Israel's ambassador to the UN slammed the Security Council Wednesday for its silence in the face of PA terror rocket attacks from Gaza.
By Chana Ya'ar
Israel's ambassador to the United Nations is asking that body's Security Council why it's not “shocked” by the constant barrage of rockets and mortars fired by Gaza terrorists at southern Israel.
Ambassador Ron Prosor declared Wednesday during a meeting of the U.N. Security Council that the unstable security situation in southern Israel should shock that body's members – which have often expressed deep dismay at similar situations elsewhere in the world. Prosor criticized the Council at its session on Wednesday for not condemning the attacks by Palestinian Authority Arab terrorists, who earlier this month killed a 56-year-old Ashkelon man and physically wounded 16 other people in a barrage aimed at the southern region.
Another 14 people were also sent to the hospital with trauma reactions and severe anxiety attacks during the five-day period in which rockets and mortars were fired at Israeli civilian communities.
“The pain caused by these attacks is permanent,” Prosor pointed out. “The scars are both physical and psychological... One million Israelis were compelled to stay home from work last week to ensure their safety... 200,000 children were kept home from school.
“These stories should shock and appall the Security Council and all decent people. Yet, not a single world of condemnation has been uttered by this Council. Not one word.
“The silence speaks volumes,” he said.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Why Did Sarkozy and Obama "Dis" [Disrespect] Bibi?
Barry Rubin
During a conversation when they thought nobody was listening French President Nicholas Sarkozy and U.S. President Barack Obama said nasty things about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. A lot of the analysis about what this tells us I think is rather misleading.
Regarding Sarkozy, French-Israel relations have been good and there have not been major problems with Sarkozy. On one hand, Sarkozy has been far friendlier to Israel than his Gaullist and Socialist predecessors. True, he is surrounded by some hostile advisors, including the career staff at the Foreign Ministry, but on the other hand there is a defense and counterterrorism establishment that admires Israel.
Indeed, Sarkozy helped kill the Palestinian unilateral independence effort in the UN Security Council, a major service to Israel. Yet France voted in favor of the Palesstinian entry into the UNESCO organization. Incidentally, Sarkozy has also not been a fan of Obama in the past.
Why suddenly has Sarkozy turned against Netanyahu? I can't prove it but I think there is evidence for the following scenario. Sarkozy decided that he was going to broker a major deal at the UN, showing that France was a leading great power in the world. (A theme I think you have heard before is a major French goal.) So he went to Netanyahu with a proposal: Israel would accept unilateral independence for Palestine and Sarkozy would get Israel something from the Palestinians (perhaps recognition of a Jewish state?) Netanyahu played along a bit but, of course, knew that Sarkozy wouldn't get anything from the Palestinian Authority. Sarkozy's idea--like that of virtually all the well-intentioned or bad-intentioned, naive or cynical, friendly or hostile to Israel busybodies who think they are going to make peace--just didn't make real sense. At any rate, Sarkozy thought he had something from Israel that he didn't have. His UN speech implying he wanted to support unilateral independence was certainly bad from Israel's standpoint.
The deal fell through--it was doomed from the start since the Palestinian Authority wouldn't compromise--and, of course, he blamed Israel and not the Palestinians. Hence his fury that Netanyahu was a "liar."
As for Obama, some have explained his remark about frustrations in dealing with Netanyahu every day as just going along with Sarkozy. Others claimed Obama's remark was justified. This latter point is absurd. The truth is that Netanyahu has done everything Obama has asked while the PA has done nothing at all. If only there was a U.S. president who talked that way. But there's more, apparently, to be gained by bashing Israel and coddling the PA in words.
Remember two things. First, U.S. policy has taken virtually no material action against Israel in terms of bilateral relations. The hostility is all words. Better nasty words and okay actions than the other way around.
Second, when PA leader Yasir Arafat doomed the Camp David talks in 2000 and turned to massive violence, then President Bill Clinton was livid. He openly blamed Arafat and the PA. Over time, though, this was all forgotten. Clinton today blames Israel for the lack of peace.
Why recent American presidents behave this way would have to be the subject of another article. But you all know the list of factors involved.
An interesting question is this: What could Netanyahu have possibly done to underpin Obama's anger? There is only one real possible argument: Netanyahu's trip to Washington in which he gave Obama a lesson in Middle East politics and made a stirring speech to Congress that made Obama look foolish.
But why did Netanyahu do this? Only because while on the way to Washington he was ambushed by a major Obama speech--which had not been discussed with him beforehand--that badly undercut Israel's strategic position. The point most cited in the speech was the idea of returning to the 1967 borders but there are worse things in it. Besides the substance, you just don't present a major new policy critical of an ally's interests while he's on the plane to Washington and you haven't even fully discussed it with him.
I could here provide a list of broken promises from Obama to Israel along with insulting and verbally damaging behavior.
But put that aside. Obama's Administration has endorsed Israel's deadliest enemy and the most important antisemitic group in the world--the Muslim Brotherhood--coming to power in Egypt. A similar stance is being taken toward Tunisia and Libya; U.S. policy is treating the Islamist regime in Turkey as its closest ally in the Middle East despite that country's leader making hysterical anti-Israel rants and virtually threatening war on Israel. The Obama Administration is also helping Islamists in Syria and doing lots of other dangerous things on a regional level.
In the face of this long list of damage being done by Obama to Israel, he has a lot of nerve to snap about Netanyahu. Meanwhile, we are still being told from certain quarters that Obama is the most pro-Israel president in history, practically Jewish, and we should shut up about any criticism, get down on our knees and vote for him.
A little lesson in diplomacy: the king of the land is the king. Israel must get along with Obama to the best of its ability. It cannot criticize him in public and must be circumspect in discussing even his policies. It must take the course of a university official in a Terry Pratchett book who told his boss: "You're right, sir, but I can tell you how to be even more right!" Suppose you were to ask an Israeli official what he thinks of Obama and his policies? If completely candid, that person would respond: It doesn't matter what I think we have to do our best to get along with him.
Ironically, Obama says that he is ashamed of past U.S. bullying and arrogance, its treatment of smaller countries. Often, however, that only seems to be true regarding countries hostile to the United States. The fact is that Israel's existence is on the line and Obama is playing with that country's fate.
I won't go further here but if I make the mistake of talking in front of a microphone that I think is "off," I might get caught complaining that we have to deal with Obama every day.
Professor Barry Rubin, Director, Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://www.gloria-center.org
The Rubin Report blog http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/
He is a featured columnist at PJM http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/.
Editor, Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal http://www.gloria-center.org
Editor Turkish Studies,http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=t713636933%22
During a conversation when they thought nobody was listening French President Nicholas Sarkozy and U.S. President Barack Obama said nasty things about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. A lot of the analysis about what this tells us I think is rather misleading.
Regarding Sarkozy, French-Israel relations have been good and there have not been major problems with Sarkozy. On one hand, Sarkozy has been far friendlier to Israel than his Gaullist and Socialist predecessors. True, he is surrounded by some hostile advisors, including the career staff at the Foreign Ministry, but on the other hand there is a defense and counterterrorism establishment that admires Israel.
Indeed, Sarkozy helped kill the Palestinian unilateral independence effort in the UN Security Council, a major service to Israel. Yet France voted in favor of the Palesstinian entry into the UNESCO organization. Incidentally, Sarkozy has also not been a fan of Obama in the past.
Why suddenly has Sarkozy turned against Netanyahu? I can't prove it but I think there is evidence for the following scenario. Sarkozy decided that he was going to broker a major deal at the UN, showing that France was a leading great power in the world. (A theme I think you have heard before is a major French goal.) So he went to Netanyahu with a proposal: Israel would accept unilateral independence for Palestine and Sarkozy would get Israel something from the Palestinians (perhaps recognition of a Jewish state?) Netanyahu played along a bit but, of course, knew that Sarkozy wouldn't get anything from the Palestinian Authority. Sarkozy's idea--like that of virtually all the well-intentioned or bad-intentioned, naive or cynical, friendly or hostile to Israel busybodies who think they are going to make peace--just didn't make real sense. At any rate, Sarkozy thought he had something from Israel that he didn't have. His UN speech implying he wanted to support unilateral independence was certainly bad from Israel's standpoint.
The deal fell through--it was doomed from the start since the Palestinian Authority wouldn't compromise--and, of course, he blamed Israel and not the Palestinians. Hence his fury that Netanyahu was a "liar."
As for Obama, some have explained his remark about frustrations in dealing with Netanyahu every day as just going along with Sarkozy. Others claimed Obama's remark was justified. This latter point is absurd. The truth is that Netanyahu has done everything Obama has asked while the PA has done nothing at all. If only there was a U.S. president who talked that way. But there's more, apparently, to be gained by bashing Israel and coddling the PA in words.
Remember two things. First, U.S. policy has taken virtually no material action against Israel in terms of bilateral relations. The hostility is all words. Better nasty words and okay actions than the other way around.
Second, when PA leader Yasir Arafat doomed the Camp David talks in 2000 and turned to massive violence, then President Bill Clinton was livid. He openly blamed Arafat and the PA. Over time, though, this was all forgotten. Clinton today blames Israel for the lack of peace.
Why recent American presidents behave this way would have to be the subject of another article. But you all know the list of factors involved.
An interesting question is this: What could Netanyahu have possibly done to underpin Obama's anger? There is only one real possible argument: Netanyahu's trip to Washington in which he gave Obama a lesson in Middle East politics and made a stirring speech to Congress that made Obama look foolish.
But why did Netanyahu do this? Only because while on the way to Washington he was ambushed by a major Obama speech--which had not been discussed with him beforehand--that badly undercut Israel's strategic position. The point most cited in the speech was the idea of returning to the 1967 borders but there are worse things in it. Besides the substance, you just don't present a major new policy critical of an ally's interests while he's on the plane to Washington and you haven't even fully discussed it with him.
I could here provide a list of broken promises from Obama to Israel along with insulting and verbally damaging behavior.
But put that aside. Obama's Administration has endorsed Israel's deadliest enemy and the most important antisemitic group in the world--the Muslim Brotherhood--coming to power in Egypt. A similar stance is being taken toward Tunisia and Libya; U.S. policy is treating the Islamist regime in Turkey as its closest ally in the Middle East despite that country's leader making hysterical anti-Israel rants and virtually threatening war on Israel. The Obama Administration is also helping Islamists in Syria and doing lots of other dangerous things on a regional level.
In the face of this long list of damage being done by Obama to Israel, he has a lot of nerve to snap about Netanyahu. Meanwhile, we are still being told from certain quarters that Obama is the most pro-Israel president in history, practically Jewish, and we should shut up about any criticism, get down on our knees and vote for him.
A little lesson in diplomacy: the king of the land is the king. Israel must get along with Obama to the best of its ability. It cannot criticize him in public and must be circumspect in discussing even his policies. It must take the course of a university official in a Terry Pratchett book who told his boss: "You're right, sir, but I can tell you how to be even more right!" Suppose you were to ask an Israeli official what he thinks of Obama and his policies? If completely candid, that person would respond: It doesn't matter what I think we have to do our best to get along with him.
Ironically, Obama says that he is ashamed of past U.S. bullying and arrogance, its treatment of smaller countries. Often, however, that only seems to be true regarding countries hostile to the United States. The fact is that Israel's existence is on the line and Obama is playing with that country's fate.
I won't go further here but if I make the mistake of talking in front of a microphone that I think is "off," I might get caught complaining that we have to deal with Obama every day.
Professor Barry Rubin, Director, Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://www.gloria-center.org
The Rubin Report blog http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/
He is a featured columnist at PJM http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/.
Editor, Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal http://www.gloria-center.org
Editor Turkish Studies,http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=t713636933%22
Friday, November 11, 2011
YESHA in Numbers
My Right Word
Four (4) cities.
Six (6) regional councils.
Thirteen (13) local councils.
One-hundred and forty (140) communities.
Three hundred and forty thousands (340,000) resident revenants.
We are living on land that equals 21% of the land mass of Israel which equals no more than 3% of the total land mass of Judea and Samaria. We have 48,000 dunams (12,000 acres) under agricultural development, growing olive groves, fruit trees, vineyards and organic vegetables.
The mountains of Judea and Samaria reach a height of 1100 meters and under the ground are the 3 aquifers that provide 50% of the water for the state of Israel.
There are 20 national parks in the area, visited by over 1,000,000 persons annually.
Eighty percent (80%) of all the events and occurrences of the Bible narrative took place in this area.
