| Home | Featured Stories | October 2004 Blog-Eds List | Background Information | News On the Web |
|
ISRAEL NEEDS ARAFAT
Posted by TheRaphi, October 31, 2004. |
|
This was written by Dov Gilor, a retired systems engineer and active
volunteer. He is a freelance writer and editor and lives in
Hashmonaim, Israel.
By the time you read this article, Yasser Arafat may have died and many will say good riddance. I, for one, want Arafat to remain alive. Let him suffer in constant pain for all the lives of Jews and his own people that he destroyed, but let him remain in power. Where would Israel be without Arafat? Former Prime Minister Menachem Begin (of blessed memory), began the giveaway to the Arabs of Egypt, Shimon Peres offered the Palestinian Arabs big chunks of Judea and Samaria, Yitzchak Rabin (of blessed memory) offered more, and even Binyamin Netanyahu offered parts of Israel; while Barak offered 95% of Judea and Samaria and Gaza. Now, Ariel Sharon is in charge of the big giveaway, but it is hard to give away land when there is no one to accept what the Israelis are giving away. Without Arafat's intransigence and his unwillingness to compromise, there would be little left of Israel today. Arafat saved the land many times over by being intractable about what the Israelis were offering. If Arafat, G-d forbid, dies, then Israel's liberal establishment will fall all over itself to offer more and more parts of Israel to any weak Arab leader that arises. Once the deal is sealed, it will be practically impossible to go back and re-conquer the land relinquished. Rabin was reported to have declared that if the Arabs were to use the rifles the Rabin administration gave them against Israel, then Israel would take the rifles away. What nonsense. Just like the rifles that were turned against the Jews, once land is given away, the anti-Israel, and even the pro-Israel, nations of the world will not let us go in to take it back. The terrorists will murder those who compromise and then they will be that much closer to their goal of taking over all of "Palestine". As Arafat has publicly declared hundreds of times, "Tel Aviv is Palestine; Jerusalem is Palestine; Haifa is Palestine; Beersheva is Palestine." As long as there is no partner, Israel, despite Sharon, will remain mostly intact. Once Arafat goes down, his successors may be bright enough to realize that if the Arabs feign peace, the Israelis will give away everything. Most non-Zionist Israelis do not care. Jerusalem means little to them and they will feel comfortable anywhere in the world that they might be forced to flee. There are many Israelis who went to live in Germany, Poland, Hungary and Russia. There are Israelis who feel at home in Australia, France, Scandinavia, England and, of course, America. They all claim to be coming back to Israel "soon", but who knows what will be left if Arafat dies and his successor is not as intransigent. Not enough of those living in Israel really care, and I do not believe that a referendum will make any difference. Only Arafat's inflexibility saved us. If he is still alive, pray that he suffers, but that he remains the Palestinian leader. TheRaphi (http://www.theraphi.com/index.html) is a pro-Israel and pro-Zionist site; it provides news articles and essays. |
|
FALSE ARAB CONDEMNATION OF TERRORISM
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, October 31, 2004. |
|
FALSE ARAB CONDEMNATION OF TERRORISM "Al-Ahram" declares that "legitimate resistance," its euphemism for the terrorism at Taba, "should be confined to the conflict zone." Dr. Joseph Lerner notes that when terrorism is committed against Jews elsewhere, as in Turkey or France, the Muslims do not condemn it. Many Egyptians are angry at the Taba bombings for having killed non-Israelis, especially Egyptians, and disrupting their tourist industry and their sense of security (IMRA, 10/19). Arabs "logic" is ad hoc. They make up conditions for a current argument, that terrorism shall be only in Israel. This is not Western logic, but an inconsistent, non-rational, deceptive, eastern logic. The Egyptians express no sympathy for the Israeli tourist families. The Arabs lack a real sense of decency! No revulsion against terrorism, only dismay when it turns on them. Uncivilized! SPLITTING LIKUD COULD OFFER ISRAEL DEMOCRACY The informal split in Likud has become so prominent, that Prof. Steven Plaut suggests the Party formally split. Party leaders are reluctant to jeopardize their Knesset seats that way, but Prof. Plaut thinks that the forced unity in the slate, with inconsistency and conflict in policy, drives away voters. Either half on its own might attract a majority, if it had a clear mission. Splitting off the nationalist portion would give Israel a democratic alternative. (The assumption here is that only a major party offers a democratic alternative, because most voters would be afraid of wasting their ballots on a minor party, even if that were the party they prefer.) When the electorate switches to Likud in order to end Labor Party appeasement, the Likud, divided in its ideology, nevertheless adopts much of that appeasement and, except recently in exchange for Netanyahu's support, retains much of Labor's socialist form of economy (Plaut, 10/19). Are the leftist surprises by Likud leaders independent or bought by foreign interests? OUR DISJOINTED WAR The US does not admit to be in an international clash of civilizations. We fight as if the Iraq war were disjointed from the Afghanistan war and from everywhere else jihad is active by force, propaganda, recruitment, and fundraising. Our war aims are not clear. The American people think they have a choice of not going to war. They do not realize the gravity of the peril. We have not mobilized for international war. Our military technology affords great advantages, but are insufficient to overcome