Elder of Ziyon: A silent correction to paper over the bigger problem

A silent correction to paper over the bigger problem

The clueless op-ed written by Catherine Ashton for the New York Times has received a silent correction. It used to say, This is where the industrial center of Gaza used to be, before the shelling just over a year ago. Now it just says This is where the industrial center of Gaza used to be. Obviously, this was corrected by the New York Times/International Herald Tribune. But just as obviously, Catherine Ashton really thought that the Erez industrial zone was destroyed by Israeli, and not Hamas, actions. The problem is not primarily with the Times' fact-checker - it is with the vast majority of EU and other officials who believe the lies they have been fed by the Arabs and their supporters over the years. They believe that the settlements are the main obstacle to peace. They believe that the Palestinians' demand to make Jerusalem Judenrein is an expression of nationalism, not bigotry. They believe that another Arab state will solve the problems and that terror will cease as long as Israel gives up everything being demanded from them. They believe that most of the victims in Gaza were women and children and that Israel is more reckless with civilian lives than other democracies have been in other wars. They believe that people are dying in Iraq because of Palestine. They believe that the Old City of Jerusalem is an historic Arab capital and that it wasn't all but ignored by the Muslim between the Crusades and Zionism. They believe that "historic Palestine" adhered to the borders of the British Mandate. They believe that there has been a unique "Palestinian" people and culture that are much more than a mere hundred years old. Israel has failed, miserably, for allowing such lies to become accepted truths among these intelligentsia. Ashton is just a symptom of a much greater illness. Here's the original version of the first paragraph of the op-ed as reproduced on the Real Clear World page. (h/t Lily)

Elder of Ziyon: A silent correction to paper over the bigger problem

Elder of Ziyon: Followup: New Al Azhar sheikh appointed

Elder of Ziyon: Followup: New Al Azhar sheikh appointed

RubinReports: Hillary Clinton's AIPAC speech: Find the Glaring Contradiction

Hillary Clinton's AIPAC speech: Find the Glaring Contradiction

By Barry Rubin

When policymakers say things that are in blatant contradiction, there is something wrong with their world view and strategy. Yes, political leaders often say contradictory things--often they have to do so--but it is not supposed to be too obvious.

In her speech to AIPAC, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized and equated two things. On one hand, there is the Palestinian “culture of hate” which spouts “incitement” to murder Jews. The other is Israeli settlement construction. These problems, Clinton adds, “undermines America ’s unique ability to play a role” in the peace process.

Have you found the glaring contradiction? You could say, if you wished, that one cannot equate "hate speech" (to use the common terms for such things nowadays) urging killing with building settlements. I am, however, willing to accept that equation from a U.S. policy standpoint.

What is unacceptable, however, is the point that every reporter and observer should be making: The United States, as we have seen recently, is willing to attack construction on settlements (even construction the administration has previously agreed to let happen!) at the highest level and in the loudest voice. It is willing to make this issue the number one issue in the world, a basis for pressuring Israel and verbally attacking it.

I have yet to hear a single word spoken by this administration on the subject of the bloodthirsty incitement to murder that goes on every day. For this incitement not only produces violence a lot more directly than construction on settlements (which also provides stability by employing thousands of Palestinian workers), it also prevents progress toward peace.

The Palestinian Authority's failure to undertake any educational or media campaign in 16 years to promote compromise with Israel has been almost completely ignored in the West. And while such an effort wouldn't be easy, only by building a public base of support for compromise and conciliation could the Palestinian Authority (even if it wanted to do so) make peace with Israel.

Bashing Israel over construction on settlements while doing absolutely nothing about Palestinian Authority incitement is not going to persuade Israelis of the administration's credibility or make any advance toward peace. Forget about asking this administration for a "pro-Israel" policy, how about just having a truly evenhanded policy?

