Middle East always gives us clues for understanding it if only we paid attention to them. Let us consider how four events coincided recently.

First, the West is abuzz with the idea of engaging Syria about the future of Iraq. There are broad hints about satisfying Syrian ambitions to control Lebanon in exchange.
Second, in Lebanon the government was discussing endorsement of an international tribunal to try those responsible for the murder of former prime minister Rafik Hariri in February 2005. All evidence points to the very top of the Syrian government as being responsible for the killing.
Third, Hizballah ministers walked out to try to sabotage the vote of the tribunal.
Fourth, Pierre Gemayel, a cabinet minister supporting the majority position was murdered.

Now, what conclusions might we draw here? I'll give you mine:

Syria wants to destroy any investigation of its murdering Hariri, to intimidate the existing Lebanese government, and to put into power a coalition of its clients, including Hizballah.

As for Hizballah, it cares more about Syrian than it does about Lebanese interests. It is an anti-patriotic organization. Always remember that Hizballah leader Hassan Nasrallah is the official representative in Lebanon of Iran's spiritual guide. The Syrian-backed triple alliance involves Hizballah, the lame duck Christian leader Michel Aoun (elected on a platform of combating Syrian influence!), and rented Sunni Muslim politicians.

But wasn't Syria worried about losing the Western offer of negotiations and concessions if it acted brutally? Ah, that's the beauty of it all. The Syrian government is not worried about it. President Bashar al-Assad believes he can use terrorism all he wants and no one will do anything about it.

After all, the attack came a few hours after UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan called Bashar to urge him to be nice in Lebanon. Don't hold your breath for a UN resolution condemning Syria, demanding that UN forces be allowed to patrol the Syria-Lebanon border to stop Syrian arms smuggling to Hizballah, or sanctions of any kind.

In other words, the Western offer of negotiating Syria has only emboldened that government. Bashar feels like the winner and thinks the West is composed of fools or cowards who will never confront him.

The attack on Gemayel was the fifteenth major assassination attempt by Syria and its allies since Hariri was killed. Gemayel was the fifth major Lebanese figure to die. Incidentally, there has not been a single violent attack on any pro-Syrian figure in Lebanon.

By the way, the organization that claimed responsibility for the killing is a front group that was responsible for murdering two other anti-Syrian figures in past years. Its communique specifically attributes the murder to Gemayel opposing Syria and Hizballah.

You may not want to take my word for it though, so here's what some other experts said about the assassination. Looking at the nonsense spouted by these and other people, perhaps Bashar is right in his low evaluation of the West:

Expert Number One: The problem is a "cycle of violence" in Lebanon. Wrong, no cycle. Only one side is using violence.

Expert Number Two: It is all U.S. President George Bush's fault. Nope. Having a Democrat in the White House would not change the behavior of Syria, Iran, and Hizballah for the better.

Expert Number Three: We all better give Syria what it wants or there will be more violence. Misleading. Yes, if we don't give Syria what it wants the Syrian government will commit more terrorism. And if we do give Syria what it wants, the Syrian government will commit even more terrorism than that. The name for this person's reasoning is appeasement. The point is to show that terrorism and aggression aren't profitable. Otherwise, they will become even more popular than they are now.

Expert Number Four: The real danger is that anti-Syrian Lebanese Christians will stage even worse violence. As if they were the villains here. Let's start by dealing with the violence we have already. The Christians are showing restraint, and Expert Number Four refuses even to condemn Syria and Hizballah, and in fact sympathizes with them.

This is not to say that all responses are so bad; yet, it is clearly terrible enough to convince Bashar that he can have both terrorism and the West groveling, both Lebanon and international compliance.

What is needed is an alternative. The international community should make it clear that Syrian backing for terrorism against Lebanon, Iraq, and Israel will bring punishment. That means isolation, sanctions, investigation, and persecution.

The situation also involves a massive program of economic and military support for the current Lebanese government so that it can survive. After all, Hizballah is getting money and arms from Iran and Syria while the moderates get nothing from the West.

In the immediate term, the number-one danger in the Middle East is not Iranian nuclear weapons, though that is a big enough longer-term threat, but an extremist takeover of Lebanon. All the Syrians and Hizballah have to do is kill two more cabinet ministers and the government will fall. And even the courage of Lebanon's patriotic majority has its limits. Such an event would be the most significant domestic political change in the region since the Iranian Islamist revolution a quarter-century ago.

When Syria, Iran, and Hizballah engage in terrorism, this is a signal that they should be opposed vigorously. Is that so hard to understand? Does anyone really remember the lessons of September 11?

Barry Rubin is Director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Interdisciplinary Center university. His co-authored book, Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography, (Oxford University Press) is now available in paperback and in Hebrew. His latest book, The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East, was published by Wiley in November 2005. Prof. Rubin's columns can be read online at: http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html.

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Shamrak, November 29, 2006.

Contrary to the common belief of anti-Semites, that Jews are shrewd, we are quite trusting people and naive. For example, if today a Christian anti-Semite or an Arab terrorist, with years of Jew-bashing experience, would announce that they condemn their evil ways of the past and support Israel's right to exist, Jewish communities around the world would immediately start actively promoting them as saints. Quite often, the reason behind these kinds of transformation is sinister - It is the desire to get the free publicity for an upcoming book, movie or Jewish money for speaking engagements.

Occasionally, I send my articles and letters to Jewish papers. Most often, they are rejected or 'modified' without my consent. The politically motivated editors of the Jewish publications are unwilling and unable to allow the freedom of speech, when the right of Jews to their ancestral land and the future of Jewish people are concerned. At the same time, they are able to allocate almost unlimited space and give any inconceivable excuse to the enemies of the Jewish state. The voices of Jewish self-haters are quite dominant in many Jewish publications and Internet. The discreditation of Jewish patriots and the original ideas of Zionism became a norm and they are not given the opportunity to state their case to the public at all.

It seems that most of those publications are Jewish by the namesake only. They are not interested in providing the leadership for communities, they claim represent. From time to time they do raise controversial questions, like "Who is a Jew?" Most of the time, it is not done to resolve an issue, but for the sake of increasing the number of subscribers.

A while ago, September of 2006, I was surprised when a correspondent of the Australian Jewish News, which is notorious for its editors' leftist ideology, expressed his interest to interview me. He wanted to publish my personal profile and information about my Internet based editorial letter in the paper. We had a 45 minutes face-to-face interview, during which we covered the wide range of questions and he made four pages of tightly written notes. Two months later, when I received a draft of the interview, many important points were omitted or distorted. Two major questions which I strongly emphasized during interview, were not included in the draft at all:

Q1: Why did I start publishing your letters five years ago? -- "Because for years I observed that Jewish leaders were apathetic and unwilling in promoting Jewish unity and original Zionist ideas."

Q2: What is the purpose of your letters? -- "Disseminate the idea that Jewish people have the right to live in peace on all Jewish land - Eretz-Israel?"

Why is it so difficult for a Jewish newspaper to give a voice to true Zionist ideas? Why are they so considerate and sensitive to "the suffering of poor Palestinians", but ignore the sufferings of their own people inflicted by the "poor Palestinians"? Why do they support almost any national independence movement, but actively deny the rights of Jewish people and ignore Zionism - the Jewish National Independence Movement?

It is time to realize that most of the so-called Jewish publications, may be run by Jews, but are just commercial enterprises targeting Jews for advertising dollars and subscriptions. It is futile to write letters to them. The only language any media organization can understand is the language of "the Bottom Line".

We must stop our subscription to all anti-Jewish publications! We must switch off all anti-Israel biased radio stations or TV channels! And, we have to let them and their advertisers know that we have done so and why. Only this way they will be able to understand that the hideous status quo will not be tolerated any more and we are serious about it! They will not change their revolting attitude, but they will be forced to change their business practice, because they do love Jewish money!

Food for Thought

It is said, that solution to any problem can be easily found by asking the right question. There are many Think Tanks around the world, looking for answer to: "How to bring peace to the Middle East, by resolving Arab-Israel conflict?" What they must ask: "How to help Israel to re-unite Jewish land, in order to send clear message to Muslim world, that Islamic expansionism will not be tolerated any more?"

What Cease-fire? Mahmoud Abbas has told an Arab audience that he will not settle for a new Arab state comprising Judea , Samaria and Gaza and that the issue of allowing millions of Arabs to enter Israel is the key to solving the Arab-Israeli conflict. (It is all or nothing! It is time for Jews to realize it and take all Jewish land back!)

Ceasefire Lasted 75 Minutes. A Kassam rocket landed in the western Negev, some 75 minutes after the PA (Palestinian Authority) declared a ceasefire at 6:00am Sunday morning. (For how long can Jewish people continue to endure stupidity of the gutless, apathetic and corrupt leadership? We need leaders with strong conviction and absolutely believe in original ideas of Zionism!)

Quote of the Week

"...there is a growing feeling that our leaders, our ministers, are abandoning [zionist] principles in order to remain in power longer." - Natan Sharansky, during his farewell speech in Knesset.

Israel Offers Another Capitulation, Terrorists Offered Death. In a major policy speech, Olmert said he was reaching out to the Arab Palestinians for peace - offering a series of humanitarian and economic incentives if violence against Israel ceased. The answer was prompt, rockets were fired into the Israeli Sderot, despite a ceasefire declared. Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, part of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah faction, claimed responsibility for the attack. (The weed must be completely removed, in order to keep the garden clean. There is not difference between Hamas or Fatah! They are just different variety of the same weed.)

UN: More Resolutions Against Israel. The U.N. Human Rights Council passed two more resolutions against Israel: Declare Israel's presence in the Golan Heights illegal and condemned Israel's settlement construction. The 47-member council has singled out no other country but Israel for human rights abuses since the council was established six months ago. (While International anti-Semitic bustards are in power, Islamic terror will thrive!)

The True Face of Islam.

Internet letter. Author unknown.

There can be no absolute freedom of any kind even in a democracy. Absolute freedom is anarchy and that is hardly consonant with democracy. And now I am about to preach hatred. But I will not lie.

Islam is not a race. It is a death cult. It strives for death for all who are non-Muslim and it strives for the death of Muslims themselves if they wish to achieve the highest rewards, the promise of sexual orgies and gluttonous feasts, in their afterlives. Muhammad was a deceitful, bloodthirsty, rapacious, sadistic, immoral warmonger.

Despite the numerous pronouncements of George W. Bush and Tony Blair and of countless Imams and murderous Islamic dictators and a few self hating Jews and uncountable anti Semites and far, far too many others, Islam is NOT "A religion of peace". Of the approximately 125 armed conflicts and massacres being conducted in the world at present, almost all of them are involve Muslims as the perpetrators and very often as the victims of their fellow Muslims.

But of all the horrible diseases that plague our world the most virulent, most devastating plague of all is Islam. As with any plague, one must either let it run its course and hope to survive its devastation or take all necessary measures to eradicate it.

Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement. For the last 3 years, he has been publishing internet editorial letters on the Arab-Israeli conflict -- independently, not as a member of any organization or political movement. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Bussio, November 29, 2006.
It began last year around this time, the Goebbelization of Iranian foreign policy. The Nazi Minister for propaganda and war criminal, Joseph Goebbels would indeed be proud if he were alive today strutting about in his jack-boots. For in Iran today, that country's dictatorship of religious fanatics known as the Mullahs have instructed their willing spokesman, Mahmud Ahmadinejad, the decayed corrupt bigot, obsessed by the evil within himself, to declare in a ranting televised speech given on December 14, 2005, that the Nazi murder of six million Jews was a fabrication. "They have created a myth in the name of the Holocaust and consider it above God, religion, and the prophets. If someone were to deny the existence of God... they would not bother him. However, if someone were to deny the myth of the Jews' massacre, all the Zionist mouthpieces and the governments subservient to the Zionists tear their larynxes and scream against the person as! much as they can." Ahmadine who is jokingly referred to as the President of Iran officiated over an October 2005 "World Without Zionism" conference. From nearly every wall in the conference hall one could see Nazi-like standards, in English calling for Israel to be wiped off the face of the earth. The use of English told many that this spewing of hate and anti-Semitism was meant for world consumption.

The statements from Ahmadinejad shocked and still shock even the weak-kneed Europeans. The German foreign ministry even went so far as to recall their Iranian charg d'affaires.

But should Europe be so shocked? Ahmadinejad's rantings are really nothing new. We have all heard this nonsense before. In fact just four years earlier before Ahmadinejad denied that the Holocaust had ever taken place, Iran's Expediency Council Chairman Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani declared before a student gathering at Tehran University, "If one day, the Islamic world is also equipped with weapons like those that Israel possesses now, then the imperialists' strategy will reach a standstill because the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything... It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality." Unfortunately and sadly to say the least many intelligence operatives and analyst in the United States and Europe dismissed Rafsanjani's! remarks, suggesting that he was alluding to self-defense only. However, Iranian government officials and members of the rubber stamp parliament understood exactly what Rafsanjani meant -- to threaten the West and her allies with the use of nuclear weapons one day soon.

The Iranian leadership past and present has called for the eradication of the state of Israel. This includes the Islamic Revolution leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to the current Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and even so-called moderates like former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami. Iranian official have made fools of the Europeans for many years now, but with Ahmadinejad's howls they can no longer deny the truth of Iranian intentions. Note the following address was given by Khatami before the Italian Parliament in March 1999: "Tolerance and exchange of views are the fruits of cultural richness, creativity, high-mindedness and harmony. One must recognize this opportunity." Khatami's conciliatory tone, though, was reserved only for gullible foreign diplomats, parliamentarians, and academics. However when spe! aking to his own people his statements are quite different. In a televised address on October 24, 2000, for example, he stated, "In the Qur'an, God commanded to kill the wicked and those who do not see the rights of the oppressed... If we abide by human laws, we should mobilize the whole Islamic World for a sharp confrontation with the Zionist regime... If we abide by the Qur'an, all of use should mobilize to kill." The destruction of Israel and the United States continues to this day to be Iran's creed.

Today the civilized world, the world of open markets, the world in which the rule of law is supreme, the world where women are accorded the same rights as men, faces this extreme and fanatical religious ideology; an ideology unchecked by even so much as basic human kindness. This ideology is about to take the momentous step into a greater world. Soon Iran will wield nuclear power.

For those of us connected to the global economy and live in countries where half our population are not considered like so much cattle, we can not understand the mentality of the Iranian Government, and its Mullah dictatorship which desires to drive its nation back to the Seventh Century when men and women were murdered for daring to rise the level of human thought. Today this same thinking is demonstrated in Iran by embracing a culture of death and romanticizing martyrdom.

Iran's president whose mentality certainly comes into question when he denies the Holocaust and calls for the destruction of the United States and Israel, is not just crazy talk, but it's that this oftentimes mentality deranged chief of state passionately believes in the imminent reappearance of the 12th Imam, Shi'ism's version of the Messiah. In fact, it has been reported that President Ahmadinejad has been saying in official meetings that the end of history is only two or three years away.

Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs he slavishly reports to fervently believe that Iran's Islamic revolution's itself is to prepare the way for the Imam's return, a return that will be preceded by worldwide destruction and turmoil. And what better way to cause such destruction and turmoil, than the eager use of nuclear weaponry.

This last summer the Iranian president pushed the world to the brink of what many are calling the beginning of the Third World War. With his support and encouragement of the Iranian backed Hezbollah terror army in Lebanon, Ahmadinejad stimulated if not ordered Hezbollah's unprovoked and heinous attack upon Israel.

There is no question that Ahmadinejad and those Mullahs who pull his strings are exceedingly dangerous. However, it is the epitome of irresponsibility for the civilized nations of the world to allow this Seventh Century nation to bring about war in the Middle East and worse - to go nuclear and threaten the peace of the global economy with its soon to be expanding arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

Contact Michael Bussio at amblerfoley@earthlink.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 29, 2006.


Hamas has boosted the range of its rockets to 21 kilometers. The explosives decomposed too soon to permit long storage. Hamas had to fire them as they were made. Smuggling in a better grade of explosives enables Hamas to accumulate them. It could lay down a blanket of explosives. That would serve as a devastating deterrent to Israeli raids (IMRA, 11/8).

The smuggling was made possible by withdrawal from the Gaza border with Egypt. Israeli leaders had heeded US demands for withdrawal and are appeasement-minded towards the Arabs. The US demands are neither in Israel's interest nor in America's. They are in the interest of bias or politics. Politics is the art of the stupid.


He proposes that the Security Council send a peacekeeping force to Gaza, to achieve a similar success there that he says it did in Lebanon (Benny Avni, NY Sun, 11/7, p.7)

Success? The UN force keeps Israeli forces from disarming Hizbullah and to let Hizbullah rearm for another round to the war. That's its "success," if not its purpose.


Daniel Pipes said that the US over-promised for the short run. When the extravagant promises were not redeemed, Americans grew impatient. Had Pres. Bush promised less, he would have been seen as making progress in the war.


UNICEF expressed concern over the war's casualties and interference in the lives of Palestinian Arab children. It did not express similar concern over similar effects upon Israeli children (IMRA, 11/9).

Neither did it express concern over the violence against the Arab children inflicted by fellow Arabs in their clan and police rivalries. Nor did it express concern over the terrible psychological damage to, and impoverishment of, Jewish children expelled from Gaza.


Israel reopened a crossing from the P.A. in Judea-Samaria to Israel, closed because of its use by terrorists. The government accompanied its concession with a threat to close it again, if terrorists use it again. The purpose was to ease the Arabs' lives (IMRA, 11/9). The US keeps demanding this despite (or because of?) Israeli casualties

The pattern is: Arabs come in and bomb, Israel closes entrance, world protests, Israel reopens entrance; Arabs come in and bomb, Israel closes entrance, world protests, Israel reopens entrance. Israel should stop easing terrorists' lives and safeguard its own people's lives. Break the pattern that terrorists exploit for murder


Israeli governments propose concessions to the Arabs without thinking them through. So said a former Deputy National Security Advisor. Those governments, which sneered at religious Jews for their faith, had a blind faith in appeasement. Instead of analyzing the problem and planning for contingencies, the officials assured the public that withdrawal brings peace and even if it didn't, the Army would re-enter and win.

Israel withdrew from Lebanon and Gaza, and got war in return. Then the government no longer thought it could send the IDF in, in strength. Concessions are counter-productive.

Nevertheless, the Olmert regime, widely condemned in Israel for foolishness, continues to propose concessions. One is to help Abbas set up still another police force. (Remember when the big, but useless reform was to consolidate the P.A. police forces?) He'd let in thousands more assault rifles (after previous allotments were turned on Israelis). He might have Israel withdraw from most of Judea-Samaria, without even getting promises of security (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 11/9, 11/10).

Olmert deludes himself into believing that Israel won in Lebanon and has regained its deterrent effect upon Hizbullah. He quotes Hizbullah's leader as regretting having attacked Israel because it responded so powerfully. But Nasrallah meant that he would have waited for when Iran needed his intervention more badly. He is undaunted. He became the Arab national hero. Hizbullah is rearming under UNIFIL and Lebanese protection for another round of warfare. How could Olmert have regained Israel's deterrent by displaying an IDF poorly trained, equipped, and led?.


Jewish residents of Jaffa report "physical and verbal violence, repeated property damage, harassment of Jewish women and girls, anti-Jewish slogans and Nazi swastikas" and illegal construction by the Arabs.

"The extent of the Arab intimidation and takeover in mixed Jewish-Arab cities was discovered to be much greater than originally thought. In cities such as Haifa, Carmiel, Nahariya, Lod, Ramleh and Be'er Sheva, a pattern of Arab population shifts has emerged over time. At first, several Arabs purchase homes in a Jewish neighborhood, and use physical and verbal violence to cause a Jewish exodus from the area. Those neighborhoods emptied of Jews then become centers of crime, drugs and prostitution."

Some MKs suggested that the Arabs motives are irredentist and anti-Jewish. In confirmation, Sheikh Raed Salah, head of the Islamic Movement in Israel, "...addressing thousands of Israeli Arabs at a rally in Nazareth...said, "History has proven to us, for hundreds of years, that the occupier is destroyed and we remain on our land. And you, oh Israeli occupier - disappear!"

Israel was accused of having expelled hundreds of thousands of Arabs who tried to stifle Jewish sovereignty in 1947. It didn't, but should have. Now a political party interested in doing so gets called extremist by other Israelis, whom its policy would protect from the growing civil war.

Such name-calling against patriots emboldens Israeli Arabs. So do appeasement-minded policies of "affirmative action," a Far Leftist Supreme Court that forbids Jewish cities from barring Arab house purchases, leftists in universities, New Israel Fund financing of the Arabs, etc..


Israeli Arabs imperil Israel's future, admits commentator Hillel Halkin. What to do about it? Israeli Cabinet member Avigdor Lieberman proposes trading Arab cities in Israel for land in Judea-Samaria and pressing the rest of Israeli Arabs to emigrate. Mr. Halkin calls that impractical and unprincipled. He argues that it is impractical because it won't work. It is unprincipled because it inflames ethnic tensions.

Halkin suggests raising Arab educational and living standards, to gain their allegiance and reduce their birthrate (NY Sun, 11/7, Op.-Ed.).

I think Halkin's proposal is impractical and unprincipled. First, there is no evidence of such a program being workable, whereas population exchange has worked, though it now is not politically correct. Damn political correctness, full speed ahead! Second, it is impractical, because it would consume tremendous resources. Arabs, whose culture, which appeasement-minded people such as Halkin fail to take into account, always make more demands. They accept concessions as based on fear of them, and would inflame religious tension to ratchet up that fear and gain more concessions. They probably would find they can afford more children. Halkin has no plan to reform Arab culture and religion, the cause of the tensions. Hence his proposal is vapid.

Such a program assumes that Arabs are motivated by economics and that prosperity reduces their unrest. Experience has shown that the Muslim Arabs are motivated primarily by religion, a religion of violent conflict, and that prosperity increases their participation in violence. Appeasement-minded people have yet to understand the religious root of the conflict, although we are in a global jihad.

Foreign Arabs would tell Israeli ones they are traitors if they don't persist. How can the locals not help hearing radical, foreign, Arab broadcasts? What about the radical imams Israel let into the country? Halkin did not suggest turning them back.

The feed-em-better theory is unprincipled, because it relinquishes Jewish sovereignty. As antisemitism rises again, foreign Jews may need sanctuary in Israel. But Israeli Arabs would demand, as part of a bi-national country, the right of Arabs to immigrate. The Muslims would come to dominate. Muslims usually persecute minorities.

Why is Lieberman's proposal impractical. Halkin's reply, that it won't work, is no answer, offers no evidence, merely restates the objection in a synonym. Calling it unprincipled for inflaming ethnic tensions is like calling self-defense unprincipled for inflaming ethnic tensions. Tensions already are inflamed, because the Arabs violate many laws and threaten riots if the laws are enforced. Imams and Arab Muslim politicians preach intolerance. Leftist social science professors take the Arabs' side in much of this. Israelis need more Jewish pride and self-confidence.

I think Lieberman's proposal unprincipled, because it gives up some Jewish patrimony in Israel and Judea-Samaria. This assumes that the Jews owe any territory to the Arabs. The Jewish people don't. For their many attacks, the Arabs owe the Jews plenty.

All over the world, Muslims are trying to dominate other peoples. It is unwise to permit them to stay in one's countries. It means strife, fundraising for terrorism, etc..


The recent election turned partly on who got the US into a mess in Iraq and was our leadership stupid. "Stupid" is not defined.

Those who call a particular leader stupid usually think of intelligence as a single facility. Actually, there are several facets to intelligence. Some leaders are clever at short-term politics and certain maneuvering, but foolish about letting venality or prejudice sway their long-term policies that harm the country.

Pres. Clinton had eight years of Islamic attacks to develop a policy against them. He didn't. He hardly responded to the attacks, and he shrank our military forces. He pressed Israel to appease the Islamists. Clinton accepted campaign contributions from China, and let China get US rocket and nuclear technology, which is traitorous.

Pres. Bush was not in office long, before the US was attacked. He did respond. But he made mistakes in doing so. He has had six years, but failed to rebuild the armed forces to handle multiple fronts. He didn't ask for the money, but approved tremendous, unneeded subsidies and tacked a tremendous financial burden upon struggling Medicare in the form of a drug prescription subsidy. He, too, pressed Israel to pull its punches in its defensive war. Both Presidents continued subsidizing Egypt, though it never was reliable and is turning Islamist.

Clinton failed to perceive the global jihad, and Bush failed to rally the country against it. Both in my opinion are stupid.


Israel endorses the Quartet demand that the Hamas regime agree to recognize Israel and agree to promise not to make war on it. Then they would aid the P.A..

That is like telling a serial killer he would be released if he agrees not to do it again.


Pres. Bush and PM Olmert met and declared that sanctions should be levied against Iran and that the "international community" should stop Iranian development of nuclear weapons. In other words, nobody is going to stop Iran. Will my city be blown up first, Pres. Bush's, or PM Olmert's?

What "international community?" The fifty members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference? China? Russia? France? None of them want sanctions, most of them deal with Iran, and all of them dislike the US and Israel. If the UNO can't get itself to levy stiff sanctions, how can one expect it to exert force?

The US must exert leadership, take action, and hope others follow it. To be world policeman, however, requires resources. The US should husband its resources.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Dvid Meir-Levi, November 29, 2006.

A columnist from the Toronto Sun hits the nail on the head, both for the USA and for Israel. Peter Worthington wrote this and it appeared November 26, 2006 in the Toronto Sun

Want to know why we (meaning the West) won't win the war on terror?

Look at Israel, arguably the toughest, least compromising of the democracies when it comes to combating terrorism. It has been fighting terrorism from the day it became a sovereign state, thanks to the UN.

Yet Israel, after failing to win the brief war with Hezbollah, is back to having to defend itself against rockets from Gaza, where Hamas rules when it isn't feuding with the Palestinian Authority.

The other day, after a rocket attack, Israel announced it was attacking the home of a suspected terrorist leader where explosives were stored. It gave the occupants 30 minutes warning to evacuate before war planes obliterated the house.

So what did the residents do? Well, not only did they not evacuate, but neighbours formed a human shield at the targeted house and, guess what?

The Israeli war planes were called off. So now, every time the Israelis give the 30-minute warning which, apparently, is policy, the "human shields" of women and children head for the targeted house, secure in the knowledge that the Israelis won't attack.

This is madness -- no way to fight a war, or terrorists. And this is Israel -- the toughest democracy on the block. And yet Israel hasn't even gotten its kidnapped soldiers back from Hamas and Hezbollah, which provoked Israeli retaliation.

American, British, Canadian and NATO soldiers are even more restrained.

When the Americans had (or thought they had) insurgents in Iraq, mostly confined in Fallujah, a hotbed of enemy activity, rather than obliterate it (as they would have done in WWII) they gave a week's warning for civilians to depart before they attacked.


When the assault eventually went in, the bad guys were mostly gone -- dispersed to other areas to continue their slaughter of the innocent.

War cannot easily be waged peacefully. Restraints often mean prolonging the war and increasing its casualties.

Today, humane considerations are paramount. The symbol of peaceful protest is Mahatma Gandhi, the creator of passive resistance that anti-military activists like to cite as a way to thwart authority. Often overlooked, is that Gandhi's formula worked against the British. If he and his followers had lain down in front of Cossacks, the Wehrmacht or the Golden Horde of Genghis Khan, Gandhi would have become an asterisk of history rather than an icon.

A report out of Britain recalls that when American forces first went into Afghanistan, the first Taliban they caught were terrified --apparently convinced by their indoctrination that the American monsters would rip their livers out. Consequently, captives babbled like brooks and told all they knew.

Then they discovered that American soldiers feed you and generally abide by certain rules and ethics unknown to Taliban and al-Qaida.

Thereafter they shut up with no repercussions.

Remember the U.S. bombing of Baghdad prior to the 2003 invasion? Peace activists from the West pompously announced they'd be human shields around prospective targets.

Once the bombing started, these people fled -- outraged that the Americans could be so inhumane, even though none were targeted.


As for Israel, if its government is nuts enough to give warnings of attacks, then it deserves what happens. The next warning should be that if human shields remain, they will quickly become ex-human shields.

One attack should be sufficient to persuade Palestinian human shields to take cover.

It's idiotic to give warning of an attack. Hezbollah and Hamas don't warn intended targets of rocket attacks and suicide bombings.

America lost the Vietnam War because it refused to do what was necessary to win -- a political decision that cost unnecessary lives on both sides, and achieved nothing.

Is that the future of Iraq? It seems so.

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 David Meir-Levi, November 29, 2006.

The cease fire is a dud. 57 minutes after it began (6:00 AM Israel time on Sunday), the qassam bombardments began again with at least 9 rockets in or near Sederth, with several more a few hours later, and several more again on Monday, and again on Tuesday.

So what purpose does it serve? Why does either side agree to it if it is meaningless? Why does Isral not respond as would any state in the world in a similar situation: re-invade and crush hamas?

Benefits of the cease fire for:

I.) Hamas:

The benefits of the cease-fire for Hamas are obvious:

a. the cease fire stopped the IDF re-occupation of the Gaza Strip which the IDF was insisting upon in the Knesset. A re-invasion was imminent just 24 hours before the cease fire was agreed upon. Some serious increased IDF action in Gaza was on the Knesset agenda, and would have been a real threat to the continued existence of Hamas as an effective terror group. So, the cease fire came just in time to save Hamas.

b. As Hamas leaders have said (per my and Widlanski's reports below) that the cease fire is perfect; because it gives Hamas time to recuperate (and reload, re-arm, redeploy) and be in a beetter position to re-start the terror war at a time of its choosing. Indirectly, this tells us that Hamas needed time to recuperate -- i.e., the IDF was winning, was inflicting unsustainable damage on Hamas, and the cease fire saved Hamas from more such damage; and thus enabled it to regroup and recuperate to better fight the next round.

c. By portraying the cease fire as a great victory for Hamas, and as a sign of weakness in israel, Hamas gains great PR advantage among its own, and its supporters everywhere. And this advantage means more money and more recruits. Just as Hamas terrorism forced Israel out of Gaza, so too now Hamas terrorism forced Israel to beg for respite, to seek some time-out from Hamas' powerful terror attacks. hamas is the victor here.

d. By playing the good-cop/bad-cop game, Hamas can reap advantage from its supporters in the EU, UK, USA and UN. In the 'old days", Arafat was the good cop and Hamas was the bad one: Arafat gained plausible deniability with Cliinton for years by pretending that he wanted peace, wanted to stop the terrorism, but could not control the Hamas "hotheads".

Now, Hamas is the good cop and Islamic Jihad (and the Resistance Committees and the dozen or so other terror groups in the Gaza Strip and West Bank) is the bad cop. Now it is, supposedly, Islamic Jihad that is causing the qassam attacks contrary to the input from Abbas and Haniyeh -- and poor Mr Abass and Mr Haniyeh are struggling to control their hot-headed terror sub-groups.

By playing the good cop, Hamas can add weight to the Abbas request for lifting the embargo and getting billions of dollars from the West.

Arafat had a great trick: one of his sub-groups, with a different name, would start a terror attack or take hostages etc....and Arafat would volunteer to come in and mediate a settlement. From Carter to Clinton, world leaders bought the charade. Arafat could look like he was a peace-maker, while pulling the strings of terrorism behiind the scenes. Now Hamas is doing the same thing. It still works.

II. Olmert

The benefits for Olmert are less obvious: and note well, they are for Olmert, not for Israel.

a. Even if the qassam attacks continue but with less intensity and frequency, Olmert can claim that he has done something that helps Israel and Sederoth and the 44 other communities in the region that have come under qassam attacks. This may help his polls, and delay (not avert, not resolve, just delay) the crisis that the Hamas-led terrorism from Gaza Strip creates.

b. Olmert disappointed Bush and incurred Bush's wrath with the Lebanon failure. Now he has a chance to make up for his earlier failure. The cease-fire is important political capital for Bush and Rice. (see below 'III'), and Olmert gains brownie points with the USA leadership by stoically keeping the IDF restrained and "giving peace a chance". It is all a charade, they all know that hamas is intransigent and will use the cease fire as it has already told the world that it will (see below, my article and Widlanski's); but the pretense justifies Olmert's political kowtowing to Bush.

III. President Bush and Secretary Rice

a. Bush is about to meet with King Abdullah II of Jordan, in Amman. There he will meet with President Maliki of Iraq. The odds of success (in Bush's terms) for these meetings are very slim. At least a little quiet from the Israel-Arab side will help improve these odds. Abdullah has made it clear that a resolution to the Arab-Israel conflict is a sine qua non for progress toward peace in the middle east as a whole, and in iraq in particular. The fact that such an assertion is completely irrational is irrelevant. This assertion is a cornerstone of Arab propaganda (useful against both the USA and Israel) and the articles written to rebut it have never taken hold in the echelons of power in the west. Thus, Bush gains political capital and clout if there is at least a veneer of cease-fire.

b. Moreover, if Olmert does not respond to the PIJ (Palestinian Islamic Jihad) attacks, then Bush looks even better, because Bush can represent the situation as a demonstration of the hold that Bush has over Olmert/Israel/IDF. Controlling Israel, and forcing it to absorb Arab terror attacks without response, are just what Bush needs in order to look good, look like he is in charge, look like he has the power to give the Arabs what they want....all of this works to increase his political capital and make him appear still relevant with his enemies as well as his friends.

c. The previous forays by Bush and Rice in the Middle and Far East have been poltiical failures. In one such foray, even the little (helpless, weak, vulnerable, recently-saved-from-perdition-at-the-hands-of-Saddam-Hussein-by-American-blood-and-guts, but proud and oil-wealthy) Kuwait gave Bush the proverbial finger and sent Rice packing without any agreements or concessions as to what Bush wanted.

The only way to save face with congress (then dominated by Republicans) was to force Israel to a concession that Bush/Rice could mis-represent to Congress as 'one more small step toward peace in the Middle East" -- so Rice forced Olmert to agree to the opening of the Rafah passage between the Gaza Strip and Sinai/Egypt, and the IDF's departure from that passage; with the result that Hamas could then freely smuggle in, under the willfully blind eyes of the Egyptians, 33 tons of arms and explosives and anti-tank and anti-helicopter weaponry.....no great step toward peace; but political victory for Bush (TYVM Condi's kiniption fit at the king david hotel in jerusalem)....and, after all, what is more important? many more dead israelis or Bush's standing with congress?

So now, again facing the prospect of a hard up-hill climb for some semblence of success in the Middle East quagmire (and facing now a Democrat-controlled Congress), Bush and Rice work in advance to secure some semblence of political victory for Bush, again at Israel's expense; so that Bush can appear successful and foist some semblence of his retained relevance upon the middle east leaders with whom he is meeting and from whom he hopes to extract some cooperation in the Iraq war.

Olmert goes along, because he has no choice. Without American support, Israel would have a harder time now than it had in the early days of the Yom Kippur war. Where is Alexander Haig when we need him?

Bottom Line:

Netanyahu is right. Today is 1938, Akhmedi-Nejad is hitler, the Arab terrorist world is Germany, Hezbollah and Hamas are the Wehrmacht, Israel is Czekoslovakia, Bush is Chamberlain, and Amman is Munich.

As Yogi Berra was wont to say: it's deja vu all over again.

This article is called "Palestinian-Israeli "Ceasefire" Already A Dud" by Michael Widlanski. It appeared November 27, 2006 on Front Page Magazine
(www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=25672). My comments are inside square brackets.

Israel and the Palestinian Authority began a "ceasefire" Sunday morning that was highly unusual in several ways:

  • The Hamas terror organization promised immediately that it would use the respite to continue weapons smuggling and rocket manufacture in Gaza;

  • The Israeli army command, which was kept in the dark about the negotiations, is angry at the agreement which it feels will fail -- an agreement handled personally by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas;
  • Minutes after the "ceasefire" went into effect Sunday morning, ten Qassam rockets hit towns in Israel, destroying a home in Sderot which the family had evacuated earlier.

"We will show restraint," declared Prime Minister Olmert in an appearance before Mif'al Ha-Payis, the government-run gambling concession, apparently unaware of the irony.

"This is going to turn into another Lebanon," several Israeli officers told Israeli Channel Two, and other media outlets here reported widespread consternation at Prime Minister Olmert's decision.

"Didn't we learn anything from six years of leaving Hizballah alone in Lebanon?" asked another staff command officer quoted by Channel 10 television.

As if to buttress the fears of the Israeli Army (IDF), a spokesman for Hamas racketeers declared that the ceasefire was to Hamas's advantage.

"We expect a total stop to Israeli aggression against Palestinian citizens," declared Hamas spokesman Mushir Al-Masri, in anArabic language interview with this reporter and IMRA news service.

The Hamas spokesman reiterated several times that the ceasefire (would not) include the cessation of Qassam rocket construction and the massive smuggling of weapons and explosives into Gaza.

More than 1,000 rockets -- with a range of six to 13 kilometers -- have struck Israeli towns and kibbutz farms in the last year, murdering several Israelis in the last month and wounding scores of others. [David Meir-Levi: over the past 5 years of random but almost daily qassam rocket attacks, 45 Israeli towns and farming communities have been terrorized, there have been almost 4000 qassams fired on these communities, 36 Israelis have been killed, hundreds wounded, hundreds more hospitalized for shock, and hundreds of millions of dollars in property damaged. Qassam rockets have twice fallen upon schools with direct hits on classrooms; and only miraculously were the classrooms empty at the time. Hamas declared before the cease fire that it would continue the qassam attacks until Sederoth became a ghost-town and would stop the attacks only when every Jew had left Sederoth].

Israel's counter-terror authorities say that more than 33 tons of explosives have been smuggled into Gaza from Egyptian-controlled Sinai in the last year since Israel evacuated Gaza, evicting almost 9,000 of its own citizens from advanced agricultural settlements there.

The perceived failure of the Gaza withdrawal to produce peace, as well as the perceived strategic failure in recent combat in Lebanon, has left the Olmert Government looking desperately for ways to combat its own (drop in) popularity.

For the last two months most of the public polls show less than 20-percent approval for Olmert and his defense minister Amir Peretz, while huge majorities favor the resignation of both men, along with IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz. [Meir-Levi: and support for Netanyahu is rising.]

Olmert, Peretz and Halutz have each tried to delay investigations of the Lebanon fighting, hoping that public disapproval will fade.

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 Hillel Fendel, November 29, 2006.

The Land of Israel Legal Forum has sued in the Supreme Court on behalf of a young father - one of 20 Yesha residents banned from their their homes and jobs without being told why.

Eran S. and his wife, parents to a five-month-old daughter, have been forced to leave their home in the Lehava neighborhood of Yitzhar in the Shomron and move to Jerusalem. The reason: Eran, together with nearly 20 other young residents of the Shomron, suddenly received a military order several weeks ago preventing him from living in his home. No reason was given, and the General Security Service says the "evidence" against him is too secret and potentially dangerous to be publicized to anyone.

The Land of Israel Forum claims in its Supreme Court suit that the order, "which restricts the freedom of an Israeli citizen as an administrative measure," is illegal in that it may be handed down only by virtue of a Knesset law - and not by order of the IDF Commander of the Central District.

The orders are in fact signed by O.C. Central Commander Maj.-Gen. Ya'ir Naveh.

The Forum claims that "whenever the government finds itself in a dead end security-wise, diplomatically and/or internationally," the Jewish settlers of Judea and Samaria become the national "punching bag" and bear the brunt of "new, sudden plans to evacuate and destroy outposts and issue exaggeratedly-restrictive orders."

Banned From Home

Over the past few months, 20 activist Jews from various outpost neighborhoods in Judea and Samaria have received orders keeping them out of the entire region. The orders are for between three and six months. Some of the men have families with up to five children, and some have no relatives outside Yesha.

The expelled residents and many of their neighbors feel that the government is merely trying to pave the way for the destruction of the outposts and neighborhoods in which they live, and weaken the local morale in general.

Among them are:

* Ariel Gruner, 21, married + 1, whose orders kept him bound to a house in an unfamiliar, secular Jordan Valley community were to expire next week. He has already received his new orders: a three-month ban on entering Judea and Samaria.

* Meir Bertler, whose wife is expecting their second child any day, who was distanced for a half-year from his home in the Bayit HaAdom (Red House) near Shilo.

* Boaz Albert of Hilltop 725 in Yitzhar, married with five children, who was distanced from his home for a full year.

* Yehoyariv Meguri of the young Ronen neighborhood in Brachah, married with one child, distanced for a full year and currently forced to live in the north.

One of the youngest of the 20 is Elad Keller, aged 19, who has been in prison for six weeks - because he refuses to agree to what he calls the "unjust and undemocratic" orders to throw him out of his home and yeshiva. A resident of Maon, with his parents, in southern Judea, and a student in the Yitzhar yeshiva in Samaria, he has refused to sign the orders keeping him away from both places - and has therefore been placed in jail "until the end of the proceedings" against him.

Elad was violently arrested - receiving bruises on his neck and above his eye - and thrown into jail in mid-October.

As Elad explained in court at the time, "A group of policemen came into my house one morning suddenly, telling me I have to leave Yesha. I asked why, and they said, 'Because.'"

Elad's mother Ruth said, "An injustice has clearly been done, and we support our son in whatever decision he makes. He could, if he want, simply sign the orders and agree to stay out of Yesha - but he refuses to cooperate with such injustice." She and her husband Ben-Tzion and several other parents of sons in similar situations have gotten together and are working on various fronts to bring the issue to the public consciousness.

"Knesset Members from several parties have gotten together," Ruth said, "with each one 'adopting' one of our sons. MK Aryeh Eldad (National Union), for instance, has adopted our son, and he visited Elad in jail, for which we are very appreciative."

Recently, then-Acting Justice Minister Meir Sheetrit promised, as did Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh, to personally look into all the cases. They made the promises in a Knesset session on the matter initiated by MK Uri Ariel. However, an aide to Ariel told Arutz-7 today that no results of any such reviews have yet been received from them.

The aide said that MK Ariel is now preparing legislation that would ban such orders from being signed by IDF generals, and would require them to be issued only by the Defense Minister.

Maj.-Gen. Naveh, who signed the distancing orders and can rescind them, can be faxed at 08-8680240; from abroad, the number is (+972)-8868-0240.

Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Israel National News.

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Freund, November 29, 2006.

As the drums of appeasement vis-a-vis Iran continue to beat ever louder, the current situation in which the West now finds itself is coming to resemble May 1940, when Winston Churchill had to choose between diplomacy or military action in the face of a surging Nazi onslaught. The choice made by Churchill was a fateful one, and it might just have saved Western civilization.

The question now is: will George W. Bush follow in Churchill's footsteps and hit Iran hard?

Below is an article of mine from today's Jerusalem Post in which I argue that for the sake of Israel and the West, it is critical that President Bush follow the path laid down by Churchill more than six decades ago. It is archived at
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid= 1162378505302&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

Comments and feedback may be sent to: letters@jpost.com or to me directly.

He was labeled a "hound," a "fool" and one whose "judgment is always at fault." Denigrated as "hopeless when in power," this wartime head of government was scorned as being arrogant, ignorant and just about everything else in between.

His strategic judgment was called into question, his military approach was belittled and maligned, and his own generals even mocked him, accusing him of spouting "absurdities" and being oblivious to detail.

Does any of this sound familiar, Mr. Bush?

The subject of the vitriol described above was none other than the fearless lion of Britain, Sir Winston Churchill. That's right. The man now credited with saving Western civilization from the Nazi onslaught was the target of ruthless censure and disapproval.

His critics were fierce and unrelenting, but that did not stop this great visionary from seeing beyond the headlines and standing up for what he knew to be right.

The question now is: Will George W. Bush follow in this great man's footsteps? The threat facing the Western world is no less urgent or grave than it was in Churchill's day. Then the Nazi leader spoke openly of murdering the Jews, and of conquering the world. Now the modern-day Hitler of Persia vows to commit genocide and boasts that the West will soon falter and collapse.

The only difference between the two is that while the Fuehrer could merely dream of obtaining an atomic arsenal, the tyrant of Teheran is dangerously close to getting one.

And the only person standing in his way, the one whom God Himself has given the ability to stop him, is none other than the president of the United States.

Without realizing it, we are standing at a defining moment not just for the Bush presidency, but for the future of the entire Jewish people and the Western world itself.

Enormous pressure is being brought to bear on the president to embrace diplomacy as the means for resolving the various crises in the Middle East. In recent months, the president has come under harsh criticism for the conduct of the war in Iraq. The results of the midterm elections earlier this month gave control over both houses of Congress to the Democrats, who will surely push for a more conciliatory approach.

And as The New York Times reported on Monday, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group headed by former US secretary of state James Baker will recommend that Washington engage rogue states such as Iran and Syria and open a dialogue with them. In other words, it is sounding more and more like 1940 all over again.

WHEN WINSTON Churchill took office in May of that year, an emboldened Germany was on the march and the pressure to appease the Nazi dictator was at its peak. The British Foreign Secretary, Lord Halifax, was a firm believer in negotiations, and he wanted nothing more than to reach an understanding with Hitler, in the hope that such a deal would hold.

But Churchill knew that the time for diplomacy had passed. He understood that the Nazis would honor an accord only for as long as it might serve their interests, and that they would not hesitate to break it in order to achieve their destructive, long-term goals.

And so, virtually alone in his belief, Churchill pressed forward, convinced that only by confronting the Nazis could the danger to his country, and the world, be averted once and for all.

At a time when others were busy closing their eyes to the mounting threat, Churchill bravely sounded the alarm and refused to back down, setting the stage not for appeasement, but for victory. It is this approach, and this approach alone, that should guide the US president in the weeks and months ahead. Diplomacy has failed, and sanctions will not deter Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from pursuing his aims. Military force is the only way to prevent the ayatollahs from joining the nuclear club, and time is running out if they are to be stopped.

THE SO-CALLED experts and realists are dead wrong when they predict that military action against Iran would kindle a firestorm throughout the Middle East. Precisely the opposite is true.

The reverberations of putting Iran in its place would be entirely positive, and would be felt throughout the region.

Right now the radicals are emboldened because they sense that America is weak and in retreat. Hence, they feel free to make mischief and continue destabilizing the area.

As a result, Syria did not hesitate to orchestrate the murder last week of the Lebanese industry minister, Pierre Gemayel, and Iran is not shying away from its ongoing pursuit of nuclear weapons.

And all this talk of talking with the bad guys has only served to encourage them still further.

What is needed now is decisive action, and fast, to slap them down and put the radicals back in their place.

A massive American air assault on Iranian nuclear installations would do just the trick. It would not only set back Teheran's atomic ambitions for years to come, but also serve as a resounding display of US will and resolve.

A strike on Iran would amount to a reversal of the Shi'ite surge that is now taking place throughout the region. It would take the wind out of the Iranian leader's apocalyptic sails, and it would have a noticeable impact on the sectarian violence now raging in Iraq, too.

Syria, Hizbullah and others would take notice, and America's ostensible Arab allies - all of whom are Sunni - would certainly welcome a blow against the dangerous Iranian regime. Stopping Iran in its tracks is the great challenge of our day. For the sake of the entire Western world, and the future of the Jewish people, we can only hope and pray that President Bush will rise to the occasion and do what needs to be done.

"Had Britain stopped fighting in May 1940, Hitler would have won his war," wrote historian John Lukacs in Five Days in London. "He was never closer to victory." The same now holds true of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who may be just months, or even weeks away from crossing the nuclear point of no return.It was Churchill himself who once said, "I never worry about action, only inaction." As a result, he led his nation and the civilized world to victory.

Mr. President, may that now become your motto too.

Michael Freund is a Jerusalem Post columnist who serves as Chairman of Shavei Israel, the organization responsible for helping the Bnei Menashe.

To Go To Top

Posted by Helen Freedman , November 29, 2006.

It is expected that the 10 person panel that makes up the Baker-Hamilton Commission will recommend that the administration pressure Israel to make concessions in an effort to entice the Syrians and Iranian to cooperate. They are in effect calling for Israel to become today's Sudetenland.

It was 1938 when Eduard Benes, the President of Czechoslovakia, much against his will, was pressured into giving the Sudetenland to Hitler, as a sop to his war-like plans. Neville Chamberlain, PM of Britain and Edouard Daladier, PM of France, joined forces with Hitler against Czechoslavakia in exchange for "guarantees of Czechoslovakia's integrity." Chamberlain returned to England declaring he had achieved "peace in our time."

We know that "peace" led to the death of twelve million souls, as well as the incalculable suffering of those who survived during the horrific battle that was WWII.

Santayana tells us that "he who forgets history is doomed to repeat it." Must we follow the leaders who have personal agendas that are entirely unrelated to the welfare of the good people of the world? If Israel becomes the sacrificial lamb to the lusts of the terrorist nations of the Middle East, including Iran and Syria, Europe and America will be next on the chopping block. These are indeed dangerous times. Attention must be paid.

Helen Freedman is with Americans for a Safe Israel (AFSI) in New York City. Contact her at ghfree@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Kushner, November 28, 2006.

I devote my posting to the broad issue of Gaza, Hamas, and the "ceasefire." At the moment nothing is more relevant to Israel's security and right to exist. What is going on is horrifying to everyone who thinks clearly on the matter.

Yesterday I wrote about the complaint of the terrorists that they wanted the ceasefire extended to Judea-Samaria -- and I explained how important IDF actions in that area were.

By last night, the news broke that "confidants" of Olmert and Abbas were in "constant contact" trying to find a way to extend the "ceasefire" to the West Bank. At that point one could only shudder and ask an anguished "Why?" Why is Olmert eager to do this? Why would he want to give this to the Palestinians? In return for what? They had already breached the "ceasefire" and there was no evidence that they had stopped or diminished smuggling of weapons. He wasn't even making a demand: show us your good faith in Gaza and then we'll see.

There are multiple possible answers to this, not mutually exclusive. None of them are good, none of them working for the best interests of the State of Israel:

*Olmert has been eager to give away our land since he came into office. He was hoping to do it unilaterally, following the model of what was done in Gaza. But the Lebanon war made that policy unpopular. The alternative, then, is to find a way to negotiate the giveaway. Olmert has repeatedly said that the "ceasefire" is a first step that can lead to negotiations.

*Olmert has no stomach for military actions and actually holds back when advised by the IDF that strength of action is needed. His reluctance to send in ground troops interfered with victory in Lebanon, and he has not allowed the IDF to do the major operation in Gaza that it has recommended as being necessary. If there is a "ceasefire" Olmert won't have to contend with this.

*Olmert hopes to gain political points by deluding the nation into thinking that the risks can be decreased and he is leading us to a safer time.

*Olmert feels the need to/wants to make the Bush administration happy. This ceasefire -- and its subsequent promise of "negotiations for peace" -- is in line with current US political needs. Bush praised the "ceasefire." And, not incidentally, Bush is due in the Middle East soon. The president's goal now is to extricate himself from Iraq with as much grace as possible (if at all grace is possible in this situation). To this end he is seeking the cooperation of certain "moderate" Arab states, who claim to put a premium on "resolving the Palestinian problem." Never mind that they all hate the Palestinians. Whether Bush is prepared to totally sacrifice our needs and rights for his ends, or would be content with a semblance of "rapprochement" between us and the Palestinians, it is difficult to say.

As to the view of what Hamas aims to do and how this terrorist group will handle itself, there are different takes. There are those who believe that Hamas intends to hold its fire long enough to secure land concessions from Israel. As I've explained innumerable times by now -- this would be in the nature of a hudna -- with Hamas strengthening all the while in preparation for hitting us when the time was right. Those who embrace this point of view believe that Hamas is prepared to arrange a modus vivendi with Israel, lending the impression that it is recognizing Israel de-facto while actually not doing so, securing land without resolving final status issues.

Others -- and I among them -- believe that Hamas is too "in your face" to carry this off and that an eruption of violence is more likely.

Either way, what Olmert is currently doing counts as a victory for Hamas. As MK Yuval Steinitz (Likud) former head of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee wrote in today's Post (emphasis added):

"A diplomatic initiative with the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority -- even if it ultimately crashes on the rocks of terrorism and the demand to destroy Israel by means of the right of return -- will leave in its wake a fundamental difference: a de facto recognition by Israel, and therefore a de jure recognition by the world, of Hamas as a partner in the international circle without that group having made any significant and permanent change in its platform or tactics."

All of this is the stuff of nightmares, a series of occurrences that I would have never thought possible. That the Western world is ultimately without principles is clear. But it is not even conducting itself in a way that is prudent from a self-protective perspective. Having a strengthened Hamas is ultimately not in the interests of Israel or the West or the so-called "moderate" Arab nations.

Yet, Olmert and Bush are signing on to something that promotes this. How perverse, how self-destructive is it possible to get?

Since yesterday other things have occurred. There have been further violations of the "ceasefire," as two Kassams were shot into Sderot. I asked yesterday how many violations will be too many for Israel. This applies all the more so now. A repeated insistence by Olmert that we have forbearance raises a host of suspicions as to his motivations. Not to mention that he makes us appear to our enemies as weak idiots, and therefore greatly vulnerable.

Additionally, this morning IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that the IDF had played only a "partial role" in the decision to participate in a "ceasefire." In other words, the IDF, seeing the "ceasefire" as not in Israel's best interests, was opposed. Halutz made it clear that in spite of attempts by the Palestinians to equate the situation in Gaza and Judea-Samaria, the IDF needed to maintain its freedom to operate in the West Bank. The Southern Command of the IDF had already warned yesterday that terrorism would increase if the "ceasefire" were extended: "The moment we walk away terror will flourish," a senior official warned.

We here in Israel have our work cut out for us. That is for certain.

But now I address myself to all those who are in the US. I appeal to each and every one of you, to act here to help save Israel from an horrendous situation. The bald fact is that Bush's promotion of this, his political needs, are a factor in what is taking place.

I ask each and every one of you to contact President Bush, the Secretary of State, and your own Congressperson and Senator on this matter. It must be conveyed from inside of the US that this is not acceptable.

I provide below contact information and some possible brief statements that can be used. (It is more effective if you state the case in your own words; the message can be short.)

A letter is most effective -- preferably hard copy, sent by snail mail, or else by fax. Second most effective is a phone call. An e-mail is least effective.

Then I ask each and every one of you to put this out as broadly as possible to others who are willing to do the same. If you are receiving this in Israel, by all means send to your US contacts.

This is merely a beginning. If you, in the US, are in a position to generate grassroots activity on a broader scale, please be in contact with me. We need to do this big-time.

(It should be noted, as I do this, by the way, that I am a US citizen, as well as an Israeli citizen.)

A Sample Letter

Do not pressure Israel into a ceasefire with a Hamas led PA, or into "peace negotiations."

Israel is a sovereign state that has a right to protect itself and its interests. Its security should not be sacrificed for what is perceived as the goal of garnering a coalition of moderate Arab states.

Former prime minister Sharon, in one of his finest moments, declared, "We will not be Czechoslovakia." Don't try to make Israel into Czechoslovakia now!

A "ceasefire" and subsequent negotiations give only a false illusion of gains for peace. As long as Hamas does not surrender its weapons and its intent to destroy Israel, what is simply happening is that the war is being delayed -- a war that will be worse because Hamas will have been given time to strengthen.

A strong Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank serves US goals badly, as it will act to destabilize the region and become a headquarters for training and equipping terrorists.

President Bush set forth a very important and principled policy of fighting terrorism. Giving international credence to Hamas undermines this policy. Any "peace process" that involves negotiations with a Hamas-majority PA gives it credence.

Pushing Israel to deal with Hamas is a betrayal of President Bush's policy of fighting terrorism -- Israel has a right and obligation to battle terrorism at its borders and should not be expected to appease it.

Send to:

President Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
Phone: 202-456-1111
Fax: (202) 456 2461
Fax: (202) 456-2883

Sec. of State Rice
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
(202) 647 5291
Fax: (202) 647-6434
Fax: (202) 647-1533

To secure contact info. for Congresspersons and Senators:

Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il or visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info

To Go To Top

Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, November 28, 2006.
Eliot Lauer and Jacques Semmelman

In Ronald Olive's op-ed piece, "I busted Pollard" (Nov. 20), Olive promotes his book, "Capturing Jonathan Pollard: How One of the Most Notorious Spies in American History Was Brought to Justice." Olive proclaims that his book "tells the true documented story of Pollard," "set[s] the record straight," and dispels "speculation, rumor, myths and lies surrounding the Pollard case."

As pro bono counsel for Jonathan Pollard since 2000, we have comprehensive knowledge of the public court record in Mr. Pollard's case. Olive's book and op-ed piece are fanciful concoctions that are utterly incompatible with the U.S. Government's own carefully-crafted submissions to the court in Mr. Pollard's case.

Jonathan Pollard was arrested in 1985. The U.S. Government conducted an overwhelmingly thorough investigation into Mr. Pollard's conduct and character, and into the harm his conduct had caused. Mr. Pollard pleaded guilty in 1986 to a charge of conspiracy to deliver classified information to Israel. He was not charged with intent to harm the U.S., although such a charge existed in the U.S. Code.

On March 4, 1987, Mr. Pollard was sentenced to life in prison. Prior to his sentencing, the U.S. Government-the United States Attorney and Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger-submitted over 130 pages of pre-sentencing memoranda to the sentencing judge. Those memoranda set forth in detail what the U.S. Government claimed it had uncovered about Mr. Pollard's conduct and character, and about the harm he had caused.

Substantial portions of the memoranda were designated "classified" and were placed under seal. No one representing Mr. Pollard, including us-his security-cleared attorneys-has been permitted to see the classified portions of the docket since the sentencing in 1987.

In his book, Olive specifically disclaims ever having seen the classified sentencing materials. Yet, he makes allegations against Mr. Pollard that appear nowhere in the unclassified, public portion of the sentencing materials. Since it is fair to assume that neither Olive nor any of his purported "sources" would violate U.S. criminal law and disclose classified information, the inevitable conclusion is that these allegations do not appear anywhere in the Government's pre-sentencing memoranda.

For example, Olive claims that Mr. Pollard delivered classified information to Pakistan in the hope that Pakistan would retain him as a paid spy. Undoubtedly, Olive wants to poison the mind of the ordinary Israeli (or Israeli supporter) into believing that Mr. Pollard was a mercenary who would just as readily have spied for Pakistan (not known as a friend of Israel's) as he did for Israel.

In assessing the credibility of this allegation, it is important to know that no such allegation appears anywhere in the public record docket materials. And, since we have to assume neither Olive nor any of his "sources" would risk going to prison by disclosing something that appears in the classified docket materials, it is apparent that this allegation is not found anywhere in the U.S. Government's voluminous pre-sentencing memoranda. It therefore has no credibility whatsoever. If the U.S. Government believed this and other allegations made by Olive, it would have included them in the pre-sentencing memoranda. The U.S. Government took an extremely aggressive approach toward Mr. Pollard, and would have relished the opportunity to inform the sentencing judge that Mr. Pollard had violated the law by delivering classified information to Pakistan-and with mercenary motives, to boot.

The book and op-ed piece contain numerous accusations that are nowhere to be found in the public sentencing docket, and that could not be disclosed if they were in the classified sentencing docket. They are therefore in neither place, and cannot be considered even remotely reliable.

In his book, Olive asserts that Mr. Pollard's conduct caused "irreparable damage" and "incalculable" harm to the U.S. However, the Victim Impact Statement submitted to the court by the Department of Justice in 1987 (and now a matter of public record) portrays a very different effect on the U.S. After preliminarily noting the substantial "breadth and scope" of the information provided, as well as the fact that "thousands of pages" of documents were delivered by Mr. Pollard to Israel, the Victim Impact Statement goes on to describe the actual damage to the U.S. as follows:

Mr. Pollard's unauthorized disclosures have threatened the U.S. [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. Moreover, because Mr. Pollard provided the Israelis virtually any classified document requested by Mr. Pollard's coconspirators, the U.S. 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 largesse is that U.S. bargaining leverage with the Israeli government in any further intelligence exchanges has been undermined. In short, Mr. Pollard's activities have adversely affected U.S. relations with both its Middle East Arab allies and the government of Israel.

While we cannot condone any unauthorized disclosure of classified information, the Government's own words in the Victim Impact Statement, carefully scripted to present the most compelling case for the maximum sentence (life in prison), reflect-at worst-short-term friction between the U.S. and unnamed Arab countries, and temporary reductionEliot Lauer and Jacques Semmelman in bargaining leverage by the U.S., rather than permanent, irreversible, and overwhelming damage to U.S. national security, as claimed by Olive. Nowhere does Olive see fit even to mention the comparatively modest damage described in the Victim Impact Statement, which is how the U.S. Government itself has chosen to describe the harm caused by Mr. Pollard's conduct, in the court document designed precisely for that purpose.

In sum, while Olive describes his book as a "true documented story," it is nothing of the sort. To use Olive's own words, his book is an exercise in "speculation, rumor, myths and lies."

Contact the Justice for Jonathan Pollard organization at Justice4JP@aol.com or freepollard@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by The Reality Show, November 28, 2006.

Re: Arabist Carter hateful anti Israel book "Palestine peace not apartheid".

Why don't we all call apartheid when it's really apartheid, racism where it is real racism and ethnic cleansing at it's actual happening?

What would you call Arabs' forcing Israel to "clear" Gaza of Jews = i.e. non-Arabs? If this is not ethnic cleansing, What is?

How will Hamas Islamic militant agenda be exempt from the usual "Islamic apartheid"?

Especially at their long war on Christians like pogroms in Bethlehem, massacring Christians in Damour, killing Christians at the Pope's comment (2006), chasing out YMCA, and other incidents as part of chasing out the Arab Christians from the holyland.

Why can Israeli Arabs be equal part of Israel's beautiful democracy but no Jews alowed into "Judenrein - Palestine"? Is that not far worse than mere: "apartheid"?

What would you call "Palestinian" Arab racist war on Jews, by their masses (no, not a fringe minority) shouting "Itbach-Al-Yahood" slogan to "kill the Jews", the slogan that Genocide bombers use, or Arab killers of Jews in any other form, to "drive all the Jews into the sea"?

If that is not racism, What is?

When their war since the 1920's is actually about Arab racism on non Arabs and Islamofascism on non Muslims, i.e. Israeli Jews.

Or "Palestinian" racism against blacks like cartoons against blacks as monkeys (cartoon on C. Rice, 2006)?

Contact the poster at thereality show@mail.com or go to the website:

To Go To Top

Posted by Daryl Temkin, November 28, 2006.

Saturday night's news was a sudden surprise. Without any reported initial meetings, seemingly out of nowhere, a ceasefire was announced -- not only between Israel and Hamas but with an agreement among all the different terrorist organizations. This sounded unreal. For over five years, Israel's southern cities have been the victims of Gazan launched, indiscriminately directed, Kessam missiles. In the past few weeks, within a short number of hours, twenty to as many as one hundred missiles have been launched mainly targeting the city of Sderot. Its residents reported that the situation was unbearable.

Sderot nursery schools, elementary and high schools, residences as well as factory sites have virtually no anti-missile protection. Only a 5 to 20 second warning signal allows the Sderot residents to run for cover. Traumatized children and adults have had to leave the city to seek shelter and protection.

The Russian philanthropist, Arcadi Gaydamak, upon hearing of this plight, paid for transporting hundreds of Sderot children to Eilat for an "emotional sanctuary", far out of the range of the Gazan rockets. In spite of sharp criticism by high ranking Israeli governmental officials, Arcadi Gaydamak has become Israel's modern folk hero. Gaydamak's offense was that he took action to help people in need instead of waiting for the government to act.

At the same time, the first suicide bomber grandmother made her debut performance. Although short lived, she successfully exploded herself but failed to kill any Israelis. Her nine surviving children and her thirty remaining grandchildren will not enjoy the anticipated fame and financial rewards that their grandmother's illustrious performance was to amass.

The Gazan ceasefire was commenced on Sunday at 6:00 A.M. When the details of the ceasefire were being revealed, it was immediately hoped that Israel would have demanded the return of their kidnapped soldier, Gilad Shalit. This would have been an excellent opportunity to get Gilad without having to release an untold number of Arab terrorist prisoners. However, when the ceasefire details were revealed they only demanded that Israel totally withdraw from Gaza and that all the terrorist organizations stop shooting their missiles into Israel. The ceasefire included no restrictions on Gazan tunnel building or weapon smuggling from Egypt. Israel again entered into a perfect, "unilateral" ceasefire, providing no monitoring and full access for its enemy to rearm and strengthen its military weaponry and supplies.

Of further confusion is that this ceasefire was not brokered by Condoleezza Rice, President Bush, the EU, or the UN. Therefore the outside pressure factor that has existed in past agreements where Israel has often been pressured to make unusual concessions, was not the operative factor. In order for the Gazans to be interested in a ceasefire, they had to be significantly hurting from the Israeli military incursion. The Gazans know that the positive benefit of a ceasefire means an opportunity to rest and to ream.

Yes, the Israeli citizens of Sderot were in pain with the death of two of its community members and they clearly wanted the Israeli Defense Forces to aggressively stop the ease of Gazan rocket launching. A sudden ceasefire and an immediate Israeli withdrawal was likely not what the citizens of Sderot had in mind for their future protection. What is mysterious in this ceasefire arrangement is that Israel should have had the upper bargaining hand and so far there appears to be no evidence that they exercised any degree of that strength. Besides using this opportunity to demand the safe return of their kidnapped solder, they could have demanded proper monitoring of the Rafah and other border crossings where endless amounts of advanced Egyptian sourced weapons are openly driven into the Gaza Strip.

This ceasefire occurred just weeks after the failed withdrawal from Lebanon, where within days after that agreement, against all promises and so called UN commitments, new weapons began flowing to the Hezbollah army. Within days of the Lebanon ceasefire agreement, Israeli sources reported evidence of Hezbollah's rearmament and the world refused to recognize, acknowledge, or respond. This week, even Time Magazine had the confidence to publish that Hezbollah is fully rearmed. Note that this speedy rearmament took place under the "watchful" eye of UNIFIL, now famous for only working during daylight hours and displaying its fortitude by threatening to shoot down Israeli surveillance over-flights.

The Lebanese ceasefire agreement severely backfired on Israel which had immediately withdrawn all of its forces and did not receive its kidnapped soldiers, Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser, whose return was promised by the UN. The UN-monitored mockery has elevated the Hezbollah terrorist enemy to a position which threatens an impending takeover of the remaining Lebanese government as well as an impending military attack.

How will the Gaza ceasefire backfire on Israel? Only hours after the ceasefire, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered sizeable land concessions in order to appease the Arabs for a peaceful coexistence. Olmert further offered a large number of Arab terrorists imprisoned in Israel in exchange for the release of Gilad Shalit. Then, Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal announced that if within six months, Israel doesn't give over the West Bank for a Palestinian state, Hamas will launch an all out attack. It is always interesting to note the "balance" between the Israeli offers and the Arab offers.

As Gazan smuggling tunnel building will continue without restriction, as Egyptian supply lines will continue to increase the already large garrison of Gazan armaments, and as Israeli leaders offer land concessions as well as the release of radicalized terrorist prisoners, this Gazan ceasefire, will hopefully provide a time of quiet for the citizens of Sderot and the other Israeli southern cities. Hopefully, Israel will also use this ceasefire time to reinforce the walls and roofs of the many nursery schools, grade schools, residential homes and business through out Sderot, Ashkelon, and the forty some other Israeli towns within missile range of the Gaza launching pads.

Only nine missiles were launched at Sderot on the first day of the ceasefire. The IDF was commanded not to respond, in hope that the second day will be better than the first. So the IDF will patiently wait until the next "backfire" that will be too grave to tolerate.

Daryl Temkin, Ph.D. is director of the Israel Institute which is devoted to teaching history and contemporary issues of Israel to Jews and Non-Jews throughout the world. He can be reached at DT@Israel-Institute.com or go to the website: http://Israel-Institute.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, November 28, 2006.

Who says so? In no order of importance, you start with Israel's current Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, Foreign Minister, Tzipi Livni, the Kadima crowd generally. They not only wish to give up the Land as a forward firing position for the terrorist Muslims much as they did with Gaza, they are willing to release more than a thousand terrorists convicted of killing Jews who vow to kill more Jews when released.

The U.N. and their various affiliates like their Council on Human Rights (and Wrongs?) Tells the Jews they must disappear, in other words, they must die to please the U.N. The Peace Now and its clones, among other Left Liberal Jewish organizations work diligently to dispossess Jews from the Land of their ancient heritage - given by G-d himself. The Peace Now actions are in deference to the Arab Muslim Palestinians whose charters and actions clearly define Jews as an endangered species, intended to go the way of the extinct carrier pigeon, the dodo bird or the dinosaur. The Muslim credo sentences Jews to death but artfully avoids using the words. The President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says the Jews must go, preferably in a blast of radio-active particles. He maintains that, only in such a conflagration will the Muslim Mahdi return to claim Islamic control of the planet Earth. Unlike the aberrant Jews who arrange our demise using words crafted by Peace Now, Ahmadinejad says he will kill us in straight forward language.

There is always the trail of the Left to follow as they manipulated Oslo to insure that the Jews would be driven off their Land or die resisting. There is the political Party of the Left, aided by the Supreme Court Chief Justice Aharon Barak who tells the Jews that the Muslims have first claim on the Land and the Jews must go. Barak says that ancient claims don't count - from Abraham's purchase of Sarah's grave-site at the Cave of the Machpeleh on til today.

Sorry, dear Jews, you simply must die out or be murdered out to please the world.

There are always the predators of so-called Christian Europe who, having tasted the blood of Jews throughout their centuries of pogroms, cannot resist a second helping. They are in lock-step with the Muslims and the Arabs, even knowing that they too as Christians (non-Muslims) are on the list of nations and religions to be conquered and ruled over by Islam.

This does not disparage the many good Christians who support the Jews and Jewish State of Israel as following the true Bible as G-d's Word. Here I would include the American people who admire and support the Jewish State while detesting the Muslims who monopolize Global Terror.

I am amused by the Leftist Jews of Israel who think they will be spared by their perfidy and participation of saving their own murdered by the Islamists. I would predict that such as Peace Now, the Israeli Supreme Court, the Leftists in general, would be the first to face Muslim justice, IF they succeed in conquering the Jews of Israel. The Muslims preferred methods include heads chopped off, burning alive, heads crushed by cement blocks as the Arab/Muslim mobs descend on them. The men and women would be raped and killed en masse' as is their culture in dealing with the infidel, even those (or especially those) who betrayed their own people.

In America there are the fellow travelers of the oil-laden Arab countries. There we have the Arabist State Department, James Baker III and the Jew haters who run the nation - often from a "Shadow Government" within the outward official government. Clearly, these are not the American people nor the Fundamentalist Christians who enthusiastically support the Jewish State. The minority of Jew haters want Israel destroyed and the Jewish people finished in a massive Genocide.

But, as they say, the plans of mice and men oft times go astray....

I see the Planet going through a catharsis which some will call a cyclical Global Warming while others will say G-d has reached His level of tolerance with the human race. I think that Europe and Russia will go into a deep freeze as in a small Ice Age. The brief summers will be dry and the streams will dry out. There will be a long famines and the people will riot before they simply die out. Some remnant will always survive. They always do.

America will be battered with storms and drought for what their leaders have done (or allowed to be done) to the Jewish people. The TV weather people will call it "Wicked Weather" - very appropriate. New Orleans' 2006 hurricanes will look like a party.

I expect more hurricanes, volcanoes, tsunamis and earthquakes across Iran, Syria, Egypt - surpassing 10 on the Richter Scale. Nothing civilized will be left standing. Disease will rage.

Ports and low cities will be flooded as the glaciers and ice caps melt, sending populations inland where there will be no room - no food or clean water.

In the meantime, the Jew haters will say: "You must die for the greater good of all others. Albert Einstein looked for a unified force which rules the cosmos. It is there and the Jews are but a fragment - but a significant fragment. Those who would destroy us have signed their own demise. For the insignificant human race our reward of mis-using the resources of this planet and the pursuit of the Jews can bring on another Noahide period where all humans are simply destroyed, except for the vital and pure remnant. I wonder how long Peace Now, the Israeli Supreme Court, Ehud Olmert, et a' can tread water.

I personally, for whatever effect it might have, prayed daily for the destruction of the Jew haters (to include those who claim to be Jewish).

Is all this wishful thinking? Perhaps. But, as I see the earth's mantle shifting with earthquakes, super-storms, tsunamis, man-killing disease plagues with no cures - even the rise of Islam as the blackest of plagues.

While Einstein may not have concluded his unified theory, nevertheless, the synergism is apparent. Poisoning the land, water, air is merely one element on their way to killing the Jews. All of those previously mentioned and those hidden have joined together to despoil the Planet loaned to us by G-d.

Somehow, the most productive race on this planet has been categorized as evil and destined for elimination. Perhaps the higher authority, that unifies the cosmos, may feel the reverse is true. That the Jew Killers have clearly demonstrated that they themselves as unworthy of further life.

I hope I am around to see them obliterated, allowing the Planet to start the long process of healing herself and the Jews also to heal themselves, along with our Jewish State of Israel.

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@comcast.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Marion DS Dreyfus, November 28, 2006.

This came from Gigi Markowitz.

This is Israel's response. Please take a minute and read this message, as it is a good read.

Several weeks ago, Germany announced its decision to stop all arms sales to Israel. Since then, other countries have followed suit. In response, Israel has canceled its annual multimillion dollar contract for its nationwide DAN buses which were manufactured in Germany, and is looking at other bus suppliers in the US, and Japan.

The Europeans and their Muslim allies should understand that boycotts work both ways. When we said NEVER AGAIN, we meant it. Europe is stuck in the mentality of 1933 and conditioned to thinking of Jews as defenseless entities. The reality is very different. As long as Europe adheres to and supports its primitive Middle Ages death cult, European products must be off limits.

We continue to call for a complete boycott of travel and products from the following countries France, Belgium, Spain, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, Denmark, Holland, and China, due to their support, sponsorship, and/or participation in global Islamic terror. The voting record of the above countries at the UN openly endorses Muslim terror.

Remember, every time you buy a bottle of Evian, a Carlsberg product, a Spanish melon, a Godiva chocolate, a Dior lipstick, a Gucci bag, or a German kitchen appliance, you are financing the next Muslim mass murderer.

The European Union gives over $10 million per month to the Palestinian Authority, knowing full well that the money is funneled to buy, import, and train Muslim terrorists and their weapons of mass murder.

We strongly encourage everyone to buy American and Israeli products instead. Buy Estee Lauder or Ahava instead of Chanel, Dior, and YSL. Tell the salespeople why. Educate the public when you shop.

Europe is underwriting the Arab war to exterminate the Jewish state. We cannot sit idly by while this happens. Make your voice heard and let them feel the sting in their pocketbooks. Let the Europeans know that supporting terror does not pay.

Please send this to at least 10 like-minded people

Contact the poster at dreyfusmarion@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 28, 2006.

The bill of goods they go on selling and game the Palestinians play with the entire world is ludicrous but is working for them like a charm...the assumption in Israel and the West is that Abbas is too weak is a myth; he prefers to appear this way. He lacks the will and appears to be comfortable with the image of the weak leader, low on funds and resources, ALL helps to terrorize Israel.

The feel sorry for me billionaire (Yes, like Yasser Arafat, this will be revealed after his death...) Abbas's message to the (feeling sorry for the Palestinians) outside world is: more weapons, more policemen and more money will enable him to move against the terrorists, which is ANOTHER fool the western world tactic, the gullible west keeps on buying into. Meantime, the Palestinians are laughing all the way to more terror, more breach of human rights, more craziness, more debilitating behavior Israel is so tired of.

The gutless Israeli government and the entire West keep on missing the target, their wrongful meddling with the Palestinians affairs is constantly backfiring on them, thus, they are losing to the wicked that won one more round!

As always, Khaled Abu Toameh gives us an honest and clear picture of Palestinian politics and events. This article is called "Palestinian Affairs: Guns and Poses," and it appeared November 23, 2006 in the Jerusalem Post

Last week, security forces loyal to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas provided evidence that they were still around and functioning.

One of the branches, the much-feared Preventative Security Service, announced that its members had arrested two Palestinians in the Gaza Strip on charges of "collaboration" with Israel. Another, the General Intelligence Force, boasted that its men managed to break a ring of criminals who allegedly swindled thousands of Palestinians in the West Bank.

The announcements came at a time when several Kassam squads were continuing to launch rockets at Israel from the northern Gaza Strip, on an average of 8-10 per day. They also came at a time when Israeli political and security officials were - and are - embroiled in a debate over how to stop the Kassam rockets: by reoccupying the entire Gaza Strip, stepping up the policy of assassinations, or launching a limited, large-scale military operation against the terrorists and their leaders.

But almost no one in the Israeli political and security echelon raised the possibility of asking Abbas to instruct his security forces to try and stop the rocket attacks.

That's because the assumption in Israel and the West is that Abbas is too weak, and that his security forces have been crippled as a result of repeated Israeli military attacks.

The facts, however, suggest otherwise.

Abbas has control over at least 45,000 members of a dozen or so security forces in the Gaza Strip. This is in addition to thousands of gunmen and activists belonging to his Fatah party. Hamas, by contrast, has less than 5,000 militiamen, who are not as effective as Abbas's policemen and security agents, some of whom were trained by American and European security experts.

