An open letter to Rachel Corrie's parents from an Israeli parent.
Lenny Ben-David Pajamasmedia.com 09 March '10
Jerusalem — Craig and Cindy Corrie, I welcome you to Israel where, I understand, you plan to bring a civil suit before an Israeli court on March 10 “to put on public record,” the British Guardian wrote, “the events that led to [your] daughter Rachel’s death in March 2003.”
I thank God for the well-being of my children and grandchildren, and I cannot imagine the pain and anger you feel over the loss of your daughter, Rachel.
My sons have served as combat soldiers, and may have actually fought on the very ground where your daughter died. The area was laced with tunnels to smuggle weapons and explosives for use against Israelis. My children are Israelis who ride in buses and eat in pizzerias, and by the grace of God they have been spared attacks by the suicide bombers your daughter championed.
Some may see the irony in your using the courts and the free press of Israel in your attempt to pursue and denounce the nation your daughter loathed. I see the tragedy in your allying with the International Solidarity Movement — the very people and organization who led and, in a sense, really pushed Rachel to her death.
According to news accounts, Israel will permit four of Corrie’s colleagues from the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) to enter Israel to give testimony on what occurred that day. Actually, I believe it’s a good decision to permit the four into Israel’s jurisdiction where the ISM members could and should be arrested for reckless endangerment, fraud, manslaughter, aiding terrorists, and a host of other charges. The public may also discover who paid for your lawsuit and the expenses of bringing you and ISM witnesses to Israel.
Mr. and Mrs. Corrie, three pictures relating to your daughter are etched in my memory.
An Arab member of the Knesset who goes all the way to the US and Canada to tell university students and professors that Israel is an apartheid state is not only a hypocrite and a liar, but is also causing huge damage to the interests of his own Arab voters and constituents.
If Israel were an apartheid state, what is this Arab doing in the Knesset? Doesn't apartheid mean that someone like this Knesset member would not, in the first place, even be permitted to run in an election?
Fortunately, Arab citizens can go to the same beaches, restaurants and shopping malls as Jews in this "apartheid" state. Moreover, they can run in any election and even have a minister in the government [Ghaleb Majadlah] for the first time.
In this "apartheid" state, the Arab community has a free media that many Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip envy. Ironically, an Arab newspaper in Nazareth or Haifa that is licensed by Israel enjoys more freedom than the media controlled by Hamas and Fatah, as well as most corrupt Arab dictatorships.
Ironically, this Knesset member who is complaining about apartheid enjoys more privileges than most Jews and Arabs in Israel. As a parliamentarian, he is entitled to do many things that an ordinary citizen cannot do, thanks largely to the immunity he enjoys as an elected official.
His parliamentary immunity allows him to enter areas that ordinary Jewish and Arab citizens do not have access to. This Knesset member, for example, travels to the Palestinian Authority-controlled territories which, for many years, have been off-limits to ordinary Israeli citizens.
When I read this I could only conclude that attorney Yael Stein of B'Tselem doesn't follow the news in Israel:
"These incidents constitute a most severe breach of minors' human rights," attorney Yael Stein of B'Tselem wrote to Jerusalem District Commander Aharon Franco.
"A military-like crackdown in the middle of the night to interrogate 12- to 14-year-old children on suspicions of throwing stones runs contrary to all reason, and cannot be justified. It's hard to imagine the security forces taking such measures against Jewish minors," she wrote, accusing police of breaking the law governing treatment of youth.
#1. The arrests she is describing match exactly what the Israeli authorities have done numerous times in detaining Jewish kids in the "occupied territories" - and elsewhere when carrying out the arrests could be a problem.
#2. The arrests are carried out in the middle of the night to avoid a clash in the neighborhood. Would attorney Yael Stein of B'Tselem prefer that every arrest carry with it the "cost" of a riot? Or would attorney Yael Stein of B'Tselem argue then that it isn't worth the cost of a riot to prosecute the stone throwers.
Or perhaps, does attorney Yael Stein of B'Tselem not think that stone throwing is something that should even be prosecuted? Maybe attorney Yael Stein of B'Tselem thinks that stone throwing is simply another form of "nonviolent protest"?
Q: Martin Kramer spoke of Gaza’s “superfluous young men.” Is anyone in Gaza “superfluous”?
A: “I don’t mind if Gazans continue producing babies, but they will have to move somewhere else. They simply will not fit into their current geography—forgetting about feeding and employing them, too.” (Dr. Hassan Abu Libdeh, president, Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, 2000.)
Q: Okay… Well, if that’s the situation, wouldn’t it make sense for Gaza’s government to promote family planning?
A: “Unlike the West that practices family planning, we encourage having children for political reasons.” (Dr. Abd al-Aziz Rantisi, co-founder of Hamas in Gaza, 2003.)
Q: Political reasons? For couples having children?
