ZVI MAZEL
THE JERUSALEM POST
After three days of a tense standoff, Egypt's determination not to allow the thousands of pilgrims returning from Mecca into the Gaza Strip without being thoroughly checked by Israel to prevent smuggling of explosives and cash to bolster Hamas rule finally crumbled and a jubilant crowd surged into the strip.
One can wonder why they were allowed to cross unsupervised into Egypt in the first place - in spite of Israel's protests, which went unheeded. Under the joint agreement signed by Egypt, Israel, the Palestinian Authority and the European Union following Israel's unilateral disengagement from Gaza, the checkpoint at Rafah between the Gaza Strip and Egypt was to have been closely monitored by EU inspectors and double-checked by Israel through video surveillance.
However, things did not go according to plan. The Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip led to the precipitated flight of the EU inspectors, who feared for their lives, and ultimately to the closing of the checkpoint.
This new breach of the border agreement comes against the backdrop of the unending flow of smuggled weapons, explosives and terrorists through the tunnels under what is known in Israel as the Philadelphi Corridor, the narrow stretch of land along the border. Israel has repeatedly protested to the Egyptian authorities - with no discernible effects - and this has led to a heightening of tension between the two countries.
The visit of Defense Minister Ehud Barak to Egypt last week was intended to defuse the situation. Barak did come back with a firm Egyptian commitment to have the pilgrims cross through the Kerem Shalom checkpoint so that Israel could make sure that no explosives or cash for Hamas would go through.
It may have been naïve to believe that this is what would happen. The pilgrims were very vocal in their determination to go back the way they had come, and their makeshift camps with wailing women and resolute men made front page news throughout the Arab world. Mubarak did try to denounce Arab media, but the outcry did not abate and he gave in. Egypt was not prepared to be portrayed any longer as a country persecuting innocent pilgrims in order to do Israel's bidding.
Two years ago, the decision to withdraw from Philadelphi was not taken lightly. Many voices had been raised to warn that it would be folly to entrust the Egyptians with guarding the border. However, a legal argument won the day: Israel, it was argued, would still be considered as the occupying power if if the IDF remained along the border.
It turned out to have been a major mistake. In spite of the fact that not a single Israeli soldier remains there, in world public opinion Israel is still the occupying power. Worse, entrusting the Egyptian with guarding the border showed a staggering lack of strategic understanding.
Though Egypt has made peace with Israel, it is first and foremost an Arab country aspiring to regional leadership, and wholeheartedly on the side of the Palestinians in their struggle against Israel.
The idea that Egyptian soldiers would be instructed to stop smuggling at all costs - which means they would have to resort to violence and to live fire - is ludicrous in that context.
Egypt cannot afford the opprobrium that would be attached to killing Palestinians on an almost daily basis for the sake of keeping the border safe for Israel. Huge public demonstration and rioting could occur in Egypt. We just saw the way President Hosni Mubarak had to bow to pressure and let the pilgrims go, in spite of his undertaking to Ehud Barak.
It is now up to Israel to think long and hard about what it wants to do. What we need is a solution, not someone to blame.
There is a warning for America, too, in that story: Don't push Egypt too far.
Zvi Mazel is Israel's former ambassador to Egypt.
Thursday, January 03, 2008
A Glimmer of Light?
Arlene Kushner
I begin with the link to my report on Fatah:
http://israelbehindthenews.com/pdf/ModerateFatah.pdf
Please, read it, share it, and use it broadly in writing letters to editors, writing to your Congresspersons, etc. One would have to have his head screwed on backwards or upside-down to believe we can "negotiate" with Abbas after reading this documentation.
This material is scheduled for broad dissemination, both here in Israel and in Washington DC. It's not over until this government is disbanded and we have elections with a stable, responsible government in place.
But the horror of Olmert is diminished by news I'm able to report today. A new group has founded, whose goal is to bring an end to the government.
It is called Habaytah, which means, Go Home. Its campaign will be directed at Ehud Olmert, and also (and this is key) Ehud Barak.
Headed by Maj-Gen (res) Uzi Dayan, former head of the National Security Council, the group is centrist but with participation from the right. It will focus not on the insanity of Olmert's current policies, but on his failures in the Lebanon War, his corruption, and other broad-based issues. The war is key and, relevant to this, the final Winograd report will be out within weeks. Reservists who fought in that war and bereaved families are among those participating in this action.
Just a week ago, Olmert stated he would not resign no matter what the Winograd report said.
~~~~~~~~~~
Barak is in for his share of criticism with regard to this whole issue as well, for when he took the position of
defense minister in Olmert's government, he stated unequivocally that it would be only until the Winograd report came out. Now it will be demanded -- via a grassroots campaign -- that he keep his word, and his credibility will be questioned. If Barak's Labor party pulls out (which would likely bring Lieberman and Shas along), the government collapses.
In addition to this issue, there is a question of Barak culpability for the failures of the Lebanon war being raised, even though he wasn't defense minister when it was fought. For Barak, as prime minister in 2000, pulled out of Lebanon precipitously, setting the stage for strengthening of Hezbollah and the diminishing of IDF deterrence. Surprisingly, former defense minister Peretz, of Labor, has issued a scathing criticism of Barak.
~~~~~~~~~~
On Monday the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, chaired by Tzachi Hanegbi, released its own report on the war. Focusing only on the military and avoiding the failures of the political echelon, it caused an angry response that has set the stage for what will follow with Winograd.
~~~~~~~~~~
Opposition head Binyamin Netanyahu (Likud) has joined the chorus of voices calling for Barak's resignation as soon as Winograd is released. Netanyahu was also very critical of the report that ignored political culpability.
~~~~~~~~~~
Returning for a moment to Olmert and his statements of yesterday: One of the things he said was that he anticipated one deviation from return to pre-'67 lines, and that would be with regard to Ma'aleh Adumim, which he considered to be part of Jerusalem and not really a settlement.
Established in 1975, Ma'aleh Adumim is today a city of over 30,000 directly to the east of Jerusalem by all of about 4.5 miles. Plans to extend the city so that it ultimately merged with Jerusalem (via a region referred to as E1) were tabled for political reasons, but in 2003, a new highway -- with tunnels running under Hebrew University in Mt. Scopus -- was completed, which allows the residents of Ma'aleh Adumim to reach Jerusalem in seven minutes.
~~~~~~~~~~
I was infuriated by this statement of Olmert's because it meant he was prepared to abandon all of Gush Etzion -- with its 18 communities numbering close to 50,000 peoples and a history going back to the 1920s -- and Hevron, the second holiest city to Jews, and Shilo, and Beit El, etc. etc.
Announcing plans to hold on to nothing in Judea and Samaria but Ma'aleh Adumim seemed to me to be a minimalist position to the point of the ridiculous.
~~~~~~~~~~
But leave it to the PA to say this position was not minimalist enough.
A PA official in Ramallah said: "Olmert must be living on another planet. Peace and settlements don't go together. If this is his policy, he can forget about finding a partner on the Palestinian side."
Personally, I think that would be great: let's forget about finding a partner.
But this statement indicates several different things worth examining.
The bottom line is that no matter how much Olmert stretches himself to "make concessions for peace," it's never going to be enough. There would seem to me to be one of two reasons why this would be the case. Either the political climate -- with Hamas breathing down Abbas's neck -- doesn't allow the PA to compromise for fear of being accused of being a traitor to the cause.
~~~~~~~~~~
Or, the PA officials know full well that they're demanding more than Olmert can give and thus are making certain that there will be no deal, because they don't want a deal, don't want a two-state solution with end of conflict, at all -- and they're playing a game but making sure that the deal never really happens. This way they can tell the world they were willing, but Israel was not forthcoming. Thus they avoid the unacceptable situation of having to sign on to Israeli permanency while appearing in the eyes of the world to be cooperative.
The influence of Hamas may be a factor. But my take is that they don't want a deal in any terms. I ask you, if you wanted a state in all of Judea and Samaria, and were offered all of it minus one community adjacent to Jerusalem (and thus not impinging on the contiguity of your proposed state), would you not take it?
~~~~~~~~~~
The PA official says they don't distinguish between Ma'aleh Adumim and an illegal outpost: "These are all illegal settlements that were built on occupied lands belonging to the Palestinian people."
Well, I never let these erroneous statements pass. We're talking about unclaimed, and thus disputed, Mandate land that was originally promised to the Jewish people. In no way whatsoever does this land "belong" to the Palestinians, nor is it "occupied."
~~~~~~~~~~
While Olmert stood his ground with regard to our right to build in Har Homa, which is within Jerusalem, he has caved in other respects. He recently declared that he would be overseeing all issues pertaining to building in settlements beyond Jerusalem. Decisions will be made not according to our legal rights, but rather "not to jeopardize" the peace process. He should recognize now -- whatever he does, it won't be enough.
~~~~~~~~~~
There is a Knesset committee that is considering some horrendous changes in the criteria for determining who has "blood on his hands" with regard to who might be released in a prisoner exchange. This has come about because of Hamas demands if Shalit is to be released, but it would set a precedent that would be very bad news indeed.
At present no decisions have been made, but among those who might not any longer be included within the category of those having blood on their hands would be:
1. Those who wounded Israelis but didn't manage to kill them.
2. Those who sent others to kill Israelis.
3. Those who actively participated in an operation killing Israelis but did not actually pull the trigger that shot a bullet that killed an Israeli.
4. Those who killed Israelis a long time ago - e.g. before Oslo.
If these definitions were adopted, those who planned suicide bombings could be released. The scuttlebutt -- for the hundredth time -- is that this is setting the scene for the release of Marwan Barghouti, who planned and set into motion a great many terrorist acts but didn't pull the trigger himself. Barghouti is being touted as a replacement for Abbas, but if the best the PA can do for leadership is a terrorist of this caliber, it tells us a great deal.
Yuval Diskin, head of Shin Bet, is opposed to these changes.
~~~~~~~~~~
Two days ago I carried reports from a very reliable journalist -- Khaled Abu Toameh -- that the perpetrators of the terrorist killing of two off-duty soldiers outside of Hevron on Friday were associated with Fatah. Well, now it's official:
Two terrorists involved (one had been shot dead -- as the victims fought back) turned themselves in to PA security forces for fear they might be caught by the IDF. Now, what does that tell us?
PA security didn't tell Israeli authorities right away that they had the terrorists. One of them is a member of Fatah with ties to the Palestinian general intelligence, and the other is a Fatah member who belongs to the Palestinian national security forces.
Yup, that again! Terrorists who belong to the security forces. Sure they depend upon those security forces to go lightly on them.
~~~~~~~~~~
Meanwhile, Defense Minister Barak has said we are going to watch closely to see if the PA fulfills its promise to prosecute these killers.
"These people need to rot in jail until their last days," Barak told Israel Radio.
"We will see if the Palestinian Authority is opening a revolving door for them and if so, the IDF...will know how to put our hands on them."
He's absolutely right to be wary. The revolving door is the Palestinian way of life. But, silly me, I must ask this: If we distrust them so completely, how can we consider turning anything over to them?
~~~~~~~~~~
see my website www.arlenefromisrael.info
I begin with the link to my report on Fatah:
http://israelbehindthenews.com/pdf/ModerateFatah.pdf
Please, read it, share it, and use it broadly in writing letters to editors, writing to your Congresspersons, etc. One would have to have his head screwed on backwards or upside-down to believe we can "negotiate" with Abbas after reading this documentation.
This material is scheduled for broad dissemination, both here in Israel and in Washington DC. It's not over until this government is disbanded and we have elections with a stable, responsible government in place.
But the horror of Olmert is diminished by news I'm able to report today. A new group has founded, whose goal is to bring an end to the government.
It is called Habaytah, which means, Go Home. Its campaign will be directed at Ehud Olmert, and also (and this is key) Ehud Barak.
Headed by Maj-Gen (res) Uzi Dayan, former head of the National Security Council, the group is centrist but with participation from the right. It will focus not on the insanity of Olmert's current policies, but on his failures in the Lebanon War, his corruption, and other broad-based issues. The war is key and, relevant to this, the final Winograd report will be out within weeks. Reservists who fought in that war and bereaved families are among those participating in this action.
Just a week ago, Olmert stated he would not resign no matter what the Winograd report said.
~~~~~~~~~~
Barak is in for his share of criticism with regard to this whole issue as well, for when he took the position of
defense minister in Olmert's government, he stated unequivocally that it would be only until the Winograd report came out. Now it will be demanded -- via a grassroots campaign -- that he keep his word, and his credibility will be questioned. If Barak's Labor party pulls out (which would likely bring Lieberman and Shas along), the government collapses.
In addition to this issue, there is a question of Barak culpability for the failures of the Lebanon war being raised, even though he wasn't defense minister when it was fought. For Barak, as prime minister in 2000, pulled out of Lebanon precipitously, setting the stage for strengthening of Hezbollah and the diminishing of IDF deterrence. Surprisingly, former defense minister Peretz, of Labor, has issued a scathing criticism of Barak.
~~~~~~~~~~
On Monday the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, chaired by Tzachi Hanegbi, released its own report on the war. Focusing only on the military and avoiding the failures of the political echelon, it caused an angry response that has set the stage for what will follow with Winograd.
~~~~~~~~~~
Opposition head Binyamin Netanyahu (Likud) has joined the chorus of voices calling for Barak's resignation as soon as Winograd is released. Netanyahu was also very critical of the report that ignored political culpability.
~~~~~~~~~~
Returning for a moment to Olmert and his statements of yesterday: One of the things he said was that he anticipated one deviation from return to pre-'67 lines, and that would be with regard to Ma'aleh Adumim, which he considered to be part of Jerusalem and not really a settlement.
Established in 1975, Ma'aleh Adumim is today a city of over 30,000 directly to the east of Jerusalem by all of about 4.5 miles. Plans to extend the city so that it ultimately merged with Jerusalem (via a region referred to as E1) were tabled for political reasons, but in 2003, a new highway -- with tunnels running under Hebrew University in Mt. Scopus -- was completed, which allows the residents of Ma'aleh Adumim to reach Jerusalem in seven minutes.
~~~~~~~~~~
I was infuriated by this statement of Olmert's because it meant he was prepared to abandon all of Gush Etzion -- with its 18 communities numbering close to 50,000 peoples and a history going back to the 1920s -- and Hevron, the second holiest city to Jews, and Shilo, and Beit El, etc. etc.
Announcing plans to hold on to nothing in Judea and Samaria but Ma'aleh Adumim seemed to me to be a minimalist position to the point of the ridiculous.
~~~~~~~~~~
But leave it to the PA to say this position was not minimalist enough.
A PA official in Ramallah said: "Olmert must be living on another planet. Peace and settlements don't go together. If this is his policy, he can forget about finding a partner on the Palestinian side."
Personally, I think that would be great: let's forget about finding a partner.
But this statement indicates several different things worth examining.
The bottom line is that no matter how much Olmert stretches himself to "make concessions for peace," it's never going to be enough. There would seem to me to be one of two reasons why this would be the case. Either the political climate -- with Hamas breathing down Abbas's neck -- doesn't allow the PA to compromise for fear of being accused of being a traitor to the cause.
~~~~~~~~~~
Or, the PA officials know full well that they're demanding more than Olmert can give and thus are making certain that there will be no deal, because they don't want a deal, don't want a two-state solution with end of conflict, at all -- and they're playing a game but making sure that the deal never really happens. This way they can tell the world they were willing, but Israel was not forthcoming. Thus they avoid the unacceptable situation of having to sign on to Israeli permanency while appearing in the eyes of the world to be cooperative.
The influence of Hamas may be a factor. But my take is that they don't want a deal in any terms. I ask you, if you wanted a state in all of Judea and Samaria, and were offered all of it minus one community adjacent to Jerusalem (and thus not impinging on the contiguity of your proposed state), would you not take it?
~~~~~~~~~~
The PA official says they don't distinguish between Ma'aleh Adumim and an illegal outpost: "These are all illegal settlements that were built on occupied lands belonging to the Palestinian people."
Well, I never let these erroneous statements pass. We're talking about unclaimed, and thus disputed, Mandate land that was originally promised to the Jewish people. In no way whatsoever does this land "belong" to the Palestinians, nor is it "occupied."
~~~~~~~~~~
While Olmert stood his ground with regard to our right to build in Har Homa, which is within Jerusalem, he has caved in other respects. He recently declared that he would be overseeing all issues pertaining to building in settlements beyond Jerusalem. Decisions will be made not according to our legal rights, but rather "not to jeopardize" the peace process. He should recognize now -- whatever he does, it won't be enough.
~~~~~~~~~~
There is a Knesset committee that is considering some horrendous changes in the criteria for determining who has "blood on his hands" with regard to who might be released in a prisoner exchange. This has come about because of Hamas demands if Shalit is to be released, but it would set a precedent that would be very bad news indeed.
At present no decisions have been made, but among those who might not any longer be included within the category of those having blood on their hands would be:
1. Those who wounded Israelis but didn't manage to kill them.
2. Those who sent others to kill Israelis.
3. Those who actively participated in an operation killing Israelis but did not actually pull the trigger that shot a bullet that killed an Israeli.
4. Those who killed Israelis a long time ago - e.g. before Oslo.
If these definitions were adopted, those who planned suicide bombings could be released. The scuttlebutt -- for the hundredth time -- is that this is setting the scene for the release of Marwan Barghouti, who planned and set into motion a great many terrorist acts but didn't pull the trigger himself. Barghouti is being touted as a replacement for Abbas, but if the best the PA can do for leadership is a terrorist of this caliber, it tells us a great deal.
Yuval Diskin, head of Shin Bet, is opposed to these changes.
~~~~~~~~~~
Two days ago I carried reports from a very reliable journalist -- Khaled Abu Toameh -- that the perpetrators of the terrorist killing of two off-duty soldiers outside of Hevron on Friday were associated with Fatah. Well, now it's official:
Two terrorists involved (one had been shot dead -- as the victims fought back) turned themselves in to PA security forces for fear they might be caught by the IDF. Now, what does that tell us?
PA security didn't tell Israeli authorities right away that they had the terrorists. One of them is a member of Fatah with ties to the Palestinian general intelligence, and the other is a Fatah member who belongs to the Palestinian national security forces.
Yup, that again! Terrorists who belong to the security forces. Sure they depend upon those security forces to go lightly on them.
~~~~~~~~~~
Meanwhile, Defense Minister Barak has said we are going to watch closely to see if the PA fulfills its promise to prosecute these killers.
"These people need to rot in jail until their last days," Barak told Israel Radio.
"We will see if the Palestinian Authority is opening a revolving door for them and if so, the IDF...will know how to put our hands on them."
He's absolutely right to be wary. The revolving door is the Palestinian way of life. But, silly me, I must ask this: If we distrust them so completely, how can we consider turning anything over to them?