There are 45 graves and other sites of Jewish sacred importance.
Seventeen thousand (17,000) persons are employed in industrial and agricultural workplaces of whom, 11,000 are Arabs, in 800 factories and workshops in 14 industrial parks.
That's YESHA.
And come back next year for better numbers.
Comment: Actually the total land mass of the Israeli citizens living in Judea and Samaria is about 2% of the total land mass of the unregistered space.
Syrian Protestors Request No-Fly Zone
Anna Mahjar-Barducci
After seeing Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi toppled, the Syrian people apparently want to be the next to be freed from dictatorship. Since the uprising started seven months ago, the Syrian regime has killed more than 3,000 innocent civilians, including 187 children; now the Syrian people are asking for a NATO foreign military intervention. Protestors decided to go to the streets on October 28 to urge the international community to help them by imposing a no-fly zone. A No-Fly zone would not cost the West as much as ground intervention, and would seriously limit Assad's capabilities. "Stop Barking Bashar, the people want a no-fly zone," thousands of people, again defying the regime, were chanting. Anxious about foreign intervention, Syrian President Bashar Assad declared on November 3rd that Syria accept a plan offered by the Arab League to end the unrest and and reach an agreement with the protestors. If the demonstrators had doubts that Assad's announcement was just a manoeuvre to buy more time, they were right. The regime broke the cease-fire agreement with its own people in less than a day.
Although the Syrian regime is perceived as secular, and a staunch enemy of the Islamists, in reality it supports and gives logistical help to the Islamic Jihad, to Hama, and mainly the Islamic Republic of Iran which is currently endangering the whole Middle East as well as the West.
A No Fly zone is important for the stability of the Middle East and the West. If this alliance can succeed in toppling Syria's President, Bashar Assad, Iran will be severely damaged; left isolated, and will lose its strategic corridor for support to Hezbollah.
The protestors advocating it come from the entire political spectrum of the Syrian society: leftist activists, secular movements, Islamists, refugees, human rights activists both inside Syria and in exile, and mainly the Free Syrian Army, formed by soldiers who defected the Syrian Army. In the meantime, they fear that Assad will continue to fight to stay in power, and do not want to be unprepared for the battle; so the debate over the no-fly zone is still on the table.
The Kurdish media outlet Rudaw reports that Syrian opposition activists maintain that a no-fly zone over Syria would "not only protect civilians but also army defectors who are reportedly taking up arms against the government." Many soldiers are reported to be moving over to the protestors' side. The Associated Press stated that ---according to the British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights -- a clash took place in Homs on October 29th between soldiers and gunmen believed to be army defectors].
Tim Hawi, a Syrian activist based in Saudi Arabia, also argues that many soldiers, still fearing an aerial bombardment, are still reluctant to defect, but states that, "if there were a no-fly zone then the army would rebel to topple the regime." Salam Hafez, Iraq editor for the Institute for War and Peace Reporting, also writes that, "tens of thousands of regime soldiers would be prepared to jump ship but are holding back because they fear they will be wiped out by government loyalists in the absence of protection from the international community." Ammar Abdulhamid, a U.S.-based Syrian writer, explains that army units and militias loyal to Assad are "on a country-wide hunt for defectors, perpetrating atrocities in every nook and cranny, from removing the wounded from hospitals, to indiscriminate shelling of residential neighborhoods, to mass execution of detainees."
Syria Threatens to Destabilize the Middle East
The Syrian army is trying to do anything it can to remain in power, and is threatening to destabilize the entire Middle East if the West should decide to intervene militarily. Damascus is warning that, with the help of Iran and Hezbollah, it can transform the region into a battlefield. In an interview with the British Sunday Telegraph, Assad announced that a Western intervention would cause an "earthquake" that would "burn the whole region." "Syria is the hub now in this region. It is the fault line, and if you play with the ground you will cause an earthquake … Do you want to see another Afghanistan, or tens of Afghanistans?" he said.
Moreover, in a meeting with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmad Davutoglu, Assad threatened to set fire to the Middle-East, especially Israel: "If a crazy measure is taken against Damascus, I will need not more than six hours to transfer hundreds of rockets and missiles to the Golan Heights to fire them at Tel Aviv," he said, adding that he will also call on Hezbollah in Lebanon to launch an intensive rocket and missile attack on Israel. "All these events will happen in three hours, but in the second three hours, Iran will attack the US warships in the Persian Gulf, and the US and European interests will be targeted simultaneously."
Nevertheless,, the UAE-based paper, The National, wrote that Assad's threats are not based on reality: "Assad's power to foment trouble beyond Syria's borders is much diminished. It is no longer certain that even Hizbollah or Hamas would dance to Damascus's tune."
Protestors Ask the International Community to Help
Unlike the late Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, Syria's Assad has not yet used the air force against the protestors -- precisely not to give the West a further justification to intervene militarily. In case NATO should impose a no-fly zone on Syria, however, Reuters argues that the area could be used as a platform for strikes on ground forces and military bases to help the population.
The West does not yet know what to do. Many leaders fear to involve their army in another conflict with unknown consequences. Several Syrian bloggers are also writing that they do not want a foreign intervention. People in Syria, however, continue to be killed every day, and protestors in the streets wave placards that show they are hoping the international community will listen to their request for a no-fly zone. Abdulhamid reports that demonstrations organized on October 31st were meant to protest Assad's latest threats to set the entire region on fire and transform Syrian into a new Afghanistan; and to demand that the Arab League freeze Syria's membership.
Ahmed Qurabi, a Syrian opposition leader based in Turkey, wrote that the Syrian people are still hoping for the active involvement of Turkey to create an area like Benghazi, the city used as a base for the Libyan uprising. The idea would be to create an area on the border between Turkey and Syria, protected by Turkey or by NATO, from where to start liberating the whole of Syria from Assad. Other suggested locations are in the south between Syria and Jordan, where the revolution originated, or else in the region between Iraq and Syria. In the meantime, the Syrian population, saying that the revolution will end only when Assad is defeated, is continuing its fight. "Now no one is afraid, because everyone realizes that this revolution cannot stop; it will continue until the end," Qurabi stated. "We speculate about months or maybe years, because we have paid the price and we are ready to give more. The [Assad] regime has now shown the whole world that it is a bloody regime, so now we have no choice, we have finish what we started."
After seeing Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi toppled, the Syrian people apparently want to be the next to be freed from dictatorship. Since the uprising started seven months ago, the Syrian regime has killed more than 3,000 innocent civilians, including 187 children; now the Syrian people are asking for a NATO foreign military intervention. Protestors decided to go to the streets on October 28 to urge the international community to help them by imposing a no-fly zone. A No-Fly zone would not cost the West as much as ground intervention, and would seriously limit Assad's capabilities. "Stop Barking Bashar, the people want a no-fly zone," thousands of people, again defying the regime, were chanting. Anxious about foreign intervention, Syrian President Bashar Assad declared on November 3rd that Syria accept a plan offered by the Arab League to end the unrest and and reach an agreement with the protestors. If the demonstrators had doubts that Assad's announcement was just a manoeuvre to buy more time, they were right. The regime broke the cease-fire agreement with its own people in less than a day.
Although the Syrian regime is perceived as secular, and a staunch enemy of the Islamists, in reality it supports and gives logistical help to the Islamic Jihad, to Hama, and mainly the Islamic Republic of Iran which is currently endangering the whole Middle East as well as the West.
A No Fly zone is important for the stability of the Middle East and the West. If this alliance can succeed in toppling Syria's President, Bashar Assad, Iran will be severely damaged; left isolated, and will lose its strategic corridor for support to Hezbollah.
The protestors advocating it come from the entire political spectrum of the Syrian society: leftist activists, secular movements, Islamists, refugees, human rights activists both inside Syria and in exile, and mainly the Free Syrian Army, formed by soldiers who defected the Syrian Army. In the meantime, they fear that Assad will continue to fight to stay in power, and do not want to be unprepared for the battle; so the debate over the no-fly zone is still on the table.
The Kurdish media outlet Rudaw reports that Syrian opposition activists maintain that a no-fly zone over Syria would "not only protect civilians but also army defectors who are reportedly taking up arms against the government." Many soldiers are reported to be moving over to the protestors' side. The Associated Press stated that ---according to the British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights -- a clash took place in Homs on October 29th between soldiers and gunmen believed to be army defectors].
Tim Hawi, a Syrian activist based in Saudi Arabia, also argues that many soldiers, still fearing an aerial bombardment, are still reluctant to defect, but states that, "if there were a no-fly zone then the army would rebel to topple the regime." Salam Hafez, Iraq editor for the Institute for War and Peace Reporting, also writes that, "tens of thousands of regime soldiers would be prepared to jump ship but are holding back because they fear they will be wiped out by government loyalists in the absence of protection from the international community." Ammar Abdulhamid, a U.S.-based Syrian writer, explains that army units and militias loyal to Assad are "on a country-wide hunt for defectors, perpetrating atrocities in every nook and cranny, from removing the wounded from hospitals, to indiscriminate shelling of residential neighborhoods, to mass execution of detainees."
Syria Threatens to Destabilize the Middle East
The Syrian army is trying to do anything it can to remain in power, and is threatening to destabilize the entire Middle East if the West should decide to intervene militarily. Damascus is warning that, with the help of Iran and Hezbollah, it can transform the region into a battlefield. In an interview with the British Sunday Telegraph, Assad announced that a Western intervention would cause an "earthquake" that would "burn the whole region." "Syria is the hub now in this region. It is the fault line, and if you play with the ground you will cause an earthquake … Do you want to see another Afghanistan, or tens of Afghanistans?" he said.
Moreover, in a meeting with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmad Davutoglu, Assad threatened to set fire to the Middle-East, especially Israel: "If a crazy measure is taken against Damascus, I will need not more than six hours to transfer hundreds of rockets and missiles to the Golan Heights to fire them at Tel Aviv," he said, adding that he will also call on Hezbollah in Lebanon to launch an intensive rocket and missile attack on Israel. "All these events will happen in three hours, but in the second three hours, Iran will attack the US warships in the Persian Gulf, and the US and European interests will be targeted simultaneously."
Nevertheless,, the UAE-based paper, The National, wrote that Assad's threats are not based on reality: "Assad's power to foment trouble beyond Syria's borders is much diminished. It is no longer certain that even Hizbollah or Hamas would dance to Damascus's tune."
Protestors Ask the International Community to Help
Unlike the late Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, Syria's Assad has not yet used the air force against the protestors -- precisely not to give the West a further justification to intervene militarily. In case NATO should impose a no-fly zone on Syria, however, Reuters argues that the area could be used as a platform for strikes on ground forces and military bases to help the population.
The West does not yet know what to do. Many leaders fear to involve their army in another conflict with unknown consequences. Several Syrian bloggers are also writing that they do not want a foreign intervention. People in Syria, however, continue to be killed every day, and protestors in the streets wave placards that show they are hoping the international community will listen to their request for a no-fly zone. Abdulhamid reports that demonstrations organized on October 31st were meant to protest Assad's latest threats to set the entire region on fire and transform Syrian into a new Afghanistan; and to demand that the Arab League freeze Syria's membership.
Ahmed Qurabi, a Syrian opposition leader based in Turkey, wrote that the Syrian people are still hoping for the active involvement of Turkey to create an area like Benghazi, the city used as a base for the Libyan uprising. The idea would be to create an area on the border between Turkey and Syria, protected by Turkey or by NATO, from where to start liberating the whole of Syria from Assad. Other suggested locations are in the south between Syria and Jordan, where the revolution originated, or else in the region between Iraq and Syria. In the meantime, the Syrian population, saying that the revolution will end only when Assad is defeated, is continuing its fight. "Now no one is afraid, because everyone realizes that this revolution cannot stop; it will continue until the end," Qurabi stated. "We speculate about months or maybe years, because we have paid the price and we are ready to give more. The [Assad] regime has now shown the whole world that it is a bloody regime, so now we have no choice, we have finish what we started."
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Nobody is above the law
Dan Margalit
Five years and four months after he tried to drag then Attorney General Menachem (Meni) Mazuz into an investigation against his employee, whom he accused of attempting to blackmail him on sexual charges, Moshe Katsav on Thursday walked the final stretch of this mine-strewn affair. The judgment was delivered by Supreme Court Justices Miriam Naor, Edna Arbel and Salim Joubran,
It was reasonable to assume that Katsav would be found guilty. The judgment was unanimous, and Katsav will be sent to jail for seven years. Today, the fog over this murky affair was finally lifted, but it will leave behind a trail of unanswered questions. Some are questions of substance, others are merely voyeuristic, but they are sure to arise at conferences, lectures, and meetings where participants engage in soul-searching.
