Love of the Land: 10 Reasons Why Syrians are a Happy People

10 Reasons Why Syrians are a Happy People

reformsyria.org
November 21, 2009
Mohammad al-Gareeb (Pseudo - 23-year old Syrian student - Translated)

Reason No. 10 - We are a happy people because weather forecasters in Syria brighten our mood by announcing a spring-like conditions in all seasons of the year. They collude to use weather forecasts, which, unbeknownst to them, do oscillate sometimes, to lift our spirits and humor us.

Reason No. 9 - We are a happy people because the average salary of an employee is such that he is never at a loss of how to spend it. In fact, the salary spends itself in the first five days of the month allowing its owner to sleep well at night not fearful of thieves who could rob him or to tire himself by thinking of ways to spend the excess.

Reason No. 8 - We are a happy people because the privacy of a toilet is the only place where we can express a democratic opinion freely, not fearful of someone listening (even those closest to us) thus suspecting, G*d forbids, they are informers. Lately, our happiness has been on the rise because the private sector in Syria has built public toilets on various streets of Damascus, which, for the first time, allows us to freely express our opinion publicly.

Reason No. 7 - We are a happy people because the Parliamentary elections, besides contributing to the national economy by employing script designers and coffee busboys, also provide the Syrian citizen with an additional income in the form of a bribe paid by the candidate for his/her vote. All the while, the economic conditions are conducive for the voter to kindly accept, or purposefully seek, the bribe. Also, we are a happy people because the elections represent a chance for the candidates to enter communal restaurants they would avoid like the pest outside election time.

Reason No. 6 - We are a happy people because the Syrian newspapers finds it as its duty to save the Syrian citizen the price of purchase, so it publishes the same stories routinely, over and over. A Syrian citizen can go for a week or a month not buying the newspaper and he would not miss any Syrian news.

Reason No. 5 - We are a happy people because Syrian television news programming produced a song entitled: "I am Syrian, Oh how lucky I am" (Ana Souri, Ahh ya Nyalli!!) and introduced it as part of the daily news.

Reason No. 4 - We are a happy people because our political parties never have any disputes or contradict each other as a result of sharing the same opinion. All of the Syrian Members of Parliament, representing the different political parties partaking the same ideology, consistently vote by raising all their hands simultaneously and lower them simultaneously as well.

Reason No. 3 - We are a happy people because our government officials have become heroes like the destructive Hulago Khan (Destroyed Baghdad in 1258), resistant like Salah Din Al-Ayoubi, and invading like Sakr Qureish (Syrian TV series glorifying Islamization of Spain). The people see these officials humbly walk amongst them and driving their big expensive cars, which render them even more heroic than the traditional heroes, something Syrians are so proud of.

Reason No. 2 - We are a happy people because our officials shelter the Syrian people from outside evil and secure us with indoctrination while their sons stimulate the Syrian economy in our absence.

Reason No. 1 - We are a happy people because we are forced to be happy. If not, we will all die from strokes and heart attacks given what goes around us and the lives we lead.

Love of the Land: 10 Reasons Why Syrians are a Happy People

Love of the Land: Is the President encouraging Palestinian violence?

Is the President encouraging Palestinian violence?

Ira Sharkansky
The Shark Blog
19 November 09

There has been a worrisome shift in Israeli commentary on President Obama's efforts to force peace between Israel and Palestine.

A prominent emphasis had focused on the President's naivete, what one called a "childish" assumption that his engagement could bring the parties to positions they had not taken on their own.

Now there is a concern that the president may actually be advancing the prospect of violence.

The possibility comes from only part of a sentence, but it was a presidential sentence that received wide media coverage. Obama said that construction in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Gilo makes it harder to achieve peace, and embitters the Palestinians in a way that could be dangerous.

It took less than a day for the media to note that a prominent Palestinian--one who was a leader in the 2000 intifada and muted as a possible successor to Mahmoud Abbas-- was urging the launch of popular campaigns to achieve statehood.

Is it too much of a stretch to see "popular campaigns" as code for mass demonstrations, likely to produce violence and the start of another intifada, and to see the Palestinians finding an endorsement for their actions in Barack Obama's mention of Israel's contribution to their dangerous embitterment?