Here one needs to be reminded of the fact that although Hamas is in power, the Islamist movement actually has no control over the Fatah-affiliated Palestinian security forces. Almost immediately after Hamas won the parliamentary election earlier this year, Abbas issued a "presidential decree," placing all the security forces under the jurisdiction of the "commander-in-chief" (who happens to be none other than Abbas himself)

WHY, THEN, doesn't Abbas simply order thousands of his policemen to deploy along the border with Israel to halt the Kassam attacks? How come he hasn't even made the slightest effort to stop the smuggling of tons of explosives from Egypt into the Gaza Strip?

The answer is simple. Abbas lacks the will - not the ability - to take harsh decisions. In fact, he appears to be comfortable with the image of the weak leader low on funds and resources . Abbas's message to the outside world is: If I only had more weapons, policemen and money, I'd be able to move against the terrorists. This was the same excuse that his predecessor, Yasser Arafat, used to give whenever he was asked why he was not doing anything to stop suicide bombings against Israel.

Judging from his actions over the past year, it is clear that Abbas is not interested at all in a confrontation with Hamas or any of the radical groups in the Gaza Strip. His strategy is based on the notion that if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Although he has repeatedly condemned the firing of the "primitive" rockets at Israel as "harmful" to the interests of the Palestinians, he has never ordered his security chiefs to go after the rocket squads - not even when the miserable residents of Beit Hanun, who are continuing to pay a heavy price, begged him to take action.

Abbas's claim that he is lacking in weapons and money is ridiculous given the facts on the ground. Just last week, thousands of PA policemen and Fatah gunmen staged paramilitary parades in various parts of Gaza, during which they reportedly fired more than a million bullets into the air. The cost of each bullet ranges between NIS 1-NIS 5, depending on the type of rifle or pistol. Also, it is worth noting that some of the weapons and ammunition that are being smuggled from Egypt goes to Fatah militias and Abbas's security forces in Gaza.

With regard to the funds, millions of dollars continue to pour into Abbas's office almost on a weekly basis. Just last week, Kuwait transferred $29 million to Abbas's bank account.

The US, which is eager to bring down the Hamas government, has also been arming and funding Abbas and his Fatah party.

One report cited an official US document as revealing that Washington had allocated $42 million to fund the opponents of the Hamas government, while another claimed that the Americans had decided to provide Abbas's Force 17 with an additional 6,000 M-16 rifles.

Such reports have left many Palestinians confused about America's Middle East policy, particularly the idea of spreading democracy.

Just over a year ago, the US and several EU countries demanded that the Palestinians hold free and democratic elections. Abbas, according to some of his top aides, first pleaded with the foreign governments to wait a little longer. Faced by strong opposition, he later decided to move ahead with his plans to hold the election on time.

Abbas's major fear was that his corruption-riddled Fatah party was not yet prepared for the vote. When Abbas sought to postpone the vote, he clearly knew what he was talking about.

Like many Palestinians, he, too, was aware of the growing power of Hamas, especially in the aftermath of Yasser Arafat's departure from the scene. The majority of the Palestinians saw Arafat's departure as an opportunity to pick up the pieces and repair the damage he had done to their cause for nearly four decades. They simply wanted a better life.

ONE OF the reasons most Palestinians voted for Hamas was their disillusionment with Abbas and Fatah. Prior to the 2005 presidential election, Abbas ran on a platform that promised to end rampant financial corruption, enforce law and order and bring about democracy and reforms. In short, his message to the Palestinians sounded so promising that over 60% voted for him, giving him a clear mandate to fulfill his pledges.

But then, Abbas did almost everything to disappoint the Palestinian people. Not only did he not keep most of his promises, but he seemed determined to continue with Arafat's legacy - one that brought only death and destruction. Instead of getting rid of all the officials responsible for financial corruption, Abbas embraced many of them, and turned them into senior decision-makers.

His promise to end anarchy and lawlessness never materialized. Under Abbas's rule, warlords, gangsters and militias became even stronger and more daring. These thugs felt so confident that they saw no problem dragging a Palestinian general out of his home in Gaza City and executing him in the street. The situation has so deteriorated that, for the first time ever, the number of Palestinians killed as a result of internal strife is higher than that of those killed in clashes with Israeli security forces.

The US's involvement in attempts to bring down the Hamas government has only made things worse for Abbas and Fatah.

The US believes that by giving Abbas more rifles and cash it would be able to bring about regime change. But in the West Bank and Gaza, there is no shortage of weapons. Tons of explosives, rifles and missiles are smuggled across the Egyptian border nearly every day.

What the Palestinians need is not more rifles - which they never use to stop Hamas, Islamic Jihad or other militias anyway - but good governance and credible leaders.

The only way to bring about regime change in the Palestinian territories is by exerting pressure on Abbas to reform his Fatah party and give younger leaders a larger say in the process of decision-making. Abbas will only do this when he feels that he is under pressure from donors. He will also only start moving against the Kassam squads and weapon-smuggling when someone bangs on the table and demands immediate action.

Fatah needs to undergo real changes and reforms if it ever wants to return to power.

Meanwhile, American meddling in Palestinian affairs is backfiring, because many Palestinians are beginning to look at Abbas and Fatah as pawns in the hands of the US and Israel . This does not help Abbas and moderate secular Palestinians, who are facing the dangers of the growing power of Islamic fundamentalism.

But, even if the Hamas government collapses - and free and democratic elections are held in the West Bank and Gaza - it is almost certain that most Palestinians will not vote for the same leaders who lost the last election because of their corruption and mismanagement

Contact the poster at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Jerusalem Prayer Team, November 28, 2006.

This week, President Bush will be attending Jordon's Summit on Iraq along with Iraq's Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki. His Host, King Abdullah, seems to have already articulated Arab demands, warning that the Middle East is facing a crisis with Palestine Territories, Lebanon, and Iraq at the brink of civil war.

"We could possibly imagine going into 2007 and having three civil wars on our hands," Abdullah said on ABC's "This Week" program Sunday. "I keep saying Palestine is the core. It is linked to the extent of what's going on in Iraq."

Abdullah said restating the Israeli-Palestinian peace process is his top priority because the "emotional impact" of the problem "can be translated to the insecurity and frustrations throughout the Middle East and the Arab world." Moderate Abdullah revealed the core problem, an ideological war in which an Arab World hates Israel and really believes that Jews are the root of all problems. But even more revealing is that Israel is the Little Satan in their eyes, and America, the crusaders, is the Great Satan.

It appears the turkey carving is going to be extended beyond Thanksgiving. Once again, Israel will be forced to pay the appeasement bill for Arab rage with more land.

Click here to sign the petition to President Bush. Ask him not to allow Israel to become a bartering chip for peace in Iraq.

Don't distort the reality of the Global Jihadist, because everyone knows that a Zionist Crusader conspiracy is behind all Arab problems, anyway.

In October 1991, Israel was dragged kicking and screaming to the Middle East peace conference in Madrid. It was their reward for not retaliating as Saddam's 39 SCUDS rained down upon the Bible land during the first Persian Gulf War; and, the U.S. froze the 10-billion-dollar loan guarantee, which was money to help absorb Russian Jewish refuges.

Having covered the summit and being the first journalist to address Secretary of State James Baker, I smell Madrid all over again. Do I not recall a similar summit in Jordon after the last Persian Gulf War to launch the Road Map for peace?

Iraq is indeed a mess, but then why should anyone be surprised? Iraq was established as the central 9-11 front on the war on terror. (Oh I forgot; it's not a world-war against Islamic fascists.) Terrorism must be fought in Iraq without chaos. (I did it again; terrorists are militia and insurgents, words that were coined by Daniel Webster to define America revolutionary fighters like George Washington, Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin.)

We don't want to offend Muslims by admitting that Muslims are killing us. When I said on 9-11 that it was Islamic Al-Qaeda terrorist in the planes, the network station said, "You cannot say that." so I said, "Okay, maybe it is Pygmies, Eskimos, and Tahitians.

Jimmy Carter paid 7.9 billion to get the hostages back, but not until Iran was certain they had achieved their political objective...444 days of humiliation, and then, releasing the hostages the day of the inauguration of Ronald Regan. If they were willing to gamble the farm on a California cowboy, you can be sure they will do their best to give us a two-year ride on the back of the protracted terror tiger in Iraq, at least until Hillary takes the oath of office. Let's not forget it's all about stalling for time until they can make the grand announcement, "We have the Bomb."

Syria and Iran have been the Jihadist traffic controllers in and out of Iraq, so you can be sure they will have seats of honor at the appeasement party. To give the terrorist cartel an invitation to the VIP Summit to help with stability and democracy in Iraq is the theater of the absurd. Why should anyone be shocked at chaos? Welcome to the world of Middle East terror, or as they call it in Israel, the Iraqi intifida.

The U.S. gave Syria one billion dollars for showing support at the first Persian Gulf War. You can be sure the prize will be much higher to slow down the tide of body bags in Iraq.

Israel was never allowed to fight a war against terror with the P.A. Every time they tried, the U.S. ran to the rescue of the billionaire Noble Peace Prize winner and godfather of World Terror, Yasir Arafat. Texas "T" ruled the day, not moral clarity. It all began when Israel was forced out of Lebanon by U.S. Liberals.

What's wrong with killing terrorists in Iraq, no matter if they were wearing a police or a military uniform? Do you think the families of 9-11 gave their loved ones so Iraq can have a democracy? Why not get over it and fight the war like the greatest generation did with Iraq as the central front?

The U.S. needs to get the innocent Iraqi refuges out of the country. That would be a great reason to have a summit. And, why not establish a base in Israel and recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital? That would end the "drive the Jews into the sea ideology" once and for all. I asked Secretary Baker to do that in Madrid; his response was, "You will not engage me in fruitless dialogue."

Iran and its death cults are on a fast track to wipe the Little Satan (Israel) off the map with an Atomic Bomb.

Click here to sign the petition to President Bush today, and then forward this email to everyone on your list. Together, we can make a difference.

Robert Gates, President Bush's nominee for Secretary of Defense, wants to talk with Iran and Syria. Why not let the 22,000-plus American families who have a wounded son or daughter talk with Iran, especially since 85 percent of all IEDs in Iraq are from Iran, according to General Moshe Yaalon, former chief of staff of Israel? Why not let the American families of the dead Marines killed in Lebanon in 1983, or the thousands of families who have a wounded or dead loved one in Israel? Why not talk to Syria since Syria has armed Hezbollah, HAMAS and the PLO for decades, and is presently turning Lebanon into the killing fields?

Did America really think we could go to Babylon and not get bitten? It's a shame that George Bush's 80-year-old childhood Sunday school teacher could not have advised him. She could have read him Revelations 18:2, "Babylon the great is fallen, and has become a dwelling place of demons, a prison for every foul spirit, and a cage for every unclean and hated bird..."

Now the issue is: Will we fight a world war on terror in Iraq or fight in our backyard? You can be sure if we run, they will be coming to a theater near you.

Please sign the petition to President Bush today! We must not delay; time is of the essence. We need 100,000 signatures.

Please don't just delete this. It will only take you a minute to pass this along to 10 friends! Please ask them to not delete it, but to do the same and ask the 10 they send to keep it going...and not delete it.

Keep this going around the world.

Mike Evans

Michael Evans is the author of "Beyond Iraq: The Next Move," and founder of Jerusalem Prayer Team, America's largest Christian coalition praying for the peace of Jerusalem. Contact them at www.JerusalemPrayerTeam.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 28, 2006.

1. Last year I published a piece on the lunatic anti-Semitic Luddite from York University, David Noble, here:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19932 Here is a selection (go to web page for full article):

Noble combines Luddism and dislike of Christianity with utter contempt and hatred for Jews and Judaism. He is a leftist hater of Jews who himself was born Jewish, a fact that helps him defend himself against charges of anti-Semitism. Self-hating Jewish academics are common on campus today, and range all the way from the phony sophisticates like MIT's Chomsky and NYU's Tony Judt, all the way down to the vulgar neo-nazi buffoonery of DePaul's Norman Finkelstein. Like those others, Noble has a long history of bashing Israel and demonizing Zionism. He has maliciously tried to stir up anti-Jewish passions at York, where he alleges that the board of the York University Foundation, the school's fundraising arm, is biased by "the presence and influence of staunch pro-Israel lobbyists, activists and fundraising agencies." Meaning Jews.

In late November 2004, Noble got into trouble for biting the hand that pays his York salary. He was attacked by his own administration for handing out information sheets regarding the York Foundation. He maintained that the presence of Jews on the board affects the "political conduct of York's administration" in important ways, such as the "silencing of pro-Palestinian voices" on York's campus. The University then issued a press release on Nov. 19, 2004, condemning material Noble had been distributing at a campus event a day earlier as "targeting Jewish members of the York community." Noble is tied to local pro-Palestinian groups, who back him in his nuisance litigation against York. Meanwhile, he has been condemned by the Canadian Jewish Congress and the United Jewish Appeal Federation of Greater Toronto for his anti-Jewish and anti-Israel activities.

But Noble's latest high-visibility antic has been against the right of Jewish students at York University to observe Yom Kippur. Most universities try to accommodate Jewish students, often asking professors not to schedule exams in the Jewish High Holidays. York actually cancels classes altogether. Noble maintains that this is "discriminatory and illegal", because classes are not cancelled (unless later made up) for every holiday of every other conceivable religious persuasion. Chris Morley, a spokesperson for Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, said canceling classes on holidays "is a decision the university has the authority to make," adding that "it seems the York policy is reasonable."

Prof. Martin Lockshin, an observant Jew who teaches at York and is on the university's senate, said that the holiday policy follows a general York principle of respecting religious diversity; but - more importantly - it avoids problems that would be created when many students and faculty cannot attend class. York also holds no classes on Christmas and Good Friday, but Noble threatened to hold classes on Good Friday as a political statement. Noble demanded that York stop accommodating Jewish students and he threatened to hold classes on the Jewish High Holidays to show his contempt for them. When threatened by the administration, Noble claimed he would henceforth cancel all classes for any holiday of any sort for any religion, including those of Bahais, Zoroastrians, and Wiccans.

Now just for the record, on Yom Kippur the Jewish students at York (Jews are 10% of the student body there) fast for 26 hours, pray the entire day, and may neither write nor use electricity. So it makes perfect sense to make accommodations for them, and I am sure that if anyone can find any Christian, Hindu or Moslem holidays on which people fast for 26 hours, York would similarly be happy to oblige them.

Anyway, now Noble is suing his own university again and some Jewish groups for pointing out that he is an Anti-Semite:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/ Layout/Article_PrintFriendly&c=Article&cid=1164149417204&call_pageid=968350130169

"Professor suing York U."
Jewish groups also target of lawsuit
Claims they suggested he was anti-Semitic

Nov. 22, 2006. 01:00 AM
Louise Brown Education Reporter

History professor David Noble is suing York University's fundraising foundation and several Jewish organizations for defamation, claiming they suggested he is anti-Semitic to try to gag criticism of their activities.

Noble, 61, who is Jewish, has brought a $25 million lawsuit against the York University Foundation, including outgoing York president Lorna Marsden, as well as the Canadian Jewish Congress' Ontario region, Hillel of Greater Toronto and the United Jewish Appeal of Greater Toronto for their criticism of flyers he distributed.

The flyers accused the university of being biased in favour of Israel and restricting pro-Palestinian groups on campus more harshly than others.

Noble distributed the flyers, titled "The Tail that Wags the Dog," on campus in 2004. They named directors and staff of the York University Foundation and cited various members' links with pro-Israel agencies, such as the United Jewish Appeal.

In response, Noble said, members of Hillel of Greater Toronto sent a fax to the university expressing concern that the flyer suggested "Jews control York University" . something Noble denies having said.

He said he criticized York figures for their political views on Israel, not their ethnicity or religion.

The University later issued a news release condemning what Marsden called "this highly offensive material, which singles out certain members of the York community on the basis of their ethnicity and political views."

While it did not name Noble, it quoted a Jewish student leader who was concerned about "such inflammatory material," and said "it is unacceptable for any students to be exposed to this type of bigotry."

Angry his claims were being called bigoted, Noble has already filed a union grievance seeking an apology and $10 million in damages for defamation.

Noble has also filed a complaint with the Ontario Human Rights Commission against York for its long-standing practice of cancelling all classes on Jewish high holidays, such as Yom Kippur.

York established the policy years ago at the request of Jewish students, but it allows any student to obtain a change of schedule if a class conflicts with a religious holiday.

In response, Noble, an outspoken critic of the policy, cancels his own classes on Muslim holidays as well.

"Look, I have very diverse classes and I want to dramatize the point that we are a multicultural, publicly funded university, so we should either recognize all religious high holidays or none," he has said.

York has an estimated 5,000 Jewish students, roughly 10 per cent of its student body, and it began cancelling classes on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur 40 years ago.

Last year, Noble said he would hold classes on the Jewish holidays in defiance of York's policy, but he changed his mind after a student filed a complaint and he received threatening phone messages.

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. Contact him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 28, 2006.


Israeli gunners aimed their cannon at a Beit Hanoun orange grove that concealed rocket launchers. Technical malfunction caused a couple of shells to go astray and kill people not aimed at. Hamas threatened "revenge." The Prime Minister of Israel expressed remorse and said he offered a "great deal" to the P.A. (Ian Fisher, 11/10, A3). See my 14573 on international legality of Israeli military operations.

I think that an objective newspaper would try to report all the facts are reported and represent all sides, although I could understand ignoring the genocidal side. The Times, however, often gives short shrift to the intended Israeli victims of genocide.

The Times practice of reporting just what people say, and being selectively one-sided about background information, does not properly inform the modern, rushed, non-thinking public nave in the faith that the newspaper fully informs it. If the reporters asked more questions of Israelis, it would have more to report. For example, it could ask why Hamas threatens revenge for what was an accident, brought on by Arab aggression (the firing of rockets at Israeli cities, also a war crime). Why? Because the aggressors pose as victims merely retaliating. It is the same trick used by the Nazis and Communists. The Soviet and Vietnamese Communists had trained the PLO in tactics.

I think the Prime Minister improperly remorseful. He didn't even combine the remorse with regret that the malfunction spared the rocket launchers, which is my main concern. He is a put-upon Jew, who has too much self-guilt towards the enemy, and not enough for the terrible trouble his policy makes for his own people. Where is his remorse for the needless casualties that his government's floundering has invited for his own people?

He doesn't owe the Arabs anything. He was right to maintain that Israel does not fire wildly and off-target on purpose. He should have observed that Hamas talk of vengeance exploits that to continue its war of aggression as if in the right. He should have castigated the hypocrisy of Hamas' indignation, since the intended target of the shells were rocket launchers used to commit war crimes!

By hastily offering concessions, PM Olmert bolsters the Arab propaganda that claims Israel acts badly and it is the victim. This proves he has no head. His callousness towards Israelis proved he has no heart. By omitting this discussion, the Times proves itself misleading. Not many readers know that the Times long has been anti-Zionist. Its publication continues to pursue that ideology.


After Muslims planned to build a fourth or fifth mosque on the Temple Mount, some Jews mentioned a plan to build one synagogue atop it. The head of Israel's Islamic Movement declared that the Temple Mount is exclusively Muslim and that Muslims would fight erection of a synagogue there (Arutz-7, 11/6). So much for Islam being a tolerant religion of peace! INTERNATIONAL LAW ON WAR MADE CLEAR & SIMPLE

Muslim Arabs (who break agreements), human rights organizations (having an anti-Zionist, anti-US agenda), and antisemites who piggyback on the NGOs accuse Israel of war crimes. I find this part of the effort to de-legitimize Israel by depicting it as the successor to the Third Reich, which the Arabs admired and emulated in some ways.

The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs explains the international law of war. Who may initiate external war is codified in the UNO Charter. A country may start external armed conflict if authorized by the Security Council under Chapter 7 or in self-defense.

Once a war begins, customary international law covers how it may be fought. One may attack only legitimate targets, to contribute to victory. In 1977, the Red Cross declared that the presence of civilians does not render a target illegitimate, as when the enemy uses roads for military transport.

The military advantage must in intent be significant, in proportion to civilian damage. Mistaken intelligence that leads to disproportionate civilian damage is excused. The attack must be made so as not to inflict avoidable civilian damage unrelated to military need. Proportionality does not mean that a defender must retaliate with force proportionate to the force that committed aggression against it.

A combatant may not lawfully evade the enemy's ability to distinguish between legitimate and non-legitimate targets by disguising themselves as civilians or hiding behind civilians. (Palestinian Arab terrorists surround themselves deliberately with civilians. They commit the war crime of perfidy).

"Perhaps the best-known charge made by international NGOs such as Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International (A.I.) is that Israeli attacks in Lebanon violated the rule of distinction. Yet if you look at the actual charges, you will see that they are made on the basis of bad or no evidence, linguistic misdirection, non sequiturs, and misapplication or misstatement of accepted legal standards."

"A.I. describes extensive destruction of residential buildings, over 1,000 Lebanese dead - of which an unknown number were civilians, and the destruction of dozens of bridges, roads, and ports as well as fuel stations and commercial enterprises. There is no systematic discussion anywhere in its report of Hizballah's fighting positions, its methods of combat, its methods of movement and communication, or whether Hizballah's combatants dressed like civilians. Instead, Amnesty argues that the physical destruction speaks for itself and demonstrates that Israel violated the principle of distinction."

"To put it bluntly, this approach has no basis in the laws of war. If one sees a residential home bombed, or even fifty bombed homes, has one seen evidence of a war crime? One cannot know without more information. Again, the ICRC commentary says that if fighting between armed forces takes place in a town which is defended house by house, it is inevitable that every house will become a legitimate military target.'"

"This means that when one looks at a residential home that has been damaged, one has to know where this home was in relation to the fighting. How did the fighting take place? Where were the combatants? Where was their weaponry? Without knowing these things, it is impossible to know whether or not a war crime took place."

"Given that Hizballah fighters based themselves almost exclusively in residential areas, and located their arms almost exclusively in residential areas, many residential houses became legitimate military targets."

"The same can be said of HRW's citations of attacks in which numerous Lebanese civilians were killed. Because Hizballah fighters in residential homes are legitimate targets, as well as the roads on which they expect to travel and the buildings they use for storehouses, it is legal for Israel to attack those targets even if there will be inevitable collateral damage including dead civilians. Moreover, as noted earlier, the question of intent is crucial. If a belligerent attacks what it believes is a legitimate target, and it turns out after the fact that the intelligence was faulty and only civilians were killed, there is no war crime."

"Given that all of the Hizballah fighters illegally hid as civilians in civilian areas as well as the general limitations of military intelligence, it is quite impossible for anyone to expect that Israel would have been able to identify all targets with 100 percent precision and no mistakes."

"Amnesty and Human Rights Watch claimed that the use of civilian shields by Hizballah does not release the opposing party from its obligations towards the protection of the civilian population.' With all due respect, this is nonsense. When a combatant hides in a civilian house, the house ceases to be a civilian target and becomes a military target."

"A.I.'s report specifically accused Israel of violating the rule of distinction in targeting civilian homes in Bint Jbeil, where house-to-house fighting occurred. Nowhere does Amnesty mention that Hizballah fighters were entrenched in residential and commercial areas of Bint Jbeil, including the center of town. There is no way for readers of the report to know (from the report) that Israel's fighting in Bint Jbeil was actually in compliance with the rule of distinction."

HRW accused Israel of bombing two clearly marked ambulances. Australia's Foreign Minister examined the photographic evidence and found this a hoax. Israeli missiles had not struck the ambulances. Their damage had rusted long before the war.

Secretary-General Annan accused Israel of inflicting collective punishment upon Lebanon. It did not. First, Israel held to legitimate military objectives. Second, collective punishment would refer to punishing an entire enemy population within one's own country or in occupation of another. No Lebanese enemy lives in Israel and Israel does not occupy part of Lebanon.

As for Israeli use of cluster bombs, themselves not banned, Israel waited until most civilians had fled, so there would be a higher proportion of military casualties from them.

"Cluster bombs are a way of killing people while reducing property damage, because the weapons widen the killing zone of an explosion. So on the one hand, these groups accuse Israel of excessive property destruction and even use the property destruction as evidence' of Israeli war crimes of indiscriminate attacks. On the other hand, the same groups say that attacking Hizballah personnel without extensive property destruction is also a war crime." (IMRA, 11/9 from Jer. Center for Public Affairs.)


Iran is providing services to various Syrian towns, in return for their inhabitants converting to Shia. The Syrian government allows this. Sunnis there are alarmed. Some suggest an alliance with Israel, which would not try to convert them (IMRA, 11/8). When they come down to it, they know that the Jews are trustworthy.

The Saudi King suggests an alliance against Iran with Jordan and Israel. The Crown Prince would exclude Israel. The State Dept. prefers him, though he is unreliable.

Meanwhile, Saudi family life is falling apart, apparently from luxurious display replacing training in family life (IMRA, 11/8).

Why don't they ask Egypt for protection? Egypt has a huge army. Perhaps they remember that Egypt sought to take over the oil-bearing countries, itself.

If Iran were defeated, Israel's new Sunni allies would turn on it.


Companies from the two countries are working together to complete a laser that can explode roadside bombs safely (IMRA, 11/8).

Roadside bombs are a major source of casualties for the two countries' armies.


It announced having trained thousands of suicide bombers to blow up enemy troops or set off mine fields (IMRA, 11/8).

Iran could be crippled militarily, according to a strategy I reported. By eliminating it navy, it could not threaten oil shipping lanes. By destroying its missiles, it could not attack distant countries. By bombing its oil refineries, it would not be able to move its ground troops around. A former CIA director proposes shifting to alternative energy, to reduce oil prices that finance jihad.


During the recent war between Hizbullah and Israel, the IDF went after Hizbullah emplacements in Beirut. In reaction, the Lebanese government plans to install thousands of surveillance cameras there. Soldiers would review the scenes so as to be able to counter-act the IDF advances (IMRA, 11/8).

Notice that the government is not disarming Hizbullah to prevent it from starting another war with Israel, but is preparing to help it fight Israeli retaliation. This disproves the basis for the UNO ceasefire, which was to get a big UNIFIL force ready to help the Lebanese Army to disarm Hizbullah.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Yrachmiel Elias and Ya'akov Golbert, November 28, 2006.

Thanks to RadioRote, here are some addenda with links to details about bribery (and that link is only about the Bush family), purchasing of influence, control of media, international banking by the same people who finance international terrorism. No, Grasshopper, it is not the Jews, despite what you and the world has "known" since publication of the infamous forgery, the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. No, no. Image that!

If you want to perpetrate genocide, you have to make people believe they are doing something positively good or at least make people indifferent to wiping those particular people off the face of the earth. That is the role of blood libels. The media, the universities, the whole intellectual establishment and very respectable and substantial segments of the political establishment are all fully complicit in setting up Israel and the Jews for the next Holocaust, God forbid!

Rote du vichy wrote:

Saudi Prince Al Walid Ibn Talal, the Saudi terrorist financeer who owns majority shares in AOL, Citibank, Saks 5th Aveneue, and FOX, knows that boycotts will not work. In order to kill Jews, he knows that he must first turn people against them through perception by the media -- and remain friends with politicians through bribes (part 1 -- http://dir.salon.com/story/books/feature/2004/03/12/unger_2/archives/oldindex.html) like the Bush Family (part II -- http://dir.salon.com/story/books/feature/2004/03/12/unger_2/archives/oldindex.html?pn=2)

Bear with me for sending this again. It's a measure of the importance I think it has. The fact that Glenn Beck never saw this stuff before is another proof that what I keep telling you is true: the media are not reporting what is happening. They are purveying imagery that is mainly false and uninformed and follows an unassailable orthodoxy called Political Correctness. Who is in control of what is politically correct? No one even knows whose party line it is. But it is not PC to name Muslims or Islam as the enemy. No, no. That's "Islamophobia" and is one of the scourges of the world. It is not PC to tell the truth about what Islamic leaders say in their sermons or teach in their madrassas or say on their media in their own languages. It is not PC to report on intimidation of the media by Arabs and Muslims or the use by the Saudis of their three trillion dollars invested in US stock markets to intimidate the US government or their ownership of controlling interest in several of the largest 'news' services in the world or their bribery of US officials and diplomats and journalists. That too is Islamophobia. But it IS definitely PC to say that Jews control the media, that the Israeli lobby has too much power, that the war in Iraq is for the benefit of Israel and not the US, that Jewish economic power is being abused to corrupt government all over the world, that Israel is the source of all the rage by Arabs and other Muslims (Die Juden sint unser Ungluck. by any other formulation. That's PC.

The result is that Glenn Beck was shocked to see this footage. He had not been informed what is going on. This footage and other similar footage has been around for years. If you have not seen it either, then you are getting your "news" from the local counterpart of Pravda. What are you going to do about it?

View what shocked Glenn Beck
by clicking here.

Yrachmiel Elias and Ya'akov Golbert are co-founders of Netzah Yisrael Lo Yeshaqer. Contact them at golbert@netzahyisrael.org or go to the website: http://netzahyisrael.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Nadia Matar & Anita Finkelstein, November 28, 2006.

A delegation of 14 Women in Green from Jerusalem, Gush Etzion and Beersheva, together with Prof Arieh Zaritzky from Beersheva and Yehudit Katzover from the Loyalists of Eretz Israel went yesterday to pay a shiva call to the Yaakovov family in Sderot, whose father and husband, 43 year old Yaakov HY"D, was killed by a Kassam rocket.

Sitting in a big tent on the grass near their house, were Yaakov's sons, one of them 12 year old Hanan who moved us all with his heart wrenching interview on Arutz 7 TV: http://www.inn.co.il/News/News.aspx/156651 -- See below.

His brother, Salomon, will be Bar Mitzva in a month. "How will I celebrate my Bar Mitzva without my father?" he asks. A relative of the family comforted him by saying that many people, especially from his father's job, are working on giving him a nice Bar Mitzva celebration at the Kotel.

Next to the boys sat their Uncle Zimru, Yaakov's brother. An amazing family!

Hearing Zimru made us understand where Hanan's self-confidence and healthy Jewish pride came from. Zimru did not mince his words. "This government has to go. They are a danger to the survival of the State of Israel." Zimru told us that instead of sinking into depression, he wants to use his anger, frustration and mourning, to do all he can to bring down this government, for the sake of all the children of Israel, before more Jews will be killed. His dream is to organize the people of Sderot, wake them up into action, so that they should lead the way to the downfall of this government.

He knows it is not an easy task. Zimru knows that many politicians, opportunists, will try to "use" him and thus he is very careful not to hook up with any of them. In fact he told us how his family refused to let any minister come to the funeral. During the shiva, security guards came to the shiva tent and announced that Minister Zippy Livni was outside waiting in her car, asking if they would let her come to pay a shiva call. The family told the guards: "Tell her to get out of here immediately. We do not want to see her."

Hearing Hanan and Zimru talking like healthy, proud Jews, reminded us that a very large part of the People of Israel is strong. They love their Land and their Jewish Heritage. The problem is that we are stuck with the most corrupt and dangerous political leaders who are more interested in pleasing Israel's enemies than in protecting the People and the Land of Israel.

We gave the Yaakovov boys a book, "Elnakam" by Ezra Yachin. The book recaptures the dedication, self-sacrifice and courage of the Lehi fighters for the freedom of Israel in the forties. On the cover of the book we wrote to Hanan and his brothers: "We went to strengthen and left strengthened. Your impressive interview in the media inspired us all and gave us all strength and hope that soon, please G-d, a new leadership will arise in Israel, a leadership of proud Jews like Hanan and his family, who are a continuation of the proud Jewish heroes described in this book."

After the shiva, all 16 of us went to do some "shopping" in the center of Sderot to give the stores there some business. The city was almost a ghost-city. Many stores were closed. One could still see the horrendous damage one Kassam had done when it fell in the center of town, destroying four stores completely and shattering the glass windows of tens of surrounding stores. All the stores had a big poster attached to the front window: "Lehatzil et ha-ir!" (Save our City!). Store owners looked at our group as if we had come from Mars. When we told them we came to do some shopping to show our support, they thanked us profusely. One storeowner, seeing our orange Gush Katif bracelets and ribbons on our purses, admitted to us that she and some other Sderot residents had been in favor of the "Disengagement" plan. "We really thought there would be quiet after that. Now we are paying a heavy price for our naivete."

The Yaakovov family on the other hand are not naive. At the shiva, Hanan was giving an interview over the phone. He was asked what he thought about the "cease-fire". Without blinking an eye, Hanan answered: "What cease-fire? Don't you know that what they call 'cease-fire' is simply another word for 're-arming'. They are using this period to reorganize and get more and more lethal weapons. We already had so-called 'cease-fires' in the past, and after each one of them, the attacks on Sderot were even worse."

Hanan reminds us of the little boy who screamed: "The emperor has no clothes!"

We left Sderot around 2:00 pm. An hour after we left, we heard on the news that two more Kassams had been shot at Sderot. Were these Olmert's so-called "cease-fire Kassams"?

"Sderot Orphan: 'If Sderot Goes, the Whole Country Goes'"
by Hillel Fendel
Arutz Sheva (www.IsraelNN.com).

A 12-year-old boy who lost his father in a Kassam attack last week speaks emotionally, but directly and clearly, about his new situation and what he thinks the government should do.

Arutz-7 TV's Gabi Newman spoke with 12-year-old Chanan Yaakobov, a pupil in the local religious school, whose father Yaakov was killed by a Kassam rocket six days ago. A video of the moving interview can be seen in both Hebrew and with an English translation. A transcript:

Q. ...What was the first thing you thought?
A. I thought how would I have a life without my father. I don't... I said to myself, aaah, without my father, I have no life.

Q. Do you want to continue living here in Sderot?
A. (firmly) Yes.

Q. Why? Why is it important to you?
A. Because, I very much love the State of Israel. If I and my cousins leave Sderot, we could do it in a day. But if we do, then the State would simply fall apart. Because if Sderot falls apart, then the whole country goes with it. If the Hamas terrorists see that they succeeded in emptying out Sderot, then they will say, we finished with Sderot, and then they will send Kassams to Ashkelon, and then we will lose Ashkelon, and then the same with Ashdod - and then the same thing with the whole country, that's it, nothing will be left of Israel. All the Jews will be scattered in places that - I don't know where they will be able to go...

Q. if the Prime Minister was here now, what would you say to him?
A. I wouldn't want to speak with him, I would tell him to get out of here, I - I would give him a kick, or throw stones at him - I don't know what I would do to him.

Q. And Amir Peretz, who lives here - what would you say to him.
A. I would tell him to go away, I wouldn't want to talk to him, I don't even want to see him. Because if the people of Sderot were important to him, a long time ago - and I mean a long time ago - he would have done what he should...

Asked about the government, Chanan said with great emphasis:

[I want] the Defense Minister and Olmert to - to say that they can't do it. They should let Bibi Netanyahu and [Avigdor] Lieberman take their place. [Gesturing emphatically with his hand] They should give up their places in the government! ... If you can do it, then I want to see your answer! I ask of you - and if not, then [eyes welling up] give up your places, but quickly! Quickly! I, the son of Yaakov, I turn to you [with choked voice]: Give up your places in the Knesset! Give them up!"

Ambivalence in Sderot

Residents are ambivalent about the ceasefire agreed upon yesterday by the Israeli government and PA leaders. "I personally am very happy to have a day in which I don't have to worry about Kassams," says Alon Davidi, who has led much of the local protests against government inaction. "But I know that it's not good for the State of Israel. This arrangement will merely give the terrorists more time to re-arm and prepare for the next round."

Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 27, 2006.

These days the cards in Washington are stacked against Israel.

The USA was let down by the Olmert's strategically weak government and they HAD to move on.

Therefore, Bush, who first regarded the Jewish state as the front line on terror, has now braced new cadre of key advisers with new approach to Iraqi policy. These advisers are drawn from the past most known anti-Israeli administrations.

The Olmert government, however forthcoming, must brace itself for a period of intensive American pressure to cede ever more assets to curry favor with the Arabs. Knowing Olmert's actions, he is already about to give the house away!

Depressing! Israel, wake up!

This is from today's DEBKAfile: "Bush to pursue US policy reversal on Israel in bid for Arab help on Iraq -- in his Amman talks Thursday. Brent Scowcroft is new administration policy guru."

DEBKAfile: Bush to pursue US policy reversal on Israel in bid for Arab help on Iraq -- in his Amman talks Thursday. Brent Scowcroft is new administration policy guru

November 27, 2006, 2:26 PM (GMT+02:00)

Hamas was quick to pick up the new tune emanating from Washington. Its leaders and Mahmoud Abbas declared a hurried ceasefire Sunday to take advantage of the US president's willingness to broaden his Amman talks from his planned meetings with Iraqi prime minister Nouri Maliki to an effort to convene an international conference on the Palestinian issue. Israel's prime minister Ehud Olmert accepted the ceasefire against military advice to capture high ground. Abdullah chipped in by saying that Palestine "is the core" of all Middle East violence.

No seasoned observer expects the truce to outlast Bush's departure.

"How Iraq and Palestinian Issues Came to Be Twinned in Revised Bush Strategy on Iraq"
November 27, 2006, 2:20 PM

One of the most pressing pieces of business the US president George W. Bush must tackle in Amman later this week is the demand for an international conference on Iraq which must be dominated by a built-in agenda on the Palestinian-Israeli dispute. Palestinian leaders, picking up the new tones in Washington, decided to cash in by announcing the cessation of Hamas' Qassam missile attacks on Israeli civilian locations, starting Sunday, Nov. 26.

Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert, loath to relinquish the high diplomatic ground to the Palestinians, promised Monday that after the kidnapped Israeli soldier is released, Israel will free many jailed Palestinians, including long term prisoners, as a confidence-building gesture to prove Israel seeks peace. As soon as a Palestinian unity government is formed, Olmert said, immediate negotiations could start with Mahmoud Abbas on the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state. He allowed the evacuation of some West Bank settlements was possible in return for real peace and Palestinian renunciation of the return of 1948 Palestinian refugees. If such talks are successful, Olmert promised to release frozen Palestinian funds.

Earlier, Ehud Olmert quickly accepted the Palestinian ceasefire - against the advice of the Israeli military. He ordered the curtailment of an effective IDF anti-missile operation and a complete troop withdrawal from the northern Gaza Strip. This left non-Hamas armed factions free to continue firing and arming while Israeli troops were ordered not to interfere.

The ceasefire -- like Olmert's promises - is unlikely to survive long after Bush's departure from the Middle East. Since Sunday, every Palestinian and Israeli verbal pronouncement has been attuned to the wavelengths of Bush and his secretary of state Condoleezza Rice. She will join him in Amman and lead the effort to bring Israeli and Palestinian leaders together. Her mission will be to extract results from these encounters for tempting Arab rulers to lend the United States a helping hand on the Iraq crisis.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly disclosed on November 24 that the brain behind this new strategy belongs to Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser to three Republican presidents, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford and George Bush Sr. He is emerging as the live wire behind the latest US foreign policy departures and the pivotal figure behind the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group.

This panel - which submits its final report to Congress on Dec. 10 - recommends an international conference on Iraq attended by leaders from Europe, Russia, the Middle East, the Persian Gulf and the main Muslim nations. According to DEBKA-Net-Weekly's Washington sources, such a conference would spend more time on the Palestinian-Israeli issue than on Iraq. The group's leaders predict that Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Morocco and other Arab participants will demand "progress on the Israel-Palestinian track" before letting the conference get down to brass tacks on Iraq.

To lay the groundwork, therefore, Washington will have to give the international community free rein to squeeze Israel for far-reaching concessions to the Palestinians - and not only the Palestinians, if Syria is to be engaged.

This would require a diametric reversal of George Bush's previous warm attitude towards "our friend and ally" Israel, possibly even a reversion to the iciness directed against the Shamir government in the early 1990s by the elder Bush, whom James Baker served as secretary of state and Scowcroft as national security adviser.

Earlier this month, Scowcroft, as chairman of the American-Turkish Friendship League, visited Ankara for an appeal to Turkish leaders to persuade the Syrian ruler Bashar Asad to cooperate on Iraq.

His mindset was revealed in an interview he gave the Turkish Daily News of Nov. 9, 2006:

"I think we need to embed Iraq in a larger regional solution, and that to me goes back to the Palestinian issue. I think this would put us back on the offensive psychologically and even make Iraq easier to manage."

Scowcroft then linked this viewpoint to the notion of an international conference, saying: "But I don't think this will start with some kind of a conference because everyone will come with their preset speeches and everything will freeze again. But I think that there will be some quiet consultations in the region. I believe the Arab states in the region are eager for such a conversation. Israel may not be eager, but Israel is in bad shape right now."

Scowcroft was therefore the first American strategic thinker to say out loud what DEBKAfile has been reporting since early August, that George Bush and his key advisers have diagnosed Israel as coming out of the Lebanon War weakened and with its strategic situation impaired.

The cards in Washington are therefore stacked against Israel these days. An unfortunate combination has emerged of a president who regards the Jewish state as strategically weak and a brace of key US advisers on the administration's new Iraqi policy who are drawn from the most anti-Israeli US administrations of the past. The Olmert government, however forthcoming, must brace itself for a period of intensive American pressure to cede ever more assets to curry favor with the Arabs.

Contact the poster at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 27, 2006.

This comes from MEMRI
http://www.memri.org/bin/opener_latest.cgi?ID=SD136606 . The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is an independent, non-profit organization that translates and analyzes the media of the Middle East.

In an editorial posted on the reformist website Middle East Transparent on July 17, 2006, five days after the outbreak of the war in Lebanon, site editor Pierre Akel warned that Hizbullah's ultimate aim was to topple Lebanon's elected government headed by Prime Minister Fuad Al-Siniora. He said that Hizbullah was trying to replace it with a new government that would be favor of Lebanese President Emile Lahoud and would reinstate "Lebanon's vassal relationship with Syria." This, he said, would be the end of Lebanon's democracy and the beginning of a "mullah-cracy," which he argued would spark a new civil war in Lebanon.

On October 16, 2006, Akel published a follow-up article, in which he pointed to the accuracy of his earlier predictions.

The following are excerpts from the October 16, 2006 article, in the original English:(1)

Hizbullah's Ultimate Goal is to Topple Lebanese Democracy

"The summer war between Hizbullah and Israel started on July 12, 2006. In an editorial dated July 17, on the Arabic page of Middle East Transparent, I wrote the following:

"'For the last few days Hassan Nasrallah and his deputy, Naim Qassem, have been declaring that "it would be better for the Israelis to put an immediate end to the current clashes and to accept the principle of prisoner exchange"! Israel's reaction has been to wage an unrestrained war against Hizbullah and against Lebanese civilian infrastructures alike. Which means that the Israeli reaction has obliged Hizbullah to enter into a decisive battle prematurely...

"'Hizbullah's attack should not be [regarded] in the context of the Arab-Israeli struggle. Rather, it should be viewed in the context of internal Lebanese politics... and in the context of Lebanon's relations with Syria and with Iran.'

"[I further wrote:] 'What were the aims of Hizbullah's attack [on Israel]...? Was it Hizbullah's intention to merely capture two Israeli soldiers? Or was the real intention to start a coup d'état... which would allow it, in the end, to seize power in Lebanon itself ?

"'Does Hizbullah's plan (which shall certainly make use of the "nationalistic" and "Islamic" prestige of a successful attack against the Israeli forces) include a "march on Beirut" with the aim of toppling the elected Siniora government [using] a mixture of [military] and political pressure, aided by President Emile Lahoud, who would sign a "decree" ending the mandate of the present government and replacing it with a new pro-Lahoud government that would reestablish Lebanon's vassal relationship with Syria, noting that Syria itself has entered into the Iranian orbit lately?'"

A Hizbullah Coup Against Al-Siniora's Government Will Be the Beginning of a "Mullah-cracy" in Lebanon

"And finally, [I wrote]: 'Was [this] "Fascist Scenario" - [which is] a repetition of Mussolini's March on Rome - the scenario adopted by Nasrallah and his Syrian and Iranian partners?... If Hizbullah's coup d'état is realized, then it will, in reality, be a coup d'état against the 1943 Convention (which was the basis of Lebanon's independence) and against the "Taif Accord" (which put an end to the Civil War). [This] amounts to saying that it would be a coup d'état against the liberal democratic regime and the starting point of a "mullah-cracy" in Lebanon. Such a "mullah-cracy" will [surely] spark a new civil war and [lead] to the division of Lebanon into [ethnic] mini-states.'

"That article, written five days from the start of heavy Israeli raids all over Lebanon [sparked] controversy. Many pseudo-liberals and pseudo-progressives rejected its 'pessimistic' analysis and expressed their dismay, in particular, at the use of the term 'fascist' to describe Hassan Nasrallah. Inevitably, there [also] had to be some pseudo-Marxists [who] pointed out that Fascism was a "European phenomenon of the 1930s" which could not recur in a totally different, Lebanese context!

"Five months later, this pessimistic scenario is unfortunately proving to be true, to the letter. The Hizbullah and Amal ministers left the Lebanese government when the ruling majority [refused to] accept their 'ultimatum', [namely, that] Hizbullah and its allies [must receive] 'one third of [the cabinet]' - which means [giving] a minority [i.e. Hizbullah and Amal] a veto power over all government decisions...

"When the Lebanese government went ahead to approve the U.N. International Court proposal for Lebanon (regarding the Al-Hariri assassination case), the Syrian-appointed President Lahoud declared that the Siniora government has become illegitimate, since the Shi'ites are no longer represented in it.

"Now, Nasrallah is giving his supporters 'assurances' that a 'clean government' will soon be established... Yesterday, Iran's Ayatollah Khamenei predicted that U.S. Imperialism will be defeated in Lebanon!

"The background to the [current] Hizbullah-Syria-Iran offensive is easy to guess: the defeat of the Republicans in the recent U.S. elections and the possible withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. [In this situation], the anti-Hizbullah forces in Lebanon are in a less advantageous position, but certainly not in a desperate position. Remember, on March 8, 2005, Nasrallah rallied 300,000 supporters in the center of Beirut [when he] declared his loyalty to the Syrian dictator. At the time, 30,000 Syrian soldiers were still occupying the country. Yet six days later... more than one million Lebanese marched on Beirut to crush Hizbullah's attempt to keep the country under [Syrian] occupation.

"It seems that Hassan Nasrallah's party is ready to play all its cards in its [thinly] disguised coup d'état. Hizbullah claims to have more than 20,000 missiles and thousands of Iranian-trained fighters. It has been strengthened by its alliance with General Michel Aoun, who seems ready to sacrifice the republic [in order to become] president. [Yet] the inherent weakness of Nasrallah's position is still there...

"Even if the U.S. forces leave Iraq, the Lebanese majority has only one option: to resist Hizbullah's fascist coup d'état and... to win. For a people which is still suffering from the consequences of 30 years of civil war and foreign occupations, the novelty is that a large majority of the Lebanese has come to believe in a civil, unarmed struggle. The Lebanese majority does not want to go back to the black days of bloodshed and destruction. That is the real challenge for the people of Lebanon and for the region."


(1) http://www.metransparent.com/texts/pierre_akel/pierre_akel_hassan_nasrallah_s_planned_coup_d_etat_fascist_style.htm. The text has been lightly edited for clarity.

Contact the poster at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, November 27, 2006.

The man who has come to rescue U.S. policy in Iraq is actually the man who rescued Saddam Hussein twice. This was written by Martin Peretz, who is editor-in-chief of the New Republic and it appeared in the New Republic.

The man who has come to rescue U.S. policy in Iraq is actually the man who rescued Saddam Hussein twice. The first time came early during the presidency of George Bush, Sr. It was James Baker who was in charge, tending Saddam's wounds and building up his arms. At that moment, the Baath dictatorship was still reeling from its brutal eight-year war with Iran, a conflict that presaged the uncivil strife occurring in Mesopotamia now. The second time was toward the close of the first Bush presidency, and Baker was still in charge.

Iraq had been forced back from the invasion of a country it had intended to annex. The logic of the victory should have suggested unseating the aggressor--a man at once reckless and conniving, hated by (most of) his countrymen and feared by (all of) his neighbors. But that logic never penetrated the victors, who maintained Saddam in Baghdad with the goal of keeping him on a tight rope and constraining his economy by a regime of sanctions. Such a regime has rarely worked. He turned out to be especially adept at manipulating it against his longtime domestic victims and for his sectarian, familial, and geographical allies. This suffering was neither here nor there for the especially visible members of the coalition that had defeated him. Arab solidarity does not cut across doctrinal lines. This was only one reason why pan-Arabism turned out to be a roaring tiger but one without teeth.

The primary consideration of Saudi Arabia, for example, was that a Sunni government of one sort or another--like the ones that had been in place since Gertrude Bell (the T.E. Lawrence of the north) installed the Emir Faisal as king in Baghdad 70 years earlier--not be displaced. This meant a permanent minority was to be in power. And, if history was an accurate predictor, it would be a brutal minority at that. A neighboring Shia state would be an enormous discomfort for the royals in Riyadh. I don't want to be cavalier about this, since, to say the least, nationhood is not a fully matured notion among the Arabs. And, if I were a responsible Saudi official, I, too, would worry greatly if adjacent Iraq became an official Shia state, especially given how the Shia minority fared under Sunni rule of the Arabian peninsula.

Almost uncannily, Baker's instincts and convictions meshed (and mesh still) with the House of Saud. Forgive me for appearing like a Marxist--a vulgar Marxist, no less. But the Carlyle Group of which Baker has been a top factotum is much at home with the Sunni princely and investor dynasty. Their compatibility is almost primordial--and also very practical.

Let's face it: The Baker-Hamilton Commission is a desperate rescue operation for the Iraqi Sunnis. George W. Bush has gotten us all into trouble, and he will now be taken to the woodshed by his father's faithful but resentful lieutenant. George W. never really liked Baker. (But who actually does?) The president might even muse to himself that, had Baker--and his dad--not saved Saddam 15 years ago, he would not have had the chore to do for himself. He probably wouldn't relish the irony of reading a speech by then-Senator Al Gore on September 29, 1992, lambasting the first Bush administration--and Baker, in particular--for leaving the despot-aggressor in power.

Michael Kinsley has written a characteristically hilarious and insightful column in Slate, "bake me a cake, baker man: why the baker commission won't fix iraq." It focuses on the predictably "blue-ribbon" members of this gathering of senior citizens. Or, as Mike writes, "This is one torch that has not been passed to a new generation, although former Virginia senator and presidential son-in-law Charles Robb (age 67) is a fresh face in the pool of Washington Wise Men." But perhaps he forgot that, aside from Baker, two other members of the commission have sins to atone for with regard to Saddam as well: Larry Eagleburger and Alan Simpson, who, in April 1990, lectured the "haughty and pampered" Western press that dared report Baathist abuses. And what, by the way, is Vernon Jordan doing on this particular commission of sages?

The truth is that commissioners rarely do the real work of the commission. That is done by its subalterns. It is true that this group is numerous and various. But several names ring alarms: Chas Freeman, Shibley Telhami, William Quandt, Phebe Marr, Marina Ottaway, Augustus Richard Norton--all fading apologists for the exhausted Sunni solution to everything.

What I fear is that the thrust of the moment is to restore as much of the old orthodoxies as possible. They haven't worked for more than two decades, even as superficially as they did before, when resentments were festering not only among the Shia, but among ever more pious--and, yes, fanatical--Sunnis as well. Their ranks, too, are swelling.

Sorry! Give George W. Bush his due. He took down the Taliban. And he also took down the savage Caesar. These are achievements. What he did not grasp--and what, for that matter, Baker and those for whom he speaks also do not grasp--is the sheer and relentless butchery of which both Sunni and Shia are capable. The fiendish barbarism of decapitated heads and mutilated bodies is now a reflex of the warriors and nothing exceptional, a commonplace. Even the bare rudiments of civilization will not soon come back to the banks of the Tigris and the Euphrates.

So what is to be done? Inevitably, Baker will deploy the only trick he knows: force Israel to retreat to the 1967 lines. OK, it can't be forced. Then at least hold a peace conference. The 1991 peace conference actually accomplished nothing, except to pay Bush-Baker's debt to their partners in the Kuwait coalition. And the Oslo accords--also nothing. In any case, although many people believe a resolution of the Palestine question is the key to everything, it is actually a key to nothing but itself. It would not affect the bloodshed in Iraq. It would not even affect the strife in Lebanon. It also would not calm the anxieties of the Saudi monarchy. Or the clamor for freedom in Egypt. Well, if a peace settlement doesn't douse these fires, another blue-ribbon panel surely will rise to the challenge.

Jerome S. Kaufman is National Secretary of the Zionist Organization of America. and host the Israel Commentary website (http://www.israel-commentary.org).

To Go To Top

Posted by Hillel Fendel, November 27, 2006.

Scholastic Australia, a publisher of books for children and youth, has refused to publish a book it commissioned - because the villains are Muslim terrorists.

Australia's national daily The Australian reports that Scholastic pulled the plug on a book by award-winning novelist John Dale after booksellers and librarians said they would not stock the adventure thriller.

Andrew Berkhut, a Scholastic general manager, said the company had canvassed "a broad range of booksellers and library suppliers," who expressed concern that the book featured a Muslim terrorist. "They all said they would not stock it," he said.

Scholastic Australia is part of Scholastic Inc., the largest publisher and distributor of books, magazines, educational and multimedia materials for children in the world. Scholastic Australia's website says it "has a strong commitment to children and education" and that it "believes that children and educators deserve the best - access to the highest-quality literature and learning materials from Australia and throughout the world."

Yet Dale's book, "Army of the Pure," was canceled because of its content - despite its fulfillment of all other Scholastic criteria. "There are no guns, no bad language, no sex, no drugs, no violence that is seen or on the page," Dale said, but "because two characters are Arabic-speaking and the plot involves a mujaheedin extremist group," Scholastic's decision is based "100 per cent [on] the Muslim issue."

Dale said the decision was "disturbing because it's the book's content they are censoring."

In March 2004, The Australian reported, Scholastic commissioned Dale to deliver "a tough, snappy thriller" that would cause young readers to "break out in sweats and their eyes to bulge without giving them actual nightmares." Scholastic later described Dale's writing as "almost flawless." Dale is the director of the Centre for New Writing at the University of Technology.

Scholastic also said that the story about four children chased by Afghan terrorists after discovering a plot to blow up Sydney's Lucas Heights nuclear reactor was a "gripping page-turner."

Dale's agent, Lyn Tranter, branded the move to withdraw the book a "gutless" publishing decision.

The Australian notes that the decision clashes with the recent publication in Australia of two books that attack the struggle against Muslim terrorism: Richard Flanagan's bestselling "The Unknown Terrorist," which is dedicated to David Hicks, a Westerner who was imprisoned after fighting side-by-side with the Taliban, and Andrew McGahan's "Underground," in which terrorists are portrayed as victims driven to extreme acts by the West's extreme struggle against Muslim terror.

The WesternResistance.com site opines, "It seems that despite the world in which today's children are growing up, where Muslim terrorists seem hell-bent on causing widespread publicity through acts of terror, politically-correct libraries and booksellers would rather delude everyone with the lie that there is no such thing as Muslim terrorism."

Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Israel National News.

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 27, 2006.

This was written by Michael Novak, who is George Frederick Jewett Scholar in Religion, Philosophy, and Public Policy at the American Enterprise Institute.This appeared in the Weekly Standard yesterday.

If I were an Islamist, a terrorist, a sworn foe of democracy, here is what I think I would have learned from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. This is what I would write down in my hard-earned manual of instruction.

BY THE WILL OF ALLAH, in all wars to come, may it prepare our brave martyrs for combat operations!

Today, the purpose of war is sharply political, not military; psychological, not physical. The main purpose of war is to dominate the way the enemy imagines and thinks about the war. Warfare is not, these days, won on a grand field of battle. Nor is it won by the force that wins series after series of military victories. Nor is triumph assured by killing far higher numbers of the enemy. The physical side of warfare no longer holds precedence.

The primary battlefield today lies in the minds of opposing publics.

The main strategic aim of war today is to dominate the mind of the enemy's public, and then ultimately to dominate the mind of that public's leaders.

Let me offer three examples. At what moment did the war in Vietnam come to an end? At that precise moment when America's leaders decided that they could not resist the unrelenting storyline of the enemy, which had long prevailed in their own press. The press surrendered first, then the leaders of the nation.

Observe that the Cold War ended not in an explosion of unprecedented violence, but rather at the precise moment when the Soviet elites no longer believed their own storyline. Superior ideas cowed them, superior will, superior narratives. Quite suddenly, the invincible Soviet elites folded, accepted humiliation, allowed the Wall to come down, and watched in bitterness as hundreds of millions of formerly captive peoples chose new forms of government.

The endgame was psychological, not military. There was a military component--Star Wars--but nobody knew whether or not that would ever work. It was the idea of that weapon, and will for Reagan to proceed with it.

The weaker political will yielded to the stronger will.

Yet, as always, will followed storyline. First comes narrative, then the acts that give it flesh in history.

What we have discovered in Iraq is the weakest link in the ability of the United States to sustain military operations overseas. That link is the U.S. media. They are Islamists' best friends.

Experience shows that the mainstream press of the United States is alienated from the U.S. military. In addition, the American press is extremely vulnerable to anti-U.S. propaganda. Thus, the American public will be fed nearly everything that foreign adversaries--our band of brothers--wish to feed it about the war. Therefore, I write:

Maxim # 1: To defeat America, impose upon the imagination of its media your own storyline.

Even if you can muster only 10,000 soldiers over the entire countryside of Iraq, paint the narrative like this: The Americans are irresistible occupiers, and yet they cannot prevent small (even individual) acts of destruction. Daily, unrelenting acts of destruction demonstrate that chaos rules. The American strategy, and the American storyline of the war, are invalidated by continuing chaos, highly visible, every single day, on worldwide television. The new dominating story is that the Americans cannot win.

Even though our own forces (for nearly two whole years now) can no longer afford to fight in a single operation lasting longer than a few hours, our martyr-brothers cannot be prevented from committing daily acts of destruction--the more stomach-turning the better--which demonstrate a ferocious will and a determination to destroy.

In such wars, my brothers, whichever party maintains the stronger will, along the most durable storyline, always wins.

To defeat the United States, then, it suffices to demonstrate that their vaunted military, for all its awesome power and tactical bravery in the field, cannot halt daily "chaos." To achieve this victory over America, it is not even necessary to create actual "chaos," but only its appearance. This definition of chaos cannot be made on cerebral, analytic, statistical, or comparative grounds. (In October the Times of London reported, "An average of 112 cars a day have been torched across France" this year, with 15 attacks a day on police and emergency services and nearly 3,000 police officers injured. We don't need comparisons like this or comparisons with traffic deaths and violent crimes in individual U.S. states.)

No, the shadowy existence of this "chaos" in Iraq is projected by a steady stream of stomach-churning, atavistic, destructive acts, staged day by day where the cameras of the U.S. press cannot resist them. Some of these acts bring orange explosions and black smoke, others consist simply of dumping dead and tortured bodies where the public cannot avoid discovering them.

We design these images to show that our fighters will go where the United States will not, that our brave martyrs have harder linings in their stomachs than anyone in the West, and that our ferocity and determination, day after day, cannot be resisted.

The aim of our terror is to induce surrender before the great battles are even fought. This is the true meaning of "asymmetric" warfare. The weaker side in military strength may demonstrate conclusively that it has a stronger stomach for relentless, unstoppable acts of terror.

Besides, brothers, there seems to be a psychological tic in the minds of American journalists, which prevents them from understanding that our terror is ultimately aimed at them. Today, yes, they think it is aimed at their government, and will cripple their political opponents within that government. Without qualm or fear, therefore, they do our bidding day after day. Willingly, gleefully, with much self-congratulation, they pump our storyline into the bloodstream of the Western public.

This is far easier than anyone ever taught us. This is our new discovery, our contribution to the history of warfare. Before our very eyes, the West grows fainter and weaker every day.

Maxim # 2: Take heart, then, my terrorist brothers! Bin Laden is even more correct than we knew before the last two years. The West does not have the will to resist. Those elites among them who do have the stomach to fight back, inexorably, day after day, are being undermined by their own media.

Now and in the future, the media will do our work. All we need are martyrs sufficient in number to keep a steady stream of orange flames and black smoke before their cameras, and to dump before them bodies that are stone-cold dead, and bear all over them the unmistakable blue marks of power drills and other disfigurements.

Of such martyrs, we need each day only a handful. In 365 successive days, we need fewer than one thousand.

This small band of brothers can defeat the most powerful army in human history. The path, my brothers, is to come to dominate the minds of their public, which they must suppose is supporting them, and in reality turns quite quickly into our best ally.

This is not so huge a task, my brothers! In the long run of glorious history, the time required is like the blinking of an eye.

Contact the poster at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 27, 2006.

Hanukkah is almost upon us and my experience last year at the home of Giants pitcher Rod Beck has made me realise that the meaning of the holiday has become distorted and in urgent need of clarification. The Jewish "Festival of Lights" is not about dancing around Jewish Christmas trees, or giving to the anti-Semitic, terrorist-enabling UNICEF. Far from it. Hanukkah is ALL about the Jewish people rising ARMED to defend their families, friends, country, and their FAITH.

In these turbulent times it is important to remember the true meaning of Hanukkah and not allow ourselves to be deceived by some Liberal, Politically Correct re-working of Jewish history and traditions. Jews have been commanded by G_d to defend their Communities and their Faith.

The Faithful at B'nai Elim, like the Maccabees, follow G_d's commandments.

This next essay is called "The Revolt of the Maccabees" by Rabbi Ken Spiro.

The Jewish revolt against the Greeks sets a precedent in human history - it becomes the world's first religious war.

We know the details of the Jewish fight against the Greeks and Hellenism from the two Books of the Maccabees.

(These chronicles are not included in the Hebrew Bible because, as we learned in Part 26, the Men of the Great Assembly had decided many years earlier what the Hebrew Bible should consist of and these events occurred much later in time. The Books of the Maccabees, which were probably written by a Hasmonean chronicler, who was certainly not a prophet, can be found in a collection called Sefer HaChitzonim which also contains other writings left out of the Hebrew Bible and which are mentioned or quoted in the Talmud.)

This revolt of the Jews sets a precedent in human history. It is the world's first ideological/religious war. No one in the ancient world died for their gods; only the Jews thought that their religion - the only monotheistic religion at the time - was worth dying for.

But (as we saw in Part 28), it is not just a war against the Greeks, it is also a civil war - Jews, who were loyal to Judaism, fighting other Jews, who had become Hellenized and who were siding with the Greeks.

The year is 167 BCE and the horrible persecution of Judaism by the Greeks is in full swing. The Greek troops show up in the town of Modi'in (a site west of Jerusalem which you can visit today off the Jerusalem-Tel Aviv highway) and demand that the Jews there sacrifice a pig to the Greek gods. The elder of the town, Mattathias, who is a cohen, that is of the priestly class, refuses.

But there is a Hellenized Jew in the town who is willing to do what is unspeakable in Jewish eyes. As he's about to sacrifice the pig, Mattathias stabs him, also killing the Greek official present. He then turns to the crowd and announces: "Follow me, all of you who are for God's law and stand by the covenant." (1 Maccabees 2:27)

Those who join Mattathias and his five sons - named Judah, Elazar, Yohanan, Yonaton and Shimon - head for the hills, expecting that the Greeks are going to come back and wipe out the whole village as a reprisal. In the hills, they organize a guerilla army, led primarily by the oldest of the sons named Judah, nicknamed Maccabee, which means "the Hammer." Maccabee is also an acronym for mi komocho ba'alim Hashem, "who is like you among the powers O God," - the battle cry of the Jewish people.

We don't know exactly how large this Maccabee army was, but even the most optimistic estimates put the number at no more than 12,000 men. This tiny force takes on the fighting Greek army of up to 40,000 men.

It's not just a numerical superiority the Greeks have. The Greeks are professional soldiers - they have equipment, they have training, and they have a herd of war elephants, which were the tanks of the ancient world. The Jews are vastly outnumbered, poorly trained, and poorly equipped (not to mention, they have no elephants), but what they lack in training and equipment they make up in spirit.

Most of the battles take place in the foothills leading from the coastal plain area (Tel Aviv) to Jerusalem. The Greeks are trying to march their armies up the natural canyons that lead into the mountain areas, the stronghold of the Jewish army. There's only a few places where the Greeks can ascend and this is where the Maccabees choose to take them on.

Now when we read the story of the Maccabees it seems like it's something that takes place over a few weeks - the battles take place, the Jews win, and the Greeks go home. But, in fact, it takes 25 years of fighting and a great many casualties on both sides.


After the first three years, the Jews are able re-conquer Jerusalem. They find the Temple defiled and turned into a pagan sanctuary, where pigs are sacrificed on the altar. When they re-enter the Temple, the first thing they do is try to light a make-shift menorah (as the real gold one had been melted down by the Greeks) but only one vial of pure lamp oil with the special seal is discovered. They use this vial to light the menorah and miraculously it stays lit for eight days, by which time fresh pure oil has been pressed and delivered to the Temple.

The Maccabees then purify the Temple and rededicate it on the 25th of Kislev, which is the date on the Hebrew calendar when we begin to celebrate the eight days of Chanukah. (The Hebrew word Chanukah means "dedication" or "inauguration.")

Chanukah - one of two holidays added to the Jewish calendar by the rabbis - celebrates two kinds of miracles: 1) the military victory of the vastly outnumbered Jews against the Greeks; and 2) the spiritual victory of Jewish values over those of the Greek. It is this spiritual victory which is symbolized by the lights of Chanukah.

The rededication of the Temple does not end the fight however. Unfortunately, some of the Hellenized Jews are not happy that the Maccabees took over Jerusalem, and they join forces with the Greeks and the fight continues.

It's not until 142 BCE, during the reign of Seleucid monarch Demitrius, that the Greeks finally have enough of the fighting and sign a peace treaty with Simon, the last survivor of the five sons of Mattathias.

In [that] year, Israel was released from the gentile yoke; the people began to write on their contracts and agreements: "In the first year of Simon, the great High Priest, general and leader of the Jews." (1 Maccabees 13:41-42)

Thus Jewish sovereignty over the Land of Israel is officially restored.

For the Kids!


Chanukah, the Festival of Lights, is observed for eight days, beginning on the evening of the twenty fifth day of the month of Kislev. This year, (2006), Chanukah starts at sundown, Friday, December 15th, and lasts for eight days thru Shabbat, December 23rd. Please see special instructions below for Friday and Saturday Menorah candle lightings.

Chanukah is a wonderful holiday of renewed dedication, faith, hope and spiritual light. It's a holiday that says: "Never lose hope."

Chanukah commemorates the victory, thru the miracles of Hashem, of a small band of Maccabees over the pagan Syrian-Greeks who ruled over Eretz Yisroel (Israel).



Chanukah has two meanings. First, and foremost, it means "dedication" because it was on Chanukah that the Beit Hamikdash (Holy Temple) was purified and rededicated to the service of Hashem, in 165 BCE, after many years of pagan defilement.

The other meaning gives us an easy way to remember the Hebrew date of the holiday: :Chanu means "they rested", and Kah (composed of the Hebrew letters for 25 - Chof and Hay) means on the twenty fifth (day of Kislev).

Chanukah is also called "The Festival of Lights" referring to the flames kindled on each night. It is also called "The Festival of Light" as Chanukah is the victory of the forces of "light" - which include faith and loyalty to Hashem and the Jewish tradition and the will to fight for these beliefs - over the forces of "darkness," represented by the hedonistic lifestyle of the ancient Syrian-Greeks.


The year was about 165 BCE. A large group of men led by Judah the Maccabee climbed to the top of a mountain overlooking Yerushalayim (Jerusalem). It was the same mountain from which, many centuries later, the Crusaders would launch their attack against the Moslems and from which, the Jordanian artillery would shell Yerushalayim in 1967. In 165 BCE, however, Judah and his men, with the help of Hashem, were about to complete a great victory, a triumph that lives on as the miracle of Chanukah.

After the death of Alexander the Great, conqueror of the world and friend of the Jewish people, his Empire was divided among his generals. Eretz Yisroel (the land of Israel), - the Kingdom of Judea - was added to the Empire of Antiochus III. When Antiochus Epiphanes became king of the Syrian-Greeks, he was not content to accept the taxes and loyalty of the Jews as his predecessors had done. He wanted the Jews to lay aside their Torah and ancient religion, and, in their place, substitute the Hellenistic Greek culture and Grecian idols.

King Antiochus bore down on his Jewish subjects with a measure of ruthlessness, stubbornness and cruelty that earned him the nickname Antiochus the Madman. (For a related story of bravery and courage about Chana & her Seven Sons, go to
http://www.torahtots.com/holidays/chanuka/chana7.htm). He defiled the Beit Hamikdash - by filling it with pagan idols and sacrifices of pigs. He forbade the Jews to observe the commandments of Brit Milah (circumcision), Rosh Chodesh (the New Moon), and the Shabbat. Jewish women were systematically mistreated.

Jews who dared to remain loyal to their faith were brutally tortured and murdered. If a woman had her infant circumcised, she was murdered, the baby publicly hanged, and all who participated in the Brit ceremony were executed and their property confiscated. Against this backdrop, Jewish resistance began to ebb and it seemed inevitable that the last remnants of resistance would soon be wiped out.

Then, one courageous old man turned the tide. His name was Mattisyahu and he was a Kohain - head of the Hasmonean family, from the Judean town of Modi'in near Lod. The Syrian-Greek governor of Mattisyahu's region set up an idol in Modi'in, rounded up the townspeople, and introduced an "enlightened" Jew who would sacrifice a pig on the idol in recognition of the decree of Antiochus. Old Mattisyahu stepped forward and slew the traitor.

With the rallying cry of, Mi La Hashem Ay-li (Whoever is for Hashem, let him come to me)," he called the people to rebellion. A pitifully small number responded at first - the people were numb with fear and hopelessness - but Mattisyahu's five sons led the way. They fought the Syrian-Greeks, retreated to the mountains, and began a guerrilla war against the Syrian-Greeks and their Jewish allies. Mattisyahu had not long to live, but on his death bed he charged his sons to carry on the struggle. The glorious brothers heeded his command. He passed on the leadership to his second son, Judah the Maccabee, who was a mighty warrior and a charismatic leader.

Many miracles happened. Outnumbered a hundred to one, Judah and his men won many battles. Jews came to join him. In a few years, he had defeated the mightiest armies of Syria. Victory belonged to the Jew, the pure, the righteous, the loyal defender of the Torah. Following the rebellion, the kingdom of Israel was restored for 200 years, until the destruction of the Second Beit Hamikdash.

So it was that Judah and his men climbed the mountain above Yerushalayim and saw that there was no resistance. On the twenty fifth day of Kislev, they marched into the Holy City and immediately made their way to the Beit Hamikdash where they saw a sight that left them shocked and angered. Idols, filth, impurity were everywhere. They rummaged through the ruins seeking at least one flask of pure olive oil with which to light the makeshift menorah they hastily put together.

Flask after flask they found - every one of them defiled. Finally - another miracle! One small jug, sufficient for only one day, remained with the seal of the Kohain Gadol intact! Quickly, with trembling hands, they poured it into the menorah and lit it. It would be eight days before they could manufacture more oil for the next lighting, but meanwhile, they lit what they had.

The flames of the menorah burned and burned and burned and burned and burned and burned and burned and burned. For eight days they burned. (I bet you counted). Those eight miraculous days were chosen as the eternal symbol to commemorate the miracle of Chanukah - the eight day long Festival of Lights, where we light the Menorah each evening, publicizing the miracle Hashem performed some 2000 years ago.


The question then arises, since the oil was adequate for one night, only seven days were miraculous. Why, then, wasn't Chanukah made a seven day festival? Many answers have been given over the years. Here are a few:

* One extra day of celebration was proclaimed to commemorate the miracle of the military victory.

* The Syrian-Greeks did such a thorough job of defiling the Beit Hamikdash, that it was a miracle to find even that one jug of oil. So the first night's lighting, too, was miraculous.

* Knowing that it would take eight days to secure new oil, the Maccabees decided to ration the oil they found. They used only one eighth each night - yet that little bit of oil burned until dawn every single night.

* After pouring the oil into the cups of the menorah, the Maccabees saw to their amazement that the oil jug was still full. A miracle - even on the first day!

* After burning all night, the cups of the menorah were still full the next morning.

* On each night, the Maccabees made very thin wicks in order to conserve oil. Nevertheless, the menorah burned with bright and hearty flames just as if the wicks had been of normal size.


NOTE: This is just a very basic introduction. A competent authority should be consulted with any questions.

The Menorah (or Hanukkiya in Hebrew), that we use today, is a nine-branch candelabra. On each night one more candle is added and lit, beginning with one candle on the first night of Chanukah and ending with the eighth on the final evening. The ninth branch is reserved for the shamash, the servant light, which is lit first and used to kindle the other lights of the Menorah. The candles of a menorah must be of equal height in a straight row. The shamash, should stand out from the rest (i.e. higher or lower).

The best time to light the Chanukah candles is at nightfall. The whole family and guests should be present. Young children should also be encouraged to light the candles. Students and singles who live in dormitories or their own apartments should kindle menorahs in their own rooms. If someone can't be home by nightfall, we may light as long as people are still up and about - either at home or out of doors.

On Friday afternoon, the Chanukah lights (which will burn until 1/2 hour after nightfall) are kindled BEFORE the Shabbat candles are lit. Saturday night, AFTER Shabbat ends, the Chanukah lights for Saturday night are lit. See below.

The miracle of Chanukah, of course, involved pure olive oil and that's why it is preferable to kindle the Chanukah lights with cotton wicks and olive oil. Candles are perfectly all right, however. Many people prefer them because they give a steady, clean flame.

The generally accepted custom is to place the menorah at a window so that it can be seen from the street. This is because we are required to proclaim the miracle publicly by means of the lights. Or, the menorah may be placed on the left side of a doorway opposite the mezuzah on the right side, so that we may be surrounded by mitzvot as we light the menorah. (such is the custom of Chabad-Lubavitch).

The lights must burn for at least half an hour into the night, (after nightfall), during which time no use may be made of the light. The standard small colored Chanukah candles will burn long enough, but - a word of caution - during the last few days of Chanukah when many candles are lit, if the family menorahs are too close together, the intense heat will cause the candies to burn down in less time. For some Chanukah safety tips, go to


On the first night of Chanukah, Friday, Dec. 15, 2006, three Brachot (blessings) are said. (For the Brachot, go to
http://www.torahtots.com/holidays/chanuka/brachot.htm). The third and last one, Shehechiyanu, is omitted all the other nights of Chanukah. The candles are lit after completion of the brachot.

The first day -- candle is placed at the far right side of the menorah. On each succeeding day, an additional candle is placed to the previous night's candle's left. The lighting is done from left to right, in other words, the new candle of each night is lit before the old one(s). Light the shamash (extra candle) first. Then use the shamash to light the candles from left to right.


This year, (Friday, December 15th, and Friday, December 22, 2006 ), the Chanukah Lights should be kindled early, BEFORE the Shabbat Lights (which are lit 18 minutes before sundown). Additional oil or larger candles should be used for the Chanukah Lights to ensure that they will last a full half hour after nightfall.

Note: From the time the Shabbat candles are lit (Friday evening) until Shabbat ends (after nightfall Saturday night) and the Havdalah prayer (separating Shabbat from weekday) is recited, the Chanukah menorah should not be re-lit, moved or prepared.

Chanukah lights for Saturday night, Dec.16th, are kindled AFTER Shabbat ends (after nightfall).


After kindling the first candle (and on the second and later nights) while the others are being lit, this simple prayer is recited. It declares that we kindle these lights in memory of the miracles Hashem performed "in those days at this season," through the brave priestly family of Mattisyahu. It concludes by declaring that all through the eight days of Chanukah, the lights are holy - and are not to be used as a light source; only to be seen as an expression of gratitude and praise to Hashem for his miracles.

One should not benefit from the light of the candles, only from the shamash and other sources of light. During the time the candles are burning, it is customary to sit by the candles, sing songs and tell stories relating to the holiday. Work should not be done in the proximity of the burning candles.


Maoz Tzur is the universal song of Chanukah. It traces eras of oppression - Egypt, Babylon, Haman, the Syrian-Greeks, the nineteen centuries since the Second Beit Hamikdash was destroyed and praises Hashem for redeeming Bnei Yisroel after each of them. A song of hope, it fills Jews with the courage to face the future and stresses the desire to a return of the Beit Hamikdash and the coming of Moshiach, Bimheira Beyomainu, (May it happen speedily in our days), Amen.


Al Hanissim is a passage that is added on the days of Chanukah and Purim to the Birchat Hamazon (Grace after Meals) and Shmoneh Esrei (the Amidah - Silent Prayer) for morning, afternoon, and evening. It starts by expressing thanks to Hashem for the miracles of Chanukah and Purim. Then follows a section that is said on each specific holiday with details of the respective miracle that occurred on that holiday.

Al Hanissim makes no mention of the miracle of the oil, per se. (The Talmud, Tractate Shabbat 21b, does however put emphasis on this miracle). Al Hanissim, focuses on both the physical and spiritual victories of the small band of Jews over the Syrian-Greek oppressors, and the guardian role of Hashem in the history of the Jews.

Al Hanissim refers to the miracles that occurred "bayamim hahem bazman hazeh, (in those days, at this time)." Some say that it only refers to the miracles Hashem performed for our ancestors; others say that it also contains a large element of praise for the countless hidden miracles that Hashem performs for us every day.