insurgencies, occupy populous countries, protect our country now fund to be vulnerable, manage terrorism, and defend us from China's burgeoning military. We focus more on what we have done than what we should do next. We should threaten Mideastern regimes with overthrow, unless they eradicate their terrorists. The difficulty in pacifying the one Arab country, Iraq, should dampen our enthusiasm for the stated mission of democratizing the whole region. (The goal is worthy, but would have to be approached incrementally and not become the major effort.) Our war aim must be a "disciplined, justifiable, and attainable objective of self-defense." We should strike here and there, as needed. Shift from our present mode of "conquer, occupy, fail, and withdraw --- to strike, return, and re-energize. In occupying Iraq, we let Iraq occupy us. That is, we let ourselves be tied down and kept from defeating other foes main forces. We hardly have devoted the resources to block our borders, safeguard our airports, and stockpile antidotes to biological warfare. Our lack of preparedness for a small pox epidemic may induce terrorists to foist the epidemic. Our war is criticized as "unilateral." It isn't. We did seek and do have allies, but their number is limited by having small armies or opposing our aims. (We should seek out allies but not be paralyzed in protecting ourselves if few allies step forward.) We admired Britain's unilateral stand against the Axis, and detest the multilateral Axis invasion of Greece. Critics would urge unilateral US action against genocide in Africa. (What about the Sudan?) The notion of unilateral vs. multilateral is all mixed up and irrelevant. It should not be a criticism of US policy. The commission on terrorism let us down. It could have warned about the clash of civilizations, and devised a strategy against it. Instead, it concluded that we merely should revise our intelligence agencies. Moreover, its recommendations are questionable. The enemy works with small groups that intelligence cannot penetrate fast enough. The commission neglected the need for competent airport screeners, proper border control, and reinforced cockpit doors. Three years after 9/11, "our strategy shiftless, reactive irrelevantly grandiose; our war aims undefined; our preparations insufficient; our civil defense neglected; our policy divided into support for either a hapless and incompetent administration that in a parliamentary system would have been turned out long ago, or an opposition so used to appeasement of America's rivals, critics, and enemies that they cannot even do a credible job of pretending to be resolute (Jewish Political Chronicle, 9/2004, p.13 from Mark Helprin, Wall St. J., 9/10). That is an admirable analysis. It is non-partisan, thoughtful, imaginative, and frank. GUESS WHAT CHINA IS UP TO China is offering its own UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) to Egypt at half the price of Western ones. China is seeking other clients for them. Egypt is co-producing planes for China, so it will get some, as a result (IMRA, 10/21). Egypt wouldn't have acquired advanced weapons with which to challenge the West, but for Western aid! 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 ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
PM: DISENGAGEMENT PLAN TO BE ENFORCED - REGARDLESS OF ARAFAT
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, October 31, 2004. |
|
Of course it does not matter what happens to Arafat. The casino must be built no matter what. The only change is that there will be one less partner for Sharon to have to share the profits. This is an item from today's Arutz-7 (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=71298). (IsraelNN.com) Prime Minister Ariel Sharon continues to make clear that he intends to go ahead with his "Disengagement Plan" - which calls for the eviction of nearly 10,000 Jews from their homes - no matter what. Many Knesset Members, including those from the Left, made repeated statements several days ago that the primary reason for abandoning Gaza would be null and void with Arafat out of the picture. As reported by the PM himself, the main reason that the Disengagement Plan was deemed necessary was the lack of any "political partner." With reports rampant in the last few days of the impending death of Arafat, many felt this would no longer be the case, and that moderates within the PA would have a chance to come to the fore, creating a new "political partner" with whom to dialogue. PM Sharon said today that, "as long as there will be no partner, we will push forward with the disengagement plan that was approved by the government and the Knesset." Agriculture Minister Yisrael Katz proposed that Israel not allow Arafat to return to Ramallah should his health improve, however Sharon stated that, "Israel has made a commitment to allow Arafat to return to the territories." Sharon added, however that "so long as I am prime minister, Arafat will not be buried in Jerusalem." Though Sharon refused to change his plans to destroy 25 Jewish towns in Gaza and the Northern Shomron, he did state to Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak on Thursday that if a new and moderate leadership were to take over the PA that Israel would coordinate its implementation of the Disengagement Plan with the PA. 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 |
|
PA CARTOONS: BIN LADEN DECIDING US ELECTIONS
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, October 31, 2004. |
|
