Arlene Kushner
Actually, I should say, "more insane than normal."
This will be a short posting. I've been working non-stop on a report concerning US funding for PA "security forces" -- an exceedingly pertinent subject, and a report that I'll be referring to now and again.
If it weren't for the signing today of the unity agreement between Fatah and Hamas, I would have waited another day. But hey...
~~~~~~~~~~
So...PA President Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas head of the politburo Khaled Masha'al went to Cairo for the signing...and promptly got into a fight about who would sit where (reportedly Abbas did not want Masha'al next to him). Delayed that signing by a couple of hours, although it ultimately did take place. The tensions between the parties are likely a window on what's really going on. Yuval Diskin, who leaves his post as head of Shin Bet next week, sees this "unity" agreement as:
"...mostly for the sake of appearances, in an attempt to show unity. From here on, there are many things both sides don't know how to apply in theory, let alone on the ground.
"These kinds of attempts have been around for a long time. Hamas is still conflicted… and has opted for a tactical move rather than a strategic one."
I sure wouldn't argue, and we're going to have to watch and see how this plays out over the next weeks, and months, and if it lasts that long, the next year or two.
~~~~~~~~~~
But the key issue from where I sit is the management of "security forces." And it's on this issue that Diskin loses me. He says Israel should continue security arrangements with the PA.
It's not just that I disagree, it's that I genuinely cannot imagine what's in his head. Yes, as of today there is no joint Fatah-Hamas management of security forces. The PA is still in charge of its own forces in Judea and Samaria (just as Hamas has forces in Gaza). But the security arrangements between Israel and Fatah have had to do with combating terrorism -- notably Hamas. And now Fatah is officially in bed with Hamas. What sort of security arrangements would these be??
Says Diskin: “As long as the [PA] security forces do not change their policies and action on the ground there is no reason for us to change our policy.”
Not change their policies of cooperating with Israel in seeking out Hamas terrorists? In his Cairo speech today, Abbas said, “we will not accept pluralism of the security forces, only one authority, one weapon and one political authority.”
As for action, just today I picked up from a highly reliable source information that, “Things are beginning to heat up now” -- there have been reports in the Tulkarem area of PA forces taking shots at Israeli troops. There may not be Fatah-Hamas cooperation in managing security forces, but the message from Hamas to Fatah is almost certain to be one that severely discourages cooperation with the IDF.
That report I alluded above is designed to try to convince Congress that there should be no more US support for PA security forces.
~~~~~~~~~~
Three Arab MKs attending the signing: Talab El-Sana (Ra'am-Ta'al), Ahmad Tibi (Ra'am Ta'al), and Mohammed Barakeh (Hadash) -- declaring the event "historic." I hate to remind them that this is not the first Fatah-Hamas unity government. There was one briefly before the Hamas coup in Gaza. As to historic, I'd like to see history made as they are tossed out of the Knesset for attending the event of a sworn enemy of Israel.
~~~~~~~~~~
It seems to me that there is a way in which Hamas is doing our work for us. They have consented to play the game with regard to "unity" with Fatah, but they won't deign to play the game with regard to being conciliatory on the issue of Israel.
Nope, they've been very proudly, defiantly up front with regard to their intentions. There are some parties who might have gone along with the unity arrangement who will find it more difficult to do, in light of Hamas's positions.
Senior Hamas official Mahmoud Zahar, for example, said today that Palestine is "hallowed ground" and that Hamas will never recognize Israel -- or as he put it, the rule of "Poles and Ethiopians." Nice guy.
But, no surprise, Fatah is itself sounding more like Hamas, with Nabil Sha'ath saying that the Quartet principles are irrelevant: "Stop asking Hamas to recognize Israel."
~~~~~~~~~~
Then there's Jimmy Carter. He thinks this unity arrangement will lead to peace and stability. Good old Jimmy is always on top of these matters.
~~~~~~~~~~
Prime Minister Netanyahu is in London, first stop of several in which he will be lobbying against support for the new unity government. That unity deal, he says, is a blow to peace, and a victory for terrorism.
Abbas, he points out, in signing with Hamas, has "embraced" an organization that lamented the death of bin Laden, calling him a "martyr."
A careful choice of words, I think. This very fact -- which thoroughly infuriated Obama -- is going to make it harder (though not impossible) for the president and certain others to approach the unity government with anything resembling good will.
For the time being, at least, we can safely assume that there will be no more "peace initiatives" with pressure applied to Israel to make more concessions for "peace." Netanyahu has made it clear we will not negotiate with this unity government. Although Secretary of State Clinton has still been making unsettling noises about the continuing US relationship with the PA.
~~~~~~~~~~
© Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner, functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced only with proper attribution.
Thursday, May 05, 2011
Wednesday, May 04, 2011
My Kingdom for a Hoax
Emmanuel Navon
To post a comment, click here: http://navonsblog.blogspot.com/2011/05/my-kingdom-for-hoax.html
A specter is haunting Israel. As the Palestinian Authority is threatening to declare statehood in September with UN recognition, many Israelis seem to believe that the Apocalypse is near. What is approaching, however, is not a Big Bang but a Big Flop.
The creation of a Palestinian state has already been proclaimed, and the admission of this “state” to the UN has already been recommended by the General Assembly. On November 15, 1988, Yasser Arafat proclaimed in Algiers the establishment of “The State of Palestine” with Jerusalem as its capital and Arafat as its President. One month later, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution that acknowledged “the proclamation of the State of Palestine” and that replaced the PLO with “Palestine” at the UN. One hundred and four states voted in favor of the resolution, forty-four abstained, and two (the US and Israel) voted against. Since then, the UN General Assembly has passed many resolutions supporting Palestinian statehood. UN General Assembly resolutions, however, are not binding (as opposed to Security Council resolutions). They are mere recommendations. The General Assembly does not and cannot establish states. Contrary to a widespread misconception, the UN did not establish the State of Israel. On November 29, 1947, the General Assembly only approved the recommendation of UNSCOP (the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine) to divide the British Mandate between a Jewish state and an Arab state. This approval was a non-binding opinion. What established the State of Israel were seven decades of labor and a war of Independence in which the Jews fought by themselves without any help from the UN (though with the military backing of a Soviet satellite –Czechoslovakia).
Nor can the General Assembly admit new members at the UN without the approval of the Security Council. If one of the five permanent members of the Security Council puts its veto, the “State of Palestine” will not be accepted to UN (Kosovo is not a UN member because of Russia’s veto). Hence the diplomatic efforts deployed by Israel and by the PA to lobby the Security Council’s two wavering veto-holders (Britain and France).
The difference between 1988 and 2011, of course, is that the PLO and Hamas partially control the West Bank and Gaza. Back then, the PLO was operating from Tunis and Hamas was in its infancy. Territorial control, even a partial one, makes the Palestinian “declaration of independence” more potent. The 1933 Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States lays down the most widely accepted formulation of the criteria of statehood in international law: 1. A permanent population; 2. A defined territory; 3. A government; 4. A capacity to enter into relations with other states. The PA fits the bill, but with two caveats that will nurture the upcoming diplomatic struggle between Israel and the Palestinians.
Until last week, the Palestinians had two governments: a Fatah government in the West Bank and a Hamas government in Gaza. While the recent Hamas-Fatah deal officially puts an end to this duality, the new Palestinian government is made up of a terrorist organization recognized as such by the US, the EU, Canada, Australia, Japan, and Israel. The Palestinians will try to obtain the “moral laundering” of Hamas (they can count on the support of countries such as Russia, Turkey, Norway, and Switzerland), while Israel will try and convince the EU not to remove Hamas from its black list.
The second caveat has to do with territory. The “Palestinian territory” is not defined. It is disputed. Hamas openly claims all of Palestine, while Fatah will officially do with the entirety of the West Bank, of Gaza, and of East Jerusalem (a review of PA schoolbooks, TV programs, and public speeches in Arabic suggests otherwise). Mahmud Abbas’ claim that the entire West Bank “belongs” to the Palestinians lacks both historical and legal basis. The 1949 “Green Line” was a temporary armistice line between Israel and its Arab aggressors. UN Security Council Resolution 242 does not require an Israeli withdrawal to those lines. The West Bank was ruled (and annexed) by Jordan between 1949 and 1967; there never was a Palestinian state there in the past. The Palestinians are trying to obliterate these facts by arguing that their territorial claims are backed by international law. They are not. But most countries endorse the Palestinians’ territorial claims. As for the Obama Administration, it has neither endorsed nor repudiated President Bush’s letter to Ariel Sharon (from April 14, 2004), which stated inter alia that “it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949.”
The true purpose of the September vote is not to declare and recognize a state that has already been declared and recognized in the past. Its true purpose is to obtain three things from the international community: 1. To abandon the demand that the Palestinians renounce their claim about the “right of return” as a condition for statehood; 2. To grant legitimacy to Hamas; 3. To de-legitimize any Jewish presence beyond the “green line” (including in Jerusalem’s Old City).
While the September vote at the UN General Assembly will be legally meaningless, it will implicitly recognize the “right of return” and whitewash Hamas’ hideous ideology and crimes. As we Israelis are about to celebrate 63 years of independence, our struggle for it is far from being over.
Emmanuel Navon, 6 May 2011.
To post a comment, click here: http://navonsblog.blogspot.com/2011/05/my-kingdom-for-hoax.html
A specter is haunting Israel. As the Palestinian Authority is threatening to declare statehood in September with UN recognition, many Israelis seem to believe that the Apocalypse is near. What is approaching, however, is not a Big Bang but a Big Flop.
The creation of a Palestinian state has already been proclaimed, and the admission of this “state” to the UN has already been recommended by the General Assembly. On November 15, 1988, Yasser Arafat proclaimed in Algiers the establishment of “The State of Palestine” with Jerusalem as its capital and Arafat as its President. One month later, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution that acknowledged “the proclamation of the State of Palestine” and that replaced the PLO with “Palestine” at the UN. One hundred and four states voted in favor of the resolution, forty-four abstained, and two (the US and Israel) voted against. Since then, the UN General Assembly has passed many resolutions supporting Palestinian statehood. UN General Assembly resolutions, however, are not binding (as opposed to Security Council resolutions). They are mere recommendations. The General Assembly does not and cannot establish states. Contrary to a widespread misconception, the UN did not establish the State of Israel. On November 29, 1947, the General Assembly only approved the recommendation of UNSCOP (the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine) to divide the British Mandate between a Jewish state and an Arab state. This approval was a non-binding opinion. What established the State of Israel were seven decades of labor and a war of Independence in which the Jews fought by themselves without any help from the UN (though with the military backing of a Soviet satellite –Czechoslovakia).
Nor can the General Assembly admit new members at the UN without the approval of the Security Council. If one of the five permanent members of the Security Council puts its veto, the “State of Palestine” will not be accepted to UN (Kosovo is not a UN member because of Russia’s veto). Hence the diplomatic efforts deployed by Israel and by the PA to lobby the Security Council’s two wavering veto-holders (Britain and France).
The difference between 1988 and 2011, of course, is that the PLO and Hamas partially control the West Bank and Gaza. Back then, the PLO was operating from Tunis and Hamas was in its infancy. Territorial control, even a partial one, makes the Palestinian “declaration of independence” more potent. The 1933 Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States lays down the most widely accepted formulation of the criteria of statehood in international law: 1. A permanent population; 2. A defined territory; 3. A government; 4. A capacity to enter into relations with other states. The PA fits the bill, but with two caveats that will nurture the upcoming diplomatic struggle between Israel and the Palestinians.
Until last week, the Palestinians had two governments: a Fatah government in the West Bank and a Hamas government in Gaza. While the recent Hamas-Fatah deal officially puts an end to this duality, the new Palestinian government is made up of a terrorist organization recognized as such by the US, the EU, Canada, Australia, Japan, and Israel. The Palestinians will try to obtain the “moral laundering” of Hamas (they can count on the support of countries such as Russia, Turkey, Norway, and Switzerland), while Israel will try and convince the EU not to remove Hamas from its black list.
The second caveat has to do with territory. The “Palestinian territory” is not defined. It is disputed. Hamas openly claims all of Palestine, while Fatah will officially do with the entirety of the West Bank, of Gaza, and of East Jerusalem (a review of PA schoolbooks, TV programs, and public speeches in Arabic suggests otherwise). Mahmud Abbas’ claim that the entire West Bank “belongs” to the Palestinians lacks both historical and legal basis. The 1949 “Green Line” was a temporary armistice line between Israel and its Arab aggressors. UN Security Council Resolution 242 does not require an Israeli withdrawal to those lines. The West Bank was ruled (and annexed) by Jordan between 1949 and 1967; there never was a Palestinian state there in the past. The Palestinians are trying to obliterate these facts by arguing that their territorial claims are backed by international law. They are not. But most countries endorse the Palestinians’ territorial claims. As for the Obama Administration, it has neither endorsed nor repudiated President Bush’s letter to Ariel Sharon (from April 14, 2004), which stated inter alia that “it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949.”
The true purpose of the September vote is not to declare and recognize a state that has already been declared and recognized in the past. Its true purpose is to obtain three things from the international community: 1. To abandon the demand that the Palestinians renounce their claim about the “right of return” as a condition for statehood; 2. To grant legitimacy to Hamas; 3. To de-legitimize any Jewish presence beyond the “green line” (including in Jerusalem’s Old City).
While the September vote at the UN General Assembly will be legally meaningless, it will implicitly recognize the “right of return” and whitewash Hamas’ hideous ideology and crimes. As we Israelis are about to celebrate 63 years of independence, our struggle for it is far from being over.
Emmanuel Navon, 6 May 2011.
Civil Administration Aids German-Funded Building of Medical Clinic in Jordan Valley
IDF Spokesperson
Officers from the Civil Administration toured the Palestinian village of Jiftlik in the Jordan Valley on Thursday (April 28th) , accompanied by representatives from the Civil Administration’s Planning and Archaeology Departments, officials from the German Consulate, members of GIZ, a German organization working towards international sustainable development, and the head of the Jiftlik village council, Mr. Abed Kassab. The tour was intended to survey progress in the nearby archaeological digging sites, where a clinic for the village residents is set to be built by GIZ (German Society for International Cooperation). Following the German consulate’s request to build the clinic, the Civil Administration evaluated the allocation of land. During initial evaluations, archaeological ruins were discovered on the site of the proposed clinic (located on Area C). The Civil Administration decided to contribute 150,000 NIS (approx. 44,200 USD) to fund the archaeological excavations, after which the site would be eligible for construction.
During the excavations, archaeologists unearthed buildings from the ancient Roman and Byzantine periods, as well as ceramic shards, basalt tools, a preserved furnace and 40 historical coins. The coins were transferred to the Head of the Archaeological Department in the Civil Administration, who will determine their origins and help clean and preserve them before presenting the historical artifacts to the public.
The Civil Administration is committed to working to establish the Jiftlik medical clinic, thus improving the medical treatment received by thousands of Palestinians in the Jordan Valley. As such, the Civil Administration is also dedicated to exploring and preserving historical remains in areas of its responsibility. It works closely with Palestinian locals, foreign governments, and aid organizations to achieve these goals.
Officers from the Civil Administration toured the Palestinian village of Jiftlik in the Jordan Valley on Thursday (April 28th) , accompanied by representatives from the Civil Administration’s Planning and Archaeology Departments, officials from the German Consulate, members of GIZ, a German organization working towards international sustainable development, and the head of the Jiftlik village council, Mr. Abed Kassab. The tour was intended to survey progress in the nearby archaeological digging sites, where a clinic for the village residents is set to be built by GIZ (German Society for International Cooperation). Following the German consulate’s request to build the clinic, the Civil Administration evaluated the allocation of land. During initial evaluations, archaeological ruins were discovered on the site of the proposed clinic (located on Area C). The Civil Administration decided to contribute 150,000 NIS (approx. 44,200 USD) to fund the archaeological excavations, after which the site would be eligible for construction.
During the excavations, archaeologists unearthed buildings from the ancient Roman and Byzantine periods, as well as ceramic shards, basalt tools, a preserved furnace and 40 historical coins. The coins were transferred to the Head of the Archaeological Department in the Civil Administration, who will determine their origins and help clean and preserve them before presenting the historical artifacts to the public.
The Civil Administration is committed to working to establish the Jiftlik medical clinic, thus improving the medical treatment received by thousands of Palestinians in the Jordan Valley. As such, the Civil Administration is also dedicated to exploring and preserving historical remains in areas of its responsibility. It works closely with Palestinian locals, foreign governments, and aid organizations to achieve these goals.
Tuesday, May 03, 2011
The Necessity of Israel
David Solway
As everyone knows, Israel is the one nation on earth whose right to exist is being constantly questioned and challenged. It is the disproportionate target of the United Nations Human Rights Council which devotes the majority of its sessions to attacking the Jewish state while giving the world’s most egregious Human Rights violators a Get Out of Jail Free card. Israel is subject to a worldwide BDS campaign and to the vicious defamation of Israel Apartheid Weeks hosted on our morally debased university campuses. The ideology of the left demonizes Israel as a racist and conquistador nation that must be delegitimized, launching books, blogs, resolutions and flotillas against its very existence. Meanwhile, its Muslim neighbors have vowed to physically erase it from the map of the world, killing indiscriminately, firing rockets at its civil centers with the regularity of a metronome, and preparing for its version of the Final Solution. Why should this be so? Are we witnessing the geographic displacement of a millennial prejudice from the diaspora to the nation, with Israel as the collective incarnation of the “international Jew”? Is the current assault on Israel merely the contemporary form of the age-old pogrom? Has the West embarked on a political and economic entente with the petro-tyrannies of the Muslim Middle East, selling its soul in the process to a triumphalist Islam, as Bat Ye’or has persuasively argued in Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis and Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide? The answer to such rhetorical questions is self-evident.