During the eight days of Chanukah, the entire Hallel (Psalms of praise taken from the Psalms of David), is recited every day in the Shacharit (morning) prayers.

In addition, there is a special reading from the Torah Scroll each morning in the synagogue. The readings recall the offerings of the Nesiyim (Princes), heads of the Tribes of the Bnei Yisroel, during the inauguration of the Mishkan.


It is customary that women do no housework for the first half hour that the Chanukah lights are burning.


First of all because the Syrian-Greeks mistreated Jewish women systematically thru their vicious laws.

Secondly, because a major figure in the victory was a Jewish woman named Yehudit, (Judith). She won the confidence of the Syrian-Greek general Halifornus. Then, after making him sleepy with wine and cheese, she decapitated him. When she hung his head out the window, the Syrian-Greek army was demoralized and the Jewish victory was greatly facilitated.


The dreidel was introduced as a special treat for children. During the long winter nights of Chanukah they are given a respite from their studies and given this special Chanukah toy with which to wile away the time.

The dreidel is a four-sided spinning top, also called a "s'vivon," in Hebrew. It is traditionally used to play a lively Chanukah game. The dreidel has on it's four sides, letters that tell the Chanukah message: a great miracle happened there - as if to say, "Play children, enjoy your beautiful gifts and your even more beautiful holiday. But remember, it was given us as a miracle by Hashem, our Creator and we will show our gratitude with renewed dedication to Him.

"In Eretz Yisroel (Israel), the dreidel bears the letters Nun, Gimel Hay, and Pay standing for "Nes Gadol Hayah Po", a great miracle happened here. In the diaspora, (around the world), however, the dreidel says the letters Nun, Gimel Hay, and Shin meaning "Nes Gadol Hayah Shom", a great miracle happened there (in Eretz Yisroel). So even the dreidel is no idle toy. As it spins, it delivers a message.


Go To http://www.Torahtots.Com/holidays/chanuka/dreidel.htm to play to play spin the dreidel

The dreidel is no idle toy.

As it spins, it delivers a message.

Each player places some dollars, quarters, dimes, or would you believe pennies, candies, raisins, or nuts into a kitty, and each player takes a turn spinning the dreidel.

"Nun" means nothing, you win nothing, you lose nothing.

"Gimel" means you take the whole kitty.

"Hay" means you win half of what's in the kitty.

"Shin" (or in Israel - "Pay") means "put in" - you lose, and must put one ...more into the kitty.


The Syrian-Greeks decreed that the teaching or studying of Torah was a crime punishable by death or imprisonment. But the children defiantly studied in secret; and when Syrian-Greek patrols were spotted, they would pretend to be playing an innocent game of dreidel.


On Chanukah, it is traditional to give all children Chanukah gelt (money) and/or presents. Of course, this beautiful custom adds to the children's happiness and festive spirit. In addition, it affords parents an opportunity to give children positive reinforcement for exemplary behavior, such as diligence in their studies, and acts of charity.

Chanukah Gelt should be given to children after lighting the Menorah. The children should be encouraged to give charity from a portion of their money.


Jewish tradition and religious observances are not exclusively tied to the synagogue. Judaism is an entire life experience that even permeates the kitchen.

So it is that Pesach (Passover) is symbolized by the matzo and by a host of delicacies that have become integral parts of every Seder table. Rosh Hashana has its honey flavored foods. Purim has its hamantaschen, all of them contributing to the completeness of the holiday celebration.

Chanukah is no exception.

Which Jewish home hasn't enjoyed sizzling potato "latkes" on Chanukah.

Why Chanukah?

Because the ancient miracle took place through a jug of oil, so Jews for over 2,000 years have commemorated the event with delicious oily delicacies and fried food. And because the Jewish heroine Judith used cheese and milk to help her lull Syrian-Greek General Helipornas to sleep so that she could kill him, dairy delicacies like luscious cheesecake are Chanukah delights.

For a few tempting recipes, go to
http://www.torahtots.com/holidays/chanuka/recipes.htm. Try them. Enjoy them. We hope they add a special flavor to your holiday


Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Riad Awwad, November 27, 2006.

Since our father is only one man, Abraham, we the arabs and you the jews have the same father. We have had, since than, a great relationship until the big forces in the world have interveened to spoil it.

After the holocaust the jews thaught were to go, and they came to their cousins, the arabs. The problem is the arabs did not welcome their cousins like they should, with flowers, but with war !!

I think this is the reason our area could not become like Japan or Switherland and has become the contrary, living hell every day !!

There is only bloodshead between us!

The terorists are the others that do not want peace to come forth in our region, political interests are those that do not let Irak, Lebanon and Israel be peacefull and calm...

Well, let us try to make peace now, if not for us, then for our chidren and our grandchildren here to come !!

Contact Riad Awwad at riadawwad2004@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Wilder, November 27, 2006.

Friday afternoon I was just coming out of a store in Kiryat Arba, when, getting into the car, I received one of the scariest phone calls I can recall. On the other end was Gerri. Gerri's husband Shlomo and I have been friends for about 30 years, of which he and Gerri have spent the last 20 years or so in Kiryat Arba. I was honored to be the 'sandak' at two of their five sons' Brit Milah, that is to be holding them during the ceremony of their circumcision. One of those two boys is studying in yeshiva. The other, Avi, is serving in the army.

Gerri: "David, Avi was injured down in Gaza. He was in an army vehicle which was blown up. They say he's ok. I spoke to him. Shlomo and I are going to the hospital in Beer Sheva to be with him for Shabbat."

I took Avi's phone number from her and called him. I too wanted to hear his voice. When I actually got a laugh out of him I knew he was OK. He was, according to his mother, full of 'resisim,' which, in English means shrapnel, from the explosion, but otherwise he seemed to be doing fine.

Yesterday Avi was released from the hospital and I went to visit him. Actually I expected to find him sleeping in bed and was a bit surprised to find him sitting in the living room, surrounded by two of his brothers and his parents. The first thing he did was to get undressed, showing me the dozens of little holes that had punctured his young body. The wounds on his legs and arms didn't seem so bad, but when he picked up his shirt to show me his chest -- WoW! I could only think that it was a miracle that we is still sitting here with us.

The fashion show over, we started with questions and answers. His unit, serving in Gaza, had set up an outpost in one of the more problematic terrorist neighborhoods. He was driving something similar to a tank, in back of three other vehicles, with a few more in back of him. His vehicle was targeted for the attack being that it potentially carried the most soldiers inside its metal stomach. A huge bomb, perhaps holding as much as 100 kilograms of explosives, detonated alongside the tank-like vehicle, tearing a hole in its side and sending thousands of tiny slivers of metal flying through the air.

Avi, realizing immediately that he had been injured, did a quick self-check to examine the damage. Then, somehow, he managed to turn his tank around and drive some 20 minutes back to his base, with much of his body bleeding like a sieve. Much of his uniform had been burned off in the explosion, and when he reached his destination and stumbled out of the driver's seat, one of his commanders, seeing him, reeled, 'what happened to you?'

Thank G-d, Avi's injuries were not terribly serious. The puncture wounds weren't very deep and none of his vital organs were hit. About as big a miracle as can be imagined. Now Avi has a few weeks off to recuperate, and then he'll report back to active duty. Whether or not he'll be able to continue in his unit will only be determined after he returns, but he didn't show any signs of wanting to run away and hide. To the contrary, he was in high spirits, despite the constant pain caused by his injuries. Avi's father explained to me: 'you know what it feels like when you get stuck by a thorn, and you can't get it out, and it hurts? That's what each one of the puncture wounds feels like.' I asked if anyone had counted how many little pieces of metal had punctured Avi's body, but the answer was negative. I guess, who would want to count them? But the whole time I was there, Avi didn't stop smiling, and I didn't hear any complaints. A real hero.

Yet, despite the heroism of Avi and many others like him, sometimes I have to pinch myself to determine whether or not I'm really awake, or in the midst of some kind of nightmare. This morning Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, speaking at the grave of David Ben Gurion, again offered the terrorists, enemies of the state, whose aims start with the destruction of Israel and end with the Islamization of the world, release of murderers from Israeli jails, establishment of a terrorist state, expulsion of tens and hundreds of thousands of Jews from their homes and abandonment of our homeland. All of this if only they would agree to a 'real peace.'

O.K. These people are brain dead. They have nothing left upstairs. They have learned nothing from the last 100 years of history, nothing from the over 2,000 people killed since Oslo, nothing from the thousands of Kasam rockets that have been launched since the abandonment of Gush Katif, and nothing from the Hizballah-Syrian-Iranian axis which launched war on Israel this past summer. I have no hopes or illusions about these people. I only pray that G-d will keep them from doing any more real damage, that, one way or another, their plans to assist in erasing Israel from the map will be thwarted.

But what about our own? Last week the rightwing Israeli weekly newspaper Makor Rishon printed an article written by Erez Tadmor, which deals with several new 'peace plans' being suggested by none other than people like former Yesha council secretary general Adi Mintz, MK Yisrael Katz, and most surprisingly, former Hebron resident Yechiel Leiter. Leiter, today a resident of Eli in the Shomron, once a prominent Hebron leader, was also a leader of the Yesha council for many years, an advisor to Limor Livnat and later to Bibi Netanyahu. His proposal, as presented in the Makor Rishon article calls for Israel to 'transfer' 5,000 Israelis in eleven communities, due to their 'problematic' locations, while declaring sovereignty over 42 percent of Judea and Samaria. That means, leaving 58% to our neighbors. He doesn't rule out 'one-sided' Israeli withdrawal: leaving heavily populated Arab land to the Arabs, while declaring Israeli sovereignty over the other land areas.

Why: 'The right has, for too long, only said no -- what not to do. Now the time has come for us to say 'yes' -- what can, and should be done.' Leiter calls this plan 'hitgabshut,' which might be translated 'the integration plan.'

Reading this article, I wasn't overly surprised by Katz or Mintz. The Yesha council has not been known, in the last few years at least, to be bastion of rightwing thought or action. However, seeing a man of Leiter's credentials offering Eretz Yisrael on a silver platter to our enemies is a matter of concern. But my greatest concern is this: Leiter has awarded legitimacy to all of those, be they Israeli, American or Arab, who proclaim that the solution to the Middle East conflict is land for peace. Eretz Yisrael for ... something. We must sacrifice our land (where is Hebron on your map, Mr. Leiter? Are up willing to displace your family from its home in Eli too?) for... what? For promises? For a piece of paper? For wants and wishes?

Leiter, with this proposal, is walking in the footsteps of his old friend, Ariel Sharon, destroying what's left of the right, integrating the right into the left, letting the genie out of the bottle, and announcing to the whole world: YES, EVEN THOSE OF US LIVING IN JUDEA AND SAMARIA, THOSE OF US WHO SPENT DECADES BUILDING OUR LAND, THOSE OF US WHO BELIEVE THAT G-D GAVE US THIS LAND, OUR LAND, ERETZ YISRAEL, WE TOO ARE WILLING TO UPROOT OURSELVES, ABANDONING OUR HOMES AND COMMUNITIES, SACRIFICING THEM TO MOLECH.

From now on, the Israeli left, fighting to destroy the Israeli presence in Judea and Samaria will have a new friend: Yechiel Leiter. They will be able to say: 'Look, even one of your own admits defeat. He says eleven communities, we say fifty communities. He says 5,000 and we say 100,000 -- this can all be put on the negotiating table. But the principal is accepted by us all -- the Land of Israel, is negotiable. It can legitimately be dealt away if the deal is right, like a discarded card in a poker game.

When reading such awful ideas, as presented by 'one of our own' I ask myself, why should young men, like Avi, and others, put their lives on the line. For what? Only to be told, after battling for their land and their people, that it was for naught, that we are 'giving it back?!'

All I can say is, thank G-d for the thousands and thousands of Avis who, with faith and strength, are willing to give their lives for their land, for their people, for their country. Their very service is the antithesis of Leiter's 'integration plan' -- they are saying 'yes' -- yes to our land, yes to our people, yes to G-d. They proclaim, with others of us -- 'peace for land.' If and when our neighbors will stop warring against us, allowing us to live peacefully and quietly in our land, we will let them live peacefully too. As long as we are forced to fight for our land, they too will not know peace and comfort in OUR land. We will agree to give them peace when they stop trying to take away our land. Peace for Land.

I wait breathlessly for the day when Avi and his friends will take off their uniforms and participate in actively leading the State of Israel - away from the directions offered by Leiter and his friends, and in the direction that G-d had in mind when he promised us, and gave us our holy land, our Eretz Yisrael.

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 Richard H. Shulman, November 27, 2006.


The IDF chased dozens of terrorists into a mosque, from which they opened fire on Israeli troops. The P.A. media reported a crowd of women and children heeding the call to march to the mosque and escort the men to safety, but were fired upon by Israeli troops. The P.A. unwittingly admitted that its civilians acted as human shields. This was not the first time that the terrorists called upon civilians to do so (Palestinian Media Watch in IMRA, 11/5).

The P.A. acts indignant that some of the women involved in that criminality and forfeiture of civilian status got shot during an Israeli attempt to get at the terrorists.

What isn't realized about Muslim Arab grievances and claims to have been humiliated is that their religion teaches them that they have a duty to humiliate people of other religions. Israel, by retaking an area that had been conquered by Islam, and by ruling over Muslims, reverses Islam's notion of the march of history, just as the Communists thought they were riding the wave of the future. Muslims perceive Israeli independence as an affront to Islam. They feel humiliated unless they are humiliating other people.


The vicissitudes of war (at least how it is reported) give the impression of both sides having a legitimate point. By fighting Israel, Hizbullah got the advantage of underdog status, although the overall Muslim forces, population, and territory make them the Goliath. The war made Hizbullah become a party to reckon with. The ceasefire made it appear to be a partner for peace. Nobody discussed what Hizbullah's cause is (because it is the destruction of Israel, nothing legitimate).

The war should have shown that Israel cannot slake Muslim hostility, not by withdrawal and not by trying to make peace. Same for the West as a whole, for the hostility is due to who and what we are, not what we do. It comes from within Islam, not as a result of Western behavior. The West lives under constant threat of Muslim violence. Al-Qaeda boasts that it will win, because Westerners love life, whereas Muslims love death and will sacrifice more. Muslims prefer "greatness" in death to achievement in life.

Sticking to misconception, Westerners think that Muslim extremism arises from oppression (or poverty). The West is afraid "of being charged with its old sins of racism, imperialism, and colonialism." (Those were and are sins of Islam, too, but most Westerners don't know it.) The West, especially Europe and the US Left, is beset with feelings of guilt. Actually, Islamists don't hate the West for oppressing them (which it does not do any more and Israel never did), but because the West ended oppression, and now Islam stands on its own. The West, being more advanced, shows it up.

The same kind of Western guilt afflicts Israel. The Israeli Left thinks its country is bigoted towards the Arabs, but "...Islamic extremism is the most explicitly and dangerous expression of human bigotry since the Nazi era." (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2006, p.36 from Shelby Steele, Wall St. J., 8/22). Every Islamic state oppresses its own people. The stronger ones strive to oppress others, too.


The president of the University of Pennsylvania held a Halloween party. She posed with an Arab guest dressed as a suicide bomber. Suicide bombers are war criminals who have murdered innocent people all over the world, including Americans. Whereas a university officer would not pose with a guest dressed as a member of the KKK, she is comfortable with one posing as a suicide bomber. What indecency! (Prof. Steven Plaut, 11/5.) She probably pretends to being moral, perhaps a progressive.


The Ford Foundation was caught working against Israel. It pledged to stop its anti-Israel projects. It didn't. It gives hundreds and hundreds of thousands to strengthen the Arabs in Israel. Now it has a new way to divide Israelis and alienate Jews from Israel.

The Foundation subsidized an Israeli organization enough to underwrite a gay parade (probably involving vulgar displays) in the holy city of Jerusalem. Religious Jews will fight against this physically. (Muslims oppose it, too.) That will alienate the mass of the Jewish people, who have come to hate homophobia more than religious Jews object to homosexuality, from Judaism and from Israel. Barry Chamish asks what else is that parade for, in that city, but just such a provocation. It is more subversive than degenerate.

The government of Israel seems complicit in the impending strife. The police wanted to ban the parade, but the Attorney-General overruled them. Thousands of police are being called away from anti-terrorism duty to protect the paraders. "They put ugly graffiti on a Tel Aviv synagogue, sent notes threatening to rape religious girls, attack the mayor...and it's all likely the Shabak's (secret service) dirty tricks department at work. The people still fall for such dirty tricks (Chamish, 11/8).

An Israeli MK suggested that police devote equivalent resources to allowing and protecting Jewish worshippers from Muslims atop the Temple Mount.

A parade there, rather than in the anything-goes Tel Aviv, is akin to the Nazi march through Skokie, home of Holocaust survivors. Couldn't be more callous. Sometimes civil libertarians are the spearhead of barbarism.


The younger, American-born, Muslims increasingly alienate themselves from mainstream US life. They choose Islamic identity over Americanism. In becoming more religious, they stick to their own communities and reject "shared values and common culture." They are separating themselves in schools via Muslim student associations, Islamic lectures, separate schools, language and dress, and in centering their lives around mosques.

So far, the younger generation is not terrorist, and follow a moderate leader (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2006, p.41 from Genevive Abdo in Wash. Post, 8/27).

The author deceives herself. To become a terrorist is a two-step process: (1) Return to Islam seriously; and (2) Become radicalized. Faith in Islam, a religion of war, is the prerequisite. Is this what we want for our country? How many cells already exist?

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 27, 2006.

The campaign for the rights and redress of Jewish refugees from Arab countries was launched at the end of October in Jerusalem and attracted coverage in the Israeli, North American, European and even Arabic press and media.

The campaign, which seeks to document the stories of Jews and their lost assets, is set to continue until April 2008. During November a conference on Babylonian Jewry took place in New York; 60 years on from the exodus of Egyptian Jews after the Suez crisis, the 'Journees Egyptiennes' in Paris focused on Egyptian Jewry. In the UK, Harif organised five events, attended in all by 450 people.

The US and France will launch their campaign in the Spring to coincide with the story of the Passover Exodus.

If you or your relatives were forced to flee Arab countries or Iran, please register your details urgently at www.justiceforjews.com.


Muslim-Jewish relations in the Maghreb, 1850 -- 1948 . Lecture by Moroccan historian Dr Mohammed Kenbib. Mon 4 December, The Sephardi Centre, London W9. 7.30 for 8pm.Harif/Spiro Ark/Sephardi Centre. Tickets 8 from Spiro Ark on 0207 723 9991.

Identity and memory among the Jews of Salonica . Salonica was for 500 years a Jewish city under Muslim Ottoman rule. Lecture by Dr Bea Lewkowicz. Thursday 18 January 2007. Holland Park Synagogue, W11. 7.30 for 8pm. Harif/Spiro Ark/Jewish Genealogical Society of GB.Tickets 7 from Spiro Ark on 0207 723 9991.

The last days of Babylon. Talk/ launch of Marina Benjamin's new book at Spiro Ark Centre, 25 -- 26 Enford St, W1. Saturday 3 February 2007. 7.30 for 8pm. Harif/Spiro Ark. Booking Spiro Ark on 0207 723 9991.

Salonica, city of silence. UK premiere of film by Maurice Amaraggi. Wednesday 7 February 2007.Holland Park Synagogue, W11. 7.30 for 8pm. Harif/Spiro Ark/Jewish Genealogical Society of GB. Tickets 7 from Spiro Ark on 0207 723 9991.

Conversation between Naim Kattan, author of Farewell Babylon and Marina Benjamin author of Last days of Babylon, Chaired by Linda Dangoor-Khalastchi. Sunday 4 March 2007, 2pm. Royal National Hotel, Bedford Way, London WC1. Jewish Book Week in association with Harif. Information 0207 446 8771.


Last days in Babylon by Marina Benjamin, just published in the US. To order online:
See posting:

FILM : The David Project's Forgotten refugees
Where to purchase to DVD online:

For all these stories and more visit the regularly-updated 'Point of no Return' at www.jewishrefugees.blogspot.com


Finally, a push for Jewish refugees from Arab lands

Jerusalem meeting an outstanding success

Coverage of Jewish refugees meeting

Minister calls on Oriental Jews to make claims

Mid-East refugees campaign

Libyan Jew fled in terror in 1967

Making the case for the forgotten Oriental Jews

US Jews step up campaign on Jewish refugees

Revisionist backlash to refugees' campaign begins


Israel must become 'the Jewish quarter of an Arab town'

Satloff on Arab anti-Zionism and anti-semitism

Stolen Jewish land and property

Jewish translators salvaged Arab philosophy


Bahrain's Jews cannot travel to Israel


The unsung Canadian who saved Syrian Jewry


US Holocaust Museum admits Nazi-Arab axis

The 1941 Farhoud was premeditated

Last Jews of Baghdad screened in London

Saddam's death sentence 'fair' -- Iraqi Jews

Can a Jew also be Arab? - Naim Kattan


Jews unwilling participants in Iranian documentary


Brindisi erects plaque to refugees of 1956
http://jewishrefugees.blogspot.com/2006/11/brindisi-erects-plaque-to-jewish.html ALGERIA

The three exiles of Algerian Jewry
http://jewishrefugees.blogspot.com/2006/11/three-exiles-of-algerian-jewry.html TURKEY

Turks remember 2003 synagogue attacks


Pope expresses solidarity with Iraqi Christians

Christians flee as extremist threat worsens

More Coptic girls disappear


Condi Rice is for a 22nd Arab state but not for a Kurdish state

Golan, right of return top Syrian priorities

Who are Palestinian refugees?

History and the Palestinian 'right of return'

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, November 27, 2006.

Dear friends,

A few days ago, one of the worst anti-Semites on my readers' list, sent me a series of anti-Semitic cartoons by Muslim cartoonists.

He sent it not to express disgust but to prove a bigoted point. You see, one of the biggest lies of all time is that the State of Israel was created is a result of the Holocaust. And more: That the "poor Palestinians suffering" is a direct from what Hitler did to the Jewish people.

The fact that this Nazi-bigot disseminates such lies is not at all surprising to me. Unfortunately, there are many such barbarians around. What is surprising is some of the people on the readers' list of this man (who does not even know how to use the Bcc feature in his software), among them people in The Guardian and The Independent newspapers, as well as university professors, mostly in England. That is shocking because they are regular readers on his list!

In case you have also been contaminated by the above mentioned lie, here are just a few facts of many:

1) Jews always lived in the Land of Israel from the time of the Roman conquest.
2) The Zionist movement (to return and settle the mostly barren Land of Israel) was founded by Herzl in the 1880s, 50 years before the rise of the Nazis.
3) Jews in the Diaspora always longed to return to Zion. They pray "Next Year in Jerusalem" every day.
4) Jerusalem is mentioned 750 times in the Old Testament, not even once in the Qor'an.
5) As described in 1868 by Mark Twain, and many others, the Land of Israel was barren, uninhabitted, uncultivated and lay completely wasted.
6) The Balfour Declaration, ratified by the League of Nations and the UN, was given in 1917.
7) Many Jewish pioneers arrived in Israel in the late 19th century and began to cultivate the land.
8) Many Arabs from neighboring countries arrived because of the created opportunities to work for the Jews and the British.
9) My mother's family arrived in the Holy Land on 1835. My father's family, like many others arrived in 1925, long before WWII.

Following, please find a great article on the subject by Naomi Ragen. Please read it and forward to as many readers as possible.

Naomi mentions the program put together for CNN by Glen Beck. In case you missed it, please find below the link to this video.

Also attached are the cartoons sent by that anti-Semite bigot. This is propaganda even the Goebels and the Nazis would be proud of.

The essay below is called "Enemies and Allies" and comes from Naomi Ragen.

Your Truth Provider,

I was in the middle of leafing through former Israeli Chief Rabbi Lau's moving autobiography of his childhood in concentration camps, when I came across a photo of a young person who survived Hitler, only to die as a soldier in Israel's War of Independence. That night, I happened to go to youtube to watch Glenn Beck's remarkable documentary aired on CNN's Headline News. In it I saw footage of an Egyptian television show about how a young girl's eyes are stolen and given to the Zionists. Other television shows on Arab channels show Jews hunting Christian children for their blood, which is needed (what else?) to bake Passover matzohs.

It suddenly occurred to me that Hitler's war against the Jews is not over. Sixty years later, the same irrational, sick hatred, racism, fascism has targeted us again. Unlike my foolish brethren in Peace Now who seek the approval of those who hate them, I do not. There is no need to search out reasons why my children (all of whom were born in Israel and so certainly can claim the same rights as anybody born in Jordan or Syria whose parents once had a house here) deserve to be vilified and targeted and terrorized and harmed, just as there is no reason to search out the crimes of six million of our brothers and sisters who lived in other lands, lands which told them they were being murdered because their noses were too long, or because they were ruling the world, or because they refused to go back to Palestine. Such reasons can only be found in the despicable nature of the culture and society which breeds our enemies, people whose sole contribution to mankind is bottomless evil and depravity. I spit on them all, and on their friends and supporters and apologists.

And to those who believe our very existence on this little piece of desert land is their just grievance, a grievance that must be avenged and redressed, I say this, quoting Zeev Jabotinsky: "We hold that Zionism is moral and just. And since it is moral and just, justice must be done, no matter whether Joseph or Simon or Ivan or Achmet agree with it or not. There is no other morality....this does not mean that there cannot be any agreement with the Palestine Arabs. What is impossible is a voluntary agreement. As long as the Arabs feel that there is the least hope of getting rid of us, they will refuse to give up this hope in return for either kind words or for bread and butter, because they are not a rabble, but a living people. And when a living people yields in matters of such a vital character it is only when there is no longer any hope of getting rid of us, because they can make no breach in the iron wall. Not till then will they drop their extremist leaders whose watchword is "Never!" And the leadership will pass to the moderate groups, who will approach us with a proposal that we should both agree to mutual concessions. But the only way to obtain such an agreement, is the iron wall, which is to say a strong power in Palestine that is not amenable to any Arab pressure. In other words, the only way to reach an agreement in the future is to abandon all idea of seeking an agreement at present."

We are at war. It is not one of our choosing, but one that has been unleashed upon us, every single Jew in the world, and every other person who doesn't pray to Mecca, as well as many who do. This not a new war, but a continuation of an old one. The enemy has changed his outfits and his philosophies, and his laundry list of grievances, but his character and his agenda remains the same: to torture and kill and destroy. The beast is hard at work. I see the signs of him winking out at me in the careless, anti American banter of late night talk show hosts, and the headlines of almost all newspapers. Everyone has jumped on the bandwagon. All of them siding with the dictators and the beheaders and the religious fanatics for oh such liberal reasons. Yet, I haven't lost hope. While as a religious Jew, I am hoping for a miracle, I also know that God helps those who help themselves. What we need is clarity.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

1. When someone- whether it is the Prime Minister of Israel, or a Syrian diplomat or Condoleezza Rice- say they are in favor of "a two-state solution, Israel and Palestine living side by side in mutual harmony and respect" what they are really saying is that they are in favor of the demise of the State of Israel. Proof: The disengagement from Gaza, a mini two state solution, which has resulted in thousands of rocket attacks on Southern Israel, reaffirming the fact that the so-called Palestinians do not want a state of their own, but to destroy the State of Israeland all the Jews who live there. Those advocating this are siding with our enemies.

2. When someone says they are in favor of the unilateral withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq, what they are saying is that they favor the capitulation and appeasement of the Western democracies to the Islamic terror network. They should be viewed as siding with our enemies.

3. When someone says that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is the source of world-wide Islamic terror, what they are saying is that the dirty Jews brought it all on themselves, and they should go back into the ovens so that the world can have peace again. What they are saying is that they think it's a dispute over land far away from their safe little homes, and that once the Islamic jihadists have wiped Israel off the map, they will be satisfied. What they are saying is that they never read a history book and don't know that this happened only 60 years ago, and the Jews were sacrificed, but that didn't satisfy Hitler, and millions of ordinary folks who "didn't want to get involved" had their lives and families destroyed anyway.They should be viewed as siding with our enemies.

4. When someone says they support "Palestinian rights," they are in favor of Palestinian terrorism. The Palestinian people- who didn't exist before the State of Israel (the people existed, but they didn't call themselves Palestinians. In fact, they were very indignant if you called them Palestinians)-are a tool in the hands of the megalomaniac Arab world, run by gunmen and dictators, to destroy the Jewish State. They do not want a State of their own. If they did, they'd be growing tomatoes in the hothouses of Gush Katif handed to them on a silver platter, instead logging bombs at Israeli schools. Their supporters, whether Israelis, Americans, Europeans, or Arabs should be viewed as siding with our enemies

We believe that the following steps need to be taken to secure the continued freedom of Israel, religion and Western values in the world. Anyone in favor of these steps, can be viewed as allies.

1. America needs to find out the identity of the terrorists in Iraq, and declare war on those who finance, supply, and send them.

2. War must be declared on all Islamic terror organizations world-wide. Israel needs to destroy Hamas, PLO, Islamic Jihad, and completely demilitarize the West Bank and Gaza. Egypt must be condemned world-wide for allowing the transfer of huge weapons shipments through her border into Gaza, her anti Semitic television programs, and her support for violent Islamic rhetoric. Anyone found with weapons in the West Bank and Gaza should be deported and their home blown to bits.

3. The U.N., in its present form, needs to be shut down. U.N. "peacekeeping" forces need to be recalled. U.N. refugee camps in the West Bank and Gaza need to be shut down, as they are breeding grounds for terror. If the U.N. can be revamped to reflect its original agenda, it can reopen. Otherwise, it should be thrown out of New York, the building razed, and affordable apartments built for American families on the same spot.

4. Iran must dismantle her nuclear program now. If not, massive bombing of Iran should commence until unconditional surrender is reached.

5. Iran and Syria must be held responsible for the Hezbollah. Any aggressive act by Hezbollah, should involve retaliation against them.

6. France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Holland, Norway, Sweden, the U.K. and the rest of Western Europe must begin deporting immigrants involved in terror, or those who attend rallies advocating murder, beheadings, and riots. Mosques and medrassas, and Middle Eastern departments at Western Universities funded by Saudi Arabia and advocating extremist Wahabi Islamic teachings must be shut down, and all personnel investigated, jailed or deported. Saudi Arabia must not be allowed to finance religious institutions abroad until it allows synagogues and churches to be built and run in Saudi Arabia.

7. All journalists and their media news outlets must be thoroughly investigated. Those found guilty of consistently and knowingly taking bribes from Saudi Arabia, publishing Islamic propaganda as news, publishing outright lies, and/or doctored photos should have criminal charged filed against them for aiding and abetting Islamic terrorism. All those organizations and individuals found guilty, must be shut down, their licenses revoked, and criminal charges filed against them. Special charges must be filed against news organizations that give in to Islamic threats and apologize, or change the news to curry favor with terrorists.

Well, that's it for starters. I welcome additions to the list.


Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Martin Sherman, November 26, 2006.

There is accumulating and accelerating evidence the extensive Palestinian emigration is not only feasible but is in fact gathering momentum. This comes from the Jerusalem Post and is archived at www.jpost.com/servelet/Satellite?cid=1161811251277@pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Palestinians are leaving the territories due to the harsh security and economic situation there, the Palestinian Foreign Ministry said on Wednesday.

Israel Radio reported that thousands of Palestinians have received permits to emigrate to Arab and other foreign countries.

Ahmed Suboh, a Palestinian Foreign Ministry official, said at a Ramallah press conference that over the last four months, foreign and Arab diplomats in the territories have authorized 10,000 Palestinians to enter their countries.

Suboh said that some 45,000 additional emigration requests were currently being evaluated by various foreign representatives.

The Foreign Ministry official noted that Palestinian emigration was likely to continue with the deterioration of the security situation. Contact Dr. Martin Sherman at ms6747@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 26, 2006.

Muslims demonstrate when Pope visits Turkey.

This next is a press release from MAS Freedom organization.

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful


Imam Barred From US Airways Joins Interfaith Clerics and NAACP Leader for Press Conference, Prayer, and Flight on US Airways

MAS Freedom Conducts Airport "Pray-in" and Press Conference

WASHINGTON, DC - (MASNET) On Monday, November 27th, 8:15 AM, at the US Airways ticket counter located in the Reagan National Airport, Imam Omar Shahin, one of the six Imams removed from US Airways flight 300, will join Imam Mahdi Bray, Executive Director of the MAS Freedom Foundation, Rabbi Arthur Waskow of the Shalom Center of Philadelphia, Rev Graylan Hagler of the United Church of Christ, Hillary Shelton, Director of the NAACP-Washington National Office, and other interfaith members for a press statement, public prayer, and flight departure on US Airways.

The "pray-in" is in response to US Airways' removal of Imam Omar Shahin and five other Imams traveling from a religious leader's conference in Minnesota. Three of the Imams were observed praying prior to departure. Subsequent to boarding the plane, the six were removed from the flight, handcuffed, and detained in the airport for questioning for over five hours. Upon release, US Airways and other airlines refused to allow them to purchase tickets for other scheduled flights to Phoenix.

"The detention of these religious leaders, and the refusal of the airline to allow them travel, is a gross example of blatant Islamophobia and the violation of the civil rights of Muslim passengers", said Imam Mahdi Bray, Executive Director of the Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation.

"The last time I checked, public prayer was still protected by the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees freedom of religion and speech. It's a shame that as an African-American and a Muslim I have the double whammy of having to worry about driving while Black and flying while Muslim. We charge the airline with not only discrimination, but with an action that is insulting and demeaning to these Muslim religious leaders, and to all people of faith."

The MAS Freedom Foundation, and many in the interfaith and civil rights community, feel strongly that in addition to religious discrimination, the issue involving the six Imams is also a religious freedom issue. We have forwarded the case to several prominent civil and constitutional rights attorneys and legal scholars.

The Freedom Foundation is the public affairs arm of the Muslim American Society (MAS), a national grassroots religious, social, and educational organization. MAS is America's largest grassroots Muslim organization with over 50 chapters nationwide. Learn more at www.masnet.org.


Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, November 26, 2006.

The last thing this world needs is another state ruled by bigots who refuse to allow others with contrasting belief systems to dwell within its borders. Israel, a unique tiny tolerant democracy, mostly Jewish but amply populated and in fact influenced in policy making by Muslims, Christians, an array of other faiths, as well as atheists, is nestled within a vast region substantially composed of many racist fundamentalist Islamic states that ban Jewish residents. So-called Palestinians, already heaped within the racist Muslim enclave of Gaza, are presumably willing to cease heaving deadly missiles into Israel for a while, if indeed Israel boots out all of its Jewish citizens from and cedes Judea and Samaria to those same Arabs. If ever there was an offer reeking with extortion this is it.

How can civilized evolving nations worldwide, observing such hubris, not castigate Muslim bigots, utterly disregarding humane principles by so disrespecting Jewish enclaves within lands of disputed sovereignty? How can civilized evolving nations worldwide not intercede and strongly opine any government negotiating to rule over any parcel of land must first pledge to protect and defend the rights of all inhabitants, ethnicity notwithstanding, of that land, especially those that have erected communities only wishing to dwell in peace? Why in fact must civil nations coddle bigoted Arab Muslims, who share nothing in common with the concept of an enlightened tolerant mankind, an absolutely essential prerequisite to prosperity in an emerging century twenty-one? Why in fact do civil nations not support Israel's conundrum, urging that besieged State to defend itself even more aggressively from deadly missile attacks, and fervently suggest no Israeli politico bow to extortion by ceding an inch of land to in effect a criminal regime launching missiles that murder and maim innocent civilians within a neighboring sovereign nation? Any and all land developed and inhabited by Israeli citizens within Judea and Samaria is worthy of their stewardship, would not have been developed conforming to humane tolerant standards by Arabs insisting on but one theological structure barring all others, thus should remain freely accessible to Jews and all others under the sovereign aegis of laws and moral principles democratically crafted and espoused by the State of Israel, to be enforced by Israel's considerable military might if necessary. Furthermore, if fairness remains a consideration, all of Judea, Samaria, east Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights should forthwith be formally declared sovereign Israeli territory, based on precedents controlling the fate of land justifiably secured in combat. The aforementioned land was so secured in 1967 by Israel, defending itself against Arab aggressors intent on annihilating the Jewish State. The horrifically stupid act of ceding Gaza to an unstable Arab entity labeled Palestine should be promptly annulled.

Any and all residents within declared sovereign Israeli territory, due to facts on the ground, must pledge their allegiance to the government of Israel to the exclusion of all other ruling cadres. Any and all residents not willing to do so should be given a reasonable amount of time to pack and leave, fairly compensated by the State of Israel for assets left behind, amounts to be determined by a fiscally prudent finance minister. Although such an edict would be entirely unacceptable to most Arab Muslim residents, at least they would be afforded an opportunity to remain and practice their faith, governed by a democratic nation, provided they recognize and adhere to the imperatives of that government. Any sovereign state has the right to expect loyalty. Any sovereign state has the right to prosecute and or expel those committing acts of treason. Israel and indeed Jews in general will be disrespected and perhaps despised by much of the world, no matter how obsequious they are, no matter how tough they are. It surely pays to be tough!

Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 26, 2006.

This is called "'If IDF doesn't leave West Bank, we'll resume attacks' -- (like they ever stopped.) The article was written by Khaled Abu Toameh and appeared today in the Jerusalem Post
(www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1162378487760&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

A Deadly Toy: An IDF sapper examines a stuffed monkey rigged with explosives, which was found at a Nablus bomb factory on Friday.

Hamas on Sunday dismissed as "unacceptable" Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas's threat to arrest any Palestinian who violates the latest cease-fire with Israel.

Meanwhile, several Palestinian armed groups warned that they would resume their attacks unless Israel also halted its military operations in the West Bank. At least three groups, including Islamic Jihad, have refused to sign on to the cease-fire agreement.

One of them is the Aksa Martyrs Brigades, which said it would not abide by the cease-fire as long as Israel continued to arrest its members in the West Bank. The group, which belongs to Abbas's Fatah party, was responding to the arrest of Mahmoud Kadoura, a top member of the Aksa Martyrs Brigades, in Ramallah.

Abu Obaidah, a spokesman for Hamas's armed wing, Izaddin Kassam, also warned that the cease-fire would collapse unless Israel stopped its military operations in the West Bank immediately.

"The Israeli aggression must stop in both the West Bank and Gaza Strip," he said. "This is a temporary cease-fire and any Israeli assault on our people in the West Bank will be viewed as a violation of the agreement."

Shortly after the cease-fire went into effect at 6 a.m. Sunday, Abbas ordered the deployment of some 13,000 PA policemen in the northern part of the Gaza Strip to stop the firing of rockets at Israel. Abbas also ordered the policemen to arrest anyone who violates the cease-fire.

But sources close to Abbas expressed fear that Hamas would try to torpedo the deployment of the security forces. They also worried that some officers would refuse to carry out Abbas's instructions, either for political reasons or to protest unpaid salaries.

Abbas's threat drew sharp criticism from Hamas, which warned against any attempt to arrest its members. "The era of political detentions has gone forever," said Khaled Abu Hilal, spokesman for the Hamas-controlled Interior Ministry, which is formally in charge of the PA security forces.

Condemning Abbas's threat as "provocative," Abu Hilal said: "Such threats don't help preserve the cease-fire; on the contrary, they jeopardize the cease-fire. We urge those who are issuing threats to backtrack or to deny them."

A Palestinian youth throws stones at Israeli army troops, not seen, in clashes during an arrest operation in the West Bank town of Ramallah, Sunday, Nov. 26, 2006. Clashes erupted Sunday in Ramallah after Israeli troops arrested one wanted Palestinian wanted, Palestinian source said. (AP Photo/Nasser Shiyoukhi)

The Hamas spokesman nonetheless stressed his movement's desire to maintain the cease-fire on condition that Israel also abided by it.

Ahmed Bahar, a senior Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip, claimed that the initiative for the cease-fire came from Israel, not the Palestinians. "The Israelis started begging for a cease-fire because of their defeat [in the Gaza Strip]," he told reporters. "The Palestinian resistance played an important role in repelling the Israeli army. The Palestinians are always triumphant."

Ghazi Hamad, spokesman for the Hamas-led government, said representatives of all the armed groups were expected to hold a meeting late Sunday to assess the situation in the aftermath of the cease-fire announcement. "We want this agreement to succeed and take hold," he told The Jerusalem Post.

"We will also launch an investigation into this morning's violations of the cease-fire. There is a consensus on the Palestinian side that the cease-fire must be based on the principle of reciprocity. I believe that all the groups are interested in maintaining this cease-fire."

Earlier in the day, Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh met with leaders of the armed groups and urged them to abide by the cease-fire. Following a similar meeting on Saturday night, Haniyeh phoned Abbas to inform him that all the groups had agreed to honor a conditional cease-fire with Israel. Abbas later phoned Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and told him about the decision.

Explaining his organization's rejection of the cease-fire, Syria-based Islamic Jihad Secretary-General Ramadan Shalah said he was opposed to "partial truces" with Israel.

"We have expressed reservations about this cease-fire because it applies only to the Gaza Strip and not the West Bank," he said. "It's not in the interest of the Palestinians to talk about a cease-fire in the Gaza Strip while Israel is continuing with its incursions, detentions and assassinations in the West Bank."

Contact the poster at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 25, 2006.

This article was written by Caroline Glick and it was published November 24, 2006 in the Jerusalem Post (www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1162378471759&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull).

Tuesday saw another nail driven into the coffin of US President George W. Bush's vision of a free and democratic Middle East. The Syrians aren't even trying to hide their involvement in the assassination of Lebanon's Industry Minister Pierre Gemayel.

Hours after Gemayel was murdered, his killers issued a communiqu calling themselves the "Fighters for the Unity and Liberty of Greater Syria." They said that they killed Gemayel because he was "one of those who unceasingly spouted their venom against Syria and against [Hizbullah], shamelessly and without any trepidation." Gemayel, they threatened, would be the first of many victims. As they put it, "Sooner or later we will pay the rest of the agents their due..."

The hit this week was not a bolt from the blue. For the past several weeks Hizbullah chief Hassan Nasrallah and his bosses in Syria and Iran have made it brutally clear that they intend to bring down the anti-Syrian government of Prime Minister Fuad Saniora and replace it with a pro-Syrian, pro-Iranian coalition led by Hizbullah.

Although their intentions are clear, a casual observer of events could be forgiven for finding the timing of Gemayel's murder somewhat mystifying. After all, the UN Security Council is preparing the establishment of an international tribunal to try those responsible for the February 2005 murder of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri. Why would Syrian President Bashar Assad wish to make people mad at him now by killing yet another anti-Syrian politician in Lebanon? What a casual observer misses is the simple fact that events in Lebanon do not stand on their own. Like Israel and the Palestinian Authority, Lebanon is a front in a regional war being waged against the US, Israel and their allies by Iran and Syria. Iraq is another front in this war and Gemayel's murder is intimately tied to developments in Iraq.

The Democratic Party's victory in the November 7 Congressional elections convinced Iran and Syria that they are on the verge of a great victory against the US in Iraq. Iranian and Syrian jubilation is well founded in light of the Democratic leadership's near unanimous calls for the US to withdraw its forces in Iraq; Bush's firing of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his appointment of his father's CIA director Robert Gates to replace him; and Bush's praise for the Congressionally mandated Iraq Study Group charged with revisiting US strategy in Iraq, which is being co-chaired by his father's secretary of state James Baker III.

Although his committee has yet to formally submit its recommendations, Baker made clear that he will recommend that the administration negotiate a withdrawal of US forces from Iraq with Iran and Syria. That is, he is putting together a strategy not for victory, but for defeat.

Baker fervently believes that US foreign policy should revolve around being bad to its friends and good to its enemies. Consequently he thinks that the US can avoid the humiliation of the defeat he proposes by buying off Syria and Iran, the forces behind most of the violence, instability, subversion and terror in Iraq. If the US accepts their conditions, they will temporarily cease their attacks to enable a US retreat that will look only mildly humiliating to the television viewers back home.

This week Bush said he has yet to decide how to move ahead in Iraq. But Baker is moving ahead without him. While Bush also said that he opposes negotiating with Iran and Syria, last Friday The New York Times reported that Baker and his group held talks recently with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem. And, as truth would have it, for the past year or so, the US Ambassador to Baghdad Zalmay Khalizad has been conducting negotiations with the Iranians. Administration sources say that Bush is expected to make a decision on the course of operations in Iraq by mid-December.

But as far as Iran and Syria are concerned, the game has already been called. They are wasting no time collecting their winnings. As Gemayel was being murdered Tuesday in Lebanon, Muallem paid a visit to Baghdad. There he established full diplomatic relations between his country and Iraq. Monday Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced his intention to host a three-way summit with his Iraqi and Syrian counterparts. Responding to Ahmadinejad's invitation, Iraqi President Jalal Talibani is scheduled to visit Iran and Syria next week.

Just as Israelis and American Jews both bitterly recall Baker's acrimonious and degrading treatment during his tenure as secretary of state, so the Syrians and Iranians take comfort from his record. They remember Baker as the man who accepted the 1989 Taif Accord that ended the Syrian-sponsored Lebanese civil war by sacrificing Lebanese sovereignty to Assadian fascist occupation in the name of regional stability.

Then too, Baker is remembered as the man who abandoned Iraq's Shi'ites to their fate at the hands of Saddam after the US failed to assist them in their post-Gulf War rebellion which the US itself had encouraged. Finally, no doubt they noticed that Baker's law firm Baker-Botts is representing the Saudi government in the 9/11 victims' lawsuit against the kingdom.

BAKER'S CURRENT dealings with Iran and Syria parallel closely Israel's talks with the Palestinians in the lead-up to its withdrawal from Gaza and northern Samaria last year. As Baker does today, at the time Israel appealed to the Palestinians to restrain themselves temporarily to enable an orderly Israeli surrender of the territories.

Last year the Palestinians demanded that Israel hand over the international border between Gaza and the Sinai in exchange for their cooperation. By forcing the IDF to withdraw from the Philadelphi Corridor, the Palestinian Authority transformed a tactical and symbolic victory for jihad into a strategic victory for jihad. Without Israel controlling the border, Gaza was rapidly transformed into a major base for global terrorists.

Today, the Iranian and Syrian price tags for cooperation are similarly high. The Iranians demand international acceptance of their nuclear weapons program replete with European abandonment of Israel. Their demands have apparently been met.

There is no end in sight for the UN Security Council deliberations over the relatively insignificant European sanctions proposal. And between British Prime Minister Tony Blair's speeches calling for Israeli capitulation on all fronts; French threats to shoot down IAF jets in Lebanon; the Spanish-French-Italian "peace plan;" and France's Arab League-like treatment of Israel in the UN, it is self-evident that the Europeans have abandoned Israel to Ahmadinejad's tender mercies.

Syria set its price for cooperating with the US in Iraq when it murdered Gemayel. That is, in addition to pressuring Israel to give up the Golan Heights, the US will be expected to accept the reassertion of Syrian/Iranian control over all of Lebanon through a new government controlled by Hizbullah and its allies which will replace the Saniora government. The fall of the Saniora government will also spell the demise of the Hariri murder tribunal. Iran and Syria also demand that the US abandon its policy of regime change in both countries.

Another similarity between Israel's retreat from Gaza and northern Samaria last year, its withdrawal from south Lebanon in 2000, and the proposed US retreat from Iraq today are the obvious consequences of such a retreat for the US, the region and the world. Far from bringing peace and stability, as the champions of the withdrawal policy mindlessly claim, a retreat will cause more war, more instability and more suffering in Iraq, in the region and throughout the world.

In the wake of a US (and Coalition) withdrawal from Iraq, the country would become an Iranian-Syrian-controlled base for global jihad. Battle-tested, heavily armed terrorists, cocky after their victory over the Great Satan, would use Iraq as a stepping-off point for attacks throughout the region and world. Israel and Jordan, as allies of the defeated great power, would be first on the list of targets.

Moreover, as was the case with soldiers and officers of the South Lebanon Army after the Israeli withdrawal, and with Palestinians who assisted Israel in counter-terror operations in Judea, Samaria and Gaza before the establishment of the Palestinian Authority, Iraqis who worked with Coalition forces will likely be killed, arrested and tortured by their new mafia-like terror masters.

Israel will find itself beset by an emboldened, nuclear weapons building Iran, an exhilarated Assad and by Iranian proxies from Gaza to Ramallah to Beirut.

BOTH ISRAEL'S decision to vacate Gaza, northern Samaria and south Lebanon and the current push in the US to leave Iraq are informed by the same strategic confusion. In choosing the strategy of retreat, Israel and the US have ignored the regional and indeed global nature of the war being waged against them. In such a war, it is impossible to view conflicts as discrete campaigns. Everything is related.

Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000 inspired the Palestinian jihad. Its withdrawal from Gaza and northern Samaria caused the two-front war this summer with Iran and Syria in Gaza and Lebanon. That war in turn inspired the current chaos on Lebanon, the Iranian-Syrian brinkmanship in Iraq, and Iran's emboldened sprint to the nuclear finish-line.

The fact that both Israel and the US continue to ignore the nature of the war was made clear this summer when they accepted UN Security Council Resolution 1701 which while setting the terms for a cease-fire in Lebanon made no mention of Syria and Iran - the main parties to the war. Then too, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's stated interest in giving Judea and Samaria to the Palestinians, and the US hope to retreat from Iraq, show that both countries continue to deny reality.

The most pressing question today then is whether Bush will give in to Baker and the Democrats and agree to capitulate to Iran and Syria in Iraq, Lebanon and indeed throughout the world. Unfortunately, things look bleak given that Bush relies most heavily on Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Rice has been blocking US action against Syria and Iran for the past two years. She was the primary architect of UN Resolution 1701 this summer, has been pushing for dangerous Israeli concessions to the Palestinians and is known for her good relations with Baker.

Although a great blow to Bush's vision of democracy in the Middle East, Gemayel's murder can still serve as an opportunity for the reinvigoration of that vision. If Bush sees this murder as the warning sign it is of what awaits Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, Iraq and indeed the entire world if the US removes its forces from Iraq or is perceived as moving in that direction; if he finally recognizes that Iraq is not a separate war, but a great battle in a larger struggle, then Bush will be able to formulate a new strategy for victory.

Such a strategy, founded on an understanding of the regional and global nature of the war, will change the emphasis of US operations in Iraq in a manner than weakens, rather than strengthens Iran and Syria.

Such a strategy is the only way to ensure the continued functioning of the Saniora government and indeed the survival of Lebanon as an independent nation.

Most importantly, such a strategy will be the only way to ensure that a policy will be formed and adopted by the US and Israel that will prevent Israel's annihilation at the hands of an Iranian nuclear bomb.

Contact the poster at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, November 25, 2006.

Muslims are rampaging all over the world and the nations are searching for a way to pacify them. They already know that Muslims, having once successfully exerted their power, cannot be pacified. The genie cannot be put back into the bottle via pacification or appeasement.

The Americans in Iraq have learned this bitter lesson also on their own soil - you might say at the Twin Peaks of their power and on the symbol of their military might. The Spanish, English, French and Dutch are in the process of learning this tragic lesson in their countries. In a last desperate act of perfidy, the nations are getting ready to re-employ the Nazi solution, namely blaming the Jews for the sheer religious insanity of the Muslims. All of these events were predicted years ago, given the hatred of the Jews by the Europeans who have now accepted the pledge of genocide proclaimed daily by the Muslims. Naturally, the Europeans will elicit civilized language, in concert with the Baker-led State Department crowd to obfuscate their real intent.

Tony Blair has been selected as the lead voice stating that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is the root cause of Islam's global assault on the West.

We see a mix of international power brokers, gathering to finalize their plans to eliminate the Jewish State as their gift of appeasement to the Muslims. History (if and when it is allowed to be documented) will speak of the individuals and nations as they re-enact the re-birth of the Wannsee Conference. For those who don't recall or are too young to remember, the Wannsee Conference was assembled January 20, 1942 by Reinhard Heydrich to plan the "Final Solution of the Jewish Question" as charged by Hermann Goring, under Adolph Hitler's orders - to deport or eliminate 11 million Jews - even from countries not in a state of war with the German Reich. (1) Adolph Eichmann took notes on the fateful meeting and became the organizer for transporting and murdering Jews. He was eventually caught in Buenos Aires, Argentina by a Mossad team headed by Peter Malkin, including MK Rafi Eitan. Eichmann was tried and hanged in Israel in 1962. (2)

"Never Again" seems to be happening again!

Who will be likely to attend the Wannsee of 2006 or 2007? I would guess that James Baker III, Lee Hamilton and Robert Gates would have already made first arrangements through the Baker Iraqi "Group". We see that Tony Blair has joined the crowd on invitation. George Herbert Walker Bush, Baker, Brent Scowcroft and that old gang would, of course, be fully informed, no doubt, as participating advisors. The current President George W. Bush will allow (encourage) Blair-Baker et al to carry the ball until it is time to apply final pressure, then a cut-off of aid and spare parts technology, trade severing links until Israel gives up everything the Arabs and Muslims want.

There are, of course, the disinformation specialists well into drafting the rationale to explain why the Jewish State of Israel is to be pressured before termination. They will, however, find different, civilized language as superficial plausibility which will give on-lookers (the American people) the sense that all of this is being done in the name of "Peace in our time". (Here "Peace" is a misnomer because the fact of peace simply doesn't exist. The talk-talk of "Peace" is always useful to mask intent.) Therefore, prepare yourselves for the finest of speeches, telling us all how what evil is being done is for the greatest benefit of all.

While James Baker and gang work diligently on a 'back door' escape route for American and British troops from Iraq, at the same time they tie the hands of the Israeli Army through the corrupt Ehud Olmert - a most accommodating betrayer of his own people.

In brief, while all are awaiting the Baker Report publically sometime in January, their plans have been laid long ago and are now fully operational. I would suspect that you would find a complete set of plans for the demise of Israel accumulated since they (the U.S. State Department, in linkage with Saudi Arabia and Syria) failed to stop the U.N. vote for Partition in 1947, IF you could subpoena the files of the U.S. State Department, the CIA and Baker's spy-training facility at the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University, Houston, Texas. (3)

The underlying idea put forward at the start by the Baker-Hamilton-Gates team is that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is the basis for all other Muslim rage globally. To further this idea Baker, Blair (among others) will journey to Syria and Iran to offer various appeasements if they will first pull back their "Mujahadin" (Islamic warriors) from Iraq so America and Britain can withdraw with "theatrical" face-saving honor. To achieve this first step the Wannsee Conference 2006 must offer Iran, Syria and their terrorist proxies (Hezb'Allah, Hamas) something they value. They will need to offer up Israel as that payment. No doubt, Syria and Iran have already been contacted and payment discussed.

This then follows the formula of the Nazi system out of Wannsee, namely to offer the Europeans the opportunity to get rid of their Jews. Naturally, the French and much (if not all) of Europe were glad to cooperate with the Nazis even though they themselves would soon be conquered. The Europeans found the trade of their cooperation on The Jewish Question to their satisfaction. Now, in 2006-7, the same offer will be made to the Arab and Muslim countries, counting on their hatred of Jews to accept a short term bribe to halt their attacks in Iraq for a brief window of escape for American and British troops.

Now it is 2006. The Arabs/Muslims have used the oil money to build vast arsenals of weapons purchased from America, Europe, Russia, China, North Korea, et al. Now they feel their long sleep as primitives is over. Now they can use both the oil weapon and the other weapons against the West. Using the hysterical rage built into their system by the Koran and Mohammed's "Hadith", they pledge to make the world one giant Caliphate under "Sharia" (Strict Islamic) laws. Jews, Christians and all others must convert to Islam, die or become slaves. The "Hudna" (temporary peace accords) Baker-Blair-Bush will be brief and the global attacks will inevitably grow exponentially.

The soft Free West cannot imagine what to do to save itself. They are not yet prepared to fight or face down the "Jihadists". Under Wannsee 2 run by James Baker III the idea is to attempt to bribe the two epicenters of religious terror in Iran and Syria to stand down their subversion in Iraq long enough for the U.S. to cut and run.

The Wannsee Group 2 know the Hudna (brief temporary peace) will not last any longer than what is needed to pull the American and British troops out of Iraq. They also know that al Qaeda, Hezb'Allah and/or Hamas will likely continue their terror but, for them that will be a small price, since the price (they think) will only be paid by Israel. The Baker/State Department ploy will be to feed Congress and the American people the idea that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is at the core of the Islamic Terror globally and, therefore, the unreasonable pressure applied to Israel will be deemed acceptable.

Recruiting such Jews as Ehud Olmert, Amir Peretz, Shimon Peres, Ehud Barak will be no problem given that they have all shown signs of prior recruitment. Olmert ran his campaign on the Olso track. Peretz similarly was for abandoning the Land. (Barak already did his part in abandoning the Lebanon Security Line resulting in the Lebanon Failure against Hezb'Allah this summer of 2006.)

Olmert is trying to save his seat as Prime Minister and Kadima at any cost to the Israeli and Jewish people. Olmert will try to fire Peretz and appoint as Defense Minister Ehud Barak who still holds the stained philosophy of "Land for Peace" and whose panicky midnight retreat from Lebanon in 2000 left the vacuum for Hezb'Allah to assume power in South Lebanon, dig in and build up their Katyusha Missiles sent from Iran through Syria to cause the Second Lebanon War last summer, kidnapping 2, killing 119 and wounding 400 soldiers - killing 44 and wounding 1,489 civilians. (4)

There is no proof of prior failure that will dissuade those mentioned that they were not right. The failure of Oslo keeps coming out of the grave like a voodoo zombie.

Now the Wannsee 2 group is gathering as many terrorist proxies to create the pretense that Israel can rely on the word of either the Baker Boys, Iran, Syria, Hezb'Allah, Hamas, Fatah, or Abu Mazen - and always - the U.N.

The Spanish, under Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, have already backed away from the prior commitment of the E.U. that Hamas must cease terror and recognize Israel before donor funds are once again pumped into terrorist groups (including Hamas). The "Trick" (being arranged) will be for Hamas to join Abu Mazen's Fatah without ceasing terror or recognizing Israel's right to exist.

Hezb'Allah and Hamas say they will continue the "Intifada" until all the Land from the Jordan River to Mediterranean Sea will be in the hand of only Muslims. The Baker groups may discuss this at first but, will likely ignore it to achieve their goals of appeasing the Arabs and Muslims by eliminating the Jewish State of Israel.

Groups like "Peace Now" have been working long and hard to re-partition Israel on its way to extinction both as a Jewish state and eventually its very existence. Of course, Peace Now and its clones claim they are advancing civilization but, they are a truly existential threat to the State of Israel. One could define them as merely harmless hard-core Leftists (useful idiots) but, others see them as genetically flawed Jews yearning to see the end of the Jewish race even when they themselves must die in a mass national suicide.

In the meantime, Wannsee 2 moves forward, recruiting the nations to make Israel the present day Sudetenland trade to keep Hitler from invading Europe - only today they are trading Israel to keep the Muslims from taking over Europe, then America as they reach critical mass.

I wonder if the new American Congress under the Democrats' control will close their eyes and let Israel slip away. Perhaps the American people, once informed, will stop the Wannsee 2 plotters. But, if the Israeli government under Ehud Olmert refuses to save their own tiny nation, why should or would others even try?

I recall the John Loftus book "Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People" (5) wherein he describes a group of Jews called "Max" who hunted down traitors and killed them after the war. I wonder if the Jews of Israel are killed in great numbers, will their remnant also hunt down the collaborators?

What will happen to the Jews of America after it become obvious that the Wannsee 2 has, with malice aforethought, arranged the destruction of Israel? Can the Wannsee 2 group have embarrassing witnesses reminding all Americans, that they participated in or initiated Genocide - again? Will America become like Germany, always knowing that they savagely murdered 6 million Jews?


1. "The Wannsee Conference and the 'Final Solution'" www.ushmm.org/outreach/wannsee.htm

2. "Hitler's Third Reich & World War 2 in the News" http://htlernews.cloudworth.com/adolf-eichmann-alois-brunner-gestapo.php

3. "Welcome to the James A. Baker Institute for Public Policy" Iraq: The Iraq Study Group co-chaired by James A. Baker III and Lee Hamilton, Baker Institute, Rice University, Houston

4. "2006 Israel-Lebanon Conflict: Casualties" Wikipedia http://en.wikiedia.org/wiki/2006_Israel-Lebanon_conflict

5. "Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People - 1920-1992" by John Loftus & Mark Aarons St. Martin's Press NY 1994

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@comcast.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 25, 2006.

The talent and creativity in this little country Israel does not stop. In spite of the Arabs eagerness to make Israel vanish and them bother her in any way they could, the Israelis remains prolifically inventive.

Israel has proven to be is a light to the nations; if the Israelis were only left unhindered, Israel would be a greater light unto the nations.

Sadly, a great deal of her budget and mental efforts go to defend itself from the ignoramus Arabists.

Wow! Now there is the possibility the USA will be able to use the described below technology in Iraq against the IEDS. The IEDS have caused enormous loss of American troop lives.

What a lifesaver it will be!

Thank you Israel ONCE AGAIN!

This news may have not yet appeared in the local newspapers so we tell you!

The Israeli Armaments Development Authority (Rafael) has developed a laser system to diffuse destroy roadside bombs, which have killed hundreds of US and Israeli soldiers in Iraq and Lebanon.

Rafael and American defense contractor General Dynamics have produced and deployed the system, which is called Thor. It uses the concentrated energy of a high-powered laser to clear unexploded bombs and improvised explosive devices.

"The directed energy from the laser may also be used to ignite combustible materials, as a standoff cutting torch, and for other combat purposes," General Dynamics said in a statement about the project ahead of US moves to purchase and deploy the system in its army.

Thor combines the Israeli-produced high-energy laser with the Browning M2 12.7-mm machine gun, made by General Dynamics, to destroy explosive devices. The weapon is used with a remote operator control station or mounted on a vehicle or bomb-squad robot.

The Thor system includes sensors that work either in day or nighttime conditions to detect the hidden explosive charge. The developers report that the Thor system has already been deployed in combat operations. "Thor has demonstrated combat effectiveness in operational engagements bringing an additional precision fire gun platform to the fight, while at the same time filling a unique tactical mission role," Rafael announced.

The developers explain that the directed energy from the laser is capable of rapidly clearing unexploded devices by inducing a low-order burning or deflagration reaction in the explosive material from a safe distance.

"The directed energy from the laser may also be used to ignite combustible materials, as a standoff cutting torch, and for other combat purposes," the developer explains. "The kinetic energy from the 12.7mm bullet fired by the M2 functions as a standoff disrupter, destroying fusing, thick-cased munitions and booby traps, also enabling distancing explosive hazards away from the force route. The M2 machine gun ultimately provides accurate, direct fire upon enemy forces and targets in either an offensive or defensive role."

The Armament Development Authority is supported by Israel's Ministry of Defense and designs, develops, manufactures and supplies a wide range of advanced defense systems.

Contact the poster at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 25, 2006.

This article is called "Muslims playing for power" and it was written by Sarah Boesveld. It was posted on Eyeopener (www.theeyeopener.com) November 16, 2006.

Ryerson University in Toronto, the Wahhabi front group calling itself the Muslim Students' Association is playing for power. And winning.

As the largest student group on campus, the Muslim Students' Association has made its presence known in student politics. Former MSA vice-president Muhammad Ali Jabbar is heading up the RSU, thanks to support from the MSA. The group has monopolized use of the multifaith room, putting the true meaning of the room's name in jeopardy.

Through its renewed fight against Islamophobia, the MSA has also been criticized as being increasingly polarized and turning the RSU's attention mostly toward Muslim issues. Smaller religious groups with less influence have been left wondering when their needs will be addressed.

A variety of religious groups on campus have said they have felt uncomfortable trying to use the multifaith room. Eric Da Silva, president of the Catholic Student Association, says the group looked into using the room for mass but was told by RSU front desk staff that the room was "permanently booked" by Muslim students.

"No one is trying to take away the space from the Muslims, we just don't want to be stepping on their toes," says Da Silva. He stresses that the group found another space to hold mass and the conflict was quickly resolved. Da Silva acknowledges that Muslims have a stricter prayer schedule than Catholics, but he challenges whether the room should be called a multifaith one. The space, which is divided to separate males from females, has rows taped on the floor for prayer and Islamic decorations adorning the walls, is only accommodating to Muslims.

"I don't think the university should be calling it a multifaith room. If we went in there and decorated the room with rosary and crosses, other students would feel uncomfortable praying there," he says.

The Ismaili Student's Association, a smaller Muslim student group that practices the Shiite Muslim religion, has experienced conflicting schedules with the MSA for prayer space during the month of Ramadan. On a regular basis, the smaller group uses the multi-faith room for prayer between 6 and 7 p.m. During Ramadan, when Muslims break their fast at sunset, the Ismaili students, who practice a separate form of prayer were resigned to finding somewhere else to pray.

"We were pretty much in a different room every night for a month," says a member of the group who wished not to be named. "It can be frustrating at times, but you kind of have to make the best of the situation," she says of having to move so the MSA can use the room.

At the semi-annual general meeting last week, RSU passed a motion to create a multifaith council in which representatives from all religious groups will come together to "learn from each other" and create "harmony on campus," Jabbar says.A Canadian Federation of Students task force tackling cultural and religious discrimination was brought to campus by members of the MSA on Nov. 1, but it only addressed the problem of Islamophobia. Anti-Semitism and racism towards other minorities were not discussed.

When Ryerson campus was slammed with death threats and anti-Muslim propaganda two years ago, the MSA stepped up to the plate, denouncing these acts and doing their part to eradicate Islamophobia.

"There was a lot of stuff on anti-Semitism then," says Jabbar. "There was nothing addressing Islamophobia on campus."

Jonathan Vandersluis, president of Hillel, a Ryerson Jewish group, has concerns that the MSA is using its power to pay attention only to issues facing them, especially pertaining to the recent task force.

"It came out of a campaign that was saying no to racism, Islamophobia, and anti-semitism. How come we're only addressing the needs of Muslims?" he asks. Vandersluis says Hillel did not get involved in the taskforce because they weren't informed about it at the time.

Getting involved is something the MSA has prided itself on. Jabbar is grateful for the MSA endorsement and high voter turnout for his election victory last spring.

"I'm not going to deny it," says Jabbar. "The support I got from the MSA, I really appreciated."

"When something positive happens, it rejuvinates our community," he says of his election win and the support he gathered.

Sarah Turnbull, who ran against Jabbar for RSU president last year, was surprised that the MSA's endorsement of Jabbar went as far as it did.

"I had my Muslim friends told not to vote for me because if they didn't vote for Jabbar, the Muslims would be suppressed," she says. "In the end some of my strongest supporters were Muslims and they were more horrified by this then even I was."

Turnbull also says that the MSA is what led to the "United" slate to choose Jabbar for president. "It was clearly Nora Loreto's turn (to run for president)," she says of the experienced and vocal RSU politico.

Jabbar says Loreto's decision to run for vice president education was her decision alone.

"That's what she holds true to her heart," he says, adding that the current slate discussed who would be best in each RSU position. Jabbar says that everyone is doing what they want to do and are working toward representing the student body as a whole, not just Muslims.

As in most democracies, there are some who feel they are not being represented by the government. There are Muslim students on campus who feel their views are not represented well by the student union.

RSU has put too much emphasis on Muslim issues at the cost of representing the needs of all student groups, says a Muslim Ryerson Business student who asked not to be named out of fear of retribution "Everything they're doing is Muslim, Muslim, Muslim. Whenever I hear them at their meetings that's the rhetoric they're using," he says.

The 1,200 student membership of the MSA is responsible for its strong voice in the RSU, not Jabbar's presidency says MSA president Waleed Elsayed.

"It was the same when Rebecca Rose was in (the RSU president's) office. She heard our concerns and so does Muhammad Ali Jabbar. Whoever the next president is, because we have an all inclusive campus, will hear our concerns too," says Elsayed.

He says that the multifaith room is used most often by the MSA because of their great numbers and their prayer schedule which demands prayers five times a day.

"In the future we may very well need another room just for Muslim students," he says if other groups wish to use the room more often.

Elsayed says the political involvement of the MSA has not been intentionally influential.

"We want to be a part of the university. Politically, there's nothing that we want, we have our prayer space in the new building."

At other schools across Canada, Muslim students are still struggling to find a space of their own. Thomas Butko, professor at University of Alberta and expert on politics and Islam says the issue of prayer space at his university campus is exactly the opposite of Ryerson's.

"On the most part, a lot of these multifaith areas have been dominated by Christians," he says, adding that at U of A, Muslims are a minority who don't want to "rock the boat."

As the largest religious group on Ryerson's campus, Butko is not surprised that the MSA is dipping its hand into politics.

"It makes common sense that larger numbers would try to be more promoters of their interests," he says.

Butko says that because religion is seen as private, a large group going public with their interests can be interpreted as controversial.

"People tend to be all or nothing about religion," he says. It was only 20 years ago that the Lord's prayer could be heard in public elementary school classrooms across Canada.

"Many Christians still don't see this as a mixing of public and private," he says.

At smaller campuses like University of New Brunswick, the MSA has little to no political influence in student government. After three years there are 70 members and have only recently gained prayer space.

"We don't have plans to be represented in the student union," says MSA president Yahya Abuamer. "We don't propogate our religions, we're just showing education to erase misconceptions about our faith."

El-Tantawy Attia, executive director of Masjid Toronto says it's important for Muslims to be involved in student politics.

"You should not penalize an active group if the others are not."

Attia commends Ryerson's MSA for its great work in helping the needy during Ramadan.

It's strong numbers allows the group to make positive contributions to the Ryerson community, such as a $7,000 donation to the Community Food Room with funds raised from a fast-a-thon.

Comment posted By joseph_walker on 11/23/06

I'm curious as to the source of Thomas Butko's comments regarding the status of "a lot of these multifaith areas" at the University of Alberta.

As far as I am aware, there has been only one "multi-faith" designated area (currently found at SUB 011) for as long as I have been a member of the U of A Interfaith Chaplains' Association (going on 8 or so years now.) And that area has been used quite heavily by the MSA. I know this from first hand experience, and from having an office located 12 feet from the door of said multi-faith room.

Perhaps the situation described by Thomas Butko existed some time ago, but for up to date information on the usage of such space, the schedule is publicly posted. The EyeOpener might also contact Greg Idell, who is in charge of facility bookings, and they will see that the situation is not quite as Mr Butko makes it out to be.


Rev. Joseph Walker
Past Chair
University of Alberta Chaplains' Association
HUB 169D
U of A, Edm, AB

Contact the poster at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, November 25, 2006.

Grandmother-Turned-Suicide Bomber: Fatma Omar an-Najar, 68, is seen holding a rifle in this Hamas-released photo before carrying out a suicide bombing that wounded three IDF soldiers in the northern Gaza Strip on Thursday.

Homicide/suicide bombers, the techno human hybrid weapons of choice of Islamic fanatics, perhaps aware that mobile delivery systems more easily infiltrate pin pointed targets than static delivery systems wrecking a maximum amount of terror and destruction with but one Muslim martyr, will not lose appeal unless and until Islamic moderates vociferously condemn the practice, citing references from the Koran suggesting it violates Islamic law. Period!!! I offer a recent insidious incident of Muslim grandmother Fatima Omar Mahmud al-Najar, blessed with more than 40 grandchildren, blowing herself asunder while wounding two Israeli soldiers near the Gaza town of Beit Lahiya, being glorified on television in a so-called martyr's video, as proof that the mind set of a deviant subculture, having metastasized to become the dominating defining force within that culture, is so mentally deranged that there is absolutely no limit to what it will not only condone but what in fact swells its sadistically mutated soul with pride. No matter what tragic loss possessed this older lady to commit such a subhuman act of suicide bent on murder, the very fact this horrific end to life, especially embodied by one grandmother responsible for bringing so much life into the world, is so glorified and indeed venerated for all the world to see, speaks volumes as to the perilously psychopathic collective state of mind of those terrorist glorifiers infecting and substantially directing Islam, a faith worshipped by a sizable portion of humanity. The very fact that Islamic moderates, as well as sane non-Muslim movers and shakers worldwide, remain deafeningly silent to this appalling incident, perhaps numbed by all the other gruesome violence and consequential human misery now occurring throughout our besieged orb, bodes ominously for the health and well being of Earth's dominant species as we enter a new millennium.

Secular life and limb has little value to those who influence and perpetrate horrendous acts of violence against both soldiers and innocent civilians, ethnicity notwithstanding. Dysfunctional Iraq produces ever-increasing amounts of casualties inflicted by both homicide/suicide martyring Muslim maniacs as well as kindred spirit Muslim murderers more inclined to rig cars with lethal explosives, recently snuffing out over 140 Iraqi Muslim lives as well as maiming twice as many in the slums of Sadr City Baghdad. Might such behavior be condoned in Islam's presumably holy Koran? Does a vengeful Allah cheer on such 'virtuous' followers, even of the grandmotherly variety? If movers and shakers thus keepers of Islamic principles and traditions as delineated in their Koran refuse to defend its gospel by vigorously castigating those who commit the unspeakable, screaming 'God is Great' before detonating, than non-Muslims must presume Islam's holy book is nothing more than a handbook for sadists including snuff addicts, like the ones who dare to glorify a sick grandmother shrouded in a suicide belt. Would Jews or Christians or for that matter members of any other faith allow human filth to prostitute their most sacred texts with interpretations supporting acts of blatant savagery? Is there any limit to what moderate Muslims might endure concerning the blasphemy of their religion, or is the term moderate Muslim an oxymoron? One has cause to wonder?

Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 24, 2006.

Israel's ONLY peace plan should be: To DEMAND from all Western Nations that want to see peace prevails in the region to SEMAND that the ENTIRE Arab World end its war against Israel; nothing more BUT for sure nothing less!

Otherwise, it is now the time to call the Arab bluff.

The ONLY solution to all this "repackaging the offer of a Palestinians state" BALAGAN (means: chaos) is for Israel to END her WEAKNESS and begin shouting, at the top of her political lungs, the truth!

Israel must become decisive and aggressive; it should no longer view these Qassam rockets attacks coming at her daily and the endless potential homicide bombing they dismantle daily as a mere nuisance, but go with full force and actively dig in and FIGHT the terror to try bringing it to its end!

Below are three articles, from Israel, the UK and the US, with views about the nature of the endless conflict between the Palestinians and Israel.

The Israeli view: (1) As long as the Arabs insist on 3-million Arab "refugees" returning to Israel, the Arabs are not serious about peace. The Palestinian refugees "right to return" demand is greatly the fault of UNRWA, which crafted refugee definition solely applicable to Palestinians -- refugee status with no expiration date -- continues indefinitely for generations. (2) As long as the Arabs DO NOT stop the state sponsored Jew hating incitements in their media, Arabs are not serious about peace, and (3) As long as the Arabs DO NOT stop supporting Hamas, Hezbollah, and other terrorist groups, Arabs are not serious about peace.

The UK MP view: Until now, all of Israel's compromises and desires for peace have been unsuccessful ONLY because Israel's willingness to compromise for peace has never been enough for the Arabs, and she is yet to find a serious and genuine interlocutor so that peace stands a chance.

It is time the Left and the media focus its attention on finding a willing and genuine peace partner for Israel, rather than concentrating on the ONLY ONE player in the region that always displayed the utmost seriousness to having peace.

The US view: Last summer it was Hizbollah's tactic; now it is Hamas, indiscriminately launching rockets into civilian populated areas, hoping to kill as many innocents as possible.

Hamas has no plans to stop the rockets attacks voluntarily and the international outrage machine can only find outrage when it comes to Israel. In the meantime, the terrorists are fulfilling their last June promise to make Sderot residents leave home and turn it into a ghost town. However, in order to defeat the likes of Hamas and Hezbollah, staying in Sderot is the simplest best way act to fight terrorism. Sderot residents must maintain firm stand something the Israeli government have long forgotten to have.

"Tell the truth about peace"
The Jerusalem Post
November 19, 2006

Following Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's US visit and a "new" initiative floated by France, Spain, and Italy, Vice Premier Shimon Peres and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni met at the weekend to look for ways to "break the deadlock" with the Palestinians. Olmert himself has said he wants to "get the ball rolling," and reportedly suggested new versions of his convergence plan while in Washington.

The pressure on Israel and the US to fill the diplomatic vacuum, following the post-war political collapse of convergence, seems to be growing.

A vacuum, however, cannot be filled by simply repackaging the policies that failed to fill it, namely the Quartet's road map and Israel's unilateral withdrawal track. Both these policies have become stalled, or worse, because they ignore the root cause of the problem. Both pretend that the obstacle to peace is the lack of a Palestinian state, when in reality the obstacle to such a state--and to Arab-Israeli peace--is the Arab refusal to accept Israel's right to exist.

It has been obvious at least since 2000, when Ehud Barak offered Yasser Arafat a state on a silver platter, that the Palestinians could have a state over almost all of the West Bank and all of Gaza whenever they wanted. The fight is not over the remaining narrow strips of land but over something much more fundamental, whether the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab world are willing to give up their desire to destroy Israel itself.

Hamas spokesman Ismail Radwan was quoted over the weekend as declaring: "I promise you, the occupation [Israel] won't last long. We've seen this in history. States based on oppression have been taken apart. ... We'll continue to fight it until we return to the homes we were expelled from in the Palestine of 1948."