~~~~~~~~~~
see my website www.arlenefromisrael.info
The Myths of Peace, and the Reality of our Dead Boys
Naomi Ragen
I want to tell you the story of two boys, twenty year olds, both them in the elite of elite army units, both of them from Rabbinical families, both of them living in Kiryat Arba, the Jewish neighborhood of Hebron. Achikam Amichai and David Rubin were out on leave from their IDF units, enjoying a well-earned holiday. They decided this past Friday afternoon to take take a little hike in their backyards. Their friend Naama Ohayon went with them. It was a beautiful day, beautiful scenery, wild and open, as it is in that part of the land of Israel. They passed an Arab, who asked them for water. The boys gave it to him, then waved goodbye and went on their way. A short while later, alerted by the Palestinian they had shared water with, three armed terrorists who had been lying in wait for an opportunity to kill Israelis and steal their weapons, drove by and opened fire on the three young people. Our boys, ambushed and badly wounded, nevertheless, began firing, killing the terrorist driver of the car. The other two terrorists then hopped out of the car, put their guns at point blank range to the fatally injured boys and fired. These "big heroes" then threw their dead comrade out of car like so much garbage, and took off, back to Hebron where they live. Hiding In the forest, Naama Ohayon, who had miraculously escaped, used her cell phone to contact Israeli security forces, who praised her unbelievable cool in the face of the horror she had witnessed. Security forces rescued her, but it was too late for the boys.
Meanwhile, Shimon Peres found time for a photo opportunity to shake hands with a member of Abu Maazen's government who expressed his "condolences." This, of course, before it became known that the killers were Abu Maazen's paid employees.
According to Efrat Weiss, writing in YNET, sometime on Friday evening, the Palestinian Authority started the rumor that it wasn't a terrorist attack at all, but a "drug deal" gone bad. This went all over the Israeli news, and you can just imagine how the parents must have felt. Others said the boys had no right to go hiking. (Right, let's all stay in our homes and quake.)
Meanwhile, the two murderers, fearing the IDF was closing in on them, turned themselves over to Palestinian security forces, who didn't say a word about this to the Israelis. However, when Israeli security asked them pointedly to turn over the weapons of the murderers and the victims, they did. But they didn't turn over the killers, who they are still "interrogating."
Surprise surprise, these weren't Hamas operatives. They were salary- earning members of the Palestinian Authority, paid for by U.S. and European Union donations to Abu Maazen, the "good Palestinian" as oppossed to the Hamas, who are terrorists and "bad Palestinians," the ones we need to weaken by supporting Abu Mazen and his gang of thugs.
The names of the murderers are: Omar Badar Ali-Halim Teha, a resident of Hebron, 26, a "soldier" in the Palestinian National
Security Forces, and an active member of Fatah; Ali al Hamid Regev Dindis, 24 a Hebron resident who is a clerk in the Sharia court of the Palestinian authority, and also connected to the Palestinian Secret service. The dead driver is 23 year olf Radil Abdul Naim Natshe.
There are many conclusions to be drawn from this story. I will leave you to draw them concerning the myths of making peace with the Palestinian Authority.
Comment by Israeli colleague: Naomi's piece that follows is what Israel lives with daily; we who are here can testify to its accuracy. We sorrow with the families; each life is precious no matter where we are. The ratio of Israelis to Americans is about 1 to 55. In other words, the killing of one Israeli is like that of 55 Americans. It is a ghastly price to pay and no matter what steps Israel has taken - described as 'painful concessions for peace' - we are further than ever from that goal. The enemy wants us out - dead - annihilated - extinct!
The present Israeli government - and the previous ones - have traveled the same path: "Maybe we just have not given enough! Let's give more! Maybe the enemy really do want peace with us!" And, as the King of Siam said, "Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera!" No thanks!
By now we should have learned that it hasn't worked. The enemy spews hatred of Israel --------and let's not leave out the U.S.as victim. Those Americans who have not heard it have been reading the newspapers that do not publish all of the news; just look into some of the internet hate sites that are so plentiful. Not pretty reading . Even the following story has been distorted by the enemy and the left media that is sympathetic to them may be reporting the wrong version; read Naomi's and know the truth.
Israel's struggle is not limited solely to her own survival. Let no one believe that the fight is just over Middle East territory! Today's ideological enemies will not hesitate to pursue their goals overseas; they have a foothold in Europe and are already ensconced in the U.S. Acquiescing to the demands of Israel's enemies only emboldens them more and more; it is clearly not in the interest of Israel to continue on this route. Let is also be clear that it is not in the interest of the United States to create a Palestinian state in the heart of Israel or to divide Jerusalem. The capital of Israel is one city; from a purely strategic standpoint, dividing it would create a Baghdad-like condition with terrorist activities carried out in every neighborhood throughout. There are other compelling reasons why Jerusalem must remain united which will not be discussed now.
Israel will be under tremendous pressure this coming week to participate in her own suicide - to take steps that will legitimize her rapacious enemies. The headline of the Jerusalem Post of Jan.1 screamed boldly:
Olmert: "Even Israel's good friends see our future based on the ' 67 borders, with Jerusalem divided"
I want to tell you the story of two boys, twenty year olds, both them in the elite of elite army units, both of them from Rabbinical families, both of them living in Kiryat Arba, the Jewish neighborhood of Hebron. Achikam Amichai and David Rubin were out on leave from their IDF units, enjoying a well-earned holiday. They decided this past Friday afternoon to take take a little hike in their backyards. Their friend Naama Ohayon went with them. It was a beautiful day, beautiful scenery, wild and open, as it is in that part of the land of Israel. They passed an Arab, who asked them for water. The boys gave it to him, then waved goodbye and went on their way. A short while later, alerted by the Palestinian they had shared water with, three armed terrorists who had been lying in wait for an opportunity to kill Israelis and steal their weapons, drove by and opened fire on the three young people. Our boys, ambushed and badly wounded, nevertheless, began firing, killing the terrorist driver of the car. The other two terrorists then hopped out of the car, put their guns at point blank range to the fatally injured boys and fired. These "big heroes" then threw their dead comrade out of car like so much garbage, and took off, back to Hebron where they live. Hiding In the forest, Naama Ohayon, who had miraculously escaped, used her cell phone to contact Israeli security forces, who praised her unbelievable cool in the face of the horror she had witnessed. Security forces rescued her, but it was too late for the boys.
Meanwhile, Shimon Peres found time for a photo opportunity to shake hands with a member of Abu Maazen's government who expressed his "condolences." This, of course, before it became known that the killers were Abu Maazen's paid employees.
According to Efrat Weiss, writing in YNET, sometime on Friday evening, the Palestinian Authority started the rumor that it wasn't a terrorist attack at all, but a "drug deal" gone bad. This went all over the Israeli news, and you can just imagine how the parents must have felt. Others said the boys had no right to go hiking. (Right, let's all stay in our homes and quake.)
Meanwhile, the two murderers, fearing the IDF was closing in on them, turned themselves over to Palestinian security forces, who didn't say a word about this to the Israelis. However, when Israeli security asked them pointedly to turn over the weapons of the murderers and the victims, they did. But they didn't turn over the killers, who they are still "interrogating."
Surprise surprise, these weren't Hamas operatives. They were salary- earning members of the Palestinian Authority, paid for by U.S. and European Union donations to Abu Maazen, the "good Palestinian" as oppossed to the Hamas, who are terrorists and "bad Palestinians," the ones we need to weaken by supporting Abu Mazen and his gang of thugs.
The names of the murderers are: Omar Badar Ali-Halim Teha, a resident of Hebron, 26, a "soldier" in the Palestinian National
Security Forces, and an active member of Fatah; Ali al Hamid Regev Dindis, 24 a Hebron resident who is a clerk in the Sharia court of the Palestinian authority, and also connected to the Palestinian Secret service. The dead driver is 23 year olf Radil Abdul Naim Natshe.
There are many conclusions to be drawn from this story. I will leave you to draw them concerning the myths of making peace with the Palestinian Authority.
Comment by Israeli colleague: Naomi's piece that follows is what Israel lives with daily; we who are here can testify to its accuracy. We sorrow with the families; each life is precious no matter where we are. The ratio of Israelis to Americans is about 1 to 55. In other words, the killing of one Israeli is like that of 55 Americans. It is a ghastly price to pay and no matter what steps Israel has taken - described as 'painful concessions for peace' - we are further than ever from that goal. The enemy wants us out - dead - annihilated - extinct!
The present Israeli government - and the previous ones - have traveled the same path: "Maybe we just have not given enough! Let's give more! Maybe the enemy really do want peace with us!" And, as the King of Siam said, "Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera!" No thanks!
By now we should have learned that it hasn't worked. The enemy spews hatred of Israel --------and let's not leave out the U.S.as victim. Those Americans who have not heard it have been reading the newspapers that do not publish all of the news; just look into some of the internet hate sites that are so plentiful. Not pretty reading . Even the following story has been distorted by the enemy and the left media that is sympathetic to them may be reporting the wrong version; read Naomi's and know the truth.
Israel's struggle is not limited solely to her own survival. Let no one believe that the fight is just over Middle East territory! Today's ideological enemies will not hesitate to pursue their goals overseas; they have a foothold in Europe and are already ensconced in the U.S. Acquiescing to the demands of Israel's enemies only emboldens them more and more; it is clearly not in the interest of Israel to continue on this route. Let is also be clear that it is not in the interest of the United States to create a Palestinian state in the heart of Israel or to divide Jerusalem. The capital of Israel is one city; from a purely strategic standpoint, dividing it would create a Baghdad-like condition with terrorist activities carried out in every neighborhood throughout. There are other compelling reasons why Jerusalem must remain united which will not be discussed now.
Israel will be under tremendous pressure this coming week to participate in her own suicide - to take steps that will legitimize her rapacious enemies. The headline of the Jerusalem Post of Jan.1 screamed boldly:
Olmert: "Even Israel's good friends see our future based on the ' 67 borders, with Jerusalem divided"
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Rabbis ask Bush to cancel his visit to Israel
"Even if it is not your intention, the slanted media in Israel is interpreting your visit as applying pressure to accelerate the implementation of "Disengagement II" a move that will place in mortal danger all residents of Israel," the Rabbis wrote. The Rabbinical Congress for Peace (RCP) comprised over over 350 leading rabbis in Israel have sent an urgent letter to U.S.President George Bush requesting that he cancel his upcoming trip to Israel next week.
"Even if it is not your intention, the slanted media in Israel is interpreting your visit as applying pressure to accelerate the implementation of "Disengagement II" a move that will place in mortal danger all residents of Israel," the Rabbis wrote.
The RCP move came came after Prime Minister Ehud Olmert sent an official letter on Sunday to the ministers of defense, housing and agriculture with an order to refrain from authorizing any construction in the West Bank without his and Defense Minister Ehud Barak's prior approval.
Officials in the PM's Office said that the order was a follow-up to the announcement he made in the cabinet meeting before the Annapolis peace conference, that Israel would not build additional settlements and would evacuate illegal outposts as it is obligated under the U.S.-backed road map of 2003.
Olmert wrote that "construction, new building, expansion, preparation of plans, publication of residency tenders and confiscation of land stemming from other settlement activities in Judea and Samaria will not go forward and will not be implemented without requesting and receiving in advance approval by the defense minister and the prime minister."
In a statement issued to the press Tuesday, the rabbis accused the media in Israel of deceiving the public by describing the disengagement and choking the settlers as a "peace process" when in reality it is "terror process" that will only lead to bloodshed.
"Regrettably, the U.S. understands the Israel's security better than the Israeli leadership but it is precisely the Israeli leadership who is "begging" President Bush and U.S. Secretary of State Condaleeza Rice to force Israel to commit suicide," the RCP claims.
The rabbis laid the blame for the terrorist attack last week that killed two innocent Israelis near Hebron on the Israeli government. "The government's actions and negotiations over another disengagement in Judea, Samaria and in Jerusalem encourages the murder of Jews. The murder of these boys are a direct result of Israel's recent statements on further withdrawals and is only a tatse of what can be expected after the Bush visit to the region," the Rabbis stated.
The Rabbis reiterated the clear Ruling in the Jewish Code of Law that is absolutely forbidden for any Jew to give up even one inch of land under Jewish control to foreigners because it only leads to instability and bloodshed in the region.
Note: The RCP has announced that it has embarked on a $250,000 relentless campaign to use all legal means and public relations to stop Olmert before it is too late. In the coming weeks the RCP plans to print up millions of brochures, place full page ads in major newspapers in Israel and abroad, convene conferences and meetings with every member of Knesset and ministers to awaken them from their slumber.
"But for this we need the public's support," say the rabbis and are asking everyone to whom the security of Israel is dear, to please send in your contribution via your bank to R.C.P – Pikuach Nefesh – Bank Leumi – Bialik Branch-803 Account # 701199/63 or send your check by mail to: R.C.P. - Pikuach Nefesh The Rabbinical Congress for Peace POBOX 56131 Tel Aviv Israel. TeleFax (972)-3-5251887+
"Even if it is not your intention, the slanted media in Israel is interpreting your visit as applying pressure to accelerate the implementation of "Disengagement II" a move that will place in mortal danger all residents of Israel," the Rabbis wrote.
The RCP move came came after Prime Minister Ehud Olmert sent an official letter on Sunday to the ministers of defense, housing and agriculture with an order to refrain from authorizing any construction in the West Bank without his and Defense Minister Ehud Barak's prior approval.
Officials in the PM's Office said that the order was a follow-up to the announcement he made in the cabinet meeting before the Annapolis peace conference, that Israel would not build additional settlements and would evacuate illegal outposts as it is obligated under the U.S.-backed road map of 2003.
Olmert wrote that "construction, new building, expansion, preparation of plans, publication of residency tenders and confiscation of land stemming from other settlement activities in Judea and Samaria will not go forward and will not be implemented without requesting and receiving in advance approval by the defense minister and the prime minister."
In a statement issued to the press Tuesday, the rabbis accused the media in Israel of deceiving the public by describing the disengagement and choking the settlers as a "peace process" when in reality it is "terror process" that will only lead to bloodshed.
"Regrettably, the U.S. understands the Israel's security better than the Israeli leadership but it is precisely the Israeli leadership who is "begging" President Bush and U.S. Secretary of State Condaleeza Rice to force Israel to commit suicide," the RCP claims.
The rabbis laid the blame for the terrorist attack last week that killed two innocent Israelis near Hebron on the Israeli government. "The government's actions and negotiations over another disengagement in Judea, Samaria and in Jerusalem encourages the murder of Jews. The murder of these boys are a direct result of Israel's recent statements on further withdrawals and is only a tatse of what can be expected after the Bush visit to the region," the Rabbis stated.
The Rabbis reiterated the clear Ruling in the Jewish Code of Law that is absolutely forbidden for any Jew to give up even one inch of land under Jewish control to foreigners because it only leads to instability and bloodshed in the region.
Note: The RCP has announced that it has embarked on a $250,000 relentless campaign to use all legal means and public relations to stop Olmert before it is too late. In the coming weeks the RCP plans to print up millions of brochures, place full page ads in major newspapers in Israel and abroad, convene conferences and meetings with every member of Knesset and ministers to awaken them from their slumber.
"But for this we need the public's support," say the rabbis and are asking everyone to whom the security of Israel is dear, to please send in your contribution via your bank to R.C.P – Pikuach Nefesh – Bank Leumi – Bialik Branch-803 Account # 701199/63 or send your check by mail to: R.C.P. - Pikuach Nefesh The Rabbinical Congress for Peace POBOX 56131 Tel Aviv Israel. TeleFax (972)-3-5251887+
'Saving a Life is No Longer Important?'
Hillel Fendel
Long-time IAF veteran Sgt. (ret.) Shmuel Rafael, who was awarded a medal for saving a fellow soldier in mid-air in 1950, feels not enough is being done to save Jonathan Pollard. Rafael has written a letter to MK Zevulun Orlev, who, as chairman of the Knesset Audit Committee, asked Israel's State Comptroller to investigate why the government has not brought Pollard home from US prison. Rafael's letter congratulated Orlev for his work, while criticizing other branches of the Israeli government for having done nothing for Pollard.
"The recognition and appreciation that I received back in 1950 for saving just one person," Rafael wrote, "was the impetus for my dozens of years of work for Israel's security in the paratroopers, on the battle field, in reprisal operations, and in other vital operations. Israel used to know how to show appreciation for its fighters - but now has changed its face, and not for the good."
"One gesture,one prisoner, Jonathan Pollard,home, now."
Bravery in the Sky
Rafael was awarded an IDF medal of valor for saving a fellow soldier whose parachute became entangled in the plane's back wheel just seconds after he jumped out. Rafael ordered the pilot to dim the motors and head for sea, and then pulled out a weighted rope and managed to direct it out the plane's door towards the dangling soldier. Utilizing the thrust of wind from the engine, he directed the rope between the chute's cords. Thus, the dangling paratrooper was raised towards the plane's door - though not before seven of his chute's cords were torn. Fighting against the wind thrust of the engine, Rafael - hanging mostly out of the plane - managed to connect the weight back to the parachute. After another ten minutes of pulling up, the parachutist was hauled, safe and sound, into the plane.
In his letter to MK Orlev, Rafael wrote, "With your actions, the many of us who have watched unbelievingly the silence and lack of action regarding an Israeli hero, Jonathan Pollard, can now stand tall. Not a thing has been done for his release - at least not to the best knowledge of the Israeli public. I wish to honor you for bringing about an investigation of what has been done to ensure that this precious man return home to us and receive the honor he so richly deserves for his actions on behalf of his beloved, but ungrateful, nation."
Instead of Investigating, Make Sure He Comes Home!
The Justice for Jonathan Pollard organization, on the other hand, says there will be plenty of time to investigate the government's malfunctioning after he returns - but that now is the time to do nothing but demand his immediate release.
In response to the news of the State Comptroller's upcoming investigation, Pollard's wife Esther told Army Radio, "There is a time to investigate, and there is a time to act expeditiously to save a life. After 23 years in prison in harsh conditions, Jonathan's life is literally hanging in the balance."
Mrs. Pollard says that with US President Bush arriving in Israel next week, "Now is the time for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to ask President Bush to make a gesture to Israel. One gesture, one prisoner, Jonathan Pollard, home, now."
Long-time IAF veteran Sgt. (ret.) Shmuel Rafael, who was awarded a medal for saving a fellow soldier in mid-air in 1950, feels not enough is being done to save Jonathan Pollard. Rafael has written a letter to MK Zevulun Orlev, who, as chairman of the Knesset Audit Committee, asked Israel's State Comptroller to investigate why the government has not brought Pollard home from US prison. Rafael's letter congratulated Orlev for his work, while criticizing other branches of the Israeli government for having done nothing for Pollard.
"The recognition and appreciation that I received back in 1950 for saving just one person," Rafael wrote, "was the impetus for my dozens of years of work for Israel's security in the paratroopers, on the battle field, in reprisal operations, and in other vital operations. Israel used to know how to show appreciation for its fighters - but now has changed its face, and not for the good."
"One gesture,one prisoner, Jonathan Pollard,home, now."
Bravery in the Sky
Rafael was awarded an IDF medal of valor for saving a fellow soldier whose parachute became entangled in the plane's back wheel just seconds after he jumped out. Rafael ordered the pilot to dim the motors and head for sea, and then pulled out a weighted rope and managed to direct it out the plane's door towards the dangling soldier. Utilizing the thrust of wind from the engine, he directed the rope between the chute's cords. Thus, the dangling paratrooper was raised towards the plane's door - though not before seven of his chute's cords were torn. Fighting against the wind thrust of the engine, Rafael - hanging mostly out of the plane - managed to connect the weight back to the parachute. After another ten minutes of pulling up, the parachutist was hauled, safe and sound, into the plane.