But bigotry and baseless aspersion are never openly admitted. Rather, for antisemites and anti-Zionists, Israel is regarded as a geopolitical irritant, a historical mistake, an artificial construct that should never have been established, however validly and legally. For the Quartet negotiators (the UN, The EU, the United States and Russia), and particularly for Britain, France and Germany, it is as if UN Resolution 242, guaranteeing “secure and recognized boundaries,” has no legitimate force. For Islam, Israel is an interloper in the region, despite the indisputable historical fact that Israel and Judea predate the Arab occupation of the Holy Land by more than a thousand years. For the so-called “realist” school of international relations, Israel is a political liability and therefore ultimately dispensable.
Moreover, Israel is by no means a great power. It is by normal census standards sparsely populated, and it covers about as much territory as Wales or New Jersey—as former mayor of New York Ed Koch says, one “might need a magnifying glass to see Israel” in a World Atlas since it could easily “disappear in the crease of a page.” In the larger scheme of things, presumably, its absence would scarcely be noticed.
Monday, May 02, 2011
"Yom HaShoah"
Arlene Kushner
In Israel, it's Holocaust Martyrs and Heroes Remembrance Day -- because we must remember those Jews who fought back against their Nazi torturers, as well as those whom the Nazis destroyed.
At 10:00 AM this morning, the siren sounded and the nation stood still. Remembering, thinking...
~~~~~~~~~~
Inevitably, Yom HaShoah becomes -- both literally and figuratively -- more distant with time, as the number of direct witnesses who are still alive diminishes.
But we must never forget.
With the remembering comes our cry, "Never again!"
With the remembering comes the understanding that there is such a thing as consummate, unmitigated evil in this world, and that it must be recognized and fought without respite.
Unfortunately, the world does not remotely understand this. (Yet?) A Holocaust memorial video. Unbearable, and yet we must remember. The song, rendered quite beautifully, is "Ani Ma'amin" -- I believe with perfect faith... A miracle, that we are still here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dr9e639d1Js&feature=related
~~~~~~~~~~
I rather like the three statements regarding the Shoah that Liat Collins shared in her JPost column yesterday:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=218606
1) "Elie Wiesel: 'The Shoah wasn’t a crime against humanity, but a crime against the Jews.'”
Today the terms and images specific to the Shoah are borrowed freely by many protesting violent offenses of one sort or another. But when everything becomes like everything else, then the historical realities are blurred or misunderstood or forgotten.
2) "Writer Haim Guri: 'Israel was created not because of the Shoah but in spite of it.'"
This is an extremely important point. The mythology in many quarters -- fostered by the Arabs -- is that Israel exists only because after the Shoah Jews had no other place to go. The Arab version has it that they are now suffering at Jewish hands because of the Holocaust; many Europeans, in particular, have bought this. This is, as well as being a libel, a denial of our intrinsic rights.
The reality is that our claim to this land is more than 3,000 years old, and our modern legal rights were established decades before the Shoah.
3) Unattributed: "Had there been a Jewish state in the 1930s, the Holocaust might not have happened at all, or would have been on a much-reduced scale."
A stark reminder, in particular, to those Jewish members of the younger generation who imagine it's OK to dissociate themselves from Israel because they're doing just fine where they are. The younger generation is without memory. If they are doing just fine they had best look to the role that Israel has played in their lives by conveying messages of Jewish power. Every Yom HaShoah, we hear from the IDF that it considers itself responsible for Jews everywhere.
~~~~~~~~~~
See this video of a Yad V'Shem (Israeli Holocaust Memorial) ceremony at Auschwitz that includes the fly-over of Israeli Air Force planes. It makes the point regarding the need for Israel's power stunningly:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfv3jsLGzL0
~~~~~~~~~~
Please, also see this article of mine that went up on American Thinker a couple of days ago:
It shares basic facts -- truths that must be known and of which too few are aware:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/04/the_palestinian_authority_what.html
After you have seen it, please then share the URL with others, including your elected representatives in Congress.
It's a certainty that there are many Congresspersons and Senators who are unaware of the events described in the article. And right now, that's not a situation that we can ignore. In a pinch, their understanding will make a difference:
For your Congresspersons:
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml
For your Senators:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~
The US got bin Laden at last. This is good, although it hardly signals the demise of radical Islam in that part of the world, as some would have it. His capture and murder should have considerable psychological impact, but the battle against al-Qaeda and its ilk will go on.
The palace in Pakistan where he was located puts the lie to the notion that terrorists are enraged because they are poverty stricken. This terrorist was anything but...
~~~~~~~~~~
Hamas is mourning the killing of this "Arab holy warrior," and condemns the US action.
Think the world will take notice? Nah...
~~~~~~~~~~
© Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner, functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced only with proper attribution.
In Israel, it's Holocaust Martyrs and Heroes Remembrance Day -- because we must remember those Jews who fought back against their Nazi torturers, as well as those whom the Nazis destroyed.
At 10:00 AM this morning, the siren sounded and the nation stood still. Remembering, thinking...
~~~~~~~~~~
Inevitably, Yom HaShoah becomes -- both literally and figuratively -- more distant with time, as the number of direct witnesses who are still alive diminishes.
But we must never forget.
With the remembering comes our cry, "Never again!"
With the remembering comes the understanding that there is such a thing as consummate, unmitigated evil in this world, and that it must be recognized and fought without respite.
Unfortunately, the world does not remotely understand this. (Yet?) A Holocaust memorial video. Unbearable, and yet we must remember. The song, rendered quite beautifully, is "Ani Ma'amin" -- I believe with perfect faith... A miracle, that we are still here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dr9e639d1Js&feature=related
~~~~~~~~~~
I rather like the three statements regarding the Shoah that Liat Collins shared in her JPost column yesterday:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=218606
1) "Elie Wiesel: 'The Shoah wasn’t a crime against humanity, but a crime against the Jews.'”
Today the terms and images specific to the Shoah are borrowed freely by many protesting violent offenses of one sort or another. But when everything becomes like everything else, then the historical realities are blurred or misunderstood or forgotten.
2) "Writer Haim Guri: 'Israel was created not because of the Shoah but in spite of it.'"
This is an extremely important point. The mythology in many quarters -- fostered by the Arabs -- is that Israel exists only because after the Shoah Jews had no other place to go. The Arab version has it that they are now suffering at Jewish hands because of the Holocaust; many Europeans, in particular, have bought this. This is, as well as being a libel, a denial of our intrinsic rights.
The reality is that our claim to this land is more than 3,000 years old, and our modern legal rights were established decades before the Shoah.
3) Unattributed: "Had there been a Jewish state in the 1930s, the Holocaust might not have happened at all, or would have been on a much-reduced scale."
A stark reminder, in particular, to those Jewish members of the younger generation who imagine it's OK to dissociate themselves from Israel because they're doing just fine where they are. The younger generation is without memory. If they are doing just fine they had best look to the role that Israel has played in their lives by conveying messages of Jewish power. Every Yom HaShoah, we hear from the IDF that it considers itself responsible for Jews everywhere.
~~~~~~~~~~
See this video of a Yad V'Shem (Israeli Holocaust Memorial) ceremony at Auschwitz that includes the fly-over of Israeli Air Force planes. It makes the point regarding the need for Israel's power stunningly:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfv3jsLGzL0
~~~~~~~~~~
Please, also see this article of mine that went up on American Thinker a couple of days ago:
It shares basic facts -- truths that must be known and of which too few are aware:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/04/the_palestinian_authority_what.html
After you have seen it, please then share the URL with others, including your elected representatives in Congress.
It's a certainty that there are many Congresspersons and Senators who are unaware of the events described in the article. And right now, that's not a situation that we can ignore. In a pinch, their understanding will make a difference:
For your Congresspersons:
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml
For your Senators:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~
The US got bin Laden at last. This is good, although it hardly signals the demise of radical Islam in that part of the world, as some would have it. His capture and murder should have considerable psychological impact, but the battle against al-Qaeda and its ilk will go on.
The palace in Pakistan where he was located puts the lie to the notion that terrorists are enraged because they are poverty stricken. This terrorist was anything but...
~~~~~~~~~~
Hamas is mourning the killing of this "Arab holy warrior," and condemns the US action.
Think the world will take notice? Nah...
~~~~~~~~~~
© Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner, functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced only with proper attribution.
Bin Laden Dead
Heritage Foundation
Justice has been done. Nearly 10 years since the 9/11 attacks that left more than 3,000 Americans dead, Osama bin Laden was killed by a small team of U.S. military personnel operating under the authority of the Central Intelligence Agency. We first want to congratulate the men and women of our military and intelligence communities, past and present, who worked tirelessly across three Administrations to bring ultimate justice to the man who killed so many. The war on terror, though, is not over.
Bin Laden’s death is the most significant victory in the war on terror since the 9/11 attacks, more important than the arrest of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in 2006. Bin Laden’s elimination vindicates U.S. strategy in the region, started under President George W. Bush, and it will be seen as a major success for the United States, showing the world that America will remain committed to hunting down its enemies as long it takes.But while America should take great satisfaction in this tremendous achievement, the United States must remain vigilant against a terrorist threat that is not yet vanquished. Terrorists are trying to attack us both at home and abroad; with 38 terrorist plots foiled since 9/11, these attempts will certainly continue, if not get worse.
With bin Laden’s death, which came by way of a small, covert strike force, there will be an impulse to believe that this action validates that covert operations are a cheap and simple answer to the most vexing national security problems. They are not. They are just one tool in the tool box. Among those tools, too, is the strategic and lawful interrogation of detainees, including those at Guantanamo Bay. President Obama and Congress should not use bin Laden’s death as an excuse to turn back the clock on the counterterrorism tools we need, like the PATRIOT Act.
That full range of tools must be applied to the United States’ continued efforts against terrorism in Afghanistan and around the world. Bin Laden’s death is a demoralizing blow against al-Qaeda that could be followed up by additional strikes against other al-Qaeda leaders. But though this is a significant achievement, much work remains. First and foremost, the United States must finish the job in Afghanistan and not relent in defeating the Taliban.
The operation also highlights that Pakistan is truly at the epicenter of global terrorism. The fact that the world’s most-wanted terrorist was captured in a major Pakistani city 150 kilometers from the nation’s capital should silence those Pakistanis who rejected the idea that bin Laden was hiding in their country as a Western conspiracy. It should also strengthen President Obama’s hand in pushing the Pakistanis to continue to take action against other terrorists on their soil.
The details on Pakistan’s involvement in the operation are still unclear. If Pakistani intelligence played a substantial role in locating bin Laden, it would generate a deep reservoir of American goodwill for Pakistan. If, on the other hand, it was largely a U.S. unilateral operation, the positive impact on relations would be more short-lived.
Ayman al-Zawahiri will almost certainly take over as al-Qaeda’s new chief. Zawahiri had in recent years become both the public voice and operational planner of al-Qaeda. However, since bin Laden was the founder and spiritual head of al-Qaeda, his death will demoralize the ranks of the organization and thus will likely be a major strategic setback for the movement. Zawahiri does not carry the same mythical aura as bin Laden and thus the organization will likely lose its luster among young recruits.
But threats remain. Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is responsible for three terror plots here in the last 18 months, something that the organization’s core could not accomplish. And, likewise, the Taliban just last weekend launched a new offensive against U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Those are facts the U.S. government must bear in mind as the debate begins over the defense budget. There is no “peace dividend” with bin Laden’s death — our military is underfunded, and we must not shortchange our military men and women who are fighting to protect America.
Though al-Qaeda suffered a significant blow last night, it was not a fatal one. It is worth stating again: the war on terrorism is not over, and the war in Afghanistan is not won. America must remain vigilant and continue its global fight against terrorism.
Edwin J. Feulner, Ph.D.
President, The Heritage Foundation
Quick Hits:
* Following news of bin Laden’s death, spontaneous celebrations erupted at Ground Zero, where thousands sang the National Anthem. Others gathered at Times Square and on the streets outside the White House.
* President George W. Bush said of bin Laden’s death, “This momentous achievement marks a victory for America, for people who seek peace around the world, and for all those who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001.”
* Former U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair said today, “The operation shows those who commit acts of terror against the innocent will be brought to justice, however long it takes.”
* Front pages of newspapers from around the country were scrapped last night in anticipation of the breaking news from the White House. This morning they carried news of bin Laden’s death.
* Read about the next steps to winning the long war against terrorism.
Justice has been done. Nearly 10 years since the 9/11 attacks that left more than 3,000 Americans dead, Osama bin Laden was killed by a small team of U.S. military personnel operating under the authority of the Central Intelligence Agency. We first want to congratulate the men and women of our military and intelligence communities, past and present, who worked tirelessly across three Administrations to bring ultimate justice to the man who killed so many. The war on terror, though, is not over.
Bin Laden’s death is the most significant victory in the war on terror since the 9/11 attacks, more important than the arrest of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in 2006. Bin Laden’s elimination vindicates U.S. strategy in the region, started under President George W. Bush, and it will be seen as a major success for the United States, showing the world that America will remain committed to hunting down its enemies as long it takes.But while America should take great satisfaction in this tremendous achievement, the United States must remain vigilant against a terrorist threat that is not yet vanquished. Terrorists are trying to attack us both at home and abroad; with 38 terrorist plots foiled since 9/11, these attempts will certainly continue, if not get worse.
With bin Laden’s death, which came by way of a small, covert strike force, there will be an impulse to believe that this action validates that covert operations are a cheap and simple answer to the most vexing national security problems. They are not. They are just one tool in the tool box. Among those tools, too, is the strategic and lawful interrogation of detainees, including those at Guantanamo Bay. President Obama and Congress should not use bin Laden’s death as an excuse to turn back the clock on the counterterrorism tools we need, like the PATRIOT Act.
That full range of tools must be applied to the United States’ continued efforts against terrorism in Afghanistan and around the world. Bin Laden’s death is a demoralizing blow against al-Qaeda that could be followed up by additional strikes against other al-Qaeda leaders. But though this is a significant achievement, much work remains. First and foremost, the United States must finish the job in Afghanistan and not relent in defeating the Taliban.
The operation also highlights that Pakistan is truly at the epicenter of global terrorism. The fact that the world’s most-wanted terrorist was captured in a major Pakistani city 150 kilometers from the nation’s capital should silence those Pakistanis who rejected the idea that bin Laden was hiding in their country as a Western conspiracy. It should also strengthen President Obama’s hand in pushing the Pakistanis to continue to take action against other terrorists on their soil.
The details on Pakistan’s involvement in the operation are still unclear. If Pakistani intelligence played a substantial role in locating bin Laden, it would generate a deep reservoir of American goodwill for Pakistan. If, on the other hand, it was largely a U.S. unilateral operation, the positive impact on relations would be more short-lived.
Ayman al-Zawahiri will almost certainly take over as al-Qaeda’s new chief. Zawahiri had in recent years become both the public voice and operational planner of al-Qaeda. However, since bin Laden was the founder and spiritual head of al-Qaeda, his death will demoralize the ranks of the organization and thus will likely be a major strategic setback for the movement. Zawahiri does not carry the same mythical aura as bin Laden and thus the organization will likely lose its luster among young recruits.
But threats remain. Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is responsible for three terror plots here in the last 18 months, something that the organization’s core could not accomplish. And, likewise, the Taliban just last weekend launched a new offensive against U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Those are facts the U.S. government must bear in mind as the debate begins over the defense budget. There is no “peace dividend” with bin Laden’s death — our military is underfunded, and we must not shortchange our military men and women who are fighting to protect America.
Though al-Qaeda suffered a significant blow last night, it was not a fatal one. It is worth stating again: the war on terrorism is not over, and the war in Afghanistan is not won. America must remain vigilant and continue its global fight against terrorism.
Edwin J. Feulner, Ph.D.
President, The Heritage Foundation
Quick Hits:
* Following news of bin Laden’s death, spontaneous celebrations erupted at Ground Zero, where thousands sang the National Anthem. Others gathered at Times Square and on the streets outside the White House.
* President George W. Bush said of bin Laden’s death, “This momentous achievement marks a victory for America, for people who seek peace around the world, and for all those who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001.”
* Former U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair said today, “The operation shows those who commit acts of terror against the innocent will be brought to justice, however long it takes.”
* Front pages of newspapers from around the country were scrapped last night in anticipation of the breaking news from the White House. This morning they carried news of bin Laden’s death.
* Read about the next steps to winning the long war against terrorism.
Distorting the Holocaust
Op-ed: Comparison of current-day events, Israeli actions to Nazis has gone mainstream
Manfred Gerstenfeld
Published: 05.01.11
For several decades now, the Holocaust has been the symbol of absolute evil in Western society.Both mention and distortion of the Shoah regularly resurface in the public sphere.