One of these is more of a curiosity than a material question. How is it possible that an experienced attorney like Yaakov Neeman believed Katsav's assertion that he was telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth and as a result counseled him (quite reasonably) to ask for the attorney general's defense? It was this step that led to his disgraceful booting out of the President's Residence. And how is it that Mazuz, who heard the president deliver the same account as Neeman did, began to suspect he was jerking him around in their very first meeting?
The scandal has left another loose end. I was sitting in the Tel Aviv courtroom when Judge George Kara read out the verdict that tore Katsav's arguments to shreds, when suddenly the street outside burst into cheers, applause and cries of joy. "Do not rejoice when your enemy falls," advises the Book of Proverbs. The incident was embarrassing, and smacked of a spiritual lynching. We live in the Jewish state, not in Libya.
Of greater importance is the claim that the media knew about Katsav's crimes and remained silent. I am part of the minority that begs to differ. In those years I frequented the halls of the Knesset. Along with everyone else, I heard dozens of rumors, both true and false, concerning forbidden sexual relationships. I heard these things about Katsav, but not more than about any of his colleagues. Two such scandals came close to being reported by Shosh Mula at Yedioth Aharonoth and Shalom Yerushalmi at Ma'ariv. But neither reporter had a smoking gun. Those who claim otherwise need to consider the following scenario: the alleged crimes are exposed. But there is no proof. No victim comes forward to the police. Katsav does not come forward either – after all, it was he who effectively brought this whole calamity on himself. The media immediately comes under attack, and rightly so, for defaming an innocent family man. That would be libel, pure and simple, and that is why we could not report anything.
We also need a psychological explanation as to what was going on in Katsav's head when he rejected the cushy plea bargain obtained by his defense attorneys. Perhaps an invisible hand intervened from on high to make Katsav blunder and forgo the easy punishment. His obstinacy inadvertently served the cause of justice, and now he received a more suitable punishment.
Most important, the Katsav trial has laid to rest public debate over the deviant claim that it is unseemly for a high-ranking criminal to stand trial. Hypocrites and tricksters express shock over the notion that a sitting president could be ousted, or even a sitting prime minister. They would rather have criminal suspects retain their positions as president, prime minister or finance minister. But our judicial system stood tall and led all of these eminences to the defendant's bench. So it was with Katsav, and with convicted Finance Minister Avraham Hirschson and with other cases in which the outcome is pending. All this resonates to the glory of the state of Israel.
Five years and four months after he tried to drag then Attorney General Menachem (Meni) Mazuz into an investigation against his employee, whom he accused of attempting to blackmail him on sexual charges, Moshe Katsav on Thursday walked the final stretch of this mine-strewn affair. The judgment was delivered by Supreme Court Justices Miriam Naor, Edna Arbel and Salim Joubran,
It was reasonable to assume that Katsav would be found guilty. The judgment was unanimous, and Katsav will be sent to jail for seven years. Today, the fog over this murky affair was finally lifted, but it will leave behind a trail of unanswered questions. Some are questions of substance, others are merely voyeuristic, but they are sure to arise at conferences, lectures, and meetings where participants engage in soul-searching.
One of these is more of a curiosity than a material question. How is it possible that an experienced attorney like Yaakov Neeman believed Katsav's assertion that he was telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth and as a result counseled him (quite reasonably) to ask for the attorney general's defense? It was this step that led to his disgraceful booting out of the President's Residence. And how is it that Mazuz, who heard the president deliver the same account as Neeman did, began to suspect he was jerking him around in their very first meeting?
The scandal has left another loose end. I was sitting in the Tel Aviv courtroom when Judge George Kara read out the verdict that tore Katsav's arguments to shreds, when suddenly the street outside burst into cheers, applause and cries of joy. "Do not rejoice when your enemy falls," advises the Book of Proverbs. The incident was embarrassing, and smacked of a spiritual lynching. We live in the Jewish state, not in Libya.
Of greater importance is the claim that the media knew about Katsav's crimes and remained silent. I am part of the minority that begs to differ. In those years I frequented the halls of the Knesset. Along with everyone else, I heard dozens of rumors, both true and false, concerning forbidden sexual relationships. I heard these things about Katsav, but not more than about any of his colleagues. Two such scandals came close to being reported by Shosh Mula at Yedioth Aharonoth and Shalom Yerushalmi at Ma'ariv. But neither reporter had a smoking gun. Those who claim otherwise need to consider the following scenario: the alleged crimes are exposed. But there is no proof. No victim comes forward to the police. Katsav does not come forward either – after all, it was he who effectively brought this whole calamity on himself. The media immediately comes under attack, and rightly so, for defaming an innocent family man. That would be libel, pure and simple, and that is why we could not report anything.
We also need a psychological explanation as to what was going on in Katsav's head when he rejected the cushy plea bargain obtained by his defense attorneys. Perhaps an invisible hand intervened from on high to make Katsav blunder and forgo the easy punishment. His obstinacy inadvertently served the cause of justice, and now he received a more suitable punishment.
Most important, the Katsav trial has laid to rest public debate over the deviant claim that it is unseemly for a high-ranking criminal to stand trial. Hypocrites and tricksters express shock over the notion that a sitting president could be ousted, or even a sitting prime minister. They would rather have criminal suspects retain their positions as president, prime minister or finance minister. But our judicial system stood tall and led all of these eminences to the defendant's bench. So it was with Katsav, and with convicted Finance Minister Avraham Hirschson and with other cases in which the outcome is pending. All this resonates to the glory of the state of Israel.
The danger of foreign funding
MK Tzipi Hotovely
Israel is in the midst of a struggle to maintain its image as an ethical state. Alongside the military campaign, we are conducting campaigns in the diplomatic and international legal arenas.
Attacks on Israeli military officers following Operation Cast Lead in Gaza in 2008-9, and the distorted reality in which senior Israeli politicians, including Deputy Prime Minister and Intelligence and Atomic Energy Minister Dan Meridor, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Opposition Leader Tzipi Livni refrained from visiting London for fear of being arrested on suspicion of war crimes, are the results of an aggressive campaign by non-governmental and non-profit organizations whose main funding sources are foreign countries. This funding breaks the accepted rules of the democratic game and breaches the borders of foreign diplomatic interference. Instead of Israelis being the masters of their own destiny, foreign countries, via organizations such as Breaking the Silence, Adalah: The Legal Center for Majority Rights in Israel and Yesh Din -- Volunteers for Human Rights, are manufacturing delegitimization of the government.
As long as the funding is coming from private individuals, every organization's freedom of speech should be protected, and funding can come from all points on the Israeli political spectrum, just as AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) operates in the U.S. as a political lobby and Israeli Knesset members are in contact with American government officials to exchange ideas.
But when England transfers more than 3.5 million euros to Yesh Din, it is enacting foreign influence over a sovereign state, contrary to the principles of democracy. The same goes for the more than 1 million euros given by the Netherlands after Operation Cast Lead to the organization B'Tselem: The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories. B'Tselem published a report accusing the IDF of war crimes. In addition, the EU overall passed more than 6 million euros to Adalah, an organization that called for the U.N. to intervene in the arrest of Ameer Makhoul, who was suspected of espionage against Israel. This data comes from Bar Ilan University Professor Gerald Steinberg's NGO monitor, and there are many other examples.
As if that were not enough, enemy countries such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait fund some of these organizations through the [Islamic charity] Welfare Association. Saudi Arabia, which funds both Hamas and Hezbollah, is not suspected in any way of having interests in line with those of Israel, as you know. It contributes through the association to these organizations. In essence, this is covert propaganda, and terrorism and foreign financing are the fuel that drive it.
I was among the initiators of the law, passed by the Knesset a year ago, that makes associations publish their donors' identities every quarter. That was a first step, as it is important that the public knows who pays for campaigns against Israel and what the interests are that stand behind those campaigns. But that is not enough. No civilized country could allow foreign diplomatic forces, for whom Israel's welfare is not at the top of their priority list, to influence its decisions.
This is also a democratic issue: Instead of Israelis affecting their own fate, foreign countries are dictating it, and with money. A prohibition on financing from foreign governments is, therefore, not an anti-democratic law, but rather the foundation for any democracy interested in protecting itself.
This is why the U.S. has defined any external donor, even a private individual, as a foreign agent, and contributions must be reported. As a sovereign state, we must insist that decisions about our future are made by the Israeli public itself, out of concern for its own future.
Israel is in the midst of a struggle to maintain its image as an ethical state. Alongside the military campaign, we are conducting campaigns in the diplomatic and international legal arenas.
Attacks on Israeli military officers following Operation Cast Lead in Gaza in 2008-9, and the distorted reality in which senior Israeli politicians, including Deputy Prime Minister and Intelligence and Atomic Energy Minister Dan Meridor, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Opposition Leader Tzipi Livni refrained from visiting London for fear of being arrested on suspicion of war crimes, are the results of an aggressive campaign by non-governmental and non-profit organizations whose main funding sources are foreign countries. This funding breaks the accepted rules of the democratic game and breaches the borders of foreign diplomatic interference. Instead of Israelis being the masters of their own destiny, foreign countries, via organizations such as Breaking the Silence, Adalah: The Legal Center for Majority Rights in Israel and Yesh Din -- Volunteers for Human Rights, are manufacturing delegitimization of the government.
As long as the funding is coming from private individuals, every organization's freedom of speech should be protected, and funding can come from all points on the Israeli political spectrum, just as AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) operates in the U.S. as a political lobby and Israeli Knesset members are in contact with American government officials to exchange ideas.
But when England transfers more than 3.5 million euros to Yesh Din, it is enacting foreign influence over a sovereign state, contrary to the principles of democracy. The same goes for the more than 1 million euros given by the Netherlands after Operation Cast Lead to the organization B'Tselem: The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories. B'Tselem published a report accusing the IDF of war crimes. In addition, the EU overall passed more than 6 million euros to Adalah, an organization that called for the U.N. to intervene in the arrest of Ameer Makhoul, who was suspected of espionage against Israel. This data comes from Bar Ilan University Professor Gerald Steinberg's NGO monitor, and there are many other examples.
As if that were not enough, enemy countries such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait fund some of these organizations through the [Islamic charity] Welfare Association. Saudi Arabia, which funds both Hamas and Hezbollah, is not suspected in any way of having interests in line with those of Israel, as you know. It contributes through the association to these organizations. In essence, this is covert propaganda, and terrorism and foreign financing are the fuel that drive it.
I was among the initiators of the law, passed by the Knesset a year ago, that makes associations publish their donors' identities every quarter. That was a first step, as it is important that the public knows who pays for campaigns against Israel and what the interests are that stand behind those campaigns. But that is not enough. No civilized country could allow foreign diplomatic forces, for whom Israel's welfare is not at the top of their priority list, to influence its decisions.
This is also a democratic issue: Instead of Israelis affecting their own fate, foreign countries are dictating it, and with money. A prohibition on financing from foreign governments is, therefore, not an anti-democratic law, but rather the foundation for any democracy interested in protecting itself.
This is why the U.S. has defined any external donor, even a private individual, as a foreign agent, and contributions must be reported. As a sovereign state, we must insist that decisions about our future are made by the Israeli public itself, out of concern for its own future.
Wednesday, November 09, 2011
West Bank settlement to apply Israeli law to Palestinian workers
Ma'aleh Adumim first town to contract municipal employees according to Israel directives, equalizing routine working conditions of Palestinian workers to those of Israel workers.
By Nir Hasson
The Ma'aleh Adumim municipality came to a precedent-setting agreement with its Palestinian employees last week, whereby it will recognize their rights in accordance with Israeli labor laws. Until now it was the Jordanian Labor Law from 1965 that was applied to the labor arrangements in this Jewish settlement beyond the Green Line, based on the local authority's legal argument that it is that law that applies in the territories. The agreement is considered precedent-setting, because it relates for the first time to the routine employment conditions of Palestinian workers and their equalization to the conditions of Israel workers. In the agreement, the Ma'aleh Adumim municipality has taken upon itself a commitment to employ the workers under Israeli law and to apply to them the collective work agreements in force for municipal employees throughout the country. This means that henceforth they will enjoy social benefits that were not given to them previously. Moreover, the municipality will pay the workers NIS 1.5 million, for wage differentials and for lawyers' fees.