In his letter to MK Orlev, Rafael wrote, "With your actions, the many of us who have watched unbelievingly the silence and lack of action regarding an Israeli hero, Jonathan Pollard, can now stand tall. Not a thing has been done for his release - at least not to the best knowledge of the Israeli public. I wish to honor you for bringing about an investigation of what has been done to ensure that this precious man return home to us and receive the honor he so richly deserves for his actions on behalf of his beloved, but ungrateful, nation."
Instead of Investigating, Make Sure He Comes Home!
The Justice for Jonathan Pollard organization, on the other hand, says there will be plenty of time to investigate the government's malfunctioning after he returns - but that now is the time to do nothing but demand his immediate release.
In response to the news of the State Comptroller's upcoming investigation, Pollard's wife Esther told Army Radio, "There is a time to investigate, and there is a time to act expeditiously to save a life. After 23 years in prison in harsh conditions, Jonathan's life is literally hanging in the balance."
Mrs. Pollard says that with US President Bush arriving in Israel next week, "Now is the time for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to ask President Bush to make a gesture to Israel. One gesture, one prisoner, Jonathan Pollard, home, now."
New TV Channel to Bring Judaism to the Masses
Hillel Fendel
The Hidabroot organization, headed by dynamic lecturer and researcher Rabbi Zamir Cohen, is about to open its own 24-hour cable Hebrew-language TV network. An agreement to this effect has been signed with Yes Satellite Television. Rabbi Cohen, a native of Beit Yisrael, a hareidi neighborhood adjacent to Meah She'arim in Jerusalem, says the goal is not to "turn people religious." Rather,"we want to increase values and ethics among Jews in Israel and all over the world, and to topple the barriers that exist between the secular and religious worlds... If we do that, that's good; if some people improve their values, that's even better; and if others come to actually observing the Torah commandments, that's an even further advancement."
Rabbi Zamir's best-selling book Mahapach (The Revolution), an attractive, colorful, large-size volume, proves how nature, science and Torah interact.
Rabbi Cohen wants to make Judaism accessible: "We would like to serve up the truth with pleasantness and at eye-level, without going overboard and without dictating to others. We place it on the table, and whoever wants, will take."
Many have done just that - including practically all of the staff at Hidabroot. Many of them, who are now religiously observant, happened to hear lectures by Rabbi Cohen over the internet, at pubs, or at various other places - others read pamphlets he wrote - and decided they wanted to learn more. Some were attracted, as well, by his best-selling book Mahapach (The Revolution), an attractive, colorful, large-size volume that proves how nature, science and Torah interact - a common theme of his lectures.
The Hidabroot channel, which is scheduled to take to the air within approximately two months, is not the first attempt at full-time religious-Jewish TV programming. A religious television station named Techelet began broadcasting via Yes in 2003, but was unsuccessful in attracting sufficient viewers to make it viable. Techelet had a Modern Orthodox bent, as opposed to the hareidi orientation of Hidabroot.
Hidabroot plans to screen only shows that broadcast pure Judaism, though not all of it frontally educational. Comic episodes promoting Torah values - especially that of becoming familiar with Torah - will be interspersed throughout the programming schedule.
Difficult Questions, Pleasant Answers
Rabbi Cohen's pleasant manner is evident in his answers to difficult questions. Asked about the bad name that religious politicians sometimes give to Torah Judaism, he told Ofrah Lax of the B'Sheva weekly, "The religious public has needs that can only be met by religious-party politicians. But we must transmit the message that they are not the Torah's representatives. I have no criticism of them; they do their job - but we must not leave the field only to them."
Asked about other religious preachers who instill fear in their listeners by warning them about the Hellish dangers that await those who do not repent, Rabbi Cohen said, "There are those who need that style... It's true that some of those phrases can sometimes sound sharp... I believe that the style that suits most of Israel today is the one described in the verse, 'The Torah's ways are pleasant and its ways are peace.'"
Interviewed for the very secular Rating television magazine, Rabbi Cohen said, "I was very hesitant about whether to be interviewed here. But I decided to do it, because it is important to me that Judaism should be accessible for every Jew, no matter what he reads, hears or watches."
The Hidabroot organization, headed by dynamic lecturer and researcher Rabbi Zamir Cohen, is about to open its own 24-hour cable Hebrew-language TV network. An agreement to this effect has been signed with Yes Satellite Television. Rabbi Cohen, a native of Beit Yisrael, a hareidi neighborhood adjacent to Meah She'arim in Jerusalem, says the goal is not to "turn people religious." Rather,"we want to increase values and ethics among Jews in Israel and all over the world, and to topple the barriers that exist between the secular and religious worlds... If we do that, that's good; if some people improve their values, that's even better; and if others come to actually observing the Torah commandments, that's an even further advancement."
Rabbi Zamir's best-selling book Mahapach (The Revolution), an attractive, colorful, large-size volume, proves how nature, science and Torah interact.
Rabbi Cohen wants to make Judaism accessible: "We would like to serve up the truth with pleasantness and at eye-level, without going overboard and without dictating to others. We place it on the table, and whoever wants, will take."
Many have done just that - including practically all of the staff at Hidabroot. Many of them, who are now religiously observant, happened to hear lectures by Rabbi Cohen over the internet, at pubs, or at various other places - others read pamphlets he wrote - and decided they wanted to learn more. Some were attracted, as well, by his best-selling book Mahapach (The Revolution), an attractive, colorful, large-size volume that proves how nature, science and Torah interact - a common theme of his lectures.
The Hidabroot channel, which is scheduled to take to the air within approximately two months, is not the first attempt at full-time religious-Jewish TV programming. A religious television station named Techelet began broadcasting via Yes in 2003, but was unsuccessful in attracting sufficient viewers to make it viable. Techelet had a Modern Orthodox bent, as opposed to the hareidi orientation of Hidabroot.
Hidabroot plans to screen only shows that broadcast pure Judaism, though not all of it frontally educational. Comic episodes promoting Torah values - especially that of becoming familiar with Torah - will be interspersed throughout the programming schedule.
Difficult Questions, Pleasant Answers
Rabbi Cohen's pleasant manner is evident in his answers to difficult questions. Asked about the bad name that religious politicians sometimes give to Torah Judaism, he told Ofrah Lax of the B'Sheva weekly, "The religious public has needs that can only be met by religious-party politicians. But we must transmit the message that they are not the Torah's representatives. I have no criticism of them; they do their job - but we must not leave the field only to them."
Asked about other religious preachers who instill fear in their listeners by warning them about the Hellish dangers that await those who do not repent, Rabbi Cohen said, "There are those who need that style... It's true that some of those phrases can sometimes sound sharp... I believe that the style that suits most of Israel today is the one described in the verse, 'The Torah's ways are pleasant and its ways are peace.'"
Interviewed for the very secular Rating television magazine, Rabbi Cohen said, "I was very hesitant about whether to be interviewed here. But I decided to do it, because it is important to me that Judaism should be accessible for every Jew, no matter what he reads, hears or watches."
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
The “peace process” has it ass-backwards
Ted Belman
Saul Singer advises How to pressure for peace.
I go further suggesting that the peace process has it ass-backwards.
Rather than arm and train the terrorists (Fatah) it should force their disarmament. Rather than finance them to the tune of $7.4 billion thereby enabling them to continue the “resistance”, they should be left to fend for themselves.
Rather than force Israel to freeze settlement activity thereby removing time as an issue it should allow Israel to build to its heart’s content thereby forcing the Palestinians to compromise quickly rather than to allow an erosion of their position in a final settlement.
Rather than force Israel to make goodwill gestures which merely encourages intransigence, it should force the Palestinians to make goodwill gestures. Whatever the resistance Israelis have to the “peace process”, it will be reduced with such real gestures.
This is so obvious that one must conclude that the peace process is designed to continue the conflict rather than end it.
I should point out that no one is demanding peace at the end of the process. You will recall that one of the things Arafat balked at at Camp David, was signing an “end of conflict agreement”. Today no one is even mentioning such a thing and the Arab League is only offering “normalization” whatever that means..
Israel knows this. That is why it is demanding, so far, recognition as a Jewish state. If there was going to be a real peace agreement and a real peace, there would be no need to demand this recognition. Israel, as a sovereign state, could be what it wanted to be. Unfortunately, such recognition if it is given, will be a poor substitute for real peace.
The Arabs are refusing such recognition because their ultimate goal is to destroy Israel as a Jewish state. This they cannot accept. They also would not accept Israel with a Jewish majority even if it were a state like any other. They want Palestine to include Israel and the Jews there to become dhimmis. The peace process is just one step along the way.
The peace process, from Israel’s point of view, is simply a negotiated withdrawal from the Westbank as opposed to the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza.
To my mind, whether Israel just withdraws or negotiates terms of withdrawal or signs a peace agreement, as with Egypt, it makes little difference as the Arabs don’t and won’t abide by the agreements.
Thus, in my opinion, Israel’s goal is to end the “occupation”. She values the international legitimacy she will receive, perhaps with internationally recognized borders maybe, more than security. She is currently working on defense systems that will ostensibly protect her from the rockets which are sure to follow.
This trade off is what Israelis should be debating. Instead the Government of Israel and the US pretend it is otherwise.
Saul Singer advises How to pressure for peace.
I go further suggesting that the peace process has it ass-backwards.
Rather than arm and train the terrorists (Fatah) it should force their disarmament. Rather than finance them to the tune of $7.4 billion thereby enabling them to continue the “resistance”, they should be left to fend for themselves.
Rather than force Israel to freeze settlement activity thereby removing time as an issue it should allow Israel to build to its heart’s content thereby forcing the Palestinians to compromise quickly rather than to allow an erosion of their position in a final settlement.
Rather than force Israel to make goodwill gestures which merely encourages intransigence, it should force the Palestinians to make goodwill gestures. Whatever the resistance Israelis have to the “peace process”, it will be reduced with such real gestures.
This is so obvious that one must conclude that the peace process is designed to continue the conflict rather than end it.
I should point out that no one is demanding peace at the end of the process. You will recall that one of the things Arafat balked at at Camp David, was signing an “end of conflict agreement”. Today no one is even mentioning such a thing and the Arab League is only offering “normalization” whatever that means..
Israel knows this. That is why it is demanding, so far, recognition as a Jewish state. If there was going to be a real peace agreement and a real peace, there would be no need to demand this recognition. Israel, as a sovereign state, could be what it wanted to be. Unfortunately, such recognition if it is given, will be a poor substitute for real peace.
The Arabs are refusing such recognition because their ultimate goal is to destroy Israel as a Jewish state. This they cannot accept. They also would not accept Israel with a Jewish majority even if it were a state like any other. They want Palestine to include Israel and the Jews there to become dhimmis. The peace process is just one step along the way.
The peace process, from Israel’s point of view, is simply a negotiated withdrawal from the Westbank as opposed to the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza.
To my mind, whether Israel just withdraws or negotiates terms of withdrawal or signs a peace agreement, as with Egypt, it makes little difference as the Arabs don’t and won’t abide by the agreements.
Thus, in my opinion, Israel’s goal is to end the “occupation”. She values the international legitimacy she will receive, perhaps with internationally recognized borders maybe, more than security. She is currently working on defense systems that will ostensibly protect her from the rockets which are sure to follow.
This trade off is what Israelis should be debating. Instead the Government of Israel and the US pretend it is otherwise.
On dialogue between Jews and Muslims
Isi Leibler
January 1, 2008
Dialogue with Muslims has become the flavor of the month, and many Jewish organizations now compete with one another to create Muslim-Jewish talk-fests. Whereas such initiatives are helpful and certainly preferable to exchanging diatribes, if the objective is primarily to ingratiate ourselves with Muslims and gain publicity, the exercise becomes counterproductive.The Jewish track record of dialogue with the Church illustrates that until Pope John XXIII's dramatic condemnation of anti-Semitism at the Second Vatican Council, our efforts had little impact beyond reinforcing relationships with marginal Christian philo-Semites.
Meaningful dialogue requires that both parties agree in advance to accord mutual respect and genuinely commit to exploring means of forging deeper understandings. It also presupposes a willingness to indulge in honest and open discussion rather than mouthing platitudes or employing glib rhetoric to cover up differences. Above all, it demands the involvement of responsible and sensitive Jewish representatives, knowledgeable about Judaism and its place in the world at large.
There are circumstances in which dialogue must be avoided. For example, if the Muslim group concerned refuses to condemn the anti-Semitic tirades emanating from Islamic quarters, or even indirectly condones global terrorism and suicide bombings, or promotes conspiracies such as implying that 9/11 was an Israeli plot. To share stages or collaborate with groups holding such views merely provides a platform for radicals to exploit dialogue as a vehicle to obtain respectability and cover up their extremism.
The problem we face with Islamic religious leaders is that while a number of their spokesmen, under pressure, do ritualistically condemn Islamic extremism, many continue to express sympathy with the radicals, or at best remain silent. The dominant Islamic voices being heard are apologists for violence, terrorism and intolerance. If there are moderate Muslims, they remain mainly in the closet or are sufficiently intimidated to avoid condemning the excesses of their jihadist kinsmen.
In this environment, it is contrary to our interests to continuously repeat the politically correct but utterly false mantra that Islam is a religion of peace. Whereas all three major monotheistic religions incorporate elements of militant piety and violence, Islam, with its unique jihadism, today represents the most violent doctrine.
This is not to deny that given more enlightened religious leaders it could become moderate. But the export of Wahhabism from Saudi Arabia has led to the creation of new Islamic schools and the domination of existing institutions by a religious ideology which sanctifies violence. It is in these sources that martyrs (shahids) and suicide bombers were incubated and became such a dominant element in contemporary Islam.
Likewise, we do ourselves a disservice if we support the false allegation that Islamophobia is rampant. While as Jews we abhor and oppose all forms of prejudice, we must recognize that under the present circumstances, it is a tribute to tolerance in Western countries that despite the violence and intimidation emanating from Muslims, overt aggression or discrimination against them has been extremely limited.
In fact, despite our abhorrence of bloodshed, we Jews encounter far more violence than do Muslims - reflected in the simple fact that, unlike synagogues, mosques rarely require armed guards and that in Europe, much of the violence directed against Jews emanates from Muslims.
We should therefore also strongly endorse the approach of those who refuse to be intimidated by Islamic bullying, as exemplified in the vicious campaign against Danish cartoons of the prophet Mohammad, or the obscene threats and violent attacks against any who question Islamic beliefs or behavior.
Some Jewish representatives also display an unfortunate penchant for demonstrating their liberal credentials by endorsing Muslim demands to outlaw security profiling. We would be well advised to remember that Jews represent the principal target for terrorists, and it would therefore surely be bizarre for Jews to undermine security procedures which may largely ultimately directly impact against them.
It is simply a denial of reality to dismiss the ethnic profiles of Arab Muslims when 95% of acts of global terrorism emanate from this group.
Rabbi Eric Yoffie, head of the Reform movement, exemplifies well-meaning Jewish leaders falling into this trap. He recently publicly condemned profiling in an address to a questionable Islamic organization, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), with whom he had recently launched a major interfaith dialogue. According to some American Jewish critics, ISNA had allegedly previously backed terrorist groups and was named as an unindicated co-conspirator in a major trial against a Wahhabi oriented group (The Holy Land Foundation) illegally raising funds for Hamas. In addition, the US Justice Department referred to the ISNA as an offshoot of the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood.
In similar vein, Rabbi Marc Schneier, sponsor of the Foundation for Ethnic Understanding, co-hosted a meeting of 12 imams and 12 rabbis at the Islamic Center in New York in conjunction with Imam Omar Abu Namous. In a previous joint meeting with Schneier's group, Namous called for the substitution of Israel with a binational state and demanded that the Israelis apologize for their "crimes" to the Palestinians. To avoid a repetition, Schneier and Namous agreed among themselves that Israel would be removed from the agenda.
This is a prime example of the damage incurred through interfaith dialogue with Muslims. If we bask in expressions of mutual love but fail to proclaim to our partners in dialogue that Israel is central to our Jewish identity, we make a mockery of dialogue and effectively capitulate to the extremists.
Of course, Muslims are entitled to criticize Israeli policies. But there must be understandings in advance that, as distinct from genuine criticism, efforts to delegitimize or demonize Israel make it impossible for us to share platforms with them. We must also insist that the condemnation of Muslim anti-Semitism be an agenda item in all such encounters.
None of this detracts from our obligation to raise our voices against those who would condemn an entire religion because of the criminal behavior of its individuals. Alas, it is galling that in the Muslim arena there are virtually no such condemnations when it comes to incitement against Israel, the Jews, or even America.
There are nevertheless genuine opportunities to conduct constructive dialogue with judiciously selected Muslim groups. For example, the recent visits of Indian Muslims and Indonesian imams to Israel under the auspices of the American Jewish Committee represent the kind of positive dialogue that should be commended and encouraged.
Bottom line: Dialogue with Muslims becomes counterproductive when we grovel and demean ourselves in order to curry favor. All that is achieved is a façade of goodwill which ultimately only strengthens extremists at the expense of the few genuine moderates within the Islamic community whom we are obliged to continue to seek out, for their sake and ours.
The writer is a former chairman of the Governing Board of the World Jewish Congress and a veteran international Jewish leader. ileibler@netvision.net.il
This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1198517257576&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
January 1, 2008
Dialogue with Muslims has become the flavor of the month, and many Jewish organizations now compete with one another to create Muslim-Jewish talk-fests. Whereas such initiatives are helpful and certainly preferable to exchanging diatribes, if the objective is primarily to ingratiate ourselves with Muslims and gain publicity, the exercise becomes counterproductive.The Jewish track record of dialogue with the Church illustrates that until Pope John XXIII's dramatic condemnation of anti-Semitism at the Second Vatican Council, our efforts had little impact beyond reinforcing relationships with marginal Christian philo-Semites.
Meaningful dialogue requires that both parties agree in advance to accord mutual respect and genuinely commit to exploring means of forging deeper understandings. It also presupposes a willingness to indulge in honest and open discussion rather than mouthing platitudes or employing glib rhetoric to cover up differences. Above all, it demands the involvement of responsible and sensitive Jewish representatives, knowledgeable about Judaism and its place in the world at large.
There are circumstances in which dialogue must be avoided. For example, if the Muslim group concerned refuses to condemn the anti-Semitic tirades emanating from Islamic quarters, or even indirectly condones global terrorism and suicide bombings, or promotes conspiracies such as implying that 9/11 was an Israeli plot. To share stages or collaborate with groups holding such views merely provides a platform for radicals to exploit dialogue as a vehicle to obtain respectability and cover up their extremism.