This point of view cannot be dismissed as the province of extremists. First, Hamas is the party in power, not a fringe group. But even Mahmoud Abbas, as MEMRI founder Yigal Carmon points out, is quite radical and specific when it comes to the "right of return," claiming that 3 million Palestinians must be allowed to "return" to Israel.

In the Arab and Muslim world today there are the "radicals" who openly call for Israel's destruction and support terrorism as a means to accomplish this. But there is no significant opposing peace camp arguing that Israel does have a right to exist, or even a pragmatic camp openly arguing for peace for the Arabs' own sake.

In such an atmosphere, no peace process worthy of the name is possible, and new American, Israeli, or European plans repackaging the offer of a Palestinian state will not only be for naught, but will tend to encourage Arab radicalism.

In this context, our government has an obligation to say the truth, not just play along with harmful myths. Israel should have a peace plan: for Western nations that want peace to demand that the Arab world end its war against Israel.

The Palestinians and Arab states often claim to be ready for peace. The well-worn pattern, however, is this: Israel yearns for peace while being wary of "peace plans;" the Arabs attack and prepare for war while claiming to embrace "peace."

It is time for Israel to urge the US to call the Arab bluff. If Arab leaders really want peace, they should help the Palestinians out of their suicidal stalemate by setting three critical examples: 1) meeting with Israeli leaders in Jerusalem and their own capitals, 2) calling on Palestinians to give up the dream of "returning" to Israel by the millions, 3) beginning to settle Palestinian "refugees" rather than continuing to use them as pawns against Israel.

In addition the Arab states could be called upon to stop fomenting anti-Semitism and supporting groups such as Hamas and Hizbullah.

We understand that if Israel advocates such a policy, we will not be able to persuade the US, let alone Europe, to adopt it overnight. Yet if Israel is unwilling to tell the truth and advocate for its own interests, who will? How can we expect any other country to stand for a sensible policy with a chance of success if we ourselves do not?

"Why I'm backing Israel"
The Guardian --http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/comment/0,,1955803,00.html
Lorna Fitzsimons
Friday November 24, 2006

The left and the Islamists portray me as a Zionist neocon, but it takes two sides to make a peace deal

Some said I should have my head examined after I agreed to become the chief executive of a pro-Israel advocacy group, the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre. But people said the same when I joined Labour in the mid-80s.

There is never a wrong time to do the right thing and if, like me, you are convinced of Israel's cause, then why not support Israel and why not now? I have always been a practical idealist, a non-Jew who has always believed in a two-state solution. But I have never been more concerned about the false reality many people are constructing around Israel and the Middle East, here and abroad. Our polling shows that opinion formers know that Israel is a fully functioning democracy, but care more about what Israel does than what Israel is.

Since its birth 58 years ago, Israel has always been prepared to compromise for peace. From Begin's agreement with Sadat in 1979 to the Arafat-Barak talks at Camp David in 2000, Israeli leaders have been prepared to challenge their own people in pursuit of peace. Last summer Israel withdrew from Gaza, angry settlers and all. Yet the terror from the Gaza Strip has continued - more than 1,000 rockets have been fired into southern Israel in the past year. Since 2000, nine fatalities have been caused by Qassam missiles.

Some media have reported the panic these missiles have caused but they downplay the impact because of the small scale of fatalities compared with those on the Palestinian side. My husband, a British soldier, is currently serving a tour of duty in Iraq. His unit has come under mortar fire nearly every night for the past six months. Not many service personnel have been killed by these missiles but every soldier fears that the next one might have his or her name on it. Do you think that a child, a parent or a grandmother in one of the towns bordering Gaza thinks there have been "only" nine fatalities? Can you imagine what that does to a civilian population?

We need to think carefully about the consequences of questioning the defensive reactions of a nation-state that is constantly bombarded by an enemy calling for its destruction, especially after it has withdrawn from Lebanon and Gaza. Would we as British citizens accept a single rocket on a British town, let alone hundreds?

The commentators' objection is that the response is "disproportionate". But how does a nation-state defend itself against a terrorist organisation or organisations that are part of, and deliberately hide behind, ordinary citizens? Of course the Israeli military and all military forces must act ethically. But if the number of civilian casualties continues to be the main issue, there is no incentive for the terrorists to stop using the civilian population as a shield.

We live in dangerous times when, in parts of the left especially, you can't be a friend to Islam or to Muslims unless you are anti-Israel. That is exactly what al-Qaida wants us to think. Events in Rochdale at the last election represent a microcosm of what we are sleepwalking into globally. The Islamists and the left argued that, because I supported Israel and its right to exist, all my work for my Muslim constituents was a lie. They suggested I was an opportunistic, neocon Zionist, aiming to dupe them.

Israel's willingness to compromise for peace has never been enough, because Israel alone cannot gain peace. The Palestinians and others in the region also have to want peace. Israel needs a serious interlocutor so that peace can stand a chance. So my question to the left is this: why not concentrate your attention there, rather than on the one player in the region who has always been serious about peace?

Lorna Fitzsimons (lf@bicom.org.uk) is chief executive of the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre and the former Labour MP for Rochdale.

"A town under siege"
by Joel Mowbray
Published November 24, 2006
Washington Times

The international outrage machine is ginned up again, and all but seven members of the U.N. General Assembly recently voted to condemn Israel for its military incursion into Gaza. The buzzword -- recycled from Israel's summer war with Hezbollah -- is "overreaction."

To what is Israel "overreacting?" Hamas, using the tactic that Hezbollah licensed from it this summer, is indiscriminately launching rockets into civilian areas, hoping to kill as many innocents as possible.

Israel's current military action is far from an overreaction. It is, in fact, a delayed reaction. Rockets have been raining down in southern Israel for years now, and only this summer did the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) finally execute a sustained response.

For more than five years, the residents of Sderot, a small development town of 26,000 in the Negev desert near the Gaza border, have been subjected to a constant barrage of Qassam rockets fired by Hamas, or the democratically elected government of the Palestinians. More than 3,000 rockets have hit Sderot and the roughly 45 smaller communities in the area.

Though former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his successor, Ehud Olmert, both had promised a strong response to attacks against civilians launched from Gaza, Hamas had suffered little more than the occasional military strike against its terrorists following a particularly "successful" Qassam strike. (One such response came after a Qassam exploded meters from the personal residence of Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz, who lives in Sderot.)

The military waited until late this June to attack Hamas aggressively and provide the response promised by both Mr. Sharon and Mr. Olmert. But that was actually triggered by the kidnapping of 19-year-old soldier Gilad Shalit -- even though rocket firings into Sderot had become unrelenting several weeks earlier.

While the Israeli campaign against Hezbollah failed to achieve any of its stated objectives, the military scored significant success with its actions in Gaza this summer. But shortly after the rate of rocket attacks fell to just a few per week, military activities largely ceased. Not surprisingly, Hamas redoubled its efforts, and Qassam rockets again became a daily reality in Sderot and surrounding communities.

Perhaps to divert attention from its failure to defeat Hezbollah this summer, Israel seems determined to degrade Hamas' ability to launch rockets at innocent civilians. But that apparent determination could crumble in the face of mounting international outcry. Never mind that the democratically elected government of the Palestinians is able to target civilians with impunity.

As bad as things are in Sderot right now -- one woman was killed this month, and another person is near death as of this writing -- none of this is new.

To appreciate just how much a daily fact of life Qassams have become, Sderot's school playground has four above-ground, concrete bomb shelters. The rectangular tunnels sit on each corner of the relatively small playground. So many are needed so close together because there is typically just 10-15 seconds warning, if any, before a Qassam hits.

Qassams have hit all around the school. Remnants of several rockets can be seen in the street in front of it. Shrapnel is lodged in the sidewalk railing meters from the playground. Shrapnel is even on the playground itself.

Not surprisingly, the residents of Sderot are both bitter and angry. Even with the recent military actions, they feel forgotten. Actually, they have been forgotten.

This June, Vice Premier and former Prime Minister Shimon Peres brushed off mounting concern about a surge in attacks with the quip, "Qassams shmassams." Echoing that theme, an IDF spokesman described Qassam rockets to this columnist in July as "dumb firecrackers."

Thing is, these "dumb firecrackers" kill people. Here is the Associated Press account of one Qassam attack in September 2004:

"The blast blew out the windows of a house, showered a minibus with shrapnel and killed two children of Ethiopian descent. Dorit Benesay, 2, and Yuval Abeva, 4, were playing under an olive tree outside Yuval's grandmother's house when the rocket struck, emergency workers and neighbors said. "'After the rocket fell, a man, maybe 20 years old, took the boy in his arms. He was in shock. He ran with the boy, he didn't know what to do,' said Zina Shurov, 48, a neighbor. 'I saw the boy, he had no legs.'"

Hamas has no plans to stop voluntarily, and the international outrage machine won't ask it to. The Islamic terrorists are merely fulfilling a promise made this June: "We have decided to turn Sderot into a ghost town. We won't stop firing the rockets until they all leave."

Hope somehow remains alive in Sderot. Rabbi David Fendel believes that the simple act of staying put is his best way to fight terrorism. In fact, he's even doing more. With a new religious school and community center under construction, Rabbi Fendel is working to make Sderot stronger.

Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, has visited Sderot and calls Rabbi Fendel "a real hero in the war on terror." He explains, "Rabbi Fendel is not only helping Sderot, but he has taken the kind of firm stand that the Israeli government needs to in order to defeat the likes of Hamas and Hezbollah."

Contact the poster at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 24, 2006.

Note: The news coming out of London England about the thwarted plot to blow up airliners between England and United States by bringing explosive components on board and assembling bombs may be shocking, but to Annie Jacobsen, it's not surprising.

Even in June of 2004, when Annie Jacobsen took her fateful flight on Northwest flight 327, it's that very scenario -- different individuals each bringing different bomb-making materials on board, assembling and detonating them while the plane is in the air -- that she is convinced was being practiced.

In this excerpt from her book, Annie Jacobsen writes that this concept of bringing bomb elements on board for later assembly is nothing new: as far back as 1994 terrorists were scheming ways to do it.

Below is an excerpt from Annie Jacobsen's Terror in the Skies: Why 9/11 Could Happen Again, Spence Publishing.

Annie Jacobsen writes about business, finance and terrorism for a variety of national and international magazines and webzines. A graduate of Princeton University, she lives in Los Angeles, California, with her husband and two sons.

That terrorists want to build bombs in aircraft bathrooms is not news. The tactic dates from at least 1994, when Ramzi Yousef, along with his uncle, Kahlid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), set out to blow up eleven or twelve U.S. passenger jets over the Pacific Ocean, simultaneously, by building bombs in the aircrafts' bathrooms. The terrorists involved in the plot were not to be suicide bombers. Instead, they would each build a bomb on one leg of the eleven or twelve flights, set the bomb's timer for later, and then deplane. If the plan seems overly ambitious, its two masterminds were certainly capable of pulling it off. Ramzi Yousef was the terrorist who tried to bring down the World Trade Center (WTC-1) in 1993 with a truck bomb. Yousef's co-conspirator, KSM, would go on to mastermind the 9/11 attack.

The plot was called Operation Bojinka (bojinka being slang in many Arabic dialects for explosion), and it was Yousef's next big operation after WTC-1. Yousef had been a kind of one-man terrorist show, barely funded and not very well organized. After his success with WTC-1, that changed. Yousef became respected as an international terrorist. The U.S. government wanted him so badly that they put a $2 million bounty on his head and air-dropped 32,000 matchbooks with Yousef's photo on them in rural Pakistan, hoping to find him. Yousef was able to evade authorities as he traveled extensively throughout South East Asia. He was now funded by his wealthy uncle, KSM, as well as his uncle's wealthy business partner, Mohammed Jamal Khalifa, -- Osama Bin Laden's brother in law.

For Operation Bojinka, Yousef set about perfecting a tiny explosive device that could be smuggled onto an aircraft in separate parts -- parts disguised as seemingly innocent items. Yousef first tested one of these bombs, on December 1, 1994, in the Greenbelt Theatre in Manila. By placing one of his miniature bombs under a theatre seat, Yousef simulated the physical conditions he'd later face on a plane. The bomb successfully exploded a few hours later. Fortunately the seat was empty. No one was killed but a few, local theatergoers were hurt.

Yousef worked for another ten days to perfect his tiny bomb. On December 11, he carried out another test for the Bojinka plot, only this time he did it on an actual plane. Posing as an Italian member of parliament -- he traveled with a fraudulent Italian passport identifying himself as one 'Armaldo Forlani' -- Yousef bought a one-way ticket, from Manila to Cebu, on Philippines Air flight 434. Yousef carried the components of his bomb on him, including nitroglycerin hidden in a bottle of contact lens solution and bomb stabilizers disguised as cotton balls. In the hollowed-out heels of his shoes, Yousef hid batteries.

During the flight, Yousef asked the flight attendant if he could change seats, telling the flight attendant he needed a better view. In truth, he wanted to occupy a seat over the plane's fuselage near the exit door. Half-way through the flight, Yousef assembled the bomb in the aircraft's bathroom. He returned to his seat and placed the bomb inside the life vest underneath. He set the timer for several hours later and deplaned.

On the next leg of the flight, the bomb exploded. The twenty-three-year-old Japanese businessman, Haruki Ikegami, who was sitting where Yousef had sat died a miserable death, his legs separated from the rest of his body. Fortunately for the 273 other passengers and twenty flight crew on board the 747, the captain was able to make a heroic, emergency landing on nearby Okinawa Island. The bomb was too small to destroy the plane in mid-air and Yousef set about fine-tuning his calculations.

A few weeks later, shortly before Operation Bojinka was set to unveil, Ramzi Yousef was building a bomb in his Manila apartment when one of the bombs exploded. A fire started and Yousef fled. Manila police discovered a cache of information about the terrorist on his computer, which interrupted Bojinka. Had the plot succeeded, it's likely that four thousand civilians would have been killed. Some of the details are extraordinary: Yousef needed his bombs to explode in seats above the planes' central fuel tanks, adjacent to the wings. When the bombs went off, they would ignite the plane's fuel, causing a massive, secondary explosion. Investigators would also learn that Yousef wanted the bombs to explode over heavily populated areas of the United States.

In the Observer article, from February 2004, Burke reported that terrorists were again working on the nightmare scenario of building bombs in aircraft bathrooms. Burke detailed a 2002 incident involving a Moroccan jet landing in Metz, France, one that had 100 grams of pentrite (the explosive used by shoe-bomber Richard Reid) hidden in an armrest, and explained that French officials believe the explosives were placed on the jet in a "trial run." At the time of the article, the incidents had only ever amounted to dry runs. In August 2004 that changed. The Bojinka scenario became real.

On the night of August 24, 2004, two civilian aircraft in Russia exploded, almost simultaneously, killing all 90 passengers and crew. The mid-air explosions were the deadly result of terrorists' bombs. The event was widely reported and has since been confirmed by the U.S. Department of State.

Not as widely reported was that Russian investigators believe the detonations occurred in the two planes' toilets.

Contact the poster at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 24, 2006.

It's Like Deja Vu All Over Again

According to a report issued by the World Jewish Congress last week, anti-Semitic sentiments in the European continent have doubled since the beginning of the summer.

And according to Professor Dina Porat, co-coordinator of the conference, the research showed a significant change in the attitudes toward Jews. And not just among extremists, but also in moderate sectors of the European population.

Porat heads Tel Aviv University's Chaim Rosenberg School of Jewish Studies and the Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of anti-Semitism and Racism.

The report included examples of anti-Semitic cartoons reminiscent of the Nazi era published in places like Norway, Mexico and even the UK.

The report also said that Ahmadinejad's repeated threats against Israel has emboldened the anti-Semites to come out of the closet, so to speak.

Congress President Edgar Bronfman cited Iran's nuclear development activities as the most dangerous threat to the Jews and Israel since the Holocaust.

Roger Kukerman, President of the Committee Representing the Jewish Institutions in France (CRIF) said that when Ahmadinejad vows to kill the Jews and "wipe Israel of the map", the remarks should be taken seriously.

Kukerman added that the only difference between the president of the Islamic Republic and the founder of the Nazi party is one of weapons. Ahmadinejad is suspected of having nuclear weapons. Adolph Hitler had none.

In Germany, a poll conducted by the German Friedrich Ebert Fund surveyed 5,000 German citizens about their attitude towards the Jews.

The findings showed that 18 percent of Germans believe Jews have too much influence in the country. Fourteen percent said that Jews are more inclined to cheat in business. And an equal number said Jews are not fit to live in Germany because they are different.

The poll found anti-Semitism is more profound in the West than in the former East Germany. And it was more prevalent among wealthy West Germans than their poorer countrymen.

In addition, the poll revealed trends that harken back to the bad old days of the 1930's.

# 15 percent believe Germans are naturally superior to other people

# 28 percent long for Germany to return to its position as a major international player and condone using force to 'reach the position [they] deserve'

# 26 percent hope for a single popular party to take control of the nation

# 9 percent support a German dictatorship

# 35 percent in western Germany and 44 percent in the east said "foreigners come to Germany only to exploit it."

And a study commissioned for the United Nations puts the blame for the war against Islamofacism squarely on Israel's shoulders.

We may wish to think of the Arab-Israeli conflict as just one regional conflict amongst many," said Kofi Annan, who leaves his post as UN Secretary General at the end of the year. "It is not. No other conflict carries such a powerful symbolic and emotional charge among people far removed from the battlefield."

Annan went on to say, "As long as the Palestinians live under occupation, exposed to daily frustration and humiliation, and as long as Israelis are blown up in buses and in dance halls, so long will passions everywhere be inflamed," Annan said.

The fact that Israel is "occupying" ISRAEL and not the Palestinian territories was of no interest to the committee members, evidently. And while Annan mentioned Israelis being blown up in busses and dance halls, he didn't mention that those targets were INSIDE Israel, and not in some undefined area of 'Israeli occupation'.

The report was drafted in the past year by a group of twenty 'impartial' global leaders, including, believe it or not, former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami and the noted Marxist apologist, Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa.

The group making the recommendations was formed in 2005 as part of the U.N.-backed "Alliance of Civilizations" initiative. It was sponsored by the Socialist government of Spain and co-sponsored by Turkey, which is 99% Islamic.

The report also called for the development of a report "analyzing the Israeli-Palestinian landscape dispassionately and objectively," and "establishing clearly the conditions that must be met to find a way out of this crisis."

The fact is, the conditions that must be met to find a way out of this crisis have ALREADY been established. The conditions call for Hamas to recognize Israel's right to exist and renounce violence and terrorism. It isn't Israeli policy that is an obstacle to peace. Israeli policy is to negotiate for peace with representatives that WANT peace.

The report recommended renewed efforts toward the goal of establishing "two fully sovereign and independent states coexisting side by side in peace and security."

Israel has already agreed to that goal. The majority of Palestinians prefer their vision of one state INSTEAD of Israel, but the report reserved its sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians.

Because peace with Israel is not the objective. Peace WITHOUT Israel is.

This was written by Hal Lindsey.

A Language Our Enemy Understands

With our cities threatened with nuclear, chemical and biological bombs, it is long past time to identify our enemy, determine what is most cherished by him and assure him that he will lose all of them if he carries out these threats against our cities.

First, our enemy is Islamic Fundamentalism, which believes it is Allah's will to kill as many infidels as possible in the quest to establish Islamic rule over the world. These Jihadists' most hated countries are Israel and America, which they see as the cultural centers of the most hated infidels -- Jews and Christians.

Our enemy is uniquely difficult to combat because he is scattered among many nations around the world. He is often disguised and hidden among Muslims who have no desire to be part of their onslaught against innocent civilians throughout the Western Civilization.

Second, we must honestly face the scope and viability of our enemy's threats. What are the threats and can he actually carry them out?

All reliable western intelligence agencies believe the leader of militant Fundamentalism, al Qaeda, has acquired a number of suite case seize nuclear, biological and chemical bombs. Some even believe that Osama bin Laden has at least one nuclear warhead that could obliterate New York City if smuggled into port on a container ship.

Assessment of threat -- it is very real and will happen soon.

Third, what does our enemy cherish most? The dedicated Islamic 'Jihadist' does not value any of the things that normal human beings do. He does not value his life, but will gladly give it in what he perceives as 'Allah's will.' He is even willing that the lives of family and fellow Muslims be sacrificed if the infidel enemy retaliates against them for being attacked. He believes they will go immediately to Paradise as part of the great crusade to establish Islamic rule over the earth.

What our enemy cherishes most are the sacred places where Mohammad received and implemented the Koran and the religion of Islam. They believe that all of Arabia is sacred soil and that no 'infidels' should be permitted to enter it. The two most sacred places are Mecca and Medina. So there is his only Achilles heel.

Now let's speak the only language our enemy will understand. We must issue the most solemn and certain warning to Muslim Fundamentalists -- that if even one of our cities are attacked with a nuclear, biological or chemical bomb, then we will give twenty four hours for innocent Muslims to evacuate Mecca and Medina before we obliterate them with nuclear missiles.

I realize this sounds harsh -- but it is the only action that our enemies will take seriously and affect him in something he truly cherishes and does not want to loose. For then his religion would be forever flawed. Of all religions, Islam places the most value on its holy places. The thought of no more pilgrimages to Mecca would be overwhelming. This is called a 'Haj" and is one of the essential parts of being a Muslim. Every Muslim is required to make a 'Haj' in his lifetime if humanly possible.

I have believed this to be the only threat our enemy could take seriously for at least 20 years. But in the light of America's present peril, I felt it necessary to openly voice it as our only option to prevent a catastrophe from which we may never recover. May our God protect us and give us the courage to act now.

Contact the poster at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Salah Choudhury, November 24, 2006.
Greetings from Dhaka!

As you all know that, Bangladesh government was almost desparate in convicting me through the controversial court of radical judge Mohammed Momin Ullah. Despite repeated requests from the esteemed members of the US Congress, the false sedition charge was not dropped. Rather the Charge was framed twice; on 18th October 2006 and 13th November 2006. In the history of Bangladesh, there is no such instance of framing the charge for two times. But, in my case, it did happen.

Meanwhile, esteemed members of US Congress have very kindly pressed a Resolution in the Congress (Resolution # 1080), as well European Parliament has very kindly passed a bill recently, which got tremendous coverage in Bangladeshi media.

Meanwhile, Wall Street Journal, New York Sun, Daily Pennsylvanian, The Australian, Georgia Straight, Chicago Tribune, Jewish Herald Voice, Jerusalem Post and other prestigious newspapers have kindly published news items on me. A number of radio stations in USA and Canada also aired programs (interviewed me as well) on me. KGO Radio aired an excellent 55 minute program on me. Meanwhile, I have been contacted by an European journalist, who wishes to interview during next week. In fact, there will be two journalists from two of the European newspapers. A large number of Human Rights groups have also extended their support to me. Several excellent individuals are also working to help me. American Jewish Committee is doing everything possible to attract attention of important people worldwide to my case.

Such exposures and resolutions have certainly put great impact on the minds of Bangladesh authorities. Many of the important people are now actively considering the possible adverse impact if I am convicted.

And of course, we are still continuing our efforts through Weekly Blitz in promoting interfaith understanding, confronting religious hatred and advocating relations between Bangladesh and Israel. Even before 2003, it was considered to be a kind of 'taboo' to pronounce openly the name of Israel or praise Jewish people in Bangladesh. But, the trend got a huge blow when we published an exclusive interview of Israeli intellectual Professor Ada Aharoni or even publsihed the news on various Israeli organizations. My brother, Dr. Richard Benkin's writings were published in Bangladeshi press, which was again a very positive step.

Now, the readers of Blitz knows for sure, what is our editorial policies and ideologies. Still they are continuing to read Blitz, even much carefully than they did before. Although, for some unknown reason, advertisers are affraid to place advertisements in Blitz. They think, adverisiting in Blitz might welcome unwarranted hassle for them from the radicals. And, very recently, it was even proved that, radicals are also reading Blitz to know what we are saying.

My lawyer Advocate Goswami has already filed an appeal with the Higher Judiciary challenging the charge. Possibly we can expect some result from the Higher Judiciary in next couple of years.

The advertisement section of Blitz is receiving inquiries from some Indian companies, who are showing interest in placing their ads in our newspaper. We have been providing them with Advertisement Rates, although till date, none of them placed their advertisements. But, their inquiries are seen as a positive sign by our advertisement section.

Even though Weekly Blitz crossed it's first year of publication during this second term, we are still banned from attending state functions, and are also deprived of various advertisements from state owned enterprises and organizations. Even some of the local periodicals, with fractional circulation compared to that of Blitz, are getting advertisements amounting to a few hundred thousand Taka each year.

The case, which we lodged against the attacker Mufti Noor Hussain Noorani under Explosives Act in July 2006, is still pending with Shahbagh Police Station and the government neither interrogated nor arrested Noorani for this crime. Another case, which had been lodged against the attackers belonging to the Cultural Wing of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) is kept pending for investigation with Criminal Investigation Department (CID) since October this year. According to information from various sources, government is hesitant in arresting and interrogating Noorani as this might open several mesteries behind the bomb attack. Noorani might name the conspirators, which would ultimately unveil several infleuntial radical leaders. On the other hand, CID is hesitant is taking necessary actions against BNP men, fearing a victory of this party in the next general election and coming back of BNP thugs with much power and influence. Moreover, even though there is a caretaker government in Bangladesh, the administrative control still remains in the grips of BNP people. But, I believe, if the media exposure will continue and the Resolution # 1080 is passed in the US Congress, it will enhance pressure on Bangladesh government is according justice to me.

Yesterday, British Trade minister met President Iajuddin Ahmed of Bangladesh in the Presidential Palace and pledged that during 2007 Britain will invest US$ 6 Billion in Bangladesh. I know, an esteemed MP raised my issue in the House of Commons but till date there is no further action from their side. Many other countries, such as, Australia and Canada are also solid development partners of Bangladesh. If there will be some actions from those governments too, the chance of finally dropping the false charge will become brighter.

My profound regards to friends and supporters in USA, Canada, Australia, Denmark, Italy, Britain, East European Countries, Israel, India, Western Europe, Brazil and many other places who are very kindly extending their valued cooperation to me. My special thanks to members of print and electronic media in the world.


Salah Choudhury is a journalist, columnist, author, amd editor of "Weekly Blitz". Email him at salahuddinshoaibchoudhury@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 24, 2006.

Peace at any price is not peace rather it is hunda (translates from Islamists' expression: time to take a break to rebuild and then attack again).

Israel disengagement from Gaza was nothing but a deadly delusion!

Anyone's in Israel having aspiration to peace with the Palestinians has deadly delusion!

There is a saying: "Humankind cannot bear very much reality." It is clear that Israel's current [No]leadership cannot bear much reality?

There is a saying: "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." No leadership of any country should be allowed to be in a position to flagrantly forget (devastating) history they must learn from so it is not repeated.

At present Israel's leadership, thus Israel is totally disoriented. For his survival, PM Olmert is playing government "chairs' shuffling."

Israel's "ulcer of disarray" is at its advancing stage.

As I said many times before: the bazaar negotiations with Israel foes should have ended yesterday. If any of the countries, in first or seconds tier surrounding Israel wish to extend the arm of peace, Israel should proclaim: Of course we, in our sovereign borders, would like to arrive at peace.


I am begging of you our Lord; change Israel's leadership to the one that will lead her back on the right path!

This was written by Shmuel Katz and it appeared November 22, 2006 in the Jerusalem Post.

The peace-at-any-price brigade is back in business. The morning papers report that Amir Peretz is drawing up a peace plan. The other day it was Tzipi Livni.

The exposure of the deadly delusion that abandoning Jewish territory and clearing it of Jewish presence would open the way to peace with the Arabs seems to have had little effect.

Everything that's happened since disengagement illuminates a great divide within Israel that has existed since the state was established (and even before) between the people who believed the Arabs when they declared that their aim was the destruction of Israel and those who claimed, in spite of three generations of hard evidence to the contrary, that the Arabs only wanted a slice of land in order to make peace -- and that consequently Israel should give it to them.

What followed the abandonment of Gaza was of course a new and emphatic vindication of the Right in the genuineness of the Arab threats.

As for the Left, its political creed was torn to pieces. The Arabs reacted to the Gaza operation exactly as the Right had said they would. Kadima, the ragtag-and-bobtail party that Ariel Sharon cobbled together after splitting the Likud, was left without its one defining idea (abandoning Gaza as the road to peace), while the one immediate change for Israel's security was the Kassam rockets being able to reach beyond Sderot into Ashkelon.

Not without irony was the proud boast by one of the Kadima stalwarts, Meir Sheetrit, soon after his defection from the Likud. With head held high he declared: "We have got rid of the kitbags of [Ze'ev] Jabotinsky and Berel Katznelson!" Had he lowered his head and looked down, he would also have realized how naked they had become.

IN THE midst of this confusion, everyone began casting around for some diversion, at least a safety belt. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, conflating his government, added loose-cannon Avigdor Lieberman and his party. Olmert now commands 78 Knesset seats, a motley company unified only by the hope of survival. He also has discovered a cause, to replace our parliamentary democracy by a president independent of parliament. He expects that will enable him to survive. Inevitably this only adds to the general disorientation: We don't know which way we are going.

As for the Left (Peace Now and its allies), a savior from nowhere, a deus ex machina (or mashiach?) has revealed himself: Bashar Assad, president of Syria. He has chosen a suitable moment. Viewing the disarray in Israel, he announced that he is prepared to make peace. The peaceniks at once jumped at the chance. They know, as we all know, that Assad wants only one thing, the Golan Heights -- from which Israel, with Damascus in her sights, successfully guards her northern frontier.

Peace Now was completely discredited by the aftermath of the Gaza giveaway and now fantasizes the great benefits to Israel from giving him the Golan, including Assad's instant abandonment of his patron and ally, Iran.

But the fact that Assad has made this offer in the midst of a national state of confusion and doubt about Israel's future should be taken as an opportunity by Israel -- to demonstrate that it has learned the lesson of the follies of the national policy of her past leaders and intends now to start behaving like a normal people. Instead of laughing at Assad's offer like the joke it is, Israel should proclaim: Of course we, in our sovereign borders, would like to arrive at peace with Syria. Israel does not demand territory from Syria, and it forgoes territory at Kuneitra, which it captured during the Yom Kippur War of October 1973.

Contact the poster at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Arlene Peck, November 24, 2006.

It takes a lot to subdue me. I am a woman who is not easily intimidated. However, recently, I was awed while sitting among some of the worlds most informed and intelligent, at the America's Truth Forum Symposium founded by Jeffery Epstein in Las Vegas while they spoke about the threat that we all face with Islamic terror. It was truly an honor to me to be made an 'honoree' among the likes of speakers like Robert Spencer, (Director of Jihad Watch) Dr. Wafa Sultan, former terrorists Walid Shoebat. Also speaking were: James Gilchrist (founder of the Minuteman Project), recognized authorities on terrorism Drs. Harvey Kushner, Bruce Tefft (CIA founder of Counter Terrorism Center, Paul Williams and Hamid Mir, the only journalist to have met with Osama bin Laden; Joe Kaufman (chair of Americans against Hate and founder of CAIR Watch) and more...

The American Truth Forum is the result of the tireless efforts of activist Jeffery Epstein. People with his devotion to bring to fruition such a symposium explaining the threat of radical Islamism at our front door, are few and far between. Jeff ran a flawless conference, except, for his misfortune to book the event at the Sahara Hotel. They changed the guarantee (at the last minute) from $110 a night for the room to $400 for a room that was decorated early Howard Johnsons. Walking through the lobby was enough to give you cancer from the lingering cigarette smoke and the food was bordering on ptomaine.

The entire two days of this amazing symposium were filled with information that although depressing, was something everyone should know. Joe Kaufman spoke at length how Hamas threatens America. CAIR is a durative of Hamas. Moreover, according to him, "That being the case, the United States and the Justice Dept should put CAIR on the same list of being a terrorist's organization"

I personally have been a victim of this particular group. It happened shortly after I wrote a column entitled, "How has Islam Enriched Your Life." Although this article was widely published in various papers, I was singled out by Google in the New Media Journal and slandered by refusing their refusing to publish Frank Salvato's paper (www.NewMediaJournal.us) because they now considered me a 'hate speech writer'. Frank incidentally was a strong supporter of the event.

I sat fascinated, while those in the know like Dr. Harvey Kushner, professor and internationally recognized authority on terrorism spoke how the universities and their Islamic studies programs are teaching hate and, a 'certain point of view'. As a parent, I find it sick that you send a kid to college, they take an American government course, and instead of learning real history, the children are learning about the degrading of America.

I didn't need the symposium to tell me how the American universities today are embedded in a wave of foreign students. There is an over abundance of foreign funding of universities. The Saudis have 15,000 'students' now in full scholarships. They are sending them over to curb unrest at home. Lovely. Hey, even the ben Laden family is funding Colombia. How many loans would it take your kid to get into one of those Ivy League schools? And George Town is heavily funded. Just follow the money. The Saudis cut a check ahead of time.

According to Dr. Kushner, we are embedded in waves of foreign students "Students come for one day and leave. To get their visa to get into our country." People we are churning out in our country who are getting educated do not stay. We educated them and then, they go back to foreign soil where they have their loyalty. However, they have learned how to use our laws and systems against us... I believe that CAIR has mastered that.

Dr. Kushner only reiterated my feelings that the professors in our country are no longer American. They are not even American nationals. They arrive with political baggage and it is dangerous when our teachers are teaching social sciences. They have a goal and it is to teach our children hate.

I remember a couple of years ago when I slipped into a local mosque and listened to a few of the well-dressed crowd that was there. The idea seemed to be to encourage their children to major in three specific fields. Those being, education, politics and communications.

So, I am not too surprised to see the fruits of their labor in our newspapers now when I read stories from Muslim writers. We have begun putting them in our congress. Our universities have become totally infiltrated and it is not the American way. What is being taught? Whose thoughts are being heard? When is the last time that any of the parents have sat through one of their kids classrooms? The teachers in these classes have no intention of becoming American citizens. They are foreign nationals for the most part with the ability to make changes in their student's minds. Islam is being taught in our schools as an example of religious expression ... gawd! Dr. Kushner said, "Religious diversity is fine, however, what is the agenda when Islam is being taught while Christianity and Judaism is being shut down."

The number of imams at major universities is growing and at a rapid rate. It does not seem to matter whether there is a substantial Muslim society at the school or not. What is the need for imams? I remember, eons ago, when I went to college. It was major event to have a Rabbi that came in. Now that I think of it, most of our hospitals are now filled with foreign doctors. Outsourcing and the key dramatic aspect is the university.

However, I digress. There we so many speakers, and each with profound thoughts that I do not want to dwell on any one topic. The problems are immense. The question that we have to answer is how to handle it? Symposiums such as the America's Truth Forum do so much to educate us in the understanding that the minds and needs of Muslims and how no matter what, Islam and Democracy is not compatible. When we think of democracy, we think of freedom of speech, the ability to write and speak about whatever it is that bothers you. Our list of What Freedom Means to us is huge. When a Muslim thinks of democracy, they can sum it up in one sentence. They won't be a slave. Simple?

Poverty is not a reason. Land has nothing to do with it either. Many countries are poor. They just don't go out and cut off heads. It is our business to connect the links and meetings like this clarify what is wrong and what needs to be done about it. I found it appalling that Jeff Epstein worked around the clock for months to bring the caliber of speakers to us. And, yet, on the final count, he struggled to break even. Where were the big 'spenders' who rush to accept plaques?

How about this?

People should be clamoring to assist with the dissemination of this vital information. Those fortunate enough to be able to contribute financially should be standing in line to help pay for such an educational symposium. We, as Americans and/or Jews and all human beings lucky enough to live in our free society have much to lose by keeping our heads in the sand and refusing to recognize the danger we are all in.

What will it take to allow everyone to clearly see the handwriting on the wall? And don't say we haven't been given fair warning. The Islamo-fascist terrorists have stated very plainly what it is that they desire: To eradicate Western Civilization. It's time to smell the Humus.

Send help to http://www.americastruthforum.com

Arlene Peck is an internationally syndicated columnist and television talk show hostess. She can be reached at: bestredhead@earthlink.net and www.arlenepeck.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 24, 2006.

People suggest that the US rely more upon diplomacy than it has. They want the US to discuss problems with other governments and the UNO, and work out joint solutions.

Referring to some successful UNO aid program, a friend remarked with mild sarcasm, "And they claim that the UN does not do anything." She mischaracterized the claim or at least its intent. The real claim is that the UNO does not promote international security and impedes the US from doing so. As for economic aid, it could be given without the UNO.

Do conditions foster the kind of international relations the US is urged to engage in? The suggestions assume that most governments and the UNO are sincere in desiring solutions. The reality is that most appease international rogues.

The US has engaged in diplomacy with rogues and within the UNO. The people who call Pres. Bush a liar claim the US did not spend much time negotiating with Saddam and Iran. Fact is, it spent ten or more years with both, in and out of the UNO. (Now who's lying?) Negotiations did not work with those regimes. Negotiations can work only if all parties want to resolve issues. Totalitarian imperialists don't have legitimate grievances to resolve, they have aggressive ambitions to achieve. They use negotiations to further those ambitions. While negotiating, they prepare their military forces to attack. The US had better attack before enemy forces have built up much.

Consider what kind of a UNO we have, with China as a member of the Security Council. China's economy is expanding phenomenally. No outsider knows what China wants beyond the obvious. The obvious, though it does not seem obvious to the State Dept. -- little does -- is that China will trade with any regime however repressive and criminal. Foreign dictators can't be worse than Red China. The Chinese Communists murdered as many people as did Nazi Germany and the USSR combined. China's military is a major employer of what amounts to slave labor.

China's two-fold trade goal: (1) Sequester raw materials, not just oil, for China's economy; and (2) Gain support in the UNO from governments indebted to China. The UNO is a pool of self-interested governments, not of idealists.

As China and Russia court Africa and the Arabs, the Arabs are courting China and Russia. Countries that used to depend upon US support are diversifying their means of support. US foreign policy officials had better take the changing circumstances into account. The US is losing power while evil regimes are gaining it.

American idealists should not expect more from the UNO than it is capable of. Being unrealistic about this makes the ideals dependent upon corrupt parties. After WWII, Americans considered whether their country should be the world's policeman. The US set up the UNO, so it shouldn't have to be. The UNO kept passing the buck to the US or dropping the ball. The US has had to be the world's policeman by default. Some countries, such as France, enjoy criticizing the US effort, while benefiting from it. The US ought to organize whatever half-way decent countries remain. It cannot impose its will. It can't afford to be everywhere and do everything. It must be selective and wiser about intervention. That means giving priority to strategic threats and perhaps genocide. We cannot afford to sully our genuine efforts by exploitative ones.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by David Wilder, November 24, 2006.

Please pray for the baby: Yair Nisi ben Roni Bat-tzion who was critically injured in an auto accident

Shabbat is starting in just over an hour, but there are some things that you feel like you have to write, even if time is short. I was busy earlier with a group from Lakewood, New Jersey, and only now can sit for a few minutes. I hope I manage to express my thoughts lucidly.

It was just a week ago that we hosted, here in Hebron, somewhere in the vicinity of 30,000 guests. No, they didn't all eat at my home in Beit Hadassah. We split them up amongst the families in Hebron and Kiryat Arba.) - Well, almost. We had something over 20 at our Shabbat table. That was considered small. Others had between 50 to 100 guests.

Some ate in tents set up all over, receiving Shabbat meals preordered from Hebron's hospitality center. Friday, during the day and all night, as well as all day Saturday, was amazing. So many Jews walking the streets, visiting the sites, just being here, in Hebron and Kiryat Arba, was really an event to be experienced. It is very difficult to express in words.

The preparations for such a weekend are long and consuming. People worked day and night for weeks to try and insure that everyone arriving would have a place to sleep and food to eat. And even those who didn't make reservations wouldn't be left out. (We had two fellows from Ashdod who 'showed up at the last minute' looking for somewhere to eat and sleep. We gave them a place on our floor and at the table. Many others did the same, welcoming 'unexpected' guests.)

People from all over the world come into Hebron particularly for this Shabbat. From the United States, from Europe, you name it and they are here. Kids, adults, everyone.

Shabbat Hebron, every year when we read in the Torah about Abraham's purchase of the Tomb of the Patriarchs, the Caves of Machpela, is always special. But this year was extraordinary. At least as far as I was concerned.

Last Friday morning our apartment beepers started buzzing. Sometimes they inform us of an engagement and at other times of a rescheduled community event, or even of a security problem. However, last Friday morning the buzzing beeper had other news for us: "Mazal Tov to Itzik and Oriya Pass on the birth of a new little baby boy."

Itzik and Oriya have two little girls. But they should have three, for Oriya gave birth to three girls. The first of those, their oldest daughter, was named Shalhevet, and over five years ago she was shot and killed by an Arab terrorist from the Abu Sneneh hills, overlooking the Avraham Avinu neighborhood. Shalhevet was in her stroller, with her parents at her side when the killer started shooting. Itzik was hit in the legs; the bullet went through Shalhevet's head, killing her instantly.

What does a family do following such a tragedy, their first-born plucked from them, at only 10 months of age? Itzik and Oriya are strong people, filled with faith and love of their land, their people and their G-d. It certainly wasn't easy, but with support from family and friends, and people all over the world, they were able to overcome their sorrow and mourning. Today they live only meters from the very spot where Shalhevet was shot and killed, with their two other daughters playing outside in the playground adjacent to where their oldest sister was murdered.

And after three girls, Oriya Pass gave birth last Friday to their first son.

Early this morning, at the 'Kollel' (Torah Study Hall) opened in Shalhevet's memory in that same Avraham Avinu neighborhood, family and friends, from Hebron and all over Israel, celebrated the new baby's 'Brit Milah' -- ritual circumcision. During the ceremony the baby was named, David Tzuri; David, in honor of Itzik's father, David Pass. Tzur, in Hebrew, means a hard stone, and connotates strength, and is sometimes a synonym for G-d (as is suggested in the Israeli Declaration of Independence). King David, writing in Psalm 144 says "'Baruch Tzuri,' praised be my rock (my strength -- my G-d), who teaches my fingers battle and my hands war." Of course, King David started ruling here in Hebron for over 7 years before moving up to Jerusalem. So the name, David Tzuri has much meaning, for the family, privately and symbolically, relating to all of us, teaching us all.

Following the loss of a child, so tragically, the Pass family didn't give up, they didn't run away. They battled, for the right to continue to live, in Hebron, in Eretz Yisrael, to continue to have children, who too can play in the city of the Patriarchs, and worship at Ma'arat HaMachpela. At the present these rights entail battle and war, privately and publicly, by each and every individual, and by the State. Sometimes these legitimate rights, to live freely and safely in our homeland are forgotten by some, but others, like Itzik and Oriya Pass, won't let them be forgotten. They are raising children, who in their very being are warriors; the fact that they live here in Hebron, or anywhere in the Land of Israel makes them so, whether they desire it or not. These little warriors are the future of our people in our land -- and little David Tzuri, together with his two sisters and the others that are yet to be born, are the best memorial their oldest sister, Shalhevet, could ever have.

To the extended Pass-Zarbiv family, Mazal tov -- best wishes for many other happy occasions. From all of us in Hebron.

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 Gerald A. Honigman, November 23, 2006.

I must be dreaming...a nightmare, at that.

Solid intelligence has shown large truck convoys leaving Iraq for Syria just prior to America's assault, largely over the WMD issue. This was confirmed by former political and military leaders, both at home and abroad.

Arab insurgents, hell-bent on stopping the spread of the democratic disease, have freely moved back and forth across the Iraqi-Syrian border.

Syria, to this date, still does not recognize an independent Lebanon....and never really has. And it has continuously assassinated--or had assassinated by its stooges--one Lebanese politician after another who believed otherwise...one just days ago. Not to mention its involvement in killing hundreds of Americans and others in Lebanon and elsewhere as well.

For decades, Damascus--which largely instigated the June '67 Six-Day War which lost them the Heights--bombarded Israelis from the Golan...which, by the way, were actually to be part of the original 1920 Mandate of Palestine after WWI, but wound up in Syria's hands after some imperial trading between the Brits and and the French. Indeed, over the centuries, the Heights traded back and forth between many different rulers--including Jews.

Yes, it must be just a bad dream...

After all, the Arab butchers in Damascus are simply peas of the same pod of the latest Arab butcher of Iraq who--thanks to us--was dragged out of his hole in the ground and is now scheduled to meet his seventy or so virgins in Islamic Paradise. Among other things (including massacres and forced Arabization of Kurds), Assad the First sired the Hama Solution--which killed far more of his Arab enemies in a month than Israel killed in all the years of fighting intifadas, Hizbullah, Fatah, Hamas, etc. and so forth.

So, I'm hoping to wake up to hear that I was just imagining reading that James A. Baker III, who is now back on the front burner after working continuously for decades behind the scenes, has proposed to solve Iraq's woes by rewarding Syrian Arabs for "their cooperation" by delivering the Jews to them on a silver platter...and shafting the Kurds once again to boot.

So what, pray tell, is this nightmarish price, that I hope I'm just dreaming, for Syria stopping its murderous, hegemonic behaviors?

Well, for starters, it expects that Baker's former promise to Assad the First while Secretary of State to his close friend, Pappa Bush, will indeed materialize. Israel will be squeezed to return to the days when Syria freely shelled Jews below on kibbutzim, in the Sea of Galilee, and so forth. Baker, with Dubya and Condi's approval, will pressure the millennial Jewish Suffering Servant to cave in to enemies sworn to its demise.

America, Great Britain, and so forth can topple governments and/or go to war thousands of miles away from home in the name of their own national security interests (what was the overthrow of Noriega in Panama or the Falklands War really all about?), but an Israel that one needs a magnifying glass to find on a world map is expected to simply return to the status quo ante and turn its other cheek...something good, predominatly Christian nations surely don't do. And rightly not...nobody should be expected to commit personal or national suicide.

Yet, keep in mind that Israel had earlier indeed agreed to such a virtual withdrawal.

Not long ago, an Israeli Prime Minister offered (and not the first time) an almost complete return of the Heights. The exception would cover a tiny stretch of land protecting Israel's water sources. But, of course, this was too much to ask of a Syria still dedicated to Israel's destruction, as are most Arabs.

Well, bad news...

I woke up with a horrendous headache...made worse when I read that I wasn't dreaming after all.

Baker's Commision recommendations to pull America's--especially Republicans'--chestnuts out of the open fire in Iraq (just in time for the Christmas season, for those familiar with the late Mel Torme's song) are evidently set to shaft both Jews and Kurds yet again for Arab interests...something the State Department, unfortunately, has a long history of doing.

But the American people are not stupid and have, on the whole, a good code of ethics--regardless of what Borat says.

They know that the one place in Iraq where folks aren't constantly blowing others apart is in the Kurdish north. Many now also know that some thirty million Kurds don't even have one state yet let alone the almost two dozen that Arabs already have, largely by conquering non-Arab peoples and the latters' lands. And they know that that Kurdish north far more exemplifies American values and is aligned with American interests far more than any of Baker's law firm's Arab clients are.

A sense of fair play must put the birth of an economically viable Kurdish state--which was indeed promised after WWI, but aborted largely on behalf of British petroleum and Arab interests--ahead of creating yet other ones for Arabs at both the Jew of the Nations and the Kurds' expense. Yet that's what Baker is up to again...evidently with Dubya's blessing.

George II (whom I voted for) would be wise to work to restore a sense of morality to American foreign policy. Many Republicans, let alone others, are not too happy with him these days.

Traditionally, it has taken a strong American executive to resist the Arabists who too often call the shots at Foggy Bottom...from President Truman onwards. There's lots of money to be made via the revolving doors of businesses tied to Arab wealth and government. Baker is just one of too many cases in point over the decades.

George II must not allow Baker's and his own family's huge financial ties to Arab petrodollars (and hiding behind the American flag won't work...again, Americans are mostly moral and are not stupid) to dictate foreign policy in this volatile region.

While a Michael Moorish/Jimmy Carter Democratic alternative won't cut it either, most Americans rejected this long ago...so it's not the model to follow. Yet, on this topic, Dubya, Condi, Baker, Moore, and Mr. Peanut all seem to agree.

Jews, Kurds, and America's soul and reputation deserve something far better.

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 Lawrence Uniglicht, November 23, 2006.

Go big, go long, or go home. Such choices now challenge the brains of United States movers and shakers, unable to figure out what to do after clumsily breaking Iraq like a near sighted elephant haphazardly swinging its trunk through a crowded Middle East bazaar. Sadist Hussein, tyrannical boss, doling out his best shops to Sunni Baathist minions, trampling Shiite and Kurdish merchants, indeed was easily toppled by the swaggering super-powered pachyderm, but now that erstwhile bazaar lay in ruins, even lacking electricity to light darkened hallways strewn with beheaded bodies, maintaining but one thriving business known as the Baghdad morgue. Meanwhile, jihad junkies jump for joy, perceiving victory whenever 'Uncle Satan' or ally Israel, recently unable to crush Hizbullah, fall short of their ambitious expectations. In other words, in a dysfunctional Middle East, ego-deflated fundamentalist Muslims win whenever they don't trip over a bar set lower than a snake's belly, and 'Westernized infidels' lose whenever they don't pole vault over a bar raised to a level befitting world class nations, alas sometimes biting off more than they can chew.

Let's not kid ourselves. Arab and Persian Middle East fundamentalist Islamic nations can fit their recent collective contributions to civilized humankind into a thimble and still have room to spare. This is not surprising as unfortunate Muslim females, nurtured within such ignorant cultures, enslaved by disgraceful sharia laws, indeed treated worse than civilized humans treat house pets, are unable to expand their minds and assert influence possibly turning things around. How can such societies that so disrespect half their members, forcing them to don head to toe burkas, presumably because their virtual slave masters, randomly endowed with the Y chromosome, have absolutely no control over repressed prurient urges, expect to thrive productively? How can societies that brainwash children with hate-filled Koranic verse, rather than nourish supple minds with secular humanistic tolerant concepts, expect to thrive productively? More importantly, when emboldened regimes like today's Iran, perhaps tomorrow's Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and possibly Iraq continue extorting exponentially increasing revenues from energy addicted non-Muslim industrial nations for fossil fuel, that prehistoric substance keeping their economies from collapsing as well as affording those war-mongering regimes the insidious opportunity to develop nuclear weapons, they imperil all civilized cultures. Let's not kid ourselves. Set backs aside, the United States, Israel, and every other non-brain dead nation on this planet had better develop strategies for dealing with an inevitable confrontation with fanatical Islamic regimes and stateless kindred spirited war crazed jihadists refusing to evolve peacefully as we enter our third and hopefully not last millennium.

Might one sensible strategy involve cutting the fossil fuel cord thus revenue flow to fundamentalist Islamic regimes? It is morally unconscionable to underwrite jihad obsessed misogynist countries, enabling them to continue suffocating the natural rights of one entire gender, enabling them to nurture terrorists, enabling them to sooner or later develop weapons of mass destruction which they or their proxies will likely use. Furthermore, Iran, led by a lunatic president and muddled mullahs truly believing it is their duty to create planetary chaos, perhaps of the nuclear variety, a glowing tribute for the coming of an all powerful Imam who will slay the infidel creating a wholly fundamentalist Islamic planet, is on the brink of fulfilling that Dr. Strangelove obsession as their centrifuges turn, yet the world dawdles. Has the stupidity virus infected leaders of energy dependent nations, unable to grasp the obvious fact that preventing a nuclear holocaust trumps any inconvenience consequential to a military solution that will prevent such a catastrophe from occurring?

Go big, go long, or go home may be today's operative conundrum troubling minds across the Atlantic, but a broken Iraq must be viewed within the context of the entire Middle East when formulating a strategic plan. If that unstable set of tribes, previously held together by a Sunni tyrant, morphs into another autocratic enclave this time ruled by a Shiite tyrant at the behest of frothing nukes-in-progress neighbor Iran, Uncle Sam's clumsy efforts at presumably creating a democracy in this neck of the desert could yield a potentially apocalyptical result. Furthermore, peace in our time accommodating Europe, strewn with Israel bashing Palestinian apologists, less than apoplectic about madman AhMADinejad and his crew of contemptible Imam possessed mullahs, will be the first to feel the wrath of any neo-Ottoman invasion jihad style, its urban battleground emerging in London, Paris, Madrid, Hamburg, Helsinki, and so many other European venues, manned by throngs of ghettoized Muslim immigrant warriors weaned on madrassa infected venom. It would be unconscionable if America merely walks away from the mess it created in Iraq, effectively strengthening a Hitler wannabe in erstwhile Persia. Would it however be too much to ask if politically correct Europe, for the sake of its own Westernized skin, joins the heretofore hated Bush Administration in this endeavor, likely more amenable to that consideration now that new kid on the block donkeys hold sway with that swaggering staggering GOP pachyderm after a midterm election thumping of the latter? Set aside differences, something must be done to turn the tide of disastrous fanatical Islam now!

Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by David Meir-Levi, November 23, 2006.

Another case of what Daniel Pipes calls "Sudden Jihad syndrome".

Crazed lone killer, acting on behalf of Allah, kills "despicable Crusader" (and wounds five others) for the honor of Islam, happy about it, got strength from Allah to do it, knows that Allah loves him for doing it, knows that Allah wanted him to kill a British subject today because of the way Britain treated the Arabs almost 90 years ago (Balfour Declaration).

Remember the van driver near a college campus in North Carolina.
Remember the van driver in the East Bay and San Francisco who ended up near the JCC.
Remember the shooter in the Seattle Jewish Federation office.
Remember the shooter at the El-Al counter in LAX in 2001.
Remember the two American Muslims who rode around the DC area shooting people randomly.

Three of the five were not targetting Jews or Israelis....just 'infidels'.

what is it that created in these people the state of mind which says that killing innocent people because they are not Muslim brings glory and God's love?

This is called "Allah blessed me, tells killer of British tourist," and was written by Harry deQuetteville. It appeared in the Telegraph in England


The self-confessed killer of a British tourist in Jordan claimed yesterday that, "Allah gave me the strength to kill the Briton".

Nabil Ahmad Issa al-Jaaoura, 38, is on trial for the murder of Christopher Stokes, a 30-year-old chartered accountant who was shot dead in September during a visit to a Roman amphitheatre popular with tourists in the capital Amman.

Five visitors from the Netherlands, Australia and New Zealand, and a Jordanian tourist policeman were also wounded in the shooting spree, during which witnesses said the gunman shouted, "God is great" before being overpowered.

At a military court yesterday, the defendant said he was "a soldier of Allah" and that killing a "despicable crusader" was "the closest to winning Allah's acceptance".

Jaaoura, a Jordanian citizen of Palestinian origin, said he had been "blessed" by Allah before setting off on his mission to kill westerners.

"Allah blessed me when I killed a British man and hurt others, because they are fighting the Prophet and his soldiers since the Balfour Declaration," he said, referring to the 1917 document in which the Britain promised support for the creation of Israel.

"The British people... insulted the honorable Quran and women who wear the head cover." Jaourah initially pleaded innocent to murder charges. But after his comments, the prosecutor said he had confessed and urged the court "to hand him the harshest punishment".

He demanded the death penalty for what he called Jaaoura's "terrorist crimes". The accused now faces sentenced to death by hanging if convicted.

The trial comes as Jordan's moderate monarchy, which has made peace with Israel and is a key ally in President George W. Bush's war against terrorism, strikes an increasingly delicate balance with extremist elements among the country's population.

Like the self-confessed killer of Mr Stokes, large numbers of Jordanians are ethnic Palestinians who resent Western policy in the region of which Jordan is a key part.

Jordan has also been unsettled by a flood of refugees from its eastern neighbour Iraq, where Jordanian-born extremist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi led al-Qa'eda before being killed by US forces in June.

Mr Stokes, whose family lives in Littleborough, near Rochdale, Greater Manchester, gave up his job at an audit company in Dublin to embark on a four-week tour of the Middle East. He travelled to Turkey and Syria before arriving in Jordan.

The shooting which claimed his life on Sept 4 was a rare attack on tourists in Jordan. Prosecutors have said that Jaourah was acting alone and had no links to terrorist groups.

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 Michael Travis, November 22, 2006.

Tristan Murphy of the eclectic and often brilliant "Western Defence" is pushing "Rational Intolerance" as the answer to mindless appeasement!

Some points to make

Robert Spencer over at Jihad Watch has published a list of points in answer to some of his critics, I thought that I would do the same! But unlike Spencer I've decided not to bullshit(Why is it all these learned men, criticise Islam, lay out sensible arguments, then fail to make logical conclusions based on the facts?)

1. Islam is not a race. One does not become a racist by opposing Islam.

2. I actually do wish to drive all Muslims out of the West.

3. I believe that good Muslims are by definition wicked followers of Satan, some Muslims may be good people, but by definition are bad Muslims. The best Muslims are recovering Muslims!

4. I have said that Muslims want to kill Jews and Christians, but they would get a bigger kick out of enslaving us and taxing us.

5. Islam is incompatible with mankind, civilisation and basic decency! FACT!

Spain is cool by the way, quite civilised, not to many Moors where I am, although the ones that are here stand out like sewage in a bed of roses!

Contact the poster at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 22, 2006.

They (Islamists) should not stop at boycotting US Airways...they should boycott ALL our airlines and then we know we are safer, business for our airlines will increase...after all we no longer transferring possible terrorists, and we will need to spend less money on security that we need to have so the imams and their compatriots do not blow up our airplanes...boycott our airlines already!

On the other hand...Minneapolis is Islamo-fascism center where you can attend "imam conference," what ever this means apart from the getting together of Muslims to plan the take over of the USA!

And our foolish government is investigating US Airways instead of sticking Homeland Security nose deep inside the-who-is-who and what-is-what in this imam conference.

Not to worry! The American political correctness victimhood mentality machine is well greased; it will intimidate airlines and their passengers but will defend the rights of six imams to chant "Allah" before boarding a US Airways commercial flight, a word that coincidentally was the last word hundreds of airline passengers heard on 9/11 before they died in the greatest Islamits attack on America yet!

You tell me!

This was written by Ann Coulter and it appeared today on Human Events Online

Six imams removed from a US Airways flight from Minneapolis to Phoenix are calling on Muslims to boycott the airline. If only we could get Muslims to boycott all airlines, we could dispense with airport security altogether.

Witnesses said the imams stood to do their evening prayers in the terminal before boarding, chanting "Allah, Allah, Allah" -- coincidentally, the last words heard by hundreds of airline passengers on 9/11 before they died.

Witnesses also said that the imams were talking about Saddam Hussein, and denouncing America and the war in Iraq. About the only scary preflight ritual the imams didn't perform was the signing of last wills and testaments.

After boarding, the imams did not sit together and some asked for seat belt extensions, although none were morbidly obese. Three of the men had one-way tickets and no checked baggage.

Also they were Muslims.

The idea that a Muslim boycott against US Airways would hurt the airline proves that Arabs are utterly tone-deaf. This is roughly the equivalent of Cindy Sheehan taking a vow of silence. How can we hope to deal with people with no sense of irony? The next thing you know, New York City cab drivers will be threatening to bathe.

Come to think of it, the whole affair may have been a madcap advertising scheme cooked up by US Airways.

It worked with me. US Airways is my official airline now. Northwest, which eventually flew the Allah-spouting Muslims to their destinations, is off my list. You want to really hurt a U.S. air carrier's business? Have Muslims announce that it's their favorite airline.

The clerics had been attending an imam conference in Minneapolis (imam conference slogan: "What Happens in Minneapolis -- Actually, Nothing Happened in Minneapolis"). But instead of investigating the conference, the government is now investigating my favorite airline.

What threat could Muslims flying from Minnesota to Arizona be? Three of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 received their flight training in Arizona. Long before the attacks, an FBI agent in Phoenix found it curious that so many Arabs were enrolled in flight school. But the FBI rebuffed his request for an investigation on the grounds that his suspicions were based on the same invidious racial profiling that has brought US Airways under investigation and into my good graces.

Lynne Stewart's client, the Blind Sheik, Omar Abdel-Rahman, is serving life in prison in a maximum security lock-up in Minnesota. One of the six imams removed from the US Airways plane was blind, so Lynne Stewart was the one missing clue that would have sent all the passengers screaming from the plane.

Wholly apart from the issue of terrorism, don't we have a seller's market for new immigrants? How does a blind Muslim get to the top of the visa list? Is there a shortage of blind, fanatical clerics in this country that I haven't noticed? Couldn't we get some Burmese with leprosy instead? A 4-year-old could do a better job choosing visa applicants than the U.S. Department of Immigration.

One of the stunt-imams in US Airways' advertising scheme, Omar Shahin, complained about being removed from the plane, saying: "Six scholars in handcuffs. It's terrible."

Yes, especially when there was a whole conference of them! Six out of 150 is called "poor law enforcement." How did the other 144 "scholars" get off so easy?

Shahin's own "scholarship" consisted of continuing to deny Muslims were behind 9/11 nearly two months after the attacks. On Nov. 4, 2001, the Arizona Republic cited Shahin's "skepticism that Muslims or bin Laden carried out attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon." Shahin complained that the government was "focusing on the Arabs, the Muslims. And all the evidence shows that the Muslims are not involved in this terrorist act."

In case your memory of that time is hazy, within three days of the attack, the Justice Department had released the names of all 19 hijackers -- names like Majed Moqed, Ahmed Alghamdi, Mohand Alshehri, Ahmed Ibrahim A. Al Haznawi and Ahmed Alnami. The government had excluded all but 19 passengers as possible hijackers based on extensive interviews with friends and family of nearly every passenger on all four flights. Some of the hijackers' seat numbers had been called in by flight attendants on the planes.

By early October, bin Laden had produced a videotape claiming credit for the attacks. And by Nov. 4, 2001, the New York Times had run well over 100 articles on the connections between bin Laden and the hijackers -- even more detailed and sinister than the Times' flowcharts on neoconservatives!

Also, if I remember correctly, al Qaeda had taken out full-page ads in Variety and the Hollywood Reporter thanking their agents for the attacks.

But now, on the eve of the busiest travel day in America, these "scholars" have ginned up America's PC victim machinery to intimidate airlines and passengers from noticing six imams chanting "Allah" before boarding a commercial jet.

Contact the poster at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Moshe Feiglin, November 22, 2006.

The planned operation was the mistake. And the mistake should have been the planned operation...

The recent military operation in Beit Hanoun, in which Israel attempted -- as usual -- to find the terror needle in the civilian haystack, was responsible for Israeli casualties, but registered no military achievements.

On the other hand, the mistake -- the accidental shelling of a civilian building in Beit Hanoun -- should have been the planned operation in the first place, albeit in a calculated and controlled manner.

Residents of territory from which Israel is fired upon must know that they have two options: Either prevent the firing or leave before their homes are destroyed. But this simple equation, clear to any normal person, is not clear at all to Israel's leaders and army commanders.

The IDF's operation in Beit Hanoun was an exact rerun of all the false concepts that created the failure in last summer's war in Lebanon. It just makes you rub your eyes in amazement: The IDF is great, strong and sophisticated. But on the other hand, it is completely entangled in the values imbroglio of the "enlightened" tyranny.

Israel's defeat in Lebanon created a flurry of studies and research projects, some more professional than others. The vast majority of these studies dealt with the army's technical functioning. All the generals on the talk shows and all the officers who voiced their opinions focused on the technical. That played perfectly into the hands of the political leaders, as if the problem is technical, it is easy to excuse with technical claims.

But the defeats that the IDF has suffered time after time are not the direct result of military capability. Instead, the defeats are the result of the inverted values which have overtaken the military establishment.

After two months in a tent in Gush Katif, I was loaded onto a bus and expelled from the region. When I got home, I said to my wife, "That's it. We don't have an army anymore."

"What do you mean?" she said. "Didn't you see how well the army was prepared? The precise logistics? Tens of thousands of soldiers?"

"There is no more army," I said once again. "It buried its soul in the sands of Gush Katif. Now the army is simply a pile of uniforms with nothing inside. The first time it will be up against a real enemy -- and it doesn't matter how small the enemy is -- the army will crumble."

We have to understand. Israel today has no army. The IDF, captive to the ethical codes of former Chief Justice Aharon Barak and Leftist army ethicist Asa Kasher, cannot defend us. Not in Beit Hanoun and not in Teheran. For all practical purposes -- it no longer exists.

First and foremost, the IDF needs an ethical revolution. The IDF has to become the army of Israel, ready and willing to fight, guided strictly by Jewish values. Jewish morals dictate that "If someone tries to kill you, you must kill him first." An army guided by Jewish morals will educate its soldiers and provide them with a love of their land and its history and pride in their Jewish heritage. It will impress them with the importance of liberating and settling all parts of the Land of Israel.

No more burying our heads in the sand, no more illusions of tiring our enemies slowly. No more cowardliness. No more worrying "what will the world think?" It means authentic mutual responsibility. It means that if our soldiers are being held captive, nobody in Gaza or Lebanon is going to sleep. They want electricity? Running water? Transportation? Their jailed leaders? Their homes in one piece? Their lives? The way to get all that is to hand over our soldiers.

But before everything else, the IDF requires moral purification from the stain of the Disengagement -- a painful process of dismissal of all the levels of command that were responsible for the crime of expulsion.

In truth, it is a bit unfair to blame the IDF. Are the army's commanders supposed to determine its moral path? I don't remember commanders of the past taking pride in the fact that they sacrificed the lives of their soldiers to prevent harm to enemy civilians. This is an inverted value, forced on the army by the civilian establishment until it became part of the army's value system. How ridiculous is the demand to have the Supreme Court investigate the failures of the Lebanon war. The Supreme Court judges are the unmistakable source of the value inversion that has eliminated the IDF.

In other words, the solution does not begin and end with the army. If Israel wants to continue to exist, it must revolutionize its entire value system. In practical terms, that means the first step is to elect a new leadership that is appropriate for the job.

Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) is a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Moshe Feiglin, its cofounder, has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To learn more about Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) and to read their plan for Israel's future, visit www.jewishisrael.org. Or contact Shmuel Sackett, International Director (516) 330-4922 (cell)

To Go To Top

Posted by Hillel Fendel, November 22, 2006.

Left-wing anti-settlement "Peace Now" made headlines by reporting that nearly 40% of Jewish towns in Judea & Samaria lies on privately-owned Arab land. The Yesha Council denies, but who hears?

The Peace Now report, which was publicized widely in newspapers all over the world, "shows that Israel has effectively stolen privately-owned Palestinian land for the purpose of constructing settlements," the group's website says.

A website summary of the report states that most Yesha settlements - 130 of them - have been constructed either entirely or partially on private Arab-owned land, and that this is illegal according to a Supreme Court ruling of 1979.

Hundreds of Thousands of Jews in Yesha, Golan and Jerusalem

Yaakov (Ketzaleh) Katz of Beit El - a veteran leader of the settlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria - dismissed the report out of hand. "They merely want to weaken us and the State of Israel, and to maintain themselves in the news," he told Arutz-7. "After what we have seen in Gaza, with the failure of the Disengagement and the senseless uprooting of thousands of Jews, which has led to the bombardment and near-emtpying out of Sderot, they know that talk of another withdrawal is out of the question. So they want to keep themselves in the headlines and publicize reports like this - but it is totally false. The Supreme Court has ruled dozens of times on these matters, and always found that the contested communities and lands were legal."

"What, do they really think that we are going to uproot Maaleh Adumim and its 40,000 inhabitants? They simply don't know what to do with the 600,000 Jews who now live in Yesha, the Golan and the new neighborhoods of Jerusalem... The purpose of publicizing that report is merely to aggrandize themselves and keep themselves in the headlines."

The Yesha Council has reacted thus far with only a general and non-detailed denial, pending its review of the alleged evidence that even Peace Now admits was secret.

"Until 1979," Council Spokesperson Emily Amrousi told Arutz-7, "new communities, towns and neighborhoods were built all over Israel on privately-owned land, by military order. In 1979, the Supreme Court ruled that this could no longer be done - and since then, the government has carefully adhered to that principle in building new communities."

Communities Were Built Based on Careful Gov't-Sponsored Research

A former IDF lawyer told Arutz-7 that decisions as to where to build new communities in Judea and Samaria were based on careful and precise research, for the express purpose of making sure to avoid all privately-owned land.

The late Pliah Albeck, as head of the Civil Department in the Justice Ministry, was responsible for locating lands in Judea and Samaria for Jewish communities. "She was extraordinarily careful to make sure that no land that could be considered privately-owned was used," the IDF lawyer said. "She was extra stringent, and many communities were not even built because of her findings. She would go out to the area and check to see if land that was not registered was used for grazing; she didn't want anyone's sustenance to suffer because of a new community..."

"One community on the east side of Highway 60 had actually been planned to be on the west," the lawyer said, "but was moved because of what she found... There were dozens of court suits against new communities, but the Supreme Court always accepted her opinions."

One source familiar with the area in Judea and Samaria said that "perhaps 5%" of the uninhabited land there is privately-owned. "Vast areas in Judea and Samaria lay totally desolate in 1967 when Israel liberated them in the Six Day War," he said. "In addition, it is likely that Peace Now used strange definitions of the term 'privately-owned.' For instance, the Turks [who ruled the Holy Land up until 1917] would sometimes tax someone for a plot of land because he planted a tree on it - and then left-wing groups come along and say that his great-great-grandson, who no longer lives in the area, is the owner of the plot... In addition, sometimes one parcel of land may have been privately-held, leading some to jump to the conclusion that all the area around it is privately-held."

Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Israel National News.

To Go To Top

Posted by Eli E. Hertz, November 22, 2006.

Dear Friend,

The Bush administration and GOP leaders renewed their drive for Senate approval of John Bolton as UN ambassador.

Democrats maintain he is too hasty and ineffective to be confirmed.

Reality and facts tell a different story;

Ambassador John R. Bolton brings tremendous experience, wisdom, expertise, courage, and finally, great honor to all of us.

A tireless defender of our nation's values, advocating freedom, peace and security, he is also a great friend and defender of the State of Israel and Jews everywhere.

History will judge him in parity with equally outspoken intellects such as Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Jeane Kirkpatrick.

Please sign the petition in support of nominating John R. Bolton the Permanent U.S. Representative to the United Nations CLICK HERE TO SIGN THE PETITION!

"The truth may not always win, but it is always right!"

Please sign the petition in support of nominating John R. Bolton as the Permanent U.S. Representative to the United Nations.

5,000 signatures are needed immediately!

Please forward petition to all friends and associates as well as those with large email lists. Help get the word out. Help us deliver this message.


Eli E. Hertz

Contact Eli E. Hertz at the www.MythsandFacts.org website.

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Freund, November 22, 2006.

Yesterday, I had the privilege of accompanying 51 new immigrants from the Bnei Menashe of India - descendants of a lost tribe of Israel - on the flight home from Bombay to Tel Aviv.

This very special event was a long time in coming - for the past 3 1/2 years, since Israel's Interior Ministry shut down the Bnei Menashe aliyah in the summer of 2003, I have waged a long and protracted struggle to reverse the decision and restart the aliyah. Thank G-d, that has now finally come to pass - and by the middle of next week, we will have brought over 218 Bnei Menashe Jews to Israel.

Below is an article I wrote on the plane ride over here, describing some of my thoughts and feelings regarding this very special miracle. It appeared today in the Jerusalem Post
(www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1162378452839&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull). I would welcome any comments or feedback that you might have. Write me at msfreund@netvision.net.il

EN ROUTE TO ISRAEL: For Arbi Khiangte, Monday evening's regularly scheduled El Al flight out of Bombay was far more than just an eight-hour long trek across the ocean.

Born and raised in the northeastern Indian state of Mizoram, which straddles Burma and Bangladesh, the striking 21-year-old is a member of the Bnei Menashe, a group that traces its ancestry back to a lost tribe of Israel.

Since childhood, Khiangte has dreamed of moving to the land of her ancestors, the Land of Israel.

With a bright and infectious smile beaming with optimism, she told me of her strong desire to take part in building the country.

"I want to be a nurse," she said. "I want to help Israel, to heal the people there. I hope that I will succeed."

Now, after years of waiting, Khiangte will at last have a chance to do so. Together with 50 other members of her community, she made aliya this week as part of the first batch of 218 Bnei Menashe immigrants set to arrive here in the coming week.

As chairman of Shavei Israel, a Jerusalem-based organization responsible for assisting the Bnei Menashe both in India and in Israel, I was blessed to accompany Khiangte and the rest of the group on their voyage home to the Jewish state.

And while flying El Al is always an experience, this particular trip was something truly special.

The excitement in the air was palpable, despite the late hour and the obvious exhaustion that everyone clearly felt. The immigrants had left their hotel near the seashore at 4:30 p.m. in order to allow enough time for their bus to crawl its way through Bombay's daunting rush-hour traffic.

More than two hours later, they arrived at the airport, where they had to make their way through security, check-in and passport control before boarding the flight at around 11:00 p.m.

It had been a long and tiring afternoon, but that didn't stop Gavriel Joram, an energetic 14 year old, from joking around with some of his fellow Bnei Menashe, lightening the mood for all those present.

Previously, in a somewhat more serious frame of mind, Gavriel had shared with me his hopes and dreams for the future.

"I want to be a soldier, and to defend the country," he told me, the earnestness in his voice moving me deeply.

"I love Israel," he said, without a hint of the cynicism or sarcasm to which we in the West have become so accustomed.

What compelling proof for the power of the Jewish spirit, I thought to myself.

After all, the Bnei Menashe trace their ancestry back to Menashe, one of the 10 tribes of Israel exiled by the Assyrians some 27 centuries ago.

Despite wandering in exile for so long, they managed to preserve a strong sense of pride and Jewish identity, keeping Shabbat, following the laws of family purity, circumcising newborn males on the eighth day and passing down across the generations a deeply held belief that they would one day go home again to Zion.

And now, here they are, doing just that.

Of the 218 Bnei Menashe that are making aliya, the youngest immigrant is an infant born just two weeks ago, while the oldest is 84-year-old Sara Haunhar, whose lifelong dream has always been "to set foot on G-d's Holy Land before I die."

Waiting for her at Ben-Gurion Airport was her grandson, who arrived here several years ago. Dressed in the green fatigues of the IDF, he proudly serves in an intelligence unit, bolstering the security of his fellow Jews.

It might sound somewhat silly, or even naive, but I truly believe that the Bnei Menashe aliya is a miracle of immense historical and even biblical significance.

Just as the prophets foretold so long ago, the lost tribes of Israel are being brought back from the Exile.

In the past decade, we succeeded in bringing nearly 1,000 Bnei Menashe to Israel under an arrangement with the Interior Ministry, whereby 100 Bnei Menashe were allowed to come here each year as tourists. They would study for conversion, and usually within a year of their arrival, they would pass the test and be accepted as Jews.

But all that came to an end in the summer of 2003, after we brought a group of 71 Bnei Menashe to Israel. The newly-appointed interior minister at the time, Avraham Poraz of the Shinui Party, decided to shut down the Bnei Menashe aliya once and for all, putting it into the equivalent of a bureaucratic deep-freeze.

As a result, thanks to the whims of one man, the 7,000 Bnei Menashe still in India suddenly found themselves with no hope of joining their loved ones in the Jewish state.

In the wake of that decision, I approached Israel's Sephardic Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar and asked him to consider issuing a ruling regarding the halachic status of the Bnei Menashe, just as the Rabbinate has done regarding other Diaspora communities in the past.

The chief rabbi readily agreed, and in March 2005, after studying the issue, he formally recognized the Bnei Menashe as "descendants of Israel," confirming their claim to Jewish ancestry. Then, in September 2005, he sent a rabbinical court to India, which formally converted the 218 Bnei Menashe who are now moving here this week.

This is the largest group of Bnei Menashe ever to come here at one time, and it is the first group to arrive in three and a half years. More importantly, however, it marks the first time that the Bnei Menashe are coming here as Jews, recognized as such by all concerned.

And so, the moment they stepped off the plane at Ben-Gurion airport yesterday, they became Israeli citizens in every respect, part and parcel of Israeli society.

Every once in a while, there are moments in life when you feel like you are not just witnessing history, but actually playing a part in helping to shape it. The flight out of Bombay was just such a moment.

And as I accompanied Arbi Khiangte and her fellow Bnei Menashe on their long journey home, I couldn't help but feel that we were witnesses to something far more significant than perhaps any of us might realize.

Because as much as we might think that we are helping the Bnei Menashe, it is the reverse that is true. It is they who strengthen us - with their faith, with their commitment and with their undying love for Zion.

At one point, when I asked Arbi Khiangte why she thinks it is so important to move to Israel, tears welled up in her eyes. "The Holy One, Blessed be He, commanded us to live there," she says. "It is a mitzva, and it is one that my ancestors have been waiting for so long to fulfill. I am happy that we are now finally going to do so."

And so, I might add, are we.

Welcome home, Arbi, and may your arrival pave the way for the rest of the Bnei Menashe to follow.

Michael Freund is a Jerusalem Post columnist who serves as Chairman of Shavei Israel, the organization responsible for helping the Bnei Menashe.

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 22, 2006.

The root of Palestinian misery come from their [no]leaders. But the Palestinians are so myopic, irrational and could not give a hoot about their society, thus they protect those who cause them misery instead of arresting them so they could live in peace.