Holocaust education is a centerpiece of remembrance and, one would hope, a prevention of the repetition of genocide. There are, however, strong indications that in today’s Western world Shoah distortion also creates a major impact. Many think of Holocaust denial in this context. Far more frequent however, is another extremely dangerous distortion of the Shoah’s memory, the inversion of the Holocaust – that is, considering Jews and in particular Israelis as Nazis. This perception has now become a mainstream view in both Western and Eastern Europe. A recent study in several countries by the University of Bielefeld on behalf of the German Friedrich Ebert Foundation shows its permeation into European societies. The study found that 63% of Poles think that Israel is conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians. The lowest figures in the study are from the Italians and the Dutch respectively, with 38% and 39%.
In Hungary, Great Britain, Germany and Portugal, between 40% and 50% think this. The study shows that, almost unnoticed, a new Europe with a widespread criminal worldview has emerged.
Some subjects concerning the Holocaust come to the fore every year. One is the way Pope Pius XII’s wartime history is remembered. There are continuous Catholic efforts to embellish it. In November 2010, Italian Jewish leaders sharply criticized a documentary that showed how Pope Pius XII made a major effort to save the Jews of Rome during the Holocaust. Rome’s Chief Rabbi Riccardo Di Segni, called the mini-series “junk.”
In December, The Guardian revealed that the Vatican had wanted to join the International Task Force on Holocaust Education, Remembrance, and Research (ITF). However, a US diplomatic cable from October 200 said the Vatican had backed out of it - perhaps due to its desire to avoid declassifying records from the war during the Pontificate of Pope Pius XII.
Berlusconi’s jokes
Another regularly returning issue concerns the memory of Anne Frank. In August, 2010 the chestnut tree that Anne had seen from her hiding place in the heart of Amsterdam was felled during a storm. This story became one of the most publicized issues concerning the Holocaust in the past year. Hundreds of media from all over the world showed photos of the fallen tree, or reported on it. Saplings were taken to be planted in the US, Israel and other countries so that the tree would live on. It was announced that blocks of the fallen tree would be placed in museums in various countries.
There was more “news” related to Anne Frank. Earlier this month a new book revealed that Karl Joseph Silberbauer, the Austrian SS officer who arrested the Frank family, was one of hundreds of Nazis employed by the German post-war intelligence service.
The diversity of “Holocaust issues” is great. One that was widely reported was of Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi telling youths at a rally a joke whereby Adolf Hitler was asked by his supporters to take power again after they discovered that he was still alive. Hitler answered, according to Berlusconi: “I’ll come back, but only on one condition – next time I’m going to be evil.” On his birthday a month later, Berlusconi told another joke, making fun of a Jew hiding another Jew during the Holocaust.
The idea of Holocaust equivalence, i.e., that some people currently behave like Nazis, also comes up regularly. In September 2010, former Cuban leader Fidel Castro accused France of carrying out a “racial holocaust” against the Roma, of which 1,000 had been expelled from the country in the preceding weeks. Viviane Reding, the EU’s Justice Commissioner, considered the French treatment of Roma as a disgrace that reminded her of the Second World War roundups of gypsies and Jews.
At the same time, the commemoration of the Shoah also gets new impetus. Rome Mayor Gianni Alemanno announced the creation of the first Italian Shoah Museum. It will open in 2013 in Rome. Athens was the last European capital to establish a Holocaust memorial. And in March, Israel and UNESCO signed an agreement to promote Holocaust education and to fight its denial.
The battle for maintaining a correct memory of the Holocaust and the fighting of distortions will become more difficult as the last generation of survivors passes away. This battle has to consist of many actions. They include, besides Holocaust education, the continual recording of survivors’ testimonies, activities by the second generation of survivors, public debate, research, activities in museums, remembrance ceremonies, legislation and many more such efforts.
Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld has published 19 books, including The Abuse of Holocaust Memory: Distortions and Responses
Manfred Gerstenfeld
Published: 05.01.11
For several decades now, the Holocaust has been the symbol of absolute evil in Western society.Both mention and distortion of the Shoah regularly resurface in the public sphere.
Holocaust education is a centerpiece of remembrance and, one would hope, a prevention of the repetition of genocide. There are, however, strong indications that in today’s Western world Shoah distortion also creates a major impact. Many think of Holocaust denial in this context. Far more frequent however, is another extremely dangerous distortion of the Shoah’s memory, the inversion of the Holocaust – that is, considering Jews and in particular Israelis as Nazis. This perception has now become a mainstream view in both Western and Eastern Europe. A recent study in several countries by the University of Bielefeld on behalf of the German Friedrich Ebert Foundation shows its permeation into European societies. The study found that 63% of Poles think that Israel is conducting a war of extermination against the Palestinians. The lowest figures in the study are from the Italians and the Dutch respectively, with 38% and 39%.
In Hungary, Great Britain, Germany and Portugal, between 40% and 50% think this. The study shows that, almost unnoticed, a new Europe with a widespread criminal worldview has emerged.
Some subjects concerning the Holocaust come to the fore every year. One is the way Pope Pius XII’s wartime history is remembered. There are continuous Catholic efforts to embellish it. In November 2010, Italian Jewish leaders sharply criticized a documentary that showed how Pope Pius XII made a major effort to save the Jews of Rome during the Holocaust. Rome’s Chief Rabbi Riccardo Di Segni, called the mini-series “junk.”
In December, The Guardian revealed that the Vatican had wanted to join the International Task Force on Holocaust Education, Remembrance, and Research (ITF). However, a US diplomatic cable from October 200 said the Vatican had backed out of it - perhaps due to its desire to avoid declassifying records from the war during the Pontificate of Pope Pius XII.
Berlusconi’s jokes
Another regularly returning issue concerns the memory of Anne Frank. In August, 2010 the chestnut tree that Anne had seen from her hiding place in the heart of Amsterdam was felled during a storm. This story became one of the most publicized issues concerning the Holocaust in the past year. Hundreds of media from all over the world showed photos of the fallen tree, or reported on it. Saplings were taken to be planted in the US, Israel and other countries so that the tree would live on. It was announced that blocks of the fallen tree would be placed in museums in various countries.
There was more “news” related to Anne Frank. Earlier this month a new book revealed that Karl Joseph Silberbauer, the Austrian SS officer who arrested the Frank family, was one of hundreds of Nazis employed by the German post-war intelligence service.
The diversity of “Holocaust issues” is great. One that was widely reported was of Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi telling youths at a rally a joke whereby Adolf Hitler was asked by his supporters to take power again after they discovered that he was still alive. Hitler answered, according to Berlusconi: “I’ll come back, but only on one condition – next time I’m going to be evil.” On his birthday a month later, Berlusconi told another joke, making fun of a Jew hiding another Jew during the Holocaust.
The idea of Holocaust equivalence, i.e., that some people currently behave like Nazis, also comes up regularly. In September 2010, former Cuban leader Fidel Castro accused France of carrying out a “racial holocaust” against the Roma, of which 1,000 had been expelled from the country in the preceding weeks. Viviane Reding, the EU’s Justice Commissioner, considered the French treatment of Roma as a disgrace that reminded her of the Second World War roundups of gypsies and Jews.
At the same time, the commemoration of the Shoah also gets new impetus. Rome Mayor Gianni Alemanno announced the creation of the first Italian Shoah Museum. It will open in 2013 in Rome. Athens was the last European capital to establish a Holocaust memorial. And in March, Israel and UNESCO signed an agreement to promote Holocaust education and to fight its denial.
The battle for maintaining a correct memory of the Holocaust and the fighting of distortions will become more difficult as the last generation of survivors passes away. This battle has to consist of many actions. They include, besides Holocaust education, the continual recording of survivors’ testimonies, activities by the second generation of survivors, public debate, research, activities in museums, remembrance ceremonies, legislation and many more such efforts.
Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld has published 19 books, including The Abuse of Holocaust Memory: Distortions and Responses
Sunday, May 01, 2011
A Conversation About Anti-Semitism
William R. Mann
“The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.” Ayn Rand
This is an article about anti-Semitism, though the reader might think it wanders a bit. It springs from a correspondence I recently shared with my friend, Joan Swirsky, who encouraged me to submit it for publication.
I have been wondering, lately, how it is that racism is seen lurking behind every utterance and act of the Obama opponents. Contrast this with the actions and statements of the opponents of Israel in this country, who are legion in deed if not in word. Do they not consider the very survival of Israel the larger problem today with the Middle East exploding? Is the US still committed to defending Israel? What happens if America does not? Have we simply altered U.S. National Interests, or has creeping and growing anti-Semitism in the Middle East and elsewhere taken root in America as well? Are we edging closer to betraying our best ally in the Middle East? We hear a lot about cultural racism. I think the big problem today is an insidious, cultural anti-Semitism being played out daily in the White House and being cloaked as U.S. Foreign Policy. So, what is there to learn about anti-Semitism? As portrayed in the 1947 film, “Gentleman’s Agreement,” this very pernicious form of bigotry goes beyond skin color, epithets, and ethnicity. That classic film stars Gregory Peck, a writer who poses as a Jew in order to find out about anti-Semitism. He learns more it than he expects. He learns that his secretary hides her Jewish identity by changing her name. Other Jews simply go along to get along. He notices commonly held attitudes that are incredibly hateful. Even the high-minded Liberal folks who hired him turn out to be bigots within the hush-hush of their private conversations. These attitudes persisted in 1947 despite the Holocaust of WWII. For perspective consider that the Nuremberg criminal trials for the major Nazi conspirators had just finished in 1946. Incredible! Do you see, similarly, how easy it is for a national conscience to renege on promises? So it is today as the Obama White House deals with their “Jewish problem.” The White House plan to “throw Israel under the bus” must be executed piecemeal so as not to alarm anyone. They must be discrete: Death to Israel by a thousand paper cuts. Shush! ...Quiet ... Let’s not talk about it.
Contrast this to racial problems in “post-racial” America
Contrast this to racial problems in “post-racial” America. There is always a big deal made about even a whiff of racial bigotry in Obama’s “post-racial” America. Every utterance of disagreement with Obama is dissected and called racism by the Mainstream Media. And, while they’re at it they capriciously add any number of adjectival enhancements: redneck, Republican, Conservative, Southern, bigot, homophobe and others. In their minds, it all fits together. How dangerous is the media’s path? If this kind of journalism is acceptable, then what chance do practicing Jews have in the world today when identified with the now-vilified Israel? In the foreign press today, Jews are frequently described as racist, murderous, treacherous, etc. Not an eyebrow is raised in the Liberal-collectivist worldview when Hamas launches missiles against Israel. The murder of an Israeli family barely makes a headline! Consider this incredible rising tolerance for Islamic barbarism; Jews, religious or not, are at risk worldwide. Christians will readily note that persecutions of Christian believers are way up as well. A Jew’s odds of religious and cultural persecution and attack are far worse than practicing Christians. It is a serious problem.
It is easy, popular and dramatic in the MSM for race-baiters to throw around racist epithets and accusations against individuals, Fox News, and conservative Talk Radio hosts. It gets Obama sympathy points in polls. But it should also tweak our conscience and inspire us to oppose it every time race cards are played. Fox News hosts and Talk Radio folks like Sean Hannity go so far as to invite accusers onto their shows so they can make their case. The race-baiters usually make their charges and accusations with absolutely no evidence, and wind up looking as blindly ignorant as their ideology. To them, those who disagree with their premises are the real racists, the new Klan in blue pinstripe suits.
Have you not heard? President Obama has replaced Reverend Jeremiah Wright with Reverend Jim Wallis of Shiloh Baptist Church in Washington, D.C. This man gets away with making objectionable statements about race, Israel and our governmental structure from the pulpit to his flock without raising eyebrows. I don’t wonder what his position is on Israel—he speaks against Israel. And President Obama does not see anything odd about this man’s rhetoric? What does that say about Obama? The Reverend Jim Wallis is also a member of President Obama’s “faith council.” Did you know that? He has been variously described as a spiritual adviser to the President, a liberal theologian, a socialist activist, and a supporter of collectivist causes that parade as “social justice.” Social Justice, in case you did not know, is code for Marxist Liberation Theology. Pope John Paul II roundly denounced Liberation Theology as being decidedly un-Christian. Reverend Wallis has described the U.S. as “the great captor and destroyer of human life.” If he thinks about Jews, like the Reverend Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan do, I wonder what influence he has on the President’s thinking. Considering Obama’s recent missives against Franklin Graham, I think I can guess.
Because of the MSM’s lack of scrutiny, aided by an army of sycophant supporters, Wallis [like Wright, Jackson, Sharpton, and Louis Farrakhan] fan the flames of separatism while claiming to want a post-racial society. They engage in personal destruction of their opponents by appealing to baser instincts. All the while, they blame the Jews and the white race. They purposely reignite old controversies and reopen old wounds by saying that the old scores were never settled. In my thinking they have become what they claim to be fighting against. What deceivers! Trying to form a Judeo-Christian conscience from such beliefs is simply unhinged and incoherent. These Pastors claim to be Christian, yet espouse erstwhile support and sympathies for the radical Islamic causes, for Palestinian Intifada, for Hamas, Hezbollah, and the deconstruction of Israel and the US Alliance with Israel. In short, one may legitimately ask whether these men are anti-Semites. This is the second of this coin. This form of anti-Semitism is particularly virulent because it carries with it the seeds of genocide. Anti-Semitism is on the rise in Europe. It is also on the rise in America. A check of multiple sources on the Internet easily verifies this. I have discovered in my lifetime that anti-Semitism is not monolithic. It comes in many flavors.
Rise of Black anti-Semitism
So whither the rise of the rise of Black anti-Semitism? Is the jealousy, resentment, and hatred of Jews by many Blacks different from White anti-Semitism? The Black experience in America has been a difficult one. Indeed, Lincoln himself wondered whether America, post slavery, could adapt after this dark chapter of American History. But, I believe that most American Blacks have chosen to move on, claiming full citizenship, and work at integrating into society like every other group of Americans. [There were many slaves and indentured servants of other races as well, many of them in the North.] Some, like many white folks, reject educational and self-improvement opportunities and don’t seem to want to move forward. Still others choose to side with the likes of Wright and Farrakhan and Wallace and espouse a very different vision of America. This latter group very carefully disguises their hatred, they resentment, and complaints against the American system that gives them this freedom to speak. Our President also falls into this latter category despite his statements to the contrary. Modern Black anti-Semitism seems to me to be a virulent mix of old stereotypes and newer Arab ones that blame America and Israel for their backwardness and poverty. If the Whites are oppressors and the Jews [in their eyes] run the banks and industry, then it is easy to believe the Big Satan-Little Satan nonsense.
White anti-Semitism is born of the lies of those who came from Europe where 19 centuries of anti-Jewish enculturation runs deep. Indeed, Christian culture for centuries highlighted the complicity of Jewish politicians who colluded with the Romans to kill their Jesus. Well, the Romans died out after 500 years, but the Europeans still had the Jews to kick around [... just like the Democrats do their bogeymen, Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon, only far more visceral]. The European Continent, perhaps more than the British, display this deep seated resentment, if not outright hatred. Despite the Holocaust of WWII, Europeans are returning in large numbers to this vomit of anti-Semitism. In America, the constant drumbeat against Israel and the self-interested positions of many Left-Liberal, pro-Arab Jews has cause a real problem for the Truth!
But for the Jew in America and around the world, the views are divergent and different. Most Christian leaning Americans have no problems, but many still harbor resentments. Allow me to explain my own limited observations. I, as a Gentile and a Catholic, have heard and seen anti-Semitism all of my life in America and it has not gone away. It has not progressed in a positive direction like race relations had before Obama. I hear the comments and see the attitudes. In reaction to this, I think many American Jews live in a strange denial. They deny their heritage trying to make the problem go away; but it won’t, not in this way. Others betray their own people like quislings, accommodating and siding with those who would destroy them as if the Jews were the ones at fault. Some, perhaps searching for salvation or sanity go to Israel as a Pilgrim; but find little solace and sometimes a different form of discrimination in Israel itself, where the Israeli Left is as virulent as our own leftists. Then there are those who sound off against anti-Semitism bravely. I may have missed a faction or two, but suffice it to say that American Jews are as factionalized as the Gentile population, yet still there is this nagging anti-Semitism.
American anti-Semitism grows in America
American anti-Semitism grows in America because too many Americans see Jewish people who look and talk like them, but somehow strangely have some key to survival and success that they don’t have. They do not understand the culture, the drive, the hard work ethic, but instead resort to lazy anti-Semitic stereotypes. It is not so much hatred as it is, “Why are Jews so special?” or “Why do Jews always seem to get the breaks?” or “Why can’t I have some of what you Jews have?”
Ironically, Americans did once upon a time have everything that the Jews have and know. Over the last Century many have simply given themselves over to the god of modernity and to the evil spiritual forces of gain, envy and jealousy. Gentiles, by and large, do not understand either the nature of Judaism or the exclusiveness of its foundation and survival. Jews, themselves, do little or nothing to remedy this insufficiency on the part of Gentiles, so the problems remain widespread. Confident and erudite Christians, I think, get it. What that means, to “get it” is a different discussion.