The problem we face with Islamic religious leaders is that while a number of their spokesmen, under pressure, do ritualistically condemn Islamic extremism, many continue to express sympathy with the radicals, or at best remain silent. The dominant Islamic voices being heard are apologists for violence, terrorism and intolerance. If there are moderate Muslims, they remain mainly in the closet or are sufficiently intimidated to avoid condemning the excesses of their jihadist kinsmen.
In this environment, it is contrary to our interests to continuously repeat the politically correct but utterly false mantra that Islam is a religion of peace. Whereas all three major monotheistic religions incorporate elements of militant piety and violence, Islam, with its unique jihadism, today represents the most violent doctrine.
This is not to deny that given more enlightened religious leaders it could become moderate. But the export of Wahhabism from Saudi Arabia has led to the creation of new Islamic schools and the domination of existing institutions by a religious ideology which sanctifies violence. It is in these sources that martyrs (shahids) and suicide bombers were incubated and became such a dominant element in contemporary Islam.
Likewise, we do ourselves a disservice if we support the false allegation that Islamophobia is rampant. While as Jews we abhor and oppose all forms of prejudice, we must recognize that under the present circumstances, it is a tribute to tolerance in Western countries that despite the violence and intimidation emanating from Muslims, overt aggression or discrimination against them has been extremely limited.
In fact, despite our abhorrence of bloodshed, we Jews encounter far more violence than do Muslims - reflected in the simple fact that, unlike synagogues, mosques rarely require armed guards and that in Europe, much of the violence directed against Jews emanates from Muslims.
We should therefore also strongly endorse the approach of those who refuse to be intimidated by Islamic bullying, as exemplified in the vicious campaign against Danish cartoons of the prophet Mohammad, or the obscene threats and violent attacks against any who question Islamic beliefs or behavior.
Some Jewish representatives also display an unfortunate penchant for demonstrating their liberal credentials by endorsing Muslim demands to outlaw security profiling. We would be well advised to remember that Jews represent the principal target for terrorists, and it would therefore surely be bizarre for Jews to undermine security procedures which may largely ultimately directly impact against them.
It is simply a denial of reality to dismiss the ethnic profiles of Arab Muslims when 95% of acts of global terrorism emanate from this group.
Rabbi Eric Yoffie, head of the Reform movement, exemplifies well-meaning Jewish leaders falling into this trap. He recently publicly condemned profiling in an address to a questionable Islamic organization, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), with whom he had recently launched a major interfaith dialogue. According to some American Jewish critics, ISNA had allegedly previously backed terrorist groups and was named as an unindicated co-conspirator in a major trial against a Wahhabi oriented group (The Holy Land Foundation) illegally raising funds for Hamas. In addition, the US Justice Department referred to the ISNA as an offshoot of the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood.
In similar vein, Rabbi Marc Schneier, sponsor of the Foundation for Ethnic Understanding, co-hosted a meeting of 12 imams and 12 rabbis at the Islamic Center in New York in conjunction with Imam Omar Abu Namous. In a previous joint meeting with Schneier's group, Namous called for the substitution of Israel with a binational state and demanded that the Israelis apologize for their "crimes" to the Palestinians. To avoid a repetition, Schneier and Namous agreed among themselves that Israel would be removed from the agenda.
This is a prime example of the damage incurred through interfaith dialogue with Muslims. If we bask in expressions of mutual love but fail to proclaim to our partners in dialogue that Israel is central to our Jewish identity, we make a mockery of dialogue and effectively capitulate to the extremists.
Of course, Muslims are entitled to criticize Israeli policies. But there must be understandings in advance that, as distinct from genuine criticism, efforts to delegitimize or demonize Israel make it impossible for us to share platforms with them. We must also insist that the condemnation of Muslim anti-Semitism be an agenda item in all such encounters.
None of this detracts from our obligation to raise our voices against those who would condemn an entire religion because of the criminal behavior of its individuals. Alas, it is galling that in the Muslim arena there are virtually no such condemnations when it comes to incitement against Israel, the Jews, or even America.
There are nevertheless genuine opportunities to conduct constructive dialogue with judiciously selected Muslim groups. For example, the recent visits of Indian Muslims and Indonesian imams to Israel under the auspices of the American Jewish Committee represent the kind of positive dialogue that should be commended and encouraged.
Bottom line: Dialogue with Muslims becomes counterproductive when we grovel and demean ourselves in order to curry favor. All that is achieved is a façade of goodwill which ultimately only strengthens extremists at the expense of the few genuine moderates within the Islamic community whom we are obliged to continue to seek out, for their sake and ours.
The writer is a former chairman of the Governing Board of the World Jewish Congress and a veteran international Jewish leader. ileibler@netvision.net.il
This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1198517257576&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Israeli Public School Bans Student-Initiated Recess Prayers
Maayana Miskin and Ezra HaLevi
The “Ohel Shem” public high school in Ramat Gan has decided to prohibit students from holding group prayers on school grounds during breaks. School officials and parents came to Jerusalem on Monday to discuss the issue with the Knesset’s Education Committee.School officials argued that the students would be allowed to leave school grounds and attend prayer services in a nearby synagogue if they wished to do so. Holding prayers on school grounds was a “provocation,” they said, with one official blaming the school prayers on “a group of extremist sources, who are trying to bring other students back to religion.” Other officials and parents also cited fears that outside sources were attempting to make students religious.
Religious MKs were outraged on Monday by the school’s decision that the students should pray elsewhere.
MK Yaakov Ben-Yizri (Shas) said that he himself became religious as a young man, and encourages others to become religious. He accused the officials of attempting to delegitimize Judaism, and said “Do you think prayer is some sort of fatal virus... that will damage the secular children in the school?” He rejected attempts to portray religious leaders as preying on the poor and weak, saying that secular Jews who decide to become religious are generally intelligent and well educated.
MK Shmuel Halpert (UTJ) expressed outrage, calling the ban on prayer “a classic case of anti-religious coercion.” If Jewish students had been forbidden to pray in any other country, he said, the entire Knesset would have been horrified
The “Ohel Shem” public high school in Ramat Gan has decided to prohibit students from holding group prayers on school grounds during breaks. School officials and parents came to Jerusalem on Monday to discuss the issue with the Knesset’s Education Committee.School officials argued that the students would be allowed to leave school grounds and attend prayer services in a nearby synagogue if they wished to do so. Holding prayers on school grounds was a “provocation,” they said, with one official blaming the school prayers on “a group of extremist sources, who are trying to bring other students back to religion.” Other officials and parents also cited fears that outside sources were attempting to make students religious.
Religious MKs were outraged on Monday by the school’s decision that the students should pray elsewhere.
MK Yaakov Ben-Yizri (Shas) said that he himself became religious as a young man, and encourages others to become religious. He accused the officials of attempting to delegitimize Judaism, and said “Do you think prayer is some sort of fatal virus... that will damage the secular children in the school?” He rejected attempts to portray religious leaders as preying on the poor and weak, saying that secular Jews who decide to become religious are generally intelligent and well educated.
MK Shmuel Halpert (UTJ) expressed outrage, calling the ban on prayer “a classic case of anti-religious coercion.” If Jewish students had been forbidden to pray in any other country, he said, the entire Knesset would have been horrified
Monday, December 31, 2007
Israel gets warned: Al-Qaida coming!
Aaron Klein
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
JERUSALEM – Israel in recent months received warnings from foreign intelligence agencies that al-Qaida operatives were seeking to infiltrate the Jewish state to set up cells to carry out large-scale attacks, WND has learned.
The warnings were followed up by the release this weekend of a new audiotape in which al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden made an unusually sharp threat of attacks against Israel. According to Israeli security officials, Israel several times received general warnings indicating al-Qaida was attempting to fly operatives into the Jewish state's international airport disguised as tourists carrying foreign passports. The latest warning was received a few months ago and indicated the passports may be from Britain, Australia and the United States.
The security officials said al-Qaida has come to the conclusion Palestinian terror groups operating in the Gaza Strip and West Bank have had great difficulty infiltrating Israel due to the country's security barrier and antiterror measures and that Palestinians who do successfully infiltrate are not capable of carrying out large-scale attacks inside the country.
The Israeli security officials said the latest warning, which was shared with Palestinian intelligence agencies, indicated al-Qaida has made a strategic decision to attempt to send foreign cells into the Jewish state instead of relying on Palestinian militants.
The warning also listed other countries aside from Israel that al-Qaida may attempt to infiltrate using the same methods, the officials said.
Groups ideologically aligned with al-Qaida are widely suspected to be operating in the Gaza Strip and there have been some reports of similar groups attempting to establish themselves in the West Bank.
But with strict border controls in place at airports and crossings, Israel is largely thought to be difficult for al-Qaida to infiltrate.
Israeli security officials did not indicate there were any thwarted al-Qaida attempts to infiltrate the country. A Palestinian security official familiar with the report also said he was not aware of any recent attempts.
Israel previously acknowledged it arrested suspected al-Qaida infiltrators. In August 2003, Israel's mission to the U.N. submitted a report stating the country had thwarted several attempts by al-Qaida operatives carrying foreign passports to enter Israel in order to gather intelligence and conduct attacks. The Jewish state also noted in the report it had captured Palestinians recruited by al-Qaida abroad to conduct attacks in Israel.
The latest al-Qaida warning was received here just a few months before bin Laden's videotape was released this weekend vowing to "expand jihad to Palestine."
"I would like to assure our people in Palestine that we will expand our jihad there," said bin Laden. "We intend to liberate Palestine, the whole of Palestine from the (Jordan) river to the sea," he continued, threatening "blood for blood, destruction for destruction."
While bin Laden and other Al-Qaida figures many times vowed to attack Israel, the latest comments were a more direct language than bin Laden usually uses.
"We will not recognize even one inch for Jews in the land of Palestine as other Muslim leaders have," bin Laden said.
The majority of the terror chieftain's message dealt with Iraq, including a warning to Iraq's Sunni Arabs against joining tribal councils fighting Al-Qaida or participating in any unity government.
Israeli officials said they were taking bin Laden's latest threat seriously. After yesterday's meeting here of the government's security cabinet, Tzachi Hanegbi, chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, told reporters, "The threat of al-Qaida is real. They've struck in Lebanon, Australia, Indonesia, Madrid, New York and London. They can easily target the Middle East and we need to be prepared for that."
Al-Qaida at Israel's border
While al-Qaida is not thought to have infiltrated Israel, the global jihad group is suspected of operating in Gaza and previously carried out numerous attacks near the Jewish state's borders.
Al-Qaida took responsibility for a series of hotel bombings in Amman, Jordan in November 2005 killing 60 and injuring over 115 others. While Jordan, which borders Israel, has had some successes fighting al-Qaida cells, security officials fear the terror group still maintains a significant infrastructure there capable of carrying out attacks.
Egypt has had difficulty eliminating al-Qaida cells, particularly those operating among Bedouin villages in the Sinai desert bordering the Gaza Strip.
Al-Qaida has been widely blamed for several Sinai attacks the past three years including the bomb blasts in April 2006 that killed 24 people and injured over 85 in the Sinai town of Dahab, and deadly bombings in the resort centers of Taba and Ras Shitan in October 2004 as well as in Sharm el-Sheik in July.
Last April, al-Qaida was blamed for two bombings near multinational peacekeeping force in the Sinai adjacent to Gaza. Almost simultaneously inside Gaza, the Popular Resistance Committees attempted to carry out a large-scale car bombing at the Karni Crossing, the main cargo passageway between the Gaza Strip and Israel. The attack was foiled at the last minute after Palestinian forces became suspicious and opened fire at an approaching vehicle. Some security officials told WND the thwarted Karni attack was planned in conjunction with al-Qaida elements in Gaza.
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
JERUSALEM – Israel in recent months received warnings from foreign intelligence agencies that al-Qaida operatives were seeking to infiltrate the Jewish state to set up cells to carry out large-scale attacks, WND has learned.
The warnings were followed up by the release this weekend of a new audiotape in which al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden made an unusually sharp threat of attacks against Israel. According to Israeli security officials, Israel several times received general warnings indicating al-Qaida was attempting to fly operatives into the Jewish state's international airport disguised as tourists carrying foreign passports. The latest warning was received a few months ago and indicated the passports may be from Britain, Australia and the United States.
The security officials said al-Qaida has come to the conclusion Palestinian terror groups operating in the Gaza Strip and West Bank have had great difficulty infiltrating Israel due to the country's security barrier and antiterror measures and that Palestinians who do successfully infiltrate are not capable of carrying out large-scale attacks inside the country.
The Israeli security officials said the latest warning, which was shared with Palestinian intelligence agencies, indicated al-Qaida has made a strategic decision to attempt to send foreign cells into the Jewish state instead of relying on Palestinian militants.
The warning also listed other countries aside from Israel that al-Qaida may attempt to infiltrate using the same methods, the officials said.
Groups ideologically aligned with al-Qaida are widely suspected to be operating in the Gaza Strip and there have been some reports of similar groups attempting to establish themselves in the West Bank.
But with strict border controls in place at airports and crossings, Israel is largely thought to be difficult for al-Qaida to infiltrate.
Israeli security officials did not indicate there were any thwarted al-Qaida attempts to infiltrate the country. A Palestinian security official familiar with the report also said he was not aware of any recent attempts.
Israel previously acknowledged it arrested suspected al-Qaida infiltrators. In August 2003, Israel's mission to the U.N. submitted a report stating the country had thwarted several attempts by al-Qaida operatives carrying foreign passports to enter Israel in order to gather intelligence and conduct attacks. The Jewish state also noted in the report it had captured Palestinians recruited by al-Qaida abroad to conduct attacks in Israel.
The latest al-Qaida warning was received here just a few months before bin Laden's videotape was released this weekend vowing to "expand jihad to Palestine."
"I would like to assure our people in Palestine that we will expand our jihad there," said bin Laden. "We intend to liberate Palestine, the whole of Palestine from the (Jordan) river to the sea," he continued, threatening "blood for blood, destruction for destruction."
While bin Laden and other Al-Qaida figures many times vowed to attack Israel, the latest comments were a more direct language than bin Laden usually uses.
"We will not recognize even one inch for Jews in the land of Palestine as other Muslim leaders have," bin Laden said.
The majority of the terror chieftain's message dealt with Iraq, including a warning to Iraq's Sunni Arabs against joining tribal councils fighting Al-Qaida or participating in any unity government.
Israeli officials said they were taking bin Laden's latest threat seriously. After yesterday's meeting here of the government's security cabinet, Tzachi Hanegbi, chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, told reporters, "The threat of al-Qaida is real. They've struck in Lebanon, Australia, Indonesia, Madrid, New York and London. They can easily target the Middle East and we need to be prepared for that."
Al-Qaida at Israel's border
While al-Qaida is not thought to have infiltrated Israel, the global jihad group is suspected of operating in Gaza and previously carried out numerous attacks near the Jewish state's borders.
Al-Qaida took responsibility for a series of hotel bombings in Amman, Jordan in November 2005 killing 60 and injuring over 115 others. While Jordan, which borders Israel, has had some successes fighting al-Qaida cells, security officials fear the terror group still maintains a significant infrastructure there capable of carrying out attacks.
Egypt has had difficulty eliminating al-Qaida cells, particularly those operating among Bedouin villages in the Sinai desert bordering the Gaza Strip.
Al-Qaida has been widely blamed for several Sinai attacks the past three years including the bomb blasts in April 2006 that killed 24 people and injured over 85 in the Sinai town of Dahab, and deadly bombings in the resort centers of Taba and Ras Shitan in October 2004 as well as in Sharm el-Sheik in July.
Last April, al-Qaida was blamed for two bombings near multinational peacekeeping force in the Sinai adjacent to Gaza. Almost simultaneously inside Gaza, the Popular Resistance Committees attempted to carry out a large-scale car bombing at the Karni Crossing, the main cargo passageway between the Gaza Strip and Israel. The attack was foiled at the last minute after Palestinian forces became suspicious and opened fire at an approaching vehicle. Some security officials told WND the thwarted Karni attack was planned in conjunction with al-Qaida elements in Gaza.
B'Tselem Report Bashes Israel, Notes Jewish Growth in Yesha
Hillel Fendel
B'Tselem, the extreme-left Israeli civil rights organization, has published its annual report condemning Israel for various offenses against the suspected Arab terrorists of Judea and Samaria. Though it concentrates on Israel's apparent misdeeds, it also notes that the growth of the Jewish population in Judea and Samaria was three times higher than in the rest of Israel. The report's opening blurb sums up by noting that though the number of Israelis and Arabs killed in "clashes in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip" has decreased, "there has been a deterioration in many other measures of the human rights situation in the Occupied Territories."
The description of the perpetual Arab terrorism against Israelis, and the Israelis' counter-terror military responses, as mere "clashes" sums up, for many Israelis, the report's anti-Israeli bias.
In addition, the "List of Topics" covered by the report includes administrative punishment, restrictions on movement, separation barrier, and 13 others describing Israeli misdeeds - while only one topic deals with "Palestinian violations."
Among the report's findings:
* In 2007, the number of PA Arabs held in administrative detention without trial increased by 13%.
* On average, 66 staffed checkpoints and 459 physical roadblocks controlled travel inside Judea and Samaria.
* The number of houses demolished in eastern Jerusalem rose by 38%, from 50 to 69. The report does not note that thousands of Arab homes in the eastern Jerusalem vicinity have been estimated to been built illegally.
* The instances of Arabs killing Arabs have increased to their highest level in many years.
B'Tselem further notes that Israel uses "security justifications for virtually every Israeli action in the Occupied Territories . There is no doubt that Israel faces serious security threats, and is entitled and even obligated to do its utmost to protect its population. However," B'Teslem continues blandly, "far too often, Israel fails to appropriately balance its security needs with equally important values, including protecting the rights of Palestinians under its control."
"In addition," the report notes, "Israeli authorities often exploit security threats in order to advance prohibited political interests, such as perpetuating settlements and effectively annexing them to Israel." In actuality, however, the Israeli government has decreed a freeze on new construction throughout Judea and Samaria.
Despite this, and despite the looming threat over the future of Jewish towns in these areas, demand for housing there continues to be strong - and this is reflected in rising real estate prices. The daily Yediot Acharonot reports that a five-room apartment in Ariel is now going for $145,000, up $20,000 from last year, while in Maaleh Adumim a similar unit has risen from $215,000 to $240,000. Similar increases have been registered in many other Yesha towns.
B'Tselem, the extreme-left Israeli civil rights organization, has published its annual report condemning Israel for various offenses against the suspected Arab terrorists of Judea and Samaria. Though it concentrates on Israel's apparent misdeeds, it also notes that the growth of the Jewish population in Judea and Samaria was three times higher than in the rest of Israel. The report's opening blurb sums up by noting that though the number of Israelis and Arabs killed in "clashes in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip" has decreased, "there has been a deterioration in many other measures of the human rights situation in the Occupied Territories."
The description of the perpetual Arab terrorism against Israelis, and the Israelis' counter-terror military responses, as mere "clashes" sums up, for many Israelis, the report's anti-Israeli bias.
In addition, the "List of Topics" covered by the report includes administrative punishment, restrictions on movement, separation barrier, and 13 others describing Israeli misdeeds - while only one topic deals with "Palestinian violations."