A: “Marriage is the same as jihad. With marriage, you are producing another generation that believes in resistance.” (Muhammad Yousef, member of the Qassam Brigades in Gaza, the Hamas underground, 2008.)
It's not a difficult question--but as you read the following article, it's hard to avoid the obvious answer, and wonder why it had to be this way.
There is a common thread that ties together
Richard Falk, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on "The situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Occupied since 1967"
Judge Richard Goldstone, head of Goldstone Commission
Desmond Travers, member of Goldstone Commission
Christine Chinkin, member of Goldstone Commission
Hina Jilani, member of Goldstone Commission
Francesca Marotta, a senior member of the UN staff that helped compile the Goldstone Report
UN Inquiry Accused of Anti Israel Bias
A controversial United Nations report called the UN Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict and more commonly known as "The Goldstone Report," is under fire for being biased against Israel. Among its conclusions was an accusation that Israel had committed "war crimes" during its twenty-two day war with Palestinian terrorists that ended in January, 2009. Critics discredit this finding - saying key members of the report were clearly biased in favor of the Palestinians.
The Arab and Muslim outcry against Israel's proposed restoration of Jewish heritage sites in Hebron is symptomatic of a campaign to deny and erase Jewish history and heritage in the region as a whole. Read my guest post on CiFwatch.
The rebuilt Hurva synagogue in the old city of Jerusalem (With thanks: Eliyahu)
Rising from the ashes like a phoenix, the rebuilt Hurva synagogue is about to be inaugurated in Jerusalem’s Jewish quarter.
The synagogue, restored to 19th century magnificence with its finely carved wooden pillars, gilt ornamentation and frescoes of Jerusalem, is a rare symbol of the revival of Jewish life after Israel’s post-1967 reunification of the city. The synagogue was razed to the ground in 1948, dynamited by the Transjordanian Arab Legion, along with scores of other synagogues. The old city was depopulated of thousands of its Jewish inhabitants, their homes looted, the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives desecrated and its tombstones used for latrines and as paving stones.
Even a cursory glance at the facts which Yair Hoffman totally ignores in his article, “Re-examining the Pollard Issue” (5 Towns Jewish Times on March 4, 2010) reveals a case which Appellate Court Justice Steven Williams described as “a fundamental miscarriage of justice.” Jonathan Pollard is currently serving his 25th year of a life sentence for an offence — that of spying for an ally– that has a median sentence of 2-4 years.
Jonathan Pollard never had a trial. He received his life sentence as the result of a plea agreement which he honored and the US Government violated. In spite of the fact that he pled guilty and cooperated fully with the prosecution, at the last minute, the sentencing judge ignored the plea deal and sentenced Pollard to life.
“Pollard’s plea agreement required him to plead guilty and to cooperate. On its side, the government made three promises of significance here. First, it would bring to the court’s attention “the nature, extent and value of [Pollard's] cooperation and testimony” and would represent that the information supplied was of “considerable value to the Government’s damage assessment analysis, its investigation of this criminal case, and the enforcement of the espionage laws.” Second, it would not ask for a life sentence (this promise was implicit but is not contested by the government), though it would be free to recommend a “substantial period of incarceration”. Third, the government limited its reserved right of allocution to “the facts and circumstances” of Pollard’s crimes. The government complied in spirit with none of its promises; with the third, it complied in neither letter nor spirit…”
“…Pollard’s sentence should be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing.”
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
September 10, 1991, Argued March 20, 1992, Decided
Dissent by: Justice Steven Williams
Jonathan was indicted on one charge only: one count of passing classified information to an ally without intent to harm the United States. There were no additional charges against him.
Ever since Pollard was able to obtain the unclassified titles of the documents that were used as evidence against him, and these titles were published in a petition to Israel’s High Court of Justice, there can be no doubt that the information Pollard passed to Israel concerned Syrian, Iraqi, Libyan and Iranian nuclear, chemical and biological warfare capabilities – all being developed for use against Israel. The US was deliberately withholding this vital information, despite a legal commitment to share this data with its ally, Israel.
Here's today's evidence that we are now living in Middle East 2.0 instead of the old version.
First, a definition:
Middle East 1.0: Characterized by Arab nationalist domination, competition among the strongerArab states to lead the region and by the weaker ones trying to survive those campaigns. Arab-Israeli conflict is a real enterprise. Roughly 1952-2000 or so. International aspect: Cold War competition between the United States and USSR and, near the end, US as sole superpower.
Middle East 2.0: Characterized by a battle between Arab nationalist regimes and revolutionary Islamists. An Iran-led bloc (Syria, Hamas, Hizballah, Iraqi insurgents) seeking regional hegemony. Israel and most Arab states have parallel interests; Arab states (except for Syria) put low priority on conflict. International aspect: Will the West support the moderates or appease the radicals.