As discussed, there are some supposedly Christian sects that are hostile to Judaism. There are also select Christian sects who see the salvation of the Jews a necessary “conversion challenge,” or see Israel only as a necessary entity required to be present for the coming final apocalyptic struggle with Satan and his minions. I also know of certain Protestant Pastors and Catholic Priests who have more than a wee smidgen of theologically anti-Semitic views. I think these views are not unlike those views that say that America and the Constitution are evil because we once tolerated slavery, or killed the Indians, or had a Manifest Destiny, or that we are a Shining City on a Hill.
Obama wants Israel out of the Big Picture. He likely has deep Muslim influences and roots due to his Indonesian upbringing and his associations with Wright, Farrakhan, et al. I believe this despite his protestations that he is a Christian. Americans are in broad disagreement with these ideas and plans, but for other reasons. Jews have bled and died for this country as have Christians, Native Americans, Asians, Mexicans, and others who joined our Armies as a path to citizenship, and other non-religious Gentile groups. The Muslims have scant such history in America that I can discover. The Muslims, have not wanted to integrate and be part of the freest country ever. They, like Obama want to transform it. Suspicions of Muslim leanings and anti-Semitism are of his own making. Judging from Passover and Christian Holy Week comments, Obama certainly knows more about Islam and less about either Christianity or Judaism. President Obama thinks: Passover recalls the bondage and suffering of Jews in Egypt and the miracle of the Exodus, but Obama says its message is seen in Muslim uprisings. Huh? And regarding the Resurrection of Christ Obama said, “Nothing beats scripture and the reminder of the eternal.” Double Huh?
I clearly see Jewish frustration about what Obama and his circle of associates are trying to do to Israel. American Jews must focus and educate others about the contributions Jews have brought to America from its very inception. American Gentiles must be taught and learn the history of the Jewish People. Americans Gentiles must be taught and learn the importance of Israel to history and to the world. All else in this frustrating process seems to me to be dross. Education about modern Israel can overcome this onslaught of Islamic propaganda. But it must join with a broader strategy by all of us to identify with the total process of righting the sinking American ship of state. These goals, it seems to me, are tied together. Why? Because Judeo-Christian theology believes in life, not death, and the individual, not the collective.
The real problem is Islamo-Fascism and it determination to isolate and wipe out the individual in order to create their collective. Islam is a collective. To achieve this, you must first wipe out Judaism, Christianity, and other free thinkers. Focus on survival. The Jewish People have much to teach and to share. I am but a rude and crude soldier and officer with a thin veneer of manners and civility. But I support the oath I swore to our Constitution to defend freedom and the country we love. I hope Jewish and Christian Americans are united and making ready for what is headed our way.
William R. Mann Most recent columns
William R. Mann, is a retired Lt. Colonel, US Army. He is a now a political observer, analyst, activist and writer for Conservative causes. He was educated at West Point [Bachelor of Science, 1971 ]and the Naval Postgraduate School [Masters, National Security Affairs, 1982]. He currently resides with his wife in Pensacola, Florida. William can be reached at: wr_mann@cox.net
“The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.” Ayn Rand
This is an article about anti-Semitism, though the reader might think it wanders a bit. It springs from a correspondence I recently shared with my friend, Joan Swirsky, who encouraged me to submit it for publication.
I have been wondering, lately, how it is that racism is seen lurking behind every utterance and act of the Obama opponents. Contrast this with the actions and statements of the opponents of Israel in this country, who are legion in deed if not in word. Do they not consider the very survival of Israel the larger problem today with the Middle East exploding? Is the US still committed to defending Israel? What happens if America does not? Have we simply altered U.S. National Interests, or has creeping and growing anti-Semitism in the Middle East and elsewhere taken root in America as well? Are we edging closer to betraying our best ally in the Middle East? We hear a lot about cultural racism. I think the big problem today is an insidious, cultural anti-Semitism being played out daily in the White House and being cloaked as U.S. Foreign Policy. So, what is there to learn about anti-Semitism? As portrayed in the 1947 film, “Gentleman’s Agreement,” this very pernicious form of bigotry goes beyond skin color, epithets, and ethnicity. That classic film stars Gregory Peck, a writer who poses as a Jew in order to find out about anti-Semitism. He learns more it than he expects. He learns that his secretary hides her Jewish identity by changing her name. Other Jews simply go along to get along. He notices commonly held attitudes that are incredibly hateful. Even the high-minded Liberal folks who hired him turn out to be bigots within the hush-hush of their private conversations. These attitudes persisted in 1947 despite the Holocaust of WWII. For perspective consider that the Nuremberg criminal trials for the major Nazi conspirators had just finished in 1946. Incredible! Do you see, similarly, how easy it is for a national conscience to renege on promises? So it is today as the Obama White House deals with their “Jewish problem.” The White House plan to “throw Israel under the bus” must be executed piecemeal so as not to alarm anyone. They must be discrete: Death to Israel by a thousand paper cuts. Shush! ...Quiet ... Let’s not talk about it.
Contrast this to racial problems in “post-racial” America
Contrast this to racial problems in “post-racial” America. There is always a big deal made about even a whiff of racial bigotry in Obama’s “post-racial” America. Every utterance of disagreement with Obama is dissected and called racism by the Mainstream Media. And, while they’re at it they capriciously add any number of adjectival enhancements: redneck, Republican, Conservative, Southern, bigot, homophobe and others. In their minds, it all fits together. How dangerous is the media’s path? If this kind of journalism is acceptable, then what chance do practicing Jews have in the world today when identified with the now-vilified Israel? In the foreign press today, Jews are frequently described as racist, murderous, treacherous, etc. Not an eyebrow is raised in the Liberal-collectivist worldview when Hamas launches missiles against Israel. The murder of an Israeli family barely makes a headline! Consider this incredible rising tolerance for Islamic barbarism; Jews, religious or not, are at risk worldwide. Christians will readily note that persecutions of Christian believers are way up as well. A Jew’s odds of religious and cultural persecution and attack are far worse than practicing Christians. It is a serious problem.
It is easy, popular and dramatic in the MSM for race-baiters to throw around racist epithets and accusations against individuals, Fox News, and conservative Talk Radio hosts. It gets Obama sympathy points in polls. But it should also tweak our conscience and inspire us to oppose it every time race cards are played. Fox News hosts and Talk Radio folks like Sean Hannity go so far as to invite accusers onto their shows so they can make their case. The race-baiters usually make their charges and accusations with absolutely no evidence, and wind up looking as blindly ignorant as their ideology. To them, those who disagree with their premises are the real racists, the new Klan in blue pinstripe suits.
Have you not heard? President Obama has replaced Reverend Jeremiah Wright with Reverend Jim Wallis of Shiloh Baptist Church in Washington, D.C. This man gets away with making objectionable statements about race, Israel and our governmental structure from the pulpit to his flock without raising eyebrows. I don’t wonder what his position is on Israel—he speaks against Israel. And President Obama does not see anything odd about this man’s rhetoric? What does that say about Obama? The Reverend Jim Wallis is also a member of President Obama’s “faith council.” Did you know that? He has been variously described as a spiritual adviser to the President, a liberal theologian, a socialist activist, and a supporter of collectivist causes that parade as “social justice.” Social Justice, in case you did not know, is code for Marxist Liberation Theology. Pope John Paul II roundly denounced Liberation Theology as being decidedly un-Christian. Reverend Wallis has described the U.S. as “the great captor and destroyer of human life.” If he thinks about Jews, like the Reverend Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan do, I wonder what influence he has on the President’s thinking. Considering Obama’s recent missives against Franklin Graham, I think I can guess.
Because of the MSM’s lack of scrutiny, aided by an army of sycophant supporters, Wallis [like Wright, Jackson, Sharpton, and Louis Farrakhan] fan the flames of separatism while claiming to want a post-racial society. They engage in personal destruction of their opponents by appealing to baser instincts. All the while, they blame the Jews and the white race. They purposely reignite old controversies and reopen old wounds by saying that the old scores were never settled. In my thinking they have become what they claim to be fighting against. What deceivers! Trying to form a Judeo-Christian conscience from such beliefs is simply unhinged and incoherent. These Pastors claim to be Christian, yet espouse erstwhile support and sympathies for the radical Islamic causes, for Palestinian Intifada, for Hamas, Hezbollah, and the deconstruction of Israel and the US Alliance with Israel. In short, one may legitimately ask whether these men are anti-Semites. This is the second of this coin. This form of anti-Semitism is particularly virulent because it carries with it the seeds of genocide. Anti-Semitism is on the rise in Europe. It is also on the rise in America. A check of multiple sources on the Internet easily verifies this. I have discovered in my lifetime that anti-Semitism is not monolithic. It comes in many flavors.
Rise of Black anti-Semitism
So whither the rise of the rise of Black anti-Semitism? Is the jealousy, resentment, and hatred of Jews by many Blacks different from White anti-Semitism? The Black experience in America has been a difficult one. Indeed, Lincoln himself wondered whether America, post slavery, could adapt after this dark chapter of American History. But, I believe that most American Blacks have chosen to move on, claiming full citizenship, and work at integrating into society like every other group of Americans. [There were many slaves and indentured servants of other races as well, many of them in the North.] Some, like many white folks, reject educational and self-improvement opportunities and don’t seem to want to move forward. Still others choose to side with the likes of Wright and Farrakhan and Wallace and espouse a very different vision of America. This latter group very carefully disguises their hatred, they resentment, and complaints against the American system that gives them this freedom to speak. Our President also falls into this latter category despite his statements to the contrary. Modern Black anti-Semitism seems to me to be a virulent mix of old stereotypes and newer Arab ones that blame America and Israel for their backwardness and poverty. If the Whites are oppressors and the Jews [in their eyes] run the banks and industry, then it is easy to believe the Big Satan-Little Satan nonsense.
White anti-Semitism is born of the lies of those who came from Europe where 19 centuries of anti-Jewish enculturation runs deep. Indeed, Christian culture for centuries highlighted the complicity of Jewish politicians who colluded with the Romans to kill their Jesus. Well, the Romans died out after 500 years, but the Europeans still had the Jews to kick around [... just like the Democrats do their bogeymen, Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon, only far more visceral]. The European Continent, perhaps more than the British, display this deep seated resentment, if not outright hatred. Despite the Holocaust of WWII, Europeans are returning in large numbers to this vomit of anti-Semitism. In America, the constant drumbeat against Israel and the self-interested positions of many Left-Liberal, pro-Arab Jews has cause a real problem for the Truth!
But for the Jew in America and around the world, the views are divergent and different. Most Christian leaning Americans have no problems, but many still harbor resentments. Allow me to explain my own limited observations. I, as a Gentile and a Catholic, have heard and seen anti-Semitism all of my life in America and it has not gone away. It has not progressed in a positive direction like race relations had before Obama. I hear the comments and see the attitudes. In reaction to this, I think many American Jews live in a strange denial. They deny their heritage trying to make the problem go away; but it won’t, not in this way. Others betray their own people like quislings, accommodating and siding with those who would destroy them as if the Jews were the ones at fault. Some, perhaps searching for salvation or sanity go to Israel as a Pilgrim; but find little solace and sometimes a different form of discrimination in Israel itself, where the Israeli Left is as virulent as our own leftists. Then there are those who sound off against anti-Semitism bravely. I may have missed a faction or two, but suffice it to say that American Jews are as factionalized as the Gentile population, yet still there is this nagging anti-Semitism.
American anti-Semitism grows in America
American anti-Semitism grows in America because too many Americans see Jewish people who look and talk like them, but somehow strangely have some key to survival and success that they don’t have. They do not understand the culture, the drive, the hard work ethic, but instead resort to lazy anti-Semitic stereotypes. It is not so much hatred as it is, “Why are Jews so special?” or “Why do Jews always seem to get the breaks?” or “Why can’t I have some of what you Jews have?”
Ironically, Americans did once upon a time have everything that the Jews have and know. Over the last Century many have simply given themselves over to the god of modernity and to the evil spiritual forces of gain, envy and jealousy. Gentiles, by and large, do not understand either the nature of Judaism or the exclusiveness of its foundation and survival. Jews, themselves, do little or nothing to remedy this insufficiency on the part of Gentiles, so the problems remain widespread. Confident and erudite Christians, I think, get it. What that means, to “get it” is a different discussion.
As discussed, there are some supposedly Christian sects that are hostile to Judaism. There are also select Christian sects who see the salvation of the Jews a necessary “conversion challenge,” or see Israel only as a necessary entity required to be present for the coming final apocalyptic struggle with Satan and his minions. I also know of certain Protestant Pastors and Catholic Priests who have more than a wee smidgen of theologically anti-Semitic views. I think these views are not unlike those views that say that America and the Constitution are evil because we once tolerated slavery, or killed the Indians, or had a Manifest Destiny, or that we are a Shining City on a Hill.
Obama wants Israel out of the Big Picture. He likely has deep Muslim influences and roots due to his Indonesian upbringing and his associations with Wright, Farrakhan, et al. I believe this despite his protestations that he is a Christian. Americans are in broad disagreement with these ideas and plans, but for other reasons. Jews have bled and died for this country as have Christians, Native Americans, Asians, Mexicans, and others who joined our Armies as a path to citizenship, and other non-religious Gentile groups. The Muslims have scant such history in America that I can discover. The Muslims, have not wanted to integrate and be part of the freest country ever. They, like Obama want to transform it. Suspicions of Muslim leanings and anti-Semitism are of his own making. Judging from Passover and Christian Holy Week comments, Obama certainly knows more about Islam and less about either Christianity or Judaism. President Obama thinks: Passover recalls the bondage and suffering of Jews in Egypt and the miracle of the Exodus, but Obama says its message is seen in Muslim uprisings. Huh? And regarding the Resurrection of Christ Obama said, “Nothing beats scripture and the reminder of the eternal.” Double Huh?
I clearly see Jewish frustration about what Obama and his circle of associates are trying to do to Israel. American Jews must focus and educate others about the contributions Jews have brought to America from its very inception. American Gentiles must be taught and learn the history of the Jewish People. Americans Gentiles must be taught and learn the importance of Israel to history and to the world. All else in this frustrating process seems to me to be dross. Education about modern Israel can overcome this onslaught of Islamic propaganda. But it must join with a broader strategy by all of us to identify with the total process of righting the sinking American ship of state. These goals, it seems to me, are tied together. Why? Because Judeo-Christian theology believes in life, not death, and the individual, not the collective.
The real problem is Islamo-Fascism and it determination to isolate and wipe out the individual in order to create their collective. Islam is a collective. To achieve this, you must first wipe out Judaism, Christianity, and other free thinkers. Focus on survival. The Jewish People have much to teach and to share. I am but a rude and crude soldier and officer with a thin veneer of manners and civility. But I support the oath I swore to our Constitution to defend freedom and the country we love. I hope Jewish and Christian Americans are united and making ready for what is headed our way.
William R. Mann Most recent columns
William R. Mann, is a retired Lt. Colonel, US Army. He is a now a political observer, analyst, activist and writer for Conservative causes. He was educated at West Point [Bachelor of Science, 1971 ]and the Naval Postgraduate School [Masters, National Security Affairs, 1982]. He currently resides with his wife in Pensacola, Florida. William can be reached at: wr_mann@cox.net
No Return to the 1967 Borders
Eli E. Hertz
In an interview with the German news paper Der Spiegel, the late Israeli diplomat Abba Eban, described Israel's pre-Six-Day War borders as "Auschwitz" lines.
Eban, a lifetime dove, vowed:
"With Syrians on the mountain and we in the valley, with the Jordanian army in sight of the sea, with the Egyptians ... hold[ing] our throat in their hands in Gaza. This is a situation which will never be repeated in history." [emphasis added] In the aftermath of the 1967 Six-Day War, after three Arab armies converged on Israel's nightmarish borders, even the United Nations was forced to recognize that Israel's pre-1967 Six-Day War borders invited repeated aggression. Thus, UN Resolution 242 - which formed the conceptual foundation for a peace settlement - declares that all states in the region should be guaranteed "safe and secure borders."
President Lyndon B. Johnson, in an address on September 10, 1968, declared:
"We [The United States] are not the ones to say where other nations should draw the lines between them that will assure each the greatest security."
"It is clear, however, that a return to the situation of June 4, 1967, will not bring peace. There must be secure and there must be recognized borders." [emphasis added]
(59 Department of State Bulletin 348 [1968] )
Comment: Of course there are no 1967 borders even though the media, some in academia and our enemy choose to intentionally misrepresent the legal facts.
Saturday, April 30, 2011
A Declaration of War
Ari Bussel
“To Israel’s enemies I have only one thing to say—HISS OFF!” Norma Zager
When a country’s enemies actively attempt to destroy it by any means possible, would one not expect the country to fight back?
Israel’s track record in that respect is dismal at best. Excuses aside, for eight long years, Israel’s “neighbor” Gaza (today’s Hamastan) was constantly bombarding her towns, cities and agricultural communities with rockets. Israel allowed the barrages to go on and on until finally fed up, at the end of 2008 and beginning of 2009 she embarked on Operation Cast Lead.As a result, she was accused of war crimes by a United Nations body that officiated an inquiry into Israel’s alleged wrongdoings under the leadership of Judge Richard Goldstone.
Still today rockets and missiles are continually launched and Israel is not taking these attacks seriously enough. She is unwilling or unable to face the root of the problem and the road she must travel to treat it.
Israel’s situation to the North is bleak. While Israel may claim that the situation is “calm” or even “under control” and that a “deterrent has been achieved,” that assessment is far removed from reality. Hezbollah is more armed than ever before and is able, if desired, to bring life in Israel to a standstill.