Among the report's findings:
* In 2007, the number of PA Arabs held in administrative detention without trial increased by 13%.
* On average, 66 staffed checkpoints and 459 physical roadblocks controlled travel inside Judea and Samaria.
* The number of houses demolished in eastern Jerusalem rose by 38%, from 50 to 69. The report does not note that thousands of Arab homes in the eastern Jerusalem vicinity have been estimated to been built illegally.
* The instances of Arabs killing Arabs have increased to their highest level in many years.
B'Tselem further notes that Israel uses "security justifications for virtually every Israeli action in the Occupied Territories . There is no doubt that Israel faces serious security threats, and is entitled and even obligated to do its utmost to protect its population. However," B'Teslem continues blandly, "far too often, Israel fails to appropriately balance its security needs with equally important values, including protecting the rights of Palestinians under its control."
"In addition," the report notes, "Israeli authorities often exploit security threats in order to advance prohibited political interests, such as perpetuating settlements and effectively annexing them to Israel." In actuality, however, the Israeli government has decreed a freeze on new construction throughout Judea and Samaria.
Despite this, and despite the looming threat over the future of Jewish towns in these areas, demand for housing there continues to be strong - and this is reflected in rising real estate prices. The daily Yediot Acharonot reports that a five-room apartment in Ariel is now going for $145,000, up $20,000 from last year, while in Maaleh Adumim a similar unit has risen from $215,000 to $240,000. Similar increases have been registered in many other Yesha towns.
How the Ruling Party Rules in Democratic Gaza
Baruch Gordon
A report released Sunday by the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) documents multiple cases in which the ruling Hamas party in Gaza is using its police to silence the Fatah opposition. In January 2006, Hamas won a landslide victory in the Palestinian parliamentary elections, and officially became the government for the Arabs of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. In a mini civil war in June 2007, Hamas cemented its rule over Gaza violently. Hamas took over rival Fatah party locations and killed several Fatah leaders. Judea and Samaria remained under the rule of the Fatah party, headed by Mahmoud Abbas.
PCHR strongly condemned Hamas's attacks against offices and institutions of the Fatah movement and demanded that the ruling party respect Fatah's right to freedom of speech.
PCHR reports that on Saturday night, the Hamas police raided an office of the Fatah movement in the al-Remal neighborhood on the west side of Gaza City. They confiscated a computer, a photocopier, a fax machine, a scanner, documents, photos, and flags of Palestine and the Fatah movement. They also arrested six people in the office and only released them after the six signed pledges not to participate in activities related to the anniversary of the Fatah movement. Failure to comply with the signed pledge would carry a $4,000 fine.
Later on Saturday night, the Hamas police, accompanied by masked gunmen in civilian clothes, raided Fatah offices in the al-Daraj neighborhood on the east side of Gaza City. There, too, they confiscated furniture and equipment and destroyed photos and flags of Fatah.
An hour later, the Hamas police, again accompanied by masked militants dressed as civilians, simultaneously raided the Fatah headquarters near the Ansar security compound and the office of the Executive Committee of Palestine Liberation Organization, both in Gaza City. In both places, the police broke down the door and confiscated equipment.
On Friday evening, the Hamas police raided the campus of al-Azhar University in Gaza City and arrested 35 students who were preparing for the celebration of the anniversary of the Fatah movement. The detainees were taken to the al-Abbas policestation and were forced to sign documents pledging not to participate in any activity related to the anniversary. Punishment for participation in the Fatah celebration was set at a $4,000 fine and a 15-day jail term.
A report released Sunday by the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) documents multiple cases in which the ruling Hamas party in Gaza is using its police to silence the Fatah opposition. In January 2006, Hamas won a landslide victory in the Palestinian parliamentary elections, and officially became the government for the Arabs of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. In a mini civil war in June 2007, Hamas cemented its rule over Gaza violently. Hamas took over rival Fatah party locations and killed several Fatah leaders. Judea and Samaria remained under the rule of the Fatah party, headed by Mahmoud Abbas.
PCHR strongly condemned Hamas's attacks against offices and institutions of the Fatah movement and demanded that the ruling party respect Fatah's right to freedom of speech.
PCHR reports that on Saturday night, the Hamas police raided an office of the Fatah movement in the al-Remal neighborhood on the west side of Gaza City. They confiscated a computer, a photocopier, a fax machine, a scanner, documents, photos, and flags of Palestine and the Fatah movement. They also arrested six people in the office and only released them after the six signed pledges not to participate in activities related to the anniversary of the Fatah movement. Failure to comply with the signed pledge would carry a $4,000 fine.
Later on Saturday night, the Hamas police, accompanied by masked gunmen in civilian clothes, raided Fatah offices in the al-Daraj neighborhood on the east side of Gaza City. There, too, they confiscated furniture and equipment and destroyed photos and flags of Fatah.
An hour later, the Hamas police, again accompanied by masked militants dressed as civilians, simultaneously raided the Fatah headquarters near the Ansar security compound and the office of the Executive Committee of Palestine Liberation Organization, both in Gaza City. In both places, the police broke down the door and confiscated equipment.
On Friday evening, the Hamas police raided the campus of al-Azhar University in Gaza City and arrested 35 students who were preparing for the celebration of the anniversary of the Fatah movement. The detainees were taken to the al-Abbas policestation and were forced to sign documents pledging not to participate in any activity related to the anniversary. Punishment for participation in the Fatah celebration was set at a $4,000 fine and a 15-day jail term.
THE PROFESSION OF DEATH
Barry Rubin
Much will be said about Benazir Bhutto’s assassination; little will be understood about what it truly means. I’m not speaking here about Pakistan, of course, as important as is that country. But rather the lesson—as if we need any more—for that broad Middle East with Pakistan at one end and the Atlantic Ocean coast on the other. This is a true story. Back in 1946, an American diplomat asked an Iranian editor why his newspaper angrily attacked the United States but never the Soviet Union. The Iranian said that it was obvious. “The Russians,” he said, “they kill people!” Murder is a very effective way to influence people.
A dozen years earlier, in 1933, an Iraqi official, Sami Shawkat, gave a talk which became one of the major texts of Arab nationalism. “There is something more important than money and learning for preserving the honor of a nation and for keeping humiliation at bay,” he stated. “That is strength....Strength, as I use the word here, means to excel in the Profession of Death.”
What, you might ask, was Shawkat’s own profession? He was director-general of Iraq’s ministry of education. This was how young people were to be taught and directed; this is where Saddam Hussein came from. Seventy-five years later the subsequent history of Iraq and the rest of the Arab world show just how well Shawkat did his job.
September 11 in the United States; the Bali bombing for Australia; the tube bombing for Britain; the commuter train bombing for Spain, these were all merely byproducts of this pathology. The pathology in question is not Western policy toward the Middle East but rather Middle Eastern policy toward the Middle East.
Ever since I read Shawkat’s words as a student, the phrase, “Profession of Death,” which gave his article its title, struck me as a pun. On one hand, the word “profession” means “career.”
To be a killer—note well that Shawkat was not talking specifically about soldiers, those who fight, but rather those who murder—was the highest calling of all. It was more important than being a teacher, who forms character; more important than a businessperson, who enriches his country; more important than a doctor who preserves the life of fellow citizens. Destruction was a higher calling than construction. And for sure in the Arabic-speaking world what has been reaped is what has been sowed.
But also the word “profession” here reminds me of the verb “to profess” as in the word “professor,” that is “to preach” and to teach. What is of greatest value is for an educator to preach and glorify death. What kind of ideology, what kind of society, what kind of values, does such a priority produce? Look and see.
Like children playing with dynamite, Western intellectuals, journalists, and diplomats fantasize that they are achieving results in the Middle East with their words, promises, apologies, money, and concessions. Yet how can such innocents cope despite—or perhaps because of--all their good intentions with polities and societies whose basic ruling ethos is that of the serial killer?
And what can be achieved when those most forward-looking and most creative, those who want to break with the ideas and methods creating a disastrous mess, the stagnant system which characterizes so much of the Middle East, are systematically murdered? Read the roll: King Abdallah of Jordan, President Anwar Sadat of Egypt, former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri of Lebanon, the bold author Farouq Fawda in Egypt, Iraqi Sunnis who dare seek compromise, Palestinian moderates, Algerian modernists, and thousands of women who seek a small degree of freedom.
The radicals are right: dying is a disincentive. And for every one they kill how many thousands give in; and for every one they threaten how many hundreds give in? Even in the West many individuals who pride themselves as knights of knowledge and paladins of free speech quickly crumble at the prospect of being culled for their cartoons.
Seventy-five years after Shawkat, Hamas television teaches Palestinian children in the Gaza Strip that their highest aspiration should be to become a suicide bomber, with success measured by how many Jews are killed. And, by the way, the Palestinian Authority’s television in the West Bank sends a similar message, albeit slightly less frequently.
Will billions of dollars in aid to the Palestinian Authority (PA) change anything when the men with the guns grab what they want? Are PA chief Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, respectively a timid bureaucrat and a well-meaning economist, going to take a bullet for lifting one finger to get a compromise peace with Israel?
How are you going to get a government of national conciliation in Iraq when the insurgents have shown they can gun down any Sunni politician or cleric who steps out of line?
The current supporters of the Lebanese government are the bravest politicians in the Arabic-speaking world, men willing to defy death rather than surrender to the radical Islamists of Hizballah or the imperialism of Syria. But how can they stand firm when democratic governments rush to engage with the Syrian government that murder them, while Western media proclaim the moderation of a Damascus ruler who systematically kills those who oppose him?
Can anyone really expect a stable society capable of progress in Pakistan when a large majority of the population expresses admiration for Usama bin Ladin? And what about the Saudi system where, as one local writer put it, the big Usama put into practice what the little Usama learned in a Saudi school?
Don’t you get it? The radical forces in the region are not expecting to retain or gain power by negotiating, compromising, or being better understood. They believe they are going to shoot their way into power or, just as good, accept the surrender of those they have intimidated.
That is why so much of the Western analysis and strategies for dealing with the region are a bad joke. Usama bin Ladin understands that, as he once said, people are going to back the strongest horse in the race. According to all too many people in the Western elites, the way to win is to be the nicest horse.
But doesn’t this assessment sound terribly depressing and hopeless? Well, yes and no.
Radical Islamists like to proclaim that they will triumph because they love death while their enemies—that is, soon-to-be-victims—love life.
Be careful what you wish for, though, because you probably will get it. For those who love death the reward is…death.
For those who love life, the outcomes include decent educational systems, living standards, individual rights, and strong economic systems. I can't help but thinking that Western Civilization has been built on a different model, even when people completely forget about it and take it for granted, based on ideas like this:
"I have put before you life and death, blessing and curse. Choose life...." (Deuteronomy 31:19)
All these things, and others that go along with them, are what really produce strength. And isn’t it interesting that, contrary to Shawkat, the nations that put the priority on these values, ideas, and constructive efforts enjoy far more honor and suffer far less humiliation than happens with his model. This is not that they have no faults but they also contain the mechanisms that are usually sufficient to correct these faults.
In contrast, the profession of death has wrecked most Middle Eastern societies. But it has never succeeded in defeating a free society. It is not an effective tactic for destroying others but only for devastating one’s own people.
Who killed Benazir Bhutto? The Sami Shawkat philosophy: alike in its Arab nationalist, Islamist, and Pakistani authoritarian versions which dominate Middle East politics.
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://www.gloriacenter.org and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://meria.idc.ac.il. His latest books are The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan) and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley).
Much will be said about Benazir Bhutto’s assassination; little will be understood about what it truly means. I’m not speaking here about Pakistan, of course, as important as is that country. But rather the lesson—as if we need any more—for that broad Middle East with Pakistan at one end and the Atlantic Ocean coast on the other. This is a true story. Back in 1946, an American diplomat asked an Iranian editor why his newspaper angrily attacked the United States but never the Soviet Union. The Iranian said that it was obvious. “The Russians,” he said, “they kill people!” Murder is a very effective way to influence people.
A dozen years earlier, in 1933, an Iraqi official, Sami Shawkat, gave a talk which became one of the major texts of Arab nationalism. “There is something more important than money and learning for preserving the honor of a nation and for keeping humiliation at bay,” he stated. “That is strength....Strength, as I use the word here, means to excel in the Profession of Death.”
What, you might ask, was Shawkat’s own profession? He was director-general of Iraq’s ministry of education. This was how young people were to be taught and directed; this is where Saddam Hussein came from. Seventy-five years later the subsequent history of Iraq and the rest of the Arab world show just how well Shawkat did his job.
September 11 in the United States; the Bali bombing for Australia; the tube bombing for Britain; the commuter train bombing for Spain, these were all merely byproducts of this pathology. The pathology in question is not Western policy toward the Middle East but rather Middle Eastern policy toward the Middle East.
Ever since I read Shawkat’s words as a student, the phrase, “Profession of Death,” which gave his article its title, struck me as a pun. On one hand, the word “profession” means “career.”
To be a killer—note well that Shawkat was not talking specifically about soldiers, those who fight, but rather those who murder—was the highest calling of all. It was more important than being a teacher, who forms character; more important than a businessperson, who enriches his country; more important than a doctor who preserves the life of fellow citizens. Destruction was a higher calling than construction. And for sure in the Arabic-speaking world what has been reaped is what has been sowed.
But also the word “profession” here reminds me of the verb “to profess” as in the word “professor,” that is “to preach” and to teach. What is of greatest value is for an educator to preach and glorify death. What kind of ideology, what kind of society, what kind of values, does such a priority produce? Look and see.
Like children playing with dynamite, Western intellectuals, journalists, and diplomats fantasize that they are achieving results in the Middle East with their words, promises, apologies, money, and concessions. Yet how can such innocents cope despite—or perhaps because of--all their good intentions with polities and societies whose basic ruling ethos is that of the serial killer?
And what can be achieved when those most forward-looking and most creative, those who want to break with the ideas and methods creating a disastrous mess, the stagnant system which characterizes so much of the Middle East, are systematically murdered? Read the roll: King Abdallah of Jordan, President Anwar Sadat of Egypt, former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri of Lebanon, the bold author Farouq Fawda in Egypt, Iraqi Sunnis who dare seek compromise, Palestinian moderates, Algerian modernists, and thousands of women who seek a small degree of freedom.
The radicals are right: dying is a disincentive. And for every one they kill how many thousands give in; and for every one they threaten how many hundreds give in? Even in the West many individuals who pride themselves as knights of knowledge and paladins of free speech quickly crumble at the prospect of being culled for their cartoons.
Seventy-five years after Shawkat, Hamas television teaches Palestinian children in the Gaza Strip that their highest aspiration should be to become a suicide bomber, with success measured by how many Jews are killed. And, by the way, the Palestinian Authority’s television in the West Bank sends a similar message, albeit slightly less frequently.
Will billions of dollars in aid to the Palestinian Authority (PA) change anything when the men with the guns grab what they want? Are PA chief Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, respectively a timid bureaucrat and a well-meaning economist, going to take a bullet for lifting one finger to get a compromise peace with Israel?
How are you going to get a government of national conciliation in Iraq when the insurgents have shown they can gun down any Sunni politician or cleric who steps out of line?
The current supporters of the Lebanese government are the bravest politicians in the Arabic-speaking world, men willing to defy death rather than surrender to the radical Islamists of Hizballah or the imperialism of Syria. But how can they stand firm when democratic governments rush to engage with the Syrian government that murder them, while Western media proclaim the moderation of a Damascus ruler who systematically kills those who oppose him?
Can anyone really expect a stable society capable of progress in Pakistan when a large majority of the population expresses admiration for Usama bin Ladin? And what about the Saudi system where, as one local writer put it, the big Usama put into practice what the little Usama learned in a Saudi school?
Don’t you get it? The radical forces in the region are not expecting to retain or gain power by negotiating, compromising, or being better understood. They believe they are going to shoot their way into power or, just as good, accept the surrender of those they have intimidated.
That is why so much of the Western analysis and strategies for dealing with the region are a bad joke. Usama bin Ladin understands that, as he once said, people are going to back the strongest horse in the race. According to all too many people in the Western elites, the way to win is to be the nicest horse.
But doesn’t this assessment sound terribly depressing and hopeless? Well, yes and no.
Radical Islamists like to proclaim that they will triumph because they love death while their enemies—that is, soon-to-be-victims—love life.
Be careful what you wish for, though, because you probably will get it. For those who love death the reward is…death.
For those who love life, the outcomes include decent educational systems, living standards, individual rights, and strong economic systems. I can't help but thinking that Western Civilization has been built on a different model, even when people completely forget about it and take it for granted, based on ideas like this:
"I have put before you life and death, blessing and curse. Choose life...." (Deuteronomy 31:19)
All these things, and others that go along with them, are what really produce strength. And isn’t it interesting that, contrary to Shawkat, the nations that put the priority on these values, ideas, and constructive efforts enjoy far more honor and suffer far less humiliation than happens with his model. This is not that they have no faults but they also contain the mechanisms that are usually sufficient to correct these faults.
In contrast, the profession of death has wrecked most Middle Eastern societies. But it has never succeeded in defeating a free society. It is not an effective tactic for destroying others but only for devastating one’s own people.
Who killed Benazir Bhutto? The Sami Shawkat philosophy: alike in its Arab nationalist, Islamist, and Pakistani authoritarian versions which dominate Middle East politics.
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://www.gloriacenter.org and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://meria.idc.ac.il. His latest books are The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan) and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley).
My trip to the heart of Jewness
Tim Blair
AN odd shift has taken place over the past 60 or so years. Where once the Jews were blamed by the far Right for controlling the world's finances, dividing societies and generally setting out to dominate the globe, now they are blamed for the same things by the far Left.
. You can see evidence of this at any Left-dominated protest march, anywhere on earth - banners and signs condemning Israel, Jews and the power they wield over Washington, Canberra and London. Admittedly, these protests are a step up from Hitler's level, which held that Jews were at once racially inferior yet somehow wily enough to undermine the entire German economy.
Also, modern protesters call them "Zionists". Last year, during the Israel-Lebanon conflict, some on the crazy Left actually took to waving Hezbollah flags - showing support for people who provoked a war by kidnapping Israeli soldiers from within Israeli territory.
Luckily, having just spent several days in Israel, I'm now in a position to correctly assess the massive influence of this sinister nation. Following is an account of my visit to the very heart of Jewness:
MONDAY
At Bangkok airport in Singapore, preparing to catch a connecting flight to Jerusalem, I am called aside - along with just about every other non-resident passenger - for special attention from agents of the great Zionist conspiracy. Questions are asked, passports closely examined, luggage inspected.
It could be airline El Al simply wishes to maintain its enviable security record flying into one of the world's more troubled regions. Or it could be my first encounter with the sprawling, globe-encircling oppressor-beast that is today's Israel.
Soon I find myself in a room far, far beneath the airport's surface (well, one floor) being subject to advanced metal-detection. Certain items of clothing are removed, possibly for study and duplication by notorious Jewish fashion barons.
In the confusion of gathering various possessions my belt is lost. I blame Mossad. The Jews may not control the world, but for now they control the height of my trousers.