At long last, someone is actually putting the horse in front of the cart, and it comes from our neighbor to the north-Canada. This is from the November 20, 2006 National Post
(www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/editorialsletters/story.html?id= 69c23d82-dd87-4c1d-a333-bf3f3979df37).

The Jabaliya Refugee Camp in Gaza was the scene of Palestinian celebrations yesterday. No, a "martyr" from the camp hadn't managed to blow up a restaurant full of Israeli families, the usual reason for joyous gatherings among Arabs in this part of the world. Rather, the locals were celebrating the victory of their "human shields" in thwarting an air strike against the home of wanted terrorist Wail Barud.

But while the assembly of hundreds of Palestinians in anticipation of the planned Israeli bombing did succeed in protecting Barud's home, the tactic may have backfired from a propaganda perspective: It served to demonstrate that Israel does not seek to kill Palestinian civilians wholesale, as Arab propagandists constantly claim. Indeed, it is clear the Palestinians themselves do not believe their own propaganda about Israel's alleged thirst for blood. Otherwise, they never would have been able to recruit all those human shields.

If Israel really were as sadistic as its critics claim, it wouldn't have called off yesterday's bombing run. Just the opposite: It would have jumped at the chance to kill so many Palestinians at one go. Just imagine if the shoe were on the other foot, and hundreds of Israeli "human shields" positioned themselves in an unguarded cafe in the West Bank. Palestinian suicide bombers would be stepping over each other in an effort to attack the target. "Human shields" work only when your enemy fights like a human.

A second irony is that it is men like Barud who are at the root of Palestinian misery--for if they were not firing rockets at Israel from Gaza, and smuggling in weapons from Egypt, there would be no need for the Jewish state to stage counterterrorist operations in Gaza, every square inch of which it evacuated in August, 2005. If Palestinians were more rational about where their society's interests lie, they would go to Barud's house not to offer protection -- but to arrest him so that others in the area could live in peace.

Contact the poster at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 22, 2006.


The Muslim media and mosques bathe the faithful in hatred. A billion people favor jihad. More than another billion are in Communist countries (China, N. Korea, and, yes, Russia, again), acting expansionist or aggressive. Meanwhile, the old antisemitism is reviving in Western Europe. So much evil!

So, whom do our supposedly progressive liberals hate? Pres. Bush. I assess rather than hate, but why don't the liberals hate the people promoting nuclear war? While the head of Iran thinks that by destroying Israel and inducing world war, he will conjure the ninth, hidden imam, who may be himself, the liberals think that Bush is turning the world against the US. What kind of a world do they think this is, with imperialist Russia, China that murdered tens of millions, jealous France, and Britain afraid to curb lawless Muslims? The liberals think we should concentrate on Afghanistan, and that Bush went too far, while the Muslims fight on different levels and all over, and where we fight, the Islamists send reinforcements from places that Bush -- his real failing -- fails to overturn. Bush couldn't bring them democracy, but don't hate him for trying. Instead of thinking America bad for standing up against Islam (though only partially), think of the rest of the world once again needing America to save it. This is not the time for America to join jaded and faded Europe in its loss of faith in Western civilization.

Is evil just a name for vicious and unfair policies, or is it a thing in itself, as certain religious sects believe? What kind of a species is the human one, that it goes in for this so much?


The Arabs have attacked Israel thousands of times, half a dozen of which were called wars but really were major battles in continual jihad. Israel should be used to it. Israel must stay ready for another round, especially since the US rescues the Arabs from their previous round and helps prepare them for the next. That is, this time the US has built Egypt into a formidable foe and is training and arming P.A. forces that are said to be ready to fight Hamas but which previously instead turned on Israel.

The Arabs do prepare for war. Egypt has been training to race through the Sinai. It has been letting arms flow into Gaza. Hizbullah is rearming. Hamas is modeling itself after Hizbullah, so as to inflict more casualties upon Israelis. Iran is building nuclear weapons. UNIFIL is helping the terrorists in Lebanon. Another Holocaust is coming.

What has Israel been doing? Israel reduced its military budget and cut training. It withdrew from strategic areas, letting the enemy fire from closer up. Now it claims it will restore its military prowess, but it has not announced major reforms.

You had better travel to Israel soon, if you want a last opportunity to do so. The State Dept. won't mind the loss of Israel. But that loss would cost the West an army that had been very helpful before and could be helpful in future. Instead, the jihadists will sense victory against the West. If Iran drops an atomic bomb on Israel, how long would it be before it drops one on the US? US anti-Zionist policy may thrill State Dept. officials but it is not patriotic.


When the US set out against Afghanistan and Iraq, the evil axis weakened and was frightened. The US, however, remained anti-Israel and cheap about building up its own military. Then the Democrats inhibited Pres. Bush. Now the US effort is faltering, Israel has a hopelessly stupid and short-sighted government. The axis is closing in on Israel and then would turn on the US. Europe is in a struggle for survival, itself. It is difficult to see a way out.


The US is considering withdrawal from Iraq. This would change the balance of forces in the Mideast. It certainly would affect Israel. Israeli officials, however, have not consulted with their experts about those effects and what measures Israel should take in consequence and in anticipation (IMRA, 11/2).

Israel rarely plans in advance. One advantage of planning in advance is to be ready for anticipated eventualities, rather than wait for them to materialize without a plan and without taking steps for dealing with them and then finding out that the ramifications will be felt before Israel has time to cushion them.


This is a matter of opinion. Analysts compare goals with results, but results depend on what people think they are. Since the Vietnam War, the West's enemies have attempted to maneuver Western public opinion into a defeatist mode, so that even while the West is defeating enemy forces, it thinks that it is losing or the war is hopeless. Arab opinion is a shifting assessment based on who seems to be prevailing. Thus when Israel was dismantling Hizbullah at the beginning, foreign Arab governments criticized Hizbullah mostly for attacking prematurely and for advancing Iranian aspirations for dominance. When Israel seemed to be bogged down, but really was hesitant and coming under UNO restriction, Arab opinion shifted.

Amir Taheri notes that hardly any Lebanese joined Hizbullah's victory marches, just a few hundred in south Beirut. Shiites would more naturally mourn the loss of "martyrs." The people of Lebanon were angered with Hizbullah for bringing down upon them destruction. The major Shiite figures in Lebanon rebuked Hizbullah for doing so.

Why did the media report Hizbullah as winning, when its forces were getting destroyed? Because the media wanted to harm Israel and the US (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2006, p.26 from Wall St. J., 8/25).

Most of the media is too biased to report accurately, but the war picture is mixed. Israel foundered too much for it to have won. As Hizbullah revives, opinion in Lebanon and among the Arabs in general may be shifting back to admiration for Hizbullah. The Muslim Arabs admire defiance.


Israel has given Egypt a list of arms smugglers operating in the Sinai. Nevertheless, Egypt never has indicted a single smuggler (despite the enterprise being large scale and requiring storage depots as well as numerous trucks taking a very few open roads to a narrow destination). Egyptian border guards are not allowed to open fire, even if fired upon, unless attacks upon them threaten their lives. By taking no action against smuggling, Egypt violates its agreement with Israel (IMRA, 11/2).

Israel does not complain about Egyptian or other Arab violations. All one hears are false accusations about Israeli violations. No wonder Israel loses at public relations!


The only way for Israel to deter Arab aggression is to fight it disproportionately. The only way to defeat the Arabs, whose greater population would enable it to win a war of attrition, is to inflict casualties disproportionately. Reserve Major General Yaakov Amidror said that the Arabs know that (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2006, p.18 from Joshua Brilliant, U.P.I., 9/7).

People won't admit what they really know. They would pretend to righteous indignation against Israel. There long has been a double standard against the Jews. It is severe, now. The Jews cannot count on "the civilized world," as the Holocaust proved.


Have you followed the story of the siege of a mosque in Gaza? According to the New York Times, dozens of terrorists pursued by the IDF took refuge in a mosque. From behind its walls, they fired upon the Israeli troops. As an Israeli officer explained, the terrorists profaned that holy place by using it for war. Under international law, Israeli troops have a right to fire back at what had been a civilian place.

Then Hamas appealed to area residents, especially to women, to come and act as human shields. In the 11/5 edition, we find that the women advanced, against warning, to shield terrorists, some of whom were hiding among them and who had been given some of their clothing, for disguise. Israeli troops fired at the terrorists, hitting some of the and also a few women (Steven Erlanger).

This illustrates Muslim Arab tactics of treachery and other war crimes. It exposes as hypocrisy Arab complaints about casualties among their civilians. It reminds one of the failure to understand Muslim tactics, when US Presidents Clinton and Bush held off firing during Ramadan or at mosques. The US assumption was that the Muslims would appreciate and not exploit our chivalry. The Times failed to draw such conclusions.

The women who came to the aid of terrorists forfeited civilian status. In justice, the Israeli troops should not have fired only at the terrorists but also should have annihilated the whole mob. Israel does not do that for two reasons: (1) A mistaken sense of decency and mistaken definition of "civilian;" and (2) The bias of the media and foreign governments, which would claim Israel is acting barbarically, although actually the Arab women and Hamas were acting treacherously. Israel should prepare the way for proper action in self-defense and to win its wars by pointing out the hypocrisy of the rest of the world, which fails to condemn the Arabs for attacking Israeli civilians and which collects relief for Arab civilians and not for Israeli civilians.


Bahrain, UAE, Kuwait, and Iraq, supposedly moderate and US allies, illegally have made 20% more inquiries of US corporations this year, in enforcement of a trade boycott against Israel. The general impression had been that the boycott was waning (IMRA, 11/2).

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Stand With Us, November 21, 2006.
This was written by Adam Brodsky and it appeared November 19, 2006 in the New York Post

MUSLIMS are often accused of not speaking out sufficiently against terrorism. Nonie Darwish knows one reason why: Their fellow Muslims won't let them.

Darwish, who comes from Egypt and was born and raised a Muslim, was set to tell students at Brown University about the twisted hatred and radicalism she grew to despise in her own culture. A campus Jewish group, Hillel, had contacted her to speak there Thursday.

But the event was just called off.

Muslim students had complained that Darwish was "too controversial." They insisted she be denied a platform at Brown, and after contentious debate Hillel agreed.

Weird: No one had said boo about such Brown events as a patently anti-Israel "Palestinian Solidarity Week." But Hillel said her "offensive" statements about Islam "alarmed" the Muslim Student Association, and Hillel didn't want to upset its "beautiful relationship" with the Muslim community.

Plus, Brown's women's center backed out of co-sponsoring the event, even though it shares Darwish's concerns about the treatment of women. Reportedly, part of the problem was that Darwish had no plans to condemn Israel for shooting Arab women used by terrorists as human shields, or for insufficiently protecting Israeli Arab wives from their husbands.

In plugging their ears to Darwish, Brown's Muslim students proved her very point: Muslims who attempt constructive self-criticism are quickly and soundly squelched - by other Muslims.

"Speaking out for human rights, women's rights, equality or even peace with Israel is a taboo that can have serious consequences" in the Arab world, Darwish says. In part to drive home that point, she wrote a book, just out. Its title says it all: "Now They Call Me Infidel: Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel, and the War on Terror."

Darwish argues that her own community - in the Middle East and in America - is hostile to criticism, even from Muslims. After 9/11, she says, many in Egypt refused to believe that Muslims were responsible. Instead, they blamed "the Zionist conspiracy."

From her childhood in the '50s, she's seen seething animosity toward Jews, Israel, America and non- believers generally pervert her culture. "I asked myself, as a Muslim Arab child, was I ever taught peace? The answer is no. We learned just the opposite: honor and pride can only come from jihad and martyrdom."

In elementary schools in Gaza, where she lived until age 8, Darwish learned "vengeance and retaliation. Peace," she says, "was considered a sign of defeat and weakness."

An event in 1996 inflamed her longstanding frustration with her community. Her brother suffered a stroke while in Gaza, and his Egyptian friends and relatives all agreed: To save his life, he needed to go to Hadassah hospital in Jerusalem, not to Cairo. Even though they had spent their lives demeaning Israelis - and boasting of Arab supremacy.

Hadassah saved her brother's life; understandably, her appreciation for Jews and Israelis grew. Today Darwish preaches not only the almost embarrassing lengths to which Jews go to seek dialogue and peace, but also their cultural, political, scientific and economic contributions.

Such notions from anyone in the Arab Muslim world are indeed rare. But Darwish isn't just anyone: Her father was killed by Israelis. Yet she doesn't blame the Jewish state - for her father was Lt. Col. Mustafa Hafaz, an Egyptian who headed one of the modern world's first terrorist groups, the anti-Israel fedayeen in Gaza.

Hafaz's terrorists killed hundreds, maybe thousands, of Israelis in cross-border attacks. Of course the Israelis fought back. Darwish realized that Egyptian ruler Gamal Abdul Nasser, who controlled Gaza, had sent her father to a certain death.

Hafaz became a shahid - a martyr for jihad - and that bought Darwish's family great status. She'd rather have had her father alive.

Darwish's message is invaluable for our age. Too few Arabs and Muslims share her desire for peace with Israel, equality and cultural reform; too few speak - in their living rooms or mosques - about the need to root out radicals from among them. When one Muslim voice does raise such sentiments, it deserves to be heard. Too bad the young Muslims (and their Jewish enablers) at Brown won't hear it.

And if those values can't be espoused in America - land of tolerance and free speech - well, what hope is there for meaningful cultural change?

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 21, 2006.

This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post

British Prime Minister Tony Blair has gone on an appeasement spree and no one seems to mind. On Friday, Blair gave a marquis interview to Al-Jazeera's new psychological warfare platform - its English-language channel - to celebrate its launch.

It is unclear whether Blair meant to give the impression in that interview that he agreed with Al-Jazeera's Man-about-Town-in-Britain David Frost's assertion that the US-British war in Iraq is "pretty much a disaster." But Blair has made unmistakably clear that what he is suing for now is an ignominious American-British retreat from Iraq.

In his recent statements and actions, Blair has been unambiguous in communicating his belief that peace in Iraq begins with Israeli surrender to the Palestinians, Hizbullah and Syria. Blair sees in suicidal Israeli retreats from the Golan Heights, Judea and Samaria the key to unlocking the hearts of the mullahs in Teheran and the Ba'athists in Damascus. As Blair sees it, these enemies of Israel, the US, Britain and the entire Free World will suddenly become reliable friends of the non-Jewish West if Israel is left at their tender mercies. As friends, Iran and Syria will allow the US and Britain to surrender Iraq with their heads held high as they hand global jihadists their greatest victory since the Soviet retreat from Afghanistan.

No less disturbing than Blair's embrace of surrender as a national strategy is the utter lack of outrage against his decision in the British and international media. No one questioned for instance, his decision to grant Al-Jazeera in English an exclusive interview. It is widely accepted, even by some of the British media, that Al-Jazeera's Arabic satellite station is used as a recruiting tool for global jihad. It can be reasonably presumed that the English channel will be used to erode the West's will to defend itself against global jihadist domination. The fact that the network is now operating an English channel should send a chill up the spine of Western and specifically British media outlets which will now have to compete against an enemy propaganda arm masquerading as a news channel.

THERE ARE many reasons that actions like Blair's strategic retreat from reason and responsibility have gone uncriticized by the media. It is not simply that Western, and particularly European journalists are overwhelmingly anti-American and virulently anti-Israel. One of the central reasons for the silence of Western intellectuals and media in the face of actions like Blair's is fear of death at the hands of jihadists.

In France today, high school teacher Robert Redeker has been living in hiding for two months. On September 19 Redeker published an op-ed in Le Figaro in which he decried Islamist intimidation of freedom of thought and expression in the West as manifested by the attacks against Pope Benedict XVI and against Christians in general which followed the pontiff's remarks on jihad earlier that month.

Redeker wrote, "As in the Cold War, where violence and intimidation were the methods used by an ideology hell bent on hegemony, so today Islam tries to put its leaden mantel all over the world. Benedict XVI's cruel experience is testimony to this. Nowadays, as in those times, the West has to be called the 'Free World' in comparison to the Muslim world; likewise, the enemies of the 'Free World,' the zealous bureaucrats of the Koran's vision, who swarm in the very center of the 'Free World,' should be called by their true name."

In reaction to Redeker's column, Egypt banned Le Figaro and Redeker received numerous death threats. His address and maps to his home were published on al-Qaida-linked Web sites and he was forced to leave his job, and flee for his life. While Redeker e-mailed a colleague that French police have set free the man they know was behind the threats to his life, Redeker recently described his plight to a friend in the following fashion, "There is no safe place for me, I have to beg, two evenings here, two evenings there... I am under the constant protection of the police. I must cancel all scheduled conferences."

For its part, Le Figaro's editor appeared on Al-Jazeera to apologize for publishing Redeker's article.

This weekend British author Douglas Murray discussed the intellectual terror in the Netherlands. Murray, who recently published Neoconservativism: Why We Need It, spoke at a conference in Palm Beach, Florida sponsored by the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He noted that the two strongest voices in Holland warning against Islamic subversion of Dutch culture and society - Pim Fortyn and Theo Van Gogh - were murdered.

The third most prominent voice calling for the Dutch to take measures to defend themselves, former member of parliament Ayan Hirsi Ali, lives in Washington, DC today.

Her former colleague in the Dutch parliament, Geert Wilders, has been living under military protection, without a home, for years. In the current elections, Wilders has been unable to campaign because his whereabouts can never be announced. His supporters were reluctant to run for office on his candidates' slate for fear of being similarly threatened with murder. Last month, two of his campaign workers were beaten while putting up campaign posters in Amsterdam.

In 2000, Bart Jan Spruyt, a leading conservative intellectual in Holland established a neoconservative think tank called the Edmund Burke Institute. One of the goals of his institute is to convince the Dutch to defend themselves against the growing Islamist threat. In the period that followed, Spruyt was approached by security services and told that he should hire a bodyguard for personal protection. Although he couldn't afford the cost of a bodyguard, the police eventually provided him with protection after showing up at his office hours after Van Gogh was butchered by a jihadist in the streets of Amsterdam in November 2004.

ANOTHER LEADING conservative voice, law professor and social critic Paul Cliteur distinguished himself for his repeated calls for freedom of thought and for the protection of the Dutch secular state. In the weeks after Van Gogh's murder, Cliteur was the target of unremitting criticism from his leftist colleagues in the press. According to a report by the International Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights, his colleagues blamed him and his ideological allies for the radicalization of the Muslims of Holland.

Clituer reacted to their abuse by announcing on television that he would no longer speak out or write about the Islamic takeover of Holland.

As the Helsinki report notes, although the European Human Rights Convention stipulates that states must enable free speech, "Annemarie Thomassen, a former Dutch judge at the [European Human Rights Court] in Strasbourg, stated that the limits to freedom of speech in the European context lie where the expressed opinions and statements affect the human dignity of another person. This means that, according to her, in Europe one cannot simply write and say anything one wants without showing some respect to other persons."

IN BRITAIN itself, the fact that no media organ dared to publish the Danish cartoons of Muhammad last year is a clear indication of the level of fear in the hearts of those who decide what Britons will know about their world.

Melanie Phillips, the author of Londonistan, noted at the Freedom Center conference that what Britons hear is best described as "a dialogue of the demented." In this dialogue, European Islamists protest victimization at the hands of the native Europeans while threatening to kill them, and native Europeans apologize for upsetting the Muslim radicals and loudly criticize the US and Israel for not going gently into that good night.

In the meantime, jihadist ideologues and political leaders are flourishing in Europe today. In Britain, aside from happily helping Al-Jazeera's ratings, the government has hired Muslim Brotherhood members as counterterrorism advisers.

In the wake of the Muslim cartoon pogroms, the BBC invited Dyab Abou Jahjah, who heads the Arab European League, to opine on the cartoons on its News Night program. Jahjah, who is affiliated with Hizbullah, led anti-Semitic riots in Antwerp in 2002 in which his followers smashed the windows of Jewish businesses, chanted slogans praising Osama bin Laden, and called out, "Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas!" Most recently, Jahjah published cartoons depicting Anne Frank in bed with Adolph Hitler.

The first action that Yasser Arafat took in 1994 after establishing the Palestinian Authority was to attack Palestinian journalists, editors and newspaper offices. Journalists and editors were arrested and tortured and all were forced to accept PA control over their news coverage. The man charged with overseeing censorship was then information minister Yasser Abed Rabbo who in a later psychological warfare coup, signed the so-called Geneva Accord with Yossi Beilin in 2003.

This is the nature of our times. We are at war and those who warn of its dangers are being systematically silenced by our enemies who demand that nothing get in the way of our complacency with our own destruction.

If journalists, intellectuals, social critics, authors and concerned citizens throughout the world do not rise up and demand that their governments protect their right to free expression and arrest and punish those who intimidate and trounce that right, one day, years from now, when students of history ask how it came to pass that the Free World willingly enabled its own destruction, they will have to look no further than the contrasting fortunes of Al-Jazeera and Dyab Abou Jahjah on the one hand and Le Figaro and Robert Redeker on the other.

Contact the poster at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by David Wilder and Noam Arnon, November 22, 2006.

22 November 2006

The Honorable Robert Rydberg

Embassy of Sweden
Asia House
4, Rehov Weizmann
64 239 Tel Aviv
Fax: 03 718 00 05

Dear Mr. Rydberg,

We have been informed that the Swedish foreign ministry has appealed to the government of Israel concerning an attack on Swedish citizen Tove Johansson, in Hebron, on Saturday afternoon, 18 November 2006. According to press reports, Ms. Johansson is a member of the extremist Palestinian organization International Solidarity Movement (ISM) and was in Hebron as part of a protest against the Israeli presence in the city.

We would like to clarify several points concerning this incident:

1. The Jewish community of Hebron rejects any and all unnecessary violence of all kinds, by anyone, be they Arab or Jewish. This is community policy, and is enforced to the best of our ability.

2. ISM has had a presence in Hebron for over a year, and other foreign organizations, including TIPH, CPT, and others have had a presence in Hebron for a number of years. Very rarely, if at all, have there been any violent incidents between Hebron's Jewish residents and members of ISM. Community residents do their best to ignore them. At most, there are verbal exchanges between the two sides. We are unfamiliar with complaints issued by ISM activists against Hebron's Jewish residents.

3. In accordance with the above paragraph, and keeping in mind the fact that over 30,000 Jews visited Hebron on 18 Nov 2006, celebrating the purchase of the Tomb of the Patriarchs for the Jewish people by Abraham some 3,700 years ago, it is clear that the perpetrator(s) of the attack were not residents of Hebron's Jewish community.

a. Hebron residents do not, and have not, physically attacked ISM members in Hebron.

b. Hebron's residents are known by security forces in the city, and anyone participating in such an attack would have been easily identified and apprehended. However, the police have yet to identify or arrest anyone who participated in the attack.

c. According to press accounts, one of the perpetrators was quoted as having said, "I have a flight to France tonight."

d. The fact that an overwhelming majority of the people in Hebron on Saturday, 18 Nov 2006 were not Hebron residents, along with the above-mentioned facts, is clearly proof that no members of Hebron's Jewish community participated in the attack against Ms. Johansson.

4. According to press accounts, police and other security forces requested, prior to the attack, that Ms. Johansson and other protesters vacate the area, due to the sensitivity of their presence. It must be remembered that strict Sabbath observance forbids use of cameras and other such equipment. Photographing people who object to use of cameras on the Sabbath is extremely sensitive and many people object to being photographed on the Sabbath. Ms. Johansson and others were requested by Israeli security forces and others to refrain from photographing Sabbath observers, however, they refused this request. This, of course, does not justify physical attack, however, clearly, had the protestors acceded to this request, most likely the attack would have been avoided.

5. According to various internet accounts, the attackers yelled, "we killed Jesus and we will kill you too." According to eye-witnesses at the scene, this accusation is false. No such phrase was uttered.

6. In addition, according to some written accounts, Ms. Johansson did not receive proper first-aid care from medics that arrived at the scene. This is also a blatant lie. Medics from the Hebron community arrived in a community ambulance, determined the cause of the injury, and then treated Ms. Johansson just as any other injured person is cared for. The Hebron Jewish community ambulance, together with medic and driver, drove Ms. Johansson to Hadassah hospital in Jerusalem, according her full treatment.

7. Finally, the presence of ultra extremist anti-Israel -- anti-Jewish organizations such as ISM and other such groups in Hebron is, as can be understood, extremely unpopular amongst Hebron residents and community supporters. Their presence is clearly provocative, with the goal of aiding Arab terrorists who attempt to murder Hebron Jewish residents and support the aim of expelling Jews entirely from the city. As stated above, Hebron's Jewish community does its utmost to ignore these people, despite the trouble they cause the community, action which, at times, borders on clear incitement against Hebron's Jewish residents as well as Israeli security forces in the area. The fact that during such a huge Sabbath celebration, ISM members saw fit to continue public protest, utilizing instruments as cameras on the Sabbath, and photographing people against their will on the Sabbath, is a tremendous provocation. Again, unnecessary violence cannot be justified, but neither can overt public provocation against such a large gathering. Had they refrained from demonstrating, the attack would not have occurred.

8. In conclusion, the Jewish community of Hebron would suggest to the Swedish Foreign Ministry that in order to avoid any other unpleasant incidents in Hebron, that all Swedish citizens, including members of TIPH and others, such as Ms. Johansson, be requested to stop their politically provocative anti-Jewish activities, leave Hebron immediately and stop interfering in internal Israeli affairs.


David Wilder and Noam Arnon
Hebron Community Council Members
The Jewish Community of Hebron

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 David Meir-Levi, November 21, 2006.

As usual, Daniel Pipes analyzes a worrisome problem in a manner that bespeaks his expertise and comprehensive acumen.

While de iure Cairo is at peace with Israel, de facto, Egypt is an enemy.

"Cairo may have no apparent enemies, but the impoverished Egyptian state sinks massive resources into a military build up. According to the Congressional Research Service, it purchased $6.5 billion worth of foreign weapons in the years 2001-04, more than any other state in the Middle East. In contrast, the Israeli government bought only $4.4 billion worth during that period and the Saudi one $3.8 billion. ...... Egypt ranked as the third largest purchaser of arms in the entire developing world, following only population giants China and India. It has the tenth largest standing army in the world, well over twice the size of Israel's."

So with al-Qaeda in Sinai, Hamas in Gaza, Hezbolla in Lebanon, Iran rattling its Syrian sabre and flexing its long range WMD muscles as well, and Egypt conducting military exercizes with a standing army twice the size of Israel's......well, things look bleak in the Middle East.

Unfortunantly, Pipes does not tell us just what lessons we should draw from the failure of the 1979 peace treaty to create peace.

This article appeared today in the New York Sun and is archived at
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/4146. It is entitled "Time To Recognize Failure Of Israel-Egypt Treaty"

David ML

Ninety-two percent of respondents in a recent poll of one thousand Egyptians over 18 years of age called Israel an enemy state. In contrast, a meager 2% saw Israel as "a friend to Egypt."

These hostile sentiments express themselves in many ways, including a popular song titled "I Hate Israel," venomously antisemitic political cartoons, bizarre conspiracy theories, and terrorist attacks against visiting Israelis. Egypt's leading democracy movement, Kifaya, recently launched an initiative to collect a million signatures on a petition demanding the annulment of the March 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty.

Also, the Egyptian government has permitted large quantities of weapons to be smuggled into Gaza to use against Israeli border towns. Yuval Steinitz, an Israeli legislator specializing in Egypt-Israel relations, estimates that fully 90% of PLO and Hamas explosives come from Egypt.

Cairo may have no apparent enemies, but the impoverished Egyptian state sinks massive resources into a military build up. According to the Congressional Research Service, it purchased $6.5 billion worth of foreign weapons in the years 2001-04, more than any other state in the Middle East. In contrast, the Israeli government bought only $4.4 billion worth during that period and the Saudi one $3.8 billion.

Egypt ranked as the third largest purchaser of arms in the entire developing world, following only population giants China and India. It has the tenth largest standing army in the world, well over twice the size of Israel's.

Egyptian president Anwar El-Sadat, U.S. president Jimmy Carter, and Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin in a good mood at the Egypt-Israel treaty signing ceremony, March 26, 1979.

This long, ugly record of hostility exists despite a peace treaty with Israel, hailed at the time by both Egypt's president Anwar El-Sadat and Israel's prime minister Menachem Begin as a "historic turning point." U.S. president Jimmy Carter hoped it would begin a new era when "violence no longer dominates the Middle East." I too shared in this enthusiasm.

With the benefit of retrospect, however, we see that the treaty did palpable harm in at least two ways. First, it opened the American arsenal and provided American funding to purchase the latest in weaponry. As a result, for the first time in the Arab-Israeli conflict, an Arab armed force may have reached parity with its Israeli counterpart.

Second, it spurred anti-Zionism. I lived for nearly three years in Egypt in the 1970s, before Sadat's dramatic trip to Jerusalem in late 1977, and I recall the relatively low interest in Israel at that time. Israel was plastered all over the news but it hardly figured in conversations. Egyptians seemed happy to delegate this issue to their government. Only after the treaty, which many Egyptians saw as a betrayal, did they themselves take direct interest. The result was the emergence of a more personal, intense, and bitter form of anti-Zionism.

The same pattern was replicated in Jordan, where the 1994 treaty with Israel soured popular attitudes. To a lesser extent, the 1993 Palestinian accords and even the aborted 1983 Lebanon treaty prompted similar responses. In all four of these cases, diplomatic agreements prompted a surge in hostility toward Israel.

Defenders of the "peace process" answer that, however hostile Egyptians' attitudes and however large their arsenal, the treaty has held; Cairo has in fact not made war on Israel since 1979. However frigid the peace, peace it has been.

To which I reply: if the mere absence of active warfare counts as peace, then peace has also prevailed between Syria and Israel for decades, despite their formal state of war. Damascus lacks a treaty with Jerusalem, but it also lacks modern American weaponry. Does an antique signature on a piece of paper offset Egypt's Abrams tanks, F-16 fighter jets, and Apache attack helicopters? I think not. In retrospect, it becomes apparent that multiple fallacies and wishful predictions fueled Arab-Israeli diplomacy:

* Once signed, agreements signed by unelected Arab leaders would convince the masses to give up their ambitions to eliminate Israel.
* These agreements would be permanent, with no backsliding, much less duplicity.
* Other Arab states would inevitably follow suit.
* War can be concluded through negotiations rather than by one side giving up.

The time has come to recognize the Egypt-Israel treaty -- usually portrayed as the glory and ornament of Arab-Israel diplomacy -- as the failure it has been, and to draw the appropriate lessons in order not to repeat its mistakes.

Contact the poster at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, November 21, 2006.

This article was written by Elli Rodan.

I suppose this is as much confirmation as is reasonably needed to what I have been saying for years; they are all Government stooges. The Yeshah council was setup by the ruling elite as a means of controlling the settlers. This was to guarantee that Yeshah would always be "under control" and not move in a directions independent of the Israeli establishment.

This is after all not surprising nor unreasonable as well. Pioneers are by nature highly independent and aggressive persons and no responsible Government wants to create a potential for civil war. In truth, as long as the elites of Israel were essentially "Zionistic" in their goals, there was really no problem. The problem began when the elites moved into the direction of being "citizens of the world." People no longer identifying with the Jewish nation, its needs and survival replaced the old time Zionists of all ideologies. That is when the fundamental conflict began.

As Universalists they needed to understand and deal with the suffering of the Arabs and could not confine their highly developed moral sensitivity to such parochial issues as Jewish rights and survival. Furthermore, in order to prove their commitment to the religion of Globalism, a sacrifice was necessary. What better than Yeshah?

The destruction of the Yeshah communities and its Jews would accomplish many great and wonderful things for the Universalists.

* It would prove their Humanity and that they are not just lowly, dirty Jews.

* It would destroy the Jews character of the State of Israel by destroying nearly all of the historical sites of significance to Jewish history and culture.

* It would demoralize the primitives of the religious sector who would then leave for Poland, Morocco or Boro Park and finally cleanse the nation of their backwardness.

* It would allow the establishment of a State of All Its Citizens and redress the wrong done to the great and noble Arabs.

* It would once and for all erase the name of Israel from the face of the Earth and bring in a era of Universal peace and prosperity. Since it is well know that the only reason that we do not have utopia is because of the Jews and their stupid State of Israel, its elimination would bring this about.

The primary instrument to accomplish all this has been the Yeshah Council. After years of telling everyone that they and only they represent the Jews of Yeshah, they could easily manipulate the naive settlers into their own destruction. So far they have greatly succeeded in this and have been appropriately rewarded by their masters for their success.

This was written by Mrs. Elli Rodan (editor@israeljustice.com) and it appeared today on the Root and Brancy Association Ltd website. It is called "Jewish Pioneering Communities ('Settlement') Leader Benzi Lieberman Admits To Bogus Disobedience Campaign".


"Lieberman, who reported frequent meetings with ministers and senior officials, said he informed and coordinated with police before and during every protest....Lieberman was not questioned regarding the source of funding for the sham civil disobedience campaign. In 2005, left-wing critics said the protests were financed through millions of dollars in government funding....Under cross-examination, Lieberman recalled the last major protest meant to block the expulsion. On July 20, 2005, the Council organized a three-day march publicized as an attempt to enter the Gaza Strip and join Jewish residents threatened with eviction....Lieberman said 100,000 people arrived at Kfar Maimon, far outnumbering the 15,000 police and soldiers. But he said the Council -- in coordination with the government -- delayed the march to ensure its ineffectiveness. Lieberman's assertion was in contrast to the insistence of police and officials that the settlement Council refused to cooperate with authorities. At the time, [then Internal Security Minister Gideon] Ezra, who visited Kfar Maimon during the protest, denied coordination with the settlement council. 'The settler leaders never came to me and if they did, the situation would not have been different', Ezra said. 'We would have not allowed the march to Gush Katif and Kissufim'".

Jewish Pioneering Communities ("settlement") leaders spent millions of dollars and recruited hundreds of thousands of supporters in a bogus civil disobedience campaign designed to facilitate the government plan to evict 16,000 Jews from the Gaza Strip and northern Shomron ("West Bank") in 2005.

The head of the effort testified that the year-long non-violent campaign organized by the Council of Jewish Settlements in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip was never intended to stop the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and northern Shomron ("West Bank"). Instead, Council leader Benzi Lieberman said the effort, coordinated with the government of then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, was staged to demonstrate that the destruction of 22 Jewish communities would not take place quietly.

"We tried to organize all the activities to influence the public to change decisions in the Knesset", Lieberman said. "In the end, they make the decisions".

"What was more important at that time and for history was that the protest would be huge and would imprint on the public consciousness that the expulsion of Jews could not pass just like that", Lieberman added.

On October 26, 2006, Lieberman testified at the trial of three withdrawal protesters -- Shai Malka, Ariel Vangrover and Adiel Sharabi -- charged with sedition and incitement in connection with the blocking of Israeli highways as part of the civil disobedience campaign. Lieberman said that in contrast to the defendants the Council coordinated efforts with the Sharon government as well as the police and military.

"People who recognize the democratic fights in other countries know that this [blocking of roads] is a relevant activity", Lieberman said. "But we considered it ineffective".

Lieberman and the other members of the Council were never charged or prosecuted for their activities. On the eve of the expulsion, the Council members were arrested on their way to enter the Gaza Strip, declared a closed military zone, and later released.

Unlike other protesters, some of whom have spent months in jail for the offense, the Council members were never imprisoned. Malka, head of the newly-organized Bayit Leumi ("National House") movement and Vangrover were arrested on May 15, 2005 and remained in prison until after the Israeli withdrawal. Sharabi was also arrested later. The state has rarely charged the Jews with sedition, punishable by five years in prison.

In his testimony, Lieberman, who said he did not know the defendants, outlined the Council's cooperation with the Sharon government. Lieberman, who reported frequent meetings with ministers and senior officials, said he informed and coordinated with police before and during every protest.

"Our policy was that we informed the police", Lieberman said. "And it should be said that in this matter, the policy of the police was to permit us -- that is also in places that they didn't like so much or want it. They understood the power and the reality and the timing".

Lieberman was not questioned regarding the source of funding for the sham civil disobedience campaign. In 2005, left-wing critics said the protests were financed through millions of dollars in government funding.

"In my estimation, the sources of the funds were state budgets slated for municipal uses and the rest from donations", Knesset member Aryeh Eldad said.

Under cross-examination, Lieberman recalled the last major protest meant to block the expulsion. On July 20, 2005, the Council organized a three-day march publicized as an attempt to enter the Gaza Strip and join Jewish residents threatened with eviction.

Lieberman said 100,000 people arrived at Kfar Maimon, far outnumbering the 15,000 police and soldiers. But he said the Council -- in coordination with the government -- delayed the march to ensure its ineffectiveness.

"I remember we had a discussion with Gush Katif [Jewish community in Gaza] people", Lieberman recalled. "They knew that we would begin Kfar Maimon, but in order not to disturb their lives, [we postponed it]. They knew that we would block the route and it would be very difficult for them to lead a normal life, especially the farmers. We thought that the earlier this activity would take place, the greater the impact on the public".

The protesters waited at the agricultural community of Kfar Maimon for the order by Lieberman and his colleagues to march toward the Gaza Strip. Instead, after three days Lieberman, who said he coordinated the protest with the government, particularly then-Internal Security Minister Gideon Ezra, declared the protest over and sent the demonstrators home.

"In actuality, after we saw that 15,000 security forces were standing opposite us, about 5,000 police and 10,000 soldiers", Lieberman said, "and after we checked in many circles and saw that the information was correct, we saw the determination of the police and the cruelty in their eyes. At that time, we understood that we might endanger lives and we decided on the same evening that we were going to march to Gush Katif, not to go head to head with the iron wall. That's how we defined the security forces. A day or two later, the event was over".

Lieberman's assertion was in contrast to the insistence of police and officials that the settlement Council refused to cooperate with authorities. At the time, Ezra, who visited Kfar Maimon during the protest, denied coordination with the settlement council.

"The settler leaders never came to me and if they did, the situation would not have been different", Ezra said. "We would have not allowed the march to Gush Katif and Kissufim".

The Council's anti-withdrawal campaign, Lieberman said, was designed to win support from within the Knesset and government. He said the settlement council -- a body comprised of regional council heads financed by the Interior Ministry -- feared a backlash against withdrawal opponents.

"The red line was violence", Lieberman said. "There were some activities that we didn't agree to -- not because we thought that they were anti-democratic -- but because we considered that they would be ineffective and they would arouse public consciousness that would negate our goals".

Shalom and Chodesh Tov,
Mrs. Elli Rodan

Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel.

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 21, 2006.

This courageous woman is the symbol of the struggle for freedom. Only two countries can save her: Israel or the USA that MUST take her and her children in.

The video was smuggled out of the Moscow airport and is exclusive to Pajamas Media. Translation by Iranian-American filmmaker Ardeshir Arian.

If you have a way to help -- HELP...if you pass this message on it may reach the people who can help to get Ardeshir Arian out of the Russian Gulag airport.

Iranian dissident Zahra Kamalfar has been living with her children under unspeakable conditions in the transit area of Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport for 73 days. They have to bath and drink from the toilets. A one-time demonstrator against the extremist theocracy, she escaped from an Iranian prison when on a two-day furlough to visit her children. She ended up being buffeted from country to country. Now in imminent danger (possibly Monday, if the Russians cooperate) of being taken back to the Islamic Republic for the Mullah's version of justice, Ms. Kamalfar speaks out in this dramatic video smuggled out of the airport to www.Pajamas Media.

Please sign the petition to help Zahra & her children receive asylum.
To Russian Immigration authorities and UNHCR in Russia:

We are submitting this affidavit to Ms. Zahra Kamalfar's application for asylum. We unequivocally support Miss Zahra kamalafar's asylum claim. She would face a serious and well-founded fear of future persecution based on her activities after she reached Russia.

Zahra Kamalfar is an Iranian citizen who had made a refugee claim, together with her two minor children, Ana (DOB 1367-11-02) and Davood (DOB 1373-3-25) through UNHCR in Russia on or about May 3, 2005.

Zahra and her husband were involved in demonstrations in Iran in 2000. In July 8 2004, Zahra arrested and held in jail. Zahra was in jail for 8 months. Then she was released on a 48 hour pass to visit her family. She immediately fled Iran with her two children on April 6 2005. She and her two children went to Turkey. False Bulgarian passport arranged by a smuggler. Zahra and her children traveled from Turkey, transiting through Russia on their way to Germany. When they arrived in Germany, the authenticity of their passports was questioned. Zahra made asylum claims but their asylum claims were refused by German immigration authorities and then they were sent back to Russia. When they returned to Russia, they were detained by the Russian authorities. Russian authorities assaulted her and her daughter. The Russian authorities want to send Zahra and her children back to Iran. Zahra is afraid to return to Iran as she believes she will be sent to jail and at risk of rape, torture and possibly death. She also fears her daughter will be at risk of being sexually assaulted and raped.

The Russian authorities now want to deport the family to Iran; something that the family is convinced will be devastating to their life and safety. The Russian authorities are imposing pressure on the family by having them stranded in the Transit hall of the Moscow International Airport for the months, denying them all access to the most basic needs, including shower, proper food, etc. Regardless of the legalities of their case, this is a clear breach of all human rights principles.

Originally, Zahra and the children were being kept at a hotel at the airport. Several months ago, they were evicted from the hotel and forced to sleep in the open terminal. They have not had access to shower facilities and are restricted to public toilets. The situation of women in Iran is inhuman, the brutality and violence against women and girls are every day occurrences in Iran. The massacred woman committed by the Iranian Islamic regime can't be denied or excused. Misogyny, racial apartheid is the norm of the Iranian Islamic regime that women are facing. Nothing can hide the fact that the Iranian Islamic government is anti-woman misogynist and antithetical to women's rights and autonomy.

The Convention on the Rights of the Child sets out the rights that must be realized for children to develop their full potential, free from hunger and want, neglect and abuse. It reflects a new vision of the child. Children are neither the property of their parents nor are they helpless objects of charity. They are human beings and are the subject of their own rights. Despite the existence of rights, children suffer from poverty, homelessness, abuse, neglect, preventable diseases, and unequal access to education and justice systems that do not recognize their special needs. The Untied Nation has proclaimed that childhood is entitled to special care and assistance. The family as the fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well being of all its members and particularly children should be afforded the necessary protection and assistance so that it can fully assume its responsibilities within the community. For the full and harmonious development of children personality, they should grow up in a family environment in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding. Miss Zahra Kamalfar would face a serious threat to her life and liberty should she be deported to Iran. Having fled Iran and being an activist against the Iranian regime places her life in danger. She has real reason to fear persecution for her legitimate and peaceful political activism should she be returned to Iran. By deporting Miss Zahra Kamalfar and her children to Iran, who is an activist against the Iranian Regime will in actuality be a preparation of her arrest, torture and then stoning.

Russia acceded to the 1951 Refugee Convention in 1993. As a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, Russia is responsible for carrying out the refugee status determination procedure and granting asylum to those people who are entitled to it.

We strongly urges the Russian immigration authorities and UNHCR in Russia to revisit the Miss Zahra Kamalfar's case and grant her and her children refugee recognition based on her well-founded fear of future persecution and execution.

The Undersigned

Click Here to Sign Petition

Contact the poster at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Israel Zwick, November 21, 2006.

The United Nations has identified almost 5000 distinct ethnic groups living in its 192 member countries (see World Ethnic Groups). Almost 300 of these have been identified as Minorities at Risk. There are over 100 national Liberation Movements that are struggling to develop regional autonomy. Yet almost the entire international community is united in its belief that the 3 million Palestinian Arabs should have their own sovereign state carved out of the minuscule State of Israel like a jigsaw puzzle. This solution, they believe, would relieve the "suffering of the Palestinian people" and resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Ostensibly, this appears to be a sensible solution. After all, if two parties can't manage to live together, they should live separately. One will live on one side of the border, the other will live on the other side of the border and all will be fine and well. But is that a realistic expectation? Let's first examine some of the basic geographic and demographic statistics. If one examines the data in the CIA World Factbook, the two states, Israel and Palestine, would have the smallest areas and largest population densities in the region, except for Lebanon. This would allow little room for population expansion. Such two micro-states would not be able to survive without a great deal of mutual cooperation. Neither could be economically viable by just remaining within their own borders. There would have to be a great deal of interdependence and cooperation between the two states on issues of regional concern. These issues include: security, transportation, commerce, agriculture, tourism, natural resources, archeology, and public health. Let's try to take a realistic view of issues that may arise with the establishment of a Palestinian state and how they may be addressed by the nascent state. There are many questions which come to mind, of which the following list is only the beginning:

Mutual Cooperation. Have any of the Palestinian groups given any indication in their words or deeds that they are ready to accept and cooperate with a Jewish State of Israel in any borders at all? Are there any indications that the establishment of a Palestinian State will be followed by the cessation of terrorist tactics against the State of Israel. Can we be confident that terrorism and conflict will replaced by an amicable atmosphere of acceptance, tolerance, and negotiated compromise? Have the Palestinians said or done anything to suggest that? So far they haven't given any indication of accepting a Jewish State of Israel with any boundaries.

Commerce and Currency. Both Israel and a neighboring Palestinian state would depend on an exchange of goods between the two states. That includes manufactured and agricultural goods, as well as human resources. Will the checkpoints that exist now be reduced or could they even be expanded to include both Palestinian and Israeli checkpoints at the borders? Will commercial vehicles be used to smuggle contraband goods and illegal arms? Will there be free trade or a system of tariffs and taxes on the goods. What kind of security will there be at the border crossings? How easy or difficult will it be for merchants to exchange goods between the two states? What kind of currency will be used?

Passports and Visas. An independent Palestinian state will have the ability to issue passports and visas. Can we feel confident that passports won't be issued to trained terrorists who want to export their skills to comrades in other countries? Since the Gaza Strip is so readily accessible by land, sea, and air, can we be confident that the Gaza Strip won't be used as a safe haven for international criminals who are trying to escape from Interpol or the FBI? Today the Gaza Strip has become a haven for terrorists, kidnappers, and arms smuggling. Why should we expect anything different?

Security and Weapons. A sovereign Palestinian state would have the right to purchase weapons for security and defense. Can we be confident that the Palestinians will do that in a responsible manner so that explosive materials and sophisticated weapons don't get into the hands of criminals and terrorists? Will the Palestinians be able to maintain a system of security and justice within their own borders? Who will security officers and judges be accountable to?

Natural Resources. Fresh water and energy sources are scarce in that part of the world. Will the Palestinians and Israelis work amicably together to conserve, develop, and distribute valuable water resources? How will they determine placement of pipelines and cables? How will they ensure that both countries get an adequate supply of water, oil, and electricity? Will they work together to utilize alternative forms of energy? What kind of security will be provided for pipelines, cables, and reservoirs?

Transportation. The Palestinians will probably want to construct airports, seaports, and highways. Can we be assured that they will do that with concern for security and environmental protection? Will the Palestinians show respect for archeological, historical, and religious sites in their construction plans? Let's take an example of a transportation issue that could feasibly arise with the establishment of a Palestinian State. Israel's Ben-Gurion International Airport is only a short distance from Palestinian areas. What would happen if an El-Al pilot has to circle over Palestinian airspace in a period of heavy air traffic or poor weather conditions? Is it possible that a surface to air missile will shoot up from Palestinian territory to destroy the plane and kill all 400 passengers? The Palestinians will immediately call a press conference and say, "We're really sorry that we shot down the plane, we didn't mean it. Our radar operator reported a military craft violating our airspace. We dismissed the radar operator and this will never happen again." In the meantime, 400 Jews were killed and travel to Israel will grind to a halt. Let's say the reverse situation occurs. The Palestinians build an airport on the Gaza Strip, a short distance from Tel Aviv. Israeli security officials will probably insist that all take-off and landing patterns be directed away from Israeli population centers. One day, Israeli radar detects a commercial jet over international waters in the Mediterranean heading straight for Tel Aviv. It is conceivable that the pilot had a legitimate need to modify his landing pattern because of air traffic, weather conditions, or a medical emergency on board. Israeli security officials will have only minutes to establish communication with the pilot to be sure that he has no malicious intent. If they can't do that, do they shoot down a commercial jet over international waters and kill a few hundred civilians, or do they allow the plane to continue on a possible mission of enormous death and destruction? That's a decision that not even King Solomon would want to make. Can we really trust the Palestinians to use transportation facilities in a responsible manner?

Tourism. Tourists who wish to visit the Holy Land will probably want to visit Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Hebron, Jericho, Nazareth, and Tiberias, all within driving distance from each other. Will Palestinians cooperate with Israelis to allow tourists of all faiths to have free access to these areas? What kind of security will be provided for tourist buses? What happens when the bus has to travel from Israeli to Palestinian areas? Will buses be able to travel directly from Jerusalem to Hebron or from Jericho to Tiberias, or will they have to take some lengthy, circuitous route for security reasons? Will it be possible to take a Jerusalem-Hebron-Massada-Dead Sea tour as it is now? Will Palestinians and Israelis work together to encourage tourism and commerce or will antagonistic policies discourage tourists from visiting holy sites?

Public Health. Can the Palestinians be trusted to address the health needs of their own population? Will children receive their inoculations? Will geriatric needs be addressed? Will Palestinian health officials cooperate with their Israeli counterparts? Suppose an atypical epidemic breaks out in Israel. It could be a tropical disease such as West Nile Fever, or it could be bio-terrorism. Will Palestinian officials provide access to Israeli health officials to investigate the source of infection or will they make it more difficult? Will Palestinains cooperate with Israelis to control the epidemic or will Israelis have to examine birds and mosquitoes at checkpoints?

Archeological, religious, and historical sites. Can we trust the Palestinians to respect and preserve the holy sites of all religions? Will there be free and secure access for all religions? Suppose the Palestinians are building new housing in Jericho and come across some artifacts from the biblical era. Will they call Israeli archeologists at Hebrew University and say, "We discovered some materials that may be of interest to you, would you like to come and examine them?" Or, will they attempt to erase any signs of Jewish history in the area?

Agricultural Methods. Both states will probably want to grow the same crops and animals for food. Will there be cooperation in the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides or will there be interference?

There are many more such questions. Yes, it's true that most of them could be resolved through negotiation and compromise. But if the Arabs would be willing to negotiate and compromise then there wouldn't be a conflict and there wouldn't be any need to develop another Arab state in a region that already has 22 Arab states.

So what are the possible alternatives? A one-state solution wouldn't work either because eventually it would result in the dissolution of the Jewish state by demography and democracy. So that suggests that the only solution for now would be a reasonable compromise between a two-state and one-state solution. That could be accomplished through a federated arrangement, similar to the arrangement between the United States and Puerto Rico. There are few Puerto Ricans that are complaining that they have been "suffering from a lengthy occupation." That's because they are benefiting from their relationship ship with the United States, so there is no need to make significant changes.

The same argument can be made for Palestinians and Israelis. If it can be demonstrated to the Palestinian people, not their fanatical leaders, that they will benefit from a federated connection with the State of Israel, then it could be adopted, even if only as an interim solution. There are many forms of federal government which can be considered. Almost any of them would be preferable to having two separate sovereign micro-states. That would not resolve the conflict or "alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people." It would only create more problems and conflicts.

Those that are really concerned about the "plight of the Palestinians" should abandon the fantasy of a two-state solution and work at developing a realistic federation of an autonomous Arab entity that would operate in a loose union with the State of Israel. It could be based on a model similar to Puerto Rico or other existing forms of federations. Almost any of these would be preferable to a two-state solution and would allow the Palestinian people to benefit from the technical, agricultural, and medical accomplishments of the State of Israel. The Palestinians would only suffer more if they had their own autonomous, fragmented micro-state in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. But if they can't accept being a minority population within a Jewish federation, then they still have 20 Arab Sunni Muslim countries to go to where they can be part of the majority population.

Contact Israel Zwick at israel.zwick@earthlink.net This was published October 27, 2006 on his website CN Publications and is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Pilczer, November 21, 2006.

Contact Pilczer at pilczer@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Judy Lash Balint, November 21, 2006.

The photos are from "Photo Feature: Sigd, Holiday of Return and Longing" by Ezra Halevi, photos by Josh Shamsi. The photo essay was published November 23, 2006 in Arutz Sheva

Yesterday was the 29th of Cheshvan, not a particularly noteworthy day for most Jews in the world. But for Jews from Ethiopia, this date has long been observed as one of their main holidays, known as Sigd--a day celebrating their connection to Jerusalem and commitment to Jewish unity.

For the 80,000 who have immigrated from Ethiopia during past decades, the day is a combination fast day, day of thanksgiving and gathering of the clan.

"All the people gathered themselves together as one man into the broad place that was before the water gate; and they spoke unto Ezra the scribe to bring the book of the Law of Moses, which the LORD had commanded to Israel" (Nehemiah 8:1)

Dozens of kessim (Ethiopian Jewish religious leaders) make their way to the Western Wall to celebrate the day which expresses their yearning for Zion and their gratitude for the Torah. The slender figures cut an elegant path through the plaza in front of the wall. Swathed in simple white robes, tallits draped over their narrow shoulders, the kessim are accompanied by an entourage that includes an escort holding a colorful umbrella over their heads. The Ethiopian women arrive separately, clothed in their distinctive white dresses adorned with colorful hand embroidered trim. Shoulders cloaked in white shawls, heads covered with colorful head scarves, the women advance shyly toward the kotel to take part in the prayer service marking Sigd here in the holy city.

Prior to their mass aliya, generations of Ethiopian Jews yearned for Zion and expressed their longing in the annual Sigd festival. Jews would walk for days to arrive at a mountain top where thousands would join in prayer and listen to Torah readings.

Following the afternoon prayers and the blowing of the shofar, the community would descend from the mountain to partake of a festive meal. The holiday has its origins in the time of the prophet Nehemia, when the entire Jewish community assembled in Jerusalem for a day of fasting and confession. The day also commemorates the covenant between God and the Jewish people at Mt. Sinai.

Young members of the Beta Israel community relax

For many young Ethiopian Jews now living in Israel, the mountain top Sigd exists only as a story recounted by their parents. Children were not included in the observances in Ethiopia because of the three day trek to get there and to preserve the solemnity of the day.

Today, Sigd is celebrated at the kotel and then at a mass gathering at the Haas/Sherover Promenade in Jerusalem's Talpiot neighborhood. From the promenade there's a clear view of the Temple Mount, and tens of thousands of Ethiopians of all ages come together to commemorate their unique holiday. Mingling with the colorful costumes and umbrellas of the elders, are the khaki and green uniforms of dozens of young Ethiopian men and women serving in the Israel Defense Forces. Younger teens are decked out in a variety of trendy clothing on this festive day with balmy temperatures. Ancient Ge'ez chants make themselves heard over the gaggle of street Hebrew as the day progresses.

Yaakov (Jejo) Tala helps an IDF paratrooper don Tefilin.

Rabbi David Yosef, a kes of the Ethiopian community who is a diminutive man with a silver beard who wears a knitted kippa, tells visitors his extraordinary life story and explains where Sigd fits into the life of Ethiopian Jews.

Rav Yosef graphically describes how men and women would separately observe the ritual of ascending the mountain for the great Sigd gathering. He points out that the tradition of Sigd was handed down by oral tradition. "Many Jews believe that we didn't know from the oral tradition," he says. Rav Yosef carefully explains the Ethiopian Jewish engagement and wedding ceremonies and asserts that their practice conforms to the Mishnaic description in Tractate Kiddushin (part of the Oral Law) of what constitutes proper Jewish betrothal.

He closes his remarks by noting that Sigd was essentially a way of remembering Jerusalem and strengthening Jews in a difficult galut (Diaspora) situation. But the holiday is just as relevant today. "We missed Jerusalem for thousands of years," Rav Yosef notes. "Today, in Jerusalem, we celebrate...but just as we say -- Next year in Jerusalem' at the Passover seder, so too at Sigd we pray for a rebuilt Jerusalem."

For Ziva, a shy twenty-one year old from Ashkelon with thick braided hair, the Sigd celebration is a significant milestone. " I feel like it's a day of unity for us."

For the young woman who arrived in Israel with her parents 13 years ago, the observance of the ancient holiday reminds her "there's so much to remember...."

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 Yoram Ettinger, November 21, 2006.

Prime Minister Tony Blair, Jim Baker, Inc. and Brent Scowcroft allege that the less-than-a-century-old Palestinian issue is the core cause of the 13-century-old Islamic terrorism and Mideast violence.

Thus, rather than flex a muscle against Iran and other rogue regimes, instead of challenging the Palestinian Terror Authority and Hamas, one should suspend disbelief, shrink the Jewish State back to the 1949 Lines and establish a Palestinian State. Such a contriving approach would, supposedly, moderate the Middle East and mollify the unprecedented wave of Islamic terrorism.

Do the aforementioned gentlemen realize that if at all there is any connection between the Palestinian issue and Mideast violence (Ahmedinejad's and Saddam's megalomaniac aspirations, inter-Lebanese conflicts, Sunni-Shia' wars, domestic and inter-Muslim terrorism, etc.), the latter may be a cause of the former? Do they really believe that the Palestinian issue is a (let alone the) cause of anti-US Islamic terrorism?

Enclosed you'll find the 197th issue of Straight From The Jerusalem Boardroom, which examines Blair's ingenious suggestion. Should you wish to examine previous issues, as well as previous OpEds and commentaries, please visit http://yoramettinger.newsnet.co.il and www.acpr.org.il (Hatikvah and Cloakroom links).

Enjoy it,


Prime Minister Tony Blair, Jim Baker and Brent Scowcroft have developed an intriguing theory: The core of the 13-century-old Islamic terrorism and Middle East violence is the less-than-a-century-old Palestinian issue. They have introduced a cost-effective tactic in combating terrorism: Rather than flex a muscle against Iran and other rogue regimes, instead of challenging the Palestinian Terror Authority and Hamas, one should suspend disbelief, shrink the Jewish State back to the 1949 Lines and establish a Palestinian State. Such a contriving approach would, supposedly, mollify the unprecedented wave of anti-US Islamic terrorism. Really?!

1. 9/11 was planned while Clinton's USA and Barak's Israel were appeasing the Palestinians and the Arabs, proposing a total Israeli withdrawal, including the re-partitioning of Jerusalem and the giveaway of the Golan Heights.

2. The October 12, 2000 Islamic terrorist attack on the USS Cole (17 sailors murdered) occurred when Israel was willing to give away the store, while the US pressured Israel to absorb and compensate Palestinian refugees.

3. The August 27, 1998 Islamic terrorist assault of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania took place (257 murdered and over 4,000 injured) while President Clinton was brutally pressuring Prime Minister Netanyahu for sweeping concessions to the Palestinians and to Syria.

4. The 1995/6 Riyadh and Khobar Towers, Dhahran Islamic terror attacks (19 murdered) were carried out while Israel implemented unprecedented concessions, in spite of Palestinian hate-education, systematic violation of all commitments made by the PA and unprecedented Palestinian terrorism.

5. The February 1993 Twin Towers bombing (6 murdered and over 1,000 injured) transpired while Israel conducted the pre-Oslo talks with the PLO, snatching the PLO from the jaws of oblivion in terrorist camps in Yemen, Iraq, Sudan and Tunisia and making unprecedented concessions.

6. The December 21, 1988 PanAm-103 (270 murdered) terrorism took place a few months following the groundbreaking initiation of direct talks between the US and the PLO, while the US attempted to initiate a direct Israel-PLO dialogue.

7. The June 1985 TWA 847 hijacking to Beirut (1 US Navy Seabee diver murdered) took place when the US was backing Iraq in Baghdad's war against Iran, irrespective of the Palestinian issue.

8. The April/October 1983 bombings of the US Embassy and Marines and French military headquarters -- by Syria and PLO-supported Islamic terrorists (300 Americans and 58 French murdered) -- occurred while the US military confronted Israeli tanks in Lebanon and the US Administration blasted Israel horrifically for its was against the PLO.

Tony Blair's, Baker's and Scowcroft's contention that the Palestinian issue is the core of anti-Western Islamic terrorism and Mideast violence reflects miscomprehension of Mideast reality. It diverts attention & resources away from The Core Cause: a 13 century old hate-education and terrorism, which has characterized inter-Muslim politics, domestically and externally

(to be continued).

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 Naomi Ragen, November 20, 2006.

This is from a List member. I don't have anything to add.

Dear Ms. Ragen,

I just saw Livni's TV ad selling Israel. Two sophomoric young men sit on a beach and leeringly utter "wow" as beautiful, scantily clad women waltz poutingly past. It was comical in a horrible, "Springtime for Hitler" kind of way. Like that audience, I could only sit there with my mouth open, mesmerized by the utter stupidity of the ad. Does Livni think most people make Israel a destination for the beaches, when Aruba, say, is cleaner, whiter and a heck of a lot safer? Does she not even consider the thousands of Christians and Jews who flock to Israel because it is the foundation of their faiths?

I would say that this ad is perfect fodder for a satirical skit on the show Saturday Night Live, but I can't see how a satire could improve on the reality...unless perhaps their ad shows kassam rockets detonating in the background.

Livni is an idiot but the government officials who bought her absolutely moronic marketing concept are in a dimension beyond stupid.

Brooklyn NY

[Editor's note: See "A Gay Old Time - How Israel Proposes To Improve Its Image " by Caroline Glick below.]

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 Jerome S. Kaufman, November 20, 2006.

A small redaction from a marvelous article by Daniel Johnson from Commentary Magazine, November 2006. Please read in its entirety

What will it mean for the Atlantic alliance if the British people in general and the Labor party in particular have indeed given up on the war against terrorism, and if the Tories mean to exploit their new political opportunity by appeasing Islamic radicalism?

Pope Benedict XVI'S brief critique of the doctrine of jihad, a critique whose validity was immediately confirmed by the hysteria and violence it evoked in the Muslim world. Leaving aside the question of what exactly Benedict meant by quoting the Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologus on Muhammad's "evil and inhuman ... command to spread, by the sword, the faith he preached," his words put European Christians on the spot

For too long, Christians have passed by on the other side as their own co-religionists have been persecuted in Muslim lands. They have hidden behind the pretense that, in David Cameron's words, Islamist terrorism is "a wholly incorrect interpretation -- an extreme distortion -- of the Islamic faith." No doubt the Muslim demonstrators outside Westminster Cathedral who demanded the Pope's execution, and who held up banners proclaiming "Islam will conquer Rome," were indeed extremists. But they were also one end of a continuum of intolerance that embraces much of Islam.

The numberof Catholics suffering persecution in Muslim countries has been estimated at more than 100 million. By speaking out, the Pope ran the risk of making their situation even worse. But now that he has spoken out, European Christians in general and Catholics in particular have a duty to decide where they stand on freedom of speech and religion.

At virtually the same time, Abu Izzadeen, a Jamaican convert to Islam living in London, advised a British audience in public forum that, "Britain does not belong to the English or the Queen or to the British government, but to Allah. He has put us on earth to implement shari's law."

Indeed, Abu Izzadeen's attempt to claim the East End of London as an exc1usively "Muslim area" may not be mere fantasy. In 2012, the East End will host the Olympics. Waiting to be built, in a spot adjacent to the Olympic village, is the largest place of worship in Europe; the London Markaz, part of a vast complex projected to cost 100 million, most of it coming from Saudi Arabia. The organizational backer for this project is Tablighi Jamaat, a Muslim missionary group that the FBI has labeled a recruiting ground for al Qaeda.

London, with over 1,000 mosques, is already Europe's unofficial Muslim capital. Its status will be enhanced immeasurably by the Markaz, whose size - it is projected to hold 70,000 worshippers - will dwarf St. Paul's Cathedral and Westminster Abbey. To contemplate the building of so potent a symbol of Islamic triumphalism over Europe's Christian heritage is all but incredible.

Will it happen? Britain today is a nation torn between defiance and appeasement, led by a political elite that with few exceptions seems to be intimidated by Islam and reluctant to address -- when it is not complicit in -- anti-Semitism. The British people are not lost to the West, but the battle to preserve liberty in their country is only just beginning. Which makes it all the more fitting is that the immediate battleground should be the East End, the original Jewish area of London created upon Oliver Cromwell's declaring freedom and tolerance with the re-admission of the Jews in 1290. This East End has now become a Muslim stronghold and the site designated for the building of the Markaz complex.

Jerome S. Kaufman is National Secretary of the Zionist Organization of America. and host the Israel Commentary website (http://www.israel-commentary.org).

To Go To Top

Posted by Eli E. Hertz, November 20, 2006.

One day after France and Spain announced a new initiative for Middle East peace, the United States seems to be ready to re-start the Israeli-Palestinian 'peace process.' Should the U.S. and the Quartet learn something from 'consistence' experience?

Since 1917 and for over 30 years, the British Government controlled the land known as Palestine and ruled its inhabitants, both Arabs and Jews. That British in-depth knowledge and experience, has been reported to the League of Nations (Equivalent to today's United Nations) on the Administration of Palestine, and the report by the "Palestine Royal Commission" 1936-1937..."

This is what the British reported to the League of Nations 70 years ago:

"... in Palestine Arab nationalism is inextricably interwoven with antagonism to the Jews... . That is why it is difficult to be an Arab patriot and not to hate the Jews."

The 1937 report concludes: "We find ourselves reluctantly convinced that no prospect of a lasting settlement can be founded on moderate Arab nationalism. At every successive crisis in the past that hope has been entertained. In each case it has proved illusory."

Since the Oslo Accords (September 13 1993) through the Quartet's Roadmap that never got to square one (May 1, 2003), and the Aqaba Summit (June 4, 2003), 14 agreements and memorandums have been signed by the Palestinian Arabs.

At each juncture, when attempts to reach a 'live-and-let-live' solution have been advanced, Arab responses have boiled down to a two-pronged offensive that dovetails diplomacy with violence. In short, the Arabs, and particularly the Palestinians, have refused to recognize Israel as a legitimate Jewish entity or to negotiate genuine compromise. Instead, they have tried to drive the Jews out through violence and terror.

Palestinians continue to cling to a political culture of empty diplomacy and violence and a policy of rejectionism, just like countless agreements since September 2000 and countless attempts since the 1920s to cajole Palestinians into accepting Jews as something other than a subordinated so-called 'tolerated minority'.

The promises continue. The hostility continues, and rejectionism and violence remains the most salient feature of Palestinian discourse. Palestinians believe that terror pays and expect the world support for the creation of a Palestinian state. A Palestinian state that has good chances of becoming a rogue state -- the kind of polity the United States is currently grappling with in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Iran, North Korea, and elsewhere.

Back in 1971 Hebrew University social scientist Professor Yehezkel Dror wrote a short volume entitled Crazy States, solicited by the Rand Corporation. Decades before Libya's Momar Kadafi began sending contraband by diplomatic pouch and Paul Pot 'invented' the killing fields, the author envisioned the emergence of polities that 'don't play by the rules' and therefore seem crazy to westerners. At the time he was roundly criticized as an extremist and prophet of doom -- his book labeled a brilliant intellectual exercise but off the mark in terms of reality. The volume gained new respect after the 1991 Gulf War. Today no one denies the existence of 'crazy states', or as they are now labeled: rogue states. More recently, in a 1999 article devoted to how US foreign policy has addressed the problem of rogue states, Professor Barry Rabin of Bar-Ilan University defined the rogue state:

"[A polity] that puts a high priority on subverting other states and sponsoring non-conventional types of violence against them. It does not react predictably to deterrence or other tools of diplomacy and statecraft."

This definition seems to fit the Palestinian Authority like a glove even in the pre-state 'test' stage prior to gaining full sovereignty.

A rogue state, said the author "requires special treatment and high levels of international pressure in order to prevent it from wrecking public order, setting off wars, and subverting whole areas of the world" -- a treatment regime Rabin labels "an international equivalent of incarceration or commitment to a mental institution, until there is sufficient recovery to permit reentry into the international system."

The European Union for example envisage that for a state, such as Turkey - a peaceful Moslem state - joining the EU might take 10 to 15 years of negotiation and 'good behavior' on-the-ground, before being granted a conditional membership in the Union.

Unfortunately, the world community has been ignoring the prospect that a full-blown independent Palestinian state will become just the kind of rogue states and renegade organizations the world is grappling with today.

In light of the Palestinians' history of violence and its poor performance coping with limited freedom or autonomy -- the equivalent of a 'half-way house' to test their readiness to join the family of nations, and in light of the support (rather than pressure to 'toe the line') that Palestinians enjoy in the international arena, Palestinians independence could very well turn into a genuine nightmare.

Contact the Eli E. Hertz at the www.MythsandFacts.org website. This article is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Plaut, November 20, 2006.

1. So let us see if we have this straight. Ehud Olmert is outraged that a Russian millionaire paid for the vacations to Eilat for residents of Sderot because such vacations were, in Olmert's "mind", escapism, fleeing from the front, abandoning their homes because of terrorism.
(www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1162378436205&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)

Of course, all of Olmert's "doctrine", if that is the correct word, is based on fleeing before terrorists and abandoning Jewish homes in acts of capitulation. First we had the flight from Gaza, in which Olmert and his friends ordered the entire Jewish population of the Gaza Strip to be forcibly removed as an act of capitulation to terrorism. That flight of cowardice produced the thousands of Kassam rockets now landing on Sderot. So when Sderot residents "flee" to Eilat, they are simply trying to get away from the rockets brought down upon them by Olmert's own fleeing from Gaza.

Then there is Olmert's still-operative grand plan to repeat the cowardly flight out of Gaza in the West Bank, so that thousands more rockets can be fired out of the West Bank into Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. And finally there was Olmert's cowardly flight out of the area of southern Lebanon that Israel took this past summer, a flight of cowardice that simply makes the next war with the Hizbollah a matter of time. (Ok, I admit it, I was off. I had predicted the next war would take place this past Succot. Like the famous obituary about Mark Twain, I was just a little premature.)

2. This Week's Israeli Communist Professor

He is Oded Goldreich, a communist professor of Computer Science and Math at the Weizmann Institute. That is notable, because Weizmann ordinarily is not a well-known den for leftist moonbats.

There is an old stereotype of math professors who do complex advanced math but cannot add three plus three when it comes to the real world.

Goldreich is an open supporter of Israel's Stalinist communist party HADASH. He endorses it here on his personal web page:
http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~oded/politics.html. He opines at length about how awful capitalism is and how wonderful communism is here: http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~oded/politicsJan03.html He endorses the Arab version of history here:

He has signed all those anti-Israel petitions, including the ones promoting a "right of return" for Palestinians, meaning their right to destroy Israel (http://oznik.com/words/040712.html ), demands for internation involvement in order to curtail Israeli sovereignty (http://www.dasbistro.com/pipermail/clarkgreen/2003-April/001218.html ), called for granting terrorist Tali Fahima a Nobel Prize (http://jacobk9.tripod.com/id25.html ), and has endorsed calls for boycotts of Israeli schools (http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/2005_05.html )

3. In the sharpest of contrasts, now let me introduce you to Professor Hillel Weiss, a well-known professor of Jewish Thought at Bar Ilan University (http://www.biu.ac.il/faculty/hillelweiss/ ).

Weiss is from the correct side of the political arena. He is active in the Professors for a Strong Israel and in the movement that opposes unilateral capitulations like last summer's Gaza "withdrawal". He holds a law degree although is not a practicing lawyer.

And he has been the victim of police harassment these past few weeks. First, the police interrogated him for opposing the "Gay Pride Parade" in Jerusalem. Weiss had called for it to be cancelled, and stated that he endorses all means for preventing the holding of the "parade" in Jerusalem, even "Acts of Pinhas". The police took that as a call for violence. You know, the very same police who seem unable to recognize it when Arab pro-terrorists and Jewish leftist pro-terrorists endorse violence, terrorism, and even genocide.

Now the most amazing thing about this is that Israeli prosecutors, products of the Israeli school system, even know who Pinhas was. And since Pinhas is often traditionally considered to reappear as Elijah the Prophet, my suggestion to Hillel is that every person singing about Elijah also be brought in for police questioning. (Remember those violent acts that Elijah did to the prophets of Baal? Isn't singing about Elijah clearly an act of incitement?)

Then, yesterday Weiss was called in again for interrogation, this time for a different matter. It seems that Weiss is involved in a group in Israel calling itself "The Sanhedrin". It is a group of rabbis and other public figures who issue opinions about matters of the day. A while back, the "Sanhedrin" sent letters to various police and army officers who had been involved in the eviction of Jews from their homes in Gush Katif in the Gaza Strip. When these did not show up to answer questions before the "Sanhedrin", the "Sanhedrin" wrote letters to the synagogues in which these folks are members and asked that the people involved in the evictions not be called up to the Torah in aliyot. In post-democratic Israel, that also evidently constitutes an act of "incitement".

Perhaps the best comment on Israel's dual judicial system (one for leftists and the other for everyone else) was a column by lawyer Yoram Shiftal in the weekly "Besheva" from Nov 16, 06. Unfortunately it is only in Hebrew and not on line, but perhaps someone out there will translate and post it. In any case, Shiftal argues that for all intents and purposes Israel's prosecutor's office is little more than a branch of the Meretz far-left party. Of the dozens of department heads within the prosecutor's office, every single one is a leftist. There had been one non-leftist, but she retired. The control of the office by those who belong to the leftist Meretz fringe explains the selective enforcement of the law, endlessly prosecuting rightists but never indicting leftists for treason and "incitement", and for the frequent involvement of the prosecution in promoting anti-religious litigation.

4. Barnard Alumnae Opposing Tenure for Anthropologist by Gabrielle Birkner - Staff Reporter of the New York Sun
November 16, 2006
URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/43652

A group of Barnard College alumnae is attempting to stop their alma mater from giving tenure to an assistant professor who minimizes Jews' historical connection to Israel.

In her 2001 book, "Facts on the Ground: Archaeological Practice and Territorial Self-Fashioning in Israeli Society," published by the University of Chicago, the professor of anthropology, Nadia Abu El-Haj says Israeli archaeology manipulates evidence to justify a modern Jewish state in the region.

Relying heavily on the input of anonymous archaeologists, tour guides, and tour participants, the book portrays Israeli archaeologists as ideologues who, driven by a desire to "efface Zionism's colonial dimension," have fabricated Jews' territorial claims to Israel.

Contacted by phone and e-mail, Ms. Abu El-Haj would not comment on the book, or her position at Barnard.

While "Facts on the Ground" has been warmly received by some biblical "minimalists," or "biblical revisionists" ... academics who contend the Bible was written centuries later than is widely accepted and, that the text has little or no historical relevance ... it has been widely dismissed by archaeologists as a political treatise, full of erroneous statements and unsubstantiated claims.

In "Facts on the Ground," Ms. Abu el-Haj suggests Jerusalem was destroyed not by the Romans, but by the Jews themselves due to rising class tensions among them. Yet, the 1st-century historian and scribe Josephus described in great detail the Roman siege of Jerusalem. Additionally, carvings in the Arch of Titus in Rome depict the Roman General Titus showing off menorahs and other objects looted from the Second Temple.

In another passage, Ms. Abu El-Haj relates how a tourist questions a Jerusalem tour guide's explanation that the Judean King Hezekiah saved the city from an Assyrian conquest in 701 B.C.E. The tourist refutes the statement, claiming that Hezekiah's actions actually led to the destruction of the nearby Israelite kingdom. "Although the tourist's objection would appear to undermine the guide's interpretation .. this is a ludicrous claim, since the Israelite kingdom had been conquered twenty-one years earlier!" an archaeology professor at Israeli's Bar-Ilan University, Aren Maeir, wrote two years ago in a University of Chicago journal, Isis.

The Assyrian conquest of Samaria in 722 B.C.E. is confirmed in Assyrian annals, which provide copious descriptions of the kingdom's fall, according to a retired professor of Near East archaeology at the University of Arizona, William Dever.

Mr. Dever, who has authored more than 20 books on Middle East History, said Ms. Abu El-Haj seems intent on writing Jews out of ancient Middle East history, and demonizing a generation of apolitical Israeli archaeologists in the process. Barnard should deny Ms. Abu El-Haj tenure, he said, "not because she's Palestinian or pro-Palestinian or a leftist, but because her scholarship is faulty, misleading and dangerous."

A 1982 Barnard alumna, Paula Stern, said she is "horrified by the possibility that Barnard College would consider appointing" Ms. Abu El-Haj to its permanent faculty.

Particularly troubling, Ms. Stern said, is Ms. Abu El-Haj's conclusion that the Palestinians who in 2000 desecrated Joseph's Tomb ... a Jewish holy site in the West Bank city of Nablus ... need to be "understood in relation to a colonial-national history in which modern political rights have been substantiated in and expanded through the material signs of historic presence."

In a recent e-mail message to fellow Barnard graduates, Ms. Stern, who lives in Israel, wrote, "In Abu El Haj's view, deliberately destroying ancient buildings is not to be condemned, it is to be ...analyzed as a form of resistance to the Israeli state.'" Ms. Stern urged fellow Barnard graduates to contact the college's president "if you share my concern about the implications of hiring a young scholar who writes with so little respect for the use of evidence."

The president of Barnard College, Judith Shapiro, herself a cultural anthropologist, has received about 20 emails from individuals who oppose tenure for Ms. Abu El-Haj, a Barnard spokeswoman, Elizabeth Gildersleeve, said. "Her studies are on a controversial subject, and that can stir the pot," Ms. Gildersleeve said.