To those who say we should not rest expectations on phrases expressed by an American president and a prominent Palestinian, it is appropriate to take another look at history. Palestinian statements and actions going back to the 1930s indicate a deep seated feeling that they have a monopoly of justice in this bi-national dispute. Moreover, they have gone the route of violence on several occasions. Recent statements by several prominent figures provide some justification for Obama's conclusion that prolonging their lack of satisfaction could produce another round.

Was the President simply expressing his worry? Was he careless in overlooking what his comment could add to existing tinder already smoldering? Could he possibly have intended to provide justification for violence, either by way of punishing Israel for not accepting his dictates about freezing settlements, or as an effort to achieve something that would save him the embarrassment of failure?
(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Is the President encouraging Palestinian violence?

Israel Matzav: Overnight music video

Overnight music video

Here's Avraham Fried singing Don't Hide from Me, in which he asks that Hashem (God), who is hidden from us today, once again reveal Himself to us.

The tape is from the Ohel Concert 5758, March 8 1998 in Madison Square Garden in New York.

Let's go to the videotape.




Israel Matzav: Overnight music video

Israel Matzav: Sarah Palin on Israel

Sarah Palin on Israel

Here's an interview with Sarah Palin on Fox News' Bill O'Reilly show. Note what she says about Israel starting at the 1:25 mark (Hat Tip: Gateway Pundit).




Well, she seems to get it.


Israel Matzav: Sarah Palin on Israel

Israel Matzav: J Street is on Iran's side

J Street is on Iran's side

The Weekly Standard exposes some email correspondence between J Street's Joel Rubin and National Iranian American Council's Emily Blout:

Here's J Street political director Joel Rubin congratulating the legislative director of the National Iranian American Council, Emily Blout, on their successful push to defeat new sanctions legislation in late 2008:

From: Joel Rubin
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 21:30:43 -0400
To: Emily Blout
Subject: Re: Hi - get together in mid-October?

I just got airtight confirmation that no 362 language will be included in the Iran sanctions subsection of the India nuclear bill. My bet is that that subsection will get dropped in conference, if it even gets that far. Of course, who knows if they'll be back in November and if the other side makes another play. In any event, you guys did great work this year. Really great

I don't think anybody would make the claim that NIAC is on the "pro-Israel" side, so when Rubin talks about "the other side," it's the genuine pro-Israel community he's talking about, right? Sanctions are the number one priority for Israel and the pro-Israel community in the United States. Why is J Street conspiring with an organization run by an Iranian national -- an organization that Congress has asked AG Holder to investigate for violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act and lobbying disclosure laws -- to kill that legislation?

Pro-Israel Pro-Iran, pro-peace pro-Obama.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: J Street is on Iran's side

Love of the Land: Map Check

Map Check

Noah Pollak
Contentions/Commentary
20 November 09

The central problem in foreign press coverage of Israel is the tendency of journalists to rewrite and sensationalize current events or, more commonly, to mischaracterize them into agreement with a preferred narrative. Take the brouhaha over Gilo. Many journalists would like to incorporate the Israeli decision to add housing to this neighborhood into the larger narrative about West Bank and East Jerusalem settlements encroaching on land slated for a future Palestinian state. It would be complicated if it was acknowledged, as Jeffrey Goldberg pointed out, that

The building of apartments in Gilo is irrelevant to [the] eventual disposition of Jerusalem because everyone — the Americans, the Palestinians and the Israelis — knows that Gilo … will undoubtedly end up in Israel as part of a negotiated solution. … It doesn’t matter, then, if the Israelis build 900 housing units in Gilo or 900 skyscrapers: Gilo will be kept by Israel in exchange for a one-to-one land swap with Palestine.

The narrative of dispossession would be even more profoundly challenged if it was acknowledged that Gilo isn’t even in the West Bank or East Jerusalem. It’s actually in Southwest Jerusalem. Type “Gilo Jerusalem” into Google Maps if you want to see for yourself. Yet almost every single story on the Gilo controversy locates the neighborhood in a completely different region — specifically, an Arab region — of Jerusalem. What’s even more remarkable is that most of these stories are written by reporters who are stationed in Jerusalem. These sloppy characters either don’t know the geography of their own backyard or are willfully misleading their readers.