The Second War in Lebanon in 2006 highlighted the precarious condition of Israeli military. Many improvements have been initiated since under the leadership of the capable former Chief of Staff Ashkenazi. Yet, the enemy has not wasted time either, and if its threat was real in 2006, it is considerably greater in 2011.
Her enemies to the North and South, both cronies of Iran, who have coordinated and been able to learn and implement new terrorist methods from one another’s mistakes and successes, await a green light to attack. Additionally, Israel now faces a more stealth enemy in the guise of the Palestinian Authority.
Known as the “PA” it is a front for Hamas, posing and speaking to the outside world in a way much more palatable than “we are committed to destroy you.” Much leeway is therefore accorded the “PA,” turning one’s head when it burns Israeli products, when it actively engages in official sponsored incitement against Israel and even when its own bylaws call for the extinction of the Jewish State.
Article 12 of the Fatah Constitution sets the following goal: “Complete liberation of Palestine and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence.” To achieve this goal, Article 17 provides the following method: “Armed public revolution is the inevitable method to liberating Palestine.” And article 19 explains: “Armed struggle is a strategy and not a tactic, and the Palestinian Arab People’s armed revolution is a decisive factor in the liberation fight and in uprooting the Zionist existence.”
They furthermore promise (ibid) “and this struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished and Palestine is completely liberated.” So much for peace promises and a frightening look at the true intentions of Israel’s closest neighbors.
The “PA” is the West’s favorite, most commiserated child. People the world over cry over the plight of the “Palestinians,” when the latter enjoy the fastest growth anywhere in the world (higher even than China’s). It is a world gone crazy with make belief, where stories are embellished, facts never quite meet reality and their intention is one, and nothing but one: the Destruction of the Jewish State.
The PA latest maneuver is one of the smartest in history, taken directly out of Israel’s textbooks. Modern Israel was born out of a UN vote in November 1947. The Palestinians are now going to duplicate that very same action.
The goal, objectives, strategy and tactics are clearly spelled out. In fact, the “PA” is focused around the clock on the upcoming September meeting of the General Assembly of the United Nations. There, the Palestinians will disclose that their leadership has been deciduously working on the establishment of a nation from the bottom up, its institutions and all manners of existence. The member nations will then be told that now it is time to recognize Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital. Like a chorus they are then expected to repeat: “Amen!”
Preparatory work is in full swing, with members of the “PA” traveling the world over to ensure their request is accepted without a glitch. All indications, according to the accord with which their emissaries are received, are that the mission will be successful. They are already treated like royalty and accepted de facto as an independent country.
The world seems to ignore one simple fact: Palestine can only rise on the ruins of the only Jewish state. Possibly, this is exactly what everyone wishes.
What is Israel to do? There are conflicting opinions. Some call for the annexation of part of Judea and Samaria, while others urge the Prime Minister to work for the establishment of a Palestinian state. These are nothing but what in engineering may be called NOISE. September will arrive, Palestine will be a fait accompli and Israel will face new, insurmountable challenges.
The Palestinians are engaged in an extremely stealth war. The world continues to participate in their game, while Israel ignores its existence and thus does not fight back.
Unlike the Second War in Lebanon, the Goldstone Report or the Turkish Terrorist Flotilla, this time around national commissions of inquiry or regret-in-retrospect will not work. The process is irreversible.
Israel must face reality and fight for her life. She must find the will and the determination to prevail. But the battle must begin without any further delay, lest we find a new Middle Eastern reality in which Israel is a bygone notion.
The series “Postcards from America—Postcards from Israel” by Ari Bussel and Norma Zager is a compilation of articles capturing the essence of life in America and Israel during the first two decades of the 21st Century.
The writers invite readers to view and experience an Israel and her politics through their eyes, Israel visitors rarely discover.
This point—and often—counter-point presentation is sprinkled with humor and sadness and attempts to tackle serious and relevant issues of the day. The series began in 2008, appears both in print in the USA and on numerous websites and is followed regularly by readership from around the world.
© “Postcards from America — Postcards from Israel,” April, 2011
Contact: bussel@me.com
First Published April 23, 2011
“To Israel’s enemies I have only one thing to say—HISS OFF!” Norma Zager
When a country’s enemies actively attempt to destroy it by any means possible, would one not expect the country to fight back?
Israel’s track record in that respect is dismal at best. Excuses aside, for eight long years, Israel’s “neighbor” Gaza (today’s Hamastan) was constantly bombarding her towns, cities and agricultural communities with rockets. Israel allowed the barrages to go on and on until finally fed up, at the end of 2008 and beginning of 2009 she embarked on Operation Cast Lead.As a result, she was accused of war crimes by a United Nations body that officiated an inquiry into Israel’s alleged wrongdoings under the leadership of Judge Richard Goldstone.
Still today rockets and missiles are continually launched and Israel is not taking these attacks seriously enough. She is unwilling or unable to face the root of the problem and the road she must travel to treat it.
Israel’s situation to the North is bleak. While Israel may claim that the situation is “calm” or even “under control” and that a “deterrent has been achieved,” that assessment is far removed from reality. Hezbollah is more armed than ever before and is able, if desired, to bring life in Israel to a standstill.
The Second War in Lebanon in 2006 highlighted the precarious condition of Israeli military. Many improvements have been initiated since under the leadership of the capable former Chief of Staff Ashkenazi. Yet, the enemy has not wasted time either, and if its threat was real in 2006, it is considerably greater in 2011.
Her enemies to the North and South, both cronies of Iran, who have coordinated and been able to learn and implement new terrorist methods from one another’s mistakes and successes, await a green light to attack. Additionally, Israel now faces a more stealth enemy in the guise of the Palestinian Authority.
Known as the “PA” it is a front for Hamas, posing and speaking to the outside world in a way much more palatable than “we are committed to destroy you.” Much leeway is therefore accorded the “PA,” turning one’s head when it burns Israeli products, when it actively engages in official sponsored incitement against Israel and even when its own bylaws call for the extinction of the Jewish State.
Article 12 of the Fatah Constitution sets the following goal: “Complete liberation of Palestine and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence.” To achieve this goal, Article 17 provides the following method: “Armed public revolution is the inevitable method to liberating Palestine.” And article 19 explains: “Armed struggle is a strategy and not a tactic, and the Palestinian Arab People’s armed revolution is a decisive factor in the liberation fight and in uprooting the Zionist existence.”
They furthermore promise (ibid) “and this struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished and Palestine is completely liberated.” So much for peace promises and a frightening look at the true intentions of Israel’s closest neighbors.
The “PA” is the West’s favorite, most commiserated child. People the world over cry over the plight of the “Palestinians,” when the latter enjoy the fastest growth anywhere in the world (higher even than China’s). It is a world gone crazy with make belief, where stories are embellished, facts never quite meet reality and their intention is one, and nothing but one: the Destruction of the Jewish State.
The PA latest maneuver is one of the smartest in history, taken directly out of Israel’s textbooks. Modern Israel was born out of a UN vote in November 1947. The Palestinians are now going to duplicate that very same action.
The goal, objectives, strategy and tactics are clearly spelled out. In fact, the “PA” is focused around the clock on the upcoming September meeting of the General Assembly of the United Nations. There, the Palestinians will disclose that their leadership has been deciduously working on the establishment of a nation from the bottom up, its institutions and all manners of existence. The member nations will then be told that now it is time to recognize Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital. Like a chorus they are then expected to repeat: “Amen!”
Preparatory work is in full swing, with members of the “PA” traveling the world over to ensure their request is accepted without a glitch. All indications, according to the accord with which their emissaries are received, are that the mission will be successful. They are already treated like royalty and accepted de facto as an independent country.
The world seems to ignore one simple fact: Palestine can only rise on the ruins of the only Jewish state. Possibly, this is exactly what everyone wishes.
What is Israel to do? There are conflicting opinions. Some call for the annexation of part of Judea and Samaria, while others urge the Prime Minister to work for the establishment of a Palestinian state. These are nothing but what in engineering may be called NOISE. September will arrive, Palestine will be a fait accompli and Israel will face new, insurmountable challenges.
The Palestinians are engaged in an extremely stealth war. The world continues to participate in their game, while Israel ignores its existence and thus does not fight back.
Unlike the Second War in Lebanon, the Goldstone Report or the Turkish Terrorist Flotilla, this time around national commissions of inquiry or regret-in-retrospect will not work. The process is irreversible.
Israel must face reality and fight for her life. She must find the will and the determination to prevail. But the battle must begin without any further delay, lest we find a new Middle Eastern reality in which Israel is a bygone notion.
The series “Postcards from America—Postcards from Israel” by Ari Bussel and Norma Zager is a compilation of articles capturing the essence of life in America and Israel during the first two decades of the 21st Century.
The writers invite readers to view and experience an Israel and her politics through their eyes, Israel visitors rarely discover.
This point—and often—counter-point presentation is sprinkled with humor and sadness and attempts to tackle serious and relevant issues of the day. The series began in 2008, appears both in print in the USA and on numerous websites and is followed regularly by readership from around the world.
© “Postcards from America — Postcards from Israel,” April, 2011
Contact: bussel@me.com
First Published April 23, 2011
Friday, April 29, 2011
The West should not be fooled by Syria
Fiamma Nirenstein
published in Il Giornale, April 28, 2011
Today, as the Syrian unrest continues, we are forced to acknowledge our weakness and to measure the lies of Realpolitik. Indeed it's worth quoting President George Bush: “... the horrors of dictatorships remind us that at the end of the day, no dialogue is possible with bullies.” After Rafiq Hariri's assassination in 2005, the Bush administration broke up all ties with Syria; following that decision, the State Department launched a wide finance campaign aimed at helping secular Syrian dissidents and their projects, including an anti-Assad satellite TV. But later on Bashar Assad started his big game, playing simultaneously ‘at once the arsonist and the fireman’, just as Fouad Ajami writes.
But it's time to be honest and to admit that we - the West, the US who sent back its ambassador to Syria, the EU that called Assad to start peaceful talks with Israel, the UN that might let him have a seat in the Human Rights Council – it's time to tell ourselves honestly that we wanted to see only 'Assad the fireman'. After so many killings, America now starts talking of personal sanctions on the Assad family (not a big deal). Meantime the US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, told publicly something really worth mentioning: the United States can prove that among Syrian security forces, the same that are perpetrating a mass killing of civilians, there are many Iranian emissaries. The governments of Italy, France, United Kingdom, Germany and Spain have summoned the Syrian ambassadors and the EU is expected to gather an high ranking meeting in the following days to discuss potential sanctions against Assad's regime. Meanwhile, another of the very few initiatives of the EU nations, i.e. a resolution in the Security Council, has been defeated by Russian, Chinese and Lebanese opposition.
But one the most interesting of all the useless reactions to the Syria slaughter is the call by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon to the Human Rights Council to take a position. Yet Syria is still a candidate for the vacant Libyan seat in the HRC. Ban Ki Moon, requested to express his opinion on this contradiction, answered that this is not his business. Since Syria is one the four Asian countries entitled to one seat in this UN body, without a veto on the nomination, Syria could get its aim, while Syrians are slaughtered in the streets.
The UN should do whatever is necessary to save Syrians, reaffirming 'the responsibility to protect', the same principle that has led the UN Security Council to approve the 1973 resolution, and allowed Nato to wage war against Muammar Gheddafi. But Robert Gates, while still US Secretary of Defense, in a joint statement with his British counterpart, Liam Fox, has stated that the situation in Syria is far different from that of Libya. And even though the international community has responded to Gheddafi's brutality with military means, it certainly won't do the same in confronting Assad.
This is the kind of weakness revealed by this UN indifference for democracy and human rights; the same unfortunate deviation we witnessed on massacres like Darfur and Tibet. And this tells the truth about the real reasons inspiring most of the approved Security Council resolutions: political interests. Gheddafi is a bizarre dictator, his ferocity is unquestionable but his strategic value is poor, it is not critical for our and Middle East future. And after all, when he started to shoot his own people, we certainly had to stop him.
Syria is a completely different story. This country is the core of Iranian power in the Middle East, a hub for deadly terrorist groups. Syria is the mother of Hezbollah, the father of Hamas. It borders with Israel and dreams to destroy it. It borders with Iraq and has sent there its anti-American terrorists. As a matter of fact, Syria still occupies Lebanon even though Assad withdrew his troops few years ago, and it shares a very long border and a complicated relations with Turkey, that refuses to condemn the Syrian regime.
Bashar Assad knows that the Sunni majority of his country - where the Alawites are a tiny Shiite minority - keeps a vivid memory of 1982 Hama massacre, where 20,000 Muslim Brothers were wiped out by Bashar's father, Hafez. The Syrian president knows that unless he would succeed in chocking the protests at the very beginning, only tanks could crush a large opposition waiting for revenge. Now we can expect from Assad an awful enormous carnage that we have the duty to stop. But the world concern about a possible collapse of Syria, the best friend of Iran, is much greater than the worry about the future of Libya. For that reason we wait and see, while Syrians keep being killed.
Because of our fear of Iran, looking at Bashar Assad in recent years, we have rather chosen to see a beanpole guy wearing well-tailored British suits, a middle class faced boy with a charming wife, instead of the professional butcher who has already decreed the killings of more of 500 among his citizens, awfully using for this aim his bother Maher who commands the Presidential Guard.
Many self made videos show us ferocious aggressions even against women and children. Assad has employed tanks and warplanes against his own towns. This is what we witness, but we don’t want to face it. In the meanwhile the death toll rises.
It's time to define with moral clarity how worth is the Western religion of human rights. But we must do it now, before the next dictator shoots his people. We gave credit to a dictator, Assad, who didn't deserve such a chance as no dictator have ever deserved. Instead he used the chance we gave him to arm terrorist groups, to build up chemical weapons and a powerful army. And today, to crash his own people.
---
Hon. Fiamma Nirenstein
Vice-president of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
Chair of the Committee for the Inquiry into Antisemitism
Italian Chamber of Deputies
www.fiammanirenstein.com
published in Il Giornale, April 28, 2011
Today, as the Syrian unrest continues, we are forced to acknowledge our weakness and to measure the lies of Realpolitik. Indeed it's worth quoting President George Bush: “... the horrors of dictatorships remind us that at the end of the day, no dialogue is possible with bullies.” After Rafiq Hariri's assassination in 2005, the Bush administration broke up all ties with Syria; following that decision, the State Department launched a wide finance campaign aimed at helping secular Syrian dissidents and their projects, including an anti-Assad satellite TV. But later on Bashar Assad started his big game, playing simultaneously ‘at once the arsonist and the fireman’, just as Fouad Ajami writes.
But it's time to be honest and to admit that we - the West, the US who sent back its ambassador to Syria, the EU that called Assad to start peaceful talks with Israel, the UN that might let him have a seat in the Human Rights Council – it's time to tell ourselves honestly that we wanted to see only 'Assad the fireman'. After so many killings, America now starts talking of personal sanctions on the Assad family (not a big deal). Meantime the US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, told publicly something really worth mentioning: the United States can prove that among Syrian security forces, the same that are perpetrating a mass killing of civilians, there are many Iranian emissaries. The governments of Italy, France, United Kingdom, Germany and Spain have summoned the Syrian ambassadors and the EU is expected to gather an high ranking meeting in the following days to discuss potential sanctions against Assad's regime. Meanwhile, another of the very few initiatives of the EU nations, i.e. a resolution in the Security Council, has been defeated by Russian, Chinese and Lebanese opposition.
But one the most interesting of all the useless reactions to the Syria slaughter is the call by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon to the Human Rights Council to take a position. Yet Syria is still a candidate for the vacant Libyan seat in the HRC. Ban Ki Moon, requested to express his opinion on this contradiction, answered that this is not his business. Since Syria is one the four Asian countries entitled to one seat in this UN body, without a veto on the nomination, Syria could get its aim, while Syrians are slaughtered in the streets.
The UN should do whatever is necessary to save Syrians, reaffirming 'the responsibility to protect', the same principle that has led the UN Security Council to approve the 1973 resolution, and allowed Nato to wage war against Muammar Gheddafi. But Robert Gates, while still US Secretary of Defense, in a joint statement with his British counterpart, Liam Fox, has stated that the situation in Syria is far different from that of Libya. And even though the international community has responded to Gheddafi's brutality with military means, it certainly won't do the same in confronting Assad.
This is the kind of weakness revealed by this UN indifference for democracy and human rights; the same unfortunate deviation we witnessed on massacres like Darfur and Tibet. And this tells the truth about the real reasons inspiring most of the approved Security Council resolutions: political interests. Gheddafi is a bizarre dictator, his ferocity is unquestionable but his strategic value is poor, it is not critical for our and Middle East future. And after all, when he started to shoot his own people, we certainly had to stop him.
Syria is a completely different story. This country is the core of Iranian power in the Middle East, a hub for deadly terrorist groups. Syria is the mother of Hezbollah, the father of Hamas. It borders with Israel and dreams to destroy it. It borders with Iraq and has sent there its anti-American terrorists. As a matter of fact, Syria still occupies Lebanon even though Assad withdrew his troops few years ago, and it shares a very long border and a complicated relations with Turkey, that refuses to condemn the Syrian regime.