TUESDAY
Lunch with senior Israeli official. Tells of being born on a train as his parents fled the Soviet Union (reminder to self: check records to find any other cases of people claiming to have run away from full healthcare and free education). Interrupted by appearance outside restaurant of hot Israeli army chicks with guns. Close inspection - very close - reveals each and every one is wearing a belt. Coincidence?
Guided by Israeli functionary Roley to inspect ancient churches and synagogues from hill high above Jerusalem. Her lecture - entertaining and informative, who knew this place had so much history? - is accompanied by spontaneous visual assistance from one of the city's many tourist exploiters, who holds up maps and photographs to illustrate Roley's historical analysis.
Wanting to protect my remaining garments, I offer to buy some of the fellow's wares. "What are you doing?" he says, alarmed. "Don't open your wallet like that! Open it towards you. There are thieves around."
(Note to self: perhaps this chap has contacts within the Israeli belt-rebirthing racket. Keep him close.)
Later visit the Wailing Wall, now known as the Western Wall presumably due to the international wailing ban. Following local custom I write an impassioned personal prayer on a small piece of paper and jam it in one of the wall's crevices. Now to wait for proof of Zionist magic: if Collingwood wins the 2009 AFL premiership, we are dealing with a very powerful force indeed.
Local shops sell "Guns'n'Moses" T-shirts. No belts.
WEDNESDAY
Meet the Gush Etzion region mayor Shaul Goldstein. Clever, engaging and belted, Mr Goldstein voices opposition to the so-called "security fence" keeping Hamas suicide bombers from innocently murdering Israeli citizens (down from 450 in 2004 to 33 in 2005). Turns out his main complaint is the fence makes it harder to pursue and capture these alleged militants and money spent on the fence could have been better used on other means of stopping the, er, Palestinian population explosion.
Mayor declares himself in favour of many small "local obstacles" rather than one continuous giant wall - boutique walls, they'd be. Mayor has background in engineering and construction. Follow the money!
Distracted from further pursuit of this subject by a section of Gush Etzion architecture that resembles exactly the buildings occupied by the Teletubbies.
Visit the Knesset. Note that security guards protect their own belts by hanging firearms off them. Good thinking. Observe attractive young female parliamentarian wave to little girl in viewing deck, was it code? An attempt to question the girl is waved away by her inexplicably hostile mother. Realise pants have fallen down.
THURSDAY
Wake in unfamiliar surrounds far north of Jerusalem. Preliminary research reveals location to be an alleged "kibbutz". Further research reveals many empty Carlsberg and Heineken bottles. Concluding research reveals kibbutz stopover was included on itinerary planned months ago. Fellow journalists on tour report similar disorientation. Vow to never again research the products of Carlsberg and Heineken.
In three days of travel, have only seen three cars not entirely utilitarian in function - an old Triumph Spitfire, a sporty Audi coupe and a tiny dune buggy. About to form compelling thesis on the joyless, purpose-only nature of Israeli society when informed that locals pay 100 per cent tax on imported vehicles. There is no local motor industry. (Note to self: Israeli market wide-open for introduction of Hebrew-friendly models. Email instructions to copyright the name "Holden Menorah".)
Accompanied on drive through northern zone by Israeli Defence Force spokesman Eli Rubinstein. Oy, what a belt that man has! Such a fine, fine belt! Caution self against adopting local speech patterns.
Long dissertation on military matters diverted by Rubinstein comment: "Israel is not only about national security. It is also a birdwatcher's paradise." Thereafter follows 15-minute description of avian migratory patterns. Was about to put this down as ruse to distract us from the day's 17 rocket attacks - why is nobody talking about this? - when informed the rocket attacks were actually made on Israel by Hezbollah forces inside Lebanon.
Million-course Lebanese lunch at town of Kish, followed by similar force-feeding at elaborate Decks restaurant in . . . hey, these pants are kind of tight. I might have to loosen my . . . oh.
AN odd shift has taken place over the past 60 or so years. Where once the Jews were blamed by the far Right for controlling the world's finances, dividing societies and generally setting out to dominate the globe, now they are blamed for the same things by the far Left.
. You can see evidence of this at any Left-dominated protest march, anywhere on earth - banners and signs condemning Israel, Jews and the power they wield over Washington, Canberra and London. Admittedly, these protests are a step up from Hitler's level, which held that Jews were at once racially inferior yet somehow wily enough to undermine the entire German economy.
Also, modern protesters call them "Zionists". Last year, during the Israel-Lebanon conflict, some on the crazy Left actually took to waving Hezbollah flags - showing support for people who provoked a war by kidnapping Israeli soldiers from within Israeli territory.
Luckily, having just spent several days in Israel, I'm now in a position to correctly assess the massive influence of this sinister nation. Following is an account of my visit to the very heart of Jewness:
MONDAY
At Bangkok airport in Singapore, preparing to catch a connecting flight to Jerusalem, I am called aside - along with just about every other non-resident passenger - for special attention from agents of the great Zionist conspiracy. Questions are asked, passports closely examined, luggage inspected.
It could be airline El Al simply wishes to maintain its enviable security record flying into one of the world's more troubled regions. Or it could be my first encounter with the sprawling, globe-encircling oppressor-beast that is today's Israel.
Soon I find myself in a room far, far beneath the airport's surface (well, one floor) being subject to advanced metal-detection. Certain items of clothing are removed, possibly for study and duplication by notorious Jewish fashion barons.
In the confusion of gathering various possessions my belt is lost. I blame Mossad. The Jews may not control the world, but for now they control the height of my trousers.
TUESDAY
Lunch with senior Israeli official. Tells of being born on a train as his parents fled the Soviet Union (reminder to self: check records to find any other cases of people claiming to have run away from full healthcare and free education). Interrupted by appearance outside restaurant of hot Israeli army chicks with guns. Close inspection - very close - reveals each and every one is wearing a belt. Coincidence?
Guided by Israeli functionary Roley to inspect ancient churches and synagogues from hill high above Jerusalem. Her lecture - entertaining and informative, who knew this place had so much history? - is accompanied by spontaneous visual assistance from one of the city's many tourist exploiters, who holds up maps and photographs to illustrate Roley's historical analysis.
Wanting to protect my remaining garments, I offer to buy some of the fellow's wares. "What are you doing?" he says, alarmed. "Don't open your wallet like that! Open it towards you. There are thieves around."
(Note to self: perhaps this chap has contacts within the Israeli belt-rebirthing racket. Keep him close.)
Later visit the Wailing Wall, now known as the Western Wall presumably due to the international wailing ban. Following local custom I write an impassioned personal prayer on a small piece of paper and jam it in one of the wall's crevices. Now to wait for proof of Zionist magic: if Collingwood wins the 2009 AFL premiership, we are dealing with a very powerful force indeed.
Local shops sell "Guns'n'Moses" T-shirts. No belts.
WEDNESDAY
Meet the Gush Etzion region mayor Shaul Goldstein. Clever, engaging and belted, Mr Goldstein voices opposition to the so-called "security fence" keeping Hamas suicide bombers from innocently murdering Israeli citizens (down from 450 in 2004 to 33 in 2005). Turns out his main complaint is the fence makes it harder to pursue and capture these alleged militants and money spent on the fence could have been better used on other means of stopping the, er, Palestinian population explosion.
Mayor declares himself in favour of many small "local obstacles" rather than one continuous giant wall - boutique walls, they'd be. Mayor has background in engineering and construction. Follow the money!
Distracted from further pursuit of this subject by a section of Gush Etzion architecture that resembles exactly the buildings occupied by the Teletubbies.
Visit the Knesset. Note that security guards protect their own belts by hanging firearms off them. Good thinking. Observe attractive young female parliamentarian wave to little girl in viewing deck, was it code? An attempt to question the girl is waved away by her inexplicably hostile mother. Realise pants have fallen down.
THURSDAY
Wake in unfamiliar surrounds far north of Jerusalem. Preliminary research reveals location to be an alleged "kibbutz". Further research reveals many empty Carlsberg and Heineken bottles. Concluding research reveals kibbutz stopover was included on itinerary planned months ago. Fellow journalists on tour report similar disorientation. Vow to never again research the products of Carlsberg and Heineken.
In three days of travel, have only seen three cars not entirely utilitarian in function - an old Triumph Spitfire, a sporty Audi coupe and a tiny dune buggy. About to form compelling thesis on the joyless, purpose-only nature of Israeli society when informed that locals pay 100 per cent tax on imported vehicles. There is no local motor industry. (Note to self: Israeli market wide-open for introduction of Hebrew-friendly models. Email instructions to copyright the name "Holden Menorah".)
Accompanied on drive through northern zone by Israeli Defence Force spokesman Eli Rubinstein. Oy, what a belt that man has! Such a fine, fine belt! Caution self against adopting local speech patterns.
Long dissertation on military matters diverted by Rubinstein comment: "Israel is not only about national security. It is also a birdwatcher's paradise." Thereafter follows 15-minute description of avian migratory patterns. Was about to put this down as ruse to distract us from the day's 17 rocket attacks - why is nobody talking about this? - when informed the rocket attacks were actually made on Israel by Hezbollah forces inside Lebanon.
Million-course Lebanese lunch at town of Kish, followed by similar force-feeding at elaborate Decks restaurant in . . . hey, these pants are kind of tight. I might have to loosen my . . . oh.
Maimonides and the “Meshugga” Prophet
Andrew Bostom
December 13th marked the 804th anniversary of the death of Maimonides (d. 1203, in Cairo), renowned Talmudist, philosopher, astronomer, and physician. The biography of this “second Moses,” is often cited by those who would extol the purported Muslim ecumenism of the high Middle Ages—particularly in “Andalusia,” or Muslim Spain, invariably accompanied by a denunciation of the fanatical intolerance of Christian Western Europe, during the same era.
A particularly egregious example of this genre of loaded comparisons was made by Amartya Sen, the Nobel laureate economist, in his recent book Identity and Violence. Sen has the temerity to proclaim, “…the Jewish Philosopher Maimonides was forced to emigrate from an intolerant Europe in the twelfth century, he found a tolerant refuge in the Arab world.”
Sen’s ahistorical drivel aside, Maimonides (b. 1135, in Cordova) was but thirteen years old (in 1148) when Muslim Cordova fell into the hands of the particularly fanatical Berber Muslim Almohads, who invaded the Iberian peninsula from North Africa. Maimonides and all the dhimmi Jews in Cordova were compelled to choose between Islam and exile. Choosing the latter course, Maimonides and his family for twelve years subsequently led a nomadic life, wandering across Spain. By 1160 they crossed the Mediterranean, and settled at Fez, Morocco (also under Almohad control) where, unknown to the authorities, they hoped to pass as Muslims, while living as crypto-Jews. Maimonides’ dual life, however, became increasingly dangerous as his reputation was steadily growing, and the authorities began to inquire into the religious disposition of this highly gifted young man. He was even charged by an informer with the crime of having relapsed (apostasized) from Islam, and, but for the intercession of the poet and theologian Abu al-‘Arab al Mu’ishah, a Muslim friend, he would have suffered the fate of his colleague Judah ibn Shoshan, who had shortly before been executed on a similar charge. Given these precarious circumstances, Maimonides’ family left Fez, embarking in 1165 to Acre, then to Jerusalem, and on to Fostat (Cairo), where they settled, living once again as dhimmis, albeit under more tolerant Fatimid rule.
The jihad depredations of the Almohads (1130-1232) wreaked enormous destruction on both the Jewish and Christian populations in Spain and North Africa. A contemporary Judeo-Arabic account by Solomon Cohen (which comports with Arab historian Ibn Baydhaq’s sequence of events), from January 1148 C.E, described the Muslim Almohad conquests in North Africa, and Spain, as follows:
Abd al-Mumin…the leader of the Almohads after the death of Muhammad Ibn Tumart the Mahdi …captured Tlemcen [in the Maghreb] and killed all those who were in it, including the Jews, except those who embraced Islam…[In Sijilmasa] One hundred and fifty persons were killed for clinging to their [Jewish] faith…All the cities in the Almoravid [dynastic rulers of North Africa and Spain prior to the Almohads] state were conquered by the Almohads. One hundred thousand persons were killed in Fez on that occasion, and 120,000 in Marrakesh. The Jews in all [Maghreb] localities [conquered]…groaned under the heavy yoke of the Almohads; many had been killed, many others converted; none were able to appear in public as Jews…Large areas between Seville and Tortosa [in Spain] had likewise fallen into Almohad hands.
This devastation—massacre, captivity, and forced conversion—was described by the Jewish chronicler Abraham Ibn Daud, and the poet Abraham Ibn Ezra. Suspicious of the sincerity of the Jewish converts to Islam, Muslim “inquisitors”, i.e., antedating their Christian Spanish counterparts by three centuries, removed the children from such families, placing them in the care of Muslim educators. When Sijilmasa [an oasis town southwest of Fez] was conquered by the Almohads in 1146, the Jews were given the option of conversion or death. While 150 Jews chose martyrdom, others converted to Islam, including the dayyan [rabbi, or assistant rabbi] Joseph b. Amram (who later reverted to Judaism). The town of Dar’a suffered a similar fate. Abraham Ibn Ezra’s moving elegy Ahah Yarad Al Sefarad describes the Almohad destruction of both Spanish (Seville, Cordova, Jaen, Almeria) and North African Jewish communities, including Sijilmasa and Dar’a (along with others in Marrakesh, Fez, Tlemcen, Ceuta, and Meknes).
Ibn Aqnin (d. 1220), a renowned philosopher and commentator, who was born in Barcelona in 1150, fled the Almohad persecutions with his family, also escaping to Fez. Living there as a crypto-Jew, he met Maimonides and recorded his own poignant writings about the sufferings of the Jews under Almohad rule. Ibn Aqnin wrote during the reign of Abu Yusuf al-Mansur (r. 1184-1199), four decades after the onset of the Almohad persecutions in 1140. Thus the Jews forcibly converted to Islam were already third generation Muslims. Despite this, al-Mansur continued to impose restrictions upon them, which Ibn Aqnin chronicles. From his Tibb al-nufus (Therapy of the Soul), Ibn Aqnin, laments:
Our hearts are disquieted and our souls are affrighted at every moment that passes, for we have no security or stability…Past persecutions and former decrees were directed against those who remained faithful to the Law of Israel and kept them tenaciously so that they would even die for the sake of Heaven. In the event that they submitted to their demands, [our enemies] would extol and honor them. . . But in the present persecutions, on the contrary, however much we appear to obey their instructions to embrace their religion and forsake our own, they burden our yoke and render our travail more arduous. . . .Behold the hardships of the apostates of our land who completely abandoned the faith and changed their attire on account of these persecutions. But their conversion has been of no avail to them whatsoever, for they are subjected to the same vexations as those who have remained faithful to their creed. Indeed, even the conversion of their fathers or grandfathers…has been of no advantage to them.
If we were to consider the persecutions that have befallen us in recent years, we would not find anything comparable recorded by our ancestors in their annals. We are made the object of inquisitions; great and small testify against us and judgments are pronounced, the least of which render lawful the spilling of our blood, the confiscation of our property, and the dishonor of our wives.
… the [Muslim] custodians are able to dispose of our young children and their belongings as they see fit. If they were given to an individual who feared Allah, then he would endeavor to educate the children in his religion, for one of their principles is that all children are originally born as Muslims and only their parents bring them up as Jews, Christians, or Magians. Thus, if this individual educates them in [what they state is] their original religion [i.e., Islam] and does not leave the children with those [i.e., the Jews] that will abduct them therefrom, he will obtain a considerable reward from Allah…
… We were prohibited to practice commerce, which is our livelihood, for there is no life without the food to sustain our bodies and clothes to protect them from the heat and cold. The latter can only be obtained through trade for this is their source and cause, without which its effect, namely our existence, would disappear. In so doing their design was to weaken our strong and annihilate our weak…
… Then they imposed upon us distinctive garments…As for the decree enforcing the wearing of long sleeves, its purpose was to make us resemble the inferior state of women, who are without strength. They were intended by their length to make us unsightly, whereas their color was to make us loathsome… The purpose of these distinctive garments is to differentiate us from among them so that we should be recognized in our dealings with them without any doubt, in order that they might treat us with disparagement and humiliation. . . Moreover it allows our blood to be spilled with impunity. For whenever we travel on the wayside from town to town, we are waylaid by robbers and brigands and are murdered secretly at night or killed in broad daylight…
Now, the purpose of the persecution of Ishmael, whether they require us to renounce our religion in public or in private is only to annihilate the faith of Israel and consequently one is bound to accept death rather than commit the slightest sin . . . as did the martyrs of Fez, Sijilmasa, and Dar’a.
Maimonides’ The Epistle to the Jews of Yemen was written in about 1172 in reply to inquiries by Jacob ben Netan’el al-Fayy_mi, who headed the Jewish community in Yemen. At that time, the Jews of Yemen were experiencing a crisis—hardly unfamiliar to Maimonides—as they were being forced to convert to Islam, a campaign launched in about 1165 by ‘Abd-al-Nab_ ibn Mahdi. Maimonides provided the Yemenite Jewish communal leader with guidance, and what encouragement he could muster. The Epistle to the Jews of Yemen provides an unflinchingly honest view of what Maimonides thought of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, or “the Madman” as he calls him, and about Islam generally. Maimonides writes:
You write that the rebel leader in Yemen decreed compulsory apostasy for the Jews by forcing the Jewish inhabitants of all the places he had subdued to desert the Jewish religion just as the Berbers had compelled them to do in Maghreb [i.e.Islamic West]. Verily, this news has broken our backs and has astounded and dumbfounded the whole of our community. And rightly so. For these are evil tidings, “and whosoever heareth of them, both his ears tingle (I Samuel 3:11).” Indeed our hearts are weakened, our minds are confused, and the powers of the body wasted because of the dire misfortunes which brought religious persecutions upon us from the two ends of the world, the East and the West, “so that the enemies were in the midst of Israel, some on this side, and some on that side.” (Joshua 8:22).
Maimonides makes clear that the unrelenting persecutions of the Jews by the Muslims is tantamount to forced conversion:
…the continuous persecutions will cause many to drift away from our faith, to have misgivings, or to go astray, because they witnessed our feebleness, and noted the triumph of our adversaries and their dominion over us…
He then notes: “After him arose the Madman who emulated his precursor since he paved the way for him. But he added the further objective of procuring rule and submission, and he invented his well known religion.” Medieval Jewish writers often referred to Muhammad as ha-meshugga, Madman—the Hebrew term, as historian Norman Stillman has observed wryly, being “pregnant with connotations.”