So, here’s to you, Ben Hubbard of the AP, Katya Adler of the BBC, Fox News, the BBC(again), Ewen MacAskill of the Guardian, Ben Lynfield of the UK Independent, Ilene Prusherof the Christian Science Monitor, and many more.

You have all flunked Journalism 101.

Love of the Land: Map Check

Israel Matzav: Brazil about to follow Venezuela and State Department has nothing to say?

Brazil about to follow Venezuela and State Department has nothing to say?

This is from a State Department briefing:

QUESTION: Ahmadinejad is going to be visiting Brazil in a couple of days. Is the fact that a friendly government like that welcoming Ahmadinejad – does that tend to dilute international solidarity on the nuclear issue?

MR. WOOD: Well, President Ahmadinejad going to Brazil, that’s an issue between the Government of Brazil and the Government of Iran. What we would hope is that the Government of Brazil would raise some of these concerns that we have, many of which I’ve just laid out here, about Iran in those meetings. But beyond that, I don’t have anything to add to that.

J.E. Dyer comments:

So: Brazil is hosting the three major regional players in Middle Eastern dynamics this month. One of them is the president of Iran, the revolutionary, terrorist-sponsoring state Obama is trying to pressure on its nuclear program. Brazil – a nuclear client of Russia – has been following Venezuela’s path toward “increased economic ties” with Iran, which in literal terms means banking arrangements that circumvent sanctions, plus plenty of “legitimate” manufacturing and container shipping to obscure trade in prohibited goods. And the views of our State Department on these circumstances boil down to an absurdly banal bromide (the Ahmadinejad visit is “an issue between Brazil and Iran”) and a “hope” that Brazil will raise some of our concerns with the Iranian president.

Doesn't anyone in Washington get it?

Read the whole thing.

Israel Matzav: Brazil about to follow Venezuela and State Department has nothing to say?

Israel Matzav: 'Negotiations,' Syrian style

'Negotiations,' Syrian style

At a meeting in Paris with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said that he is only willing to 'negotiate' with Israel if he is guaranteed in advance that the 'negotiations' would lead to Israel giving the entire Golan Heights to Syria. Earlier this week, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told Sarkozy that he wished to negotiate with the Syrians without preconditions.

Assad said that talks without preconditions were "unacceptable," and that he expected the full return of land and rights before he would begin any peace talks.

"This is where talks begin from. The result of the talks is peace; if you want peace then the result will be peace," Assad said.

...

During the meeting with Sarkozy, Assad questioned Israel's will to restart peace talks and suggested that a summit meeting between the two enemy states would be useless.

Assad welcomed renewed indirect discussions mediated by Turkey, but appeared to dismiss suggestions of a direct meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

"If Mr. Netanyahu is serious, he can send his teams of experts, we will send our teams of experts to Turkey. They can then talk, if they are really interested in peace," Assad said.

What does Assad propose to actually negotiate? The shape of the table?

Israel Matzav: 'Negotiations,' Syrian style

Israel Matzav: Israel's border with Lebanon heats up

Israel's border with Lebanon heats up

Sunday is Lebanon's Independence Day, and the country's leadership has seen fit to celebrate the occasion by heating up the border with Israel. On Saturday, Lebanese newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi reported that Lebanon's army commander instructed his troops to raise the alert level along the border in preparation for an attack by the 'Israeli enemy.'

In a statement published ahead of Lebanon's independence day, which will take place on Sunday, the Lebanese military chief called for "greater vigilance" on the border "to counter the planned attacks by the Israeli enemy against the homeland."

All the available options must be used to address Israel's violations of the country's sovereignty "land, sea and air," Kahwaji said.

He asked the army to stand by the Lebanese people "to support their steadfastness on their land" and stressed Lebanon's right to the "liberation of its land still under occupation in the Sheba Farms, and the villages of Shuba and Ghajar."

Kahwaji also urged his troops to "cooperate with the international forces in implementation of Security Council Resolution 1701."

In a possible allusion to those who cooperate with Israel, Kahwaji urged the military to "make the utmost possible to reassure the citizens to their lives and livelihoods and continue in pursuit of terrorists, criminals and all those who undermine the country's security."