Bashar Assad knows that the Sunni majority of his country - where the Alawites are a tiny Shiite minority - keeps a vivid memory of 1982 Hama massacre, where 20,000 Muslim Brothers were wiped out by Bashar's father, Hafez. The Syrian president knows that unless he would succeed in chocking the protests at the very beginning, only tanks could crush a large opposition waiting for revenge. Now we can expect from Assad an awful enormous carnage that we have the duty to stop. But the world concern about a possible collapse of Syria, the best friend of Iran, is much greater than the worry about the future of Libya. For that reason we wait and see, while Syrians keep being killed.
Because of our fear of Iran, looking at Bashar Assad in recent years, we have rather chosen to see a beanpole guy wearing well-tailored British suits, a middle class faced boy with a charming wife, instead of the professional butcher who has already decreed the killings of more of 500 among his citizens, awfully using for this aim his bother Maher who commands the Presidential Guard.
Many self made videos show us ferocious aggressions even against women and children. Assad has employed tanks and warplanes against his own towns. This is what we witness, but we don’t want to face it. In the meanwhile the death toll rises.
It's time to define with moral clarity how worth is the Western religion of human rights. But we must do it now, before the next dictator shoots his people. We gave credit to a dictator, Assad, who didn't deserve such a chance as no dictator have ever deserved. Instead he used the chance we gave him to arm terrorist groups, to build up chemical weapons and a powerful army. And today, to crash his own people.
---
Hon. Fiamma Nirenstein
Vice-president of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
Chair of the Committee for the Inquiry into Antisemitism
Italian Chamber of Deputies
www.fiammanirenstein.com
Abbas’ Holocaust-Denial Dissertation Widely-Taught in PA
Hillel Fendel
Research by the Center for Near East Policy Research Center has found that the doctoral dissertation of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas “stars” throughout the Palestinian Authority educational curriculum, and “is the basis for Holocaust studies in the PA.”
The Center’s Director, David Bedein, has asked Education Minister Gideon Saar and the government of Israel to demand that the PA remove the work from its schools and from its curricula.
Bedein wrote that the Center is engaged in preparing a movie on the PA educational system, in the course of which it tracks that which is taught in PA classrooms. “Throughout the educational system of the PA,” he wrote to Saar, “we have found that the doctorate of Mahmoud Abbas stars, and forms the basis of PA Holocaust studies.” Downgrades Number of Victims, Accuses Zionists of Collaboration
The doctorate was published as a book in 1984, entitled,"The Other Side: the Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism.” It was completed in 1982 at a university in Communist Russia, and was defended at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
It downgrades the number of Holocaust victims to “[possibly] below one million,” and accuses Zionist leaders of encouraging the persecution of Jews.
It also denies that the gas chambers were used to murder Jews, quoting a "scientific study" to that effect by French Holocaust-denier Robert Faurisson.
Excerpts:
* “…it is possible that the number of Jewish victims reached six million, but at the same time it is possible that the figure is much smaller--below one million.”
* "The historian and author, Raoul Hilberg, thinks that the figure does not exceed 890,000." [Holocaust authority Dr. Rafael Medoff says, “This is, of course, utterly false. Professor Hilberg, a distinguished historian and author of the classic study 'The Destruction of the European Jews', has never said or written any such thing.”]]
* "It seems that the interest of the Zionist movement, however, is to inflate this figure so that their gains will be greater… This led them to emphasize this figure [six million] in order to gain the solidarity of international public opinion with Zionism.”
* "A partnership was established between Hitler's Nazis and the leadership of the Zionist movement ... [the Zionists gave] permission to every racist in the world, led by Hitler and the Nazis, to treat Jews as they wish, so long as it guarantees immigration to Palestine."
# Medoff writes that Abbas writes in his dissertation that the Zionist leaders actually wanted Jews to be murdered, because "having more victims meant greater rights and stronger privilege to join the negotiation table for dividing the spoils of war once it was over. However, since Zionism was not a fighting partner --suffering victims in a battle --it had no escape but to offer up human beings, under any name, to raise the number of victims, which they could then boast of at the moment of accounting."
(IsraelNationalNews.com)
Research by the Center for Near East Policy Research Center has found that the doctoral dissertation of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas “stars” throughout the Palestinian Authority educational curriculum, and “is the basis for Holocaust studies in the PA.”
The Center’s Director, David Bedein, has asked Education Minister Gideon Saar and the government of Israel to demand that the PA remove the work from its schools and from its curricula.
Bedein wrote that the Center is engaged in preparing a movie on the PA educational system, in the course of which it tracks that which is taught in PA classrooms. “Throughout the educational system of the PA,” he wrote to Saar, “we have found that the doctorate of Mahmoud Abbas stars, and forms the basis of PA Holocaust studies.” Downgrades Number of Victims, Accuses Zionists of Collaboration
The doctorate was published as a book in 1984, entitled,"The Other Side: the Secret Relationship Between Nazism and Zionism.” It was completed in 1982 at a university in Communist Russia, and was defended at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
It downgrades the number of Holocaust victims to “[possibly] below one million,” and accuses Zionist leaders of encouraging the persecution of Jews.
It also denies that the gas chambers were used to murder Jews, quoting a "scientific study" to that effect by French Holocaust-denier Robert Faurisson.
Excerpts:
* “…it is possible that the number of Jewish victims reached six million, but at the same time it is possible that the figure is much smaller--below one million.”
* "The historian and author, Raoul Hilberg, thinks that the figure does not exceed 890,000." [Holocaust authority Dr. Rafael Medoff says, “This is, of course, utterly false. Professor Hilberg, a distinguished historian and author of the classic study 'The Destruction of the European Jews', has never said or written any such thing.”]]
* "It seems that the interest of the Zionist movement, however, is to inflate this figure so that their gains will be greater… This led them to emphasize this figure [six million] in order to gain the solidarity of international public opinion with Zionism.”
* "A partnership was established between Hitler's Nazis and the leadership of the Zionist movement ... [the Zionists gave] permission to every racist in the world, led by Hitler and the Nazis, to treat Jews as they wish, so long as it guarantees immigration to Palestine."
# Medoff writes that Abbas writes in his dissertation that the Zionist leaders actually wanted Jews to be murdered, because "having more victims meant greater rights and stronger privilege to join the negotiation table for dividing the spoils of war once it was over. However, since Zionism was not a fighting partner --suffering victims in a battle --it had no escape but to offer up human beings, under any name, to raise the number of victims, which they could then boast of at the moment of accounting."
(IsraelNationalNews.com)
Thursday, April 28, 2011
"Back on Track"
Arlene Kushner
Me, that is. Certainly not this part of the world. I'm post-Pesach, post a major writing assignment, and ready to look at this part of the world (oi!) via my postings...
~~~~~~~~~~
The big news now is the purported unity agreement between Fatah (the PA) and Hamas that has been secretly brokered by Egypt.
As I share information please keep in mind that it's all a bit nebulous and "iffy," with conflicting reports coming from different sources. It is apparent why this is coming about now:
The PA wants to go to the UN in order to be recognized as a state in September. Its leaders believe their chances of pulling this off are better if they can say they are seeking a state that encompasses all Palestinians, not just half of their people.
Hamas, for its part, is concerned with increased international credibility. Without a doubt, Hamas is also watching the instability in other nations -- Egypt, Syria -- with which it has links and seeking to maximize its own stability.
~~~~~~~~~~
An aside here: Even though the PA is much more like Hamas than most people perceive -- both want Israel destroyed, etc. etc. -- there is one significant difference. Fatah is still a nationalist movement, while Hamas, as a jihadist movement, is interested in an international caliphate.
~~~~~~~~~~
The impetus for striking the deal was apparently Moussa Abu Marzouk, deputy head of the Hamas's politburo, and Fatah Central Committee member Azzam al-Ahmad. Announcement was first made by Egyptian intelligence via the Egyptian state news agency, MENA.
What is known about the deal at this point is that both sides have initialed an agreement, with signing to take place soon in Cairo. A caretaker government of neutral professionals -- persons who would satisfy both parties -- is slated to take over shortly, with this government then making preparations for presidential and legislative elections in a year. The election committee will be decided upon by both factions. Political prisoners will be released.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to Reuters, Taher Al-Nono, the Hamas spokesman in Gaza, has declared that "All points of differences have been overcome."
And I will declare that I do not believe it for an instant. The "unity" that is being forged is superficial, with Hamas still in charge in Gaza and the PA in Judea and Samaria. The big unknown remains who will control what security forces: there is to be the formation of a "joint security higher committee."
How many times have the parties attempted "reconciliation," only to find it didn't work? What they have done now is determine that the semblance of unity would suit all concerned. How long this will last is anyone's guess.
~~~~~~~~~~
One thing that is clear is that whenever Fatah and Hamas strike an agreement, it is Fatah that makes concessions, and Hamas that comes out ahead. In this instance, at the moment, I am seeing two things. One, that there will be re-structuring of the PLO so as to include Hamas participation; this is something Hamas has sought for a long time.
And then, it has apparently been agreed, at Hamas's insistence, that Salam Fayyad, who is currently PA prime minister, will not be part of the professional interim government that is to be set up. What is significant here is that Fayyad is the darling of the West, the one who presents the most moderate image. It is largely because of him that Western nations have been forthcoming with the support for the PA that they have. This decision, then, in essence, is Fatah thumbing its nose at the West.
Should this "unity" Palestinian entity achieve statehood (I do not think it will), the dominance of Hamas suggests that it would ultimately be in charge.
~~~~~~~~~~
Prime Minister Netanyahu's response to this turn of events was quite clear:
"Palestinian Authority needs to choose between peace with the people of Israel and peace with Hamas. You cannot have peace with both, because Hamas aspires to destroy the State of Israel, and I'll say it openly.
"Hamas fires rockets at our cities and anti-tank missiles at our children. I think the mere idea of reconciliation demonstrates the Palestinian Authority's weakness, and brings up the question of whether Hamas will take over Judea and Samaria as it did Gaza.
""I hope the PA makes the right choice, to choose peace with Israel. The choice is hers."
~~~~~~~~~~
Mahmoud al-Zahar of Hamas then responded that, "Our plan does not involve negotiations with Israel or recognizing it. It will be impossible for an interim government to take part in the peace process with Israel."
Following this, however, Abbas suggested that negotiations would still be possible following the establishment of the interim government because the PLO, which he heads, is responsible for negotiations.
What we see here, of course, is evidence that all disagreements have not been resolved.
My first, question, among many, is what about the agreement that Hamas would now be a constituent element of the PLO?
What sort of game is Abbas playing -- pretending that he is prepared to negotiate, when a faction within the state we would be negotiating about is dedicated overtly to our destruction?
It becomes enormously convoluted -- this game playing.
~~~~~~~~~~
Abbas then responded to what Netanyahu had said, commenting that, "Netanyahu and Lieberman said yesterday that I had to choose between Israel and Hamas, but Hamas is part of the Palestinian people, and whether or not you like or agree with them, they are part of our nation and they cannot be extracted from us."
~~~~~~~~~~
I am pleased to say that Obama has seemed disgruntled with the "unity" announcement. This throws a monkey wrench into his plans for negotiations.
White House spokesman Tommy Vietor issued a statement saying that: "To play a constructive role in achieving peace, any Palestinian government must accept the Quartet principles and renounce violence, abide by past agreements, and recognize Israel's right to exist."
~~~~~~~~~~
Significantly, there are key Congresspeople who are suggesting that the Fatah-Hamas merger might spell the end of US support.
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), the chair of the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, declared, "The reported agreement between Fatah and Hamas means that a Foreign Terrorist Organization which has called for the destruction of Israel will be part of the Palestinian Authority government. U.S. taxpayer funds should not and must not be used to support those who threaten U.S. security, our interests, and our vital ally, Israel."
Others who are on board with this approach include Congresswoman Nita Lowey (D-NY), the senior Democrat on the foreign operations subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee; Congressman Gary Ackerman (D-NY), the senior Democrat on the House Middle East subcommittee and Senator Mark Kirk (R-Ill), who is on the Senate Appropriations Committee.
~~~~~~~~~~
In closing let me carry the idea of discontinuing aid to the Palestinians one step further: If there is a joint Hamas-Fatah government, the US is forbidden by its own laws from providing it with assistance. US funds cannot go to a terrorist entity. We will need members of Congress to be fully cognizant of these laws (some, I know, are not). I'll have more on this is due course.
~~~~~~~~~~
© Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner, functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced only with proper attribution.
see my website www.ArlenefromIsrael.info
Me, that is. Certainly not this part of the world. I'm post-Pesach, post a major writing assignment, and ready to look at this part of the world (oi!) via my postings...
~~~~~~~~~~
The big news now is the purported unity agreement between Fatah (the PA) and Hamas that has been secretly brokered by Egypt.
As I share information please keep in mind that it's all a bit nebulous and "iffy," with conflicting reports coming from different sources. It is apparent why this is coming about now:
The PA wants to go to the UN in order to be recognized as a state in September. Its leaders believe their chances of pulling this off are better if they can say they are seeking a state that encompasses all Palestinians, not just half of their people.
Hamas, for its part, is concerned with increased international credibility. Without a doubt, Hamas is also watching the instability in other nations -- Egypt, Syria -- with which it has links and seeking to maximize its own stability.
~~~~~~~~~~
An aside here: Even though the PA is much more like Hamas than most people perceive -- both want Israel destroyed, etc. etc. -- there is one significant difference. Fatah is still a nationalist movement, while Hamas, as a jihadist movement, is interested in an international caliphate.
~~~~~~~~~~
The impetus for striking the deal was apparently Moussa Abu Marzouk, deputy head of the Hamas's politburo, and Fatah Central Committee member Azzam al-Ahmad. Announcement was first made by Egyptian intelligence via the Egyptian state news agency, MENA.
What is known about the deal at this point is that both sides have initialed an agreement, with signing to take place soon in Cairo. A caretaker government of neutral professionals -- persons who would satisfy both parties -- is slated to take over shortly, with this government then making preparations for presidential and legislative elections in a year. The election committee will be decided upon by both factions. Political prisoners will be released.
~~~~~~~~~~
According to Reuters, Taher Al-Nono, the Hamas spokesman in Gaza, has declared that "All points of differences have been overcome."
And I will declare that I do not believe it for an instant. The "unity" that is being forged is superficial, with Hamas still in charge in Gaza and the PA in Judea and Samaria. The big unknown remains who will control what security forces: there is to be the formation of a "joint security higher committee."
How many times have the parties attempted "reconciliation," only to find it didn't work? What they have done now is determine that the semblance of unity would suit all concerned. How long this will last is anyone's guess.
~~~~~~~~~~
One thing that is clear is that whenever Fatah and Hamas strike an agreement, it is Fatah that makes concessions, and Hamas that comes out ahead. In this instance, at the moment, I am seeing two things. One, that there will be re-structuring of the PLO so as to include Hamas participation; this is something Hamas has sought for a long time.
And then, it has apparently been agreed, at Hamas's insistence, that Salam Fayyad, who is currently PA prime minister, will not be part of the professional interim government that is to be set up. What is significant here is that Fayyad is the darling of the West, the one who presents the most moderate image. It is largely because of him that Western nations have been forthcoming with the support for the PA that they have. This decision, then, in essence, is Fatah thumbing its nose at the West.
Should this "unity" Palestinian entity achieve statehood (I do not think it will), the dominance of Hamas suggests that it would ultimately be in charge.
~~~~~~~~~~
Prime Minister Netanyahu's response to this turn of events was quite clear:
"Palestinian Authority needs to choose between peace with the people of Israel and peace with Hamas. You cannot have peace with both, because Hamas aspires to destroy the State of Israel, and I'll say it openly.
"Hamas fires rockets at our cities and anti-tank missiles at our children. I think the mere idea of reconciliation demonstrates the Palestinian Authority's weakness, and brings up the question of whether Hamas will take over Judea and Samaria as it did Gaza.
""I hope the PA makes the right choice, to choose peace with Israel. The choice is hers."
~~~~~~~~~~
Mahmoud al-Zahar of Hamas then responded that, "Our plan does not involve negotiations with Israel or recognizing it. It will be impossible for an interim government to take part in the peace process with Israel."
Following this, however, Abbas suggested that negotiations would still be possible following the establishment of the interim government because the PLO, which he heads, is responsible for negotiations.
What we see here, of course, is evidence that all disagreements have not been resolved.
My first, question, among many, is what about the agreement that Hamas would now be a constituent element of the PLO?
What sort of game is Abbas playing -- pretending that he is prepared to negotiate, when a faction within the state we would be negotiating about is dedicated overtly to our destruction?
It becomes enormously convoluted -- this game playing.
~~~~~~~~~~
Abbas then responded to what Netanyahu had said, commenting that, "Netanyahu and Lieberman said yesterday that I had to choose between Israel and Hamas, but Hamas is part of the Palestinian people, and whether or not you like or agree with them, they are part of our nation and they cannot be extracted from us."
~~~~~~~~~~
I am pleased to say that Obama has seemed disgruntled with the "unity" announcement. This throws a monkey wrench into his plans for negotiations.
White House spokesman Tommy Vietor issued a statement saying that: "To play a constructive role in achieving peace, any Palestinian government must accept the Quartet principles and renounce violence, abide by past agreements, and recognize Israel's right to exist."