RubinReports: Hillary Clinton's AIPAC speech: Find the Glaring Contradiction

RubinReports: Exclusive Scoop: A Shocking Example: How NY Times Coverage Buries Middle East Reality; Find the Four Gigantic Errors

Exclusive Scoop: A Shocking Example: How NY Times Coverage Buries Middle East Reality; Find the Four Gigantic Errors

Please remember that this blog is only possible due to your tax-free donations. Please contact me or the GLORIA Center to discuss how to make financial contributions. And thanks for reading.

AND PLEASE BECOME SUBSCRIBER 9603

By Barry Rubin

In my entire life I have rarely read an article which simultaneously showed the need to be well-informed before reading a newspaper and the shocking shortcomings of mass media coverage of the Middle East than this minor piece about the reopening of the Cairo synagogue. I've never said this before but will now: If you want to understand the Middle East's reality and how it is distorted in the media, read the following anlysis.

Have a little patience and I think you will see precisely what I mean.

There are four huge—gigantic—gaps in this article that show how the Middle East story is being missed. The word “gap” here is polite. I can think of a number of less polite words defining the combination of whitewash and ignorance displayed here.

Here is the link. Go and read the short piece if you want to see if you can spot them, then come back and read my response. Or, if you prefer, read my analysis first. It’s up to you.

Ok, here we go.

The headline for this story is, “A Synagogue’s Unveiling Exposes a Conundrum.” So, naturally, you want to know what the conundrum was. The article explains:

“The restoration project, and its muted unveiling, exposed a conundrum Egyptian society has struggled with since its leadership made peace with Israel three decades ago: How to balance the demands of Western capitals and a peace process that relies on Egypt to work with Israel with a public antipathy for Israel.”

So here is point number one—how can the article not even mention the Egyptian government’s own role in stoking public antipathy toward Israel? Of course, this antagonism is also the product of history and to a considerable extent comes from the public itself. Yet day after day, the Egyptian government’s religious, educational, media, and other institutions preach slander and hatred. toward Israel. There is no effort in terms of communication with the public to reduce antagonism.

Let me make it clear: I am not blaming Egypt’s government for the very existence of “public antipathy,” but not to mention its role in this process at all is shocking. The effect is to play down the role of regimes, even moderate ones, in so heating up the atmosphere as to make full peace and normalization close to impossible. Their fault, as opposed to criticism of Israel for the lack of resolution in the conflict, gets buried.

Here’s point two. One of the main people quoted in the article is Zahi Hawass, general secretary of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities. Here is what it says about him:

“`This is an Egyptian monument; if you do not restore a part of your history you lose everything,’” said Zahi Hawass, the general secretary of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, which approved and oversaw the project. “I love the Jews, they are our cousins! But the Israelis, what they are doing against the Palestinians is insane. I will do anything to restore and preserve the synagogue, but celebration, I cannot accept.”

Later his role is again mentioned:

“But the work was completed, and at first the authorities told members of the Egyptian Jewish community that the news media could not attend the ceremony because they wanted to make the official announcement themselves. Then Dr. Hawass announced he was canceling that, too.

“`I am trying to give the Israelis a message that they should make peace,’ Dr. Hawass said.”

So the New York Times allows Hawass to talk about how he loves the Jews and he even wants peace with Israel, he just wants them to be a bit more flexible.

One would never guess, however, that when this article was being edited the Times should have been aware of other public statements Hawass has made. Indeed, MEMRI translated this in a dispatch that came out about the same time that the reporters were preparing the story. Here is what Hawass said on Egyptian television last year:

Zahi Hawass: "For 18 centuries, [the Jews] were dispersed throughout the world. They went to America and took control of its economy. They have a plan. Although they are few in number, they control the entire world.”

Notice that Hawass hates his cousins and that his hatred is based on his belief in the most basic antisemitic stereotypes for a 2000-year period, not since Israel was created in 1948.

And here we see how the Times hides the massive problem of antisemitism in the Arab world, the fact that the conflict cannot be resolved not because Israelis don’t want to make peace but because many or most Arabs don’t want any Israelis to exist. More likely than not, letting Hawass sound like a dove of peace rather than a raving Jew-hater is due to ignorance rather than intention. The result is the same.