Last week, a Lebanese military court sentenced a soldier and his wife to death for 'collaborating' with Israel. The soldier's sister and her husband were also sentenced to death, but they purportedly live in Israel.

Isn't it great that Hezbullah is part of the Lebanese government?

Lebanon's army immediately acted upon Kahwaji's request, reporting on Saturday afternoon that it had fired on an Israeli drone.

Lebanon's army said it opened fire on an Israeli unmanned aerial vehicle on Saturday afternoon, forcing the drone to leave Lebanese airspace amid rising tensions between the neighbors.

According to the report, the drone had been flying above the southern Lebanese village of Bint Jbail, where Israel Defense Forces troops engaged Hezbollah guerillas in a fierce battle during the 2006 Second Lebanon War.

After troops directed anti-aircraft fire at the unmanned aerial vehicle, the Lebanese army said, the drone rose to a higher altitude and then left Lebanese airspace.

No word on whether there has been an Israeli reaction to the report.

Michael Totten reports that the next war between Israel and Lebanon will be worse for both sides than the previous war was:

Hezbollah is much more dangerous than any terrorist group that has ever been fielded from the West Bank or Gaza. It managed to create hundreds of thousands of refugees inside Israel, and it did so with fewer and shorter range rockets than it has now. And while the "Party of God" may think it's terrific that it can do what Hamas in Gaza only fantasizes about, its arsenal indirectly threatens Lebanon just as much if not more than it threatens Israel. Nasrallah can unleash a great deal of destruction, but it's still no match for what the IDF can dish out while fighting back.

If Israel's nuclear power plant comes under fire, if Tel Aviv skyscrapers explode from missile attacks, if Hezbollah manages to turn all of Israel into a kill zone where there is no place to run, Israelis will panic like they haven't since the 1973 Yom Kippur War when it briefly appeared the Egyptian army might overrun the whole country. I wouldn't want to be anywhere in Lebanon while Israelis are actively fending off that kind of assault. No country can afford to be restrained while fighting for its survival.

The last Lebanon caught almost everyone by surprise, although it should not have. The next one might start much the same way because few seem to be taking its likelihood or its potential magnitude seriously.

It's possible that a "balance of terror" on each side of the border will prevent anyone from doing anything stupid, but I wouldn't count on it. Hezbollah's rhetoric is more belligerent this year than ever. Not only does Nasrallah threaten to avenge the assassination of his military commander Imad Mugniyeh, he and the rest of the leadership fantasize in public about nuclear war.

And Hezbullah's supporters are thrilled at the prospect. Read the whole thing.

Israel Matzav: Israel's border with Lebanon heats up

Israel Matzav: The truth about IKEA?

The truth about IKEA?

Shavua tov, a good week to everyone.

IKEA may have stores in Israel like this one in Netanya, but if the claims in a book recently published in Swedish are true, the Israeli stores don't make up for its founder's racism and Nazi-linked past.

Kamprad's former personal assistant, Stenebo reveals in a new book published in Sweden that the budget-furnishings monolith seems to have quite a few sordid secrets. The Truth About Ikea has yet to be translated into English, yet it's already sent ripples through the media, as Ikea fans learn that all may not be sunshine and meatballs at their favorite cheap, simple, eco-friendly big-box home-furnishings store.

Stenebo's position has given him amazing access to Kamprad, but he's not the first to question the furniture tycoon's morality. A journalist in 1994 threatened to expose Kamprad's adolescent membership in Nazi youth organizations. Kamprad addressed the matter publicly, apologizing to his Jewish employees and dismissing this revelation as a brief and foolish flirtation with Nazism. But it appears he may have been raising funds and recruiting members as late as September 1945, and he remained friends with a Swedish fascist politician through the 1950s.

And Kamprad's Nazi adventure may have been indicative of a deeper vein of racism. Stenebo says Ikea execs often refer to foreigners as "niggers" and deny them promotions. All of Ikea's top executives come from the same small region of Sweden as Kamprad, Stenebo alleges; he also characterizes Kamprad's heir apparent, Peter, as an "incompetent racist."

There's more too. Read the whole thing. It will make you think twice before shopping at IKEA again. Especially considering that the store is Swedish.

Israel Matzav: The truth about IKEA?