The latest occasion is an interview of Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Saudi foreign minister with Maureen Dowd of the New York Times. Of course, there are the usual rhetorical flourishes about Israel but the passion and focus is clearly on Iran and various Islamist terrorists. (“There is nothing wrong with keeping the terrorists on the run,” says the prince.)
This is the same man who told Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that sanctions would be too slow in stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons and the United States better do something quick. Here he says he prefers a resolution through the UN but it isn't clear what that means.
It's funny that in the West the region is being discussed, written about, and taught as if we were back in the 1970s. There is a particular obsession with the idea that everything is about the Arab-Israeli conflict. But if the Saudis talk like this publicly (you can imagine what they say privately) it's a sign of how changed everything is in Middle East 2.0's world.
As the Obama administration is poised to proceed with “indirect” talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, the chances for success in the foreseeable future are virtually nil. The PA president (a) is in the 62nd month of his 48-month term, unable to hold (and in any event unwilling to risk) new elections; (b) heads a party still corroded by corruption; (c) governs only half the putative Palestinian state; and (d) is unable to dismantle the Iranian proxy that rules Gaza. Even if an agreement could be reached on any “core” issues, the PA would be in no position to carry it out.
As Robert Malley noted in useful testimony last week in a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing:
Mahmoud Abbas is President, though his term has expired; he heads the PLO, though the Organization’s authority has long waned. Salam Fayyad, the effective and resourceful Prime Minister, cannot govern in Gaza and, in the West Bank, must govern over much of Fatah’s objection. Hamas has grown into a national and regional phenomenon, and it now has Gaza solidly in its hands. But the Islamist movement itself is at an impasse — besieged in Gaza, suppressed in the West Bank, at odds with most Arab states, with little prospect for Palestinian reconciliation. …
All of which leaves room for doubt whether the Palestinian national movement, as it currently stands, can confidently and effectively conduct negotiations for a final peace agreement, sell a putative agreement to its people, and, if popularly endorsed, make it stick.
Malley’s testimony also noted that Benjamin Netanyahu’s positions reflect a broad Israeli consensus — one that emerged after withdrawals from Lebanon and Gaza resulted in new wars and after the Palestinian Authority in 2008 rejected (yet again) an offer of a state on virtually all the West Bank after land swaps. Israel’s rejection in the new negotiations of the indefensible 1967 borders and a “right of return” will be positions that extend far beyond the Israeli right wing:
Allison Kaplan Sommer Pajamasmedia.com 08 March '10
As Joe Biden’s plane fueled up to head in the direction of the Middle East for today’s arrival, even the most optimistic of Israelis were viewing the U.S. vice president’s trip to Israel with skepticism — and the more pessimistic anticipated his mission with outright suspicion.
Publicly, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu waxed enthusiastic and “praised” the upcoming visit by his “personal friend of 30 years,” even as a “senior diplomatic official” (presumed to be either Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman or Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon) was quoted as angrily asking why Israel must settle for second best. President Obama, the official pointed out, seems to have no trouble showing up in person to woo Arab countries — and yet he keeps his distance from Israel.
“If the president speaks to one side, why do you send the No. 2 to speak to us? He can’t give a speech in Cairo to the Arabs, and suffice with speaking to us through videos.”
The answer isn’t complicated. In the Obama playbook, countries that are hostile to the U.S. deserve a charm offensive. Allies like Israel can be taken for granted. But to be fair, even the most supportive presidents have rarely graced Israel with their presence, unless there was a significant diplomatic achievement to take pride in. And at this moment in time, diplomatic progress has never seemed further from sight.
And so, with the possible exception of Netanyahu, Israelis weren’t exactly waiting for Biden’s arrival with bated breath. On Sunday’s news programs, news of preparations for his visit followed stories of multiple car accidents, coverage of crimes, and long discussions of the chances of Israel’s entry Ajami to win the Academy Award for best foreign-language film (with the mini-scandal that accompanied the entry after one of the directors, an Israeli Arab, declared that his “film shouldn’t represent Israel because Israel doesn’t represent me”).
When the hosts of the morning news shows finally got around to talking about U.S. envoy George Mitchell’s meeting on Saturday night with Defense Minister Ehud Barak to prepare the ground for the Biden arrival, they rolled their eyes and exclaimed, “Déjà vu!” Indeed, it seems as if Mitchell has been dropping in on a weekly basis as the latest Sisyphus of the peace process. His comings and goings have become part of the landscape.
How has Dubai's Police Chief Lt. Gen. Dhahi Khalfan Tamim solved the case? He concluded that it must be the Mossad because they recently added a recruiting link to the Mossad website.
Now that's police work!