The Palestinian Authority (PA) continues to revere Osama Bin Laden, and even suggests that he has the power to dictate America's future. In response to Bin Laden's taunting and vaguely threatening message to the US, released Saturday by Al-Jazeera, cartoons in two PA dailies today show a gloating Bin Laden determining the outcome of Tuesday's US presidential election. The first cartoon shows a rifle-toting Bin Laden, triumphantly astride the conquered ballot box, while George Bush and John Kerry - depicted as much smaller and weaker than Bin Laden -- cower below him. The second shows a smirking Bin Laden casting what is obviously meant to be the deciding vote in the US election. Besides mocking the two presidential candidates, the tone of the cartoons reflects the PA's continued admiration of Bin Laden's power. Palestinians danced in the streets after the terror attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. The PA-controlled media has continued to celebrate the anniversary of 9/11 with mocking cartoons, such as a fearful Uncle Sam running in terror from an image that depicts both the Twin Towers and the date, 9/11. Today's cartoons suggest that should he choose, Bin Laden has real power to determine the future of the US -- just as the train bombings in Madrid are believed to have changed the outcome of the Spanish elections. VISIT PMW VIDEO ARCHIVES WITH IMP MATERIAL ON 12 TOPICS http://www.pmw.org.il/tv.html VISIT PMW VIDEO ARCHIVES ON PA INCITEMENT TO GENICIDE http://www.pmw.org.il/tv%20part6.html VISIT PMW VIDEO ARCHIVES ON PA INCITEMENT OF CHILDREN TO SHAHADA [MARTYRDOM] http://www.pmw.org.il/tv%20part1.html Itamar Marcus is director of PMW -Palestinian Media Watch - (http://www.pmw.org.il). Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. |
|
GUESS WHO OPPOSES THE EXPULSION PLAN?
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, October 31, 2004. |
|
This was written by Hehezkel Bin-Num.
Quick! Who said the following sentence? "Those who espouse unilateral disengagement under fire - to this line or that - only invite more terror." (Jerusalem Post, January 9, 2003) As amazing as it sounds, if you answered Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, you would be correct. In fact, it was on this platform that Ariel Sharon ran in the last Israeli general elections and on this platform his Likud party won almost a third of the seats in the Israeli Knesset. The party that supported unilateral disengagement, the Labor party, lost half its seats in parliament. So people naturally became upset when Sharon gave democracy the boot and did the exact opposite of what he promised. Sharon's words against his own plan, unfortunately, have proven prophetic. Since he announced his scheme to forcefully expel the Jews of Gush Katif, the number of Arab terror attacks in the region has risen exponentially. In the past year, dozens of civilians and soldiers have been slaughtered. But that is only the tip of the iceberg. Sharon's capitulation in Gaza and the victory handed to Arab terrorists has emboldened them for the first time to attack Israeli civilian targets within the 1967 borders with artillery. In the past few months, Arabs shooting Kassam rockets on the development town of S'derot have murdered three children and one woman. And the death from the skies continues to pour down daily. Attacks of this type were unheard of prior to Sharon's show of weakness. Large population centers such as Ashdod and Ashkelon are also within range of the terrorist rockets. Of course, we didn't need Sharon to tell us that surrender to terror only leads to more terror. We already learned that from "Oslo". After 10 years of territorial compromise in exchange for promises of peace, Arab terrorists have murdered 1,500 Israeli citizens, a 700% increase in the number of terror victims over the 10 years prior to Oslo. The current plan has many asking how can we continue to go forward with such a discredited policy? Has Sharon learned nothing from the failure of Oslo? But worse than compromising Israel's security is the immoral nature of the plan. The ethnic cleansing of Bosnian Muslims by Serbs was roundly condemned by the world, and former US President Clinton even sent in the US military to forcefully stop the practice. But the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Gush Katif is not only ignored by the world, but encouraged. Most hard to believe is the Jewish leftist support for the racist policy. They have been at the forefront of the civil rights movement in the US. In the sixties, they forced segregated schools and universities in the American South to accept Black students. In Israel, the Left has forced Jewish communities to accept Arab families; whereas, many Arab towns are legally off limits to Jews, such as Shechem and Bethlehem. Unfortunately, these same activists who fight against racial discrimination against Blacks and Arabs favor racial discrimination against their own Jewish brothers. They are willing to kick these people out of their homes only because they are Jewish. Jews today can live in New York, Paris, London and throughout the free world. Only in the Land of Israel, and due to a Jewish government, are there rules forbidding them from living where they will. Throughout their history, Jews have been expelled from the majority of the lands in which they lived. The English forbid Jews to live in England for centuries. It took Oliver Cromwell to overturn that decree. France had a similar policy. Of course, they were the good guys. What the rest of Europe did to the Jews was a lot more efficient - they simply burned them in ovens. After all, these expulsions and ethnic cleansing of Jews, it is particularly painful to see Jews doing the same thing to other Jews. Its sad to say, but after two thousand years of anti-Semitism, it seems that the message of Jew-hatred has finally been internalized. Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, Twins, because their hearts were softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, Generations, because the lion wears stripes." |
|
TERROR HITS ISRAELIS HARD - BUT LESS SO IN GUSH KATIF
Posted by Mordechai Ben-Menachem, October 31, 2004. |
|
This is from today's Arutz-7.