This feeds into point three, which is equally incredible. Let’s read the text:

“When the subject of restoring the synagogue of Maimonides was first raised about two years ago, Egypt agreed to do the work, but asked that it not be made public. The project was announced a year later when the culture minister, Farouk Hosny, was hoping to become the next director general of Unesco, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. When his bid for the post failed, many doubted whether the project would be completed.”

Are you a curious person? Perhaps you’d like to know why Hosny’s bid failed. It is a matter of public record, covered in hundreds of articles. Even a glance at his biography in Wikipedia—but not the Times--includes the answer to that question. So let’s see what the Times staff could have read if they had gone to Wikipedia:

“During a May 2008 argument with a Muslim Brotherhood member of Parliament concerning cultural ties with Israel, Hosny provoked controversy by declaring, `I'd burn Israeli books myself if I found any in libraries in Egypt."

“Prior to the book burning comment, the Anti-Defamation League noted that Hosny `has a long record of stymieing cultural relations with Israel, promoting censorship in Egypt, and making harsh anti-Israel and anti-Jewish statements.’ In 2001 interview, he called Israeli culture `inhuman’ and in a 1997 interview stated, `The Israelis do not stop claiming that they built the [Egyptian] pyramids... This proves that Israel has no history or civilization....’’

There was an international outcry at the former culture minister’s expressions of antisemitism and attitudes—favoring book-burning—not entirely consistent of being the world’s most important cultural official. Despite the fact that he was originally thought to be a shoe-in for the job, Hosny was defeated. The state-controlled Egyptian media then went on an antisemitic rampage, blaming the Jews for his defeat.

Might this have some relevance to the background of the synagogue restoration? The article mentioned that the project was announced during the time Hosny’s candidacy was put forth but there is no hint as to the project being a transparent fig-leaf to make people forget about Hosny’s own behavior. The project was completed but then downplayed and there was an attempt to act as if the synagogue had nothing to do with anything specifically Jewish.

Finally, there is a remarkable gap in covering internal Egyptian politics, which shows how dictatorships often get the benefit of the doubt in Times coverage. I want to quote this point fully so s to give you a sense of what’s the issue here:

“Hala Mustafa, the editor of one of Egypt’s premier political journals, Democracy, was formally censured last month for having met the Israeli ambassador in her office. It was first time the journalists’ syndicate punished a member for defying a ban on normalization since the group was founded in 1941, according to the independent daily newspaper Al Masry Al Youm.

“Even some of her critics, who strongly disagree with Ms. Mustafa’s politics, said they were surprised at the selective nature of the condemnation. Singling out Ms. Mustafa said as much about the way the state and state-aligned institutions apply laws and rules, critics said, as it did about widespread hostility to Israel.

“While Ms. Mustafa was punished, six top Egyptian scholars, including some from the nation’s premier research center, the Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, attended a conference with the Israeli ambassador. None of them were punished.”

But again the reader is at a loss. Why was Mustafa singled out for special punishment? The answer is only hinted at by the name of her journal, Democracy. Mustafa is a liberal reformer and a democracy advocate and that is why she is being repressed. It is one more step in the campaign of Arab regimes against liberals and for maintaining a very tight control over their own societies. Without knowing this, the three paragraphs make no sense.

I am not focusing on an individual reporter here, especially because I don’t know how his original piece was edited. But what is important is the product. In this one article, the Times deserves an “F” for journalistic competence and it has failed to inform readers of some of the most important aspects of the contemporary Middle East.

In these respects, I cannot imagine a better example of what’s wrong with media coverage of the region—and much more.

To quote George Orwell on a similar situation in 1945 (when the correspondent of a left-wing newspaper was criticized by readers for revealing how badly Soviet troops behaved toward civilians), once you accept the idea that the media should support "good causes" rather than just report accurately: "It is only a short step to arguing that the suppression and distortion of known facts is the highest duty of a journalist."