I'm waiting for Dubai's Police Chief and Counter Terrorism Mastermind Lt. Gen. Dhahi Khalfan Tamim to announce that it was Colonel Mustard in the Library with a spoon! The Mossad website, in both Hebrew and English, invites anyone who thinks he has "the right stuff" to consider a career with the agency and submit his or her resume by filling out a series of online forms.
Reference to the online Mossad is given through periodic advertisements published in Israel's daily newspapers. They appeared lately on February 12, almost a month after the assassination. "If you have audacity, wit and sophistication, you will be able to make a difference and realize a personal and national mission," it read.
The advertisement then listed the Mossad employment prerequisites: an academic degree, diversified life experience, high inter-personal abilities, flexible and creative thinking, curiosity, ability to work independently and in a team, and fluency in a foreign tongue other than Hebrew. Preference is given to candidates with a foreign background who are willing to embark on missions abroad immediately following the end of their training.
The Mossad isn't just in need of spies and field operators. Current job listings include a car mechanics specialist, fluent Arabic and Farsi speakers for an unspecified intelligence job, translators, a quartermaster, a certified electrician and an experienced fitness instructor.
If you think you've got what it takes, you can apply online atwww.mossad.gov.il! Good Luck!
American Vice President Jo Biden is in town today, mostly to make sure Netanyahu doesn't order a pre-emptive attack on Iran anytime soon, but along the way also to pretend things are moving forward on the Israel-Palestine negotiation track:
"I think we are at a moment of real opportunity, and I think that the interests of the Israeli and Palestinian people, if everybody stops and takes a deep breath, are actually more in line than they are opposites," he added.
Why do respectable people make such silly statements? I can't answer that. I mean, the man is the number 2 person in the American administration; there's a reasonable chance he's being recorded, and someone might even be watching; who knows, if you stretch your imagination a wee bit it's even (just) imaginable that someone will still remember long enough to know how unrealistic he was being.
Ehud Yaari recently published an important article in Foreign Affairs, and a quick summary of it in The Forward. Sadly, the full article is not accessible, and neither of those two links lead to the parts that - to my mind - are most important, namely, the description of how the Palestinians are not interested in a two state resolution to the conflict. Yaari is one of our top experts on the Arab world and the Palestinians in particular; he has spent his entire professional career of over 40 years listening to things Arabs say (in Arabic, of course). His analysis is obvious to those of us who stake our lives on knowing what's going on around us, but needs to be said from the perspective of someone who really listens, directly. So I've cut and pasted a snippet, in the hope the Foreign Affairs people won't sue me for copyright infringement. Its a long and interesting article, and I've only cited three paragraphs.
A small sovereign state within the pre-1967 boundaries has never been the fundamental goal of Palestinian nationalism; instead, Palestinian national consciousness has historically focused on avenging the loss of Arab lands. As the prominent Palestinian academic Ahmad Khalidi has argued, “Today, the Palestinian state is largely a punitive construct devised by the Palestinians’ worst historical enemies.” Furthermore, he contends, “The intention behind the state today is to limit and constrain Palestinian aspirations territorially, to force them to give up their moral rights.” Indeed, in a private conversation in 2001, then pa President Yasir Arafat told me that he believed statehood could potentially become a “sovereign cage.”
Many Palestinians now feel that by denying Israel an “end of conflict, end of claims” deal, they are increasing their chances of gaining a state for which they are not required to make political concessions. Within a few years, the scant support for the two-state formula that currently exists will likely erode, and new concepts will begin to compete as alternatives. In other words, the Palestinian community will accelerate its collapse into Israel’s unwilling arms, in effect accomplishing by stealth the sort of Arab demographic dominance that Israeli leaders have for decades sought to avoid by occupying, rather than annexing, the Palestinian territories. Such an annexation in reverse would leave Israel no choice but to coexist alongside an Arab majority within the whole of Palestine as it existed under the British Mandate.
Khalidi has illustrated what many Israelis and Americans refuse to see: the Palestinian general public instinctively distinguishes between “independence” (the end of occupation) and “sovereignty” (statehood). Most Palestinians wish to get rid of Israeli control but do not necessarily strive to see the land divided. More and more Palestinians are therefore considering options other than statehood. One option proposed by Abdel Mohsin al-Qattan, former chair of the Palestinian National Council, would be to maintain the territorial integrity of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea and govern it through a weak joint central government and two strong autonomous governments—without necessarily demarcating geographic borders between them. Another popular solution among Palestinian leaders is a unitary state, which, for purely demographic reasons, would eventually be controlled by an Arab majority.
Regular readers will know that I'm a great fan of our ambassador in the US, Michael Oren. Recently he was shouted down by rowdies at the University of California, Irvine
On that occasion he won the discussion simply by maintaining his composure in the face of uncouth behavior. And especially note his final sentence in the YouTube film.