More than one out of every five Israeli Jews has experienced the loss of a relative or friend through terror or war in the past four years of the Oslo and Road Map Wars. This is the picture that emerges from a phone survey conducted by the University of Haifa's Center for National Security Studies. The poll shows that 21.8% of Israel's Jewish population suffered the terror-related loss of a friend or relative since September 2000, and over a quarter of the Israeli public (28.1%) makes sure to stay away from events, persons, or situations that remind them of a terrorist incident. The terrorism of the past four years has, according to the respondents answering the phone pollers, deteriorated to the extent that some 2/3 of the public report a drop in their confidence in the government's ability to protect them. Just over half the Israeli public - 51.8% - says it feels "less in control" of factors affecting their lives. The poll was conducted by Center director Prof. Gabriel Ben-Dor and research associate Dr. Daphna Canetti-Nisim, who arranged telephone interviews in late September with 1,613 respondents. The researchers found that Israel's Arab population is even more despondent - despite the fact that they have been less exposed to terrorism-related suffering than Jews. Another study carried out of late shows that the residents of Gush Katif are dealing with stress better than residents in other parts of the country. The results were surprising, said Dr. Hagit Cohen, who supervised the study on behalf of the Mental Health Center in Be'er Sheva, considering the proximity of Gush Katif to centers of violence and the constant mortar shellings and rocket attacks. Dr. Cohen, a researcher in the Center's Trauma and Post-Trauma Clinic, said that the results show that the people of Gush Katif show less stress and display fewer fears than others. "For instance," Dr. Cohen told Arutz-7 today, "we asked them to rate their sense of security on a scale from 1-10. Most of the people in Gush Katif gave very high ratings - adding, 'with G-d's help,' of course - while in the greater Tel Aviv area we saw mostly ratings of 1-3." She said that preliminary results from Kiryat Arba, in southern Judea, indicate a similar trend. The researchers' evaluation is that these residents are aided by their ideology, support for each other, and group-cohesiveness. The entire survey will be released later this week. Mordechai Ben-Menachem is at Ben Gurion University. He can be reached by email at quality@acm.org |
|
TEN MINUTES AFTER TAKING OFFICE
Posted by Arlene Peck, October 31, 2004. |
|
Lord, what happens to Israel's leaders, in just ten minutes after taking office? They all turn into "Barak" and want to give away the store. Is it because they want to be loved so much? Well dear Israel it's not working. No matter matter how much you give in, newspapers like the Los Angeles times, and many more, are going to insist that it's not enough. We'll get to that in a minute. I used to think that it was only Arafat, the EU and United Nations who were determined to chop up Israel into little pieces, like slicing salami. However, that was before I watched with dismay how Ariel Sharon turned into a dictator, against his own people, no different from the ones who surround him in the third world Arab countries. In addition, I will be frank with you. I live in a state, California, where we are flooded with referendums to vote on every issue from three strikes for criminals and the key is thrown away, for life! to making ferrets legal. The absolute power a few tired, retired, retreaded or retarded politicans are able to wield amazes me. Hey, even our Governor, Arnold Schwartznegger,was brought into power by a dissatisfied constituency. Therefore, knowing that, it is obvious why I have been conditioned to thinking that a vote by the people is the only way to go. For one man to decide to turn over a chunk of his country to a foreign power would be the same as George Bush one day waking up and deciding to turn over the State of Texas to his good friend President Fox of Mexico. Because, he believed it historically belonged to them and was the "right" thing to do. Furthermore, it actually might not be such a great loss? However, we could not just do things like that in this country. An action such as a state giveaway would cause riots and chaos in our streets and there are people who would even miss Texas. So, that brings me back to the "love issue." Hey, as a journalist, I've traveled to Gaza a few times and saw for myself what a disgusting, filthy, nest of hate it is. There are hordes of barbarian, savage terrorists living there as a result of largesses of their Arab brothers. All they have to do with their time is to burn tires, smoke that 'laughing water ', and plan how they can get into Israel for their homicide bombings of innocent civilians. Personally, to my way of thinking, it is a cancer in the middle of the country and needs to be cut out by transferring the Arab population. However, I never envisioned the transfer to be that of the Jews from the Jewish State. But, it is a problem. If the Arabs can't be expelled, and they can't be controlled, let them stew in their own filth. So, let me tell you guys outside of the United States how this issue is playing out with the editors in my city. The Los Angeles Times reported Sharon's and the Knesset's actions as "A step toward a lasting