Many of the academics who reviewed "Facts on the Ground" rejected the author's methodology and her conclusions. "Abu El-Haj has written a flimsy and supercilious book that does no justice to either her putative subject or the political agenda she wishes to advance. It should be avoided," a biblical archaeologist, a former adjunct professor at Purchase College, Alexander Joffe, wrote in the Journal of Near Eastern Studies. Mr. Joffe now works for an Israel advocacy organization, the David Project.

Bar-Ilan University's Mr. Maeir, in a telephone interview, said archaeologists in Israel ... like archaeologists elsewhere ... have used their work for nationalistic purposes in the past. He said the field has evolved in recent decades, and its Israeli practitioners are not "out there working on this nationalist, jingoistic agenda of proving the Zionist point of view, and negating the Arab point of view," as Ms. Abu El-Haj would have readers believe.

Ms. Abu El-Haj portrays Western scholarship as colonialist and imperialist. "The work of archaeology in Palestine/Israel is a cardinal institutional location of the ongoing practice of colonial nationhood producing facts through which historical-national claims, territorial transformations, heritage objects and historicities ...happen,'" she wrote.

More mainstream archaeologists, according to Mr. Dever, trace the origins of the Israelite state to the 10th or 9th century B.C.E., contend that Bible was written in 8th or 7th century B.C.E., and that the biblical stories are "based on some historical facts. "Their minds are made up," Mr. Dever said of the minimalists, whom he calls "nihilists."

"They never pay any attention to archaeological evidence, except to discredit it," Mr. Dever said.

One of the most prominent minimalist academics, Keith Whitelam, a professor of religious studies at England's University of Sheffield, in an e-mail interview with The New York Sun, hailed "Facts on the Ground" as a "first-rate book." "It is important to study how national identity is constructed and the assumptions which are then built into academic work on history and archaeology," he wrote. " ...Facts on the Ground' is a very fine contribution to that debate and our understanding of the processes." Mr. Whitelam is the author of "The Invention of Ancient Israel: The Silencing of Palestinian History."

A history and religion professor at Northwestern University, Jacob Lassner, in a 2003 review of "Facts on the Ground" published in Middle East Quarterly, wrote that minimalist archaeological claims have become a popular vehicle for those with decidedly anti-Zionist motives, writing "it is only those who deny Israel's right to exist or contest the legitimacy of its current borders who deny altogether or compromise Israel's links to the past."

Even so, Mr. Lassner told The New York Sun said efforts by Barnard alumnae to block Ms. Abu El-Haj from receiving tenure would likely prove ineffectual. "Universities don't react to pressure of alumni on matters of tenure," he said. "It's not going to do very much good for alumnae to start complaining, especially if they're not scholars."

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. Contact him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Yehuda Poch, November 20, 2006.

When a person, particularly one in a position of power, begins to utter complete nonsense with increasing regularity, it is often a sign of panic.

Perhaps, in that case, this week began with some very good news for Israel. Ehud Olmert decided to convene a meeting of several government ministers, mayors from the communities north and west of the Gaza Strip, and several ministry directors-general to discuss continuing government aid to the communities in question.

Given the vastly increased safety of the residents of Sderot in recent days, one wonders first of all why such a meeting was necessary. There is precious little meaningful government aid to be continued, so any discussion must almost necessarily have been quite short.

Apparently to fill the time, Olmert made the following remarks at the start of the meeting: "Throughout our history in this Land, during far more difficult times, we have never run away from our homes. We will not lend a hand to hasty actions that may be good for two or three days but which are liable to have destructive long-term effects. We do not want to take people out of their homes. Localized instances will be dealt with case-by-case but to load people on buses and whisk them off to five-star hotels? In no way is this Government policy."

When I read these comments, I could not help but be amazed at the incredible hypocrisy of our prime minister. Why, just for these comments alone he should be impeached. To provide any Knesset member who wishes to attempt such a maneuver with all the ammunition necessary, I will answer these points one by one.

First, it is simply untrue that "we have never run away from our homes". Twice in Israeli history, Israeli governments have driven Israeli citizens from their homes. First with the expulsion of Jews from their homes in Yamit in 1982, and second with the expulsion of Jews from 25 Israeli communities in Gush Katif and northern Samaria in 2005. The second of these forced expulsions was the brainchild of the man currently our prime minister -- the very person who uttered such an absurd comment.

And beyond the expulsions, tens of thousands of Israelis were forced to leave their homes this summer as a result of the war launched on us by Hezbollah. The Olmert government's mismanagement of that war likely ensured that they will have to do so again in the not-too-distant future.

Second, for Olmert to say that he "will not lend a hand to hasty actions that may be good for two or three days but which are liable to have destructive long-term effects," is simply ludicrous. Not only have Israeli governments lent a hand to such hasty measures, they have been the ones to instigate them. The Oslo process has been arguably the single most destructive Israeli policy every adopted. It created deep schisms in Israeli society, and provided the grounds for the Israeli extreme left to marginalize, ostracize and demonize the most self-sacrificing, patriotic elements in Israel who saw the danger and did not keep quiet. There was the expulsion from the Gaza Strip last summer which, beyond being a continuation of the destruction wrought by Oslo, was both hasty and incredibly destructive, as the residents of Sderot will be more than glad to tell you today. And Olmert himself had a decisive hand in the latter.

To then say that "we do not want to take people out of their homes" is such a banal platitude that it would be funny if it weren't so sad.

Lastly, Olmert's summation that "to load people on buses and whisk them off to five-star hotels? In no way is this Government policy," should be enough to stir the ire of even the most forgiving of Israelis. Not only has this been government policy until not too long ago, but the last of those expelled from Gush Katif and northern Samaria to leave the hotels in which they were cooped up did so almost a year after the expulsions because the government authority charged with finding them new accommodations has failed its job quite miserably. To this day, 15 months after the expulsion, only one new neighborhood has received all the planning approvals necessary, while dozens more have not yet even been brought before any committee for approval.

But in Olmert's last comment, at least there is a grain of truth. The families expelled from their homes in 2005 were not put up in five-star hotels. They only got three stars if they were lucky, while many settled for school dormitories.

It has become quite apparent that Ehud Olmert has completely lost his grip on reality. He is in a state of panic at the mounting criticism he faces from all corners -- a panic that is impairing whatever ability he ever had to properly run the country. The longer he stays in office, the greater the real existential danger to the State of Israel becomes.

If Olmert does not resign, then for the good of Israel, our representatives in the Knesset must force him out. The damage he has wrought, and the blind eye he turns to it, are more than sufficient grounds for new elections.

Yehuda Poch is a journalist living in Israel. Contact him at butrfly@actcom.co.il. This article is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 20, 2006.


Instead of figuring out what is best for our country to do and to be, many Americans are obsessed over Pres. Bush. As a typical example, my boyhood friend misses no opportunity to call Pres. Bush "stupid." Some seem to enjoy our country's predicament.

They suppose that the US did not have great foreign policy problems until Bush took office. Presto, he drums up a war, and we get into trouble? They don't understand. The problems resulting in war go back more than a dozen years, through administrations of both major political parties. Pres. Bush Sr. built up Saddam, and failed to take him down. Pres. Clinton let the US military run down in size, while our enemies attacked Americans and built up their power. How lax he was! Americans should rise above partisanship and analyze realistically.

My friend is pleased that hawks are leaving the current Administration. How pleased will he be if their replacements, and Bush's replaced direction, follow the policies that failed to stop jihad? The Democrats have no answer. They assert that Bush was lying about Saddam pursuing nuclear weaponry, but Bush was not and he is vindicated by the captured Iraqi documents that confirm the warnings by Ariel Sharon and other Israeli officials that Iraq transferred its nuclear program to Syria. They contend that Bush didn't negotiate, but as I have explained in earlier pieces, that is not correct. We spent years negotiating, letting others negotiate, and letting the UNO try. It didn't work. The Democrats are lying (really, overlooking the record).

A policy of resolving problems with the jihadists through negotiations is based on absurd ignorance of the enemy. As fanatical as the Nazis and more fanatical than the Communists, the jihadists don't have "problems" with us. They want to kill us and then conquer us, though as they radicalize, they get more inclined to conquer us and kill us.

Bush's main mistake was not in prosecuting the war on Saddam, which the UNO authorized (another fact that Democrats conveniently forget). It is that he didn't first rebuild the US military so that it would have enough troops to hold Iraq and continue on to Iran, etc.. Most leading Democrats don't realize yet that jihad is a world war, and we need a strategy. Bush, the supposedly stupid one, warned about an evil axis. Iran, heading this axis, prepared Hizbullah to the point at which it could make war on Israel.

My friend, Marty, laments the Israeli government letting itself appear disinterested in making peace by refusing to "talk" with Syria. It is a point I have made. PM Olmert rightly concludes that Syria doesn't want peace, but foolishly lets Syria claim that Israel won't cooperate in making. As Marty points out, Muslims are developing weapons of mass-destruction. Israel should foster moderates and not antagonize them by spurning peace offers. I asked what moderates. He did not name any. He must have forgotten that before the rise of Islamism, the Arabs trying to destroy Israel. Almost all over the Muslim world, Muslims once not activist are becoming radicalized. Blaming enemy antagonism to Israel (or to the US) for what the victim of Muslim aggression does, is like blaming the Jews for what the Nazis did. It is not what the victims do, but that the victims are: (1) Prey; and (2) Resist jihad.

In preparing to talk with Assad, Israel should be aware that negotiations with Muslims are a trap, just as they were with Hitler and Stalin. Fanatical totalitarians with imperial ambition don't make peace. They use negotiations to bolster their position against their negotiating "partners," to use the fatuous phrase employed by Israelis. The trap is that Israel states its minimum conditions and not asserting its rights, the enemy starts negotiating downward from there, and the rest of the world pressures Israel to keep making concessions, as if eventually some concession would slake the Muslim thirst. But it is a religiously-driven thirst for conquest. Concessions only bolster its drive.

First, Israel would have to make its case. Crippled by self-doubt, political correctness, and appeasement-mindedness that supposes that rich Saudis and Iranians are terrorist because of poverty, Israel doesn't state its case if it even knows how to.

Second, Israel would have to insist there be no pre-conditions, or else these are no negotiations but the signing of a surrender. Israel might not have the courage to insist.

Third, Israel should explain that it wants peace, and therefore, as appropriate under international law, would not cede the Golan Heights. International law states that territory used by aggression, as Syria repeatedly used the Golan, may be taken by the victim if necessary to prevent aggression. The way Syria is going, it would misuse the Golan.

Peace can be made with Muslims, suggests Marty, citing Egypt and Jordan. Why didn't he mention the PLO, which also signed peace agreements, but subsequently committed wars on Israel? Does he know of the Muslim doctrine of signing peace agreements so as to get a reprieve during which to prepare for war? Egypt officially but quietly is turning Islamist. Jordan's people are Islamist. Egypt leads the international diplomatic effort against Israel. Marty did not know that Egypt has gotten $60 billion worth of US aid to build an army trained almost solely to invade Israel. Egypt is the willing conduit through which the P.A. gets the arms to tie down the Israeli army and bleed the country.

Since the US is pro-Israel, my friend began, why would it build up an Egyptian army to invade Israel? It is a surprising statement from Marty, who, after all, thinks the US and Israeli governments unable to act intelligently in the national interest. The State Dept. thinks it can manipulate other regions, whereas regional powers use it for their own regional agendas. That is why US attempts to work through proxies such as Iran, Iraq, and now Egypt, fail. In addition, the State Dept. traditionally is anti-Zionist. Of that, I've adduced before but suffice to say here that it opposed the formation of Israel, tried to get statehood rescinded, and continued to hobble Israeli military victories and to press Israel for territorial retreat to indefensible borders. Don't be fooled by Congressional aid. The real policy Pollard stumbled on -- hide from Israeli Arab preparations for war.

Marty wants Jews to criticize both sides. I do -- the Muslim Arabs for aggression; Israel for fighting harder. It's the same as dealing with the Nazi war on the Jews.

Marty is smarter than I am. I enjoy his intellectual sparkle and challenge. It can keep me on my toes. Unfortunately, however, on this subject he has fewer sources and relies largely on the New York Times, which also traditionally is anti-Zionist and which practices advocacy journalism. I've written many articles on that and demonstrated hundreds of instances of bias in that paper, indicating that its false propaganda is deliberate. It downplays news about State Dept. machinations against Israel and frames the issues to Israel's disadvantage. It harps on the need to work with moderates among the Palestinian Arabs (none of whom is in power) who are more extremist than the people of Iran.


Twice as many Jews were refugees from Arab states as Arabs were from Israel. (Unlike the Arabs, the Jews had not committed aggression and were forced out.) Until now, the Jewish refugee claims were ignored. Now Israel decided to back their claims, and place them parallel to the Arabs' claims.

The descendants of the Jewish refugees are content to stay where they are, they just want recognition for the record, though some will assert financial claims. They consider there to have been a population exchange. They want to show that Israel is as much for Jews from Arab states as it is for Jews from Europe. (The Arabs falsely claim that Israel was founded solely as compensation by Europe to its Jews for persecution. Zionism is broader than that.)

They also want to appeal to the descendants of the Arab refugees to make something of their lives instead of letting themselves become political pawns of others (sorry, lost source). The Arabs were aggressors who left on their own, and deserve nothing.


Stepping up its production of fuel for nuclear bombs, Iran now is months away from having bombs to fill its missiles with. Russia is continuing to build nuclear plants for Iran. The West imposed ridiculously weak sanctions on the rich oil state. Israel says it is preparing, but its policy hampers action.

It's policy is to let the enemy encircle it, thereby hampering its ability to reach Iran and multiplying the enemy's ability to retaliate through proxies. It dithered in Lebanon, letting Hizbullah survive and invitijng hostile European forces in to protect Hizbullah. Already the French made threats, not against Hizbullah, its ostensible reason for entry, but against Israel for monitoring Hizbullah when UNIFIL should have been doing that, but it does nothing against the Muslim aggressors. The German navy sneaked a helicopter illegally over Israeli air space, when it was supposed to coordinate with Israel even for sending the helicopter up outside Israel. When Israel protested, Germany did it again! Now that is provocation! (But the media put it as if Israel had fired near the German ship.)

It is clear that if Israel wanted to knock out Iran's nuclear facilities, and Syria and Hizbullah intended to retaliate against Israel, UNIFIL would fight against Israel. Olmert had begged UNIFIL to come to protect Israel. Now he is receptive to letting thousands of PLO terrorists from Jordan into Judea-Samaria. He learns nothing.

Egypt has announced the dispatch of troops to the Gaza border, to block any Israeli raid on the smuggling that Egypt allows but is supposed to prevent. Israel did not protest. It both denies the Egyptian move and welcomes it as if Egypt finally will stop the arms smuggling. Egypt, however, has been building up its military, stationing it along the Canal, training it to fight Israel, and now allowing the P.A. heavy arms with which to bleed Israel. Egypt is part of the encirclement of Israel. If it gets away with sending in those troops, it would send in many more, presenting a strategic threat to Israel. It is taking advantage of the Olmert regime's weakness (IMRA, 10/31 from Caroline Glick).


The EU has lax asylum and anti-terrorist laws. Terrorists can enter one country, then pass into others without being checked. They travel freely and often between Europe and the Mideast. They blend into Muslim communities. Some intermarry with native-born Europeans, and become more anonymous. Mosques and businesses launder the transfer of funds to terrorist activities. (Middle East Forum news, 10/31).

The Middle East Forum reviews a book on suicide-murder by women, wondering why women sacrifice maternal instincts to abandon their children or to urge their children to blow themselves up among Israelis. Some of those women find gender equality in death that they were deprived of in life! (Op. Cit..)

The Europeans need to declare war on Islamism and develop a war strategy. That means figuring out what laws and restrictions they need, and ending their old-fashioned or inappropriate rules on asylum and multi-culturalism. They need to take back their own countries. They need to regain pride in the better features of their culture, and to raise more children.


Advanced Russian anti-tank missiles have been sent to Gaza. These could strike at tanks or reach 5 kms. into Israel. This changes the strategic balance, as they did in the hands of Hizbullah, in the recent war in Lebanon (IMRA, 10/31).

This is the penalty for Israel's having abandoned Gaza, including the border with Egypt. Egypt let the weapons into Gaza. But the government of Israel still trusts Egypt to protect the border.

How do the most stupid and venal people become that country's leaders?


The IDF declares that it will fight P.A. terrorism "with all the means at its disposal." This does not mean with all its military might. No, it means with all limits that the Olmert regime's media advisors think will keep it afloat (11/1). It pulls its punches.

The regime is so incompetent, corrupt, and anti-Zionist that it places a mighty burden on its media advisors. Advisors or not, Israel continues to get the worst of it in the international press. Can't be otherwise, considering that the regime does not strive for victory; it is inhibited by its appeasement-mindedness and concern for praise from abroad, but there is so much antisemitism abroad.


In the past four months, 10,000 P.A. Arabs have received permission to enter foreign countries. Another 45,000 submitted applications. As insecurity continues, so would this trend (IMRA, 11/1).


Israel has affirmative action for university admission. It is making up for 1,300 years of Muslim discrimination against Jews by university discrimination against... Jews! Problem is, fewer Arab students are entering medical school lately. They are failing the "ethical awareness" exam, Arab leaders claim, because they don't serve in the army.

Proponents of affirmative action usually oppose high standards. High standards keep the favored group out. Rather than coax and coach the favored group to raise its standards, proponents of ethnic discrimination prefer to lower the admission standards. So your doctor isn't as good.

A couple of years ago, the college boards test was eliminated. So many mediocre students then entered, that the boards had to be restored. That meant fewer Arabs again. The Left, which favors discrimination against jEWs, was disappointed.

The notion that the Arabs didn't ponder ethical questions because they didn't serve in the Army is a poor excuse. First, they could volunteer for the Army. Second, they could wait a few years, gain some maturity in life, and then apply for advanced schooling.

Arab MK Ahmed Tibi, who encourages the Arabs to fight Israel and therefore give Jewish youth experience in the Army and knowledge of ethics, wants a quota system for Arabs, who don't serve their country (Prof. Steven Plaut, 11/1). Help the enemy?


A Hamas advisor wrote an Op.-Ed. defending an offer of a truce without offering to disarm. He denied that the purpose of a truce was to tighten Hamas' grip over the P.A. and to build up its military. Truces are common among Muslims, he added.

He lied that the IRA agreed to a truce without offering to disarm. Actually, the IRA signed an agreement that promised disarmament (IMRA, 11/1). Hamas plans war.

Islam encourages truces in order to build up militarily and then end the truce when ready to renew war. Arafat used to justify his peace agreements with Israel by citing Islamic history to that effect. I think that Islamist terrorists are beyond the Pale, and that they don't express views but false propaganda as a tool of war. The NY Times was remiss in lending its pages to them, just as it would if it made space for Saddam Hussein.


The Foreign Minister of Egypt said that Egypt would not let Israel bomb the Gaza side of the border, to destroy the arms smuggling route that Egypt had undertaken to block but has not blocked. He said it would violate international agreements and P.A. sovereignty (IMRA, 11/1). Egypt lets heavy weapons into Gaza.

The P.A. is not sovereign, but Muslims don't recognize infidel sovereignty. There are no international agreements against Israel bombing the area, there is war by the P.A. on Israel and total P.A. violations of its agreements with Israel, that Hamas openly flouts.


The US has accepted mild sanctions against Iran that hardly impair its economy and that make an exception of the nuclear fuel plant that Russia is completing for Iran. Bear in mind that international inspection, as constituted, does not detect much. The US is paying lip service to taking action against Iran. Apparently, the US is resigned to Iran developing nuclear weapons, launching them against Israel, and then threatening to use them against neighboring countries, Europe, and the US (IMRA, 11/1).

The GOP seeks electoral victory on the grounds that it provides Americans with security. However, Pres. Bush is working within the same UNO that sabotages action against evil regimes, just as Sen. Kerry would have.


The Pentacostal European Fellowship, having almost five million members, declared its support for Israel and lamented the divestment from Israel by certain other Christian sects. The Fellowship is part of a movement claiming 34 million members in Europe and to be growing fast (IMRA, 11/1).

Those are Christian fundamentalists, whom Democrats dislike and fear.


Referring to Paris (or at least its suburbs), "Hardly a night passes without gangs -- many of them from immigrant families -- attacking police cars, buses, and emergency rescue teams." There are about 14 attacks a day (David Rennie, NY Sun, 11/2, p.8).

Doesn't France know it has the same enemies as Israel? Let it join the anti-jihad axis!


The US demanded that Israel approve the transfer (The US claims that Abbas needs the rifles to face down Hamas, and it claims, without making a case but just asserting it, that this would be beneficial. I think both claims erroneous, if even sincere.)

Abbas has said he would not wage civil war and unless Israel agrees to his own demands, he would fight Israel (IMRA, 11/1). When he does, he'd have 5,000 more rifles.


Syria apparently is preparing some terrorists to strike down Saudi leaders whoa re antagonistic towards Syria (IMRA, 11/1).

Syria gives reasons, but Muslims' stated reasons usually are pretexts. I think that S. Arabia has started to oppose the Shiite axis, of which Syria is part. Hence Syria, which is getting bold, seeks to get at S. Arabia.


Israel's Defense Min. Peretz said that the old Saudi "peace" plan basically of land-for-peace (and, I think, of bringing in refugee descendents to smother Israel), would make a good basis for negotiation. He qualified that as not accepting the plan but starting negotiations with its plan (Ibrahim Barzak, NY Sun, 11/2, p.7 from Associated Press).

It has proved disadvantageous for Israel to base negotiations on an adverse principle. Israel should offer its own plan, peace for peace. Let it offer not to order the US to attack other Arab states! Of course, it cannot order the US to do anything, but since the Muslim Arabs have the antisemitic belief that Israel runs the world, why not get some negotiating advantage out of? Perhaps the world would laugh the Arab notion to death.

Fresh from having proved inept at national defense, Peretz now is showing ineptitude in diplomacy. He would do better to explain why, with jihadists, diplomacy is counter-productive. Whereas Von Clausewitz described war as "diplomacy by other means," Peretz should describe Muslim diplomacy as "war by other means." Islam makes truces to build up forces and diplomacy to better position them, before renewing war.


UNIFIL does not patrol after dark. Too dangerous. Therefore, Hizbullah (which has night vision equipment) can bring in arms after dark without UNIFIL interference. The UNO admits that Syria still is smuggling weapons to Hizbullah.

The Lebanese Army, which is supposed to prevent the smuggling and disarm Hizbullah, and which could authorize UNIFIL to patrol the border, now has 20,000 men in southern Lebanon. It performs none of those duties. (Its troops largely are Shiites, as is Hizbullah; Lebanese follow communal loyalty above all.) What the Lebanese Army did try to do was to shoot down an Israeli plane flying over Lebanese air space to monitor Hizbullah's rearmament. Israel is reconsidering its commitment to the ceasefire agreement that the other parties are not keeping (Arutz-7, 11/2).

Israel gets into disadvantageous agreements it would beware. Then it sticks with them too long. The US keeps demanding one-way compliance by Israel.


The general in charge of filling the ranks explained that some battles in Lebanon were halted as soon as the government heard of any Israeli casualties in it. Of course, that is no way to run an army and direct it at war (Prof. Steven Plaut, 11/2).

This is an example of the hesitancy that frustrated the Army when it had Hizbullah on the run. If in taking a few casualties, the Army would knock out Hizbullah, it would prevent many more casualties. The government's reaction to casualties is so ridiculous, it is close to being insane. Many Israeli policies and practices are equally absurd.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by David Frankfurter, November 20, 2006.

Dear Friends,

The British PM, Tony Blair, made a significant foreign policy speech (www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page10409.asp) on Monday (November 13, 2006), at the London Lord Mayor's banquet. He outlined his "whole Middle-East strategy". After stating Israel/Palestine "is the core", Blair drew a direct line to Teheran.

"Iran is being confronted over its nuclear weapons ambitions... [T]hey are using the pressure points in the region to thwart us. So they help the most extreme elements of Hamas in Palestine; Hizbollah in the Lebanon; Shia militia in Iraq. That way, they put obstacles in the path to peace, paint us, as they did over the Israel/Lebanon conflict, as the aggressors, inflame the Arab street and create political turmoil in our democratic politics."

Blair's solution to the nuclear threat, global terror and and the Israel-Palestinian dispute is simple: appeal to moderate Islam. His introduction was the base. "In this century, a new and unconventional enemy has appeared: a global terrorism, based on a thoroughly warped misinterpretation of Islam, which is fanatical and deadly."

My question is this: Where is this moderate Islam? Why is an "infidel" explaining that global terrorism is a warped misinterpretation of Islam? Shouldn't it be Muslim's speaking for (not to mention protecting) their own religion? Where are the masses of Muslims who are leading or at least joining the war on terror? And I don't mean lapsed or secular Muslims - I mean religious Muslims.

My studies of comparative religion in high school and the memory of the Muslims I met at university create a dissonance between what I thought was Islam, and what I see today. On the other hand, the Islamist vision of dominating the world as the sole religion has been openly and clearly declared, and is being brought to implementation stage. It is not dissimilar to the vision of the Crusaders, which led to the pogroms of the Middle Ages. Not too different to the Catholic vision that created the Inquisition. And I guess that its political edge is parallel to the vision of the 1,000 year Reich.


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://dfrankfurter.livejournal.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Professor Eugene Narrett, November 20, 2006.

The core of this excerpt is a column I wrote for the Metro West Daily News in December 1996. It appeared in similar form in the January 1997 Outpost. Visit http://www.israelendtimes.com and click on the December 1996 archive for this entire essay. May Hashem bless abundantly all lovers of Israel and bring light from the gathering dark

As I re-visited it it grew; it had to; the darkening and descent of the road has taught us all, hopefully, to see Hanukkah more fully in its light, the quintessential and supreme holy days of Israel: the light in the darkness, remembrance, active faith, victory and re-dedication. In honor of Rosh Hodesh Kislev, this beautiful month of dreaming and healing, of birth and the amethyst of remembrance, this portion of a longer piece is offered. The rest of this part I is archived on my site in December 1996 category. May we act to merit the stream of healing light, the milk and wine of malkhut Yehuda for us very soon

Hanukkah is the supreme holy day: light in the darkness; the triumph of Judaism and the loving, long-suffering Jewish people after millennia of slaughter and persecution. Courage, victory, sovereignty, Torah and light held within each family and then to fill the world...

There will be nothing without victory: liberation, service, endurance, faith are meant to culminate in victory to be complete. G-d is not a magician. Faith is proved in deeds; the Promise must be activated by human endeavors.

Hanukkah is a joyous re-dedication of worship, purity and national integrity. Like all Jewish holy days it is a memorial (tziyun from Zion), it commemorates a refusal to bend the knee to state power and concludes with a miracle achieved through active faith.

It also is relevant that the original triumph memorialized by Hanukkah did not, in the historical sweep of things, have staying power. The battle between a Torah state and those who follow the international cult of the body, of force, fraud and sexual extravaganzas still rages, and a blend of fidelity, courage and faith is needed to save the land, -- and world again. So when we light the candles and again sing the blessings, "in those days, at this season" the substance of the wonders, battles, victories and need for salvation of Hanukkah is greatly with us.

The bridge of peace, shalom linking heaven and earth must be reflected back to heaven in our deeds, proof of our gratitude and refinement, and it can only arise from the midst of shaleim, the integrity of Israel which is inseparable with its victory and eternity.

The Book of Maccabees begins by glancing at the ascension of Alexander whom the world calls "The Great." But the children of Israel had a different perspective: "he traversed the earth to its remotest bounds, and plundered countless nations" the text reads, as if critiquing the principles set out three centuries earlier by Pericles in his "Funeral Oration" for the Athenian dead: "our adventurous spirit has forced a way into every land": indeed. "His pride knew no limits."

"And then," the text adds, "he died," dryly making the oldest point in the book, that mortal pride is ridiculous. The problem was that Alexander bequeathed his pagan empire to kings "who brought untold miseries upon the world," the winged goat blazing a path for "the beast with iron teeth. One of these predatory Hellenistic kings was Antiochus Epiphanes, 'the incarnation' one could loosely translate his Greek idea, who became king at Antioch about 175 BCE in the historical Aram that the Greeks called "Syria."

By that time the Jewish people, fighting many battles and taking many losses had survived many foreign empires and tyrants. Antiochus was not the main problem but rather "a gang of renegade Jews who sought...to enact non-Jewish laws and customs. They built a sports stadium in the Greek style, repudiated the holy covenant and abandoned themselves to evil ways." They sought to assimilate to a homogenized, secular super-State. They wanted peace in a "New Middle East."

Antiochus backed this secularizing initiative ("yesterday's gone") and the habits to which it led. "He issued a decree: his subjects were all to become one people and abandon their own laws and religion." It could have been the first world security state. "Nations everywhere complied, as did many in Israel. Swine were slaughtered on the holy altar and "anyone in possession of a Book of the Covenant was put to death."

But in the town of Modi'in an old priest named Mattisyahu one day had had enough. His battle cry was, "everyone who is zealous for the law and the covenant follow me!" For almost three years he led the Jews against the cultists of the body and the world State. When he died, his son Judah the Hammer led. The medieval Church considered Judah one of "the seven worthies of faith." Writing in about 124 BCE, the authors of Maccabees put Judah in a line including Abraham, Joseph, Joshua, Caleb, David, Elijah and Daniel.

Like all those who worship their own power and have a snazzy new cult to sell it, Antiochus was outraged that a bunch of ragtag Jewish 'extremists' (Jews) kept defeating his well-paid Greeks. He assembled an immense force but found himself running a big monetary and popular deficit "as a result of the disaffection and violence he had brought upon the world by abolishing traditional laws and customs."

But tyrants, whether in blue, green or bronze helmets know all about deficit-spending so Antiochus sent out his United Nations army complete with the high-tech weapon of that day, elephants. Praying for divine mercy, Judah unfurled a Torah scroll, sounded the shofar, led the Jews into battle against the Greeks and, as the text relates, "humbled their pride." Nest year, he marched into Jerusalem, "restored the Temple, renewed the sacred vessels and menorah, burnt incense, lit the lamps, and set the loaves of bread for each tribe on the table. On the very day of the anniversary the gentiles had profaned it, it was rededicated with hymns of thanksgiving" (the Hallel).

"And the entire congregation of Israel declared that the rededication should be observed with joy and gladness at the same season, each year for eight days."

The gentiles and their Jewish allies fought twenty more years to install the Olympian cult complete with Madonna (eventually they did it, with Roman might). Long before then, the Hasmonean dynasty began adopting Greek names and ways; the Romans backed the interloper Herod and put them out.

Today the west is a society in which creatures like Salome are icons and the cult of the body, of concupiscent and erotic fantasies seems to have triumphed utterly.

In small hill towns and outposts away from urban centers and omnipresent media and police, holy people in the old style, people of grace and integrity, the beautiful people are going against the regression that is modernism. Perhaps folks are more and more reflecting on the original social paradigm of Israel...

Professor Eugene Narrett teaches writing and Literature at Boston University. He is the author of hundreds of articles, columns and reviews on politics, American culture and the arts. He is completing a study on Romanticism and the longterm decline of Western Culture. He writes often on subjects relating to Israel and Judaism and is a weekly columnist for the MetroWest Daily News in Framingham, Massachusetts.

To Go To Top

Posted by Steven Shamrak, November 19, 2006.

These are news items from all over. My comments are in square brackets [] and italics.

Beware of Surrender Plan.

These are excerpts from an article by Mitch Potter of the The Star of Toronto entitled "Israel secretly studies 'bold' peace bid." (www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/ Article_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1163631019081

...Israeli officials are believed to be exploring a new diplomatic shady overture that calls for the surrender of large swathes of the West Bank to a new Arab Palestinian leadership in exchange for a decade-long ceasefire [Not even peace]. The plan, still in the formative stages, was outlined in the Hebrew daily Ma'ariv on Nov. 16, as a "bold and original" initiative [Only self-hating Jewish traitors can think this way].

The plan would enable the creation of a provisional Arab Palestinian state as a first step toward normalization with Palestinians and the wider Arab world [What a delusional idea. How many of those self-destructive steps can Israel survive?]

It is alleged that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert secretly presented the concept to President George W. Bush during a meeting at the White House Monday. [If it is not treason, why in Israel 's democratic society, the important plan like this is kept secret from the public?]

Nothing Less. PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is calling on Israel to renew diplomatic contact with the PA [they need US and EU money to finance terrorism and corruption] in the framework of a total Israeli withdrawal from Judea, Samaria, Gaza and eastern Jerusalem. In an address televised in the PA, he called on Israel to "seize the opportunity for peace." [What about the framework of a total departure of all Arabs from the Jewish land -- Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Trans Jordan! Abbas can also seize the opportunity. It works both ways. This approach will definitely bring peace to Israel! All previous negotiations and compromises made by Israel only encouraged more demands from Arabs and escalated Islamic terrorism, not only in Israel but all over the world.]

Stupidity Unlimited. Olmert government is considering to authorise 1500 armed Arab Palestinian terrorists, based in Jordan, to move into the West Bank and Gaza Strip, as a way to counterbalance the growing power of Hamas. No official announcement has been made, although US President George Bush had formally requested the troop transfer before the 45-minute private meeting he held with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert last week. [Why not allow Iran to move armed force to Iraq, to help the coalition to fight al-Qaida? For how long will Jews tolerate this ugly attitude from so-called friends? We must do what is good for our own state, as any self-respecting nation does!]

Human shield is illegal!

Stop advance warnings! Stop humiliation of IDF! Stop bombings of empty buildings! Destroy the enemy!

International anti-Semitism in Action.

UN General Assembly condemned Israel by 156-7 vote, but systematic cross-border missile attacks against Israeli civilians were not even mentioned!

Food for Thought.

Who held the hands of IDF in Lebanon, when Hezbollah sent rockets to Israel, and during all other conflicts as well? Who broke many promises and started talking about two-state solution? Are we supposed to be grateful for 6 decades of war and misery imposed on Jews in Israel and the rise of anti-Semitism facilitated by our 'friends' and enemies? Under the close scrutiny the US friendship and attitude toward Israel looks surprisingly different to what we customarily think!

Same Game Plan. The, so-called, Palestinian Unity Cabinet, yet to be confirmed, will not recognize Israel -- The Hamas movement representative announced in Gaza.

Gaza is Terror University. Iran and Hezballah are working together with Hamas to transform the Gaza Strip into a "university" for studying terrorism. The head of Israel's Shin Bet security services, Yuval Diskin, told Israeli lawmakers that Palestinians had smuggled 30 tons of military-grade explosives as well as large quantities of weapons, including anti-tank missiles, into Gaza since Israel withdrew its troops and deported settlements from Gaza last summer.

New Undetectable Suicide Belts. Israel's military and intelligence services said the two belts it had acquired "contained unusually large amounts of liquid explosives" that would have triggered disastrous consequences if detonated.

Israeli Leaders Surrender. The recent fatal rocket attacks on Southern Israel have brought Israel to its knees. Israel's weekend newspapers are full of articles quoting Israeli leaders who have given up hope in stopping the ongoing attacks on Sderot and the Western Negev. On the Iranian front, Israeli leaders are no less clueless. The international media quoted Shimon Peres stating, that Israel must not take the lead in international efforts to curb Iran. [When will the gutless Gullut mentality end?]

Quote of the Week:

"Nazi Germany murdered over 6 million Jews during the Holocaust in World War II from 1939 to 1945. This corresponds to about 10,000 Jews a day, including women and children. On bad days the number of Jews murdered would be as high as 20,000-30,000 corresponding to a mid-size football stadium." -- All those years the anti-Semitic world was silent! The international community is quite vocal now, in order to facilitate the demise of the Jewish state!

UAE turns back Israeli Delegation. An Israeli delegation was blocked from attending a United Nations-affiliated international postal conference in Dubai last week, sparking protests from the UN and an American delegation. On Tuesday, the Emirates authorities invited the Israeli delegation to return - the conference finished on Friday. [No UN resolution condemning the UAE action is expected!]

UNIFIL Protests. "UNIFIL strongly protested to Israel over the flights which are unacceptable and in violation of resolution 1701," UNIFIL spokesman, Milos Struger, said. [At the same time UNIFIL have done nothing to stop Hezbollah from re-arming, this is also a violation of resolution 1701. There are no protests about it!]

Empty Promises. The terrorist group Islamic Jihad made a promise to PA President Mahmoud Abbas that it would consider halting rocket attacks on Israel if Israel stops retaliation attacks in Gaza. [They did not promise the end of terror, only the consideration!]

Jewish Contribution to Humanity.

Charles Ginsburg (1920-1992) was the leader of a research team at Ampex which developed one of the first practical videotape recorders. He was inducted into the National Inventors Hall of Fame in 1990.

Iran in the Scope. USS Boxer Strike Group, entered the Persian Gulf, the largest US landing force to reach this water in a decade. The group's commander, Capt. David Angood said that if "anything important happens in the real-world environment, the task force will deal with it in the most efficient manner."

Complaints from Evil Empire. Iran filed a complaint to the UN Security Council over remarks by Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh that Israel must be ready to prevent Iran's nuclear program "at all costs." [But no one complained to the UN Security Council and no resolution was adopted over the threat made by the president of Iran to destroy the state of Israel.]

PA television: Suicide is the Most Glorious Death. Death by carrying out a suicide operation is one of the most glorious ways to die and is rewarded with eternal paradise and 72 dark-eyed virgins, according to a religious instruction broadcast last week on PA television run by Abbas' Fatah party. [There is no difference between Fatah and Hamas. They use same rhetoric and the same goals!]

Clear Declaration of Affiliation. Knesset member Muhammad Barakeh, speaking at a Ramallah memorial service for PA Chairman Yasser Arafat called Arafat "Our great leader" and warned that "the shoes of the child from Beit Hanoun will stomp on the head of the Israeli empire. Your security will not come at the expense of our children? You will not kill our dream..." The Arab-Israeli MK has openly identified himself as belonging to the Arab-Palestinian side.

Barakeh called on Palestinians to stop firing Qassam rockets at Israel: "I unequivocally spoke against them, in front of the prime minister's deputy and other Hamas members. I said that if the means of resistance do not bring you closer to freedom and give the occupier excuses to continue his actions, you are giving him an excuse to attack you..." [He is not concerned about the lives of Jewish Israelis, but pre-occupied with the goal of Arabs to destroy Israel!]

Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement. For the last 3 years, he has been publishing internet editorial letters on the Arab-Israeli conflict -- independently, not as a member of any organization or political movement. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, November 19, 2006.

Yet again, The 'world class(less)' New York Times demonstrates its anti-Israel bias, in an 11/18/2006 front page marquee article 'For West Bank, It's a Highway To Frustration' by Greg Myre, a skilled writer seemingly smitten with a so-called 'Palestinian' apologist perspective. The Israel skewering hand wringing description of so-called 'Palestinian' life on the so-called 'West Bank' emphasizes a daily nightmarish check point plagued plight presumably endured by these Arabs taking little note as well as expressing no sympathy for Israel's perspective on this matter. Indeed, per the thrust of Myre's article, depicting numerous examples of Arab life being disrupted by Israeli security measures, Palestinian inconvenience is so onerous that it trumps the security of Israeli citizens, despite the little emphasized fact that many innocent Israelis have been murdered and maimed in the past when martyring homicidal/suicidal Arab lunatics were more casually allowed to enter Israeli towns and cities, then blew themselves and proximate human beings asunder. Might Myre consider interviewing and entering the opinion of but one victim of a homicidal/suicidal attack, perhaps one member of a grieving Israeli family who has lost a loved one to such perverted behavior, for the sake of journalistic fairness? Of course not, that would sabotage the objective of his not so subtle editorial disguised as an objective lengthy report on a major international issue.

Any journalist or editor possessing an ounce of integrity would avoid misleading readers into believing that one particular articulated perspective on an issue was a fair and balanced piece of news, thus avoid vividly displaying any such subjectively crafted article, including any large picture emphasizing the tone of its content, on the front page of a presumably objective newspaper. Indeed, that is the function of an opinion page! The New York Times, alas, in a more subdued and well-written but nevertheless ever-potent manner, consistently presents its collective subjective anti-Israel viewpoint within its prodigious body of presumed factual news ala 'news rags' catering to a readership of intellectually bereft bigots. Furthermore, readers of that 'highly acclaimed' newspaper, in general, are not bigots (at least blatant bigots), tend to be fairly well educated, somewhat intelligent, politically concerned, as well as perhaps dependent on what they believe are objective reports and analysis' offered about subjects they have no time to independently research and contemplate. Thus The New York Times becomes a lethal mind manipulating weapon, ironically bludgeoning the only tolerant democratic nation, that happens to be defined by its Jewish culture, in a vast misogynist intolerant Islamic neck of the desert, whenever that media outlet suspects Israel behaves in a politically incorrect way toward, in the newspaper's skewed opinion, ever abused ever occupied ever challenged Palestinian waifs, ever fated to be refugees, including those that now dwell within the all Arab sovereign ceded state of Gaza, surely a place to hang their turbans and burkas, not exactly an encampment for stateless people. Might we conclude The New York Times and Al-Jazeera are kindred spirits when it comes to defining Israel? At least the latter media outlet does not attempt to disguise its proclivities.

Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by David Ben-Ariel, November 19, 2006.

The Wakf, the militant Muslim authority that oversees Jerusalem's Temple Mount, Judaism's holiest site and Islam's alleged third holiest site (following Mecca and Medina) continue to show blatant disregard for Jewish, Christian and biblical history and non-Muslim sensitivities.

Matti Friedman's AP article - "At Temple Mount Holy Site, What Is Treasure?" (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061118/ap_on_sc/israel_temple_trove) - exposes how the Wakf engaged in unsupervised and illegal gouging of the Temple Mount (the holy site of both Solomon's Temple and Zerubbabel Temple enlarged by Herod that Jesus and the apostles worshipped in), removing tons of its historically rich soil and callously dumping it in the nearby Kidron Valley (that I've walked through many times, climbing the Mount of Olives). Such atrocious acts reveal a serious lack of proper respect for archaeology and other religions and serve as an indictment against the Wakf ! and the Israeli government for looking the other way.

However, this serious breach of religious respect and tolerance for non-Muslims is nothing new, as a Muslim mob overran the biblical patriarch Joseph's Tomb, site of a synagogue, burnt the Torah scrolls and murdered the rabbi who supervised the site, as well as a Druse officer trying to protect it, and utterly trashed the holy place. And who can forget the Muslim terrorists holed up in the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, using the baptismal font as a latrine and abusing the New Testaments there? Not to mention the daily religious discrimination upon the Temple Mount where they illegally forbid Christians and Jews from praying or reading the Bible.

These are the concrete actions of the leaders of the "Palestinian" community, documented actions that are in stark contrast to the virtues they profess to the Western media about religious tolerance and freedom of access to religious sites within "Palestine."

It's past time the Israeli government act responsibly and change the deplorable status quo upon the Temple Mount, and restore Judaism's holiest site as the Temple Mount, hosting a "House of Prayer for all peoples" as envisioned by the Prophets.

David Ben-Ariel is author of "Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall." Contact him by email at davidbenariel@earthlink.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Yehuda Poch, November 19, 2006.

The following very disturbing news report crossed my desk over the weekend, from the Ha'aretz newspaper:

Defense Minister Amir Peretz on Thursday blasted business tycoon Arkady Gaydamak for financing a free weekend in Eilat for 800 residents of the rocket-battered western Negev town of Sderot.

"The state of Israel does not allow rich men and philanthropists to gain control from the distress of citizens," said Peretz. "This phenomenon cannot continue. We will prepare an organized and established plan to alleviate these residents so they will not need to knock on the doors of philanthropists."

Peretz's reaction to Gaydamak's generosity is representative of the pompous disregard Israel's leading politicians have for the people of this country. The idea that the "State of Israel does not allow" any of its citizens to help when others are in need flies in the face of the vaunted democracy and socialist ideology that Peretz and his party claim to uphold.

Gaydamak's generosity has aroused considerable controversy in Israel, both this weekend, and over the summer when he paid to house over 12,000 residents of Israel's north who fled the Katyusha attacks on their homes during the war. That such generosity should catch people's attention is a good thing. That it should raise controversy is in itself testimony to the extremely poor level of social awareness Israelis have for one another.

Many news reports, and many opportunist politicians, scream loudly every so often about the income gaps in Israel, about the wide disparity between the haves and the have-nots. But that is not where the true social disparity lies. Rather, residents of one part of the country don't understand residents of another, and worse, they become alienated from residents of other localities to the extent that one could almost be in a completely different country rather than in a different region of Israel. People from one area view people from another with contempt, scorn, pity, or loathing, or they ignore them altogether.

It is very true that many Israelis "did not truly experience the war" as one wounded soldier recently told me when I met him in the rehab ward. For the vast majority of Israelis living in the greater Tel Aviv area, or regions further south, the war was no more than a story on the hourly newscasts. Life went on as if the war were in some far-off land, rather than a mere hour's drive away.

Along came Arkady Gaydamak, showing everyone in Israel what can be done if someone just cares enough. There are plenty of people in Israel with money to spare when the need arises. And there are plenty of charitable organizations who do so. I work for one of them, and through my work, I have the opportunity to meet people from all across Israel who have been harmed by the failures of Israeli defense, foreign, and social policy. And they are so incredibly appreciative when someone -- simply holds out a hand to help. These are the true Israelis -- the ones who put life and limb on the line daily just to be able to live in the Jewish homeland, and the ones who help them along when the going gets a little too tough in the adventure of the Jewish State.

That adventure is meant to have as its crowning glory a Jewish government and Jewish army pledged to defend and promote the Jewish state in all its facets and in all realms of activity. Unfortunately, the army cannot accomplish this goal without a government of strong moral clarity and conviction of the justice of our cause. And the Israeli government lacks precisely these elements which would enable it and the army to fulfill this mission and ensure the success of this adventure.

Arkady Gaydamak is a threat to the ruling classes in Israel particularly because he does what is needed. He believes fully in the Zionist enterprise. He believes fully in the people of Israel, and is willing to literally put his money where his mouth is. He is a fine example of the true Israeli.

The Peretz's and Olmert's of our country are examples of what is wrong with Israeli society. They, and others speak of preparing "an organized and established plan to alleviate these residents so they will not need to knock on the doors of philanthropists." But neither Sderot residents, nor residents of the north, nor any other group of Israelis actively seeks such aid. Sderot residents don't want to be shelled day in and day out or watch their neighbors get killed or maimed by our enemies' attacks. Northern residents don't want to have their homes destroyed, their lives interrupted, or their fathers, mothers, or children killed while strolling in the garden.

What Israelis want is a government that is prepared to put the safety, security and prosperity of its residents first and foremost on its agenda -- ahead of petty intrigue and personal gain, ahead of scandals and wasteful spending, and ahead of ineptitude and negligence. What Israeli residents want is a government that takes the needs of its citizens seriously, whether those needs are military, educational, cultural, social, financial, infrastructural, environmental, housing, judicial, or any other kind.

The Israeli government is not preparing "an organized and established plan" to help anyone. If they were, it would have been in place long ago. Actually, the government should never have needed such a plan. Providing for proper defense of Israelis from enemy attack would have obviated the need for such plans, or for Gaydamak. Instead, the Israeli government has failed its citizens, and failed them miserably, being more interested in caving in to terrorists or to international tongue-waggers than in building up our national home on our terms.

We fought a war this summer and gained exactly nothing other than greater international impediments to our future security and greater military buildup on the part of our enemies for the war that every Israeli schoolchild knows is merely a matter of time away. We have been ignoring the growing war being fought on our southern flank by an enemy growing constantly more emboldened with every missile strike that deepens the confusion and impotence of our so-called leaders.

In the absence of any kind of leadership, it is up to the real "doers" of Israeli society, the Gaydamaks of this country, to do step in to the breach. That we have such people is a testament to the basic human goodness of our nation. That we have a need for such people is a testament to the failure of our national institutions to tap into that goodness and promote the fulfillment of every citizen's needs. That one of our leaders can say that the "State of Israel does not allow" such activities is testament to the abject moral bankruptcy of our national leaders.

Yehuda Poch is a journalist living in Israel. This article is from his website and is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 19, 2006.

"But I can tell you what it is not about. Not about Israel, not about Iraq, not about Afghanistan. They are mere excuses. Algerian Muslim fundamentalists murdered 150,000 other Algerian Muslims, sometimes slitting the throats of children in front of their parents. Are you seriously telling me that this was because of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians or American foreign policy?"

This is from the National Post of Canada. It is based on an interview of Dr. Tawfik Hamid by Michael Coren, who is an author and broadcaster. Mr. Coren can be reached at his website: www.michaelcoren.com. The article is archived at

Dr. Tawfik Hamid doesn't tell people where he lives. Not the street, not the city, not even the country. It's safer that way. It's only the letters of testimony from some of the highest intelligence officers in the Western world that enable him to move freely. This medical doctor, author and activist once was a member of Egypt's Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (Arabic for "the Islamic Group"), a banned terrorist organization. He was trained under Ayman al-Zawahiri, the bearded jihadi who appears in Bin Laden's videos, telling the world that Islamic violence will stop only once we all become Muslims.

He's a disarmingly gentle and courteous man. But he's determined to tell a complacent North America what he knows about fundamentalist Muslim imperialism.

"Yes, 'imperialism,'" he tells me. "The deliberate and determined expansion of militant Islam and its attempt to triumph not only in the Islamic world but in Europe and North America. Pure ideology. Muslim terrorists kill and slaughter not because of what they experience but because of what they believe."

Hamid drank in the message of Jihadism while at medical school in Cairo, and devoted himself to the cause. His group began meeting in a small room. Then a larger one. Then a Mosque reserved for followers of al-Zawahiri. By the time Hamid left the movement, its members were intimidating other students who were unsympathetic.

He is now 45 years old, and has had many years to reflect on why he was willing to die and kill for his religion. "The first thing you have to understand is that it has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with poverty or lack of education," he says. "I was from a middle-class family and my parents were not religious. Hardly anyone in the movement at university came from a background that was different from mine.

"I've heard this poverty nonsense time and time again from Western apologists for Islam, most of them not Muslim by the way. There are millions of passive supporters of terror who may be poor and needy but most of those who do the killing are wealthy, privileged, educated and free. If it were about poverty, ask yourself why it is middle-class Muslims -- and never poor Christians -- who become suicide bombers in Palestine."

His analysis is fascinating. Muslim fundamentalists believe, he insists, that Saudi Arabia's petroleum-based wealth is a divine gift, and that Saudi influence is sanctioned by Allah. Thus the extreme brand of Sunni Islam that spread from the Kingdom to the rest of the Islamic world is regarded not merely as one interpretation of the religion but the only genuine interpretation. The expansion of violent and regressive Islam, he continues, began in the late 1970s, and can be traced precisely to the growing financial clout of Saudi Arabia.

"We're not talking about a fringe cult here," he tells me. "Salafist [fundamentalist] Islam is the dominant version of the religion and is taught in almost every Islamic university in the world. It is puritanical, extreme and does, yes, mean that women can be beaten, apostates killed and Jews called pigs and monkeys."

He leans back, takes a deep breath and moves to another area, one that he says is far too seldom discussed: "North Americans are too squeamish about discussing the obvious sexual dynamic behind suicide bombings. If they understood contemporary Islamic society, they would understand the sheer sexual tension of Sunni Muslim men. Look at the figures for suicide bombings and see how few are from the Shiite world. Terrorism and violence yes, but not suicide. The overwhelming majority are from Sunnis. Now within the Shiite world there are what is known as temporary marriages, lasting anywhere from an hour to 95 years. It enables men to release their sexual frustrations.

"Islam condemns extra-marital sex as well as masturbation, which is also taught in the Christian tradition. But Islam also tells of unlimited sexual ecstasy in paradise with beautiful virgins for the martyr who gives his life for the faith. Don't for a moment underestimate this blinding passion or its influence on those who accept fundamentalism."

A pause. "I know. I was one who accepted it."

This partial explanation is shocking more for its banality than its horror. Mass murder provoked partly by simple lust. But it cannot be denied that letters written by suicide bombers frequently dwell on waiting virgins and sexual gratification.

"The sexual aspect is, of course, just one part of this. But I can tell you what it is not about. Not about Israel, not about Iraq, not about Afghanistan. They are mere excuses. Algerian Muslim fundamentalists murdered 150,000 other Algerian Muslims, sometimes slitting the throats of children in front of their parents. Are you seriously telling me that this was because of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians or American foreign policy?"

He's exasperated now, visibly angry at what he sees as a willful Western foolishness. "Stop asking what you have done wrong. Stop it! They're slaughtering you like sheep and you still look within. You criticize your history, your institutions, your churches. Why can't you realize that it has nothing to do with what you have done but with what they want."

Then he leaves -- for where, he cannot say. A voice that is silenced in its homeland and too often ignored by those who prefer convenient revision to disturbing truth. The tragedy is that Tawfik Hamid is almost used to it.

Contact the poster at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gennadiy (Baruch ) Faybyshenko, November 19, 2006.
Hi. My name is Gennadiy and I organized a Commemoration for Rabbi Meir Kahane last Sunday. Here is the article that I wrote about the event.

On Sunday, November 12th the Ocean Avenue Jewish Center was the venue for a commemoration ceremony of the 16th Yahrzeit of Rabbi Meir Kahane, ZTK"L, H"YD. (May the memory of this saint be immortalized and may G-d avenge his blood). The Yahrzeit was organized by Bnai Elim (Sons of the Mighty) whose name was taken from King David's Psalm 29. The members of this organization are those who are inspired by the teachings of Rabbi Meir Kahane and decided that it was time to revive the ceremony as was done in the past. Previous yahrzeits were organized annually by Mike Guzofsky of voiceofjudea.com, however Mr. Guzofsky made aliyah in 2003.

I am a young Russian Jewish man who was very fascinated about Rabbi Kahane's life and what he stood for. I only started to read about him last year and had no idea who this great person was. People don't speak his name and the media somehow never mentions him. I never knew that Rabbi Kahane fought for Jews who were locked in the Soviet Union. What a brave person he was, when his small organization was able to break the iron curtain of one of the most powerful countries in the world. Thank G-d that he freed Soviet Jews, because it was horrible living in that place where anti-Semitism was everywhere and Jews were persecuted verbally. I asked my friends if they knew who Rabbi Meir Kahane was and they had no idea. I realized that people my age don't know who he was. That was very sad to me and I started speaking to other people about him. I felt that was not enough and some actions had to be taken. When I announced that I want to organize this event a lot of older people voluntarily offered their assistance. Some helped me with the flyers, others with advertisements; and other kindly donated equipment.

There is no question that the name of Rabbi Meir Kahane, ZTK"L raises some eyebrows. Even posthumously, there are those who choose to revile him and his memory. Rabbi Kahane was a visionary and a unique leader of Klall Yisroel. There is no question that everything that he predicted has occurred in the last sixteen years since his murder. His words and message were permeated with the timeless wisdom of the Torah and right now, people are beginning to realize the truth of his message. A wise man is he who sees tomorrow today.

I invited a lot of talented speakers. A young woman Valeria Kvint who was mistress of the ceremony opened the event. Rabbi Burg who is the Rabbi of the Synagogue was the first speaker and he had an amazing opportunity to meet Rabbi Kahane's son, Benjamin. The meeting took place on the plane to Israel and Rabbi Burg had an opportunity to pray with Benjamin and personally speak to him. Matt Finberg who is a chairman of Bnai Elim came all the way from Colorado and spoke of Aliyah. Rabbi Kahane said that Israel needs Jews there. And Matt Finberg repeated those words. He is making Aliyah this upcoming summer and is going to live in Eli. Fern Sidman is a writer and a Jewish activist who spoke of the early days of the JDL, of Rabbi Kahane's prescience and the Israeli/Arab conflict. Rabbi Mordechai Yitzchok Friedman who is the President of VAAD HaRabonim of America made a very strong speech. He asked the question if we are not ashamed, that Jews waited two thousand of years for a State and now they are afraid to live there. Rabbi Kahane mentioned that so many times, is it fair that Jews get killed in their own state. Where do you see that happening in other countries? That is such a shame for the Israeli government that they are making different roads in Galille where Jews have to go around Arab villages that are located in the so called Green Line. Rabbi Friedman went even further and gave us example from the Torah where G-d commended Moses what to do with Canaanites.

Audiences were listening quietly and no one disputed that because that was written by G-d and we mortals have no rights to deny. I was honored to see Shmuel Sackett who is a religious Zionist and a co-founder and International Director of Manhigut Yehudit. He raised a concern for a lack of Jewish leadership.

I concluded the ceremony and told all the audience and asked them to speak properly when they talk to others. Rabbi Kahane was constantly repeating not to use the words of our enemies. If you repeat lie enough times, it becomes a truth. All of us can do that. We should not speak of the word West Bank, it has no meaning. I personally don't care of west bank, what is that, a shore on the west. We should only speak either of Judea or Samaria and all Jews who read bible know that Yehuda and Shomron were a heartland of biblical Israel.

Also, we get so confused so many times and say the word occupied. That is what our enemies want us to speak. Older people know when they speak of that word occupied that the lands are not really occupied, but their children ask themselves this question and judging fair say if we occupied something we should give it back. We must call them liberated territories. G-d gave us those lands and League of Nations also promised them, there is no dispute here.

And lastly, do not speak of the word Palestinian, there was never such country or nation called Palestine. The Soviets came up with that word to make a fake country and hoping that by repeating so much times people would start to believe in that lie. We should call them Arabs not Palestinians. How come Palestinians did not exist before Six Day War? They only started to exist when Arab countries realized that they cannot win Israel in a fair war and that is why they need some kind of fake nation to place in Israel and hoping that little by little Israel will make concessions and finally to push Jews to the Sea, G-d forbid. Followed my speech was a slide show where I was reciting the original poem HaTikva which was very emotional.

The preparation took a lot of time. I did not get young Russian Jews so they would know the real history about iron curtain. I know there is an organization Shaarei Emunah and Ezra which provides a birthright and educational programs to Russian Jews and help them with Shuva (Return to Judaism). When I told the local Rabbis, they were glad to help me but unfortunately, the Gateways who sponsor them, told them if they will help me with promoting the name Kahane even once, they will lose all their donations. I can't blame them but I realized that there are people who are still afraid of Kahane. I know why, I realized why, they are afraid. They are afraid of true Judaism. Rabbi Kahane was hated because he possessed a weapon that only few people had and that was truth. He was a person who never lied and we know that truth hurts. Truth makes sense, truth opens people's eyes and truth makes decent people follow. My organization and I and hopefully all the people will once again bring Rabbi Kahane's name back and this time to listen to him instead of screaming some words that people have no idea. All I want is for everyone to speak the truth because this way we can bring the final redemption. Rabbi Kahane said once, "We don't wait for Mashiah, we bring Mashiah."

Contact the poster at gennadiy1981@yahoo.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Israel Academia Monitor

Below are several reviews of Ilan Pappe's new book, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. The first is from the Economist. It is followed by a rebuttal by Professor Menachem Kellner (kellner@research.haifa.ac.il) sent as a Letter to the Economist. Next is a letter by David Meir-Levi sent to the Haifa University administrators. The last review is by David Pryce-Jones, senior editor of National Review in New York. Mr Pryce-Jones notes, "As history, the book is worthless. In interviews Pappe regularly explains: 'We do [historiography] because of ideological reasons, not because we are truth seekers.'"

[Editor's note: In case you don't know who Ilan Pappe is, he is a professor at Haifa U and an ardent Communist, who believes in the "one-state" solution to the Arab-Israel conflict; i.e., that Israel lose its Jewish identity and become Arab-dominated. He was caught red-handed helping a student, Teddy Katz, invent a massacre that supposedly took place in the 1948 War. The Alexandroni Brigade, which Pappe and Katz claimed had committed the massacre, sued and won by showing that the taped witness reports had been misquoted.]

The Economist
November 2, 2006

An Israeli academic who argues that Israel should confess to a deliberate campaign to expel nearly 800,000 Palestinians in 1948 is courting controversy at home

SO IS it to be 1967 or 1948? For watchers of the Middle East this question is shorthand for two different ways to think about the origins of, and solutions to, the long conflict between Israel and the Arabs of Palestine. In the eyes of the 1967 crowd, Israel was entitled to the borders it had before its abrupt expansion in the six-day war of that year. To make peace, the trick is therefore to create circumstances in which Israel will give up most or all of that land and allow an independent Palestinian state to arise in the West Bank and Gaza. That, as generations of failed peacemakers have discovered, is quite a tall order.

For the 1948 crowd, however, this way of thinking about the conflict is a mistake. They argue that peace is impossible unless Israel admits to and atones for the crime they say it committed nearly 60 years ago, in its independence war of 1948. That crime, they say, was deliberately to expel most of the Arabs of Palestine, close to 800,000 people, in order to be sure of having a Jewish majority for the Jewish state. Unless Israel somehow makes amends for this earlier catastrophe, which the Arabs call the nakba, peace is an impossibility.

Ilan Pappe, a political scientist at the University of Haifa, is one of the purest Israeli exponents of the 1948 view. He knows how provocative it is to choose the phrase "ethnic cleansing" for the title of his latest book. But ethnic cleansing, he insists, is precisely what occurred in the first Arab-Israeli war. It was, he says, a long-premeditated crime, implemented ruthlessly and then systematically denied. In 1948 the Zionists did not happen to wage a war that tragically but inevitably led to the expulsion of parts of the indigenous population. The ethnic cleansing of all of Palestine, he maintains, was the main goal all along.

Inside Israel, the historiography of 1948 has been in ferment for more than 20 years. Israel and its admirers once clung to a simple collective view about the circumstances of the state's birth. In a Solomonic judgment, the United Nations voted to divide the contested land into a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews accepted the plan, but the Arabs tried to strangle the Jewish state at birth. In the course of the war that followed, the Jews overcame vast odds, guaranteeing their survival and expanding the territory allotted to them under the original plan. In the course of the fighting, most of the Arab population fled.

The last bit of this over-simple narrative has by now been comprehensively debunked. In 1988 Benny Morris, an Israeli historian, published "The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949", challenging the view that most of the Arabs fled of their own accord, in panic or at the behest of the Arab states. In many towns and villages they were put to flight deliberately. Mr Morris said that there was no master plan to evict all the Arabs: many expulsions took place in the heat of battle and the fog of war. But he also argued that the idea of a population transfer had been carefully considered by David Ben-Gurion and the other Zionist leaders, and hovered behind their actions and deliberations.

Mr Morris and other "new historians" in Israel unleashed fierce argument. Other scholars accused Mr Morris of traducing Ben-Gurion through selective quotation. In a new version of "The Birth" in 2004, Mr Morris offered even more evidence of the extent to which the Zionist leadership hankered after a population transfer, and the alacrity with which they exploited the events of 1948 to bring one about. (Mr Morris also said, in an interview that stunned his supporters, that Israel was justified in uprooting the Palestinian "fifth column" once the Arabs had attacked the infant state, and that the number executed or massacred -- some 800, on his reckoning -- was "peanuts" compared with, say, the massacres in Bosnia in the 1990s.)

Mr Pappe, however, goes a good deal further than Mr Morris. He insists that there was indeed a master plan. On March 10th 1948, he asserts, 11 men met at the "red house", the Tel Aviv headquarters of Israel's pre-state army, the Haganah, to put the final touches to Plan Dalet, "a plan for the ethnic cleansing of Palestine". That evening, military orders were sent to units on the ground to prepare for the expulsion of the Palestinians. Mr Pappe calls this group of men the "consultancy", an ad hoc cabal of political and military leaders dominated by Ben-Gurion. And population transfer did not just "hover" in the background of their thinking, he says. It was central from the start.

Still in a fog

You might suppose that after 60-odd years the story of 1948 would by now have been laid bare. Historians have access, on the Israeli side at least, to military archives, political minutes and personal diaries.

It is not, alas, so simple. The consultancy rarely kept minutes. Ben-Gurion was a prodigious diarist, but selective in what he recorded. Mr Pappe admits that he does not in fact know what Ben-Gurion said at the supposedly fateful "red house" meeting on March 10th. As for Plan Dalet, this is no new discovery by Mr Pappe. The plan has been public for decades and does not read unambiguously like a master plan for wholesale ethnic cleansing. The aim was to crush the Palestinian militias before the Haganah had to face the invading Arab armies. It gave commanders discretion to occupy or destroy and expel hostile villages or potentially hostile villages; some destroyed swathes of villages and a few did not. And Mr Pappe's detractors will ask why he ignores the orders sent out by the chief of staff of the Haganah, Israel Galili, on March 24th, reminding commanders of the policy to protect the "full rights, needs, and freedom of the Arabs in the Hebrew state without discrimination".

Thanks to such inconsistencies, the history of 1948 will remain contentious. And like much of the "new history", this book has the defect of treating the Palestinians only as victims, not as actors in their own right. But how much really turns on this debate among historians? Mr Pappe says that Zionism needs to acknowledge and reverse its original sin. But whether or not the population transfer of 1948 was premeditated (as he says), or largely opportunistic (as Mr Morris says), history can hardly be rewound over half a century.

Some thoughtful Israeli politicians have indeed acknowledged their country's portion of the blame. In his 2005 memoir, "Scars of War, Wounds of Peace", Shlomo Ben-Ami, a former foreign minister (and historian) accepted that in 1948 an Arab community "in a state of terror" was put to flight by a "ruthless" Israeli army that perpetrated atrocities and massacres. This was done consciously to enlarge the borders of the new state. But whatever the moral case for letting back the refugees, Mr Ben-Ami says, after the war this was "out of the question in a historical and political context", not least because of the illegitimate demands of the Arab states, who never accepted partition and indeed grabbed for themselves much of what should have been the Palestinian state.

As Ehud Barak's foreign minister, Mr Ben-Ami was part of the team that tried at Camp David in 2000 to make peace on roughly the border of 1967. Mr Pappe is not surprised that this failed. For the Palestinians, he says, "1948 is the heart of the matter and only addressing the wrongs perpetrated then can bring us closer to the end of the conflict." But Mr Pappe wants Israel not just to apologise but also to let back all the Arab refugees, and so give up the idea of remaining a Jewish state with a Jewish majority. It is hard to imagine many Israelis agreeing to that, whatever they come to believe really happened in 1948.

Letter to Economist
"Back to tilting at windmills again"
Professor Menachem Kellner (kellner@research.haifa.ac.il)
Dept. of Jewish History and Thought,
University of Haifa, Haifa, 31905, Israel


Your review of Ilan Pappe's book on the alleged ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by Jews in 1948 is admirably fair-minded but withal mistaken on an important point. Pappe, who is on record as denying the possibility of writing objective history at all, has not written a history of the origin of the Palestinian refugees, but rather a legal brief which ignores inconvenient counter-evidence (as your reviewer indeed notes). Should, God forbid, Pappe's clients ever come to power, we are all too likely to see a real and not imagined case of ethnic cleansing, of, not by, Jews (and Christians) on the part of Hamas and Hizbollah.

"Discontent with the Professor Ilan Pappe"
To: President Aharon ben-Ze'ev (abenzeev@univ.haifa.ac.il)
and Rector Yossi ben-Artzi (yossib@univ.haifa.ac.il)
Haifa University
From: David Meir-Levi (david_meirlevi@hotmail.com)

Dear President ben-Ze'ev and Rector ben-Artzi,

Prof. Ilan Pappe is a tenured senior lecturer at Haifa University's Department of International Relations. One would expect that a high ranking tenured academician in such a department at a major Israeli university would be a top-tier scholar of the highest integrity.

Unfortunately, Prof. Pappe is best known not for his scholarship, but for his high-profile anti-Israel pronouncements, and for his faux-scholarship which substitutes diatribe and propaganda for history and political analysis.

Prof. Pappe stands publicly in favor of the UK's boycott of Israeli scholars and scientists. He directed and approved one of his students' masters thesis despite the fact that an Israeli court of law found that thesis to be an illegitimate, unfounded, and factually incorrect defamation of Israel's legendary Alexandroni Brigade. In his numerous highly publicized lectures in Israel and abroad he heaps opprobrium upon Israel and condemns its government for crimes against humanity -- but when called upon to offer facts and data to support his heinous accusations, he resorts to the typical demagoguery of diatribe and invective, distorting history, de-contextualizing events, offering half-quotes and mis-quotes and quotes taken out of context.

He has even offered pure fiction as justification for his anti-Israel screed; and when caught in a lie, he has retorted with "I am not concerned with veracity. I have an agenda to advance". He personally confirmed that quote to me, on the air, during a radio-broadcast debate between him and myself in Northern California in 2003.

These are not the words or actions of a scholar who brings honor to his institution. These are not the actions of an academician of integrity.

Based upon his publications, publicized speeches, and my own debate with him noted above, I must conclude that his approach to the Arab-Israel conflict is very one-sided, consisting mostly of anti-Israel political indoctrination, pro-Arab propaganda, and an antipathy to the state of Israel which seems to me to border on the pathological.

But what is more appalling is that in his coterie of publications, there is not a single discussion of the role of Palestinian terrorism, or any acknowledgment of Israel's rights to defend itself against a brutal 13-year terror war. You will never learn from his publicized writings or speeches that Israel's "occupation" of "Palestinian lands" was caused by Arab aggression and violence, and not the other way around. You will never learn that Israel offered to return conquered land in exchange for peace, many times, and the Arabs instead chose war.

You will never hear that the main cause of escalated Palestinian terrorism in the past 13 years was not occupation at all, but rather the end of occupation. You do not learn that Israel, the UN, the UK, the USA, and/or some combination of these have offered Palestinian leadership its own state, next to Israel, fifteen times since 1937; only to have the offer rebuffed with terrorism and war. You do not learn that Arafat vowed to continue his terror war against Israel, on television in Jordan, even before the ink was dry on the Oslo Accords.

As promulgated by Western civilization, the concept 'academic freedom' does NOT mean freedom to teach lies, hatred, subversion, and treason. Similarly, "freedom of speech" does not mean freedom of hate-speech, hate-preach, or hate-teach.

I most sincerely encourage you to examine carefully Prof. Pappe's courses and writings and public presentations, in the context of the Western concept of 'academic freedom,' and in the context of Israel's current state of war with the Palestinian Authority and other countries in the Muslim world.

If what Prof. Pappe teaches is sound history, and rational analysis based upon bona fide facts and validated data, then Israel, as a free country where democratic process and rule of law prevail, must accommodate Prof. Pappe's right to teach the truth even if it raises difficult political questions.

However, if Professor Pappe is, as I suspect, exploiting his tenured position, and the academic license which it bestows upon him, to preach Israel-hatred under the faux mantle of scholarship, substituting transparently anti-Israel mendacious propaganda and de-contextualized narratives for honest scholarship, then he is not only betraying his profession and his academic institution; he is also aiding and abetting Israel's enemies in time of war.

In doing so, he is making it easier for Israel's enemies to gain political advantage. And in doing that, he is strengthening them and aiding them in their terrorist murder of Israelis. In time of war, that is treason.

Academic license is NOT license to kill.

Any academic institution of quality must maintain the highest level of integrity in its scholars and in their scholarship in order to maintain its own integrity as an institution worthy of international admiration and support.

The responsibility for that maintenance rests upon the shoulders of the highest officer in the University's governance. The buck stops at your desk.

"Raus Mit Uns"
David Pryce-Jones

Ilan Pappe is an Israeli academic who has made his name by hating Israel and everything it stands for. In his view, expressed with obsession and a degree of paranoia, Jewish nationalism, that is to say Zionism, has been from its outset a deliberate tool for dispossessing the Palestinians; and therefore it is to be condemned root and branch. He reserves the Palestinian term of Nakba, meaning catastrophe, for describing what to Israelis is their war of independence of 1948. To him, Israeli politicians and soldiers, one and all, are so many murderers. Forests have been planted only to cover up the past. Houses are 'monstrous villas and palaces for rich American Jews'. Everything Israeli is ugly, everything Palestinian is beautiful. One day, he supposes, the Israelis may well consummate their original crime with something even worse. The only possible alternative lies in the immediate return of every Palestinian to his original home, and that will mean the end of the state whose existence so offends Pappe. This, of course, is exactly the inflexible position taken by Hamas and the PLO.

The reader's initial reaction must be one of pity. Poor man! What a strain it must be to belong to a nation whose members are so overwhelmingly unbearable that he longs for them to be overpowered by others. Yet there is more to it than that. Sad and creepy though it is, Pappe's anger is open to rational analysis.

The doctrinal element pushing Pappe into anti-Zionism is his prominent involvement in the Israeli Communist Party, known as Hadash. An outcrop of pure Stalinism and always a marginal movement, Communism in Israel rejected Zionism in favour of internationalism, according to which Jews and Arabs were to form a state together. Events, indeed the whole thrust of history, have proven this to be a complete illusion, but Pappe remains one of a minute handful still in its grip.

The further emotional element pushing Pappe towards his hatred of Zionism is best elucidated by J L Talmon in his profound book, The Myth of the Nation and the Vision of Revolution. Among the 'horribly charged and tormenting questions' Talmon asks is why so many Jews have adopted identities that seemingly allow them to deny their Jewishness. Uncountable numbers of Jews have followed the example of the Karl Marxes, Trotskys and Rosa Luxemburgs who sought identities as Communists and revolutionaries in the hope that this would allow them to merge with those who otherwise would be their persecutors. Some Communists -- like Lazar Kaganovich, and many in the KGB as well as leaders in the Soviet satellites -- set about the deliberate destruction of the Jewish religion and culture. Talmon speaks openly of the neurosis and 'morbid masochism' motivating such unhappy people.

In Nazi Germany a few Jews tried to camouflage themselves in a similar manner. Felix Jacoby opened his Kiel University lectures in 1933 by comparing Hitler to the Emperor Augustus. Dr Hans-Joachim Schoeps and Max Naumann even formed a movement of Jews for Hitler. With gallows humour, other Jews replied that this movement's slogan was Raus mit Uns, or Out with Us. In Israel today, Neturei Karta, a sect of ultra-Orthodox Jews, believes that the Messiah alone should bring about a Jewish state, and that Israel is therefore an impiety fit for destruction. In New York they have a branch called Jews Against Zionism, and recently they welcomed President Ahmedinejad in person there, supporting his call for genocide in Israel. Pappe is the secular and political version of these sectarians. As often happens, extremists have come from opposing poles only to reach the same conclusion.

Zionism, in Pappe's conventional Marxist view, had nothing to do with the need for Jews to survive persecution by Europeans or Arabs, but was only a settler and colonialist movement cynically directed by British imperialists and their greedy Jewish collaborators. He characterises David Ben-Gurion, the driving personality in the latter stages of the foundation of the state of Israel, as someone who always intended to expel Palestinians from the land. To bring this about, he assembled a body which Pappe refers to as the Consultancy, but the details of who these people were, and what they really did, he fails to give us, instead preferring to conjure an aura of sinister conspiracy. The Israelis were always the stronger party and knew that they would win out at the end of the British Mandate in 1948, Pappe says. In contrast, the Palestinians were defenceless and hardly violent at all, designated victims whose villages were mercilessly overrun and many of the inhabitants butchered.

A huge literature exists in British, Arab and Israeli archives to reveal the multiple reasons for the flight of the Palestinians at the time, ranging from a belief that invading Arab armies were about to rescue them, and they should move out of harm's way, to a cultural reflex that they could not accept Jews in positions of authority, an escapism on the part of some leaders and delusions of power on the part of others, and of course fear. Savage things were certainly perpetrated by both sides -- guerre comme la guerre -- but Pappe will have none of that, completely ignoring the context in all its complexity and local variation. His technique is to list towns and villages as though their capture involved always and only simple brutality and expulsion. No mention of the Jewish need to survive in an existential struggle in the aftermath of the Holocaust; no mention of the 6,000 Jews killed, which was 1 per cent of the population; no mention of Azzam Pasha of the Arab League promising a massacre of Jews on the scale of the Mongols; no mention of Arab radio propaganda and disinformation; no proper account of Arab military successes, brushing over Arab atrocities and the destruction of Jewish settlements; no mention of the countervailing expulsion and expropriation of a million Jews in Arab countries.

As history, the book is worthless. In interviews Pappe regularly explains: 'We do [historiography] because of ideological reasons, not because we are truth seekers.' For him, as a Marxist and anti-nationalist, 'there is no such thing as truth, only a collection of narratives'. To substantiate his particular ideological narrative, Pappe puts the worst possible interpretation on any Jewish deed or word, while validating anything said or done by Palestinians. For evidence of Israeli monstrosity, he relies on quotations from his own previous works or from Palestinian polemicists, and above all on the oral testimonies of Palestinian refugees. Over half a century of military and ideological conflict has passed since their exodus, but Pappe declares his faith that whatever they now say is true. This might all seem too pathological to matter much, but Arab and Muslim extremists are making huge efforts to contest the legitimacy of Israel, and many of their allies on the international Left will lean on Pappe for purposes of 'pilgering' and 'fisking'.