Those of you with very long memories may be able to go back to the previous millennium and reconstruct the scientific-moralistic doom-theory of the day. This was before a series of unusually hot summers convinced everyone humans were cooking the planet; the Armageddon of the time was genetically modified crops: they were going to wreak havoc on nature, destroy the future, and anyway they were an American conspiracy of hegemony, so they had to be bad.
Then the world was distracted, GM crops fell off the radar, and more fashionable reasons were invented for the world to end. GM crops, however, are still out there - and mostly doing good, as a matter of fact. True, they're still banned in Europe, but Europe isn't a very important place anymore, and this is yet another indication of why.
It may be that we're now seeing the demise of the Church of Global Warming. The Weekly Standard - never a stalwart of the Church to begin with - has a long article about how the entire edifice seems to be crashing these past few months. So far, so unconvincing: that's what the Weekly Standard is supposed to say. Now if the Guardian were to say the same, that might get our attention... Over here. George Monbiot himself, the High Priest of the Church at the Guardian, trying to explain why no-one's listening anymore: it must be because people are stupid (he uses different words, but that's the thesis). Of course, if they're stupid now, how were they less stupid two years ago as they crammed the pews of his Church and clamored for the airlines to shut down? He doesn't get into this. Nor does he mention the possibility that rather than being plain stupid, people may look out the window from time to time: in the late 1990s it really was hot for a couple of summers; recently, it really has been quite cool for a number of winters.
I recommend reading the comments below his article, in which some seemingly educated folks engage with Monbiot, who to his credit engages back. This is what the demise of an entrenched intellectual fad looks like, and it's fascinating.
For what it's worth, here in the Holy Land we've just had the warmest winter in decades, so if Monbiot wishes to turn Zionist this is his opportunity.
Anyway, as I never tire of saying, I'm agnostic on the science of the matter, which is totally beyond me, but I'm convinced that paying the Saudis and the Iranians quadzillions of $ so we can pour gook into the air can't be a good thing; the sooner someone invents cheaper and cleaner options, the better. If it's cheaper, everyone will go for it, because whether folks are all stupid or not, they tend to look out for their private interests.
Right now, as you are reading this, there is a group of religious fanatics who are actively and aggressively seeking nuclear weapons. Right now this second, as these words are entering your brain there is a country whose government regularly interferes with oil prices...driving them up and with them the price of what you pay to fill your car with gasoline. Then they complain that they don't have enough access to cheap energy.
This same government has violently and ruthlessly suppressed any internal opposition to itself. This government has regularly made threats against you, your family, your country and your soldiers. This same government has already been indirectly (and sometimes directly) responsible for the deaths of scores of your soldiers. This same government has and will continue to target you at home and abroad. Furthermore this government has the CAPABILITY to reach you even as you go to work or school or take a bus or go to the mall.
You already know that I'm talking about Iran but what if I told you that the target I'm referring to isn't Israel?
It's America. It's you.
Well hey, at least there is some good news...apparently Ahemdinejad has discovered the cure for AIDS! Unfortunately it means destroying all of us...
Meet United Against Nuclear Iran or UANI for short. My friends over there are very serious about the Iranian threat to the entire Middle East and beyond. And they have very good reason to be concerned right now as everyday there seems to be a new article about how crazy Ahmedinejad is or that Iran has achieved another step toward producing a nuclear weapon or now an actual ICBM!! What peaceful purpose could an ICBM have? Only the ayatollahs must know the answer to that question.
But even if you're not worried about a new Cold War on the horizon (this time with a government run by truthers and suicidal lunatics) or doubt that Iran would ever actually use their nuclear device (that they spent decades of time and hundreds of billions of dollars developing) UANI wants you to know that the threat to America is not only very REAL but very CURRENT. Here is a summary from UANI of some of the ways Iran has ALREADY been attacking Americans:
• According to U.S. State Department, Iran is already a major proliferator of conventional weapons and it has exported rocket and missile technology to terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas. Hezbollah has taken U.S. citizens hostage and caused the deaths of hundreds of civilians and military personnel through its various campaigns—including the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing that took the lives of 241 American servicemen
• Iran already has the ballistic missiles necessary to hit U.S. and allied troops stationed in the Middle East and parts of Europe. If Tehran were allowed to develop nuclear weapons, the threat to American military personnel would increase dramatically.
• During the 1979 Iranian Revolution, Iran violated two of the most sacrosanct principles of international relations: 1) by invading the American embassy, a violation of basic state sovereignty, and 2) by taking hundreds of American diplomats hostage—a violation of the principle of diplomatic immunity.
• “Death to America” rallies are a common sight in the streets of Iranian cities.
• A nuclear-armed Iran poses a threat to America’s allies in the Middle East.
• A nuclear-armed Iran would spark a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.
And lest you think it's all about nuclear doom and gloom, here are some fun facts about how Iran deals with its own citizens:
• The Iranian regime persecutes members of a wide range of minorities, social, and religious groups, including Christians, Bahais, homosexuals, women, labor activists, and student groups.