peace between the Jewish state and the Palestinians. BUT much more is required: the actual evacuation of those settlers and many more in the West Bank." Get that guys? No matter what Israel offers, too much is never enough. The PLO supporting Los Angeles Times also wrote in this searing editorial, "Several hundred other settlers will be removed from the West Bank under the plan, but more than 200,000 Israelis will remain---a major stumbling block to the peace process." Personally, knowing their anti-Semitic leanings, they would not be happy until the entire state of Israel was given over to the PLO and I am not sure even that would be enough. Folks, they do not love Israel. All the Arabists who are on the payrolls of the Arab states from our State Department would probably agree with them when the Times wrote, "The government (Israel) should work with the Palestinians, to let them cross into Israel for the jobs they need: Gaza is heavily dependent on foreign aid, with more then half the population living on $2 a day or less." Why, in heaven's name is it Israel's responsibility to put these terrorists to work in the Jewish state and they don't feel the burden should go to any of the surrounding Arab states who have put them in their deplorable situation with their "refuge camps" for fifty years instead of absorbing them into the population. A follow-up editorial in the Los Angeles Times continued in this vein with "If Arafat is replaced with a transitional interim government, Israel can offer support by negotiating with it and letting ... Arlene Peck is an internationally syndicated columnist and television talk show hostess. She can be reached at: bestredhead@earthlink.net and www.arlenepeck.com |
|
TERROR ON THE WESTERN CAMPUS
Posted by Phyllis Chesler, October 31, 2004. |
|
Sometimes, as bad as things may seem, one must also remember to count one's blessings because things can always be worse. Indeed, elsewhere, they often are worse. For example: for the last month my columns have focused on what was happening at Duke University. In my view, when universities refuse to teach students the difference between what is true and what is false this constitutes an abdication of intellectual and moral responsibility which renders democracy utterly vulnerable to barbarism. I fear that Duke's hosting of the PSM conference without "taking sides," may indeed border on such abdication. But, as the immediate Jewish world and our supporters were covering the Palestine Solidarity Conference at Duke, something decidedly worse was happening at the University of Pisa in Italy. At Duke, both the pro-Israel and the pro-Palestine speakers, activists, protestors, and infiltrators were physically non-violent. Jew-hatred is far more physically violent in Europe, not only on their mean streets but at their universities. According to my informant, the prominent Roman journalist, Anselma Dell'Olio, last week, Shai Cohen, an Israeli diplomat, was invited to give a talk to students at the University of Pisa, a venerable institution which was founded in 1343. Cohen was to speak on "Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East. " Professor Maurizio Vernassa invited students from the History Department and from the Afro-Asian institutes. The invitation was no secret. Cohen entered through the main entrance of the Aula Magna of the Political Science Department. According to Dell'Olio, "Cohen was greeted by a group of about 20 students wearing the Palestinian keffiah around their necks, shouting "Sharon assassino! Israel is a death dealer! Zionism is a crime against humanity!" Cohen was called a fascist murderer and other personal and far worse insults. The left-wing group then proceeded to shout him out of the University, literally and loudly threatened to pass from verbal to physical violence if he did not leave. Other students tried to calm things down and defended Cohen's right to speak, but they were unsuccessful, and the left-wing thugs shouted that no Israeli would be allowed to speak, that Israel has no right to exist and so on." The point: No national scandal ensued, except in Guiliano Ferrara's influential newspaper, Il Foglio, which has been publishing pieces about what happened in Pisa. The Dean of the University sent a tepid, delayed apology to Cohen. More important: The invitation to Cohen has not been re-scheduled. According to Dell'Olio, "A press release proudly bragging about "Pisa antagonista" successfully casting out the Israel heathen from the university and preventing the conference, appeared in Indymedia. Can what happened at the University of Pisa happen here? Some might say that it already has. There is very little free speech for anyone who takes a pro-Israel position at Berkeley. Concordia University in Montreal, the site of previous anti-Jewish riots, recently refused to allow former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak to speak; citing security risks, they previously did not allow former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak either. Ironically, Duke University spent more than $50,000.00 to protect the PSM's freedom of speech. My point: Threats of violence have led to self-censorship on some NorthAmerican campuses. Pro-Israel factions do not threaten to riot if anti-Israel speakers come to town. De facto censorship also rules the North American campuses courtesy of Arab oil money, (and American oil