More than two years ago, about 60 municipal workers, members of the Jahalin Bedouin tribe who live adjacent to Ma'aleh Adumim, a town of some 40,000, sued in Labor Court to be employed under the Israeli labor laws. In the wake of their suit, filed on their behalf by attorney Shlomo Lecker, a process of mediation between the sides began, presided over by retired Judge Dina Efrati. Employers, including the local councils in the territories, benefit from a lacuna in the law that enables employment of foreign workers cheaply and without any oversight. Thus, for decades Ma'aleh Adumim's municipal employees, like most of the Palestinians hired in the Jewish settlements, were employed without any social benefits, pension arrangements or oversight of their conditions of employment, as the law requires inside Israeli territory. In most cases the Palestinian workers also do not enjoy the improvements made in the Jordanian law since 1965.
In 2007, in the wake of a petition by a group of workers from Givat Zeev, a bench of seven at the High Court of Justice ruled that the local council must pay them severance compensation in accordance with Israeli employment laws. "The question remains as to why lengthy court procedures were necessary in order to bring about the obvious outcome from the High Court precedent by an expanded bench handed down in October of 2007," wondered Lecker. "Why did the municipality argue in court until recently that it was proper to continue to apply the Jordanian law to the plaintiffs?"
Municipality director general Eli Har Nir says in response that Ma'aleh Adumim will be the first employer in the country to have such a large group of Palestinian municipal workers employed under Israeli law. "The situation that has been created isn't easy and it has serious budgetary implications for us," admitted Har Nir. "We had an agreement with the workers from 2005 that adopted the Jordanian law. The agreement is valid and was approved by a court but circumstances led to the filing of the new suit. We have studied its details and we agreed, at the judge's recommendation, to the mediation process."
By Nir Hasson
The Ma'aleh Adumim municipality came to a precedent-setting agreement with its Palestinian employees last week, whereby it will recognize their rights in accordance with Israeli labor laws. Until now it was the Jordanian Labor Law from 1965 that was applied to the labor arrangements in this Jewish settlement beyond the Green Line, based on the local authority's legal argument that it is that law that applies in the territories. The agreement is considered precedent-setting, because it relates for the first time to the routine employment conditions of Palestinian workers and their equalization to the conditions of Israel workers. In the agreement, the Ma'aleh Adumim municipality has taken upon itself a commitment to employ the workers under Israeli law and to apply to them the collective work agreements in force for municipal employees throughout the country. This means that henceforth they will enjoy social benefits that were not given to them previously. Moreover, the municipality will pay the workers NIS 1.5 million, for wage differentials and for lawyers' fees.
More than two years ago, about 60 municipal workers, members of the Jahalin Bedouin tribe who live adjacent to Ma'aleh Adumim, a town of some 40,000, sued in Labor Court to be employed under the Israeli labor laws. In the wake of their suit, filed on their behalf by attorney Shlomo Lecker, a process of mediation between the sides began, presided over by retired Judge Dina Efrati. Employers, including the local councils in the territories, benefit from a lacuna in the law that enables employment of foreign workers cheaply and without any oversight. Thus, for decades Ma'aleh Adumim's municipal employees, like most of the Palestinians hired in the Jewish settlements, were employed without any social benefits, pension arrangements or oversight of their conditions of employment, as the law requires inside Israeli territory. In most cases the Palestinian workers also do not enjoy the improvements made in the Jordanian law since 1965.
In 2007, in the wake of a petition by a group of workers from Givat Zeev, a bench of seven at the High Court of Justice ruled that the local council must pay them severance compensation in accordance with Israeli employment laws. "The question remains as to why lengthy court procedures were necessary in order to bring about the obvious outcome from the High Court precedent by an expanded bench handed down in October of 2007," wondered Lecker. "Why did the municipality argue in court until recently that it was proper to continue to apply the Jordanian law to the plaintiffs?"
Municipality director general Eli Har Nir says in response that Ma'aleh Adumim will be the first employer in the country to have such a large group of Palestinian municipal workers employed under Israeli law. "The situation that has been created isn't easy and it has serious budgetary implications for us," admitted Har Nir. "We had an agreement with the workers from 2005 that adopted the Jordanian law. The agreement is valid and was approved by a court but circumstances led to the filing of the new suit. We have studied its details and we agreed, at the judge's recommendation, to the mediation process."
Antisemitism on Palestinian Authority TV
Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
A Palestinian Authority TV program stated that rain falls on Jerusalem to wash away the impurity of the footsteps of Jews on behalf of Muslims who come to pray in the city.
The following is the text as broadcast on official PA TV:
"The golden dome [of the mosque] shines with colors of the sky, with the white of clouds, while the joyous holiday [Eid Al-Adha] is good to the residents. The light rain cleanses the steps of the foreigners [Jews] so that the feet [of Muslims] in prayer will not step on impurity." Palestinian Media Watch reported a few months ago that the same PA TV program, Sights of Jerusalem, portrayed Jews praying at the Western wall as "sin and filth." It also stated that the PA plans to build an Arab residential area in place of the Western Wall Plaza in Jerusalem "when they [Israelis] disappear from the picture, like a forgotten chapter in the pages of our city's history."
The following is the transcript from the PA TV program in August:
"They [Israelis] know for certain that our [Palestinian] roots are deeper than their false history. We, from the balcony of our home, look out over [Islamic] holiness and on sin and filth (Jews' praying at Western Wall) in an area that used to have [Arab] people and homes. We are drawing our new maps. When they [Israelis] disappear from the picture, like a forgotten chapter in the pages of our city's history, we will build it anew (residential area). The Mughrabi Quarter will be built here (on the Western Wall Plaza)."
[PA TV (Fatah), Aug. 10, 2011]
Click to view
The Palestinian Authority denies that Jews have any historical rights to Jerusalem and even to the Western Wall, a remnant of the Temple Mount, which is Judaism's holiest and most important prayer site.
Tuesday, November 08, 2011
The Supreme Court Is Misreading The Issue on Jerusalem
My Right Word
I read this in the Washington Post report on the Supreme Court's deliberations of the Jerusalem birth registration matter:
The justices seemed reluctant to question the administration’s position that the law was an improper congressional attempt to speak for the country on foreign policy.
Justice Elena Kagan said the congressional action read more like a foreign policy statement than a passport law.
“It’s a passport statute that seems to have nothing to do with immigration functions that passport statutes usually serve,” Kagan said. Chief Justice John Roberts said that it seemed that the family was asking the court to substitute its foreign policy judgment for the president’s, as if to say “we know foreign policy better; we don’t think it’s going to be a big deal.”
and left this comment there:
Actually, the matter is quite bureaucratic and the judges should intervene and instruct the State Dept. to add a country. In leaving the country unidentified, no one can know in later years if the child was born in Jerusalem, New Zealand; or Jerusalem in Neuenkirchen, Germany; or Jerusalem in either Vermont, Ohio or Arkansas; or in Lincoln, England. From which country could he claim a second passport or pension rights? Or could he be subject to right, privileges or responsibilities to a second country?
In addition, State Dept. guidelines force clerks at the Consulate in Jerusalem to register an American citizen born outside Jerusalem but west of the Jordan River as being born in, say, Shiloh WEST BANK or Ramallah WEST BANK.
But the "West Bank" is not a state.
By what right can they do that but refuse to recognize Israel's adminstration of Jerusalem?
The State Dept. is not only being discriminatory against Israel and logice, but favors a non-existent Arab "country". That is not justice nor law and the Supreme Court should decide on that issue.
UPDATE
A related exchange between Kagan and Lewin produced a rare moment of levity in the courtroom. Kagan told Lewin: "I think you would have a better argument if this statute said if you were born in Jerusalem you can pick anything you want in your passport. You can pick Jerusalem, you can pick Israel, or you can pick Palestine. But the statute in fact doesn't say that. It says you can pick Israel."
Lewin responded: "The statute does say that the individual passport holder … if he's born before 1948, he can say Palestine."
That led Kagan, born in 1960 and 51 years old, to say, "Well, you have to be very old to say Palestine."
To which Ginsburg, born in 1933 and age 78, interjected, "Not all that old." The justices and spectators erupted in laughter.
I read this in the Washington Post report on the Supreme Court's deliberations of the Jerusalem birth registration matter:
The justices seemed reluctant to question the administration’s position that the law was an improper congressional attempt to speak for the country on foreign policy.
Justice Elena Kagan said the congressional action read more like a foreign policy statement than a passport law.
“It’s a passport statute that seems to have nothing to do with immigration functions that passport statutes usually serve,” Kagan said. Chief Justice John Roberts said that it seemed that the family was asking the court to substitute its foreign policy judgment for the president’s, as if to say “we know foreign policy better; we don’t think it’s going to be a big deal.”
and left this comment there:
Actually, the matter is quite bureaucratic and the judges should intervene and instruct the State Dept. to add a country. In leaving the country unidentified, no one can know in later years if the child was born in Jerusalem, New Zealand; or Jerusalem in Neuenkirchen, Germany; or Jerusalem in either Vermont, Ohio or Arkansas; or in Lincoln, England. From which country could he claim a second passport or pension rights? Or could he be subject to right, privileges or responsibilities to a second country?
In addition, State Dept. guidelines force clerks at the Consulate in Jerusalem to register an American citizen born outside Jerusalem but west of the Jordan River as being born in, say, Shiloh WEST BANK or Ramallah WEST BANK.
But the "West Bank" is not a state.
By what right can they do that but refuse to recognize Israel's adminstration of Jerusalem?
The State Dept. is not only being discriminatory against Israel and logice, but favors a non-existent Arab "country". That is not justice nor law and the Supreme Court should decide on that issue.
UPDATE
A related exchange between Kagan and Lewin produced a rare moment of levity in the courtroom. Kagan told Lewin: "I think you would have a better argument if this statute said if you were born in Jerusalem you can pick anything you want in your passport. You can pick Jerusalem, you can pick Israel, or you can pick Palestine. But the statute in fact doesn't say that. It says you can pick Israel."
Lewin responded: "The statute does say that the individual passport holder … if he's born before 1948, he can say Palestine."
That led Kagan, born in 1960 and 51 years old, to say, "Well, you have to be very old to say Palestine."
To which Ginsburg, born in 1933 and age 78, interjected, "Not all that old." The justices and spectators erupted in laughter.
A pathetic strike
Dan Margalit
Monday's general strike, touted as a "historic day" by its instigator, Histadrut labor federation head Ofer Eini, turned out to be nothing more than a soap bubble, a deflated balloon. Eini had hoped to witness throngs of people marching alongside him on behalf of contract workers, just as hundreds of thousands of protesters demanding social justice flooded city streets this summer. But nothing of the sort occurred. Those workers compelled to strike until 10 a.m. appeared to be watching the hands of the clock until the appointed hour when they could get back to work. It was embarrassing. On Sunday night one could already discern signs of impatience, not just in government representatives and employers, but in Eini's conduct as well. As if possessed by a demon, he announced that there had been no progress in talks with the Finance Ministry and that only the courts could decide. Between the lines you could hear him saying, "To hell with it, let the judges prohibit us from striking and spare us the torment and embarrassment."
But Labor Court Justice Nili Arad and her colleagues prolonged their deliberations, asking questions, arguing and cogitating. They lambasted Eini in colloquial language for his hasty act, but they also sought to salvage the Histadrut's honor to some extent, so they allowed it to hold a mini-strike. Perhaps they did the right thing. In a well-ordered democratic society there is a need for strong labor unions.
But this strike requires an autopsy. It was born in sin. Its initiators in the Histadrut are actually complicit, to a secondary degree, in the crime of perpetuating the phenomenon of contract workers -- the poor, oppressed and defenseless victims of Israeli society. Histadrut politicos are thus suspect of trying to quickly wash their hands of their own misdeeds and omissions, going so far as to declare a general strike in order to do so. Responsible leaders do not pull out their big guns all at once. They do not hasten Judgment Day, which in this case is a general strike.
Israelis need to learn that public battles should progress step by step. First you address your rival. You make a request. Then you negotiate. Next, you issue a threat. You enact a small measure, then a medium-sized one. You open a door. You slam the door shut. The road to a general strike is a long one. Someone who immediately launches a society-wide general strike forces his opponent to pull out all the stops to block it. The result was clearly discernible.