• Under Iran's strict apostasy laws, conversion to Christianity is a crime punishable by death.
• Since 1979, Iranian authorities have killed more than 2,000 Bahai leaders, arrested and imprisoned thousands more, and dismissed more than 10,000 Bahais from government and university jobs. (By the way, guess which Middle East country loves the Ba'hai)
• Homosexuality is illegal in Iran, and gay sex is considered a capital crime. The Iranian government targets gays with beatings, lashings and execution.
• The June 2009 presidential elections in Iran were marked by a fierce and massive campaign of government repression...hundreds of thousands of Iranians participated in the initial protests against the disputed results of that election. The ensuing crackdown killed at least 20 people, and some protesters claim that the actual death toll was closer to 250...over a thousand students and other protesters were detained, and many have yet to be released.
So if today the world is unwilling to stand up to this horrendous behavior, how will we do so when Iran can threaten us with nuclear reprisals? Think about it, any country with nuclear weapons can essentially guarantee that they CANNOT lose a war without their enemy (and/or its allies) losing a massive portion of their own population - if not all of it, as was the case during the Cold War. You think there are any Western leaders that would take action to defend gay Iranians if they knew they could lose a few million of their own civilians in the process? You think there's even one?
How many Russians were purged by Stalin for not being in line with Soviet ideology? How many free European nations fell behind the iron curtain? How many millions of Asians, Arabs, Jews, Christians, Cubans and others on every continent and in every hemisphere were enslaved by the horror of communist dictatorships while the West was powerless to stop the nuclear-armed Bolsheviks in Moscow?
How many innocent people will find themselves enslaved under the harsh ideology of the Supreme Leader of Iran?
This is what we are talking about here. It's not just about Israel...it's not just about nuclear fireballs...it's about anyone and everyone that would fall under Iran's growing, nuclear-powered sphere of influence. It's about the millions of people who do not subscribe to the extremist, intolerant Shi'a ideology of the ayatollahs and would be trampled under the boots of these oppressors. As we have seen, this applies to women, homosexuals, Ba'hais, Jews, Christians, "impious" Muslims, people who like rap music...in other words roughly 95% of the living, breathing world.
And make no mistake, the plan for Iran does not end with Iran. Or even Israel. We are talking about a movement that is very aggressive, very expansionist and has a very long memory that dates back to the times of the Crusaders. As we have seen, Iran has killed Americans in the past and is rapidly progressing towards building an ICBM. That's an Inter-CONTINENTAL Ballistic Missile by the way. The only reason you need one of those is to be able to hit a target on another CONTINENT.
Suddenly doesn't seem so far away does it?
Iran is also engaged in a massive disinformation campaign about its intentions. Despite the protestations from Ahmedinejad (and certain naive people who think he can be talked to) that ICBMs and long-range Shahab missiles are actually going to be used to rain flower petals over their targets instead of death and detruction, the evidence mounts everyday that Iran's facilities are too small for civilian use and too large to simply be research facilities.
Then, in addition to the usual dog and pony show about its nuclear program being only for peaceful purposes - that even the IAEA isn't buying anymore - Iran, through fronts like the Alavi Foundation, regularly funds politicians and universities all while raising charitable donations for - you guessed it - the Iranian government and by extension their nuclear program.
If you clicked on the universities link you would have read a CAMERA article about the Alavi Foundation giving over $100,000 to Columbia University and $351,600 to the Rutgers University Persian language program. This isn't the first time that we've reported on this site that Rutgers has been involved with questionable charities either. The $100,000 was only handed over to Columbia after they agreed to host Ahmedinejad for his 2007 exercise in cognitive dissonance (he declared at Columbia that there were no gays in Iran despite his regime regularly hanging them) - I wonder what Rutgers had to agree to in order to receive their donation. Aside from the obvious lunacy of a liberal college campus playing host to the biggest violator against liberal ideals alive in the world today, there is the disgrace of giving such a hate-monger a public forum to perpetuate his lies and infect the minds of students who likely have little to no background on the history of the region.
So what can we do about it? Well, for one thing if you are a student at one of these universities (or any college for that matter) you can form a local UANI chapter like they are doing at Rutgers as we speak. You can also write a letter to your university demanding an explanation for why they would accept funding from a terrorist regime like Iran.
If you're not a student you can join UANI's boycott of corporations that do business with Iran or accept funding from them. UANI has something they call the Iranian Business Registry - a list of these companies (some of which have received taxpayer handouts during the recent economic nuclear meltdown!) that you can stop buying from and tell your friends/family to do the same. You can demand answers from your representative in Congress about why you are funding the Iranian nuclear program with your taxes. Make sure you VOTE for politicians who recognize how dangerous of a crisis this really is...and if you choose NOT to vote for someone based on this issue - make sure they (and everyone else) know it. There's a lot you can do, but there's not really very much time to do it.