~~~~~~~~~~
Significantly, there are key Congresspeople who are suggesting that the Fatah-Hamas merger might spell the end of US support.
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), the chair of the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, declared, "The reported agreement between Fatah and Hamas means that a Foreign Terrorist Organization which has called for the destruction of Israel will be part of the Palestinian Authority government. U.S. taxpayer funds should not and must not be used to support those who threaten U.S. security, our interests, and our vital ally, Israel."
Others who are on board with this approach include Congresswoman Nita Lowey (D-NY), the senior Democrat on the foreign operations subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee; Congressman Gary Ackerman (D-NY), the senior Democrat on the House Middle East subcommittee and Senator Mark Kirk (R-Ill), who is on the Senate Appropriations Committee.
~~~~~~~~~~
In closing let me carry the idea of discontinuing aid to the Palestinians one step further: If there is a joint Hamas-Fatah government, the US is forbidden by its own laws from providing it with assistance. US funds cannot go to a terrorist entity. We will need members of Congress to be fully cognizant of these laws (some, I know, are not). I'll have more on this is due course.
~~~~~~~~~~
© Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner, functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced only with proper attribution.
see my website www.ArlenefromIsrael.info
Hamas, Fatah initial a fake agreement
Elder of Ziyon
From JPost:
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah movement hammered out an agreement with rival group Hamas on Wednesday, setting the stage for forming an interim government as well as fixing a date for a general election.
"The consultations resulted in full understandings over all points of discussions, including setting up an interim agreement with specific tasks and to set a date for election," Egyptian intelligence said in a statement. Spokespeople for both Hamas and Fatah confirmed that "all differences" have been worked out between the long-feuding Palestinians political movements.
A spokesperson for Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said that Hamas has agreed to hold elections within a year, a part of the reconciliation deal it signed in Cairo.
A Hamas spokesperson said that "all points of differences" between the rival groups have been overcome. He added that officials in Cairo will soon invite top Hamas and Fatah officials for a signing ceremony in the Egyptian capital.
Here is where it is useful to know a little history.
Palestinian Arabs have long been able to put together temporary, paper agreements and truces to achieve larger political goals. Inevitably, Westerners are consistently fooled by these, stupidly believing that short-term absence of violence indicates a long-term shift in attitudes.
In 1947, in the months before the UN Partition vote, virtually all Arab terror against Jews stopped. Amazing! The Arabs were proving to th world that they could act responsibly and run an Arab-led Palestine where they would protect the Jews as Islam requires them to, and they were puching this as an alternate plan to partitioning Palestine.
But within hours of the UN vote to partition Palestine, the Arabs gave up their pretense of peacefulness and started attacking Jews (in those days, they didn't bother with calling them "Zionists.")
In the months before Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, Hamas managed miraculously to reduce rocket fire from Gaza, and the rocket count dropped dramatically from 1157 in 2004 to 417 in 2005 as Israel implemented the plan. The next year, the number of rocket attacks increased back up to nearly the pre-disengagement levels.
Now the Palestinian Arabs are faced with another deadline.
The PA is putting all of their eggs in the unilateral recognition basket, that they are hoping the world provides to them in September. The biggest obstacle to that recognition was the simple fact that the PA and Hamas are hopelessly split - ideologically, physically and politically. There is no way that sympathetic Europeans can overlook that problem and support the establishment of a state where there are two competing rulers.
Hamas also recognizes the immense political value that recognition would bring them - something that, like the disengagement, would happen once and would likely never be reversed.
So even though Fatah and Hamas have been negotiating for years over the exact same issues without being able to come to an agreement, they now are agreeing to paper over their differences with vague wording that is just enough to convince the credulous, wishful-thinking West that they major obstacle to Palestinian Arab independence has been removed.
Note the little we do know: "Hamas has agreed to hold elections within a year." You can bet that the elections will be scheduled after September, because the result of elections beforehand - either way - would torpedo any chance for a unity government.
Vagueness will be the hallmark of the agreement - just enough to fool the world into thinking that these two groups can work together. Hamas can play the unity game until September, and, if the world is sufficiently fooled, for a few months afterwards. Then the elections, or absence of elections, will start to rock this false alliance.
By then, they hope, Palestine will already be de facto recognized as a state, and Israel will be on the ropes politically anyway. The world will be cheerleading the PalArab insistence on ethically cleansing the heart of the Land of Israel of Jews, and Hamas-Fatahstan will blame all of their new problems on Israel. They will say things like they cannot accept Palestinian Arab "refugees" in their new state as long as Israel holds any of "their" land. The ever present threat of them exploding in a new terror war will cause the West to pressure Israel, as always, as they insist on Israeli concessions to solve their problems.
The outline of what is coming is clear. Because we've seen this game before. Unfortunately, Western amnesia will help ensure that it plays out the way the PalArabs are planning it.
From JPost:
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah movement hammered out an agreement with rival group Hamas on Wednesday, setting the stage for forming an interim government as well as fixing a date for a general election.
"The consultations resulted in full understandings over all points of discussions, including setting up an interim agreement with specific tasks and to set a date for election," Egyptian intelligence said in a statement. Spokespeople for both Hamas and Fatah confirmed that "all differences" have been worked out between the long-feuding Palestinians political movements.
A spokesperson for Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said that Hamas has agreed to hold elections within a year, a part of the reconciliation deal it signed in Cairo.
A Hamas spokesperson said that "all points of differences" between the rival groups have been overcome. He added that officials in Cairo will soon invite top Hamas and Fatah officials for a signing ceremony in the Egyptian capital.
Here is where it is useful to know a little history.
Palestinian Arabs have long been able to put together temporary, paper agreements and truces to achieve larger political goals. Inevitably, Westerners are consistently fooled by these, stupidly believing that short-term absence of violence indicates a long-term shift in attitudes.
In 1947, in the months before the UN Partition vote, virtually all Arab terror against Jews stopped. Amazing! The Arabs were proving to th world that they could act responsibly and run an Arab-led Palestine where they would protect the Jews as Islam requires them to, and they were puching this as an alternate plan to partitioning Palestine.
But within hours of the UN vote to partition Palestine, the Arabs gave up their pretense of peacefulness and started attacking Jews (in those days, they didn't bother with calling them "Zionists.")
In the months before Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, Hamas managed miraculously to reduce rocket fire from Gaza, and the rocket count dropped dramatically from 1157 in 2004 to 417 in 2005 as Israel implemented the plan. The next year, the number of rocket attacks increased back up to nearly the pre-disengagement levels.
Now the Palestinian Arabs are faced with another deadline.
The PA is putting all of their eggs in the unilateral recognition basket, that they are hoping the world provides to them in September. The biggest obstacle to that recognition was the simple fact that the PA and Hamas are hopelessly split - ideologically, physically and politically. There is no way that sympathetic Europeans can overlook that problem and support the establishment of a state where there are two competing rulers.
Hamas also recognizes the immense political value that recognition would bring them - something that, like the disengagement, would happen once and would likely never be reversed.
So even though Fatah and Hamas have been negotiating for years over the exact same issues without being able to come to an agreement, they now are agreeing to paper over their differences with vague wording that is just enough to convince the credulous, wishful-thinking West that they major obstacle to Palestinian Arab independence has been removed.
Note the little we do know: "Hamas has agreed to hold elections within a year." You can bet that the elections will be scheduled after September, because the result of elections beforehand - either way - would torpedo any chance for a unity government.
Vagueness will be the hallmark of the agreement - just enough to fool the world into thinking that these two groups can work together. Hamas can play the unity game until September, and, if the world is sufficiently fooled, for a few months afterwards. Then the elections, or absence of elections, will start to rock this false alliance.
By then, they hope, Palestine will already be de facto recognized as a state, and Israel will be on the ropes politically anyway. The world will be cheerleading the PalArab insistence on ethically cleansing the heart of the Land of Israel of Jews, and Hamas-Fatahstan will blame all of their new problems on Israel. They will say things like they cannot accept Palestinian Arab "refugees" in their new state as long as Israel holds any of "their" land. The ever present threat of them exploding in a new terror war will cause the West to pressure Israel, as always, as they insist on Israeli concessions to solve their problems.
The outline of what is coming is clear. Because we've seen this game before. Unfortunately, Western amnesia will help ensure that it plays out the way the PalArabs are planning it.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Netanyahu on Front Lines in Europe to Fight PA State
Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
A7 News
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will dig into the diplomatic front lines next week and fly to London and Paris as Europe tightens support for ‘Auschwitz Borders,” the phrase the late United Nations Ambassador Abba Eban used to describe the “Green Line” that existed until 1967.
The Israeli government has acknowledged that Prime Minister Netanyahu will travel to the European capitals next week to discuss “political matters” with French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister David Cameron. Prime Minister Netanyahu is to address the U.S. Congress shortly afterwards, while U.S. President Barack Obama prepares his ideas for establishing the Palestinian Authority as a new Arab country within Israel’s current borders. The president reportedly will reject the Arab world’s demand for the immigration of thousands of foreign Arabs to Israel. Abbas has said he will not surrender on the issue.
Palestinian Authority PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas has almost won public support from leading European countries, particularly France and Britain, for leaning on Israel to sacrifice to the Palestinian Authority the homes of more than half a million Jews in United Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria.
Abbas, since taking over from Yasser Arafat six years ago, has successfully globetrotted to build international support for his one-sided demands while going through the motions of accepting American-sponsored ideas to negotiate the terms of creating the PA state.
The United States last month thwarted plans by the Quartet – the United Nations, Russia, the United States and the European Union – to officially propose a PA state based on the old Armistice lines of 1949, often incorrectly termed "1967 borders", after the Arabs lost the war they launched as a rejection of the re-establishment of Israel as a country.
European leaders, acting independently of the United States, have announced their increasing support for Abbas’s demands, without any negotiations with Israel, where nearly 10 percent of the Jewish population lives in areas demanded by the PA.
"The recognition of a Palestinian state is an option that we are currently thinking about, with our European partners,” Gérard Araud, France’s ambassador to the United Nations said last week, one day after Abbas met with French President Nicolas Sarkozy.
Abbas told France24 in an interview last week that “We can’t say that certain organizations or countries promised to recognize a Palestinian state. But all the signs they are sending show that they are awaiting the right moment to do so. You notice that a certain number of European countries have recently sent additional delegations and official representatives to the Palestinian territories. From our side, we are already treating them like ambassadors.”
A7 News
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will dig into the diplomatic front lines next week and fly to London and Paris as Europe tightens support for ‘Auschwitz Borders,” the phrase the late United Nations Ambassador Abba Eban used to describe the “Green Line” that existed until 1967.
The Israeli government has acknowledged that Prime Minister Netanyahu will travel to the European capitals next week to discuss “political matters” with French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister David Cameron. Prime Minister Netanyahu is to address the U.S. Congress shortly afterwards, while U.S. President Barack Obama prepares his ideas for establishing the Palestinian Authority as a new Arab country within Israel’s current borders. The president reportedly will reject the Arab world’s demand for the immigration of thousands of foreign Arabs to Israel. Abbas has said he will not surrender on the issue.
Palestinian Authority PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas has almost won public support from leading European countries, particularly France and Britain, for leaning on Israel to sacrifice to the Palestinian Authority the homes of more than half a million Jews in United Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria.
Abbas, since taking over from Yasser Arafat six years ago, has successfully globetrotted to build international support for his one-sided demands while going through the motions of accepting American-sponsored ideas to negotiate the terms of creating the PA state.
The United States last month thwarted plans by the Quartet – the United Nations, Russia, the United States and the European Union – to officially propose a PA state based on the old Armistice lines of 1949, often incorrectly termed "1967 borders", after the Arabs lost the war they launched as a rejection of the re-establishment of Israel as a country.
European leaders, acting independently of the United States, have announced their increasing support for Abbas’s demands, without any negotiations with Israel, where nearly 10 percent of the Jewish population lives in areas demanded by the PA.
"The recognition of a Palestinian state is an option that we are currently thinking about, with our European partners,” Gérard Araud, France’s ambassador to the United Nations said last week, one day after Abbas met with French President Nicolas Sarkozy.
Abbas told France24 in an interview last week that “We can’t say that certain organizations or countries promised to recognize a Palestinian state. But all the signs they are sending show that they are awaiting the right moment to do so. You notice that a certain number of European countries have recently sent additional delegations and official representatives to the Palestinian territories. From our side, we are already treating them like ambassadors.”
Joyce Kaufman. The 7 Reasons to Support Israel
Watch the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmV1ffKP0ms
We do not apologize for the United State or for Israel!
Does the world care if Jewish kids run into bomb shelters every twenty minutes because Hamas shoots rockets at their home town daily? NO! Because the world never cared what happened to the Jews...so we MUST not care what they think about us Jews and Israel as long as we talk the truth!
Israel is the place where every great thing that happened in terms of civilization was birthed there
Reason 1: Israel has the right to the land because of all the archeological evidence. You do not have to go into a long philosophical argument because the archeological evidence proves that Jews have been in Israel since the beginning of its civilization. Reason 2: Historic; history supports it totally and completely; the land belonged to Israel way before the Roman Empire conquered it and exiled many Jews, though some remained to live there and never left! 700 years ago the Turks conquered the land and controlled it until WWI when the land was conquered by the USA Founding Fathers, the British! The British Government was very greatful to a Jewish Chemist named Weisman who discovered a way to manufacture Nitro Glycerin from materials that existed in England and to the Jewish people who bank rolled all Weisman's research and so the British promised to give the Jews their Homeland back! That is exactly how it went down all is supported by historical evidence.
Reason 3: the practical value of the Israelis being there; Israel today is a modern marvel of agriculture. There is no place on earth where a desert has become an orchard.
Reason 4: Humanitarian Concerns ground; there were six millions Jews slaughtered in the last century because the Jews had no where to go or a home to call their own! Make sure that Israel stays in tact so no one pogrom or Holocaust takes place again!
Reason 5: Strategic ally to the United States; Israel is a deterrent, a detriment and impediment to certain groups that want to destroy democracies all over the world. More often than not, it is Israel that keeps these groups from coming to the USA doors. It is good to know that we in the USA have a genuine--the only--ally, strategic and otherwise—in the Middle East on whom the USA can depend.
Reason 6: Israel is a road block to terrorism; Israel has cutting edge technology to fight terrorism; The problem we have is that we have an administration that refuses to use it; an administration that thinks that if they take a stand against US foes they will lose favor in the courts of the world's opinion. Guess what...they hate us no matter what!
Reason 7: and the most important...because God said so! And if God said it, that settles it all! Amen!
We do not apologize for the United State or for Israel!
Does the world care if Jewish kids run into bomb shelters every twenty minutes because Hamas shoots rockets at their home town daily? NO! Because the world never cared what happened to the Jews...so we MUST not care what they think about us Jews and Israel as long as we talk the truth!
Israel is the place where every great thing that happened in terms of civilization was birthed there
Reason 1: Israel has the right to the land because of all the archeological evidence. You do not have to go into a long philosophical argument because the archeological evidence proves that Jews have been in Israel since the beginning of its civilization. Reason 2: Historic; history supports it totally and completely; the land belonged to Israel way before the Roman Empire conquered it and exiled many Jews, though some remained to live there and never left! 700 years ago the Turks conquered the land and controlled it until WWI when the land was conquered by the USA Founding Fathers, the British! The British Government was very greatful to a Jewish Chemist named Weisman who discovered a way to manufacture Nitro Glycerin from materials that existed in England and to the Jewish people who bank rolled all Weisman's research and so the British promised to give the Jews their Homeland back! That is exactly how it went down all is supported by historical evidence.
Reason 3: the practical value of the Israelis being there; Israel today is a modern marvel of agriculture. There is no place on earth where a desert has become an orchard.
Reason 4: Humanitarian Concerns ground; there were six millions Jews slaughtered in the last century because the Jews had no where to go or a home to call their own! Make sure that Israel stays in tact so no one pogrom or Holocaust takes place again!
Reason 5: Strategic ally to the United States; Israel is a deterrent, a detriment and impediment to certain groups that want to destroy democracies all over the world. More often than not, it is Israel that keeps these groups from coming to the USA doors. It is good to know that we in the USA have a genuine--the only--ally, strategic and otherwise—in the Middle East on whom the USA can depend.
Reason 6: Israel is a road block to terrorism; Israel has cutting edge technology to fight terrorism; The problem we have is that we have an administration that refuses to use it; an administration that thinks that if they take a stand against US foes they will lose favor in the courts of the world's opinion. Guess what...they hate us no matter what!
Reason 7: and the most important...because God said so! And if God said it, that settles it all! Amen!
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Revisiting the Jordan option
Asaf Romirowsky
Amid the unrest now sweeping the Middle East, Israeli government and security officials are quietly discussing an unusual strategy that would pass the Palestinians’ political future off to Jordan. With the odds of a negotiated two-state solution at an all-time low, former Defense Minister Moshe Arens, Knesset Member Arieh Eldad, and Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin resurrected the “Jordan is Palestine” model for regional peace.