RubinReports: Exclusive Scoop: A Shocking Example: How NY Times Coverage Buries Middle East Reality; Find the Four Gigantic Errors

RubinReports: A Trial Balloon? Washington Post Columnist Calls for Imposed Settlement on Israel

A Trial Balloon? Washington Post Columnist Calls for Imposed Settlement on Israel

By Barry Rubin

Has anyone else noticed that David Ignatius, a Washington Post columnist who always tries to echo what he's hearing from his administration contacts, has just called for an imposed settlement on Israel and the Palestinians? This is the first time I've seen this from a mainstream journalist.

He writes:

"What's needed now is for Obama to announce that when negotiations begin, the United States will state its views about Jerusalem and other key issues — sketching the outlines of the deal that most Israelis and Palestinians want. If Netanyahu refuses to play, then we have a real crisis in U.S.-Israeli relations."

Note three points:

First, this reverses and breaks every promise the United States has made to Israel in the last 20 years, which formed the basis of numerous Israeli concessions and risks. The position has always been that it would be up to the parties involved to make these decisions.

Second, the United States would substitute itself for the actual people of Israel and the Palestinians, since it would purport to know what "most Israelis and Palestinians want." Of course, this ignores what they say they want through voting.

Third, and this alone should make people understand how ludicrous this kind of thing is, it puts the onus ONLY on Israel. It doesn't say: If Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas refuses to play, just Netanyahu.

The implication is that any proposal would be so favorable to the Palestinians that they would of course accept it. But really of course they would reject even a favorable offer, as we have seen repeatedly.

I'm not saying that this is going to be the Obama administration policy. Actually, I believe it won't ever happen that way because they understand it would be a disaster for them. Still, I'm pointing out this column as a possible sign of something to watch.

RubinReports: A Trial Balloon? Washington Post Columnist Calls for Imposed Settlement on Israel

Love of the Land: Exclusive Scoop: A Shocking Example: How NY Times Coverage Buries Middle East Reality; Find the Four Gigantic Errors

Exclusive Scoop: A Shocking Example: How NY Times Coverage Buries Middle East Reality; Find the Four Gigantic Errors

Barry Rubin
The Rubin Report
22 March '10

In my entire life I have rarely read an article which simultaneously showed the need to be well-informed before reading a newspaper and the shocking shortcomings of mass media coverage of the Middle East than this minor piece about the reopening of the Cairo synagogue. I've never said this before but will now: If you want to understand the Middle East's reality and how it is distorted in the media, read the following anlysis.

Have a little patience and I think you will see precisely what I mean.

There are four huge—gigantic—gaps in this article that show how the Middle East story is being missed. The word “gap” here is polite. I can think of a number of less polite words defining the combination of whitewash and ignorance displayed here.

Here is the link. Go and read the short piece if you want to see if you can spot them, then come back and read my response. Or, if you prefer, read my analysis first. It’s up to you.

Ok, here we go.

The headline for this story is, “A Synagogue’s Unveiling Exposes a Conundrum.” So, naturally, you want to know what the conundrum was. The article explains:

“The restoration project, and its muted unveiling, exposed a conundrum Egyptian society has struggled with since its leadership made peace with Israel three decades ago: How to balance the demands of Western capitals and a peace process that relies on Egypt to work with Israel with a public antipathy for Israel.”

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Exclusive Scoop: A Shocking Example: How NY Times Coverage Buries Middle East Reality; Find the Four Gigantic Errors

Love of the Land: Pollster: Ha'aretz Misrepresented Obama Poll

Pollster: Ha'aretz Misrepresented Obama Poll

TS
CAMERA/Snapshots
22 March '10

It seems that we have a Ha'aretz trifecta today (see here and here). In the third strike, the Jerusalem Post reports today ("Haaretz fiddled with Obama poll"):

Haaretz misled readers to give the impression that an overwhelming majority of Israelis see US President Barack Obama as “fair and friendly” toward the country, the newspaper’s pollster, Tel Aviv University professor Camil Fuchs, said on Sunday.