The final element contributing to Pappe's mindset lies in the sphere of psychology and fashion. Contemporary intellectuals have long been accustomed to glorying in an adversarial stance towards their own society, preening themselves as men of nobler spirits than the dull indifferent masses around them, and isolated not because they are foolish but because they are brave. It is a form of snobbery -- moral snobbery -- which is why intellectuals of this kind are so widely resented. There is a fatal contradiction at the heart of Pappe's advocacy of the immediate return of all Palestinian refugees as the necessary condition of peace. If Israelis are really as vicious as Pappe presents them, then Palestinians could not possibly want to live among them. Are Palestinians to return only to wipe out Israelis or to be wiped out themselves? Poor Palestinians, poor Israelis, to be mobilised for such fates. And should Hamas, the PLO or President Ahmadinejad make good on threats to eliminate Israel, there will not be time to rescue Pappe from the consequences of his moral snobbery and his Marxism, or to discover whether he really applauds his own Raus mit Uns demise.

Contact Israel Academia Monitor at e-mail@Israel-Academia-Monitor.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, November 19, 2006.

James A. Baker III, close friend and confidant of the Bush family and Secretary of State under George the First, is back in the news again.

Lest we forget, this is the same Baker who, when Israel wasn't caving in to his State Department's demands fast enough (such as his promise to Hafez al-Assad, Saddam's twin butcher in Syria, of a complete Israeli withdrawal from the Golan--from which Syria regularly bombarded Israelis below), responded " _ _ _ _ the Jews, they don't vote for us anyway!"

He regularly referred to his "Jew boys," whom he had do his bidding for him at Foggy Bottom. It's great to have a Jew stick it to other Jews in Israel. Keep in mind that, right from the getgo, the State Department opposed the rebirth of Israel in the first place and fought President Truman all the way on this.

And regarding Israel, Baker was quoted a while back as seeing it in the eyes of a hunter stalking a wild turkey.

Baker has been in the background for decades, especially since his close friends, the Bushes, gained ascendancy in American politics. His law firm represents Saudi Arab interests in this country and typifies how people move through the revolving doors of businesses tied to Arab interests back and forth into government positions--especially those in Foggy Bottom. Baker's law partner, Robert Jordan, was appointed ambassador to Saudi Arabia by President Bush in 2001. Currently, among other things, his law firm is defending Saudis (who provided most of the suicide bombers) in a law suit filed by survivors and families of 9/11 victims.

Baker & Co. (including the Bush clan) have gotten very rich off of Arab oil wealth.

And they know full well, in the Arabs' own words, that the latter would view the long overdue birth of Kurdistan as "another Israel"-- i.e., how dare anyone else but Arabs claim political rights in "their" region.

So, pardon me if I smell a fish when I hear that Baker is back on center stage regarding plans for a future Middle East.

The man is tied up to his eye balls to Arab interests.

In other words, Jim is an Arab's dream.

In the wake of America's problems in Iraq, George II has sent Baker there as part of the Baker-Hamilton Commission. Their main goal will be to find a way out for the United States without totally losing face.

America's overthrow of one of the worst of the Arabs' all-too-many Hitlers was noble...even if it came a bit too late. George the First earlier told the Shi'a and Kurds to revolt and then, along with Baker, did nothing while tens of thousands of them were slaughtered.

But America never learned the Brits' earlier lesson over a half century ago, when millions of native Kurds, who lived in the area millennia before the Arabs' own conquest of it, were denied independence and forcibly tied to a newly created Arab Iraq to appease British petroleum interests and Arab nationalism...causes close to Baker's own heart.

The Arabs revolted against them anyway--as foreign imperialists. Of course, without the Brits help, they never would have gotten the oil wealth in the Kurdish north. But, as Janet Jackson's song asks,"What Have You Done For Me Lately?" And, after all, if it's not the Arabs' own particular conquering and subjugating brand, imperialsim is nasty.

So, America is in a similar pickle barrel now, reaping what was sown after World War I when a united nation was formed that never should have been.

Iraq is the Yugoslavia of the Middle East, with hostile groups thrown together largely for others' interests. And it will likely follow Yugoslavia's same fate. As the latter's days were numbered after the death of its strongman, Marshal Tito, Iraq's days are numbered as well with Saddam out of the picture. And that's not a bad thing...

By the way, America led that dissolution of Yugoslavia--which was undergoing at the time much the same as what we're seeing happening right now in Iraq.

As for potential problems with the Turks, read this author's own "Talking Turkey About Turkey," "State Department Math," Horsefeathers," and/or "So What's Your Plan B?" for that response.

So, what does this all have to do with Baker?

Well, if the early reports I've seen about the recommendations of Baker's Commission are correct, it's going to be, "_ _ _ _ the Kurds, they don't vote for us anyway ! "

A recommendation to divide Iraq into three highly autonomous federal states looks good on the surface. But, as Dr. Rashid Karadaghi points out in the Kurdish Media ( " The World According To Baker," 11/5/06), it appears that oil-rich Kirkuk will be handed over to Baker's Sunni Arab buddies to insure their economic position.

To hell with the fact that Kirkuk is as Kurdish as Mecca is Arab, and Kurds lived there and ruled there since Biblical times, thousands of years before the first Arab arrived during the Arabs' own imperial caliphal conquests.

To hell with the fact that many Arabs only live there now because of a forced Arabization policy in that economically important and strategic area...while they were slaughtering hundreds of thousands of Kurds over the past century.

America has acted this way too often before when non-Arab interests were involved--especially those of the Kurds and Jews. Both have too often been expected to cave in to Arab interests and demands, despite the predictable bloody consequences. Almost two dozen states on over six million square miles of territory is still not enough for Arabs. They have to deny everyone else any piece of the pie...no matter how small.

Thirty million Kurds in the region remain stateless and victimized by those in whose countries they now live.

It's their turn now for center stage.

The economic viability of that newly-proposed Kurdish federal state needs the oil wealth of its own lands to succeed. Perhaps a way to share the oil from the south and the north can be arranged. That would be acceptable.

But make no mistake about it...Kirkuk is as Kurdish as London is English. Many other folks may live in Great Britain now--including lots of Arabs and other Muslims--but that doesn't change the fact any.

While representing Arab interests has made Baker a very wealthy man, this gives him no right to wield such power over the fate of a people far more in tune with American values and interests than any of his Arab clients are.

While Arabs blow each other apart to the south, the Kurdish region is the one example of pride and success that America can point to right now.

America has shamefully used and abused these people too often in the past.

It's time to atone for those sins...not to repeat them.

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 Batya Medad, November 19, 2006.

One description that can't be used for US President George Bush is "self-made man." the White House Officious Website of George W. Bush says it well:
He brings a whole lifetime's experience of having sprung from the loins of a long line of entitled millionaire politicians. A native of blue-blooded New Haven, Connecticut ...

Even the more objective Answers.com opens his biography with:

George W. Bush became president of the United States on 20 January 2001. Bush is the son of former U.S. president George Bush, who served from 1989-93.

It's clear that if he had been born into an ordinary family, he'd just have an ordinary job. As first-born son, it was obvious that the "family professions," oil and politics would always be open to him. As it happened, he also inherited the staff, including not only the VP Cheney, but Robert Gates who is taking over for Donald Rumsfeld.

None of this is a secret.

Bush Says He's Open to Change in Iraq, but ... Look at who's chairman of the committee!

Addressing reporters in the Oval Office, Mr. Bush shed little light on the substance of his hour-and-15-minute session with members of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, led by James A. Baker III, the former secretary of state,

From what I can see, his father US President #41 is still in charge, at least via his team. And it's important to remember that the Sr. Bush was very "cold" to Israel to say the least. Israel shouldn't count on anything from the United States, except a Trojan Horse.

Batya Medad lives in Shiloh. She can be reached by email at Shilohmuse@yahoo.com or visit her website http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/ or go to http://www.shilo.org.il. This essay is archived at

To Go To Top

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, November 19, 2006.

This was written by Jason Moaz, Senior Editor of The Jewish Press.

New York Times Jerusalem bureau chief Steven Erlanger is so openly pro-Palestinian in his reporting that he's beginning to call to mind perhaps his most biased predecessor in that post -- the truly execrable (inferior, wretched) Deborah Sontag, whose transparently one-sided dispatches would invariably read as though she wrote them with a PLO flag draped over her word processor.

On page 7 of this week's Jewish Press, the always incisive Rick Richman of Jewish Current Issues (jpundit.typepad.com) cuts the heart out of Erlanger's futile pretensions at objectivity and just plain old reading comprehension. Rarely does a book review come in for such thorough dismemberment, and the resultant carnage is a beautiful thing to behold.

Erlanger is not particularly shy about trumpeting his bias: as reported in August on Ynetnews.com, he told a convention of journalists in Jerusalem that Israelis "were not interested in whether 1,000 Lebanese civilians needed to die" in the recent war with Hezbollah, and admitted he rejected an IDF offer of accessibility that would have enabled him to write about Israel's efforts to ensure the arrival of humanitarian aid to Lebanon. He was not interested in the story he told the panel.

Erlanger is the character who, in an August 5, 2005 story on a claim by an Israeli archaeologist that the palace of King David may have been unearthed, gave the politically motivated lies of Yasir Arafat equal billing with historical fact. "The find," Erlanger wrote, "will also be used in the broad political battle over Jerusalem -- whether the Jews have their origins here and thus have some special hold on the place, or whether, as many Palestinians have said, including the late Yasir Arafat, the idea of a Jewish origin in Jerusalem is a myth used to justify conquest and occupation."

As the Monitor noted at the time, "Just try to imagine a New York Times story on slavery that would accord historical weight to a statement by, say, David Duke, or a piece at the height of the civil rights movement in which a Times reporter would cite as potentially authoritative the ravings of some discredited boor."

This, the Monitor conjectured, using Erlanger's basic framework but changing a handful of words, is what such a piece of drivel would look like: "The dispute hinges on whether Negroes are being deprived of their constitutional rights or whether, as many white Southerners have said, including Alabama Governor George Wallace, the idea of their systematic mistreatment is a myth to justify sympathy and federal intervention."

Unfortunately, such mindless moral relativism -- unimaginable in a Times story on civil rights in 1966 or 2006 -- is a defining characteristic of the paper's coverage of the Arab-Israel conflict.

In September 2005, in a front-page story ostensibly about the burning by Palestinians of recently abandoned synagogues in Gaza, Erlanger led with this bit of disinformation: "Throughout the abandoned Israeli settlements of Gaza, Monday was a carnival of celebration, political grandstanding and widespread scavenging for a Palestinian population whose occupiers vanished overnight..." Nothing about burning synagogues.

A couple of paragraphs later Erlanger gave us this cheerfully misleading depiction:"Donkey carts were piled with bathroom fixtures, pieces of metal, skeins of wire and long pieces of wood, to feed home ovens. Men, women and children worked with a seriousness of purpose, trying to take home some little personal benefit from the return of lands many feel will somehow, as usual, end up in the hands of the wealthy or well connected." Still no mention of any synagogues set afire.

A hint of the fate that befell the Gaza synagogues came several paragraphs later: "...a settlement synagogue built in the shape of a huge Star of David was smoldering; fires inside sending smoke through the edges of the star." But even there Erlanger neglected to say who or what caused those "fires inside sending smoke through the edges of the star."

Finally, in the sixteenth paragraph of his 26-paragraph story Enlanger wrote, rather ambiguously and without identifying the perpetrators: "In Kfar Darom, there was an extensive march of armed fighters, but the synagogue there, was protected from burning by security forces who made a kind of headquarters out of it."

New York Times, "Paper of Record" indeed!

Jerome S. Kaufman is National Secretary of the Zionist Organization of America. and host the Israel Commentary website (http://www.israel-commentary.org).

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, November 19, 2006.

Perhaps this title: "Return Of The New World Orderists" overstates the facts because they actually never left. When George W. Bush took office, the appearance was that he was going to be his own man and not merely a clone of his father's administration. He started off slowly but, eight months into his administration he dealt with 9/11 because he understood that a vast world of terror had developed under his father's watch and then advanced further under President Clinton. Granted, he might have continued as his father or Clinton but, that was interrupted by 9/11.

As President, George W. Bush had to respond, both politically and militarily. Regrettably, Bush did not fully understand the reality and mind-set of radical Muslim Islamists. They can be bribed but they don't stay bribed. As soon as the bribe or pressure (carrot or stick) is lifted, they continue their stated trek toward their own view of a New World Order, Islamic style - as they say they intend to eliminate all "infidels" (non-Muslims) and establish a new World Caliphate with the whole world governed by and forced to obey strict Islamic "Sharia" laws.

Now, that American foreign policy has failed in Iraq, the "Mujahadin" (warriors for Islam) from all over the Arab and Muslim world immigrated into Iraq to fight American and allied soldiers and those re-building the Iraqi infrastructure. How has Bush responded to this onslaught of terrorists (not insurgents)? Bush called in "officially" his father's old team, led by former Sec. of James Baker, III. Baker, with Lee Hamilton, former Representative (D. Ind.), co-chair of the Iraq Study Group, and Robert Gates, former head of the CIA were enlisted to compile a series of "recommendation" of how to get out of Iraq while saving face. Given Baker's history, he will probably try to enlist Syria and Iran but, he cannot go to them empty-handed. He must approach with the coin of "baksheesh" (to us Westerners, known as a bribe).

Here again, James Baker, the pro-Arab State Department and Bush's father often used Israel and concessions from Israel as the coin of their bribe. They force Israel to surrender Land and make her vulnerable to attack by the surrounding hostile Arab Muslim countries (compounded by attacks from within by Arab Muslim "Palestinians"). Their goal is to return to Islam, their self-perceived image as indomitable Muslim warriors.

Muslims cannot accept being defeated in battle - especially by Jews whom the Muslims want to believe are inferior to them. James Baker and his old team of Arabists understand this and have no problem offering Israel up as a blood sacrifice bribe to Muslims.

This philosophy fits very well with the New World Order first announced by then President George Herbert Walker Bush. Here the superior nations would divide up the nations as to which countries would be eliminated, which countries would be empowered, which countries would remain merely as a workforce, and which countries would be protected and valued as material resource countries with oil and/or other valuable minerals. This becomes of vital, national interest as the superior nations decide which oil nations are to be bribed as America competes with China for oil resources.

According to the New World Orderists, some nations will live; some will die and some will merely become a resource under control of the New World Orderists. Clearly, the State Department, the Baker Bunch and, always, the Europeans and the Russians under Putin have designated Israel first for truncation in order to increase her vulnerability for extinction.

As for Israel, the method could be to recruit Leftist Jews (easy to do) as they have in the past. Before it was Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Bibi Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon and now Ehud Olmert.

Israel's Prime Minister Olmert was supposed to come to America where he would be entrapped by Bush, Rice, Baker and his team, as was once done to Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir in Madrid, in 1991. He was scheduled to meet November 13th with President Bush and Sec. of State Condollezza Rice before the annual United Jewish Communities GA (General Assembly). But, today November 9th, we hear that Bush and Rice are telling Olmert he shouldn't come to the White House next week.

Given that Olmert is exceptionally weak and leans far to the Left, he will be too easy for the Bush team to manipulate. Olmert will either go along because he has adopted the "Oslo" track or he will be threatened with a cut-off of aid, replacement munitions, spare parts for American equipment Israel bought, jet fuel, cooperation in evolving new technologies and building weapons' systems, etc. These threats were used before by Ms. Rice at the behest of Bush after the urging of Saudi Arabia.

These issues and more represent a significant threat to Israel's safety and sovereignty. Rice and the State Department carried the message. Now it will be Baker who carries a personal visceral hatred for Jews and the Jewish State. His coming advisory to Bush will, no doubt, have this anti-Israel message seeded into their recommendations.

Some may recall Baker's special relationship with Syria's President Hafez al-Assad and Baker's pressure for Israel to abandon the Golan Heights to Syria - all the way down to the Lake Kinnerat (Israel's only fresh water lake resource.

I would imagine that the Baker report will have a secret appendix which recommends forcing Israel to use the Saudi/Oslo Plan which calls for Israel to surrender the Golan Heights (including the Sheva Farm on Mt. Dov which oversees all of Israel's facilities of observation over the Golan Heights), the Jordan Valley, Judea, Samaria and all of Jerusalem that Jordan controlled and desecrated for 19 years.

This would include orders that Israel not strike back at Arab Muslim Palestinian and/or Hezb'Allah rocket attacks, using the U.N., as usual, to condemn Israel.

I expect International Forces would be deployed to "protect" the Arab Muslim "Palestinians" in Gaza, the "West Bank" (Judea and Samaria) which replicates the UNIFIL- MNF (United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon/Multi-National Force), now acting as a shield for Hezb'Allah and Syria.

The question is: Will Israel evict Olmert and take her proper position as a sovereign nation, entitled to defend herself against terrorists and terrorist nations, namely Iran and Syria - both of whom are being armed by President Vladimir (Ras) Putin of Russia.

Note! I have added a relevant commentary by DEBKAfile which not only speaks about the hostility to Israel of the Baker team but, also mentions that the Democrats who just achieved a majority in Congress under Nancy Pelosi, as new Speaker of the House (third in line of succession to the Presidency). Ms. Pelosi and many Democrats have shared this hostility to Israel for some time. Regrettably, many Jews (except for some) rarely vote their interests and wonder why we Jews and Israel get slammed.


DEBKAfile Exclusive: The White House intimates to Israeli PM that his scheduled visit to Washington next Monday, Nov. 13, would be untimely November 8, 2006,

The Democratic midterm election victory and the defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld coming replacement by Robert Gates will usher in radical Middle East policy changes that will apply also to Israel. For now, policy-making is in a state of flux, and as long as Bush has not got together with Democratic leaders to forge a bipartisan position, there is no point in the prime minister's visit, it was indicated.

A senior US official told DEBKAfile sources Wednesday night: Olmert would be wise not to insist on the visit going ahead on time," but rather take note of the president's stress in his first speech after the election that he is waiting for the bipartisan Iraq commission headed by ex-secretary of state James Baker and former Democratic congressman Lee Hamilton to submit their report.

Bush means to base his work with the Democrats on these findings. Since the report is not just about Iraq but encompasses the full range of US policies for the Middle East and the Arab and Muslim world which will require time to air, the Olmert visit next week would be premature.

According to this official, the Baker-Hamilton panel is charting drastic changes in administration policy on Israel, whose speedy implementation is recommended as the key to extricating the US from its imbroglio in Iraq. Hinging the solution of Middle East problems as a whole on the Palestinian-Israeli issue has always been the Democratic way. It is favored in particular by Nancy Pelosi of California who, as her party's candidate for next Speaker of the House of Representatives, will become one of Washington's most influential politicians.

This was also Baker's line under George Bush senior in the 1980s, when he dragged prime minister Yitzhak Shamir to the Madrid Peace Conference against his will.

The White House also has a bone to pick with Olmert over his remark in a television program this week when he said that two world-class leaders were working to arrange a meeting for him with Lebanese prime minister Fouad Siniora. US officials deny this and say this indiscretion placed in jeopardy the efforts to bolster the Lebanese government and even put Siniora in danger of his life.

Olmert has a perfectly valid pretext for postponing his Washington visit in the extremely high security tension following the Beit Hanoun episode

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@comcast.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Lel817, November 19, 2006.
This was written by Jerry Gordon and it appeared in Israpundit

Read Adam Brodsky's piece `Dissent Crushed' from yesterday's New York Post that I posted on Israpundit, yesterday. It is about the callow spineless quality of Hillel leadership at Brown University in knuckling under to intimidation by Muslim Student Association and preventing an extraordinary person, Nonie Darwish, a former Muslim born in Egypt, who I have written about, filmed an interview on Rabbi Rock and had the good fortune to hear along with others at a Jewish Temple in Ridgefield, Connecticut.

Nonie brings truth to power in her memoir, `They Call me infidel' about the barbaric treatment of women and intolerance in Islam to non- believers as well as her personal transformation from hate to love of both Jews and Israel-the latter in part for saving her brother's life given vital treatment at Hadassah Hospital in Jreusalem.

Nonie is a good personal friend of my colleague Brigitte Gabriel- herself a vessel of moral clarity in a darkening world of intolerance of truth.

Both of them are in awe of another amazing woman, Dr. Wafa Sultan, not only for her elegant Arabic, but also her ability in her native language and English to skewer the masters of hate-the Imams themselves.

This band of sisters are joined by a brother - former PLO terrorist and ha yedid, Walid Shoebat.

And yet the truth that this 'sacred band' speaks is muzzled by spineless fearful young Jews and their leaders on college and university campuses throughout north America because they have been raised to tolerate moral equivalence in their homes and, unfortunately, their religious sanctuaries and schools, whether secular or religious.

We seen it at elite and state universities throughout north America. The roll of shame includes among notable institutions; Concordia University in Montreal, Queens University in Kingston, Ontario, University of Michigan, Duke University, Columbia University, Ohio State University, the University of Memphis, University of Chicago, Harvard University, Yale University, Central Connecticut State University, Wesleyan University, University of California at Berkeley, Irvine, San Francisco, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz, Los Angeles, Rutgers University and, now Brown University.

The common thread throughout all is the public willingness to permit intolerant radical Islamic voices to be heard at the exclusion of Christian, Jewish and other non-believing voices speaking about the dark inner craw of this `religion'.

That Jewish collegiate leadership in many instances goes along with this intolerance ia an abomination that should be expunged, but it won't. The Jews are powerless to cast the first stone at patent violation of their and our civil rights to speak openly and speak the truth. Many Jews in the faculties and a few in the administrations of these institutions of higher learning are themselves the gatekeepers of this hatred of the Other.

Better to live another day in quiet terror 'schnorring' the oppressors of `emet' - the truth than face the public ridicule of their campus colleagues abetted by campus administrations and yes, groups like Hillel.

Will this change? Given this latest episode and those that I have personally witnessed and personally tried to counter it will not.

That is why I admire speakers who bring truth to power like Nonie Darwish, my colleague Brigitte Gabriel, Dr. Wafa Sultan and Walid Shoebat. They do this day after day in the hope that we in North Amercia will wake up and say, `no mas.' No more to intolerance and the manipulation of our basic constitutional rights whether on college campuses or in the media and other public forums.

North America and the US in particular constitute the last bastion along with Australia and a few island nations in the pacific against radical Islam. If we don't draw the line in this valued country of ours and aren't energized to prevent here what is happening with the patent islamization of Europe and the clear and present danger to Israel, then we have lost the battle and must inevitably face the consequences of what happened last Thursday at Brown University.

Wake up chaverim - the hour is nigh and the barbarians are inside the gates.

To Go To Top

Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, November 19, 2006.
Dear Friends, Below is a short review by Melanie Phillips about the excerpted film "OBSESSION: RADICAL ISLAM'S WAR AGAINST THE WEST". It appeared November 7, 2006 on her website: http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/?p=1379 What she writes is essential, 'sine qua non', information. "Obsession shows you archival footage of current Islamic TV and Arab Muslim propaganda demonizing the Jews - threatening to kill all the Jews, then the Christians, Hindus, Buddists, etc. until Islam rules the world. What I would add is only that the film's director and producer selected the some of the world's best speakers to explain this footage, including:

Itamar Marcus of PMW (Palestinian Media Watch) pmw.org.il;, John Loftus (author of "Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People 1920-1992"); Steve Emerson, executive director of The Investigative Project (author of "American Jihad: The Terrorists Living Among Us"); Nonie Darwish, (founder of ArabsforIsrael.com, author of "Lifting the Veil; by the daughter of a Shahid"); Alan Dershowitz (author of 22 books and hundreds of articles in magazines, journals and newspapers); Brigitte Gabriel, founder, AmericanCongressforTruth.com; Sir Martin Gilbert, a leading historian of the modern world, author of 73 books, many of which use a unique series of maps to demonstrate his historical timelines; Caroline Glick, Sr. Fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs at the Center for Security Policy and deputy managing editor of the Jerusalem Post; Daniel Pipes, director of Middle East Forum www.meforum.org & www.danielpipes.org; Walid Shoebat, former PLO Terrorist, www.shoebat.com; and Prof. Robert Wistrich, intl expert on Anti-Semitism, author & editor of 23 books [member of the Intl Academic Board of the Winston Institute for the Study of Prejudice] - and others, but these are ones we know personally.

If you go to the website: http://www.Obsessionthemovie.com, you can read more about it and order a DVD of the full film.

I have just viewed the film 'Obsession', the documentary about radical Islam's war on the west, which was also shown on Fox News in the US at the weekend and which you can read about on this website. It should be made compulsory viewing for every politician and pundit who clings to the misguided belief that all we face is terrorism rooted in various grievances around the world. It is the single most powerful and terrifying public exposition of the fact that a global Islamic jihad is now being waged from Bali to Istanbul, from Chechnya to Madrid, from Morocco to Manhattan, from Thailand to Bloomsbury -- and that the world that is under attack is deeply in denial about what it is facing. More than that, this film shows in graphic and undeniable detail that this jihad is a direct descendant of Nazism. It has clear historical links -- it was to the Nazi-supporting Mufti of Jerusalem in 1941 that Hitler vouchsafed that he intended first and foremost a war of extermination against world Jewry; it has the same agenda of genocide of the Jews and world domination, and the same techniques (and almost identical motifs and visual imagery) of whipping up a frenzy of murderous rage against America and the Jews through repeated hysterical claims of their purported and infernal intention to destroy the Islamic world, conveyed through truly diabolical imagery straight out of the infernal handbooks of medieval and Nazi blood-lust.

Some of the footage in this film leaves you speechless. The Shatat series on al Manar TV, for example, transmitted into millions of Muslim homes around the world, which purports to show a Jew kidnapping a Christian child and slitting his throat in order to use the blood to make Passover matzahs. This of course was the medieval blood libel against the Jews which caused unspeakable savagery to be meted out against them on the basis of a monstrous lie; and here is this same abominable lie, animated for TV and thus doubtless convincing millions of Muslims of the diabolical nature of the Jews. Just as horrifying are the children seen being indoctrinated to hate Jews and Americans, to kill them and to die. A three year old girl, asked why she doesn't like the Jews, answers 'because they are apes and pigs' (a common depiction) as was said by 'our God in the Koran'. The images of these young children, with their sweet and innocent faces, being programmed to hate and to kill are unspeakable. As a former member of the Hitler Youth observes, the techniques and iconography are identical to those used by the Nazis -- because they were learned from the Nazis.

The similarities to the Nazis are indeed overwhelming. The screaming demagogues, the wholesale indoctrination of children into the cult of hatred and death, the repeated use of diabolical propaganda, the aims of genocide and global domination -- and the fact that although such aims are constantly reiterated, although the deeds that follow plumb unimaginable depths of barbarity, although the lies are as transparent as they are systematic, the watching world still refuses to acknowledge that this is indeed a global war that is being waged. Just as in the thirties, it takes refuge in fantasies and excuses and refuses to act; worse than in the thirties, it elevates Islamic fascists to downtrodden martyrs and heroes. There are Muslims in this film who speak the truth plainly and unmistakably: the Palestinian correspondent for the Jerusalem Post Khaled abu Toameh, who says that the Islamic world has hijacked his religion and has declared holy war upon the west in order to destroy its civilisation and Christianity; or Nonie Darwish, born and brought up in Gaza, who relates how as a child she was taught jihad, to wage holy war and conquer the world for Islam, and how her classmates would cry with the emotion of declaring themselves ready to die as martyrs for the cause. And Nonie Darwish is a middle-aged woman. The widespread belief in the west that jihadism, suicide bombers and the rest of it are merely responses to recent actions by Israel or America, or to 'oppression' by Israeli occupiers, is demonstrably ridiculous.

This is a film about fanaticism. It does not make easy viewing. It destroys the fiction that Islamic terror is the product of 'grievances' about specific conflicts. It demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is instead the product of fanatical, hysterical, paranoid, medieval hatred, bigotry and power-mania. What it shows above all is that we are up against an ideology which turns millions towards madness and savagery -- but we are totally failing to combat that ideology. Indeed, we don't even recognise it for what it is. This film goes a long way towards opening our eyes.

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@comcast.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 19, 2006.

While the world anxiously awaits the first volley of missiles [and WMD's] fired at Israel heralding the beginning of the inevitable "next big war", it is important to note that the [Israeli] government is preoccupied with other plans. The recent fiasco in Lebanon has taught us that our [Israeli] government is more concerned with carrying out the orders of their State Dept. [and hence Saudi] masters, than it is with defending the Jewish State. The forced removal of Jews from their homes in Judea, Samaria, and the Golan Heights is more important (not to mention lucrative, to the graft-addicted politicos) than a mere five million Jewish lives.

At this critical time in Jewish history we are in grave danger of losing the next war because of being caught with our trousers pulled down around our ankles. Or Olmert's ankles. Or Ramon's ankles. Or Moshe Katsav's ankles.

This comes from Investor's Business Daily 10/30/2006.

Mideast: James A. Baker III is back, running around saying it would be great if we talked to enemies like Syria. As the media eat this stuff up, Damascus is helping rebuild Hezbollah and has its own plans for Israel.

The second coming of the former secretary of state is upon us, with Bush 41's chief diplomat heading something called the Iraq Study Group. The ISG's questionable pronouncements are being used by the MSM (mainstream media) to bludgeon and prod Bush the younger into taking a position toward the enemies of freedom that can charitably be called appeasement.

The ISG, for example, seriously considered and did not entirely dismiss Sen. Joe Biden's plan to Balkanize the Middle East further by partitioning Iraq into three autonomous regions, creating less stability, not more, as well as smaller, more bite-size targets for insurgents and jihadists.

Baker -- who is also selling a book -- has been making the media tour with his suggestions, including an appearance on Comedy Central's "Daily Show with Jon Stewart." In an interview on ABC, Baker opined: "I believe in talking to your enemies. I don't think you restrict your conversations to your friends. ... In my view it's not appeasement to talk to your enemies."

We too believe in talking with our enemies, preferably on the deck of an American naval vessel accepting their unconditional surrender. But not the Clinton, Carter and Baker way of saying to our enemies: How can we bribe thee, let us count the ways.

As co-chair of the ISG, Baker already has been talking to our enemies, meeting with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem in New York City on Sept. 20 and with a "high representative" of the Iranian government.

This has met with the editorial praise of the Los Angeles Times, which recently argued that President Bush should send Baker, "a veteran of many rounds of bruising negotiations with (Bashar al-)Assad's father," to Damascus to "jump-start" the "peace-process."

During the interview on ABC's "This Week," Baker suggested that his 15 trips to Damascus prior to Desert Storm should serve as a model for the current Bush administration. Let's hope not, for during those "bruising negotiations" to get Syria, then and now officially a state sponsor of terror, to join the coalition to topple fellow Baathist Saddam, all Baker did was to ignore the same oppression and activities that we accused Iraq of, including attacking a neighbor.

He said then that Syria "happens to share the same goals we do." Only if those goals include the destruction of Israel and the absorption of Lebanon. He claimed Syria had no place on the State Department's list of state sponsors of terror. And "was put on the list without any justification."

While the likes of Baker and the L.A. Times claim the time is ripe and the need clear to have Syrian participation in the "process," there are Israelis as we speak who still bear the scars of Syrian participation in Hezbollah's recent attack.

Missiles pulled out of the Syrian army's inventory were supplied to Hezbollah. Iranian weapons were shipped through Damascus to Hezbollah along the Beirut-Damascus highway. Missiles that struck Haifa were filled with Syrian-made ball bearings designed to maim, if not kill, Israeli civilians.

And lest anyone believe Syria is willing to let bygones be bygones, a Syrian Baath party official told World Net Daily in July that Damascus was becoming a Hezbollah franchisee, forming its own similar group in hopes of recovering the Golan Heights from Israel.

Shaul Mofaz, Israel's deputy prime minister and former defense minister, said recently that both Syria and Iran continue to arm Hezbollah. "Arms smuggling across the border from Syria has continued after the war," he said. "We know of the activity, but we don't know the types of weapons involved."

Talk softly, Mr. Baker, but it looks like we and the Israelis may yet again need that big stick.

Contact the poster at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 19, 2006.

Al-Qaeda's best assets prime UK timebomb

British Muslims who volunteer to fight infidels in Iraq and Afghanistan are being told to go back to the UK and establish sleeper cells: British Muslims volunteering to fight against coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan are being sent back to Britain to become al-Qaeda "sleeper" agents, The Sunday Telegraph has learned.

MI5 agents believe that young Asian men, who have been trained to take part in the so-called "global jihad" in al-Qaeda camps in Pakistan and Afghanistan, are now regarded as too valuable an asset to be used fighting ritish and American troops. MI5 and MI6 are working on the assumption that they are being ordered to return to their communities in Britain with instructions to establish secret, autonomous cells and to conduct independent terrorists operations without any direct input from al-Qaeda's high command.

Security sources claim that al-Qaeda is unlikely to send a British passport holder to his death as a suicide bomber in Iraq when he would be far more valuable as a "sleeper" in Britain.

MI5 fears that it is impossible to estimate how many British Muslims have attended training camps over the past decade or how many are back in the UK planning attacks.

"Muslim leader sent funds to Irving"

A founder of Britain's Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC UK) is exposed as a financial supporter of Holocaust denier David Irving tonight by, of all media outlets, the Guardian:

One of Britain's most prominent speakers on Muslim issues is today exposed as a supporter of David Irving, the controversial historian who for years denied the Holocaust took place.

Asghar Bukhari, a founder member of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC), which describes itself as Britain's largest Muslim civil rights group, sent money to Irving and urged Islamic websites to ask visitors to make donations to his fighting fund.

Bukhari contacted the discredited historian, sentenced this year to three years in an Austrian prison for Holocaust denial, after reading his website. He headed his mail to Irving with a quotation attributed to the philosopher John Locke: 'All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good people to stand idle.'

In one email Bukhari tells Irving: 'You may feel like you are on your own but rest assured many people are with you in your fight for the Truth.'

Bukhari pledges to make a donation to Irving's fighting fund and says that he has asked 'a few of my colleagues to send some in too'. He also offers to send Irving a book, They Dare to Speak Out, by Paul Findley, a former US Senator, who has attacked his country's close relationship with Israel. Bukhari says Findley 'has suffered like you in trying to expose certain falsehoods perpetrated by the Jews'.

In a follow-up letter, Bukhari writes: 'Here is the cheque I promised. Good luck, if there is any other way I can help please don't hestitate to call me. I have also asked many Muslim websites to create links to your own and ask for donations.'

Jawdropper of the Day

Colorado's Attorney General took a trip this week to Saudi Arabia, to explain to the leaders of the religious apartheid state why Colorado sentenced a Saudi man to 28 years in prison for enslaving and sexually assaulting his Indonesian housekeeper: Suthers reassures Saudis. (Hat tip: Doss.)

Because in Saudi Arabia, this sort of thing doesn't even raise eyebrows.

Colorado Attorney General John Suthers flew to Saudi Arabia this week to reassure government officials there that Homaidan Al-Turki was treated fairly when he was convicted of sexually abusing an Indonesian nanny held a virtual captive in his Aurora home.

Suthers sat knee-to-knee for an hour with King Abdullah and also met with Crown Prince Sultan, Saudi journalists and relatives of Al-Turki during his weeklong trip to the capital city of Riyadh, Deputy Attorney General Jason Dunn said Friday.

"There was a lot of public attention in Saudi Arabia on this case," Dunn said, adding that "misperceptions" there about the U.S. judicial system and Colorado in particular convinced U.S. officials that the highly unusual trip was warranted.

In June, Al-Turki was convicted in Arapahoe County of 12 counts of unlawful sexual contact with force, one count of theft of services over $15,000, false imprisonment and conspiracy. He was sentenced to 20 years to life in prison.

Al-Turki has been portrayed in the Saudi press as a victim of the U.S. judicial system's bias against Muslims. Many Saudis say Al-Turki would not have been convicted in his own country.

The Saudi government gave Al-Turki $400,000 to post bail on the charges.

"Saudi gets long sentence"
Who Are We To Judge?
(Hat tip: LGF readers.)

The Saudi man sentenced to 28 years in prison today in Colorado for enslaving and sexually assaulting his Indonesian housekeeper told the court he committed no crimes -- he was only following "basic Muslim behaviors:"

And the Saudi government posted his $400,000 bond.

CENTENNIAL - Sniffles and sobs resonated in a packed courtroom Thursday as a Saudi man convicted of sexually assaulting his Indonesian housekeeper was sentenced Thursday to 20 years to life in prison.

Homaidan Al-Turki, 37, was also ordered to serve eight additional years for theft charges.

He denied in Arapahoe County District Court that he enslaved the woman and said authorities targeted him because of his religion.

"Your honor, I am not here to apologize, for I cannot apologize for things I did not do and for crimes I did not commit," he told Judge Mark Hannen. "The state has criminalized these basic Muslim behaviors. Attacking traditional Muslim behaviors was the focal point of the prosecution," he said.

Prosecutor Natalie Decker said the trial had nothing to do with Al-Turki's Muslim beliefs. "It has to do with what he did to her for five years," she said outside the courtroom.

Al-Turki was convicted this summer of 12 felony counts of unlawful sexual contact with use of force, one felony count of criminal extortion and one felony count of theft. He also was found guilty of two misdemeanors: false imprisonment and conspiracy to commit false imprisonment.

The case has captured the attention of the Muslim community worldwide. The Saudi government gave Al-Turki the money he needed to post a $400,000 bond on the charges in Arapahoe County.

Prosecutors said Al-Turki brought the victim, who is now 24, from Saudi Arabia in 2000 to work as his family's nanny and housekeeper in their Aurora home. Al-Turki is married and has five children.

The victim testified in court that she worked seven days a week and was paid $150 a month. She said Al-Turki and his wife kept most of that money. Al-Turki also allegedly took the woman's passport and sexually abused her.

"Palestinians form human shield to protect home from Israeli air strike"

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (AP) - Hundreds of Palestinians formed a human shield around the home of a militant in the northern Gaza Strip late Saturday to prevent an Israeli air strike on the building, residents said.

People flocked to the home of Mohammedweil Baroud after he received a warning from the army late Saturday giving him 30 minutes to leave the house.

Barhoud is a commander in the Popular Resistance Committees in the northern town of Beit Lahiya and said to be "in charge of firing homemaderockets" at Israel. Crowds of people stood on the rooftop and in the yard of the home.

Israel routinely orders occupants out of homes ahead of air strikes on suspected weapons-storage facilities, saying it wants to avoid casualties. The incident in Beit Lahiya was the first time Palestinians have tried to prevent such a strike.

The crowd chanted anti-Israel and anti-American slogans, and people said they were prepared to give their lives to protect the home. "Yes to martyrdom. No to surrender," the crowd chanted.

"We came here to protect this fighter, to protect his house and to prove that we are capable of defeating this Zionist policy," said Nizar Rayan, a local Hamas leader who joined the protest.

This picture, released by protest organizers, show hundreds of Ethiopians taking to the streets of the capital to protest the landmark conviction by a US court of an Ethiopian man for sexually mutilating his two-year-old daughter with scissors. (AFP/HO)

In the Netherlands we have seething, following the announcement that the government may ban a misogynistic symbol of political Islam: "Dutch Muslims hit out at proposed burqa ban"

Dutch Muslims have hit out at a proposed government ban of face veils, saying it was over the top, ill-conceived and infringed religious rights.

On Friday the Dutch cabinet said it was proposing a bill banning clothing that covers the face in public, targeting in particular Muslim woman wearing the burqa or niqab. The burqa is an Islamic veil covering the entire face and body and a mesh screen to see through, while the niqab is a veil covering the face but leaving the eye area clear. The garments are worn by a few dozen women in the Netherlands.

Rita Verdonk, minister of immigration and integration, said the bill proposed a ban on the basis that covering the face constituted a risk to public order and safety. The ban would be imposed in public and "semi-public" places such as schools, courts, ministries and trains, her spokesman Martin Bruinsma told AFP. "In this country, we want to be able to see each other. The ban is a question of security," daily De Telegraaf quoted on Saturday the minister as saying.

But representatives of the country's Muslim population were unimpressed.

"They are going to have to find a better argument than security. It is an infringement on the freedom of religion," said Ahmed Markouch, a Moroccan mosques representative. He predicted that the bill would go down badly with the country's sizeable Muslim population, "because it comes from Verdonk, not because they are in favour of the burqa."

Green Party lawmaker Mustapha Laboui, who is of Moroccan origin, said that although he believed the wearing of the burqa in Dutch society was "not logical", he was sceptical as to the bill's legality.

And Ayhan Tonca from the CMO, a group representing Muslims, said that such a law would be "useless".

UPDATE at 11/18/06 2:36:23 pm:

Sheikh Mohammed Sayyed al Tantawi, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Mosque, thinks suicide bombing against Jews is fine but when it comes to the burqa he's a champion of women's rights. He says it's OK for a woman to show her face and hands as long as every other inch of her skin is covered:

Asharq Alawsat

Q) There has been much debate in Egypt concerning the Niqab recently. From a religious standpoint what is the proper dress code for a Muslim woman? dress code for a Muslim woman?

A) God says: "And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms." Since the Quran says this, we, men and women, should say: We hear and obey. What I think is meant by God's words "except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof" is the face and hands. As long as a woman's face and hands are the only revealed parts of her body, she is following the required religious dress code. As for covering the face or what is called the Niqab, this issue is more to do with traditions.

UPDATE at 11/18/06 2:50:03 pm:

And to underline the human misery and pain caused by Islamic repression of women:
"Afghan women commit suicide by fire"

KABUL, Afghanistan - Blood dripped down the 16-year-old girl's face after another beating by her drug addict husband. Worn down by life's pain, she ran to the kitchen, doused herself with gas from a lamp and struck a match.

Desperate to escape domestic violence, forced marriage and hardship, scores of women across Afghanistan each year are committing suicide by fire. While some gains have been made since the fall of the Taliban five years ago, life remains bleak for many Afghan women in the conservative and violence-plagued country, and suicide is a common escape.

Young Gulsum survived to tell her story. Her pretty face and delicate feet were untouched by the flames, but beneath her red turtleneck sweater, floral skirt and white shawl, her skin is puffy and scarred. More than a month after her attempt, her gnarled hands still bleed.

"It was my decision to die. I didn't want to be like this, with my hands and body like this," she said, sitting on a hospital bed in Kabul and hiding her deformed hands beneath her shawl.

Reliable statistics on self-immolation nationwide are difficult to gauge. In Herat province, where the practice has been most reported and publicized, there were 93 cases last year and 54 so far this year. More than 70 percent of these women die. ...

An estimated 60 to 80 percent of Afghan marriages are forced, the report said. More than half of Afghan women are married before they turn 16 and many young girls are married to men who are several decades older, the report said. The exchange of women and girls to resolve a crime, debt or household dispute is also common.

Contact the poster at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Marcel Cousineau, November 19, 2006.

Last week a once proud and invincible, now sickly, IDF called a Hamas terrorist leader in Gaza on the phone to warn him that they would target their house in 30 minutes.

This is how Israel works hard to lose the war now going into it's seventh year.

This weak and defeatist boy scout move used to work and was acceptable to the divider and destroyer of Israel in Washington.

He has limited Israel's actions to one of sure defeat and the self loating Jews always oblige their master in Washington, always.

This time the jihad men, boys, the jihad women and children came out to become human shields to protect their terrorist Hamas leader. It worked, Israel retreated.

The Palestinians know how to easily play the game to win while Israel plays hard to lose.

The Islamic hordes know Israel is now too stupid, weak and feeble to defeat them.

Israel has become a nation which now never misses an opportunity to snatch defeat out of the mouth of victory.

At one time they used to know how to fight and win wars but no longer.

All of Israel's enemies can see how mad the Jews have become for a false peace.

They are so intoxicated that they can no longer see straight.

Delusions,madness and lies flow down from leaders Olmert Peretz, Livini on a daily basis as truth.

Even the IDF has been corrupted by this terminal sickness.

Who but a suicidal and sick people release Islamic terrorists from prison to kill Jews again and again in return for nothing but lies from the enemy because a phony ally tells them they must make painful concessions for only lies in return?

Who but fools continue to buy the same trojan horse packaged as peace?

Who but an insane people continue to put their trust in a non producing peace plan as their peace partners bring in tons of weapons and explosives into Gaza unhindered?

Who but a people devoid of any rational thought allow terrorists to grow and strengthen on their borders to please a world bent on fulfilling Hitlers final solution.

Who but idiots allow thousands of Palestinian terrorist Badr brigade to enter Gaza from Jordan with their weapons of war at the urging of a fake peacemaker and his phony Road Map which anyone sane can see only leads to the final solution?

Who but faithless and fearful Jews can no longer say no, Never Again, and always capitulate to pressure which weakens Israel when it comes from a false ally and his Road Map.

The Palestinian's human shield plan worked well in Gaza, the IDF retreated as Israel and the IDF always does today.

Israel has not missed an opportunity to give her enemy victory after victory but all that matters is that their false messiah of no peace George is happy.

Israel is the only one who cannot see how her pathetic weakness and appeasement has only incited another soon coming holocaust.

Neville Chamberlain has been upstaged by a self loathing Jewish leadership.

Only Hashem can save Israel and His people from themselves.

Marcel Cousineau can be reached at up2zionsg8@yahoo.com or at his website: http://averyheavystone.blogspot.com/

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 19, 2006.

Two news items.

"Lieberman; Kill Hamas Leadership, Deal With Jordan"

Yisrael Beiteinu Chairman Avigdor Lieberman, the newest government minister, has called for discarding the US-backed Road Map plan, ignoring Mahmoud Abbas and killing Hamas's leadership.

Speaking with Israel Radio Saturday, Lieberman outlined his vision for the steps Israel must take. He asserted that the Palestinian Authority's Arabs are not interested in setting up a state, but in destroying Israel "in the service of international Jihad." Lieberman said that to ensure its survival, Israel must reject all past agreements and current interim proposals, from the failed Oslo Accords to the unimplemented US Road Map to Peace.

"Continued commitment to Oslo and to the Road Map will lead us to another round of conflict - a much bloodier round," he said. "And in the end we will be in an even worse dead-end position that threatens our very existence in the future."

Lieberman dismissed efforts to empower Fatah chief Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), whose group was trounced by the Islamist Hamas in the PA's parliamentary elections. The newly appointed Minister of Strategic Threats said Israel should instead develop closer coordination with the Hashemite rulers of Jordan regarding administrating the Arab areas of Judea and Samaria.

"We have always targeted the wrong places and taken care not to speak with the right people. We are seeking a reliable partner and that only exists in Jordan right now. We have to coordinate with Jordan and say that Abbas is simply not relevant. We must ignore him. He has no authority and no power."

The Hashemite regime in Jordan is increasingly nervous that it will be overthrown by Islamist groups such as Hamas, which enjoy massive support among Jordan's populace, a majority of whom are Palestinian.

Lieberman flat-out called for the liquidation of Hamas's entire leadership. "The entire leadership of Hamas and Islamic Jihad walk around freely, inciting violence. They have got to disappear - to be send to paradise, all of them. There can't be any compromise."

"There is no point in targeting refugee camps or Beit Hanoun," he added. "Those people, who live on ten shekels a day, have nothing to lose. When they are killed, they volunteer gladly. We have to focus on those who have something to lose - the leaders of Hamas and the Islamic Jihad."

Lieberman stopped short of calling for the complete retaking of Gaza, let alone resettlement of its destroyed Jewish towns, but did demand that Israel reassert sovereignty over the Gaza-Egypt border in order to stop massive weapons smuggling.

"We have heard about the smuggling of tons of weapons, missiles and hundreds of millions of dollars into Gaza - the fuel driving this entire war," he said. "They have all failed - the international observers sitting at the Rafiah crossing and the Egyptians [who are supposed to prevent smuggling from the Egyptian side of the border]."

Lieberman said he hopes his entry into the government can finally signal an end to the repetition of the mistakes of Oslo. "We must learn our lessons from Oslo, from leaving Gaza, from what happened following the disengagement," he concluded. "Without those lessons, moving on is impossible."

Meretz Chairman Yossi Beilin demanded that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert fire Lieberman for his statements. "If [the PM] doesn't do so," Beilin said. "Lieberman's statement become the statements of the entire government."

Some of Lieberman's statements, at least, drew support from fellow government member MK Matan Vilnai (Labor), who echoed the call to target members of the Hamas government.

Former Minister of Science, Technology, Culture, and Sports, fellow Labor MK Ophir Pines-Paz, who quit the government over Lieberman's entry, issued a statement shortly after declaring that if voted chairman of the party he would issue Olmert an ultimatum -- "Either us or Lieberman."

"Israel orders killing of Hamas politicians," by Uzi Mahnaimi, Tel Aviv, today's Sunday Times.

IN A desperate attempt to stop the barrage of rockets fired by Hamas at Israeli villages, Ehud Olmert, Israel's prime minister, has ordered his security chiefs to target the Islamic movement's political leadership.

According to Israeli security sources, a decision to assassinate leading Hamas politicians was taken by Olmert and his defence minister, Amir Peretz. Early yesterday Israeli missiles struck Hamas targets in Gaza, including a charity run by the group.

Since withdrawing from Gaza more than a year ago, Israel has targeted Hamas's military activists, but that has not stopped the rockets. Outraged by an attack last Wednesday on the village of Sderot, Israel is determined to ensure the political leadership in Gaza, the West Bank and abroad will "no longer escape responsibility".

The controversial change in tactics has been driven by Peretz, who broke down in tears when one of his bodyguards was badly injured in Sderot, his home village. The army has been battling against Palestinian rocket units in northern Gaza for months and has intensified its operations there in recent weeks. Since the beginning of this month, 98 Palestinians have been killed.

"The Gaza Strip is about to turn into the biggest terrorist compound on earth," Yuval Diskin, the head of the Israeli internal security service, warned a parliamentary committee last week. "We have no choice but to consider a massive military operation there."

Yesterday, deputy prime minister Avigdor Lieberman called for the assassination of Hamas and Islamic Jihad leaders. "They have to disappear, go to paradise, all of them," he said.

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, November 19, 2006.

James "(expletive deleted) the Jews, they didn't vote for us any way" Baker, a blast from the Bush 41 past, is back on the scene to rescue 'son of Bush 41' from clumsily as well as arrogantly implemented foreign policies, unraveling at mind-boggling speed, that threaten to shred his legacy to tatters. Might Mr. Baker attempt to soothe the feelings of Iranian madman disguised as president Mahmoud "wipe Israel off the map" AhMADinejad, or woo Syrian dictators with eyes on the Golan Heights prize by offering that to them? Furthermore, might this Machiavellian pragmatist, obviously no friend of Israel, be willing to negotiate away Judea, Samaria, and east Jerusalem to morphed Jordanians called Palestinians, hoping to remake the image of Bush 43 for historical consumption and worldwide kudos engendered by a perceived Middle East peace settlement at the expense of the beleaguered Jewish State? Lets not forget the 'right of return', Baker's possible piece de resistance, insuring peace in our time at least until Iran underwritten Hamas and Hizbullah rearm sufficiently to further punish what is left of Jewish Israel. Say it isn't so, but while cleaning off the splatter from rose-colored glasses Ehud never forget those immortal words "(expletive deleted) the Jews, they didn't vote for us any way." When things fall apart, a Baker's gotta do what a Baker's gotta do to put his boss' son's legacy back together again, even if that means breaking bread with jihad junkies and/or their financers. Furthermore, since a disproportionate number of neo-conservative ideologues that pushed for the Iraq invasion and occupation are Jews and supporters of Israel, when in fact such pushers served as ideal cover for the real time White House driven fossil fuel and petrodollar related reasons to topple Sadist Hussein if truth be told, why not blame Israel/Jews for today's dysfunctional politically horrific human misery causing Shiite/Iran empowering occupation and consequential GOP midterm thumping mess? Might such a concept be part of an insidious calculation in the mind of special agent 0041 Baker assigned to 'rescue mission impossible' i.e. save my boy the bungler; just in case his CIA finds a way to shed the 'faulty intelligence' stigma and another scapegoat is needed? Blue blood indeed is thicker than water as well as blood lacking the necessary pedigree, yet if the son of a blueblood conjures up those red corpuscles obvious in his Texas swagger, tells his daddy's special agent to stick the Road Map where the moon don't shine, and bolsters his legacy with more than a riot act recital to AhMADinejad, he will repair the bond now broken in the minds of many disillusioned Israelis, proving once again that at least today's President Bush is a true friend of the Jewish State, and in fact his own man.

Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Jock L. Falkson, November 19, 2006.

A headline in Ma'ariv newspaper last week sums it up: "IDF Despairs". Jerusalem Post's editorial Nov. 16, "Stop the Kassams now" provides no military solution. PM Olmert in Jerusalem Post Nov. 17 is headlined: "No 'quick fix' to Kassam attacks".

Our military commanders, Cabinet Ministers and pundits tell us it's not possible to win the war against the Kassams. That the best we can do is continue searching for the launching pads and hitting the rocketeers from the air.

Israel's few successes are too few to make a decisive difference. Our only solace is that Kassam fatalities are infrequent and the wounded civilian casualty count is low. Damage to homes and buildings is containable.

The most serious damage is to the mental condition of people in small towns like Sderot. Their suffering clearly affects the psyche of the children and adults. They have experienced too many traumas, too many siren warnings, too many unexpected explosions, too many miracles.

Worst of all is the despair of knowing that our wonderful IDF has no effective answer. Many residents are not shy to admit they don't know how much longer they'll be able to grin and bear it. Lots are reported to be leaving or have left Sderot. Who can blame them?

Yet there is a relatively inexpensive military answer to the Kassams within the restrictions of Disproportionate Response.

That is to replicate their Kassams with those of our own. And to lob the same number we receive every day into their populated areas next day. Plus 50 more.

During the evening news services we should announce the number of Kassams we'll be launching next day. And we should add this message daily: "We'll stop when you stop." Whenever they start up again, so do we.

Plus 50? Yes, the extra 50 is a reasonable attempt to achieve numerical equivalence since Hamas already has a head start, having fired over 4,000 missiles at us. That's downright unfair and clearly disproportionate. The least we are entitled to is catch up. At 50 per day, that will take 80 days to balance the Hamas' reign of Kassam terror. Then we'll have achieved a proportional balance.

How long will Hamas be able to take the punishment they so happily dish out to us with almost universal silence if not approval? I'd be surprised if they withstand it for longer than a week or two. For once we're giving their civilians what they're giving ours, plus 50, what would be their point of continuing?

To be put on Jock Falkson's email list, contact him at falkson@barak-online.net

To Go To Top

Posted by Buddy Macy, November 18, 2006.

The article below was redacted from an article by Professor Paul Eidelberg that appeared in The Jewish Press, November 3, 2006.

Please write to the following men, demanding that they remove Olmert from the OU (Orthodox Union) program this Wednesday in Jerusalem: ndiament@ou.org, steiners@ou.org, frank@ou.org. Thank you very much. This is what I wrote them. Feel free to copy it.


I am a secular Jew who is appalled at the extreme anti-traditional Jewish stance Ehud Olmert has taken from the moment he assumed the position of Prime Minister of Israel. You must do everything in your power to see to it that his speaking engagement is canceled at the OU conference this coming Wednesday. Anything less, and you will be endorsing his orchestrated bloodbath in Amona, his policy of expelling Jews from Israel's Biblical heartland, his heartless attacks on peaceful protestors and his financial corruption.

Do the right thing, or do not complain as he continues his assault on the religious Jews of Israel, and on Judaism, itself.

Most sincerely,
Buddy Macy

On June 9, 2005, Ehud Olmert revealed what he is made of in a speech to the Israel Policy Forum in New York. Israel's government, of which he was the vice premier, was then in the process of preparing some 50,000 soldiers and police to implement Sharon's plan to withdraw front Gaza and expel its 8,000 Jewish residents. Olmert told his New York audience that the withdrawal represents "a remarkable process ... that will have an enormous impact on everything that will happen thereafter, in the State of Israel and in the Middle East." Dwelling in wonderland, Olmert spoke glowingly of the unilateral aspect of the Gaza withdrawal: "We don't have to wait anymore," he said. Glib as usual, he even boasted to his American audience: "We really don't need the United States to lead the [peace] process in the Middle East, we will lead this process.

Israel will lead the process, he blabbered "because it's good for us" --

Really! "And we will lead it because it may do good to the Palestinians." (How generous!)"And we believe that if it will be good for us and will be good for the Palestinians, then it will be good." Impeccable logic! And why will it be good? Because "It will bring more security, greater safety, much more prosperity and a lot of joy for all the people that live in the Middle East." Hallelujah!

Intoxicated with himself, Olmert confided:

"We are tired of fighting; we are tired of being courageous, we are tired of winning; we are tired of defeating our enemies; we want that we will be able to live in an entirely different environment of relations with our enemies. We want them to be our friends, our partners, our good neighbors."

This confession reveals not only an errant fool but of a degenerate. Before you turn off, ponder the words of that great Zionist, Max Nordau, a psychologist of profound learning -- an atheist who understood the mentality of Jews like Olmert. I call to your attention Nordau's 1895 work, Degeneration. This heavy tome, which was re-published in 1968, has been the subject of several doctoral dissertations. It offers a deep understanding of people of Olmert's mentality -- suffice to mention Ariel Sharon, Shimon Peres and former Supreme Court president Aharon Barak, who decriminalized the government's expulsion of those thousands of Jews from Gaza.

According to Nordau, "That which nearly all degenerates lack is the sense of morality and of right and wrong." This degeneracy is widespread in democratic societies where moral relativism is rampant and I have evidence that the persons mentioned have been tainted by this academic doctrine. An inevitable consequence or concomitant of moral relativism is what Nordau calls "egomania," which he discusses at great length. "Egomania renders degenerates incapable of empathy. Pre-occupied with themselves, they are insensitive to the feelings of others. Degenerates lack public spiritedness, a heightened sense of outrage at the suffering of others, and of course they lack a sense of honor."

I dare say it is in these terms that we are to understand not only Sharon's policy of self-restraint toward Arab terrorists -- which made the murder of an indeterminate number of Jews "acceptable" -- but also his less deadly policy of expelling Jews from their homes. Did not this egomaniac tell his cabinet: "Anyone who speaks or writes against disengagement is guilty of incitement!" Nordau also claims that the degenerate is "incapable of correctly grasping, ordering, or elaborating into ideas and judgments the impressions of the external world..." He "surrenders himself to the perpetual obfuscation of... fugitive ideas". He is given to "fixed" ideas, however nebulous (like "peace").

Moreover, "facts which do not please him he does not notice, or so interprets that they seem to support his delirium." Here Nordau anticipates Harry Stack Sullivan's concept of "selective inattention" -- typical of Jews whose lust for peace blinds them to 14 centuries of Arab bellicosity and barbarism.

This selective inattention raises the question of whether degenerates compulsively misrepresent or consciously lie about reality (like unilateral disengagement is good). Nordau contends that they believe in the truth of their fabrications. Perhaps, but self-delusion may sometimes be a developmental phenomenon. Selective inattention is often the result of fear as well as of egoism. Nordau has observed this. Indeed, not only does continued fear govern many degenerates, but also such is their inability to face reality that even their instinct of self- preservation is crippled. Nordau's analysis of degenerates clearly applies to Israel's ruling elites, exemplified by Israel's current prime minister.

  • Olmert has witnessed 13 years of the Oslo policy of "territory for peace" and its consequences: the murder and maiming of thousands of Jewish men, women, and children. Yet he persists in this delusion. Olmert continues to condone the arming and release of thousands of Arab terrorists, who invariably revert to terrorism.

  • Olmert's aforementioned speech in New York clearly conveys his inability or unwillingness to recognize the obvious: the implacable hatred and genocidal pronouncements of Israel's enemy.

  • Contrary to tons of blood-filled evidence, Olmert boasted that "unilateral disengagement" from Gaza would be a major step toward peace.

  • And now, despite the fact that the Gaza withdrawal brought Hamas to power and made Gaza a center for international terrorism, Olmert wants to withdraw from Judea and Samaria even while arms from Gaza are pouring into these strategically important areas. All this is not simply a consequence of American pressure. It is not simply a consequence of miscalculation or even of stupidity. Israel has -- and not for the first time -- a degenerate prime minister. There is a lesson to be drawn from this analysis. Criticism of Israel's ruling elites, as if they were rational actors, is misleading if not irrelevant. Another election, even if Olmert were to be replaced by some other member of the Knesset, will not steer Israel away from the suicidal path of its last seven prime ministers. Let's stop kidding ourselves. Democracy offers no solution to this malaise -- certainly not that which passes for a democracy in the shrinking state of Israel.

Contact the poster at vegibud@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 18, 2006.

Former Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu said few days ago: "It's 1938 and Iran is Germany." But he is WRONG!

In 1938 people could say, "Maybe it won't happen. Maybe Hitler doesn't mean it. Maybe we can talk him out of it. Maybe we can appease him and find a way to live with the Nazi ideology". They had NO reference.

In 2006 we have plenty reference. Still in 2006, though American politicians, particularly but not only Democrats, now know that Saddam Hussein had rape rooms, he tortured, he gassed Kurds, and 400,000 bodies, including children, were found in mass graves, YET, they still DARE say, "If I knew then what I know now...," meaning if they knew that toppling Saddam would lead to a difficult, protracted and politically unpopular war, they would have NOT voted for the war in Iraq. If they knew that Saddam didn't have photo op stockpiles of WMD, but only a workable WMD program and was awaiting the end of sanctions to import the means to restart the program, they would have NOT voted for the war in Iraq.

Washington does not have moral compass! Did it ever?! It also does not have the courageous clarity to act on truth!

So, if in 1938 there was a glimpse of hope that Hitler didn't mean what he said, in 2006 we know better and do not have the luxury to think this way. To believe that Iran president Ahmadinejad doesn't mean what he say, or to believe that bribes and negotiations can change his mind, or to believe the "Palestinian problem" is the key to our problems is CRIMINAL and WEAK EXCUSE and the key to willful blindness and the no will to defend the world against (the Islamo-Fascism) evil. We are wiser than the world of 1938 and CAN avert the disaster that lies ahead. Indifferent world leads to disaster!

This is from yesterday on JINSA Online. It is JINSA Report #621 and is entitled "It's 1938 and Iran is Germany."

So said former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In some ways, maybe. And his plea that the West, "believe him and stop him", is precisely the prescription for the world's future security.

But in a meaningful way, this is most assuredly not 1938.

In 1938, people could say, "Maybe it won't happen. Maybe Hitler doesn't mean it. Maybe we can talk him out of it. Maybe we can appease him and find a way to live with the Nazi ideology". ("Appeasement" wasn't the same sort of dirty word then, for obvious historical reasons). Their hope that evil wasn't real was understandable.

By 1945, the remnants of the Jewish people were saying, "Never Again," as in "never again" would Jews allow themselves to be without the means of self-defense and be attacked without fighting back. Others, including American political leaders, expanded the thought to mean the world had some obligation to protect those whom evil would destroy - it was their obligation "never again" to permit a Holocaust.

By 1975, the Cambodian genocide mocked "never again." Rwanda and Darfur and even 9-11 are proof that the moral clarity produced by a moment of horror fades very quickly.

In 2006, American candidates, particularly but not only Democrats, frequently said, "If I knew then what I know now..." They meant if they had known that toppling Saddam would lead to a difficult, protracted and politically unpopular war, they wouldn't have voted for it. If they had known that Saddam didn't have photo op stockpiles of WMD, but only a workable WMD program (including scientists) and was awaiting the end of sanctions to import the means to restart the program, they wouldn't have voted for it.

On the other hand, now they know about Saddam's rape rooms; the torture; the gassing of the Kurds; and the 400,000 bodies, including children, in mass graves. If they knew those things then, wouldn't they have had to vote for the war so as not to further debase the obligation of the powerful to protect the weak?

If in 1938 it was still possible to hope that Hitler didn't mean it, in 2006 we know better. To believe Ahmadinejad doesn't mean it, or believe bribes and negotiations can change his mind, or believe the "Palestinian problem" is the key is willful blindness and no defense against evil.

We know now what we didn't know then. We know evil coupled with weapons of dreadful capability - whether Zyklon B or nuclear bombs--and an indifferent world lead to disaster. We are wiser than the Jews of 1938, wiser than the world of 1938. Only that can avert the disaster that lies ahead.

Contact the poster at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Barbara Lerner, November 18, 2006.
NRO is wrong about what he couldn't do. Last week, National Review reluctantly concluded that, despite his stellar performance in other areas, when it came to Iraq, outgoing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld "made serious -- perhaps catastrophic -- mistakes."

If you look at the war in Iraq as NR's editors, and most other Americans, currently do -- as a local war, a war in one country only -- this conclusion is all but inescapable. As the editors correctly note, the basic objective in counterinsurgency warfare in any country is to provide security to the population. We have been trying to do that in Iraq with something like 130,000 - 160,000 troops for over three years now, and we haven't succeeded. Instead, we face a continuing insurgency and a looming civil war. From this perspective, it makes obvious sense to argue that if we put many more U.S. boots on the ground, we would have a much better chance of quelling both the insurgency and the civil war, establishing security at last and, with it, the victory we all pray for. From this perspective, Rumsfeld's steady opposition to any large increases in the number of American troops in Iraq can only be seen as a serious -- perhaps catastrophic -- mistake; and a peculiar blind spot for a man NR rightly recognizes as a visionary in so many other areas of military strategy and defense policy.

The editors here offer a number of possible explanations for this blind spot, but there is one possibility they failed to consider, or even to recognize: the possibility that Rumsfeld's whole perspective on the war in Iraq is fundamentally different from theirs because he sees it as a regional war; a war that Iran, aided and abetted by its client-state, Syria, and its proxy army, Hezbollah, is waging against us. From this perspective, the war in Iraq, as President Bush has thus far insisted on defining and fighting it, ends up being for Iran an all-gain, no-pain proxy war -- a war in which Iran can insure our eventual defeat in Iraq, without paying any real price for it, by continuing to refuel both the insurgency and the civil war there for as long as it takes to get us to give up. How this is done is no secret: Iran sends a never-ending supply of money, men, and weapons to Sunni as well as Shia terrorists inside Iraq, and gives them all a safe-haven network of extra-territorial training and supply bases -- some on Iranian soil, others just across the border in Syria.

From this perspective, it doesn't make a lot of sense to send greatly increased numbers of U.S. troops to Iraq. We would still be fighting a basically defensive war, and doing it in a way that would greatly increase the cost to us, in money and perhaps in blood as well, without dealing with the most intractable of the many problems we face in Iraq: the Iranian offensive. From this perspective, it makes much more sense to send American planes, warships, and missiles to strike Iran hard enough to cripple its regime's ability to make war on us -- in Iraq or anywhere else -- with either the conventional weapons they already have or the nuclear weapons they are racing to produce. I have been arguing for some time now that that is what America must do -- get off the defensive, go on offense, and bring the war home to Iran -- in order to start winning at last, not just in Iraq, but in the global, multi-front terror war our Islamofascist enemies are waging against us with increasing ferocity, vastly encouraged by Iran's growing success and seeming invincibility (see, e.g., here and here). A small but growing number of others have been willing to make the same essential point, plainly, in print: namely, that we need to hit Iran, not with straw sanctions tomorrow, but with real missiles today, because if we don't, things will go downhill for us very rapidly. Those others include Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney and Major Gen. Paul Vallely (End Game), Mark Steyn (City Journal), Lt. Col. Gordon Cucullu (Front Page), Quin Hillyer (American Spectator), Mark Levin (NRO), and Arthur Herman (Commentary).

The obvious question, at this point, is this: If Rumsfeld really does see the war in Iraq as a regional war that we must fight as such if we are to win, why the devil didn't he say so? The answer, I think, is that he did, many times and in many ways, starting in 2003. But he would have said it only to the president he agreed to serve, and to a very few trusted allies, like Vice President Cheney, who share Rumsfeld's sense of the loyalty that serving cabinet members owe to their commander-in-chief in a time of war. To the best of my knowledge, the only time Rumsfeld made it clear, in public, that he disagreed with the president on the scope of the war was when he acknowledged that he had asked for permission to cross the border into Syria to strike terrorists fleeing there after carrying out attacks in Iraq. He asked a number of times, beginning in 2003. The president said no.

Why, then -- it seems reasonable to ask -- didn't Rumsfeld resign years ago? Didn't he recognize the obvious risk that he would fail to persuade George W. Bush to acknowledge the scope of the war; and that then he would end up being the scapegoat for this president's misconceptions about the war in Iraq and the overall state of the Muslim world today? Rumsfeld was most likely keenly aware of the likelihood of that outcome, but had three reasons for remaining at his post in spite of it. First, he wanted time to do all the good and important things he has done to modernize our military forces and upgrade our defenses. Second, he thought there was a chance, however slim, that he might eventually persuade the president to redefine the war we are fighting in a more realistic way. Then the president would be able to use the bully pulpit to educate the American people about the war that is being waged against us and the offensive action we must take to win it.

Finally, I think Secretary Rumsfeld feared that when he left, he would be replaced by a very different Defense secretary -- a man clever enough to share his own understanding of Iran's centrality to the war in Iraq and much else, but not wise enough to see, or not principled enough to admit, that attempts to avoid a military confrontation with Iran by "opening a dialogue" or striking a deal have no more chance of success today than Neville Chamberlain's dialogues and deals with Hitler did in the 1930s. With the nomination of Robert Gates, a man strongly backed by the first President Bush and his key deal-makers, James Baker and Brent Scowcroft, it seems that Secretary Rumsfeld has proved prescient once again. And I think that Republican hawks like Bill Kristol at The Weekly Standard -- hawks who have been screaming for Rumsfeld's scalp for years -- are not going to like the results, because, in the end, no American patriot will.

This appeared in National Review Online (NRO) November 15, 2006.

To Go To Top

Posted by Women in Green, November 18, 2006.

This was written by Sarah Honig and it appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post.

Earlier this year we indisputably elected a government of super-flunkies, to the likes of which even previous bunglers cannot compare -- and we've suffered quite an assortment of both schlimazels and hardly benign schlemiels.

Some of our more harmful governments bamboozled public opinion sufficiently to retain popularity, but Olmert's bunch hasn't even managed that. Belying his supercilious demeanor, Olmert scores the lowest approval ratings ever for a serving premier.

The Lebanese fiasco alerted the voters to their grievous error in record time, soon after they put the Kadima coterie of snake-oil salesmen in control. This crew's knack for botching every facet of combat, while neglecting noncombatants in the rocketed hinterland, boggles the mind.

Our arrogant, shady and inexperienced premier - who zigzagged on every issue from convergence/realignment to cease-fire in Lebanon and negotiations with Syria - also appointed ministers as ill-suited as himself to handle that with which he entrusted them.

In a true parliamentary democracy one would expect a government that malfunctions as severely as the one lackadaisically inaugurated in Jerusalem, to be removed ASAP by the legislature which approved its creation.

But irony of ironies - the least deserving of all of Israel's coalitions to date has lately grown stronger. Avigdor Lieberman's alacrity to prop it (purportedly in order to thwart Iran) constitutes an unequivocal distortion of his voters' will. Lieberman's rightist ticket attracted the very voters for whom Kadima was anathema. Rushing to Olmert's rescue skews the balance of power in direct contravention of the voters' decree.

But that's nothing new. The Oslo flop was facilitated by the defection of two MKs of the now-defunct Tsomet list, as much to the Likud's right as Lieberman's Israel Beiteinu. Alex Goldfarb was bribed with a Mitsubishi and Gonen Segev with a ministerial appointment. The latter Oslo-enabler's ethical status was underscored more recently by his conviction for drug smuggling and forgery.

Yet what rankles more painfully than betrayal is the fact that Lieberman and Olmert are now co-hatching an overhaul of our system of government to egregiously fortify the executive at the legislature's expense (contradicting the parliamentary system's inherent premise).Thus the revamp would mandate a majority of 66 MKs to pass a no-confidence motion, making it excessively difficult to sack a premier.

True, the conventional gripe is that PMs allocate too much energy to parliamentary survival and that sending them packing is a relatively attainable proposition. Yet while the desire for a stable government is understandable, so is the logic of being able to remove an out-and-out failure. Fortifying an unworthy government shouldn't be democracy's objective.

Considering that this indisputably unsuccessful government has just incongruously buttressed its defenses, its mooted system alterations will reduce our anyway hypothetical democracy to a farcical facade thereof.

It's already almost that. This administration's predecessor, in which Olmert was the second-in-command linchpin, expelled 9,000 settlers after then-premier Ariel Sharon hoodwinked his voters and proceeded to implement the direct opposite of the platform which elevated him to office.

That may have been the most flagrant political breach of promise in Israel's annals but not the only one. Remember Amir Peretz's vow to pursue a socioeconomic agenda?

THINGS BEING as they are even prior to the proposed "reform," we needn't over-exert our imagination to envision how they'll be after Olmert is rendered immune to most any parliamentary upset. Already now the public helplessly watches the abuse of powers which it conferred upon its so-called representatives. Is it then wise to further augment the clout of wanna-be autocrats?

What must never be forgotten is that democracy is the expression of the electorate's sovereignty. Governments are there to serve our best interests - not to put one over us. It's half-baked - if not actually dangerous - to install via the back door a premier/pseudo-American president, who needs nobody to appoint him to form the government, whose accountability to the Knesset is negligibly enforceable and whom it's next to impossible to unseat.

This insincere quasi-imitation of the American system would moreover be imposed on a structure which lacks the American model's underlying checks and balances - to say nothing of as much as a constitution. Divesting our legislative branch of its remaining authority could augur nothing auspicious. The Supreme Court daily diminishes the Knesset. Additional attenuation from an inordinately dominant executive will hardly bolster democracy.

In situations of aggravated disaffection - as Israel has been experiencing since last summer's Lebanese conflict - schemes to station a strongman at the national helm boast undeniable allure. But not every powerful leader is necessarily the panacea for which the populace yearns.

Moreover, the need to shore up a fraying coalition shouldn't constitute the rationale behind far-reaching changes whose implications and ramifications haven't been adequately considered. What should be approached with utmost trepidation cannot become the object of dilettante experimentation or expedient horse-trading.

We need plain horse-sense. What ails our system isn't so much its technical framework but the content we voters pour into it - all too often willy-nilly, following inane fads, swayed by polls, overlooking issues and pooh-poohing serious debate. We hanker after instant solutions, dismiss bitter truths and prefer the sweet comfort of delusion.

Our dereliction of the most fundamental civic responsibilities lies at the root of our travails. Avoiding the difficult and unpleasant in favor of simplistic answers to deep-seated existential problems will invariably result in bad government.

Nothing afflicts our system so dreadfully that competent leaders and sound policy guidelines cannot ameliorate, if not cure. Superficial pretend reforms won't compensate for lack of elementary capability - they'll just make it possible for incompetent leaders, sans any guidelines, to make a bad situation incomparably worse.

Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 18, 2006.

Imagine that! The Syrians working together with the Iranians! Certainly an odd-couple, but in a region where bearded men in flowing gowns (think Carol Lombard) hold hands and stroll the shopping malls together...while women stay home, dressed in garbage bag chic -- anything could happen!

Well, no, not quite "anything". Secular regimes such as Syria are anathema to Islam. Whether Saudi-Wahhabi, Irano-whacko Shiite, or good old fashioned, bomb-belted Sunni......they all agree that the secular regimes, with their tolerance of "unwrapped meat" (women's rights) and other manifestations of 21st century Western lifestyles, must be returned to the 8th century [male] bosom of Islam.

Assad and his gangsters are crap, and the Syrian people deserve better.....however, it MUST be remembered that as Middle-Eastern leaders go...the gangly eye-doctor ain't that bad.

Please have a look at the attached photographs. Those are the faces of typical Syrians circa. 2006...save those photos, and look again in two years time, after we have installed a religious government in Damascus....and folks like those in the pictures have either fled the country or been separated from their heads.

President Jimmy Carter unleashed modern Islamic terrorism upon the world in 1979, making the peanut farmer from Georgia a hero in the eyes of millions. [of primitive, murderous savages]

George Bush is set to out-do Carter by being the President who completely eliminated secular regimes from the Middle-East. Then the Islamic world will love us.

Well.....not right away.

Remember, there are still quite a few people in the Americas who have not yet returned to Islam.

"Report: Baker Met With Syrians To Discuss Cooperation On Iraq"
By Al-Reuters

Former United States Secretary of State James Baker, co-chairman of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group examining strategic options in Iraq, has met several times with Syrian officials to discuss cooperation with the U.S., The New York Times reported on Saturday.

Syrian Ambassador Imad Moustapha told the newspaper in an interview held on Friday that Baker has asked Syria's Foreign Minister Walid Muallem during a meeting in New York in September: "What would it take Syria to help on Iraq?"

The Bush administration withdrew its ambassador to Damascus and has stated it will not authorize higher-level contacts because of Syria's suspected role in supporting terror groups, Iraqi insurgents and opponents of Lebanon's government.

But there has been speculation the study group chaired by Baker will advocate greater U.S. cooperation with Syria and Iran as the administration considers a change in course on the war after voters vented their anger over it in this month's elections.

Moustapha said in the interview that the New York meeting with Baker, which the ambassador said he had arranged, was "very promising."

Other members of the Iraq Study Group also attended the meeting at Baker's request, the Times reported, and Moustapha met twice with the group in Washington.

While Moustapha did not provide specifics, the newspaper reported that he told the study group what things Syria could and could not do.

"We were very candid with each other," he told the Times. "We explained to them why it is in our own national interest to try to help stabilize the situation in Iraq."

The White House said on Friday that Syria could play a positive role in the region, if it desired, the Times reported.

"The United States and the international community have made very clear the constructive role that Syria can play in the region," it quoted Dana Perino, a deputy White House press secretary, as saying.

"Even the Iraqis have said that Syria and Iran have not been constructive in Iraq; they have not supported the Iraqi unity government," Perino added.