Love of the Land: Banished at Turtle Bay

Banished at Turtle Bay

A U.N. critic has her credentials stripped.

Wall Street Journal
20 November 09

As part of our public-service reports on the workings of your favorite world body, allow us to introduce you to Anne Bayefsky. The Toronto native is an expert on human-rights law and an accredited United Nations observer. She is also a friend of Israel, which makes her persona non grata as far as the folks at Turtle Bay are concerned.

Ms. Bayefsky's sin was a two-minute talk she delivered at the U.N. earlier this month after the General Assembly had issued a resolution endorsing the Goldstone Report, which levels war crimes charges at Israel for defending itself in the face of Hamas's rockets. "The resolution doesn't mention the word Hamas," she said. "This is a resolution that purports to be even-handed; it is anything but."

Ms. Bayefsky's comments were the only note of criticism on a day otherwise marked by much U.N. jubilation. Whereupon she was summarily stripped of her U.N. badge and evicted from the premises. "The Palestinian ambassador is very upset by your statement," Ms. Bayefsky says the U.N. security chief told her. Journalist Matthew Russell Lee tells us that he heard the ambassador asking whether U.N. security had "captured" Ms. Bayefsky.

For the record, the U.N. claims that Ms. Bayefsky violated procedures by bringing a colleague who lacked a proper badge, and that she was not entitled to speak where she did, though representatives of nongovernment organizations have used it in the past. And when we called the Palestinian Mission to get their side of the story, they told us the fracas was the last of their worries. Maybe so.

Yet the U.N. continues to bar Ms. Bayefsky from the premises, despite calls on her behalf by the U.S. mission and Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel. Best-case scenario, one U.N. insider tells us, is that "they'll put her on probation." We hear the U.N.'s NGO accreditation committee, chaired by Sudan, will likely make the final decision.

Meanwhile, a committee of the General Assembly recently passed a resolution on the so-called defamation of religion. "Everyone has the right to hold opinions without interference, and has the right to freedom of expression, the exercise of which carries with it special duties and responsibilities and may therefore be subject to limitations," it says.

"Without interference" yet "subject to limitations." Orwell should be living now.

Related : Sudan?!

Love of the Land: Banished at Turtle Bay

Love of the Land: Yad Vashem with an air force

Yad Vashem with an air force

Sarah Honig
"Another Tack"
JPost
19 November 09

One of this country's prominent professional talking heads, who also happens to be a longtime friend, opined in all earnestness when we met the other day that "the most pivotal recent political development" was Tom Friedman's op-ed in The New York Times (November 7) entitled "Call White House, ask for Barack." The broadcaster positively glowed and gloated. From his ultra-leftist standpoint this was a devastating blow to Binyamin Netanyahu and he lustily savored the triumph.

I had to confess my abysmal failure to be wowed. I gave Friedman's supposedly seminal column less than passing attention and couldn't see what the hoopla was about. Friedman is a veteran Jewish Israel-basher, whose career was constructed on his "personal crisis" of disillusionment with the Jewish state. Trashing Israel, after all, is his proven stock-in-trade. So what if Friedman figures there's "no romance, no sex, no excitement, no urgency" to our peace process, "not even a sense of importance anymore"? Big deal. Whoopty-do!

"The Americans are fed up with Bibi. They'll hang him out to dry and ditch the peace process," the media-hotshot retorted with noticeable exasperation.

"What peace process?" I snapped back. "It's a sham. There never was any process to achieve real coexistence, only a pretext to weaken Israel. Some 'useful-fool' Israelis play along for political expedience and others are intimidated to adopt the agenda," I argued. "Please let Washington quit trying to make us more vulnerable. By all means let them leave us alone."

That said, I wasn't optimistic: "It's too good to be true. What have we got to go on? Friedman? Since when does he call the shots?"

My influential colleague was flabbergasted: "Friedman reflects Obama's mood. This is a stern warning for us. At the very least Friedman will sway Obama and then we'll see where that gets us."

I ached to ask which side my famous interlocutor rooted for and whether he gave voice to left-wing wishful thinking, but I controlled myself.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Yad Vashem with an air force

RubinReports: When it Comes to Iran, President Obama Won’t Hear “No” For an Answer

When it Comes to Iran, President Obama Won’t Hear “No” For an Answer

[Please subscribe and get original analytical and news articles on the Middle East, U.S. foreign policy, and other topics.[

By Barry Rubin

Question: What does Iran have to do to get across the fact that it isn’t making a deal on its nuclear program?