Israeli officials fear that a Palestinian Intifada could break out on both sides of the Jordan River, and they seek to make it as much a Jordanian problem as an Israeli one. In February, Human Rights Watch, the world’s self-proclaimed defender of minority rights, produced a 60-page report entitled, “Stateless Again: Palestinian-Origin Jordanians Deprived of their Nationality.” The paper details how Jordan deprives its Palestinian citizens of West Bank origins their basic rights, such education and healthcare. The report received scant attention back then. But the problem of Jordanian Palestinians, amidst growing unrest in the Hashemite Kingdom, has put the issue back on the front burner.
Israeli analysts worry that if the Jordanian government is to become more representative, it is possible that the country’s 72% Palestinian population could effectively take control. Jordan, in effect, could become “Palestine.”
The notion of a Palestinian controlled polity in Jordan is not new. From the war of Israeli independence in 1948 through the Six-Day War in 1967, Israeli politicians on the Left and Right advanced a policy of “Jordan is Palestine.” While defending Israel from Arab aggression, they proposed that Jordan become the Palestinian homeland. Israeli officials proposed various scenarios for a Jordanian-Palestinian confederation that fused the East Bank and West Bank of the Jordan River under one administration.
However, it is not as simple as that. Dan Schueftan, author of A Jordanian Option, correctly noted in 1986 that such an arrangement would be dependent on Israeli-Jordanian relations and how the two parties view potential threats from the Palestinian populations in their midst.
Inseparable security needs
To be sure, in the years after the Six-Day War, the Jordanian monarchy was wary of the Palestinians. Palestine Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat challenged the sovereignty of the country in 1970. After that, the kingdom had blocked the flow of Palestinians from the West Bank into the East Bank in order to preserve the kingdom’s Hashemite political structure. To a certain extent, the Jordanians renounced all claims to the West Bank in 1988, backed the creation of the Palestinian Authority in the early 1990s, and then made peace with Israel in 1994 in an attempt to prevent further flooding of Palestinians into their country.
To a certain extent Jerusalem h as long looked to the Hashemite monarchy to maintain stability and security on both sides of the river. Both Amman and Jerusalem, in fact, recognize that their security needs are inseparable. Jordan has benefited from the periods of relative quiet and prosperity in Israel. Accordingly, Jordanian security forces have been increasingly involved in the West Bank, where they conduct joint training sessions with Palestinian forces. It has been a win-win-win situation for Jordan, Israel and the Palestinians.
The problem now is that Jordan’s traditional power centers are unhappy with the rise of Palestinian influence in the country. Tribal leaders resent Jordan’s Queen Rania, born in Kuwait to a family with roots in the West Bank, for her vocal advocacy of the Palestinian cause. In fact, 36 tribal leaders recently published their objections to Rania’s position, fearing that it will accelerate a slow Palestinian takeover of the kingdom.
With hopes fading for a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, this seemingly far-flung notion may become the last, best option. The problem is that it could embolden Palestinian radical groups, as well as the Muslim Brotherhood, which derive much of their power from disillusioned Palestinians in the West and East Banks. With the rise of such groups in Jordan, the peace agreement between Amman and Jerusalem would be in peril.
Nevertheless, as uncomfortable as it might be for Palestinians, Israelis and Jordanians to admit, the Jordanian option might be the best one they have.
Asaf Romirowsky is an adjunct scholar at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a former liaison officer from the Israeli Defense Forces to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.
Amid the unrest now sweeping the Middle East, Israeli government and security officials are quietly discussing an unusual strategy that would pass the Palestinians’ political future off to Jordan. With the odds of a negotiated two-state solution at an all-time low, former Defense Minister Moshe Arens, Knesset Member Arieh Eldad, and Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin resurrected the “Jordan is Palestine” model for regional peace.
Israeli officials fear that a Palestinian Intifada could break out on both sides of the Jordan River, and they seek to make it as much a Jordanian problem as an Israeli one. In February, Human Rights Watch, the world’s self-proclaimed defender of minority rights, produced a 60-page report entitled, “Stateless Again: Palestinian-Origin Jordanians Deprived of their Nationality.” The paper details how Jordan deprives its Palestinian citizens of West Bank origins their basic rights, such education and healthcare. The report received scant attention back then. But the problem of Jordanian Palestinians, amidst growing unrest in the Hashemite Kingdom, has put the issue back on the front burner.
Israeli analysts worry that if the Jordanian government is to become more representative, it is possible that the country’s 72% Palestinian population could effectively take control. Jordan, in effect, could become “Palestine.”
The notion of a Palestinian controlled polity in Jordan is not new. From the war of Israeli independence in 1948 through the Six-Day War in 1967, Israeli politicians on the Left and Right advanced a policy of “Jordan is Palestine.” While defending Israel from Arab aggression, they proposed that Jordan become the Palestinian homeland. Israeli officials proposed various scenarios for a Jordanian-Palestinian confederation that fused the East Bank and West Bank of the Jordan River under one administration.
However, it is not as simple as that. Dan Schueftan, author of A Jordanian Option, correctly noted in 1986 that such an arrangement would be dependent on Israeli-Jordanian relations and how the two parties view potential threats from the Palestinian populations in their midst.
Inseparable security needs
To be sure, in the years after the Six-Day War, the Jordanian monarchy was wary of the Palestinians. Palestine Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat challenged the sovereignty of the country in 1970. After that, the kingdom had blocked the flow of Palestinians from the West Bank into the East Bank in order to preserve the kingdom’s Hashemite political structure. To a certain extent, the Jordanians renounced all claims to the West Bank in 1988, backed the creation of the Palestinian Authority in the early 1990s, and then made peace with Israel in 1994 in an attempt to prevent further flooding of Palestinians into their country.
To a certain extent Jerusalem h as long looked to the Hashemite monarchy to maintain stability and security on both sides of the river. Both Amman and Jerusalem, in fact, recognize that their security needs are inseparable. Jordan has benefited from the periods of relative quiet and prosperity in Israel. Accordingly, Jordanian security forces have been increasingly involved in the West Bank, where they conduct joint training sessions with Palestinian forces. It has been a win-win-win situation for Jordan, Israel and the Palestinians.
The problem now is that Jordan’s traditional power centers are unhappy with the rise of Palestinian influence in the country. Tribal leaders resent Jordan’s Queen Rania, born in Kuwait to a family with roots in the West Bank, for her vocal advocacy of the Palestinian cause. In fact, 36 tribal leaders recently published their objections to Rania’s position, fearing that it will accelerate a slow Palestinian takeover of the kingdom.
With hopes fading for a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, this seemingly far-flung notion may become the last, best option. The problem is that it could embolden Palestinian radical groups, as well as the Muslim Brotherhood, which derive much of their power from disillusioned Palestinians in the West and East Banks. With the rise of such groups in Jordan, the peace agreement between Amman and Jerusalem would be in peril.
Nevertheless, as uncomfortable as it might be for Palestinians, Israelis and Jordanians to admit, the Jordanian option might be the best one they have.
Asaf Romirowsky is an adjunct scholar at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a former liaison officer from the Israeli Defense Forces to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.
Monday, April 25, 2011
Who Makes U.S. Policy? UN, Arab League, international community or U.S. Government?
Barry Rubin
This interview with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton deserves close analysis for a reason that neither I nor anyone else noticed before.
"QUESTION: But, I mean, how can [Libya] be worse than what has happened in Syria over the years, where Bashar Asad’s father killed 25,000 people at a lick? I mean, they open fire with live ammunition on these civilians. Why is that different from Libya?
"SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I --
"QUESTION: This [Syria] is a friend of Iran, an enemy of Israel. “SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, if there were a coalition of the international community, if there were the passage of Security Council resolution, if there were a call by the Arab League, if there was a condemnation that was universal – but that is not going to happen, because I don’t think that it’s yet clear what will occur, what will unfold.”
On one hand, what Clinton says is quite logical. It doesn’t make sense for Western countries to send forces to Syria and start bombing. But that’s not the issue. The issue is supporting the Syrian opposition and really comprehending that Syria is an enemy of the West whose regime deserves no quarter.
Yet what does Clinton begin with as the reasons for treating the two differently? Let’s list them:
1. “a coalition of the international community”
2. “passage of Security Council resolution”
3. “call by the Arab League”
4. “a condemnation that was universal”
But, she correctly concludes, “that is not going to happen.”
Now, this is no way for a U.S. secretary of state to speak. What about U.S. interests? What about an independent American decisionmaking process?
Again, these steps might be appropriate for military action–which, again, is not the issue here–but let’s recall, for example, how President George Bush set U.S. policy on Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990 and then put together an international coalition on the basis of decisions made on the basis of U.S. national interests. That’s the way it’s supposed to work. Not the other way around.
Since Syria is an American enemy killing Americans in Iraq and backing terrorist groups to a degree exceeded only by Iran–which is its ally and also an enemy of the United States–why does the U.S. government need an international coalition, UN resolution, Arab League call, and universal condemnation to act?
At any rate, this kind of things certainly does not apply for taking a strong U.S. stance of diplomatic opposition, freezing all the concessions this administration has given to Syria, recalling the U.S. ambassador in protest, building an anti-Syria alliance, blocking Syria’s takeover of Lebanon, working actively to eliminate Syria’s Gaza client, supporting the Syrian opposition and trying to bring down the regime, punishing Syria for its surrogate warfare against the United States in Iraq, and so on.
But instead the kind of thinking this administration all too often represents turns over U.S. power and sovereignty to others.
Every American secretary of state from 1789 onward would be shaken and shocked by such thinking. They would say: No, the United States determines its interests, sets its policy, and implements that policy. Getting international support is an element in that process but it is a byproduct of U.S. interests and decisionmaking; not the other way around.
It is preferable that the United States act multilaterally if possible, but it is not the precondition for action either. Nor should trying to maximize foreign support require too much watering down of the measures taken or–in the case of the Iran sanctions–smoothing passage by giving exemptions to Russia, China, and other countries thus gutting the sanctions.
Similarly, the U.S. government should not become so obsessed with international popularity and multilateralism as to ignore it when countries stab it in the back, as Turkey’s government did on the UN sanctions issue. Nor should it bring situations, as is happening with the unilateral Palestinian independence issue at the UN, in which the United States opposes something as dangerous but doesn’t lobby energetically with other countries on it.
During the Cold War, the United States usually acted with coalitions under president after president. Even the supposedly obsessive unilateralist President George W. Bush put together an international coalition to invade Iraq.
Yet now broad international support has in many cases become the precondition for U.S. action or indeed formulating a U.S. policy at all. In other cases, the U.S. government refuses to take leadership as if such behavior was a demonstration of high virtue. This kind of thing has become so common as to be accepted without anyone even noticing.
This interview with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton deserves close analysis for a reason that neither I nor anyone else noticed before.
"QUESTION: But, I mean, how can [Libya] be worse than what has happened in Syria over the years, where Bashar Asad’s father killed 25,000 people at a lick? I mean, they open fire with live ammunition on these civilians. Why is that different from Libya?
"SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I --
"QUESTION: This [Syria] is a friend of Iran, an enemy of Israel. “SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, if there were a coalition of the international community, if there were the passage of Security Council resolution, if there were a call by the Arab League, if there was a condemnation that was universal – but that is not going to happen, because I don’t think that it’s yet clear what will occur, what will unfold.”
On one hand, what Clinton says is quite logical. It doesn’t make sense for Western countries to send forces to Syria and start bombing. But that’s not the issue. The issue is supporting the Syrian opposition and really comprehending that Syria is an enemy of the West whose regime deserves no quarter.
Yet what does Clinton begin with as the reasons for treating the two differently? Let’s list them:
1. “a coalition of the international community”
2. “passage of Security Council resolution”
3. “call by the Arab League”
4. “a condemnation that was universal”
But, she correctly concludes, “that is not going to happen.”
Now, this is no way for a U.S. secretary of state to speak. What about U.S. interests? What about an independent American decisionmaking process?
Again, these steps might be appropriate for military action–which, again, is not the issue here–but let’s recall, for example, how President George Bush set U.S. policy on Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990 and then put together an international coalition on the basis of decisions made on the basis of U.S. national interests. That’s the way it’s supposed to work. Not the other way around.
Since Syria is an American enemy killing Americans in Iraq and backing terrorist groups to a degree exceeded only by Iran–which is its ally and also an enemy of the United States–why does the U.S. government need an international coalition, UN resolution, Arab League call, and universal condemnation to act?
At any rate, this kind of things certainly does not apply for taking a strong U.S. stance of diplomatic opposition, freezing all the concessions this administration has given to Syria, recalling the U.S. ambassador in protest, building an anti-Syria alliance, blocking Syria’s takeover of Lebanon, working actively to eliminate Syria’s Gaza client, supporting the Syrian opposition and trying to bring down the regime, punishing Syria for its surrogate warfare against the United States in Iraq, and so on.
But instead the kind of thinking this administration all too often represents turns over U.S. power and sovereignty to others.
Every American secretary of state from 1789 onward would be shaken and shocked by such thinking. They would say: No, the United States determines its interests, sets its policy, and implements that policy. Getting international support is an element in that process but it is a byproduct of U.S. interests and decisionmaking; not the other way around.
It is preferable that the United States act multilaterally if possible, but it is not the precondition for action either. Nor should trying to maximize foreign support require too much watering down of the measures taken or–in the case of the Iran sanctions–smoothing passage by giving exemptions to Russia, China, and other countries thus gutting the sanctions.
Similarly, the U.S. government should not become so obsessed with international popularity and multilateralism as to ignore it when countries stab it in the back, as Turkey’s government did on the UN sanctions issue. Nor should it bring situations, as is happening with the unilateral Palestinian independence issue at the UN, in which the United States opposes something as dangerous but doesn’t lobby energetically with other countries on it.
During the Cold War, the United States usually acted with coalitions under president after president. Even the supposedly obsessive unilateralist President George W. Bush put together an international coalition to invade Iraq.
Yet now broad international support has in many cases become the precondition for U.S. action or indeed formulating a U.S. policy at all. In other cases, the U.S. government refuses to take leadership as if such behavior was a demonstration of high virtue. This kind of thing has become so common as to be accepted without anyone even noticing.
Sunday, April 24, 2011
PA daily: "Jews, Jews! Your holiday [Passover] is the Holiday of Apes"
Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook
An article in the official PA daily newspaper claims that Palestinian Christian youth perform a spring march in the streets that includes the chant: "Jews, Jews! Your holiday [Passover] is the Holiday of Apes." (See PMW web site for examples of the Palestinian Authority referring to Jews as "apes and pigs.") He writes that these "meaningful messages" are in response to Israel's security measures in Jerusalem during the holiday of Passover:
"For many years the holy city [Jerusalem] has been deliberately closed to Palestinians, under security-related pretexts and for the Jewish festival of Passover."
The writer says that the Easter services in Jerusalem have lost their Palestinian flavor because of western Christian pilgrims:
"The festivities at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre have begun to assume a western character, because of the massive presence of foreign Christian pilgrims and the limited presence of Palestinians."
But the writer insists that in Palestinian Authority cities, the festivities have retained their Palestinian flavor. He describes youth chanting that the Jewish holiday of Passover is the "Holiday of the Apes":
"The spring carnival has retained its [Palestinian] flavor in towns such as Bethlehem, Beit Sahour and Ramallah... with the demonstrations of the Scouts, songs, dances, and popular Palestinian hymns about Christian-Islamic unity and internal Christian unity. These hymns carry meaningful messages, in response to the Israeli prohibition [to enter Jerusalem], as seen in the calls of the youth who lead the procession of light, waving swords and not caring if anyone accuses them of anti-Semitism: ... 'Our master, Jesus, the Messiah, the Messiah redeemed us, with his blood he bought us, and today we are joyous while the Jews are sad,' and, 'Jews, Jews! Your holiday is the Holiday of the Apes, while our holiday is the Holiday of the Messiah.'"
[PA TV (Fatah), April 11, 2011]
An article in the official PA daily newspaper claims that Palestinian Christian youth perform a spring march in the streets that includes the chant: "Jews, Jews! Your holiday [Passover] is the Holiday of Apes." (See PMW web site for examples of the Palestinian Authority referring to Jews as "apes and pigs.") He writes that these "meaningful messages" are in response to Israel's security measures in Jerusalem during the holiday of Passover:
"For many years the holy city [Jerusalem] has been deliberately closed to Palestinians, under security-related pretexts and for the Jewish festival of Passover."
The writer says that the Easter services in Jerusalem have lost their Palestinian flavor because of western Christian pilgrims:
"The festivities at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre have begun to assume a western character, because of the massive presence of foreign Christian pilgrims and the limited presence of Palestinians."
But the writer insists that in Palestinian Authority cities, the festivities have retained their Palestinian flavor. He describes youth chanting that the Jewish holiday of Passover is the "Holiday of the Apes":
"The spring carnival has retained its [Palestinian] flavor in towns such as Bethlehem, Beit Sahour and Ramallah... with the demonstrations of the Scouts, songs, dances, and popular Palestinian hymns about Christian-Islamic unity and internal Christian unity. These hymns carry meaningful messages, in response to the Israeli prohibition [to enter Jerusalem], as seen in the calls of the youth who lead the procession of light, waving swords and not caring if anyone accuses them of anti-Semitism: ... 'Our master, Jesus, the Messiah, the Messiah redeemed us, with his blood he bought us, and today we are joyous while the Jews are sad,' and, 'Jews, Jews! Your holiday is the Holiday of the Apes, while our holiday is the Holiday of the Messiah.'"
[PA TV (Fatah), April 11, 2011]
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)