Neither Baker nor the study group's co-chairman, Democratic former congressman Lee Hamilton, would comment on the meetings with Syrian officials, the Times said.

According to the Times, an outside adviser to the group who spoke on condition of anonymity said that the panel had also interviewed the Iranian ambassador to the United Nations, Javad Zarif.

Baker had a three-hour dinner in New York with Iran's UN ambassador Javad Zarif, the Washington Post reported earlier this week.

The newspaper, which did not say when the dinner took place, said: "Baker made clear that he was not negotiating for the U.S. but that the commission wanted Iran's input and suggestions."

Contact the poster at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Naomi Ragen, November 18, 2006.


As the citizens of Sderot are dying from Gazan rocket attacks, our Prime Minister took his photo ops in America. He smiles, and smiles, and smiles some more. Such a happy guy, there, in America. Good hotels, important meetings with people who treat him like he is actually an important person who represents the best interests of his people. I'm sure his meals are also good. And he isn't rushed. Oh, no, why would he be rushed? Because a private citizen has come up with the funds to give hundreds of Israeli citizens in Sderot under fire a vacation in Eilat, after all. And the rocket attacks? Well, he's already dealt with that, for goodness sake. Didn't he say, courageously, right up front: "There is no quick solution?" So, why should our Prime Minister be in a rush to come home and deal with the situation of Israelis dying in their homes? He has important things to do, like visiting the Wiesenthal Center, and speaking to clueless American Jews before whom he had bluster and say: Never Again! even while he is actively preventing our defense forces from countering the terrorists who have made yet another place in Israel unlivable. Never again? Who are you kidding, Mr. Olmert? You are the facililtator of again, and again and again.

So, Mr. Olmert, why are you smiling? American Jews, why are you smiling back and shaking his hand? My friend Caroline Glick tells us all about Israel's delighted leaders. This is called "Israel's Delighted Leaders" and it appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post.
(www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1162378421874&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull).


To the delight of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, an international coalition has coalesced around Iran's nuclear weapons program.

In his remarks Tuesday in Los Angeles before the delegates to the United Jewish Communities' General Assembly, Olmert explained his enthusiasm. First he stated, "America's leadership in preventing Iran's nuclearization is indisputable and unequaled. I just met my good friend, a true friend of Israel, President George W. Bush in Washington... His determination to prevent this most serious of developments is unquestionable. But America must have the support of the international community if we are to successfully defuse this mortal threat."

So from Olmert's perspective, it is America's responsibility - not Israel's -- to prevent Iran from acquiring the means to destroy Israel. At the same time, he accepts that the US will take no action against Iran without first receiving permission from the French, Russians, Chinese and Arabs.

Olmert then explained that the Arabs have to agree to let the US protect Israel. As he put it, "A coalition of moderate Arab countries can and must unite their common interest in preventing Iran from undermining stability in the Middle East. This coalition must struggle against the dangers of radical Islam that manipulate the very source of Islam itself."

For her part, Livni told the crowd in California that there is little doubt that the nations of the world will shortly unite to prevent Iran from achieving nuclear capabilities. As she put it, "If the promise of 'Never Again' is more important than the price of oil, then the time for international indifference and hesitation in the face of the Iranian threat has long passed."

Livni then explained that she is eager to give Judea and Samaria to the Palestinians and is working to "brand" Israel as a place where it is fun to live. She concluded by recommending that American Jews invite Israeli Nobel laureates to visit their communities.

In sum, our foreign minister is certain that the international community will act against Iran because it means it when it says it thinks that the Holocaust was a bad thing more than it means it when it says, "Fill it up with unleaded."

Moreover, as far as Livni is concerned, the world will protect Israel because the Olmert government is so eager to render Jerusalem and Tel Aviv defenseless by surrendering Judea and Samaria to Palestinian jihadists.

Aside from that, Livni trusts that the world will protect the Jews because thanks to her we have UN forces protecting Hizbullah on our northern border and we're rebranding ourselves to let the international community know that Jews are both good at science and really fun to drink with.

To their credit, Olmert and Livni are correct to say that today an international coalition made up of the US, the EU and some of the Arabs is forming around Iran. But what binds the members together is their collective opposition to taking any effective action to prevent Teheran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Standing next to Olmert in the White House Monday, Bush limited his remarks on Iran to expressing his hope that the international community would agree to economically isolate Iran. International support is necessary because Iran's chief targets -- the US and Israel - don't have the legitimacy to act. As he put it, "My attitude is let's work in concert to convince the government [of Iran] that it's not just the Israeli voices speaking, or the United States' voices speaking, but there's a lot of other voices saying the exact same thing."

There is no doubt that isolating Iran internationally would be a welcome development.

But there can also be no doubt that isolating Iran will not cause it to end its nuclear weapons program. This is particularly true if that isolation involves approving the European draft resolution for mild sanctions against Iran in the UN Security Council. In the best case scenario, the most sanctions can do is make it more difficult to Iran to reconstitute its nuclear program in the aftermath of an Israeli military attack on its nuclear installations.

EACH OF the parties in the "Do-nothing-against-Iran" coalition has its own reasons for not lifting a finger.

Bush's interpretation of the Democrats' victory in last week's Congressional elections convinced him not to act against Iran. Starting with his press conference last Wednesday where he announced Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's replacement by Robert Gates, Bush has made absolutely clear that as far as he's concerned, he lacks the domestic political strength to carry out a successful operation.

In one of his recent daily calls for Israel's destruction, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad offered Europe a Faustian bargain. He promised to leave Europe alone if the Europeans abandon Israel. On Monday, British Prime Minister Tony Blair accepted his offer. In a speech at the London Lord Mayor's annual banquet, Blair explained that success in Iraq and in Iran is contingent on Israel making concessions to Palestinian and Lebanese terrorists and to the US and Europe making concessions to Syria and Iran.

The fact that Blair made this speech four days after the director general of the MI5, Eliza Manningham-Buller, said that today 30 terror plots are being planned in Britain; that future threats could involve chemicals and nuclear devices; that young British Muslims are being groomed to become suicide bombers; and that her agents are tracking some 1,600 suspects, tells us just about everything we need to know about Europe's interests. The fact that he made a similar statement to the Iraq Study Group, which, led by former secretary of state James Baker III is planning on recommending that the US sell out Israel and appease the Iranians and Syrians, tells us everything we need to know about how Europe feels about the US hope to isolate -- not attack -- Iran.

There is little doubt that the Arab states would prefer a non-nuclear Iran. But the Arabs have no intention of preventing Iran from acquiring such weapons. To the contrary, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia now want to build their own nuclear reactors. Iran's program serves as a justification for Arab A-bombs.

The implication of the coalescence of this new coalition is inescapable. Despite Olmert and Livni's breathless protestations to the contrary, no one will take action to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. No one will block the prospect of Israel's annihilation.

IT IS worthwhile to consider why this is the case -- if only to bring reality to the attention those directly entrusted with ensuring Israel's survival.

The Bush administration is today in a state of strategic disarray. According to historian John Lewis Gaddis in his book Surprise, Security and the American Experience, one of the strategic assumptions that underlay Bush's decision to order the invasion of Iraq was the predicted psychological effect the campaign would have on regimes like Iran. In his words, "The purpose was as much psychological as military: to eliminate individuals, gangs and regimes who commit or support terrorism, but also to intimidate those who might be thinking about doing so."

Unfortunately, the psychological effect was dependent on a clear US military victory. After the initial push to Baghdad and the overthrow of Saddam's regime, America's ability to defeat the insurgency was increasingly dependent on political will. That will in turn was heavily influenced by the level of international support America's actions enjoyed. The Europeans refused to back the campaign and their antagonism prevented the US from undertaking the kind of aggressive counter-insurgency measures -- particularly operations inside Syria and Iran, which act as bases for the insurgency -- that were necessary to win the conflict decisively.

As time passed, the lack of European support caused an erosion of domestic US support for the Iraq campaign. It was the cumulative effect of that erosion that brought about the Republican defeat last week.

The EU opposes US operations in Iraq, and indeed its member states have become hotbeds of anti-American prejudice for various reasons -- one of which is counter-intuitive.

The Europeans perceive themselves as powerless dilettantes. As such, they assume that their hostility will make little impact on the US and that America will eventually win the war against the global jihad regardless of what they think. This being the case, from their perspective, nothing is to be lost in the long run, and much is to be gained in the short run, from abusing the benevolent US and appeasing the violent jihadists. France in particular would like for the US to emerge from the war victorious but weakened, much as Britain emerged from World War II.

While the Arabs oppose Iranian regional and pan-Islamic hegemony, they believe they will deter Teheran from attacking them by acquiring nuclear capabilities. Moreover, an Iranian nuclear strike against Israel would serve several Arab interests. First, as long as Israel exists, Iran will concentrate on Israel and leave the Arabs alone.

Second, if Iran attacks Israel with nuclear weapons, either Israel or the US will likely launch a devastating counter-strike that will significantly weaken the Teheran regime. Although awash in glory for its destruction of Israel, Iran would be in no position to assert control over the now nuclear-armed Arabs whose "Jewish problem" it had solved.

But no matter, our leaders tell us. We should just think happy thoughts as they do. In Olmert and Livni's world, Israel won the war in Lebanon this summer; UNIFIL forces are good for the Jews; and Hizbullah -- which is now working to overthrow the Lebanese government -- has no interest in renewing its war against Israel.

The government sees no reason to prevent 1,500 PLO terrorists from Jordan from marching into Gaza with their guns and their families. Olmert and Livni welcome the prospect of releasing thousands of terrorists from prison to "strengthen" PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, and they are eager to hand Judea and Samaria over to Abbas, not because doing so would help Abbas, but because it would good for Israel.

As Livni put it this week, we want to hand over land because otherwise the so-called peace process will stagnate, and "Stagnation is not in our interest and it is not our policy."

Our jovial government justifies its decision to do nothing to prevent Ahmadinejad from acquiring the means to keep his promise to destroy the Jewish state by incessantly claiming that someone else is willing and able to pay the price to defend us.

The people of Israel must not be seduced by the blindness and empty promises of our leaders. All efforts must be made to sideline these incompetent, self-serving bumblers and replace them with responsible leaders as quickly as possible.

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, November 18, 2006.

The governments of the free world are leading its citizens down a path of devastation. Only a bloody beating will pull westerners back together again.

Steven Emerson is the Executive Director of the Investigative Project. My concern for the growing threat that Islam poses to the future of our world long ago led me to Mr. Emerson, who is a preeminent researcher of this issue. The vast findings of his organization are used to inform the public as well as to brief various governmental entities, such as the FBI, Homeland Security, Congress, and the White House. The Investigative Project, which consists of a staff of roughly two dozen, also provides substantive information to foreign governments.

Earlier this week, Mr. Emerson's latest book, Jihad Incorporated, was the center of attention at the Regency Club in Westwood. As an outspoken critic of Islamo-fascism, Mr. Emerson has many enemies, but they cannot deter the former CNN reporter from his constant vigilance, which was evidenced by the forceful message he delivered at this book signing reception.

Mr. Emerson spoke with a quiet sophistication but the message he delivered was eloquent; unfortunately, his message was grim and frightening.

Nowadays, Gaza is an area saturated with arms, like anti-tank mortars and rockets, more so than anywhere else in the world. Arms are smuggled from Egypt and Lebanon. Egypt, for all intents and purposes, has simply opened its borders to smuggling. Factors such as this, Emerson asserted have eroded Israel's deterrence capability, and the country is less secure arguably than ever before. To regain its might, Israel must demonstrate a willpower that has been much lacking, even if bloodshed will result.

While Al-Queda has been rendered generally ineffectual, Mr. Emerson suggested that it has been replaced by a more worrisome threat -- homegrown terrorists. Second generation Muslims in the U.S., Europe, and Canada are troubled, restless, self-activated, self-financed, and extremely radicalized. Even the Internet is being used to radicalize and recruit them to be jihadists. Today, the U.S. has the largest Hamas populations outside the Middle East that are spreading from Chicago to Wisconsin and from Florida to California. Weekend terror training camps are held in the U.S.

Masquerading as human rights organizations, radicalized Islamic organizations, such as CAIR, have managed to penetrate the American political process. These organizations have injected themselves into the doings of the FBI, Homeland Security, and the State Department determined in order to gain access and legitimacy. They have earned respect from the U.S. media and have gained governmental endorsement. CAIR, however, is known to be thick as thieves with the Islamic Brotherhood. Terrorist led groups have permeated the highest levels of American government and have quietly but irrevocably altered out society forever.

The job of Steven Emerson's organization is to change public opinion through information that must be gently massaged into the American consciousness. According to Emerson, "Providing unique information gains public attention and leads to action that ends up getting the bad guys." The ongoing battle for the Investigative Project is against the new, pervasive mindset of inverted victimization, whereby perpetrators are conversely recognized as victims, as in the case of the Palestinians. The media is much to blame for spreading this fire of bias, but the Investigative Project is committed to countering such regularly biased and discriminatory reporting.

Mr. Emerson conveys the following message: If we continue hiding under pretence and we do not stop the Islamo-fascists, they will grow and finally take over. While a few members of Congress fight the good battle alongside the Investigative Project, many more are needed. Like very few other organizations, Steven Emerson and his Investigative Project are providing us with the necessary information to identify and address the Islamo-fascism that threatens to overwhelm us, but we must answer the challenge to act upon it.

For more information or to receive daily updates, contact:
The Investigative Project on Terrorism

Steven Emerson, Executive Director
Phone: 202-363-8602
Fax: 202-966-5191

Contact the poster at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Sharon Rubin, November 18, 2006.

If you are a person who is despairing about what Olmert is doing to the country: you may have been wondering where the opposition to the gov't is, and why it hasn't been brought down.

Now, for the first time, there is at least a hint of the possibility that it might be brought down.

MK Effie Eitam (National Union/NRP) has gone to the Likud party to appeal for a cooperative effort, if not a full merger, to create a strong opposition to the gov't. Said Eitam:

"Right now, the public is quiet, despite the revulsion they feel for this government; they feel there is nothing they can do in the current political constellation. There is great anger and disgust, but it is not being manifest. The sense is that the public is like a coiled spring, ready to burst and act -- but they need a leadership that will guide and encourage it."

If this describes you, it is important for you to let relevant MKs know. Now is not a time to stay quiet.

First, Effie Eitam needs to be congratulated in this action and strengthened -- let him know you are with him and that he should persist.

Then, key persons in National Union/NRP and Likud need to know that you are strongly for this initiative. They need to know that something is expected of them in terms of leadership, and that they are being watched. They have to understand that you want them to take the gov't down, and that their efforts now will affect how you vote later.

Below you will find phone numbers and e-mails for key persons, as mentioned above. Phoning is more effective. In most instances you will reach an aide and not the MK himself. This is fine -- deliver your message dynamically to that aide.

Then, please, send this on to everyone you can think of here in Israel who is also upset with the gov't and would respond to this. We have to make this response snowball. If we don't try, for certain nothing will happen.

It is especially important to move this message beyond the Anglo community to native Israelis in every part of the nation.

Taking the time to do this --
make the phone calls and forward this e-mail to others.

It is a modest effort on behalf of a nation in trouble.

MK Effie Eitam -- aide Shlomit 054-726-7810

MK Benny Elon -- head of National Union --
most effective is to use his beeper and leave message (no need for call back): 03-610-6666, then give #44150

MK Uri Ariel -- National Union -- 050-724-1680

MK Aryeh Eldad -- National Union -- 050-787-4669

MK Zevulun Orlev -- head National Religious Party -- 052-396-9888; aide Shuki 050-569-0103

MK Binyamin Netanyahu -- head Likud -- aide Ofir 050-200-2004

MK Yuval Steinitz -- Likud -- 052-385-3280

MK Ruby Rivlin -- Likud -- aide Rivka, 050-623-3710

Contact Sharon Rubin at amazonp@netvision.net.il

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 18, 2006.

This article is by Art Moore, a news editor with WorldNetDaily.com. It is called "Global Jihad" and appeared today in World Net Daily

Bush empowering terrorists, charges vocal Muslim critic Wafa Sultan says 'religion of peace' pronouncement undermines her efforts to battle religion's 'barbarism'

President Bush is undermining criticism vital to the survival of Western civilization and empowering terrorist leaders by proclaiming Islam a "religion of peace," says one of the most outspoken critics to emerge from the Muslim world in recent years.

Wafa Sultan, a native of Syria, seized attention worldwide in February when her electrifying interview on Al-Jazeera television spread across the Internet through a video clip produced by the Middle East Media Research Institute.

Named this year to Time Magazine's list of 100 influential people in the world, Sultan spoke with WND after addressing a symposium on radical Islam in Las Vegas hosted by America's Truth Forum. She understands Bush's position as president and believes he is only trying to be diplomatic, but insists, nevertheless, his words are "empowering" Muslim leaders whose ultimate aim is for Islamic law to govern the world.

"I believe he undermines our credibility by saying that," said Sultan. "We came from Islam, and we know what kind of religion Islam is.

In her February Al-Jazeera appearance, which has brought her death threats, she asserted the world is witnessing "a battle between modernity and barbarism which Islam will lose."

The video clip is estimated to have been viewed at least 1 million times, according to the New York Times.

Sultan told WND she would urge Bush to take a closer look at Islamic culture and its general embrace of violence as a means of establishment and expansion.

"Facts are very stubborn things. Facts are facts," she said. "If you are not familiar with Islamic culture, how can you claim Islam is a peaceful religion?"

The White House declined WND's request to respond to Sultan's comments.

Since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the president has made an effort to reach out to Muslim leaders at home and abroad to assure them the U.S. is not in a war against Islam

Six days after 9-11, Bush told Muslims in remarks at the Islamic Center of Washington, D.C., "The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don't represent peace. They represent evil and war."

In an October 2002 speech in Washington, Bush said, "Islam is a vibrant faith. Millions of our fellow citizens are Muslim. We respect the faith. We honor its traditions. Our enemy does not. Our enemy doesn't follow the great traditions of Islam. They've hijacked a great religion."

President Bush at White House Ramadan dinner with Muslim leaders in 2004 (White House photo)

But Robert Spencer, a scholar of Islam who also spoke at the Las Vegas conference, contends President Bush and other Western leaders don't need to make any pronouncements about the nature of Islam at all.

"They would be much wiser to limit themselves to declaring that their foes wish to impose Islamic sharia (law) rule upon their countries and the world, and that they are going to lead the resistance to that," Spencer writes in his best-selling, controversial book, "The Truth About Muhammad."

'This is your Quran'

Sultan, a psychiatrist, said that amid the death threats, she has received a flood of correspondence from Muslim men and women from around the world, using assumed names, who are "encouraging me to keep up doing what I am doing."

"Once they feel protected, they will come out and speak up, I believe," she said.

One e-mail came from a man in Morocco who said he gresw up in a family of mullahs.

"He printed out all my articles and made a small book out of them," Sultan said. "He gave them to his 17-year-old son and he said, 'Son, from now on this is your Quran.'"

Sultan told the Nov. 10 America's Truth Forum symposium the turning point of her life came in 1979 when she was a medical student at the University of Aleppo in Syria and witnessed the murder of a teacher by members of the Muslim Brotherhood, the terrorist organization founded in Egypt in 1928 that spawned groups such as al-Qaida, Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

"They filled his body with bullets while screaming "Allah is great,'" she said. "I was traumatized, and I started questioning what kind of god we worshiped."

Sultan came to the U.S. in 1989 with her husband, David, and they later became naturalized citizens.

"I decided to fight this ideology of hatred," she said, "and began to search for a new place to do what I do freely.

"And here I am doing what I do," she said to applause.

But Sultan admitted wounds remain.

"Islam is a very painful chapter of my life, and it doesn't matter how much I try to close this chapter and move on with my life -- I will never be able to heal the ugly scar Islam left in my heart," she told the Las Vegas conferees.

Sultan contended, contrary to prevailing wisdom, Islam has been a major problem for the world since its inception more than 1,400 years ago.

"We need to find an effective way to deal with Islam, but it must be based on truth and honesty," she said.

Previous dialogue has failed, because it hasn't been based on truth, she said, and has ended up "empowering the fanatics."

"It's time to face the Islamic world and discuss with them the problems in the Islamic faith, without fear," said Sultan.

While many Muslim leaders and non-Muslim apologists insist terrorists have "hijacked" Islam, Sultan asserts people such as those who kidnapped and beheaded Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in 2002 are "true Muslims."

Osama bin Laden and other terrorist leaders are simply following the example of Muhammad, who "committed the most brutal acts against those who opposed him," she said.

By contrast, she told of meeting Pearl's mother, Ruth.

"The forgiveness and love she has in her heart is stunning," Sultan said. "She believes that by showing Muslims love and forgiveness they will see the faults and reform."

But Sultan cautioned that while many Muslims are inclined to this "civilized way of dealing with humans," the "thinking process doesn't fit with people who have been taught the true Muslim faith."

Speaking of Muslims in Western nations in particular, Sultan said regardless of how much help and benefit they receive from their country, they "will always be loyal first to Islam."

In Islam, as taught in the Quran, she said, there is no guilt toward any action against non-Muslims.

Peace, she said, is impossible to achieve with true Muslim believers.

"You must realize that for the Israelis to make peace with Palestinians, they must make peace with every Muslim country in the world. The Iranian president says Israel must be wiped out. What did Israel do to Iran?"

Muslims, she said, are coming to the U.S. and using the country's constitutional freedom of religion to advance an alien system that seeks political dominance.

It's time to "define what constitutes a religion," Sultan urged.

"Please don't let your civilized way become your worst enemy and become a weak point in protecting the country and the rest of the world," she concluded.


Some of Sultan's critics complain she has no authority to criticize Islam because she no longer is a Muslim. Los Angeles Times' reporter Teresa Watanabe argued Sultan had "never been connected with progressive Islamic groups and does not know the writings of Islam's most respected voices of reform."

In an interview with CNN, Hussam Eyloush of the Council on Islamic Relations' Los Angeles office called Sultan "Islamophobic" and insisted "reform is alive and well within Islam, but it will only happen by those from within Islam and not those who hate Islam."

Wafa Sultan spars with Al-Jazeera host Faisal al-Qasim

Sultan's February interview found her squaring off with Al-Jazeera host Faisal al-Qasim and Islamic scholar Ibrahim Al-Khouli about Samuel P. Huntington's "clash of civilizations" theory. The exchange took place on the 90-minute discussion program "The Opposite Direction," with Sultan speaking via satellite from Los Angeles.

Sultan: "The clash we are witnessing around the world is not a clash of religions, or a clash of civilizations," she said. "It is a clash between two opposites, between two eras. It is a clash between a mentality that belongs to the Middle Ages and another mentality that belongs to the 21st century. It is a clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality. It is a clash between freedom and oppression, between democracy and dictatorship. It is a clash between human rights, on the one hand, and the violation of these rights, on other hand. It is a clash between those who treat women like beasts, and those who treat them like human beings. What we see today is not a clash of civilizations. Civilizations do not clash, but compete."

Al-Qasim: "I understand from your words that what is happening today is a clash between the culture of the West, and the backwardness and ignorance of the Muslims?"

Wafa Sultan and Islamic scholar Ibrahim Al-Khouli

Sultan: "Yes, that is what I mean."

Al-Qasim: "Who came up with the concept of a clash of civilizations? Was it not Samuel Huntington? It was not bin Laden. I would like to discuss this issue, if you don't mind. ..."

Sultan: "The Muslims are the ones who began using this expression. The Muslims are the ones who began the clash of civilizations. The Prophet of Islam said: 'I was ordered to fight the people until they believe in Allah and His Messenger.' When the Muslims divided the people into Muslims and non-Muslims, and called to fight the others until they believe in what they themselves believe, they started this clash, and began this war. In order to stop this war, they must re-examine their Islamic books and curricula, which are full of calls for takfir and fighting the infidels."

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, November 18, 2006.

Iran has apparently crossed a sacred line in the desert sand. If the Bush Administration, in concurrence with a Democrat controlled House and Senate, does not act aggressively at erstwhile Persia's blatant affront to America's economic well being the modern day superpower nation they steward risks a precipitous decline in stature not unlike tentative empires of yesteryear, perhaps licking wounds of battles gone awry. The Middle East fossil fuel rich upstart Shiite regime, in a thankfully miscalculating act of giddy defiance bereft of common sense and historical perspective, ignoring the fate of Sadist Hussein who was toppled for the same reason, spews venom at an anti-Iranian Uncle Sam and his sacred petro-greenback by suggesting it will deal in other currencies especially when selling (at extortionist prices) the raw material source of its newfound wealth to energy addicted industrial nations. "Since any transaction, made worldwide on the basis of the dollar, should be checked in the Clearing House in New York, we decided in line with the government's policies to carry out transactions in other hard currencies," recently asserts a retaliatory Persian Minister of Economy and Finance Davood Danesh Jaafari, throwing caution to a fire-breathing desert wind, fanned by unforgiving transatlantic cross currents generated by a prescient Uncle correctly noting Iran to be a member of the ever infamous axis of evil, thus logically influencing American banks to disrupt the Shiite regime's dollar-based transactions, some of which no doubt were destined for terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hizbullah. Oil for euros, oil for yuans, how dare the madman AhMADinejad and his crew of muddled mullahs in a moment of lofty exuberance, hoist with its own petard, drunk on perceived power, display such chutzpah, imperiling the value of today's challenged but still revered dollar, America's most important export and reserve currency of the world! Some things are just not done if one values his sun-baked skin. Indeed, even a self-serving vengeful interpretation of the Koran, promising an Islamic planet, will not save the day for these delusional fools, presuming those movers and shakers of today's one superpower nation do not go wobbly.

It is one thing to disrespect civilized nations by ignoring civil requests to stop spinning fissile material producing centrifuges. It is one thing to disrespect the sovereign state of Israel by asserting it should be wiped off the map. But when those Iranian louts disrespect the almighty dollar, believing they've got 'The Great Satin' over a barrel, inferring they will especially trade Persian tea for paper bearing no resemblance to dead U.S. Presidents, their turbans must be adjusted way too tight cutting off blood flow to their Imam possessed brains. 'Shock and awe' indeed is not exclusively reserved for the Taliban or Iraqi insurgents. Regime change indeed is not exclusively reserved for less formidable and well-connected nations when the stakes are so high. It is almost inconceivable that U.S. movers and shakers, despite being politically bludgeoned by a disgruntled public drained of resolve by a dysfunctional Iraq occupation, will not react with force when its petrodollar status is imperiled. Yet twilights set on battle weary Roman and British Empires unable to muster zeal when overextended and weighed down by public sentiment naïve to the ways of the world. Israel surely has much to lose if its one mighty ally fatally opts not defend its dollar, the financial enabler of a world-class vibrant democracy. A sober assessment, encouragement, and promised support from the one thriving Middle East democracy aware of the inevitable fallout precipitating from an Uncle Sam that in effect says uncle to a regime obsessed with infidel annihilating jihad is a most essential duty at this most perilous moment in time.

Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net

To Go To Top

Posted by N. Natan, November 18, 2006.

In an hostile Moslem environment which no Hudna (islamic truce but never peace) will ever dissolve, Israel will only survive by ascertaining itself (besides never-ending military means) as the fundamental and indisputable true Source of the Land of Israel : That is to say by its glorious founding Temple (without which nobody would have ever heard of Jerusalem).

How long will the servile dhimmis Jews continue to pray at the wrong place, at the feet of the Moslems (who despise them more for that) and at a simple basis of a rampart of an antique Jewish citadel !!!

Israelis politicians, journalists and other people may have a (little) excuse for remaining ignorant and silent.

But it should have been the duty and the pride of Israelis archaeologists to search and discover the Truth which can be found through the study of the Temple hydraulic system (devised and working by sole gravitation) which has been miraculously preserved in the rocky underground of the Haram (the ancient Jerusalem citadel which stood upstream of the Temple).

I feel ashamed for the Israeli archaeologists.

I feel ashamed for the slavish dhimmi Israel, who will not survive without its founding Temple.

And I sincerely hope that in the same way as the Shoah did force the Jews to recreate Israel, an atomic disaster will not finally force them to restore their Temple wherefrom they are issued.


Contact N. Natan at n.natan@jerusalem-4thtemple.org or go to the website: http://www.jerusalem-4thtemple.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Alex Traiman, November 17, 2006.

Tens of Thousands of Jews will ascend to Hevron for the annual reading of Chayei Sarah, the Torah portion which records the Jewish patriarch Abraham's purchase of the Cave of the Patriarchs. Each year tens of thousands arrive at the site where the Jewish patriarchs and matriarchs Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca, and Jacob and Leah are buried, for the annual reading to retell and relive Biblical history.

According to the Torah, Abraham made the purchase in front of a large local community gathering, for an exorbitant price, to serve as the burial ground for his deceased wife Sarah and his Jewish descendants.

Genesis Chapter 23

And the life of Sarah was one hundred years and twenty years and seven years; [these were] the years of the life of Sarah. And Sarah died in Kiryat Arba, which is Hevron, in the land of Canaan, and Abraham came to eulogize Sarah and to bewail her.

And Abraham arose from before his dead, and he spoke to the sons of Heth, saying, "I am a stranger and an inhabitant with you. Give me burial property with you, so that I may bury my dead from before me." And the sons of Heth answered Abraham, saying to him, "Listen to us, my lord; you are a prince of God in our midst; in the choicest of our graves bury your dead. None of us will withhold his grave from you to bury your dead."

And Abraham arose and prostrated himself to the people of the land, to the sons of Heth. And he spoke with them, saying, "If it is your will that I bury my dead from before me, listen to me and entreat for me to Ephron the son of Zohar. That he may give me the Machpelah (double) Cave, which belongs to him, which is at the end of his field; for a full price let him give it to me in your midst for burial property."

Now Ephron was sitting in the midst of the sons of Heth, and Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham in the hearing of the sons of Heth, of all those who had come into the gate of his city, saying, "No, my lord, listen to me. I have given you the field, and the cave that is in it, I have given it to you. Before the eyes of the sons of my people, I have given it to you; bury your dead."

And Abraham prostrated himself before the people of the land. And he spoke to Ephron in the hearing of the people of the land, saying, "But, if only you would listen to me. I am giving the money for the field; take [it] from me, and I will bury my dead there."

And Ephron replied to Abraham, saying to him, "My lord, listen to me; a [piece of] land worth four hundred shekels of silver, what is it between me and you? Bury your dead." And Abraham listened to Ephron, and Abraham weighed out to Ephron the silver that he had named in the hearing of the sons of Heth, four hundred shekels of silver, accepted by the merchant.

And so the field of Ephron which was in Machpelah, facing Mamre, was established (as Abraham's possession). [This included] the field and the cave that was in it, and all the trees that were in the field, which were within its entire border around.

[It was] to Abraham as a possession before the eyes of the sons of Heth, in the presence of all who had come within the gate of his city. And afterwards, Abraham buried Sarah his wife in the cave of the field of Machpelah, facing Mamre, which is Hevron, in the land of Canaan. And the field and the cave within it were established to Abraham as burial property, [purchased] from the sons of Heth.

The Jewish community of Hevron is relatively small with only 1,000 residents and students living in the city currently populated by 150,000 Arabs. However, at certain times throughout the year, as many as 100,000 Jews arrive in Hevron to visit the celebrated Jewish monument located in the city.

"We are expecting tens of thousands of Jews to arrive here in Hevron this Shabbat, just several weeks after the conclusion of Sukkot, in which over 100,000 Jews came to the city," according to Jewish community spokesman David Wilder.

"It shows the tremendous support the Jewish people have for the residents of Hevron, and reaffirms our commitment to live in this Biblical city," Wilder says.

Yet with only permanent lodgings for 1,000 Jews, the yearly reading of Chayei Sarah (or the life of Sarah) stretches the limits of the small Jewish community's hospitality, a trait for which the patriarch Abraham was renowned.

"People sleep anywhere and everywhere," Wilder says. "The weather is nice, and there will be lots of tents. Plus, literally anyplace there is a space to put a mattress or sleeping bag will be used."

The annual Shabbat reading will feature many rabbis and lecturers addressing topics relating to the Torah and the Jewish people. In addition, this weekend is one of the few times during the year the large room memorializing Isaac in the Cave of the Patriarchs will be open to Jewish worshippers. "Isaac's room" houses the tunnels which lead several stories down to the underground burial caves. The room is used throughout the year by Muslims as a mosque.

Yet the climax of the Shabbat will be the Torah reading itself, in the exact spot where Biblical history took place approximately 4,000 years ago.

While Hevron is often in the news due to security or political concerns, the Hevron community does not expect any incidents at this peaceful annual gathering. "The only challenge will be how to get tens of thousands of Jews home safely following Shabbat," Wilder says.

Wilder contends that Hevron is always open throughout the year to every Jew in the world, "Anyone that is still able to come for Shabbat is absolutely invited, and whoever cannot make it this year, should begin planning now to be in Hevron this time next year or sometime in between."

This essay appeared in today's Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNN.com).

To Go To Top

Posted by Shalom TV, November 17, 2006.

Charges that the "paper of record" has "broken the record." Suggests that The New York Times has an anti-Israel bias.

In a Shalom TV interview that begins airing this Sunday, November 19, Malcolm Hoenlein, the executive vice-chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, levels serious charges against The New York Times in response to its publishing full-page ads stating that "the Israel lobby" (i.e. American Jewry) is responsible for the current war in Iraq and for a possible war in Iran.

The New York Times printed advertisements paid for by CNI, the Council for National Interest, including an ad that ran in "The Week In Review" section the Sunday before mid-term elections. The ad included a cartoon depicting the Israel Lobby as a used-car salesman "selling" Uncle Sam on a future war in Iran with a headline stating, "The Israel Lobby Is Trying to Sell Another War."

Below are excerpts of Mr. Hoenlein's comments, the professional leader of the organization that speaks on behalf of American Jewry on matters pertaining to Israel and other Jewish communities in foreign countries.

HOENLEIN: "To me, the shock is not that CNI would run these ads [with] cartoons that depict the pro-Israel community in the most vicious terms; but that The New York Times would publish it. We have submitted ads that they [the Times] would not publish because they were too opinionated.

"The problem is that they [The New York Times] agree more often than disagree with the sentiment in that ad. If The New York Times wanted to bend over backward [to support the principle of free speech] they would have covered a rally of 35,000 people who gathered to demonstrate against Ahmadinejad and in support of Israel. Not one word [about the rally] in The New York Times! How do you justify that?

"It tells you something about The New York Times and I'm sorry to say that the newspaper of record has broken the record.

"This is really of such an extreme magnitude that where we see them publish an ad of such vile content, there is no justification! And they have no moral standing anymore when it comes to reporting on Israel. It has clearly been demonstrated to be biased."

Contact Shalom TV at news@shalomtv.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 17, 2006.

After 59 years of Israel existing in Arabist neighborhood, I do not believe the Palestinians' intent and can predict what will happen if Hamas steps down. All we are looking at is masqueraded deceit. Sadly, the West will buy into this Palestinians' ill with good mask intent. The West will give them billions of dollars, their "leaders" will squander some, use some more to continue buying arms and deploy suicide/homicide bombers into Israel and with the rest of the money left they will continue funding teaching their children's lies, anti Semitism-anti-Israel, hate for the West and by end of the day they will sit and laugh how stupid we, in the West are, that once again we bought into their "plausible" game. And in the meantime, for a while, the world can set aside the Israeli-Palestinian's headache causing, problematic issue and the "story" can comet off the headlines. UNTIL the Palestinians true colors are exposed ONCE AGAIN, probably with another military encounter with Israel. And then, for a while, the world will AGAIN get angry with the Palestinians' behavior, realize how much money was spent in vain, how much money was misappropriated and then some action will be taken and so the vicious circle continues.

What is annoying and so very wrong is that 59 years ago the world nations recognized Israel and since it has been a sovereign state, now seeking the Palestinian "leadership" to recognizes her existence. Who are the Palestinians to give their seal of approval for Israel's existence? Why Israel needs a bunch of murderers ill intent thugs to give her the stamp of approval God only knows because the Israelis and the world do not. The Palestinians need our permission to exist, if not for anything else, just see what they are taught as they grow up: not mathematics and science, history and literature, only hate, anti-Semitism, anti-west and how to take the world over for the sake of their wicked Allah. SICK it is!

How sad we all appear to be, WE, not the Palestinians! Only because all has become fictional; more so justifiable!

This article is called "Palestinian negotiator: Hamas-led gov't will resign" and appeared today in the Jerusalem Post
(www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1162378420386).

The Hamas-controlled Palestinian government will resign within two or three days to make way for a new unity government that could help end a punishing Western aid boycott and resume long-frozen peace talks with Israel, a senior Palestinian negotiator said Friday.

The negotiator took part Thursday in a nighttime meeting in Gaza where Palestinian Authority Chairman President Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah and Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas pressed forward with efforts to bring their rival factions together. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the meeting was not public. The two leaders were set to meet again Friday.

Despite the reported progress, Abbas has said he hopes to tie unity efforts to a broader deal that would see Israel release Palestinian prisoners, including several jailed Hamas Cabinet ministers, in return for the release of a captured IDF soldier Cpl. Gilad Shalt soldier. Slow progress on such a deal could delay the creation of the new government.

Formation of a moderate Cabinet to replace the one headed by Hamas is an important plank in a new peace initiative offered Thursday by France and Spain, aimed at stopping constant Israel-Palestinian violence and moving toward peace negotiations.

The concept is to replace the Cabinet of Hamas ministers with independent experts linked to, but not members of, the two movements. Abbas and his Palestine Liberation Organization would be charged with handling peace negotiations, while the Cabinet would deal with the daily affairs of the Palestinian areas.

The sides have already agreed in principle on a compromise candidate for prime minister: Mohammed Shabir, 60, a US-educated microbiologist with ties to both Hamas and Fatah. At Thursday's meeting, Abbas assured Haniyeh that Shabir enjoyed broad international acceptance, the negotiator said.

The object is to satisfy Western demands for a Palestinian leadership that recognizes Israel, renounces violence and accepts previous peace deals. At stake is vital foreign aid -- hundreds of millions of dollars a year that have kept the Palestinian Authority afloat for the past decade.

Contact the poster at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, November 17, 2006.

This was written by Kenneth Lasson and distributed by IMRA. Kenneth Lasson is a law professor at the University of Baltimore and Director of the Haifa Summer Law Institute.

It is intellectually offensive to read in the Jerusalem Post a totally unsubstantiated "news" story that "Pollard Gave Info to Pakistan, Australia." It is doubly onerous that this allegation comes over twenty years after Jonathan Pollard was sentenced to life in prison, and curiously released just as rumors of clemency on his behalf are being heard.

While the Post headline may be journalistically irresponsible, though, the FBI agent making those charges is guilty of patently immoral deception: the evidence he provides is a shoddy collection of hearsay, innuendo, and deceptive half-truths -- none of which ever appeared in court documents. One may rest assured that the Justice Department would have included any charges it thought it could prove in its original indictment in 1985 or in subsequent court filings.

Pollard's most staunch defenders make no apology for his actions. He clearly committed a punishable wrong. He is not a hero, but he is most certainly a victim of a monumental miscarriage of justice.

Here are the undisputed facts:

First, Pollard was apprehended for passing classified information to a foreign government. He was never charged with nor convicted of the crime of treason. Nor was there anything in his indictment to suggest he intended harm to America -- or that he compromised the nation's intelligence-gathering capabilities, or that he caused injury to any of its agents.

Second, in lieu of a trial, the government entered into a plea agreement under which it promised not to seek life imprisonment in return for Pollard's cooperation. The Justice Department acknowledged in court that he had cooperated fully. Nevertheless, the chief prosecutor (Joseph DiGenova) said immediately after sentencing he hoped Pollard "never sees the light of day."

Third, Pollard was sentenced on the basis of a government official's private statements to the judge that, for all anyone knows, may be lies. The secretary of defense (then Caspar Weinberger) presented the court with a secret memorandum that has never been subject to cross examination. Later he told the press that Pollard was one of the worst traitors in American history (and still later was quoted as saying that the case "was blown way out of proportion.").

But where was the evidence?

Our system of law requires that an accused be confronted by, and given an opportunity to challenge, his accusers. That's what Pollard was denied.

What did Jonathan Pollard do to deserve life imprisonment?

Nowhere does his indictment allege, as the FBI agent falsely claims, that he gave classified information to Pakistan or Australia or that he betrayed worldwide intelligence data. Nowhere in their briefings to the Senate Intelligence Committee did U.S. officials claim Pollard gave Israel sources and methods.

On the other hand, there is ample evidence that Pollard is being punished for a crime he didn't commit and is being disproportionately punished for the one he did: passing on satellite pictures and reports that showed U.S.-built missile and chemical factories in Iraq. American foreign-policy architects are as embarrassed today as they were angered then that their support of Saddam Hussein had been disclosed to Israel.

The anti-Pollard intelligence community never mentions the fact that the appellate decision in his case turned on narrow procedural grounds, not on the merits. The dissenting judge, Steven Williams, concluded that the government's breach of the plea agreement was "a complete and gross miscarriage of justice."

President Bush should correct this longstanding miscarriage of justice. Dozens of Americans have been convicted of the same crime as Pollard and have served an average of four years. Many more perfidious spies have received lesser or no punishment -- about which the FBI is utterly mute. (There have been at least two Americans caught spying by Israel and who were quietly returned to their homeland.)

Just as the law should not be bent to release Pollard, neither should it be bent to keep him behind bars. Whatever the FBI's motives in characterizing Pollard as a bête noire, they are arrogantly undeclared, anachronistic, and irresponsibly vindictive.

The fair, moral, and principled thing for the President to do is show Pollard clemency. It is incumbent upon Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to insist upon it.

Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard at Justice4JP@aol.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Bryna Berch, November 17, 2006.

This was written by David Steinmann and it appeared in Family Security Matters and is archived at

It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that Muslims in western countries would expect that our laws and culture should be bent to accommodate their behavior and actions. Those kinds of claims/demands (depending on the circumstances of the matter at hand) are simply part of an ever increasing, gradual, insistent pressure designed -- sometimes intentionally, sometimes unintentionally -- to have western countries evolve over time into Islamic ones.

But because it is hard for almost all westerners to imagine that actually happening, they tend to fall back on the cultural norms we have developed amongst ourselves which require tolerance, forbearance, compromise and understanding. All of which work just fine when all of the parties involved subscribe to the same basic understandings. But when one party comes to the conflict with an unyielding, intolerant insistence on having it done their way, as so many Muslims do when they come to western countries, then our tried and true approach to conflict resolution -- tolerance, compromise, understanding, flexibility -- fails and we are left having yielded to demands which, were they to have been seen and understood in the context of a multi-faceted on-going, protracted cultural and religious war would never have been made.

Happily, the Canadian court cited in the article below did not yield to an Islam based appeal that a man's "dishonor" should be a mitigating factor in his sentence for having murdered his wife. But for every such rejection of Islamic insistence on having western countries do it their way, there are these days a dozen examples of western countries giving in and yielding to these demands in the name of tolerance, multi-culturism and flexibility. I circulate articles about some of these examples from time to time just to keep you all posted on the increasing absurdity of the west's willingness to subjugate itself to another more insistent, self confident culture.

Unhappily, all signs in western Europe point to an increasingly speedy decline in their ability to articulate and defend their cultures against an aggressive Islamic insistence on the Islamisization of those countries. America and Australia seem so far to have had the most success in resisting this encroachment but even here there is an endless supply of efforts by Muslims to change our culture to first accommodate their beliefs and religion and, although they don't often articulate it clearly, eventually change us into an Islamic society. In order to defend ourselves, we will have to understand two things: what our culture is and why it is worth defending; and that there really is a religious war going on around the globe right now, the intention of which is to Islamicize the world.

It has taken the west a very long time to evolve into a society we are comfortable with. But if we have come to take it for granted, or have forgotten why we value its underlying principles, or have lost the ability to fight to defend it, then we will lose this war because the other side is religiously driven and is convinced that it is fighting for its god's principles. Can a post-modern, secular society muster the will to resist that kind of assault? Our children and grandchildren are going to have to be ready to answer that question and perhaps fight to defend our culture. Often it will be a subtle conflict with its battles fought in places such as schools or in courtrooms. And sometimes the battles will be fought with guns. But they will all be part of the same conflict and we fail to understand that at our extreme peril.

This isn't the kind of "war" we are used to understanding and knowing how to go about winning. Both on the battlefield and inside our own country the rules have changed and the enemy is using tactics we haven't faced before. We will have to adjust to these changes if we are to be successful. When you read the news try to see it through that kind of prism and you will understand it better and, hopefully, be better prepared to be less tolerant and more insistent that western values and culture not be eroded in order to accommodate Muslim insistence on their culture and values which are so often anathema to our beliefs and values. It's going to be hard but we are all soldiers -- like it or not -- in this conflict. And it's past time to saddle up and get into the battle.

To Go To Top

Posted by Voice of Judea, November 17, 2006.

The recent fatal rocket attacks on Southern Israel have brought Israel to its heels. Israel's weekend newspapers are full of articles quoting Israeli leaders who have given up hope in stopping the ongoing attacks on Sderot and the Western Negev.

Maariv ran the following headline: "IDF Despairs." There has been an exodus of thousands of Jews from Sderot and there appears to be no-end in site. Military analysts admit that the only possible way to stop the attacks would be to reenter into Gaza and seize control of the Philadelphi pass. Israel is not prepared to take the necessary action because they fear the reaction of the international community.

The European Union is already volunteering to send international troops to Gaza, a move that will effectively prevent Israel from taking any military action in the area.

On the Iranian front, Israeli leaders are no less clueless. The international media quoted Shimone Peres stating that Israel must not take the lead in international efforts to curb Iran’s nuclear program.

The vice premier on Thursday played down speculation that Israel might launch a pre-emptive military strike to prevent its arch-enemy from attaining the bomb. “We cannot and should not be the ones directing the campaign against Iran, because Iran is a danger to the entire world,” Peres told Israel Radio.

Voice of Judea Commentary:

It is simple. Israeli leaders are walking us down the road to another Auschwitz, just as Jewish leaders did 70 years ago. Israeli leaders admit that Ahmadenajad is a modern day Hitler. However, they are waiting for the world to come and rescue us. They have learned nothing from the Holocaust. And they have the audacity to say that if there was an Israel, during the Holocaust then there would not have been a Holocaust. Really? And what exactly would Israel have done? Cry to the United Nations to save them?

The time has come to show faith in God and unleash the full force of the IDF to save Jews and Israel, before it is too late. Never Again? Shimone Peres and the other leaders of Israel are making all of the same mistakes, over and over again!

The real slogan that represents Israel's commitment to stopping the next Holocaust is much more like "All over again".

There is hope and no reason to despair. There is another way. There is a Jewish alternative of faith in God combined with Jewish firepower. We have tried the way of Shimone Peres and it has led us to defeat, despair and Holocausts. Let us try the Jewish way!

Contact the poster at mishar@mishal.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 17, 2006.


An English girl was put onto a group of six, in her science class. The other five were Pakistani immigrants. Four didn't know English. The fifth spent the whole time translating for the other four into Urdu. The girl wasn't learning anything. She asked to be placed with a group what spoke English.

The school called the police, who arrested her for being intolerant. She was alleged to have called the Pakistanis a name, but that is not known.

"...after forty years of angry controversy, after the transformation of entire English towns and city districts into simulacra of Karachi and Dhaka, after race riots and jihadist bombings-after all that, illiterate (in English, at any rate) Muslim South Asian peasants are still pouring into England in numbers apparently uncontrolled, and are being granted courtesies, dignities, and privileges which the native English are denied." (Miriam Gardner of American Yated Neeman, 10/25 from John Derbyshire.) British Muslims usually are not arrested for exhorting the murder of Christians and Jews.


The Muslim Arabs think differently and have different values from us, though the following examples do not hold 100%, as the West departs from its traditional values. They are hospitable but treacherous. We put a value on doing things well (or we used to), whereas they value having non-Arab Muslims do their work. We value love within marriage, they arrange marriages, treating wives as chattel and obsessing over sex. Overshadowed by the West, the Muslim sense of self-worth comes from a belief that they are the followers of God and everyone else is not. (Judaism is not exclusive.)

Muslim Arabs do not build modern infrastructure, and let what they have run down. We think of contractual obligations as mutual, but they think that the superior partner has a lesser obligation than the inferior partner and that obligations to believers and clansmen override obligations to non-believers and outsiders. For example, Muslims in England put up a mosque and then demanded removal of the 600 year-old pub nearby.

To superior force, they become obsequious and lie to get you to turn your back so they can stab it. They don't expect their rhetoric to be taken seriously, and are surprised when we take it and ours seriously. They issue death threats over minor matters, not really meaning it. They lie routinely, as in claiming that the Jews want Medina back. They believe in all sorts of supernatural things and have an illogical notion of cause and effect. They teach by rote and without critical thinking. They do not live in the here and now, as when they exact revenge for problems from hundreds of years ago. They blame their problems on other people (largely because they are ashamed to admit faults). They know their civilization is declining and inferior, and feel humiliated over it. (So they are trying to destroy ours.) They don't agree that everyone is entitled to an opinion. S. Arabia punishes people who don't totally follow the revealed word. They don't feel their civilization can co-exist with ours, which has pluralism, a fee media, free women, and free enterprise. They do not coexist with us in our civilization, which they try to subvert (Op. Cit., 10/30 from anthropologist Steve Bowne).


Israel does not have a choice between war and peace. The Arabs are bent on conflict. Therefore, the question for Israel is how to win the conflict and minimize damage to it. Waiting for the enemy to strike, as it mostly does, will not do.

The government sent the army to the Gaza-Egypt border. The troops found a dense network of arms-smuggling tunnels. Those tunnels, as well as Egypt's failure to guard the border, are the Arabs' way of maximizing the damage to inflict upon Israel. After destroying but a fraction of the tunnels the army estimated were below, the army pulled back. It gave no reason. The reason probably was that the inexperienced and appeasement-minded civilian government was afraid that if it kept the soldiers there longer, the rest of the world would criticize it.

The government should do what Israel needs, not what anti-Israel outsiders want. It should have kept the troops in to do the job, retaken control over the border, and widened the corridor to make it easier to monitor (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 10/26).

It needs a public relations arm to explain the need for sending and stationing troops and to explain that tunnels lead to innocent deaths.

Someone had proposed relocating the P.A. Arabs out of the town that straddles the border and provides cover for tunnels, and destroying their houses in the town.


Abbas' aide, Saeb Erekat, announced that in the past year, the P.A. economy shrank 28%. Investment in the coming year is expected under present conditions to fall 60%. If such declines continue, the P.A. areas would face total collapse. He attributed those problems to Israeli closure and foreign financial boycott (IMRA, 10/28).

Arabs blame outsiders, but their thugs extort from business and induce Israeli closure. If the P.A. collapses, Arabs would move out, and the P.A. would have less cannon fodder. They would have less money for war, although Iran provides some. Israelis could reclaim deserted parts of the P.A., as Jewish patrimony, recognized by the Mandate. As Daniel Gordis wrote in the New Republic Online (8/31, reprinted in Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2006, p.20), Israelis have learned that the P.A. Arabs don't care about statehood (as a goal in itself), they voted for Hamas not to establish a state but to wreck the Jewish one. Those Arabs deserve no sympathy.

Therefore, Israel should declare the P.A. Arabs in a state of war with it, intensify closure, and block the Gaza-Egyptian border to keep Iranian arms out. This would produce a victory in the world war known as jihad. The West needs a victory.


The bridge connects Lebanon with commercial outlets in Syria. It will cost $20 million (IMRA, 10/28). Weapons may flow in to Hizbullah, too. Why doesn't the US first demand that Lebanon ask UNIFIL to help it stop that flow and disarm Hizbullah?


Mr. Solana demanded that Israel fully open its border to Gaza people and goods. Closure, he claimed (without evidence, there being none), makes the Arabs angry with Israel and more violent. Vice-PM Peres retorted that closure is one answer to providing security from terrorism by the Arabs, and therefore won't be lifted until the Arabs cease terrorism.

Solana also demanded that Israel transfer to the P.A. excise duties it used to send. Peres refused, pointing out that the Arabs bring their problems upon themselves. Israel will not cooperate with the P.A., so long as it commits terrorism against Israel.

Peres dismissed Syrian alleged peace feelers as insincere attempts to relieve US pressure on Syria for its belligerency.

Solana asked the Foreign Minister to evacuate Israel's "illegal" outposts (IMRA, 10/28).

Solana mixed up the sequence of events. First comes terrorism. Then Israel takes counter-measures that reduce terrorism. The more severe the counter-measures, the greater the reduction of terrorism. Therefore, it is silly to suggest that if Israel did not take counter-measures, the Arabs would not commit terrorism. Solana should be denouncing the aggressor Palestinian Arab people, who collectively favor terrorism.

Peres was uncharacteristically realistic and defensive of Israeli rights. He might have added that the EU request that Israel send large sums to the P.A., even while the EU refrains from sending much money to the P.A. because its regime is terrorist, would be financing the deaths of Israel's own citizens. He should challenge Solana over that.

Having pointed out that the P.A. is violating its peace agreements with Israel, Peres should have concluded that the P.A. is just as insincere as Syria, in proposing peace.

The Foreign Minister should have told Solana that his asking Israel to take legal action in its own country is an unacceptable interference in sovereign Israel's internal matters. His demanding that Israel open its borders to its enemies is outrageous.


Senior Defense Ministry officials warned Olmert more than once that the Army was not ready. It had been hollowed out by budget cuts for years (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2006, p.18 from Akiva Eldar of Haaretz, 8/15). He let it be shown up, instead of first building it back up. That cost Israel its deterrent and therefore future lives.

They balanced their budget at the Army's expense, though the existence of the state is menaced by the Muslims. Soldiers died and Israeli cities were bombarded, as a result of unpreparedness combined with foolish leadership. Olmert acted prematurely.


They upgraded Egypt's SAM missiles (IMRA, 10/30). Can't Russia do anything decent?

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

To Go To Top

We Are Right! means WAR!
Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 17, 2006.

The thought of the day ... if you find it worthwhile, please read and pass it on.

There is a part of me that is proud of Israel's civility but my other part is relieved there is another perception.

There are those who believe that a continued dialogue and patience with the Palestinians, Hezbollah and the like is the only way to go. But I would hate to think that an agenda of going to war against any individual or nation was thought to be a completely wrong.

It is encouraging to know that behind the faade of 'we are firstly humanitarian and must find a way to talk it through,' there are reasonable and rational people who realize that the time is fast coming when enough is really enough!

Why enough is enough?

Giving genuine citizenship to such large Israeli Arabs population should have been enough, especially when there is no reciprocity even hinted when speaking of a Palestinian State.

Allowing Arabs be full members of the Israeli Knesset should have been enough, especially when there is no reciprocity even hinted when speaking of a Palestinian State.

Welcoming Arabs into Israel's hospitals, universities and the dandy beaches and providing social services even for those living outside her boarders should have been enough, especially when there is no reciprocity even hinted when speaking of a Palestinian State.

Displacing 8,500 of Israel's citizens in the most painful disengagement display from homes and land ever seen should have been enough, especially when there is no reciprocity even hinted when speaking of a Palestinian State.

Letting the US provide further US made arms and ammunition to Abbas should have been enough, especially when there is no reciprocity even hinted when speaking of a Palestinian State.

Israel endless bending backwards trying to come up with more, and even more concessions for the Palestinians should have been enough, especially when there is no reciprocity even hinted when speaking of a Palestinian State.

I absolutely love being Jewish; I am so very proud to be part of such a warm, humane human culture and tradition, but I believe we have come to the time when enough really needs to be enough!

So all that remains for me is to now pray that this time, when elections come and Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu is again elected as Israel's Prime Minister he indeed follows up on his own speeches, writings and teachings that go back decades, and does the right thing! Hopefully he does what needs to be done to make Israel a stronger and safe place for all its citizens, those who already live there and those who will inevitably have to come live there, considering that Europe and Venezuela are already either Nazi or Islamo fascist greatly and gravely anti Semitic societies.

I think it is good the USA takes a note when it comes to Iran and North Korea.

We Are Right! means WAR!

Contact Nurit Greenger at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Nurit Greenger, November 17, 2006.

"While Israel is building its future with Nobel laureates, the Arab world fills its future with suicide bombers."

The power to revolt is a pre-disposition to a low self-esteem, which inevitably helps building the mentality of a suicide bomber. Suicide bombers represent Arab descent people with the lowest self-esteem.

Further more, Intifada is a struggle; it is the human body last movement upon death. The true meaning of a struggle -- Intifada is that Arabs are still moving yet not truly alive as citizens of the world.

If Arabs continue pursuing the same policies that drove them to the lowest point in our history they are the only one to LOSE!

AND, if the Arabs keep on listening to their rulers, they will always be kneeling on the sideline watching Nobel prize winners produced by the Middle East -- but not by them or for them rather by ISRAEL for Israel and the betterment of the entire world!

Unfortunately it is one voice in the Islamo fascists hate and distortion cesspool. Unfortunately not enough Muslims and Arabs see, think and speak the way Farid Ghadry does. His article is called "Israel Builds for Nobel Prizes, Arabs Build for Suicide Bombers." Farid Ghadry is President of the Reform Party of Syria.

But it is encouraging there are some sane ones who still exist and do speak out the truth!

The news this week that two Israeli scientists, in addition to an American, won the Nobel Prize in chemistry, should be read with interest in the Arab world. This win says a lot about the state of affairs of the Middle East.

While Israel builds its future with Nobel laureates, the Arab world fills its future with suicide bombers. Ever since the inception of the State of Israel, Arabs have had this romantic notion that through wars and revenge we can return to our past glory. Of course, they don't tell us which past they are referring to. Was it when we were governed by the Ottoman Empire or by England and France? Or was it more like 1,300 years ago when spears ruled the battleground?

Ever since 1967, Arabs from all countries--but especially Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Egypt--have lived this fantasy that we can throw the Israelis to the sea. With the 1973 near-win against Israel, Arabs concluded that one more loss is not reason enough to stop and think. One more loss, with so many lives lost on both sides, is not enough for us to understand that the continued struggle is destroying us from within.

Even after Anwar Sadat came to understand the value of peace and co-existence, it seemed that more and more of our energies were diverted toward destruction. The downfall of the Soviet Union, the longtime ally of the Arab world, seemed to spur us to seek justice with the barrel of a gun rather than through pragmatic understanding.

The Oslo Accords produced a willing Israel and exposed fraudulent Palestinians. Again,we watched as Arab leaders mounted a campaign of deceit to divert our attention away from our own oppression. We, the obedient Arab sheep, followed. We carried banners, objected, revolted and in the end, we created a new cadre of school children with strong arms to throw stones but without the education and discipline no brains to produce Nobel prizes.

Ever since the Intifada, a term that truly spurns our sense of justice, we have achieved the lowest point of our self-esteem. Arab children that throw stones seem to feel an invisible power that is not available to the children of the State of Israel.

That power to revolt consequently pre-disposes to a low self-esteem, which inevitably helps to build the mentality of a suicide bomber. Suicide bombers feel nothing, understand little, and cannot see the future. They go on automatic pilot with the brain functioning as a guiding tool to self-destruct literally, as a person and against the society that developed them. Suicide bombers represent the lowest of our self-esteem as people of Arab descent.

We are in an Intifada, but it is one that is seen through the eyes of the Israeli Nobel laureates. We, as people of the Middle East, are dying and we cannot even feel it. We have reached the bottom and we do not even know it. Because of oppressive regimes that give us no chance to think for ourselves, we have no hope, no future, and certainly no Nobel prizes in science awaiting us. What very few people know is that an Intifada is also attributed to the last movement by a human body upon death.

Could that be this understanding of Intifada that is the true symbol of a struggle that should have ended long ago? All Arabs are in an Intifada, still moving yet not truly alive as citizens of the world. Every time the Syrian Ba'athists call for armed resistance, secretly support groups like Hezbollah and Hamas, and propagandize Arab unity, we fall further and further into oblivion.

The funny thing is that very few Arabs care to understand why we do not have Nobel laureates. They blame it on Imperialism and Zionism. In their minds, absent these two forces, we could be raking in those Nobel prizes. So while Israel survives Intifadas, wars, hate, and oppressive Arab rulers, we, the Arab people, must wake-up. If we pursue the same policies that drove us to the lowest point in our history (Asr al-Inhitat or Era of Despair as opposed to Asr al-Jahyliah or Era of Ignorance that preceded Prophet Mohammed), only we lose.

If we listen to our rulers, we will always be kneeling on the sideline watching Nobel prize winners produced by the Middle East -- but not by us or for us.

Contact Nurit Greenger at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Michael Travis, November 16, 2006.

The least we can do for the man, who sacrificed his life in such a heroic fashion, is to tell his story.

Major Roi Klein, the deputy batallion commander of 51th batallion of the Golany infantry brigade, from the Eli settlement, was the highest ranking officer between his soldiers in Beit Jbeil. During the combat, he noticed a hand grenade thrown at his men. Since there was no time to evade the effect of the upcoming explosion, he jumped at the grenade so as to block the shards and thus save his men. His sacrifice was succesful. His men, who thus survived the battle, told later that he cried out "Shma Israel" as he jumped at the grenade.

Roi Klein, a real hero in the age of anti-heroes worship, was burried at the day he turned 31.

It is told of him, that he was an excellent saxophone player and a brilliantly spiritual man, who completed cum laude his engineering degree. He hiked with friends in Afrika, he had a captivating laughter. All his friends say he was a quiet, gentle man. His widow wishes their children to grow up just like him.

May he rest in peace.

Instead of lighting a candle, please pass the story on. He deserves much more than that, but that's as much as we can do.

Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com

To Go To Top

Posted by Ruth Matar, November 16, 2006.

Dear Friends,

The most basic responsibility of a government is to protect its citizens. The Olmert government is not fulfilling this responsibility.

Yesterday, a woman was killed and a man lost his legs when Kassam rockets landed in downtown Sderot. The Islamic Jihad and Iz A-Din El-Kassam terrorists proudly claimed credit.

Fatima Slutzker, a Moslem woman married to a Jew, was the seventh fatal victim of a Kassam rocket among the nearly 1,700 that have been fired since the withdrawal from Gaza. She was 57 years-old.

The rockets fell not far from the house of former Sderot Mayor Amir Peretz, now Israel's Defense Minister. Maor (ben Dorit) Peretz, the 24-year-old guard assigned to protect Peretz's house was also hit by the rocket's wildly-scattered deadly shrapnel.

Both Fatima and Maor were taken to Barzilai Hospital in Ashkelon where the woman died, leaving behind her husband and two sons. Peretz had both of his legs amputated. Six other people were treated for light injuries.

Close to ten Kassams were fired at Sderot Wednesday. In addition, four other rockets were fired at the Western Negev. Another rocket landed near a children's nursery in a nearby kibbutz.

The nearly 1,700 Kassams were not an accident. They were meant to kill and when they did kill Jews, the Arabs celebrated! No apologies forthcoming from them!

However, when an Israeli artillery shell accidentally strayed 500 meters off course, killing 19 and wounding 29 others in Beit Hanoun, senior Fatah officials called for sanctions from the UN Security Council and incited the Arab populace to increase terror attacks on Israeli civilians.

Israel's wimpy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, on the other hand, publicly apologized to the entire world for the IDF's accidental firing, giving the Arabs additional propaganda ammunition.

There is currently an intense debate about whether Israel should re-conquer Gaza to stop the Kassams. The journalist Haggai Huberman wrote an excellent article in today's Hebrew newspaper Hatzofe. The following are excerpts from this article:

One of the lies spread by spokesmen in the government in particular, and by the left in general, is "And when we sat in Gaza, there were no Kassams?" The answer is simple: "NO!" When we sat in Gaza, there were no Kassams.

We left Gaza (and other places from where they are sending Kassams, like Beit Hanoun, Mejabliya, etc. ... in 1994 because of the Oslo agreements. [R.M. Remember the famous "Gaza-Jericho" plan?]) Before 1994, (when the IDF controlled Gaza) there were no Kassams. Not on Sderot, not on Miflassim, not on Nahal Oz.

Another famous sentence uttered in these days by the left is: "We tried already everything." No! That is not true. It is true we tried everything except the one and only thing that will stop the rockets: Complete re-conquest of the entire Gaza Strip. Complete IDF security control in each and every corner.

And thus we will repeat it ad nauseam! There is only one way to stop the rocket attacks. To re-conquer Gaza and stay there. It will happen sooner or later. Even Yuval Diskin, General Security Service Chief, and Avi Dichter, Internal Security Minister, already understand this.

Dear friends, I am including an article by Israel Harel, columnist for the Hebrew newspaper Haaretz, entitled, "You Promised a Dove, We Got Kassams". This article sheds light on how Israel's leaders got us into this terrible mess we are in. "You promised a dove, we got Qassams" ny Israel Harel, Haaretz November 16, 2006.

The unilateral disengagement, said the politicians who initiated it and carried it out and the journalists who jumped on the bandwagon, will bring calm to the Gaza border. The unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon, went one of the most influential arguments, proved that steps of this nature, despite the delusional warnings of opponents of peace, succeed. Shelly Yachimovich, who, from her influential positions in the media, was one of the instigators of the flight from Lebanon, even scoffed: "The entire region will burn? Not only is the region not burning, but there is absolute calm" (Haggai Segal and Uri Orbach, "They Promised a Dove").

Not even an enclave like Shaba Farms, on the Lebanese border, was left in the Gaza Strip. Instead, 25 flourishing settlements were uprooted and Israel withdrew to the last millimeter. In addition, a high fence, almost impassable, was erected between the Gaza Strip and the western Negev. And good fences, according to the slogan that those who supported the flight from Lebanon, the uprooting in Gaza and the uprooting in Judea and Samaria like to recite, make good neighbors.

But despite the fence and the traumatic disengagement that tore Israeli society apart, 100 doves of peace are not springing up in the Gaza Strip as promised. Instead, Palestinians are shooting hundreds of Qassam rockets, including the lethal ones fired yesterday. Miraculously, most have not been fatal. But yesterday, there were no miracles.

Last week, an annual conference on social issues took place in Sderot. At one session, following the calamity in Beit Hanun, a melancholy rhetorical question was asked: What is the point of our responding forcefully, even though we certainly did not intend to kill civilians? There have been years of military operations, but the Qassams continue to fall. And shells from Israeli cannons kill civilians, including children. How is it possible to educate our children in such a situation? What kind of hope are we giving them, so that they will not abandon the country and emigrate?

These remarks were made out of genuine concern. But past experience shows that as long as we were educated, and educated others, to a reality of "there is no choice," there were few cracks in our emotional fortitude and our sense of justice. The loss of hope occurred after we tried the "alternatives" and, as at Oslo, "achieved breakthroughs."

The sowers of illusion convinced us that there is a Palestinian partner, and pushed the decision makers into unrealistic and even delusional harbors. For the sake of "giving the children hope," whether their own children or all children, the parents who were in the driver's seat lent a hand to moves that have proven lethal: Oslo, the flight from Lebanon and the disengagement. And because they were lethal for the Jews, they were also -- since it is not possible to refrain from responding to suicide bombings, or even to Qassams -- lethal for the Arabs.

It is not vacuous, and therefore unavailing, moves, like the uprooting from Gaza and the flight from Lebanon, that our children need to prevent them from abandoning the country, and us. Imparting illusions, instead of educating our children to believe in the principles of Zionism, national and social solidarity and the need to continue fighting as long as fighting is necessary, increases emigration rather than decreasing it.

It is no wonder that many of those who believe in these illusions have evaded service in the Israel Defense Forces or now live abroad. In the bubble of illusion, disappointment and despair reign: "You promised a dove," they say, but you did not keep your promise.

We must tell the next generation the truth. We must prepare it, and ourselves, to cope without illusions -- among other things, with the fact that fences and unilateral withdrawals increase the enemy's motivation.

In the Bnei Akiva youth group and the national religious community's educational institutes, they do not teach that our life in this country is conditional on the Palestinians' consent. There, teaching about the nation of Israel's right to its land -- which used to be what everyone was taught -- is still the key component of an education, and not the supposed injustices the nation of Israel is causing the neighboring nation. Nor is reality whitewashed there.

And the results prove that a difficult truth is preferable to a fraudulent illusion.

It is important to educate for peace. But it is also necessary to inculcate the fundamental educational baggage that will give the students the tools to cope with a situation in which the longed-for peace fails to arrive, despite sincere and costly efforts to attain it. Above all, it is necessary to instill in the students something that many households and educational institutes no longer do: a belief in the justice of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel.

* * *

Member of Knesset Tzvi Hendel (National Union), commenting on the government's refusal to send in massive forces to enter Gaza, said bitterly, "Only a rocket on Tel Aviv will cause Olmert to take over Gaza."

MK Hendel is wrong! A rocket on Tel Aviv will not make Olmert send forces to take over Gaza. Only a direct hit by a rocket on Prime Minister Olmert's residence in Jerusalem would accomplish this!

With Blessings and Love for Israel, Ruth Matar

Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org

To Go To Top

Posted by Richard H. Shulman, November 16, 2006.


The Security Council Resolution on Lebanon was vague about who would contribute what troops when and what they would do. After the ceasefire, the troops turned out to be fewer and their mandate less than needed (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2006, p.8 from David Pryce-Jones, National Review, 9/11).

The Lebanon War demonstrate that Israel is dependent upon the UNO and on world opinion and that its government, including the Army, has become afraid to make decisions (Op. Cit., p.9 from Amnon Rubinstein, Jerusalem Post, 8/19).

Israel fought the war in the same way the US did in Iraq, with too few ground troops. The UNO ceasefire was arranged between Israel and Lebanon, but Lebanon was not a combatant, Hizbullah was. Hizbullah defied the resolution's provision for giving up its arms, and Lebanon let it be. And this was the resolution supposed to enforce the flouted Resolution 1559 about disarming Hizbullah (Ibid, p.11 from New Republic Online, 8/28). Lebanon stated that it wouldn't confiscate terrorists' weapons even if it found their caches. Israel fought with concern about inflicting casualties upon civilians and with incurring casualties, whereas Hizbullah fought to win (Ibid, p.14 from Ralph Peters, NY Post, 8/17).

Hizbullah won a victory when the US sponsored the cease-fire irresolution before Israel had dismantled Hizbullah's army (Ibid, p.12 from Caroline Glick, Jerusalem Post, 8/13).

If the government were decisive, it would not be dependent upon the UNO. If it made an effort to win over public opinion and were peppery about false criticism, it would not be as dependent upon world public opinion.


A French TV station broadcast a faked film of what private investigators eventually demonstrated was a staged slaying of the Al-Dura boy, which, without evidence, the narrator blamed on Israeli forces. The film inflamed Europe against Israel. The Israeli government has not contested the film.

The station sued one of its critics for libel. The critic produced extensive evidence in behalf of his accusations. Station executives did not appear in court, and its lawyer presented no evidence nor refuted plaintiff's. The court investigator concurred with the defendant. Nevertheless, the judge, in the first of three trials, sided with the station. He argued that the station was above reproach and it would stain the honor of France to admit the accusations. That was the same kind of reasoning that French officials used in the Dreyfus case, refusing to admit that the Army had scapegoated Dreyfus.

By ignoring the issue, Israel demonstrated its continued lack of understanding of the effect of propaganda against Israel (IMRA, 10/24 from Caroline Glick).

Even leftist journalists in Israel bemoan Israel's buffeting by international public opinion. But they have no plan to fight back. What good is a Jewish state that won't defend itself and Jews everywhere, including Pollard and against FBI and CIA bias against Jews.

WEST'S NARROW STRATEGIC WAR VISION Both the US and Israel are making excuses (with some validity) for not succeeding in their current wars. Both, however, focus too narrowly. They focus on their single campaign in a single place. The real war is broader, a world jihad. They do not have a strategy for winning the broader war. (And the US thwarts Israeli defense.)

Syria and Iran are running a regional war against us. In that sense, Afghanistan, Iraq, Gaza, and Lebanon are different theaters of the same war. Our enemies also are acting as fifth columns in Europe, India, Indonesia, Australia, and the US.

Israel cannot destroy Hizbullah by fighting only in Lebanon, and the US cannot protect Iraq and Afghanistan by fighting only there. We must change the regimes behind the warfare in Damascus and Teheran. Israel eliminated hundreds of Hizbullah fighters, but Syria and Iran have been rebuilding Hizbullah, and war is expected again. The answer is to cut off Hizbullah from its supply of money, weapons, training, and intelligence.

The US will pay a price for halting the IDF advance in Lebanon. The same kind of Iranian missiles used against Israeli warships off the coast of Lebanon are being sent to Somalia, for use against our fleet in the oil lanes. Likewise, the same kinds of terrorist cells recently rolled up in Britain, Germany, Italy, and France may spread to the US and may have a common sponsor (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2006, p.13 from Michael Ledeen, National Review Online, 8/14). We let Somalia fall at our own peril.

This is like my having warned years ago that our GIs are chewing up the terrorists in Iraq, but they keep coming in through Syria and Iran and are inspired by S. Arabia.


The IDF failed to block Hizbullah's communications with Iranian headquarters in Syria. Hizbullah listened in on Israeli communications networks. Iranian equipment in Lebanese Army radar stations blocked Israeli anti-missile missiles, so a Hizbullah missile could strike an Israeli corvette. Israel also was unable to jam the military systems at the Iranian embassy in Beirut, from which Hizbullah issued its commands.

Israel and the US and under-estimated Iran's advances in electronic warfare in Iraq and in Lebanon. Hizbullah communications networks were connected by optical fibers not susceptible to electronic jamming. Electronic warfare was the purpose of Iran's naval exercise in April. The US and Israel did not notice that, noticing only the old-fashioned weaponry (Op. Cit., p.15 from DEBKAfile, 8/23). Hizbullah jammed Israeli walkie-talkies.

Israeli troops were so weak from hunger and thirst, so unequipped and untrained for this kind of warfare, that some refused orders that in their state would be suicidal. Orders constantly changed and largely were uncoordinated. Instead of the big force moving out, they were told to wait in concentrated groups that made better targets (Ibid. p.16 from Peter Waldman, Wall St. J., 9/1).


"The chronic lawbreaking among the city's Arab residents, as cited by their Jewish neighbors, takes the form of illegal construction, large outdoor events held without a license, unauthorized sellers' stands -- which are a security and safety danger to the public -- as well as the operation of mosque loudspeakers at unusual times and at high volume." (The high volume seems to reflect spite.)

"In contrast to its apparent inability to enforce the law against Arab residents of Jerusalem's Old City, MK Gabbai said, the police and municipality have instituted ever more regulations limiting the freedom of movement of many Jews in the city. For example, during the just-ended Muslim holy month of Ramadan, the 800 Jews living in the Muslim Quarter of the Old City were instructed by the Jerusalem police not to leave their homes without prior coordination during the evening hours. This restriction was announced because of the large number of celebrants -- including many hostile ones -- returning from the Temple Mount each night of the month-long Muslim holiday."

"Furthermore, the Ministry of Education has forbidden any school trips, including those with armed escorts, from entering the Muslim Quarter -- despite the presence of its 800 Jews. The Jewish residents of the quarter also complained to MK Gabbai about a lack of basic services, such as mail delivery, in their area of the Old City." (Arutz-7, 10/25.)

There's just no living with Muslims there.


Near an army lookout point and within sight of an IDF checkpoint, Arab drivers blocked the car of a Jewish family and attacked them. They hit them, threw rocks at them, stole their property, and tried to break their windows to get at them. Finally, another Arab pushed the assailant away. The driver had blown his horn. The soldiers at the checkpoint claim not to have noticed, but the lookout reported the attack, and got no response. Noting that earlier the Army had tried to close the road to Jews, Arutz-7 hints that the failure to protect those settlers was deliberate (10/26).


The Islamist Prime Minister of Turkey pledged to adhere to democratic and secular norms, but uses his position to undermine the secular republic. He subverted the banking system by: appointing all Islamists, who no longer account or funds; getting Islamists who lack modern education into the civil service; and enlarging education boards and mandating early retirement to get Islamists to control colleges and courts.

The secular society, especially the Army, was ready to fight back. The US (like the EU) headed it off. Out of political correctness, the State Dept. pretends that the government is not Islamist and that the Army, which wants to defend the Constitution and liberty, would be interfering in civilian affairs. The State Dept. pretends that the government is part of the democratic ethos. The Prime Minister's key comment about democracy came when he started in politics. He likened it to a streetcar that one stays on, until one gets off (Barry Rubin, Middle East Forum, 10/24). He exemplifies how Islamists exploit elections. We need to replace our State Dept. -- it's too foolish.

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

To Go To Top

Posted by Jake Levi, November 16, 2006.

This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post November 13, 2006. It is archived at
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1162378391145&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

A week before the US Congressional elections The New York Times published a front-page story which all but admitted that Iraq's nuclear program had been active until March 2003, when the US-led coalition deposed Saddam Hussein. The Times report relayed concerns of officials from the International Atomic Energy Agency regarding captured Iraqi documents which the administration had posted on the Internet.

The documents in question contained Iraqi nuclear bomb designs that could be useful to rogue states like Iran which are currently working to build a nuclear arsenal. The Times article also reported that, in the past, the same Web site had published Iraqi documents relating to nerve agents tabun and sarin. They were removed after their content elicited similar concerns from UN arms control officials.