Secretary of State Hilary Clinton says she doesn’t consider the Iranian foreign minister’s statement that they aren’t making the deal to be “the final word.” The Obama Administration will give Tehran a few more chances—and probably a few more months—to stall in order to race ahead in their atom bomb program and to build up ways of overcoming any sanctions that are some day applied.

Indeed, the United States and five other powers are holding still another meeting to, in the words of EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana's spokeswoman "review the latest developments on the Iran nuclear issue." But since no one is concluding Iran is saying no, they won’t take one step toward higher sanctions.

Higher sanctions, you might remember, were supposed to come about in September 2009 under the Obama Administration's own original time table. You know when the deadline was for the multi-year European negotiations with Iran was? September 2007.

Now at the earliest sanctions probably wouldn’t come before, what, March 2010? Victory for the Iran regime.

Another great power statement says that Iran has "not responded positively" to the plan, "We are disappointed by the lack of follow-up," and "Iran has not engaged in an intensified dialogue and in particular has not accepted to have a new meeting."

I think Iran is trying to tell you something, guys. But since it isn’t in writing yet, well, they claim they can’t do anything. And of course the Iranian regime will--with U.S. government cooperation--draw this out as long as possible.

Memo to world leaders: Do you think they might be stalling for time?

Note something important here. It isn’t as if the minute they declare that Iran rejects any compromise or serious negotiations there will be stronger sanctions. Oh, no. At that point, the United States and Europeans will start meeting to figure out what sanctions to put on. Of course, they will disagree, the Russians and Chinese will water it down. The plan is also to bring in the entire EU which means, for example, that Spain or Sweden could slow down the process or force a reduction in the planned pressures on Tehran.

Now what is the president of the United States's response to all this? Hold onto your syntax:

"Iran has taken weeks now and has not shown its willingness to say yes to this proposal...and so as a consequence we have begun discussions with our international partners about the importance of having consequences."

Can you imagine what would have been said if President George W. Bush, that fumblemouthed clown so unlike the brilliant articulate Obama had said "the importance of having consequences"? What does that phrase mean? Translation: I refuse to threaten Iran. I am reluctant to put on sanctions. I don't want to admit that engagement has failed. Where's the teleprompter?"

Now a new voice has been added asking for Obama to take tough action. that of Mohsen Makhmalbaf, international spokesman for Iran's main opposition movement. He urged Obama to increase public support for Iranian dissidents and stop the regime from getting nuclear weapons.

Recall that Obama's claim that a tougher stance would hurt the opposition was a major reason for him refusing to condemn the election theft, speak out forcibly against the repression, and hit the regime harder. Well, obviously that's untrue.

But even Makhmalbaf, former campaign spokesman for presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, thinks the regime won't make a deal because, in his words, "If they agree not to pursue a nuclear bomb and start negotiations, they will lose their supporters. Definitely dialogue is better than war. ... But can you continue your dialogue without any results?"

Answer: Apparently yes.

Now here's where it gets really disgusting.

In 1983, 241 U.S. servicemen were killed in the bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in an operation backed by Iran and Syria, carried out by Hizballah and other Iranian agents. Two yars ago, a federal court ruled that Iran was indeed responsible and ordered that Tehran pay $2.65 billion in damages to families of those killed.

The Justice Department is arguing that implementing the decision "can have significant, detrimental impact on our foreign relations, as well as the reciprocal treatment of the United States and its extensive overseas property holdings."

Really? What is Iran going to do, seize the U.S. embassy and hold everyone hostage? Oh, they already did that. Support terrorist attacks against Americans in Iraq. Oh, they are doing that, too. Hold anti-American rallies and call the United States "the Great Satan?" Oh, too late.

What this Administration doesn't understand is the value of pressure, leverage, credibility, and lots of other diplomatic techniques. What it should do is: let the court decision be implemented and put on sanctions now. That would be a much better situation:

--Under more pressure the likelihood of its slowing down the program and bargaining will increase. Sure, they won't really make a deal but at least they will be more scared and cautious.