Still, we must not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Contract workers are oppressed. They deserve improved living conditions, job security and a pension, as stipulated by law. What is needed now is for both sides to set aside petty politics, as well as their personal whims and egos, and come to the negotiating table with a willingness to solve the problem and improve the quality of life for those described as "the slaves of the 21st century."
Monday's general strike, touted as a "historic day" by its instigator, Histadrut labor federation head Ofer Eini, turned out to be nothing more than a soap bubble, a deflated balloon. Eini had hoped to witness throngs of people marching alongside him on behalf of contract workers, just as hundreds of thousands of protesters demanding social justice flooded city streets this summer. But nothing of the sort occurred. Those workers compelled to strike until 10 a.m. appeared to be watching the hands of the clock until the appointed hour when they could get back to work. It was embarrassing. On Sunday night one could already discern signs of impatience, not just in government representatives and employers, but in Eini's conduct as well. As if possessed by a demon, he announced that there had been no progress in talks with the Finance Ministry and that only the courts could decide. Between the lines you could hear him saying, "To hell with it, let the judges prohibit us from striking and spare us the torment and embarrassment."
But Labor Court Justice Nili Arad and her colleagues prolonged their deliberations, asking questions, arguing and cogitating. They lambasted Eini in colloquial language for his hasty act, but they also sought to salvage the Histadrut's honor to some extent, so they allowed it to hold a mini-strike. Perhaps they did the right thing. In a well-ordered democratic society there is a need for strong labor unions.
But this strike requires an autopsy. It was born in sin. Its initiators in the Histadrut are actually complicit, to a secondary degree, in the crime of perpetuating the phenomenon of contract workers -- the poor, oppressed and defenseless victims of Israeli society. Histadrut politicos are thus suspect of trying to quickly wash their hands of their own misdeeds and omissions, going so far as to declare a general strike in order to do so. Responsible leaders do not pull out their big guns all at once. They do not hasten Judgment Day, which in this case is a general strike.
Israelis need to learn that public battles should progress step by step. First you address your rival. You make a request. Then you negotiate. Next, you issue a threat. You enact a small measure, then a medium-sized one. You open a door. You slam the door shut. The road to a general strike is a long one. Someone who immediately launches a society-wide general strike forces his opponent to pull out all the stops to block it. The result was clearly discernible.
Still, we must not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Contract workers are oppressed. They deserve improved living conditions, job security and a pension, as stipulated by law. What is needed now is for both sides to set aside petty politics, as well as their personal whims and egos, and come to the negotiating table with a willingness to solve the problem and improve the quality of life for those described as "the slaves of the 21st century."
The flame of Fiamma
Before she undertook the role of Israel's defender in Italy, Fiamma Nirenstein was raised as a leftist in a Jewish family • Today, as vice president of the Italian Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee, she is convinced: "The Palestinians want their own state in order to destroy the Jewish state" • An interview brimming with ideology and vision.
Dror Eydar On my way to the residence of Fiamma Nirenstein in Rome, I passed protest signs linking the mayor of Rome to Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. Nirenstein, a Jewish intellectual and media personality, was elected three years ago to the Italian parliament as a member of the "People of Freedom" party headed by Berlusconi. She serves as vice president of the Italian parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee and heads several other parliamentary committees, such as the Committee for the Inquiry into Anti-Semitism. Fiamma means "flame" in Italian – an apt description of this energetic women, who, during our talk, which extended in all directions, managed to hold two conversations with the speaker of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, the foreign minister, and her two bodyguards, allocated to her ever since entering political activity and consequently receiving threats on her life, from various quarters.
On the table lay the Il Giornale newspaper, in which she publishes a pro-Israel column titled "Fuoco e Fiamma," which means "fire and flame." Her walls are lined with numerous books, among them her publications on Israel, the Jewish people, anti-Semitism, the Middle East and terror. Her latest book is titled "Israel Is Us." Prior to this, she gathered about 3,000 Italians, including senior intellectuals and politicians, to a pro-Israel rally, and its dozens of speeches were compiled in a book titled "For the Truth, For Israel." On the table also lay a draft of her new book.
She recounts how her father arrived in Italy with the Jewish Brigade, and met her mother in Florence, where he decided to remain. For years he served as the reporter for "Al Hamishmar" in Italy. "We were an extremely leftist family," she laughs.
So, you went astray?
I, too, was a communist – the same as the rest of my generation. However, I sobered up by the end of the 1970s. In 1967, a few months before the outbreak of the Six Day War, my parents sent me to Kibbutz Neot Mordechai. When war broke out I got to see it through Israeli eyes. As a journalist, I spent all the following wars in Israel, too. I saw with my own eyes how essential it was to be together when facing danger. This is the reason why I hope the Jews in Israel can unite, despite their differences. Because my main concern is for the Jews.
With all my struggles for Israel, with the Palestinian issue and the unilateral declaration at the U.N., the real story is Iran. It is very hard to convince the Jews of their present danger. It was different during the Six Day War; the sense of togetherness was much stronger.
A sense of no-choice?
That too. And also that we were in the right. A few days ago, A.B. Yehoshua visited here. We are very good friends. The territories and the settlements make him extremely angry. He has an idealism that blinds him from seeing with whom he is dealing. He describes the settlements as 'stepping on the Palestinians' feet.'
I told him that he does not know the settlers. He perceives them in a fantastic light. He does not know them, nor does he have any sympathy for them. I do. I know them well. I have lived among them. They are the salt of the earth.
There is naïveté, not viciousness, in A.B. Yehoshua and his friends. They construct a world for themselves in which the Arabs fit into their rational theories. And each time this blows up in their faces. Like Thomas Friedman's writing.
Friedman is constantly wrong. He no longer has eyes to see. I have been following Israel for more than four decades. As a journalist, I did not cover the events from my home; I was there when [the late Palestinian Authority President Yasser] Arafat arrived in his helicopter, in Bethlehem, Jericho, Ramallah. I witnessed the expansion of the Hamas movement and traveled to Gaza University to speak to them. I saw for myself what took place in Israel. This is precisely why I understood what terror was. This is the most difficult thing for the Western world to comprehend.
When I returned to Italy after the 1967 war, I was accused by all of being a criminal since I was in Israel at the time of the occupation of the "poor Palestinians" by the Israelis. Yet I knew how events really developed. I witnessed the battle from Neot Mordechai and the Israelis going up to the Golan. We remained at the kibbutz, had missiles fired at us at night, and saw the MiGs in the sky above us. So to me the story of the poor Palestinians and Syrians … and that the Israelis were occupiers, was clearly wrong. It was then I began my journey to the other side of the political map, from the leftist views I held at the time. It was not the kibbutz that changed me, but rather my return to Italy, where I was labeled an 'unconscious fascist.' I had not then changed sides completely, but became aware of the utmost importance to me of my Judaism and my connection with Israel. From the time when others perceived me this way, as the 'other,' I too began to perceive myself this way.
Did it cause you to justify why you are the 'other'?
It was the same with feminism. I am very active as a parliament member and vice president of the Committee of Foreign Affairs, but people see me first and foremost as a Jew and as 'the' friend of Israel.
After a while, you realize you have to make something positive of this association. For instance, when I am asked why I defend Israel and devote so much of my time to this subject in my position in the Committee of Foreign Affairs, I respond that it is an honor for any Western state, and particularly for Italy, to defend Israel. It is shameful that states such as Finland and other northern European countries have become anti-Israel and at the end of the day also anti-Semitic.
We have achieved many results in our defense of Israel. We voted against the Durban II conference, we were active against the Goldstone report. To achieve this we worked hard in the Italian parliament. It is true that I act in defense of Israel, but it is also for the benefit of Italy, since it is an honor for Italy to deal with this issue. Come tomorrow, with all the economic troubles and sexual scandals of Berlusconi, Italy can always proudly say that it stood in defense of Israel, and this will forever serve as a badge of honor for this government.
Why do you use the term "honor" – for Italy, for the Western world – in reference to the defense of Israel?
Since democracy is the badge of honor of our time. It is a Judeo-Christian invention. If we invest in democracy and act on its behalf also in the international arena, it will attest to our commitment to it. It is easy to wake up in a reality of freedom of expression and state: 'Yes, I believe in democratic rule.' The test is when you reach the U.N. and object to a unilateral declaration [of a Palestinian state], and suffer the criticism. It is here that I am unsure whether Italy will stick with its decision, but our parliament has more supporters of negotiations between the sides than for a unilateral declaration. We are working on this.
You speak of a principled support of Jews and Israel; how can Italy, or the West, benefit from the struggle for Israel?
Italy experienced Fascism. Europe murdered six million Jews, and even if Italy was not principally to blame for the Holocaust, the Fascist regime under Mussolini acted against the Jews and aided the Nazis. When in August 2009, Sweden published in the Aftenbladet an article about Israeli soldiers harvesting organs from Palestinians, I participated in a meeting with the Swedish foreign minister. I stood up and asked what he meant to do about the anti-Semitism in Sweden. He denied that such a phenomenon even existed there and added that Sweden defended the freedom of the press. Would you believe it?! I am sure that had an Italian paper published such a lie, it would have caused a revolution. The honor of Italy would have exposed it as a blood libel.
It is disgraceful that a continent which killed six million Jews and which was glad to lend a hand in the deportation of Jews to concentration camps could publish, in this day and age, that Israeli soldiers harvest organs of Palestinians.
There is a basic anti-Semitism that will never go away, and one of its expressions is the accusation that Israel is the new Nazi. Of course, only the most extreme express themselves this way. The most common accusation is that Israel is an occupier, a child killer. See for example the Turkish television series on Israeli soldiers who kill children, and similar series' in other Arab countries.
This makes me to think that the Arab Spring will never succeed. While I identify with the demands of the people, filling the streets against the tyrant who humiliated them, I also see the indoctrination of pure hatred toward Jews that these people underwent for many decades. One can only see what is published in the newspapers and what is broadcast on television, including Palestinian television, and how streets are named after suicide bombers and terrorists. More than the territorial problem, there is a basic objection – stemming from an Islamic perspective – that brought about tremendous anti-Semitism, and Muslim immigrants to Europe bring it with them. They simply do not accept the fact that there is a piece of the Western world inside the Arab 'Umma.'
Why does the European Left cooperate with them?
This should be examined in connection with the relationship of the Left with the Soviet Union before its fall. The Left always thought in terms of a capitalist, imperialist power, incarnated predominantly by the U.S. and Israel, versus the poor of the world, which must be defended. And even in the case of Iran, where women are stoned, homosexuals are hanged, and any civil rights are opposed, nevertheless, Iran should be supported due to its belonging to the part of the world exploited by Colonialism and the West. Those prejudices are expressed here, positively discriminating the third world, including the Palestinians, in the face of the western world. This is the basic point.
Add to this the social situation of sitting at the table with your bourgeois friends, whether in Italy or France, where it is fashionable and acceptable to take up the side of the Palestinians – with all the many lies involved.
And yet, we can ask why it is that when facing a unilateral declaration, the world is prepared to support a Palestinian state? As this is lunacy. First, a Palestinian state cannot exist, divided as it would be between Hamas and the PLO. They have nothing in common, neither institutions nor an economy. So only violence can result from such an unrealizable expectation. Second, what could be the nature of a Palestinian state? On the basis of our knowledge until now – a state where women are inferior; extremist Islam prevails and perhaps wins the next elections; homosexuals are persecuted, as well as regime dissidents. In this case, why has it gained such widespread support around the world, particularly in the western world?
The Jews are the reason. The Palestinians' raison d'être is not a positive aspiration to establish a state, but a negative one, to destroy the Jewish state. This apparently suits the cultural and political agenda of the world's Left.
I have a bad feeling about the unilateral declaration. It rests entirely on lies. They approached the U.N. as if it were a judge who has the deciding power. First of all, the U.N. can make no practical decision. It cannot create a state where there is none. Second, the U.N. is made up of a bunch of totalitarian states with an automatic majority that votes against Israel in every possible situation. That being the case, the almost only truth resulting from the U.N. is a terrible wave of scorn and violence toward Israel. This is why the situation saddens me so.
If you look at my website, you will see the incredible mass of initiatives I made: I went to the U.N. in my capacity as president of the Jewish members of parliament, with our steering committee, together with the heads of the World Jewish Congress, and we held a dinner for the European ambassadors there, followed by a press conference on the subject. We went to Washington and were received by the Jewish members of Congress. In Italy I met 150 non-Jewish members of parliament. In parliament, in the Foreign Affairs Committee, I presented a motion to vote against the unilateral declaration. I presume we will win since we have a majority, and we will be the only parliament to vote on this subject. And then, when all this is over, I will have a discussion open to the public with Fratini, the minister of foreign affairs, who is extremely supportive of us. And I have been writing hundreds of articles, too.