Check out the UANI site for additional ideas about how to raise awareness on this crisis. Remember, it may seem like it's too big of a task for an individual but so was the Berlin Wall and South African apartheid! Make enough noise and you'll be heard.
The alternative may seem like it's too horrible to even consider, but you must consider it and you must act on it. The people of Iran and the Middle East need you to speak up for them because they get killed for doing it themselves. But perhaps most importantly, your soldiers who fight, bleed and die everyday to defend your rights need you to speak up for them. Your children need you to speak up for them. YOU need to speak up for yourself. What are you waiting for?
Last week, I reported that the Emirate of Dubai had decided to take the hit to duty free sales and ban all Israelis from Dubai.
At the time, I questioned the Emirates' authorities' assertions that they knew how to recognize Israelis Jews and that they would therefore know whom to band, even if an arriving passenger was carrying a British, French, Australian or for that matter, American passport.
But it's left to Pravda, the old Russian communist news service, to really make a mockery of the Emiratis (Hat Tip: Pamela).
It is not quite clear, though, how Arab officials are going to identify Israelis. They would obviously have no difficulty in identifying Orthodox bearded hasids for their side-locks, hats and glasses. It looks like a joke though: “Wearing a hat and a pair of glasses makes you a Jew.”
Such people would never think of traveling to Emirates. Will Emirates liken itself to the Third Reich and use rulers and protractors to measure the shape of the nose, earlaps and the skull structure? If it does, the UAE will lose all of its friends in the West.
Unemployed professor and Holocaust humorist Norman Finkelstein is publishing a new book this month, This Time We Went Too Far: Truth and Consequences of the Gaza Invasion.
An excerpt has been published in Counterpunch—which is very generous of Finkelstein, since it gives us an early opportunity to scrutinize his “scholarship.”
Finkelstein claims:
Public outrage at the Gaza invasion did not come out of the blue but rather marked the nadir of a curve plotting a steady decline in support for Israel. One poll registering the fallout from the Gaza attack in the United States found that American voters calling themselves supporters of Israel plummeted from 69 percent before the attack to 49 percent in June 2009, while voters believing that the U.S. should support Israel dropped from 69 per cent to 44 per cent. Consumed by hate, emboldened by self-righteousness, and confident that it could control or intimidate public opinion, Israel carried on in Gaza as if it could get away with mass murder in broad daylight.
The poll Finkelstein is referring to was conducted by the Israel Project. However, he neglected to mention a few relevant facts:
On Tuesday night, Mrs. Carl and I are going to the wedding of the daughter of very close friends (we were neighbors for two years in the mid-90's and have stayed close ever since), so I thought we'd get in the mood....
The Talmud describes Jews as rachmanim b'nei rachmanim: a compassionate people who are sensitive to human suffering. They are unable to sit by and ignore the terrible drama of human misery. Instead, they get up and do something about it.
As the world learned the news about Haiti one Tuesday in January, the Israeli Defense Forces were already planning their response. By Friday they had already pitched camp in Haiti. I watched a handsome IDF officer explain the facilities that had been erected within 8 hours of landing after a 16-hour flight across the world. He described the distinct tents serving critically ill obstetric, neonatal and adult patients as well as the surgical operating theaters they had erected in so short a time. Having practiced critical care medicine for a decade myself, I could imagine clearly the amount of planning and infrastructure required. Somehow these structures had gone up overnight.
The IDF had sent an initial team of 220 soldiers and among them 120 medical personnel. They were already operating, treating, delivering care for the earthquake survivors as network cameras rolled. Their initial mission included 40 doctors, 20 paramedics and 24 nurses, as well as medics and medical technicians, all of whom report to IDF chief medical officer Brigadier General Nachman Ash. Over a third of the manpower was specifically called up out of reserve to serve this humanitarian mission.
Humbled, I wondered why we were not watching a Muslim officer also from the Middle East showing similar services flown in perhaps from somewhere in the Arab world? Why were elements from the Muslim world not evident in such emphatic force and at such speed. Imagine semi permanent hospitals flying the Saudi Arabian National Guard Insignia just as these IDF facilities bore their insignias.
A year ago, Dutch politician Geert Wilders was denied entry into England. On Friday, he spoke to the House of Lords. His speech was incredible, and even though Israel is not even mentioned in the speech by name, I cannot urge you enough to read it (Hat Tip: Instapundit).
Here are a couple of highlights that caught my fancy.
Ladies and gentlemen, not far from here stands a statue of the greatest Prime Minister your country ever had. And I would like to quote him here today: "Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. No stronger retrograde force exists in the World. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step (...) the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome." These words are from none other than Winston Churchill wrote this in his book 'The River War' from 1899.
Churchill was right.