--If sanctions are increased, Iran's ability to move ahead quickly with the program and its other aggressive designs will be weakened.

--Seeing the West being tougher and the United States showing some real leadership, Arab and other states will take heart and will resist more themselves. Otherwise, they will rush--as is already happening--to appease Iran.

Otherwise, the U.S. government will just go on holding "discussions with our international partners about the importance of having consequences." Unfortunately, for Iran Obama's policy has no consequences.

RubinReports: When it Comes to Iran, President Obama Won’t Hear “No” For an Answer

RubinReports: Israel: We believe in Life; You Benefit

Israel: We believe in Life; You Benefit

By Barry Rubin

You may be aware that while its enemies are threatening to wipe it off the map or are attacking it with terrorism and while many of those who should be its friends slander it daily, Israel does things that benefit all humanity. When you see four such medical and technological breakthroughs announced in one day, it should be hard to ignore.

There’s a now-famous Islamist slogan: We believe in death and you believe in life? Remember the implications of that for the rest of the world. But there’s also the opposite: We believe in life, including helping to save and better your life.

Here are the four latest examples:

-- A new Israeli invention allows cancerous tumors on the skin to be detected and examined before they become visible to the naked eye, Ben-Gurion University announced. Dermatologists and plastic surgeons usually diagnose skin tumors by the appearance of the tumor, normally with the naked eye, only rarely using a dermatoscope - a magnifying tool that allows tumors to be examined in detail. The newly developed instrument, known as OSPI, uses safe levels of radiation, projected at the tumor and returned to the gadget, which measures its character, including its contours and spread. OSPI also uses liquid crystals to carry out the examination.

--About 70% of all people with severe burns die from related infections. But a revolutionary new wound dressing developed at Tel Aviv University could cut that number dramatically. Prof. Meital Zilberman of TAU's Department of Biomedical Engineering has developed a new wound dressing based on fibers she engineered that can be loaded with drugs like antibiotics to speed up the healing process, and then dissolve when they've done their job. A study published in the Journal of Biomedical Materials Research - Applied Biomaterials demonstrates that, after only two days, this dressing can eradicate infection-causing bacteria. The new dressing protects the wound until it is no longer needed, after which it melts away.

--A team at Jerusalem's Hadassah University Medical Center has managed to separate platelets and adult stem cells from the blood and bone marrow of patients with fractures and inject them - causing the bones to join together three to four times faster and repairing some breaks that would have failed to heal.
• Israel's water technology, including ways to recycle and clean water better is growing quickly. One of these companies Aqwise, which has a system which breeds bacteria to break down organic waste, saw its sales increase 50% in 2009. Israel expects to export $2.5 billion worth of technology by 2011. Hundreds of millions of people around the world still have no access to clean water.

Now if you want international attention and sympathy you can carry out terrorist attacks or you can save lives through humanitarian advances. Which should garner the most support?

RubinReports: Israel: We believe in Life; You Benefit

Austrians Mute Israeli Anthem at Fencing Tourney - Jewish World - Israel News - Israel National News

Austrians Mute Israeli Anthem at Fencing Tourney - Jewish World - Israel News - Israel National News

Historian: Obama Won't Go Head-to-Head with US Jews - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Historian: Obama Won't Go Head-to-Head with US Jews - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

'US Knows Bibi Can Be Squeezed,' says Former Head of PM's Office - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

'US Knows Bibi Can Be Squeezed,' says Former Head of PM's Office - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Belgium PM to Head EU, Lady Ashton to Replace Solana - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Belgium PM to Head EU, Lady Ashton to Replace Solana - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Israel Fears Israeli Arab Links with Iranian Terrorists - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Israel Fears Israeli Arab Links with Iranian Terrorists - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Swastikas at Gush Katif Evictee Site at Nitzan - Jewish World - Israel News - Israel National News

Swastikas at Gush Katif Evictee Site at Nitzan - Jewish World - Israel News - Israel National News

Mumbai Doctor Smashed Idols and Became a Jew with Holtzbergs - Jewish World - Israel News - Israel National News

Mumbai Doctor Smashed Idols and Became a Jew with Holtzbergs - Jewish World - Israel News - Israel National News