Do you experience feelings of despair?
Yes, because I feel isolated. Many people say that they have had enough of the Palestinian-Israeli issue, even in my own newspaper, which is the most sensitive of all. Otherwise I would not be publishing my articles in it, otherwise I would not be in this parliament, or on this side of the government, otherwise I would not have written my last book, about Jerusalem. It is about my story of love for Jerusalem, a personal story, about my son, and how I met my husband in Jerusalem.
You spoke earlier about the political transition you experienced in your own worldview. Were you the only one among your friends to change sides?
There are actually many writers, including well-known ones, who write with the same passion as me, and they are Christian. They can no longer stand the nonsense written about Israel. Neither can they stand the lie of Communism any longer. They understood how deeply connected Communism was to totalitarianism, and today, among the Italian elite, it is even better understood how mistaken is the approach to Israel, and that much work needs to be invested to change it, as I do.
How did you become acquainted with Berlusconi?
Through my writing. I published many articles and books and three years ago he contacted me.
And how do you feel about the scandals surrounding him?
I am exceedingly sorry about them, because I think he is a brilliant person. In a period when Italy was entirely in the hands of the Communists and the Catholics, he took Italy and ushered it into the era of modern economy. All the rest is less important to me. I am very sorry to hear about the sexual scandals. They particularly grieve me as a feminist. Yet, it is important to recall that in the immediate wake of the Left's failure to win the elections, the judicial system took its place in opposition to Berlusconi, and it is unbelievable what they put him through.
Do you mean that some of the accusations against him are false?
Yes, and the way it has been done is also contemptible. The fact is that he was tried many times, and was vindicated.
So the judicial system ganged up against him?
There is no doubt about it. Everyone acknowledges this, as does most of the media, which is predominantly left-wing. Even those working for Berlusconi's own television network. The worst thing is that Italy is no longer governed by politics but by its hatred of Berlusconi, as well as envy of his ability to build himself up with his own two hands. This is a new phenomenon in Italy, with its aristocratic families who nurtured generations of politicians.
How can you explain that instead of the culture of debate, the Left attacks ad hominem (the person) instead of ad factum (the facts)?
Because it is perceived as a moralist choice. I am better than you because I am on the Left. It is not an issue of whether I am right or wrong, but that I am better than you, morally, intellectually, as a human being; my cultural life is better. We simply have a demonization of Berlusconi here – the same as was done in Israel to [Ariel] Sharon and [Benjamin] Netanyahu.
Finally, I would like to ask you about the religious issue. Rome is a holy city to millions of Catholics. How much does this play a role in their approach to Israel and how does the Muslim issue factor in?
Already in 1995, the church proclaimed that the Jews did not kill Jesus. However, a more significant step in changing the church's attitude toward Israel was the visit to Israel by John Paul II and his recognition of it. Before this, the church perceived the Christians as versus Israel, the true Israel (and the Jewish people as carnal Israel – merely the biological descendents of the biblical people of Israel). Once the pope travelled around Israel, visited the Western Wall and placed a note in it, this made a great difference. John Paul also clarified that the Jews were the elder brothers of the Christians, and this greatly transformed the relations. As a Pole, he understood this.
As for Islam, this was never an issue in the past. It started surfacing in public debates due to the growing awareness of the persecution of Christians all over the world (the majority of Christians in the Middle East fled). Following this, the church has attempted a cautious handling of this issue. However, their fears of the Arab world resulted in the church showing less enthusiasm to raise the discussion on the issue.
Toward the end of our conversation, I told Fiamma about the four sages who sojourned to Jerusalem after its destruction. Upon seeing the destroyed temple and city, they tore their clothes and wept. Only Rabbi Akiva laughed. He told them that the prophecy of destruction was linked to the prophecy of redemption. Now that he had witnessed the realization of the prophecy of destruction, he knew that the prophecy of redemption would be fulfilled, and he quoted the prophet Zachariah's prophecy: "Old men and women shall yet sit in the streets of Jerusalem … And the streets of the city shall be full of boys and girls playing." Who destroyed the temple back then? Rome, the city in which we sit today and have our talk. Such a historical perspective allows us to ask who beat whom – the Roman legions or Rabbi Akiva's laughter.
"I am glad you told me this," she says in response. "I embrace it and hope; this is a difficult week [the week of the Palestinian declaration at the U.N.], but we have overcome Pharaoh," she laughs, "and we will overcome this too."
Monday, November 07, 2011
FUNDING FOR UNESCO
(italics for emphasis)
Oh, all this talk of 'Palestine' is making me quite weary,
Just convoluted history and , frankly, it is eerie!
So long ago - two thousand years- the conquerors from Rome
Decided then to change our name -deprive us of our home!
'Judea' turned to 'Palestine' ; our heart remained in place
In holidays to celebrate and saying daily grace.
Our name was 'Palestinian' - the 'pushka' blue and white ~
Our history was recognized in every holy site. Our ancestors left names behind so we would know for whom
Each edifice was built with love - like Mother Rachel's Tomb.
Our Temples in Jerusalem - with love we still recount
The fruits we brought three times each year - G-d's home on Temple Mount!
We never meant to leave the place that was our land of birth ~
Though war and hatred pushed us to all corners of this earth
A remnant of our people 'held the fort' and did remain
Two thousand years of hope our dreams would bring us home again!
Our Jewish 'Palestinians' - with courage did persist
In living with an enemy that would not co-exist.
The League of Nations - fifty-nine - unan'm'sly agreed
The Jews had rights to Palestine - the whole - they all decreed!
But that was 1922 and Arabs in the land
Decided it belonged to them - "Jews, leave!" was their command.
But history had taught us well - no longer would we roam ~
Two thousand years was long enough - the call was 'come on home!'
Re-birth - May, ninety-forty-eight - a cause for celebration ~
We settled for a smaller state but still face condemnation.
'Israelis' now - we build this land; - the country is a gem
While fending off attacks the world refuses to condemn.
The Arabs -'Palestinians' -a name they would not use
Adopted it because they knew that it would make the news!
They goofed in their stupidity - oh, time and time again ~
And now they've brought their high jinks to the fraudulent U.N.!!
UNESCO's got the problem now because the U.S. shunned
The 'Palestinian' demand - and will no longer fund ~
Oh! poor UNESCO getting back a little bit of tsoros ~
Perhaps they ought to ask for help from trouble-maker Soros!
The man that I've just mentioned - frankly, gives me indigestion !
I think that I can even give a more correct suggestion ~
Instead of building houses for the killers just let loose
Abbas should fund UNESCO ! I bet that would cook his goose!!
Chana
in beloved Jerusalem
Nov. 7, 2011
Oh, all this talk of 'Palestine' is making me quite weary,
Just convoluted history and , frankly, it is eerie!
So long ago - two thousand years- the conquerors from Rome
Decided then to change our name -deprive us of our home!
'Judea' turned to 'Palestine' ; our heart remained in place
In holidays to celebrate and saying daily grace.
Our name was 'Palestinian' - the 'pushka' blue and white ~
Our history was recognized in every holy site. Our ancestors left names behind so we would know for whom
Each edifice was built with love - like Mother Rachel's Tomb.
Our Temples in Jerusalem - with love we still recount
The fruits we brought three times each year - G-d's home on Temple Mount!
We never meant to leave the place that was our land of birth ~
Though war and hatred pushed us to all corners of this earth
A remnant of our people 'held the fort' and did remain
Two thousand years of hope our dreams would bring us home again!
Our Jewish 'Palestinians' - with courage did persist
In living with an enemy that would not co-exist.
The League of Nations - fifty-nine - unan'm'sly agreed
The Jews had rights to Palestine - the whole - they all decreed!
But that was 1922 and Arabs in the land
Decided it belonged to them - "Jews, leave!" was their command.
But history had taught us well - no longer would we roam ~
Two thousand years was long enough - the call was 'come on home!'
Re-birth - May, ninety-forty-eight - a cause for celebration ~
We settled for a smaller state but still face condemnation.
'Israelis' now - we build this land; - the country is a gem
While fending off attacks the world refuses to condemn.
The Arabs -'Palestinians' -a name they would not use
Adopted it because they knew that it would make the news!
They goofed in their stupidity - oh, time and time again ~
And now they've brought their high jinks to the fraudulent U.N.!!
UNESCO's got the problem now because the U.S. shunned
The 'Palestinian' demand - and will no longer fund ~
Oh! poor UNESCO getting back a little bit of tsoros ~
Perhaps they ought to ask for help from trouble-maker Soros!
The man that I've just mentioned - frankly, gives me indigestion !
I think that I can even give a more correct suggestion ~
Instead of building houses for the killers just let loose
Abbas should fund UNESCO ! I bet that would cook his goose!!
Chana
in beloved Jerusalem
Nov. 7, 2011
Iran Backs Islamic Jihad’s 8,000-Man Army in Gaza
Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
Hamas’ rival Islamic Jihad has built an 8,000-man army supported by Iran and “ready for martyrdom or victory.”
“Martyrdom is the more desirable," it says.
Its estimate of the number of terrorists trained for war against Israelis the first time Islamic Jihad has disclosed how many fighters it has.
"We are proud and honored to say that the Islamic Republic of Iran gives us support and help," Abu Ahmed, the spokesman for Islamic Jihad's al-Quds Brigades told Reuters in a rare interview. He denied that its weapons come from Iran and refused to comment on whether its fighters were trained by Iranians. Israeli intelligence officials previously have said that Hamas and other terrorists often travel to Iran, where Revolutionary Guards teach them.
"What I will say is that we have every right to turn to every source of power for help," said Abu Ahmed.
He told the interviewer that there is a demand from young people to join Islamic Jihad but that it “can't accept everyone ... It is a question of quality, not quantity.”
Concerning Israel’s successful targeting of Islamic Jihad terrorists last week, Abu Ahmed commented, "It is a good feeling to be under drone attack. When we chose the path of resistance, we opted either for martyrdom or victory. Martyrdom is the more desirable.”
Islamic Jihad has become more prominent by virtue of its not being in an official political role in Gaza, which officially is governed by Hamas.
It has been the most prominent holdout in a number of “ceasefires” from Gaza, none of which has held for a long time.
Abu Ahmed boasted of an advanced missile launcher that it showed on a video last week as it fired multiple missiles almost simultaneously from a pick-up truck. Israeli military officials think the video may have been taken in some other area, such as Lebanon or Iran.
However, Abu Ahmed maintained, "The al-Quds Brigades really surprised Israel, forcing them to rethink their assessment of us ... I don't think they realized we had that weaponry.”
Hamas’ rival Islamic Jihad has built an 8,000-man army supported by Iran and “ready for martyrdom or victory.”
“Martyrdom is the more desirable," it says.
Its estimate of the number of terrorists trained for war against Israelis the first time Islamic Jihad has disclosed how many fighters it has.
"We are proud and honored to say that the Islamic Republic of Iran gives us support and help," Abu Ahmed, the spokesman for Islamic Jihad's al-Quds Brigades told Reuters in a rare interview. He denied that its weapons come from Iran and refused to comment on whether its fighters were trained by Iranians. Israeli intelligence officials previously have said that Hamas and other terrorists often travel to Iran, where Revolutionary Guards teach them.
"What I will say is that we have every right to turn to every source of power for help," said Abu Ahmed.
He told the interviewer that there is a demand from young people to join Islamic Jihad but that it “can't accept everyone ... It is a question of quality, not quantity.”
Concerning Israel’s successful targeting of Islamic Jihad terrorists last week, Abu Ahmed commented, "It is a good feeling to be under drone attack. When we chose the path of resistance, we opted either for martyrdom or victory. Martyrdom is the more desirable.”
Islamic Jihad has become more prominent by virtue of its not being in an official political role in Gaza, which officially is governed by Hamas.
It has been the most prominent holdout in a number of “ceasefires” from Gaza, none of which has held for a long time.
Abu Ahmed boasted of an advanced missile launcher that it showed on a video last week as it fired multiple missiles almost simultaneously from a pick-up truck. Israeli military officials think the video may have been taken in some other area, such as Lebanon or Iran.
However, Abu Ahmed maintained, "The al-Quds Brigades really surprised Israel, forcing them to rethink their assessment of us ... I don't think they realized we had that weaponry.”