Georges Vajda’s magisterial 1937 essay on the anti-Jewish motifs in the hadith, includes a fascinating discussion from Maimonides Teshuvot Responsa on the question of whether Jews should attempt to teach the Torah to Muslims, versus Christians. Although, in principle the response is negative, i.e., non-Jews were proscribed from formal study of the Torah per se, Maimonides makes this striking distinction between Christians and Muslims, regarding the teaching of the commandments and their explanations, because of the unique threat posed by Muslims due to their doctrinal intolerance:
…it is permitted to teach the commandments and the explanations according to [rabbinic] law to the Christians, but it is prohibited to do likewise for the Muslims. You know, in effect, that according to their belief this Torah is not from heaven and if you teach them something, they will find it contrary to their tradition, because their practices are confused and their opinions bizarre mippnei she-ba’uu la-hem debariim be-ma`asiim [because a mish-mash of various practices and strange, inapplicable statements were received by them.] What [one teaches them] will not convince them of the falseness of their opinions, but they will interpret it according to their erroneous principles and they will oppress us. [F]or this reason…they hate all [non-Muslims] who live among them. It would then just be a stumbling block for the Israelites who, because of their sins, are in captivity among them. On the contrary, the uncircumcised [Christians] admit that the text of the Torah, such as we have it, is intact. They interpret it only in an erroneous way and use it for purposes of the allegorical exegesis that is proper to them Ve-yirmezuu bah ha-remaziim hay-yedu`iim la-hem [They would exchange secret signs known only to them.] If one informs them about the correct interpretation, there is hope that they will return from their error, and even if they do not, there is not stumbling block for Israel, for they do not find in their religious law any contradiction with ours.
Returning to The Epistle to the Jews of Yemen, Maimonides highlights one of the presumptive reasons for Muslim hatred of Jews:
Inasmuch as the Muslims could not find a single proof in the entire Bible nor a reference or possible allusion to their prophet which they could utilize, they were compelled to accuse us saying, “You have altered the text of the Torah, and expunged every trace of the name of Mohammed therefrom.” They could find nothing stronger than this ignominious argument.
Elaborating on the depth of Muslim hatred for the Jews, Maimonides makes a further profound observation regarding the Jewish predilection for denial, a feature that he insists will hasten their destruction:
Remember, my co-religionists, that on account of the vast number of our sins, God has hurled us in the midst of this people, the Arabs, who have persecuted us severely, and passed baneful and discriminatory legislation against us, as Scripture has forewarned us, ‘Our enemies themselves shall judge us’ (Deuteronomy 32:31). Never did a nation molest, degrade, debase and hate us as much as they …. Although we were dishonored by them beyond human endurance, and had to put with their fabrications, yet we behaved like him who is depicted by the inspired writer, “But I am as a deaf man, I hear not, and I am as a dumb man that openeth not his mouth.” (Psalms 38:14). Similarly our sages instructed us to bear the prevarications and preposterousness of Ishmael in silence. They found a cryptic allusion for this attitude in the names of his sons “Mishma, Dumah, and Massa” (Genesis 25:14), which was interpreted to mean, “Listen, be silent, and endure.” (Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, ad locum). We have acquiesced, both old and young, to inure ourselves to humiliation, as Isaiah instructed us “I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair.” (50:6). All this notwithstanding, we do not escape this continued maltreatment which well nigh crushes us. No matter how much we suffer and elect to remain at peace with them, they stir up strife and sedition, as David predicted, “I am all peace, but when I speak, they are for war.” (Psalms 120:7). If, therefore, we start trouble and claim power from them absurdly and preposterously we certainly give ourselves up to destruction.”
December 13th marked the 804th anniversary of the death of Maimonides (d. 1203, in Cairo), renowned Talmudist, philosopher, astronomer, and physician. The biography of this “second Moses,” is often cited by those who would extol the purported Muslim ecumenism of the high Middle Ages—particularly in “Andalusia,” or Muslim Spain, invariably accompanied by a denunciation of the fanatical intolerance of Christian Western Europe, during the same era.
A particularly egregious example of this genre of loaded comparisons was made by Amartya Sen, the Nobel laureate economist, in his recent book Identity and Violence. Sen has the temerity to proclaim, “…the Jewish Philosopher Maimonides was forced to emigrate from an intolerant Europe in the twelfth century, he found a tolerant refuge in the Arab world.”
Sen’s ahistorical drivel aside, Maimonides (b. 1135, in Cordova) was but thirteen years old (in 1148) when Muslim Cordova fell into the hands of the particularly fanatical Berber Muslim Almohads, who invaded the Iberian peninsula from North Africa. Maimonides and all the dhimmi Jews in Cordova were compelled to choose between Islam and exile. Choosing the latter course, Maimonides and his family for twelve years subsequently led a nomadic life, wandering across Spain. By 1160 they crossed the Mediterranean, and settled at Fez, Morocco (also under Almohad control) where, unknown to the authorities, they hoped to pass as Muslims, while living as crypto-Jews. Maimonides’ dual life, however, became increasingly dangerous as his reputation was steadily growing, and the authorities began to inquire into the religious disposition of this highly gifted young man. He was even charged by an informer with the crime of having relapsed (apostasized) from Islam, and, but for the intercession of the poet and theologian Abu al-‘Arab al Mu’ishah, a Muslim friend, he would have suffered the fate of his colleague Judah ibn Shoshan, who had shortly before been executed on a similar charge. Given these precarious circumstances, Maimonides’ family left Fez, embarking in 1165 to Acre, then to Jerusalem, and on to Fostat (Cairo), where they settled, living once again as dhimmis, albeit under more tolerant Fatimid rule.
The jihad depredations of the Almohads (1130-1232) wreaked enormous destruction on both the Jewish and Christian populations in Spain and North Africa. A contemporary Judeo-Arabic account by Solomon Cohen (which comports with Arab historian Ibn Baydhaq’s sequence of events), from January 1148 C.E, described the Muslim Almohad conquests in North Africa, and Spain, as follows:
Abd al-Mumin…the leader of the Almohads after the death of Muhammad Ibn Tumart the Mahdi …captured Tlemcen [in the Maghreb] and killed all those who were in it, including the Jews, except those who embraced Islam…[In Sijilmasa] One hundred and fifty persons were killed for clinging to their [Jewish] faith…All the cities in the Almoravid [dynastic rulers of North Africa and Spain prior to the Almohads] state were conquered by the Almohads. One hundred thousand persons were killed in Fez on that occasion, and 120,000 in Marrakesh. The Jews in all [Maghreb] localities [conquered]…groaned under the heavy yoke of the Almohads; many had been killed, many others converted; none were able to appear in public as Jews…Large areas between Seville and Tortosa [in Spain] had likewise fallen into Almohad hands.
This devastation—massacre, captivity, and forced conversion—was described by the Jewish chronicler Abraham Ibn Daud, and the poet Abraham Ibn Ezra. Suspicious of the sincerity of the Jewish converts to Islam, Muslim “inquisitors”, i.e., antedating their Christian Spanish counterparts by three centuries, removed the children from such families, placing them in the care of Muslim educators. When Sijilmasa [an oasis town southwest of Fez] was conquered by the Almohads in 1146, the Jews were given the option of conversion or death. While 150 Jews chose martyrdom, others converted to Islam, including the dayyan [rabbi, or assistant rabbi] Joseph b. Amram (who later reverted to Judaism). The town of Dar’a suffered a similar fate. Abraham Ibn Ezra’s moving elegy Ahah Yarad Al Sefarad describes the Almohad destruction of both Spanish (Seville, Cordova, Jaen, Almeria) and North African Jewish communities, including Sijilmasa and Dar’a (along with others in Marrakesh, Fez, Tlemcen, Ceuta, and Meknes).
Ibn Aqnin (d. 1220), a renowned philosopher and commentator, who was born in Barcelona in 1150, fled the Almohad persecutions with his family, also escaping to Fez. Living there as a crypto-Jew, he met Maimonides and recorded his own poignant writings about the sufferings of the Jews under Almohad rule. Ibn Aqnin wrote during the reign of Abu Yusuf al-Mansur (r. 1184-1199), four decades after the onset of the Almohad persecutions in 1140. Thus the Jews forcibly converted to Islam were already third generation Muslims. Despite this, al-Mansur continued to impose restrictions upon them, which Ibn Aqnin chronicles. From his Tibb al-nufus (Therapy of the Soul), Ibn Aqnin, laments:
Our hearts are disquieted and our souls are affrighted at every moment that passes, for we have no security or stability…Past persecutions and former decrees were directed against those who remained faithful to the Law of Israel and kept them tenaciously so that they would even die for the sake of Heaven. In the event that they submitted to their demands, [our enemies] would extol and honor them. . . But in the present persecutions, on the contrary, however much we appear to obey their instructions to embrace their religion and forsake our own, they burden our yoke and render our travail more arduous. . . .Behold the hardships of the apostates of our land who completely abandoned the faith and changed their attire on account of these persecutions. But their conversion has been of no avail to them whatsoever, for they are subjected to the same vexations as those who have remained faithful to their creed. Indeed, even the conversion of their fathers or grandfathers…has been of no advantage to them.
If we were to consider the persecutions that have befallen us in recent years, we would not find anything comparable recorded by our ancestors in their annals. We are made the object of inquisitions; great and small testify against us and judgments are pronounced, the least of which render lawful the spilling of our blood, the confiscation of our property, and the dishonor of our wives.
… the [Muslim] custodians are able to dispose of our young children and their belongings as they see fit. If they were given to an individual who feared Allah, then he would endeavor to educate the children in his religion, for one of their principles is that all children are originally born as Muslims and only their parents bring them up as Jews, Christians, or Magians. Thus, if this individual educates them in [what they state is] their original religion [i.e., Islam] and does not leave the children with those [i.e., the Jews] that will abduct them therefrom, he will obtain a considerable reward from Allah…
… We were prohibited to practice commerce, which is our livelihood, for there is no life without the food to sustain our bodies and clothes to protect them from the heat and cold. The latter can only be obtained through trade for this is their source and cause, without which its effect, namely our existence, would disappear. In so doing their design was to weaken our strong and annihilate our weak…
… Then they imposed upon us distinctive garments…As for the decree enforcing the wearing of long sleeves, its purpose was to make us resemble the inferior state of women, who are without strength. They were intended by their length to make us unsightly, whereas their color was to make us loathsome… The purpose of these distinctive garments is to differentiate us from among them so that we should be recognized in our dealings with them without any doubt, in order that they might treat us with disparagement and humiliation. . . Moreover it allows our blood to be spilled with impunity. For whenever we travel on the wayside from town to town, we are waylaid by robbers and brigands and are murdered secretly at night or killed in broad daylight…
Now, the purpose of the persecution of Ishmael, whether they require us to renounce our religion in public or in private is only to annihilate the faith of Israel and consequently one is bound to accept death rather than commit the slightest sin . . . as did the martyrs of Fez, Sijilmasa, and Dar’a.
Maimonides’ The Epistle to the Jews of Yemen was written in about 1172 in reply to inquiries by Jacob ben Netan’el al-Fayy_mi, who headed the Jewish community in Yemen. At that time, the Jews of Yemen were experiencing a crisis—hardly unfamiliar to Maimonides—as they were being forced to convert to Islam, a campaign launched in about 1165 by ‘Abd-al-Nab_ ibn Mahdi. Maimonides provided the Yemenite Jewish communal leader with guidance, and what encouragement he could muster. The Epistle to the Jews of Yemen provides an unflinchingly honest view of what Maimonides thought of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, or “the Madman” as he calls him, and about Islam generally. Maimonides writes:
You write that the rebel leader in Yemen decreed compulsory apostasy for the Jews by forcing the Jewish inhabitants of all the places he had subdued to desert the Jewish religion just as the Berbers had compelled them to do in Maghreb [i.e.Islamic West]. Verily, this news has broken our backs and has astounded and dumbfounded the whole of our community. And rightly so. For these are evil tidings, “and whosoever heareth of them, both his ears tingle (I Samuel 3:11).” Indeed our hearts are weakened, our minds are confused, and the powers of the body wasted because of the dire misfortunes which brought religious persecutions upon us from the two ends of the world, the East and the West, “so that the enemies were in the midst of Israel, some on this side, and some on that side.” (Joshua 8:22).
Maimonides makes clear that the unrelenting persecutions of the Jews by the Muslims is tantamount to forced conversion:
…the continuous persecutions will cause many to drift away from our faith, to have misgivings, or to go astray, because they witnessed our feebleness, and noted the triumph of our adversaries and their dominion over us…
He then notes: “After him arose the Madman who emulated his precursor since he paved the way for him. But he added the further objective of procuring rule and submission, and he invented his well known religion.” Medieval Jewish writers often referred to Muhammad as ha-meshugga, Madman—the Hebrew term, as historian Norman Stillman has observed wryly, being “pregnant with connotations.”
Georges Vajda’s magisterial 1937 essay on the anti-Jewish motifs in the hadith, includes a fascinating discussion from Maimonides Teshuvot Responsa on the question of whether Jews should attempt to teach the Torah to Muslims, versus Christians. Although, in principle the response is negative, i.e., non-Jews were proscribed from formal study of the Torah per se, Maimonides makes this striking distinction between Christians and Muslims, regarding the teaching of the commandments and their explanations, because of the unique threat posed by Muslims due to their doctrinal intolerance:
…it is permitted to teach the commandments and the explanations according to [rabbinic] law to the Christians, but it is prohibited to do likewise for the Muslims. You know, in effect, that according to their belief this Torah is not from heaven and if you teach them something, they will find it contrary to their tradition, because their practices are confused and their opinions bizarre mippnei she-ba’uu la-hem debariim be-ma`asiim [because a mish-mash of various practices and strange, inapplicable statements were received by them.] What [one teaches them] will not convince them of the falseness of their opinions, but they will interpret it according to their erroneous principles and they will oppress us. [F]or this reason…they hate all [non-Muslims] who live among them. It would then just be a stumbling block for the Israelites who, because of their sins, are in captivity among them. On the contrary, the uncircumcised [Christians] admit that the text of the Torah, such as we have it, is intact. They interpret it only in an erroneous way and use it for purposes of the allegorical exegesis that is proper to them Ve-yirmezuu bah ha-remaziim hay-yedu`iim la-hem [They would exchange secret signs known only to them.] If one informs them about the correct interpretation, there is hope that they will return from their error, and even if they do not, there is not stumbling block for Israel, for they do not find in their religious law any contradiction with ours.
Returning to The Epistle to the Jews of Yemen, Maimonides highlights one of the presumptive reasons for Muslim hatred of Jews:
Inasmuch as the Muslims could not find a single proof in the entire Bible nor a reference or possible allusion to their prophet which they could utilize, they were compelled to accuse us saying, “You have altered the text of the Torah, and expunged every trace of the name of Mohammed therefrom.” They could find nothing stronger than this ignominious argument.
Elaborating on the depth of Muslim hatred for the Jews, Maimonides makes a further profound observation regarding the Jewish predilection for denial, a feature that he insists will hasten their destruction:
Remember, my co-religionists, that on account of the vast number of our sins, God has hurled us in the midst of this people, the Arabs, who have persecuted us severely, and passed baneful and discriminatory legislation against us, as Scripture has forewarned us, ‘Our enemies themselves shall judge us’ (Deuteronomy 32:31). Never did a nation molest, degrade, debase and hate us as much as they …. Although we were dishonored by them beyond human endurance, and had to put with their fabrications, yet we behaved like him who is depicted by the inspired writer, “But I am as a deaf man, I hear not, and I am as a dumb man that openeth not his mouth.” (Psalms 38:14). Similarly our sages instructed us to bear the prevarications and preposterousness of Ishmael in silence. They found a cryptic allusion for this attitude in the names of his sons “Mishma, Dumah, and Massa” (Genesis 25:14), which was interpreted to mean, “Listen, be silent, and endure.” (Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, ad locum). We have acquiesced, both old and young, to inure ourselves to humiliation, as Isaiah instructed us “I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair.” (50:6). All this notwithstanding, we do not escape this continued maltreatment which well nigh crushes us. No matter how much we suffer and elect to remain at peace with them, they stir up strife and sedition, as David predicted, “I am all peace, but when I speak, they are for war.” (Psalms 120:7). If, therefore, we start trouble and claim power from them absurdly and preposterously we certainly give ourselves up to destruction.”
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Terrorism and the Times: What's Not Fit To Print
Steven Emerson
IPT News Service
On Friday, two Islamic converts, radicalized while in prison, pled guilty to terrorism charges, after admitting plots to attack "United States military operations, "infidels," and Israeli and Jewish facilities in the Los Angeles area."
The cell leader, Kevin James, founded Jam'iyyat Ul-Islam Is-Saheeh (JIS) while incarcerated in Folsom prison, and began recruiting other converts. Levar Washington pled guilty, along with James last week, and a third cell member, Gregory Patterson, pled guilty on Monday.
A fourth JIS member, Hammad Samana, has been found unfit to stand trial, but is accused of having researched "targets and prepared a document called ‘Modes of Attack.' The document listed ‘LAX and Consulate of Zion,' ‘Military Targets,' ‘Army Recruiting centers throughout the county,' ‘Military base in Manhattan Beach' and ‘Campsite of Zion,'" on behalf of the cell.
The JIS plotters face 20 to 25 years in prison. The plots and guilty pleas come as no surprise to those who have closely followed prison chaplaincy programs, as all too often, those in charge of selecting imams have Wahhabist and radical links. Former NYC prison chaplain Warith Dean Umar has stated that the 9/11 hijackers should be remembered as martyrs, and Umar Abdul-Jalil, top Imam of the New York City Department of Corrections, has his own radical views. As reported by the NY Post, citing tapes provided by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), Abdul-Jalil spread his radical views at a Muslim Students Association conference in Arizona:
At one conference session, Abdul-Jalil charged that Muslims jailed after the 9/11 attacks were being tortured in Manhattan, according to the tape. "They [some Muslim inmates] are not charged with anything, they are not entitled to any rights, they are interrogated. Some of them are literally tortured and we found this in the Metropolitan Correctional Facility in Manhattan. But they literally are torturing people," Abdul-Jalil said.
Abdul-Jalil also accused the Bush administration of being terrorists, according to the tape. "We have terrorists defining who a terrorist is, but because they have the weight of legitimacy, they get away with it . . . We know that the greatest terrorists in the world occupy the White House, without a doubt," he said.
At another session, Abdul-Jalil urged American Muslims to stop allowing "the Zionists of the media to dictate what Islam is to us" and said Muslims must be "compassionate with each other" and "hard against the kufr [unbeliever]."
And still, despite deadly terrorist attacks perpetrated on U.S. soil, and the all too frequent instances of anti-American sentiment voiced by jihadists, the various usual suspects are intent on either underplaying the threat or pretending that none exists.
In a front page story in October 2006, titled, "F.B.I. Struggling to Reinvent Itself to Fight Terror," the New York Times dismissed out of hand the dangerous nature of the JIS cell in California (and called into question the validity behind other instances of U.S. based-terrorism cells), writing:
In that case, three men are charged with committing robberies to raise money for jihadist attacks on synagogues and military recruiting stations, in what Director Mueller has described as a bid to create "Al Qaeda in California." Their actions are said to have been directed by Kevin James, who headed a Muslim group behind bars.
But agents checked on more than 100 prisoners with links to Mr. James and charged none. And though Mr. James has been portrayed as the mastermind, reporters for The New York Times and "Frontline" were repeatedly able to visit him in jail in Santa Ana, Calif. Such access is almost never granted to people accused of terrorism because the authorities fear that they could direct a plot from prison.
In an effort to downplay the threat, the Times concludes that there must be some kind of conspiracy, when a more plausible explanation – mere incompetence – exists.