company money too) who, over many years, have funded anti-Israel and pro-Palestine scholars at Middle East Institutes. Again, I ask: Can what happened at the University of Pisa happen here? America is a former British colony. Ex-colonials tend to internalize the belief that the colonizer is wiser, more sophisticated, intrinsically "better. " Thus, Americans are avid followers of British culture. But Americans--especially its intellectuals--love Italy for it's sensuous, pagan-Catholic beauty, landscape, music, art. Recently, one American leftist told me that if President Bush wins this next election she will "probably become an expatriate in Italy." Another left-wing professor said that if President Bush wins that "America will effectively become a police state and I'll probably have to move to Europe." Some second- and third-generation Israeli Jews have been moving back to their grandparents' European countries of origin, especially Germany and Poland. "The Promised Land," directed by Israelis Avy Hemy and Yael Friedman, and produced by Idan Regev, is an excellent film about this troubling subject. I recently viewed it at the East Hampton Film Festival. I understand: Jews have always been on the road, we are the original "beatniks." I understand: Like the biblical Abraham, some Jews, whether in Israel or elsewhere, want to leave their fathers' homes to explore both inner existential and outer geographic space, move freely, as individuals, from continent to continent. I understand: Some Israeli Jews want to escape the pressure cooker of the Middle East, even for a little while if not forever. Of course, most Israeli Jews are absolutely ready to die for their right to remain in Israel, despite the cost. But, if you've read the recent pieces by long-time expatriates Nidra Poller in Commentary (France) and Carol Gould in Frontpage (England), it is increasingly clear that Europe is no longer safe for Jews. If you've seen any of Pierre Rehov's important films, including his latest one, "Hostages of Hatred," which I also viewed at the EastHampton Film Festival, you will know that the Muslim Middle East is boiling over with Jew-hatred. Arab Jews can't go home again. Nor can most Christians. Please visit my website (www.phyllis-Chesler.com) where I have posted a 45 minute video by the Maronite Christian Brigitte Gabriel, who talks about her experiences growing up under Palestinian tyranny in Lebanon. North America remains safe. But, if the hate propaganda against the Jews and against the Jewish state is not quickly and effectively countered, then what happened at the University Pisa will happen here. It is only a matter of time. Let us use that time very well. Phyllis Chesler, Ph.D., is the author of twelve books including her latest, The New Anti-Semitism. The Current Crisis and What We Must Do About It (Jossey Bass/John Wiley). She may be reached through her website, www.Phyllis-Chesler.com. This article appeared on Front Page Magazine (www.frontpagemagazine.com), October 29, 2004. |
|
WHO BELIEVES A LIAR?
Posted by Marcel Cousineau, October 31, 2004. |
|
P.M. Sharon came out loud and clear that he will not permit Arafat's body to be buried in Jerusalem. But we all know that P.M. Sharon has lost his spine. He's says alot of things that he doesn't mean. There is no doubt that just 1 phone call from Washington will change his mind. This has been proven time and again. He's said a lot of things in the past with conviction that he has suddenly changed his mind on. There is no truth worth holding to with these politicians, they sell their soul to hold to power and advance their delusional agendas. The sad thing is they get away with their lies. A weak Israel will bend and Arafat will very likely be buried in Jerusalem. That's the reality appeaser Sharon gives us as he quiets all credible oppposition to his schemes that have proven dealdy to Am Yisriel, but pleasing to those who seeks Israel's extermination. |
|
THE MOHAMED AL DURA AFFAIR CONCLUDED; BIALIK IN BAGDAD
Posted by Steven Plaut, October 30, 2004. |
|
"Al Dura Affair: the Dramatic Conclusion" (info # 012510/4) by Stéphane Juffa, Metula News Agency, 25 October 2004. This is a Résumé by Nidra Poller. The original article in French can be read at: http://www.menapress.com/article.php?sid=956 Background September 30, 2000: A France 2 news report filed by Talal Abu Rahma with a voice-over commentary by Charles Enderlin purports to show the fatal shooting of a Palestinian child, Mohamed Al Dura, and the wounding of his father Jamal by Israeli gunfire. France 2 distributed the report free of charge to world media. Metula News Agency has thoroughly investigated the affair, and concluded that the report is a fabrication, deliberately aimed at vilifying the IDF. The accusation against the IDF was based solely on the testimony of
France 2 reporter Abu Rahma, backed up by his hierarchy at France
Télévision. Abu Rahma's testimony under oath before the
Palestinian Center for Human Rights can be read here: [accéder
à la déclaration]
The 3-year Metula News Agency investigation, in conformity with the
findings of the IDF commission led by physician Nahum Shahaf, has
consistently maintained that Abu Rahma's declaration was false, and that
the 27 minutes of footage allegedly showing the Israelis shooting at the Al
Duras does not exist. Repeated requests by our agency to view the 27
minutes of footage were denied.