The ultra-Orthodox punching bag
Dr. Haim Shine
Last week, former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy expressed harsh sentiments against the ultra-Orthodox. According to Halevy, the radicalization of the ultra-Orthodox community is a greater threat to Israel than Iran. His statements continue a painful and disturbing trend of hatred leveled at the ultra-Orthodox from left-wing liberal circles. There is a tendency to blame the ultra-Orthodox for every ill, ache and pain in Israeli society. Over just two decades, the ultra-Orthodox have become the punching bag for a violent and decadent society, which mercilessly beats anyone who dresses differently or adopts an unfamiliar lifestyle. Yet the ultra-Orthodox are much worse off than other minorities in Israel. Arabs in Israel have a wall to protect them, both in the Supreme Court and among the Israeli Left, in the face of any effort to infringe on their rights. Israelis are willing to lay on barbed wire to protect a few Palestinian olive trees. For every other sub-culture in Israeli society there is some protection for freedom of expression, ideological pluralism and individual rights. Only the ultra-Orthodox have no one to care for them. Their honor is trampled in the streets, evil slander is often voiced and sludge is hurled at them in unthinkable ways.
Israeli society contains a violent and dangerous element that arouses discord and hatred in order to consolidate a majority based on false unity. Secular versus religious, veteran Israelis versus new immigrants, Ashkenazi versus Sephardi, urbanites versus those who live outside of central Israel, Jews versus Arabs and the list goes on. The Israeli tribal flame is heating up, burning hotter as it focuses on the weak and different. When we hate others, we love ourselves and our kind more. From time to time, the object of our hatred is replaced, but the hatred itself remains. Israeli society increasingly and systematically delegitimizes the ultra-Orthodox. We have a plethora of stigmas and anti-Semitic stereotypes that would not shame the German propaganda machine and that we hurl at the ultra-Orthodox public without batting an eye.
Hatred for the ultra-Orthodox has garnered such admiration that Israeli students traveling to Poland have said that they feel closer to Muslims in Europe than to the ultra-Orthodox in Jerusalem. Timely propaganda has caused them to forget that just a few generations ago, their forefathers looked and behaved exactly as the ultra-Orthodox in Jerusalem and Bnei Brak do today.
It is true that among the ultra-Orthodox, as with any other society, there are people whose behavioral norms deserve condemnation, people whose actions stain the entirety of ultra-Orthodox society. But collective denigration, without basis, is directed specifically toward the ultra-Orthodox. There is simply no foundation for collective blame, only malice and wickedness. The Jewish people have suffered, for thousands of years, from the contagion of epithets; they need to be extremely sensitive to applying such names to their own people as they might any other person who is different.
It is important to remember that beyond our differences, we are still one people. We are a small nation which cannot allow itself to be filled with alienation and hatred. One who instills hatred in a child should not be surprised when one day that child hates him. The hatred bubbles up, and it does not know how to differentiate between the just and the evil, between good and bad.
The ultra-Orthodox population is the Jewish people's insurance certificate. Israelis are not everywhere, yet in every sub-culture to which he or she is connected, he or she can be sure that their sons and their son's sons will continue to affiliate as Jews. From the Himalayas to San Francisco, by way of Israel and Europe, you can find many Israelis who have abandoned their Jewish heritage. The percentage of assimilation in the U.S. is frightening. Judaism en masse is experiencing the quiet kiss of death. Those who feel Judaism is important must honor and appreciate the ultra-Orthodox; they must protect and safeguard them just as one does with a life insurance card. The ultra-Orthodox public is the insurance policy for the continuing existence of the Jewish people. Even when the premium goes up, one does not forego life insurance.
These days, in the face of constant existential threats from the north, south and east, it is important to remember that we are brothers. Additional obstacles await us, but only if we are united will be able to deal with the difficulties ahead.
Last week, former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy expressed harsh sentiments against the ultra-Orthodox. According to Halevy, the radicalization of the ultra-Orthodox community is a greater threat to Israel than Iran. His statements continue a painful and disturbing trend of hatred leveled at the ultra-Orthodox from left-wing liberal circles. There is a tendency to blame the ultra-Orthodox for every ill, ache and pain in Israeli society. Over just two decades, the ultra-Orthodox have become the punching bag for a violent and decadent society, which mercilessly beats anyone who dresses differently or adopts an unfamiliar lifestyle. Yet the ultra-Orthodox are much worse off than other minorities in Israel. Arabs in Israel have a wall to protect them, both in the Supreme Court and among the Israeli Left, in the face of any effort to infringe on their rights. Israelis are willing to lay on barbed wire to protect a few Palestinian olive trees. For every other sub-culture in Israeli society there is some protection for freedom of expression, ideological pluralism and individual rights. Only the ultra-Orthodox have no one to care for them. Their honor is trampled in the streets, evil slander is often voiced and sludge is hurled at them in unthinkable ways.
Israeli society contains a violent and dangerous element that arouses discord and hatred in order to consolidate a majority based on false unity. Secular versus religious, veteran Israelis versus new immigrants, Ashkenazi versus Sephardi, urbanites versus those who live outside of central Israel, Jews versus Arabs and the list goes on. The Israeli tribal flame is heating up, burning hotter as it focuses on the weak and different. When we hate others, we love ourselves and our kind more. From time to time, the object of our hatred is replaced, but the hatred itself remains. Israeli society increasingly and systematically delegitimizes the ultra-Orthodox. We have a plethora of stigmas and anti-Semitic stereotypes that would not shame the German propaganda machine and that we hurl at the ultra-Orthodox public without batting an eye.
Hatred for the ultra-Orthodox has garnered such admiration that Israeli students traveling to Poland have said that they feel closer to Muslims in Europe than to the ultra-Orthodox in Jerusalem. Timely propaganda has caused them to forget that just a few generations ago, their forefathers looked and behaved exactly as the ultra-Orthodox in Jerusalem and Bnei Brak do today.
It is true that among the ultra-Orthodox, as with any other society, there are people whose behavioral norms deserve condemnation, people whose actions stain the entirety of ultra-Orthodox society. But collective denigration, without basis, is directed specifically toward the ultra-Orthodox. There is simply no foundation for collective blame, only malice and wickedness. The Jewish people have suffered, for thousands of years, from the contagion of epithets; they need to be extremely sensitive to applying such names to their own people as they might any other person who is different.
It is important to remember that beyond our differences, we are still one people. We are a small nation which cannot allow itself to be filled with alienation and hatred. One who instills hatred in a child should not be surprised when one day that child hates him. The hatred bubbles up, and it does not know how to differentiate between the just and the evil, between good and bad.
The ultra-Orthodox population is the Jewish people's insurance certificate. Israelis are not everywhere, yet in every sub-culture to which he or she is connected, he or she can be sure that their sons and their son's sons will continue to affiliate as Jews. From the Himalayas to San Francisco, by way of Israel and Europe, you can find many Israelis who have abandoned their Jewish heritage. The percentage of assimilation in the U.S. is frightening. Judaism en masse is experiencing the quiet kiss of death. Those who feel Judaism is important must honor and appreciate the ultra-Orthodox; they must protect and safeguard them just as one does with a life insurance card. The ultra-Orthodox public is the insurance policy for the continuing existence of the Jewish people. Even when the premium goes up, one does not forego life insurance.
These days, in the face of constant existential threats from the north, south and east, it is important to remember that we are brothers. Additional obstacles await us, but only if we are united will be able to deal with the difficulties ahead.
The Boycott of Lod's Arab Taxi Drivers
Jameel @ The Muqata
Found this interesting tidbit tonight...on Yediot Ayalon/MYNET.
There is a taxi company in the Israeli city of Lod, which employs both Jewish and Arab taxi drivers. Upon the release of the 1027 terrorists in the "Gilad Shalit" exchange, some of the terrorists were Israeli Arabs...who returned to their hometown of Lod. The Arab taxi drivers partied publicly, honking and celebrating in the streets of Lod at the heroic release of their terrorist-brothers, Mohammad Ziada and Mochlis Borgial.
Ziada and Borgial were convicted and sentenced to life in prison for throwing a grenade onto a bus full of IDF soldiers. Luckily, the grenade didn't explode.
The Jewish residents of Lod, were disgusted by this behavior and started a boycott of their own; when calling the aforementioned taxi company, they openly request a Jewish driver. As a result, for the past 2 weeks, the number of calls to this particular taxi company has decreased dramatically, almost to the point of many drivers sitting around all day, doing nothing. It's probably illegal under Israel law for the Jewish residents to boycott the Arab taxi drivers, and I wonder how long before someone is brought up on charges for this.
The Arab drivers do not see anything wrong with their support for the released terrorists:
"In the recent weeks, people specifically request a Jewish driver," said an anonymous driver. Like all the taxi drivers in this article on MYNET, every single driver spoke only on the condition of absolute anonymity for fear of hurting their livelihood.
"We feel are significant drop of work in the taxi station, and currently I am searching for additional work. On the other hand, this is infuriating. Who are these people boycotting the taxi drivers and telling them how to behave? Drivers have the freedom to behave how they wish. Its true that some of the drivers went to visit [released terrorist] Mochlis, because they are friends of his family. What's the big deal?"
Another driver commented, "We went to visit Mochlis just to wish him well and say, "Welcome home to your city", we just wanted to see him. But now we are talking about our livelihood, and we don't deal in politics."
"We the driver respect Jews and Arabs alike, but when a customer requests only a Jewish driver, it is very humiliating.
One Lod resident saw on TV the tax drivers that she usually drivers with, when they were celebrating the return of the 2 terrorists. "Even if there is no other taxi available, I will never go into one of those [Arab-driver] taxi. It was extremely offensive to their joy and celebration [when the released terrorists returned to Lod....]"
Like her, there are many similarly-minded residents. "Should I need to worry then they drive me, because they lifted the released terrorists onto their shoulders as heroes?", said one of the residents who now refuses to use that taxi service.
"Why did they behave like that -- I thought they respected their customers...their neighbors..."
Link
The taxi station manager replied: "We don't understand politics and don't want our drivers will be politically active. We live here in mutual harmony between Arabs and Jews and see no reason for this issue... (MYNET)"
It's pretty telling that the Station manager has no clue why the behavior his drivers giving a heroes welcome to convicted terrorists might be a turn off to some people. To say "its all politics" shows how little they really understand what terrorism really is...
Here's a short video clip of the day the terrorists were released in Lod (note all the Palestinian flags being waved by the Israeli Arab residents of the city).
Found this interesting tidbit tonight...on Yediot Ayalon/MYNET.
There is a taxi company in the Israeli city of Lod, which employs both Jewish and Arab taxi drivers. Upon the release of the 1027 terrorists in the "Gilad Shalit" exchange, some of the terrorists were Israeli Arabs...who returned to their hometown of Lod. The Arab taxi drivers partied publicly, honking and celebrating in the streets of Lod at the heroic release of their terrorist-brothers, Mohammad Ziada and Mochlis Borgial.
Ziada and Borgial were convicted and sentenced to life in prison for throwing a grenade onto a bus full of IDF soldiers. Luckily, the grenade didn't explode.
The Jewish residents of Lod, were disgusted by this behavior and started a boycott of their own; when calling the aforementioned taxi company, they openly request a Jewish driver. As a result, for the past 2 weeks, the number of calls to this particular taxi company has decreased dramatically, almost to the point of many drivers sitting around all day, doing nothing. It's probably illegal under Israel law for the Jewish residents to boycott the Arab taxi drivers, and I wonder how long before someone is brought up on charges for this.
The Arab drivers do not see anything wrong with their support for the released terrorists:
"In the recent weeks, people specifically request a Jewish driver," said an anonymous driver. Like all the taxi drivers in this article on MYNET, every single driver spoke only on the condition of absolute anonymity for fear of hurting their livelihood.
"We feel are significant drop of work in the taxi station, and currently I am searching for additional work. On the other hand, this is infuriating. Who are these people boycotting the taxi drivers and telling them how to behave? Drivers have the freedom to behave how they wish. Its true that some of the drivers went to visit [released terrorist] Mochlis, because they are friends of his family. What's the big deal?"
Another driver commented, "We went to visit Mochlis just to wish him well and say, "Welcome home to your city", we just wanted to see him. But now we are talking about our livelihood, and we don't deal in politics."
"We the driver respect Jews and Arabs alike, but when a customer requests only a Jewish driver, it is very humiliating.