A month before, the Times was already on record downplaying the nature of the JIS threat, selectively seeking out experts to belittle the dangerous character of the plot. And the Times, found Thomas Kean, former Chairman of the 9/11 commission, who "said the (JIS) case threatened small-scale violence and should have been a routine police concern."
Yet what should concern everyone is not just the Times record of downplaying actual terrorist threats, even as yet again the Times editors find themselves with egg on their faces as the JIS plotters plead guilty, but that the Times consistently apologizes for radical Islam by flacking for domestic Muslim Brotherhood groups with a history of extremism. As I have documented in the past, the New York Times is a serial offender when it comes to giving an uncritical voice to the nation's most virulent Islamist fronts.
Monday's edition, unsurprisingly, has yet another glaring example, titled, "Boycotted Radio Host Remains Unbowed." The article quotes Ahmed Rehab and his organization, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), on radio host Michael Savage's lawsuit against CAIR. While the Times informs its readers that CAIR's "stated mission includes correcting mischaracterizations of Islam," it, of course, fails to tell its readers of CAIR's long history of extremism, support for terrorism and anti-Semitism, let alone CAIR's documented history as part of the Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood infrastructure in the United States.
Rehab himself is on the record refusing to condemn Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist groups and supporting Hamas-linked defendants. CAIR-Chicago, Rehab's home branch, referred to the cases against Hamas operative Mohammed Salah as a "political persecution" and stated that Salah, and his codefendant and another Hamas operative, Abedelhaleem Ashqar, were "targeted" by "the Bush administration has attempted to criminalize charitable aid to Palestinians." Salah is serving nearly 2 years in prison for obstruction of justice for lying under oath about his Hamas connections in a civil trial, and Ashqar is serving 11 years in prison, for obstruction of justice and criminal contempt, for his refusal to testify in front of a grand jury investigating Hamas front groups in the U.S.
But when the Times reports on CAIR, you won't read about such instances. Nor does the Times, in this specific article and almost all others which mention the group, inform its audience that CAIR has been named by federal prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing case in U.S. history, named as a member of the Palestine Committee of the Muslim Brotherhood, and that the same prosecutors have officially stated that CAIR is "affiliated" with the terrorist group Hamas.
And on Saturday, after Kevin James and Levar Washington pled guilty, the Times, after twice downplaying the JIS cell as not dangerous and nothing more than a criminal endeavor more than a year earlier, printed a very short, 100 word account lifted from the Associated Press:
Two men accused of plotting in prison to attack military sites, synagogues and other targets pleaded guilty to conspiring to wage war against the United States. The men, Kevin James, 31, and Levar H. Washington, 28, pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy charges. Mr. Washington also pleaded guilty to using a firearm to further that conspiracy. The authorities say Mr. James, Mr. Washington and two others were part of a California prison gang cell of radical Muslims. The police said they uncovered the plot in July 2005 while investigating gas station robberies that they say were committed to finance the attacks.
Even though James and Washington pled guilty, and copious information about the JIS plots have emerged, the Times still uses the phrases "authorities say" and "police said" to describe their actions. In reporting on Gregory Patterson's guilty plea, the Times yet again just picked up the AP story, also using the language "prosecutors said" and "officials said," rather than straight reporting on what the men have confessed to plotting. Despite the Times' motto, some news is apparently not fit to print, and sadly that includes not just information about the inner workings of a home grown terrorist cell, radicalized in prison, but any information that tarnishes America's "most prominent" Muslim Brotherhood front group.
IPT News Service
On Friday, two Islamic converts, radicalized while in prison, pled guilty to terrorism charges, after admitting plots to attack "United States military operations, "infidels," and Israeli and Jewish facilities in the Los Angeles area."
The cell leader, Kevin James, founded Jam'iyyat Ul-Islam Is-Saheeh (JIS) while incarcerated in Folsom prison, and began recruiting other converts. Levar Washington pled guilty, along with James last week, and a third cell member, Gregory Patterson, pled guilty on Monday.
A fourth JIS member, Hammad Samana, has been found unfit to stand trial, but is accused of having researched "targets and prepared a document called ‘Modes of Attack.' The document listed ‘LAX and Consulate of Zion,' ‘Military Targets,' ‘Army Recruiting centers throughout the county,' ‘Military base in Manhattan Beach' and ‘Campsite of Zion,'" on behalf of the cell.
The JIS plotters face 20 to 25 years in prison. The plots and guilty pleas come as no surprise to those who have closely followed prison chaplaincy programs, as all too often, those in charge of selecting imams have Wahhabist and radical links. Former NYC prison chaplain Warith Dean Umar has stated that the 9/11 hijackers should be remembered as martyrs, and Umar Abdul-Jalil, top Imam of the New York City Department of Corrections, has his own radical views. As reported by the NY Post, citing tapes provided by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), Abdul-Jalil spread his radical views at a Muslim Students Association conference in Arizona:
At one conference session, Abdul-Jalil charged that Muslims jailed after the 9/11 attacks were being tortured in Manhattan, according to the tape. "They [some Muslim inmates] are not charged with anything, they are not entitled to any rights, they are interrogated. Some of them are literally tortured and we found this in the Metropolitan Correctional Facility in Manhattan. But they literally are torturing people," Abdul-Jalil said.
Abdul-Jalil also accused the Bush administration of being terrorists, according to the tape. "We have terrorists defining who a terrorist is, but because they have the weight of legitimacy, they get away with it . . . We know that the greatest terrorists in the world occupy the White House, without a doubt," he said.
At another session, Abdul-Jalil urged American Muslims to stop allowing "the Zionists of the media to dictate what Islam is to us" and said Muslims must be "compassionate with each other" and "hard against the kufr [unbeliever]."
And still, despite deadly terrorist attacks perpetrated on U.S. soil, and the all too frequent instances of anti-American sentiment voiced by jihadists, the various usual suspects are intent on either underplaying the threat or pretending that none exists.
In a front page story in October 2006, titled, "F.B.I. Struggling to Reinvent Itself to Fight Terror," the New York Times dismissed out of hand the dangerous nature of the JIS cell in California (and called into question the validity behind other instances of U.S. based-terrorism cells), writing:
In that case, three men are charged with committing robberies to raise money for jihadist attacks on synagogues and military recruiting stations, in what Director Mueller has described as a bid to create "Al Qaeda in California." Their actions are said to have been directed by Kevin James, who headed a Muslim group behind bars.
But agents checked on more than 100 prisoners with links to Mr. James and charged none. And though Mr. James has been portrayed as the mastermind, reporters for The New York Times and "Frontline" were repeatedly able to visit him in jail in Santa Ana, Calif. Such access is almost never granted to people accused of terrorism because the authorities fear that they could direct a plot from prison.
In an effort to downplay the threat, the Times concludes that there must be some kind of conspiracy, when a more plausible explanation – mere incompetence – exists.
A month before, the Times was already on record downplaying the nature of the JIS threat, selectively seeking out experts to belittle the dangerous character of the plot. And the Times, found Thomas Kean, former Chairman of the 9/11 commission, who "said the (JIS) case threatened small-scale violence and should have been a routine police concern."
Yet what should concern everyone is not just the Times record of downplaying actual terrorist threats, even as yet again the Times editors find themselves with egg on their faces as the JIS plotters plead guilty, but that the Times consistently apologizes for radical Islam by flacking for domestic Muslim Brotherhood groups with a history of extremism. As I have documented in the past, the New York Times is a serial offender when it comes to giving an uncritical voice to the nation's most virulent Islamist fronts.
Monday's edition, unsurprisingly, has yet another glaring example, titled, "Boycotted Radio Host Remains Unbowed." The article quotes Ahmed Rehab and his organization, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), on radio host Michael Savage's lawsuit against CAIR. While the Times informs its readers that CAIR's "stated mission includes correcting mischaracterizations of Islam," it, of course, fails to tell its readers of CAIR's long history of extremism, support for terrorism and anti-Semitism, let alone CAIR's documented history as part of the Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood infrastructure in the United States.
Rehab himself is on the record refusing to condemn Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist groups and supporting Hamas-linked defendants. CAIR-Chicago, Rehab's home branch, referred to the cases against Hamas operative Mohammed Salah as a "political persecution" and stated that Salah, and his codefendant and another Hamas operative, Abedelhaleem Ashqar, were "targeted" by "the Bush administration has attempted to criminalize charitable aid to Palestinians." Salah is serving nearly 2 years in prison for obstruction of justice for lying under oath about his Hamas connections in a civil trial, and Ashqar is serving 11 years in prison, for obstruction of justice and criminal contempt, for his refusal to testify in front of a grand jury investigating Hamas front groups in the U.S.
But when the Times reports on CAIR, you won't read about such instances. Nor does the Times, in this specific article and almost all others which mention the group, inform its audience that CAIR has been named by federal prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing case in U.S. history, named as a member of the Palestine Committee of the Muslim Brotherhood, and that the same prosecutors have officially stated that CAIR is "affiliated" with the terrorist group Hamas.
And on Saturday, after Kevin James and Levar Washington pled guilty, the Times, after twice downplaying the JIS cell as not dangerous and nothing more than a criminal endeavor more than a year earlier, printed a very short, 100 word account lifted from the Associated Press:
Two men accused of plotting in prison to attack military sites, synagogues and other targets pleaded guilty to conspiring to wage war against the United States. The men, Kevin James, 31, and Levar H. Washington, 28, pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy charges. Mr. Washington also pleaded guilty to using a firearm to further that conspiracy. The authorities say Mr. James, Mr. Washington and two others were part of a California prison gang cell of radical Muslims. The police said they uncovered the plot in July 2005 while investigating gas station robberies that they say were committed to finance the attacks.
Even though James and Washington pled guilty, and copious information about the JIS plots have emerged, the Times still uses the phrases "authorities say" and "police said" to describe their actions. In reporting on Gregory Patterson's guilty plea, the Times yet again just picked up the AP story, also using the language "prosecutors said" and "officials said," rather than straight reporting on what the men have confessed to plotting. Despite the Times' motto, some news is apparently not fit to print, and sadly that includes not just information about the inner workings of a home grown terrorist cell, radicalized in prison, but any information that tarnishes America's "most prominent" Muslim Brotherhood front group.
Osama: We will not recognize even one inch for Jews in the land of Palestine as other Muslim leaders have"
Even a dog can walk around in the daylight. But not Osama bin Laden. "Blood for blood, destruction for destruction." Blah for blah. Talk about a tired act.
"Bin Laden issues warning on Iraq, Israel," by Salah Nasrawi for Associated Press (thanks to Sr. Soph):
CAIRO, Egypt - Osama bin Laden warned Iraq's Sunni Arabs against fighting al-Qaida and vowed to expand the terror group's holy war to Israel in a new audiotape Saturday, threatening "blood for blood, destruction for destruction."
Most of the 56-minute tape dealt with Iraq, apparently al-Qaida's latest attempt to keep supporters in Iraq unified at a time when the U.S. military claims to have al-Qaida's Iraq branch on the run.
The tape did not mention Pakistan or the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, though Pakistan's government has blamed al-Qaida and the Taliban for her death on Thursday. That suggested the tape was made before the assassination.
Bin Laden's comments offered an unusually direct attack on Israel, stepping up al-Qaida's attempts to use the Israeli-Arab conflict to rally supporters. Israel has warned of growing al-Qaida activity in Palestinian territory, though terror network is not believed to have taken a strong role there so far.
Islamic Tolerance Alert:
"We intend to liberate Palestine, the whole of Palestine from the (Jordan) river to the sea," he said, threatening "blood for blood, destruction for destruction."
"We will not recognize even one inch for Jews in the land of Palestine as other Muslim leaders have," bin Laden said.
In Iraq, a number of Sunni Arab tribes in western Anbar province have formed a coalition fighting al-Qaida-linked insurgents that U.S. officials credit for deeply reducing violence in the province. The U.S. military has been working to form similar "Awakening Councils" in other areas of Iraq.
Bin Laden said Sunni Arabs who have joined the Awakening Councils "have betrayed the nation and brought disgrace and shame to their people. They will suffer in life and in the afterlife."
White House spokesman Tony Fratto said bin Laden's tape shows that al-Qaida's aim is to block democracy and freedom for all Iraqis.
"It also reminds us that the mission to defeat al-Qaida in Iraq is critically important and must succeed," Fratto said. "The Iraqi people — every day, and in increasing numbers — are choosing freedom and standing against the murderous, hateful ideology of AQI. And we stand with them."
Several hours before the tape was issued, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, said al-Qaida was becoming increasingly fearful of losing the support of Sunni Arabs and had begun targeting the leaders of the Awakening Councils.
Petraeus said al-Qaida attaches "enormous importance" to "these tribes that have turned against them, and to the general sense that Sunni Arab communities have rejected them more and more around Iraq."
"They are trying to counter this and they have done so by attacking them," which is increasingly turning Sunnis against al-Qaida, he said.
In the audiotape, bin Laden denounced Abdul-Sattar Abu Risha, the former leader of the Anbar Awakening Council, who was killed in a September bombing claimed by al-Qaida.
"The most evil of the traitors are those who trade away their religion for the sake of their mortal life," bin Laden said.
Note, yet again, the exclusively religious nature of his appeal to Muslims.
"Bin Laden issues warning on Iraq, Israel," by Salah Nasrawi for Associated Press (thanks to Sr. Soph):
CAIRO, Egypt - Osama bin Laden warned Iraq's Sunni Arabs against fighting al-Qaida and vowed to expand the terror group's holy war to Israel in a new audiotape Saturday, threatening "blood for blood, destruction for destruction."
Most of the 56-minute tape dealt with Iraq, apparently al-Qaida's latest attempt to keep supporters in Iraq unified at a time when the U.S. military claims to have al-Qaida's Iraq branch on the run.
The tape did not mention Pakistan or the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, though Pakistan's government has blamed al-Qaida and the Taliban for her death on Thursday. That suggested the tape was made before the assassination.
Bin Laden's comments offered an unusually direct attack on Israel, stepping up al-Qaida's attempts to use the Israeli-Arab conflict to rally supporters. Israel has warned of growing al-Qaida activity in Palestinian territory, though terror network is not believed to have taken a strong role there so far.
Islamic Tolerance Alert:
"We intend to liberate Palestine, the whole of Palestine from the (Jordan) river to the sea," he said, threatening "blood for blood, destruction for destruction."
"We will not recognize even one inch for Jews in the land of Palestine as other Muslim leaders have," bin Laden said.
In Iraq, a number of Sunni Arab tribes in western Anbar province have formed a coalition fighting al-Qaida-linked insurgents that U.S. officials credit for deeply reducing violence in the province. The U.S. military has been working to form similar "Awakening Councils" in other areas of Iraq.
Bin Laden said Sunni Arabs who have joined the Awakening Councils "have betrayed the nation and brought disgrace and shame to their people. They will suffer in life and in the afterlife."
White House spokesman Tony Fratto said bin Laden's tape shows that al-Qaida's aim is to block democracy and freedom for all Iraqis.
"It also reminds us that the mission to defeat al-Qaida in Iraq is critically important and must succeed," Fratto said. "The Iraqi people — every day, and in increasing numbers — are choosing freedom and standing against the murderous, hateful ideology of AQI. And we stand with them."
Several hours before the tape was issued, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, said al-Qaida was becoming increasingly fearful of losing the support of Sunni Arabs and had begun targeting the leaders of the Awakening Councils.
Petraeus said al-Qaida attaches "enormous importance" to "these tribes that have turned against them, and to the general sense that Sunni Arab communities have rejected them more and more around Iraq."
"They are trying to counter this and they have done so by attacking them," which is increasingly turning Sunnis against al-Qaida, he said.
In the audiotape, bin Laden denounced Abdul-Sattar Abu Risha, the former leader of the Anbar Awakening Council, who was killed in a September bombing claimed by al-Qaida.
"The most evil of the traitors are those who trade away their religion for the sake of their mortal life," bin Laden said.
Note, yet again, the exclusively religious nature of his appeal to Muslims.
Khamenei: Today the Iranian nation is the standard-bearer of Islamic unity in the world
Some Sunnis might beg to differ. But it is abundantly clear, particularly given Iran's aid to Hamas and the Taliban, that this is how the mullahcracy has been trying to position itself."Islamic unity is the lesson of Ghadir: Leader," from the Tehran Times (thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist):
TEHRAN -- Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said here on Saturday that the important lesson from the Ghadir event is to avoid division in the Islamic world.
“Hazrat Ali ibn Abi Talib (AS) was the Prophet’s appointee, but when he noticed that realizing this right might harm Islam and cause discord, he not only did not make any claims but cooperated with those who ruled the Islamic society… because Islam needed unity,” the Supreme Leader told thousands of well-wishers in remarks made on the occasion of the Eid al-Qadir holiday.
By following Imam Ali (AS), today the Iranian nation is the standard-bearer of Islamic unity in the world, the Leader noted.
Stressing the need for vigilance in the face of enemy plots to spread the “virus of discord” between followers of various Islamic schools of thought, the Leader added, “The great lesson of Ghadir is to fight against discord and to put this important lesson into practice, the followers of Islam should avoid insulting each other’s sanctities and stop bringing up provocative and sensitive issues.”
“And, as it was expressed in the hajj message, through their vigilance and unity, they should disappoint the plan by the (global) arrogance (imperialist forces) to create religious divisions and a Shia-Sunni clash.”
Eid al-Ghadir is the anniversary commemorating the last sermon of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his household) at Ghadir Khumm on Dhul Hijjah 18, in the year 10 AH. It is celebrated mainly by Shias, who regard it as confirmation that Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (AS) was to succeed Prophet Muhammad (S).
Some, alas for Khamenei, beg to differ indeed.
TEHRAN -- Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said here on Saturday that the important lesson from the Ghadir event is to avoid division in the Islamic world.
“Hazrat Ali ibn Abi Talib (AS) was the Prophet’s appointee, but when he noticed that realizing this right might harm Islam and cause discord, he not only did not make any claims but cooperated with those who ruled the Islamic society… because Islam needed unity,” the Supreme Leader told thousands of well-wishers in remarks made on the occasion of the Eid al-Qadir holiday.
By following Imam Ali (AS), today the Iranian nation is the standard-bearer of Islamic unity in the world, the Leader noted.
Stressing the need for vigilance in the face of enemy plots to spread the “virus of discord” between followers of various Islamic schools of thought, the Leader added, “The great lesson of Ghadir is to fight against discord and to put this important lesson into practice, the followers of Islam should avoid insulting each other’s sanctities and stop bringing up provocative and sensitive issues.”
“And, as it was expressed in the hajj message, through their vigilance and unity, they should disappoint the plan by the (global) arrogance (imperialist forces) to create religious divisions and a Shia-Sunni clash.”
Eid al-Ghadir is the anniversary commemorating the last sermon of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his household) at Ghadir Khumm on Dhul Hijjah 18, in the year 10 AH. It is celebrated mainly by Shias, who regard it as confirmation that Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (AS) was to succeed Prophet Muhammad (S).
Some, alas for Khamenei, beg to differ indeed.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)