Further, MNA concluded that France 2 correspondent Charles Enderlin
was deliberately lying, to make the incident seem authentic, when he
claimed that he cut out the sequence of the childs death throes
because they were too horrible to show. Enderlin also declared that
there was no footage showing the fatal bullet hit the child.
The images on the news report do not corroborate the accusation
that child was killed by Israeli soldiers; the commentary suggests
what the images do not show. France 2 claimed to be holding the
clinching evidence -- the film of the childs death throes -- but would never
present it.
Friday October 22nd: the abscess is lanced
Under circumstances connected to the Metula investigation and film
demonstration, France Télévisions CEO, Marc Tessier,
asked the station's news director Arlette Chabot to show the 27 minutes
of raw footage to Luc Rosenzweig, former Le Monde journalist (now free
lance contributor to Metula News Agency, Radio Communauté Juive, etc.)
Rosenzweig, accompanied by two eminent media directors, was
received in the France 2 offices by A. Chabot, Didier Epelbaum
(advisor to the president of France 2) and an image analyst from the
station's legal department.
The France 2 officials tried to sidestep projection of the 27
minutes of raw footage, dismissing them as insignificant and
irrelevant, since Abu Rahma had retracted his testimony, explaining
that the cameraman had been caught off guard when he testified. Caught
off guard? Three days after the incident, comfortably seated in a
lawyers office?
So they are admitting that Abu Rahma gave false testimony and
subsequently retracted. Now that the sole witness to the assassination
of Mohammed Al Dura has retracted, there is nothing left of the affair
but a shred of bad fiction not worth a kopek.
Rosenzweig and his colleagues were not aware of Abu Rahma's
retraction for the simple reason that France 2 never made it public.
For four years French public TV officials had been hiding the fact
that they do not have 27 minutes of film to prove the blood libel
against Israel.
They had allowed the hoax to become a symbol of the Palestinian
revolt against the barbarous Jews. The Al Dura image has generated
years of dreadful violence, murderous mobs, the Ramallah lynching,
etc. It has fanned hatred between Palestinians and Israelis, between
Jews and Arabs.
The atmosphere in the France 2 office became tense. Didier Epelbaum
was violating numerous provisions of the ethical charter he himself
had drafted, namely the obligation to correct news reports when new,
contradictory information arises.
Informed that Abu Rahma is in Paris undergoing medical treatment,
Rosenzweig said he would like to speak with him. Epelbaum replied that
it wouldn't be worth the trouble because the Palestinian cameraman
doesnt speak French and his English is very poor.
St&ecute;phane Juffa remembers hearing Abu Rahma speak on CNN; his
English was fine.
Finally Rosenzweig and his colleagues are shown the 27 minutes of raw
footage. No new images of the Al Duras. No shots of Israeli soldiers.
Scenes of demonstrators attacking the Israeli position, scenes of kids
pretending to be wounded by the Israelis. Epelbaum comments: Those kids
are always doing that!
Enderlin claimed he'd handed over the raw footage intact to Israeli
authorities. Rosenzweig saw that this wasn't true. The few seconds where
you can see the child moving voluntarily after he was (allegedly) killed
instantly by the fatal shot had been retouched with stills.
Rosenzweig asks about the unbearable death throes
Embarrassed reaction from the France 2 officials. There are no such
images.
Epelbaum asks the visiting journalists if they have proof that the
news report is a fake. He doesn't seem to realize that the September
30, 2000 incident at Netzarim Junction is totally baseless now that it
has become obvious that the sole witness (Abu Rahma) gave false
testimony and the correspondent (Enderlin) was caught lying. But
Rosenzweig has further proof. He plugs his USB stick into a computer
and brings up the picture of a dead child taken in Gaza's Shifa
Hospital on the day of the Al Dura incident, and presented as Mohamed Al
Dura. There's a slight problem here, he says. The face on this corpse
is not exactly the same as the face [of Mohamed] in your news report.
Chabot wonders out loud if they had been fooled, and suggests
having police experts compare the two. Metula has already made the
test: the two boys are not the same age, the wounds on the corpse have
nothing in common with the alleged wounds of M. Al Dura.