Ladies and gentlemen, I don't have a problem and my party does not have a problem with Muslims as such. There are many moderate Muslims. The majority of Muslims are law-abiding citizens and want to live a peaceful life as you and I do. I know that. That is why I always make a clear distinction between the people, the Muslims, and the ideology, between Islam and Muslims. There are many moderate Muslims, but there is no such thing as a moderate Islam.
Islam strives for world domination. The Quran commands Muslims to exercise jihad. The Quran commands Muslims to establish shariah law. The Quran commands Muslims to impose Islam on the entire world.
...
No wonder that Winston Churchill called Adolf Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' "the new Quran of faith and war, turgid, verbose, shapeless, but pregnant with its message". As you know, Churchill made this comparison, between the Koran and Mein Kampf, in his book 'The Second World War', a master piece, for which, he received the Nobel Prize in Literature. Churchill's comparison of the Quran and 'Mein Kampf' is absolutely spot on. The core of the Quran is the call to jihad. Jihad means a lot of things and is Arabic for battle. Kampf is German for battle. Jihad and kampf mean exactly the same.
Islam means submission, there cannot be any mistake about its goal. That's a given. The question is whether we in Europe and you in Britain, with your glorious past, will submit or stand firm for your heritage.
But the disgrace is not that Libya or Iran may sit on the Human Rights Council; it’s that the U.S. does. As the editors remark, “A year ago, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton promised that by joining the Council—the Bush Administration had refused—the U.S. ‘will engage in the work of improving the U.N. human rights system.’ Whatever they’re doing, it doesn’t seem to be working.” Well working for whom, I guess is the question. America’s presence on the Human Rights Council provides a patina of respectability to the thugs who appear periodically to condemn Israel, raise the banner for terrorists and their state sponsors, and dream up ways to impinge on the free expression of anyone who might criticize the less-than-admirable human-rights record in their own country.
If we want to stop the erosion of America’s moral standingin the world, a good way to start would be by leaving the Human Rights Council. And then we could actually begin condemning, loudly and specifically, the atrocities of the Iranian regime. Too much to ask? There’s always hope for change — but, regrettably, for the Obama administration that too often seems to stop at the water’s edge.
“I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.”
(Robert A. Heinlein quotes)
Hatzibbur Hacharedi moves
-
The news is reporting that the new Haredi party HaKahal just signed an
agreement to run on a joint list with the Noam party of Avi Maoz. I assume
that even...
Two Acts of Terror in One Picture
-
It's 7:00 in the morning in Israel. Time when people get up, dressed and
out the door for work. Time when children are dressed and fed, their books
and ...
From LFJ to Northern Breeze
-
I am writing to you from the celestial city of Tz’fat (Safed), set amidst
the green hills of Israel’s beautiful Galilee, where I moved from Jerusalem
with ...
Building the New Walls of Yerushalayim
-
Ha-Rav Avishai Tzruya
Rosh Yeshiva of Ateret Yerushalayim
located in the Muslim Quarter of the Old City of Yerushalayim
Asara Be-Tevet – the 10th ...
Nitai Stern's Playground
-
When I was a schoolboy, fallen soldiers were a special kind of grownup.
Usual grownups went to work and had meetings, whatever those were, or they
drove...
Descubram as diferenças
-
Como é que uma notícia com autoria "Diário Digital com Lusa" é *tradução
exacta* de uma com autoria "AFP com Times of Israel"?
Descubram as diferenças:
...
Até um dia Sefarad...
-
Chegou ao fim um ciclo iniciado há 5 anos.
Agradeço a todos os leitores a sua passagem por "Terras de Sefarad", em
especial aos que contribuíram com ...
HA'AZINU; TOWER OF SALVATION
-
by Rabbi Baruch Binyamin Hakohen Melman In our parsha, Ha'azinu, as for
every parsha, we need to ask: what is the question and what is the answer?
In this...
Parashá Tzav
-
“Shabat Hagadol”
No contexto da parashá desta semana, Parashá Tzav, na qual a Torá nos
relata as obrigações dos sacrifícios, com tantos detalhes que chegam...
Marketing Israel
-
At this point, it would be a cliche to say that Israel has a PR problem. It
is clear that in many sectors, Israel has lost the battle for hearts and
minds....
Women Of Valor (אשת חיל מי ימצא)
-
22 of the Tenth Month 5771
אֵשֶׁת-חַיִל, מִי יִמְצָא; וְרָחֹק מִפְּנִינִים מִכְרָהּ. מִשְׁלֵי לא,י
A woman of valor who can find? for her price is far abov...
SHALOM, SHALOM
-
Afirmava Elie Wiesel que o oposto da vida não é a morte, senão a
indiferença. Como membros da sociedade democrática occidental temos
contraído a obriga de...
.jpg_g.jpg)
.jpg_g.jpg)
Posts