One Lod resident saw on TV the tax drivers that she usually drivers with, when they were celebrating the return of the 2 terrorists. "Even if there is no other taxi available, I will never go into one of those [Arab-driver] taxi. It was extremely offensive to their joy and celebration [when the released terrorists returned to Lod....]"
Like her, there are many similarly-minded residents. "Should I need to worry then they drive me, because they lifted the released terrorists onto their shoulders as heroes?", said one of the residents who now refuses to use that taxi service.
"Why did they behave like that -- I thought they respected their customers...their neighbors..."
Link
The taxi station manager replied: "We don't understand politics and don't want our drivers will be politically active. We live here in mutual harmony between Arabs and Jews and see no reason for this issue... (MYNET)"
It's pretty telling that the Station manager has no clue why the behavior his drivers giving a heroes welcome to convicted terrorists might be a turn off to some people. To say "its all politics" shows how little they really understand what terrorism really is...
Here's a short video clip of the day the terrorists were released in Lod (note all the Palestinian flags being waved by the Israeli Arab residents of the city).
Sunday, November 06, 2011
US Could Defund Nuclear Watchdog Over Palestine Vote
The vote to accept the Palestinian Authority as a member of the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has already cost the agency $80 million a year in U.S. funding.
Now further moves by the Palestinians to seek membership in other U.N. agencies could lead to America’s defunding of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which plays a key role in monitoring nuclear proliferation in Iran and other nations. UNESCO voted overwhelmingly on Oct. 31 to approve the Palestinian Authority’s membership. The United States responded by cutting off all funding for the agency, as required by laws enacted in the 1990s barring American funding of any agency that grants membership to the Palestinians.
But after the UNESCO vote, Palestinian diplomat Ibrahim Khraishi said the Palestinians will seek membership in 16 other U.N. agencies. If those U.S. laws are applied to the agencies, they would all likely lose their American funding.
Those agencies could include the IAEA and the World Health Organization, which coordinates international efforts to deal with public health threats.
The Palestinians could also gain membership in the World Intellectual Property Organization, which seeks to curb piracy of American movies and software, triggering U.S. defunding.
“All of this puts the United States in a bind,” the Christian Science Monitor observed.
“Though the State Department said it wants to continue to work with UNESCO, even as it cuts funding, it’s hard to see how.
“The Obama administration is expected to reach out to Congress to find a way both to continue to fund UNESCO and give the U.S. government flexibility if Palestine is recognized as a member by other, more important U.N. organizations. Whether it will get very far in that appeal is another matter.”
Palestinian Authority foreign minister Riyad Malki reportedly said on Thursday that the PA has decided not to pursue admission to additional agencies “at this time,” and would instead focus on its bid for full U.N. recognition.
CS Monitor
But PA health minister Fathi Abu Moghli has said an application for membership in the World Health Organization was being prepared.
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement that it was “smart” for the United States to withhold funding from UNESCO.
She also drew attention to UNESCO’s election on Wednesday of Saudi Arabia, Cuba, and “other intolerant regimes” to the agency’s Executive Board.
“Just days after admitting ‘Palestine’ and advancing the Palestinian leadership’s anti-Israel, anti-peace scheme, UNESCO has once again welcomed the Cuban dictatorship and other pariah states with open arms, disregarding their human rights violations,” Ros-Lehtinen said.
“Cuba and Saudi Arabia will keep working with other repressive regimes on the executive board such as China, Syria, Belarus, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, and Vietnam to advance an anti-American, anti-Israel agenda.”
Now further moves by the Palestinians to seek membership in other U.N. agencies could lead to America’s defunding of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which plays a key role in monitoring nuclear proliferation in Iran and other nations. UNESCO voted overwhelmingly on Oct. 31 to approve the Palestinian Authority’s membership. The United States responded by cutting off all funding for the agency, as required by laws enacted in the 1990s barring American funding of any agency that grants membership to the Palestinians.
But after the UNESCO vote, Palestinian diplomat Ibrahim Khraishi said the Palestinians will seek membership in 16 other U.N. agencies. If those U.S. laws are applied to the agencies, they would all likely lose their American funding.
Those agencies could include the IAEA and the World Health Organization, which coordinates international efforts to deal with public health threats.
The Palestinians could also gain membership in the World Intellectual Property Organization, which seeks to curb piracy of American movies and software, triggering U.S. defunding.
“All of this puts the United States in a bind,” the Christian Science Monitor observed.
“Though the State Department said it wants to continue to work with UNESCO, even as it cuts funding, it’s hard to see how.
“The Obama administration is expected to reach out to Congress to find a way both to continue to fund UNESCO and give the U.S. government flexibility if Palestine is recognized as a member by other, more important U.N. organizations. Whether it will get very far in that appeal is another matter.”
Palestinian Authority foreign minister Riyad Malki reportedly said on Thursday that the PA has decided not to pursue admission to additional agencies “at this time,” and would instead focus on its bid for full U.N. recognition.
CS Monitor
But PA health minister Fathi Abu Moghli has said an application for membership in the World Health Organization was being prepared.
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement that it was “smart” for the United States to withhold funding from UNESCO.
She also drew attention to UNESCO’s election on Wednesday of Saudi Arabia, Cuba, and “other intolerant regimes” to the agency’s Executive Board.
“Just days after admitting ‘Palestine’ and advancing the Palestinian leadership’s anti-Israel, anti-peace scheme, UNESCO has once again welcomed the Cuban dictatorship and other pariah states with open arms, disregarding their human rights violations,” Ros-Lehtinen said.
“Cuba and Saudi Arabia will keep working with other repressive regimes on the executive board such as China, Syria, Belarus, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, and Vietnam to advance an anti-American, anti-Israel agenda.”
Can There Ever Be Peace Between Muslims and Jews?
Dear Ali Sina,
My name is Yafa and I am currently a college student in the metro Detroit area, which has a huge population of Muslims.
Recently we had a speaker come to our University – Gill Hoffman from the jpost, and Muslim studets organized a huge protest against it. These are the pictures from the event. I have never seen so much hate and anger in my lif I don’t think all of them are alike. I believe education and communication can help solve this. However, many of the Muslims on our campus refuse to listen to anything about Israel and anything that has to do with it, which makes it impossible to communicate with them. The only thing they see is the oppression of the Palestinians and nothing else. How do you suggest I go about that? How can I at least get them to listen to what the other side has to say? In the end all I want to do is to promote peace between Arabs and Jews, which will never happen if we don’t listen to each other.
I greatly appreciate your time,
Yafa
Hi Yafa,
Promoting peace between Arabs (Here I mean exclusively Muslims) and Jews is a delusion. Anyone who suggests such thing is ignorant of Islam. The hatred of the Jews is mixed with the milk that Muslims drink from their mother’s breasts. It is in the Quran. As long as Muslims believe in the Quran they will continue hating the Jews.
As far as Muslims, peace can be attained only when the Jews are subdued and subservient to them, recognize them as superior, pay jizyah with willing submission and feeling themselves humiliated. If this is not your idea of peace, then prepare to defend yourself.
Know your enemy. This is the golden rule of war. If you think as a Jew you can make peace with Muslims you don’t know your enemy and your defeat becomes inevitable.
I sometimes wonder at the naiveté of non-Muslims. Don’t they read the Quran and other Islamic sacred texts? A group of naïve Jews has joined a group of deceiving Muslims to form the Center for Muslim-Jewish Engagement cmje.org. This is like the alliance between sheep and wolf. They say ignorance is bliss.
Any alliance between Muslims and Jews will be temporary. The goal is to deceive. Muslims know that at the end they will kill you. Sahih Bukhari (4, 52, 77) says “Allah’s Apostle said, “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. “O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.”
This is what Ahmadinejad is dreaming. He wants to be the person who will hasten the advent of the Hour, by massacring the Jews. He is convinced that if he nukes Israel Mahdi will come out of his hiding well and will make the righteous Muslims, i.e. the Shiites, dominate the world. If millions of Muslims are killed in the process, it is not a problem because once Mahdi comes, the dead will resurrect.
You ask what you can do for peace. The first thing you shoul do is to stop deceiving yourself. Know your enemy. He uses land as an excuse. Why a person from Iran, or Pakistan or Indonesia should care about Palestine? It is you that he hates. He hates you because you are a Jew. The same applies to the liberal in the west who takes the side of the Palestinians. They all masquerade their anti Semitism by claming they are concerned about Palestinians. Palestinians don’t need any body’s concern. They have thier own homeland, called Jordan. Jordan is bogus name given by the British. That country is Palestine.
Muslims don’t want to kill you. They wants to subdue you. And the more you give in the more they demand. Giving up land for peace or releasing 1000 terrorists to show good will emboldens them. They see these concessions as victory and escalate their hostility for their final victory, which is your total subjugation.
You Jews must understand one thing. As long as you are Jews Muslims will hate you. The very name Jew excites the Muslim and brings in him unbounded hatred. Watch the beheading of Daniel Pearl. His killers made him say he is a Jew and his father and mother are Jews before beheading him. Why? They did it because it excited them. It brought all their hatred out and they relished butchering him. By reminding themselves that he is a Jew they took a sadistic pleasure in killing him. This is difficult to understand. Maybe an example helps. Some people enjoy sex more when they engage in dirty talk, moan and make noises. The fact that these Muslims’ victim was a Jew gave them so much pleasure that they wanted to hear him say it. To them it was ecstasy. They were not just killing an infidel, they were killing a Jew. Their pleasure was unbounded.
You can’t be friends with a people who hate you so viscerally. Don’t say some Muslims are better. That is nonsense. Ask those “better” Muslims whether they are ready to denounce the verses of the Quran that incites hatred against the Jews. If they are really better, they shoud leave Islam.
For Muslims, “Jew” is a word of insult. They call you johood. It sounds like yahood (Jew) but it is a derogatory term, possibly derives from jihad and it may mean somone who should be fought against or someone who fights against God. If a Muslim wants to insult his fellow Muslim he would say to him, you are worse than a Jew. And that is a serious offence. You must have read that Muslims sometimes call me a Jew. It is not that they think I am a Jew. It is because they want to insult me. By calling me a Jew they express their hatred.
You must understand that you can’t make peace with Muslims. They will never accept you as equal. They will accept you as dhimmi (bonded) but never as equal. This is true about Christians too, but Jews are first and Christians will be the next. As they say, first comes Saturday and then Sunday. What they mean by this is that first we will subdue the Jews (people of Sabbath) and then the Christians, who celebrate thier religion on Sunday.
There is only one solution. Muslims must be weaned from Islam. Instead of trying to establish a dialogue with them, which you will never succeed, attack their religion. Help them see Muhammad was a liar and this insane hatred that they harbor for the Jews is the result of following a psychopath. They act insane because they follow an insane man.
You can’t appease a bully. The Jews in Medina could bring Muhammad down and smash his nose, but they feared him instead and tried to appease him. It resulted in their genocide. There were millions of Jews in Germany and not all the Germans were against them. They could fight against Hitler, assassinate the Nazis, bomb their headquarters, and shoot them in the streets. They could cause chaos and burn the cities. Many Germans would have taken their side. Governments can be toppled when there is unrest. But they didn’t do anything. They tried to not rock the boat. Six million of them were incinerated as the result. Compare that to how a tiny group of Muslims have terrorized the entire Europe that no one dares to whisper a word against them. What does this tell us? It tells us that strength gets more result than appeasement.
Isn’t it time for the Jews to realize that the only way to survive is through strength and not through appeasement?
Jews overwhelmingly voted for Obama when this man’s enmity to Israel and his connection to Muslims were glaringly obvious. They decided to close their eyes to facts and believe in his lies. Even today, after this fraud has proven to be no friend of Israel, most Jews will vote for him again. What is wrong with you people? If you don’t know what is good for you, what can others do for you? Why the great majority of Jews are liberal when it is clear that the Left has left them in the cold?
So you want to know how to make peace with Muslims. You can’t, unless you agree to be a dhimmi. Muslims will never take a Jew as their friend or ally. This is against the Quran (5:51).
There is only one solution. Wean them from Islam. Show them that Islam is a lie and Muhammad was a psychopath. He was a deceiver. This is not difficult. I have been doing it with great success. Muslims are leaving Islam in large numbers. Truth is setting them free. Once they leave Islam they will be your friend and ally. Then you can have peace with them. Only then Palestinians and Jews can live together.
Most of the wars and killings that are happening now are because of Islam. They will cease. The world will be a safer place. This is not wishful thinking. It is a reality that is happening already.