Conclusion
Enderlin can stick to his usual defense--explaining that Israeli
army officers fell into his trap, which is true, and that the State of
Israel would have sued him if the report were a hoax but it won't work
anymore. In fact, Daniel Seaman, head of the government press office
(GPO) and the Prime Minister's spokesman, Raanan Gissin, have already
publicly announced that the Al Dura news report is a fake. Seaman
informed us that the government had decided it was not appropriate to
drag accredited foreign correspondents into court. But that might
change after the revelations in this article.
There is nothing left of the claim that Mohamed Al Dura was
assassinated by Israeli soldiers. But the larger question, of the
dangers when foreign media interfere in a conflict, remains to be
addressed. France 2 has been fooling people for four years, pretending
they were holding raw footage that showed Jewish soldiers
assassinating an Arab boy. The French public TV channel contributed to
the revival of medieval rumors that demonize Jews: the Israeli
soldiers would have to be utterly heartless to pick out a child in the
crowd and fire at him for 45 minutes until they killed him.
The media hoax fabricated by Abu Rahma and Enderlin exceeded their
expectations. The image of the ferocious Israelis still holds, and it
has convinced the vast majority of French-speaking people. Now France
Télévision has a tremendous task. They have to explain
what happened and acknowledge what they did. And they must reconsider
the journalists and methods that produced the Al Dura affair, the
biggest hoax in media history. The people who did it should no longer
be allowed to inform the French public about the Arab-Israeli
conflict. And they shouldnt be allowed to keep the prizes awarded for
the scoop.
The Metula News Agency will be watching!
The original article in French can be read at:
http://www.menapress.com/article.php?sid=956
"Bialik in Baghdad" by Amnon Rubinstein, The Jerusalem Post, Oct.
26, 2004. Amnon Rubinstein is founder of the Shinui movement and a
former education minister, is dean of the Radzyner School of Law at
The Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya.
What is the connection between the Hebrew poet Chaim Nachman Bialik and
the American invasion of Iraq? Is there a connection between the author of
In the City of Killing, who died in 1934, and the killing now taking place
in Baghdad?
The answer is given several times a week in Britain, at London's National
Theater, which is having a successful run of a new play by David Hare
called Stuff Happens.
This play, like others presently on in London, fiercely attacks the United
States and the Bush administration over its invasion of Iraq. The
three-hour play presents two kinds of actors: caricatures and reciters.
The caricatures are of the stupid enemies of humanity George Bush, Donald
Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz and Condoleezza Rice all of whom
are presented as mindless idiots.
Two characters, however, are not idiots Colin Powell and Tony Blair.
They're weak, ridiculous, and ultimately manipulated by the mindless
idiots.
The reciters stand up and say what they think of the situation. One of
them is a "Palestinian academic" who declares that the Hebrew poet Chaim
Nachman Bialik said Israel would be normal and human only when it had
Zionist crooks, Zionist prostitutes and Zionist murderers.
She adds: "Well, it's human now. The victims of the conflict have become
the problem. We are the Jews of the Jews."
The audience one of the most sophisticated audiences in the world bursts
into applause.
The Palestinian reciter goes on to describe Israel as a "$3-billion-a-year
American colony in the Middle East," for which the mindless idiots are
waging the war.
Needless to say, there is no Israeli reciter to refute that. The
new fashion rules out any such balance.
That story about Bialik is a joke that made the rounds during the
Palestinian yishuv: According to the anecdote whose veracity is hard to
ascertain when Bialik learned there had been a theft in the little Tel
Aviv of the day, he responded with typical humor: Finally we are normal.
Bialik didn't say anything about murderers. And anyone who knows anything
about the poet also knows he was incapable of saying what playwright David
Hare attributes to him.
Hare, moreover, has seemingly never heard of Palestinian, Arab or Muslim
murderers. The only murderers mentioned in the play are Bialik's imaginary
"Zionist murderers."
Hare can hardly be accused of anti-Semitism his wife is a leading Jewish
fashion designer. Nor can we charge him with extreme anti-Israeli
sentiments.
His monologue about a visit to Israel and Palestine may be critical of
Israeli policies who isn't? but it was fair and full of empathy toward
Israelis.
So what's going on here?
Two things: First, ideology defeats artistry. This is not the first time
an artist has subjugated his talent to rigid ideology, the result being,
invariably, boring theater.
Secondly, fashion trumps common sense.
It's faddish to be anti-Israeli, even when Israel is not involved and
it's a fashion that must not be argued with.
The Spectator's theater critic noted that there is no play in London which
understands, or even tries to understand, the Bush-Blair position, because
were there a playwright who wrote such a play, nobody would present it.
And if, by some miracle, such a play did get produced, it would be trashed
by the critics and closed within days of opening.
We cannot ignore this fashion, so prevalent in Western intellectual
circles including among those who were once avid supporters of Israel.
And we cannot fight it with hasbara.
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. |