Both the English and Hebrew editions of Friday’s Haaretz led with the headline “Poll: Most Israelis see Obama as fair, friendly toward Israel.” The English edition elaborated near a picture of Obama that “69% say Obama is fair and friendly.”

The story itself gives no numbers, but the lead says “A sweeping majority of Israelis think his treatment of this country is friendly and fair.” The English edition contains no graphic distributing the actual numbers, either online or in print.

The print and online versions of the newspaper’s Hebrew edition included a graphic indicating that just 18 percent of respondents considered Obama “friendly” toward Israel, 3 percentage points fewer than the 21% who called the president “hostile” to the Jewish state.

Ten percent did not know, and 51% defined Obama’s approach to Israel using the Hebrew word “inyani,” which can be translated as “matter-of-fact” or “businesslike,” but not as fair.

Fuchs, who chairs Tel Aviv University’s statistics department, said he received many reactions from people around the world who were surprised by the poll’s headline. He distanced himself from the headline and criticized the way his poll was presented.
“What can I do? Only the editor writes the headlines,” Fuchs said.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Pollster: Ha'aretz Misrepresented Obama Poll

Love of the Land: The Resistance Bloc Will Not Be Appeased

The Resistance Bloc Will Not Be Appeased

Michael J. Totten
Contentions/Commentary
21 March '10

Hezbollah’s reaction to Israel’s plan to build 1,600 apartments in a Jewish neighborhood in East Jerusalem might help President Barack Obama understand something that has so far eluded him: the Syrian-Iranian-Hamas-Hezbollah resistance bloc will not allow him to appease it.

“The scheme is yet another part of a Judaization campaign,” Hezbollah said in a statement quoted by the Tehran Times, “that targets the holy city of al-Quds [Jerusalem] and a provocation of Muslim feeling.” If Obama expected a little appreciation from Israel’s enemies for making the same point with more diplomatic finesse, he was mistaken. “The Zionist plan to construct hundreds of homes in al-Quds,” Hezbollah continued, “truly shows American cover to it.”

So not only is Obama denied credit for standing up to Israel’s government, he is accused of doing precisely the opposite.

Anti-Americanism is ideological oxygen for partisans of the resistance bloc. They will no sooner let it go than they will stop breathing. Their entire worldview and political program would turn to ashes without it, much as Fidel Castro’s would without socialism. When the United States doesn’t follow the script, they just lie.

If we extend a hand in friendship, they’ll bite it and try to chew off a finger. If we take their side once in a while to appear evenhanded, they’ll twist the truth until it looks like a sinister plot, then they’ll bite us again.

A couple of years ago Hezbollah stretched a banner across an overpass near Lebanon’s international airport that said, in English, “All our catastrophes come from America.” Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah would have an awfully hard time climbing down from that high a tree even if his Iranian masters would let him — and they won’t. They’ve been calling Israel the “Little Satan” and the U.S. the “Great Satan” since Jimmy Carter, of all people, was president.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: The Resistance Bloc Will Not Be Appeased

Love of the Land: Obama’s Position on Israel: Why Are We Surprised?

Obama’s Position on Israel: Why Are We Surprised?

Ron Radosh
Pajamasmedia.com
19 March '10

In the past few days, there have been many sharp, biting and on target comments about the fabricated crisis Obama has manufactured between Israel and its most important ally, the United States. If you go to this link, check out the Daily Alert for March 19th, and read the links to the articles by Marty Peretz, Bret Stephens, Charles Krauthammer, Jackson Diehl, Elliot Abrams, Dan Senor, Jonathan Schanzer, Lanny Davis, Mitchell Bard and Clifford May. All of these writers, each in their own distinct way, show how the Obama administration has chosen this moment to appease the Palestinians, who have done little of content to show any real desire for a peace agreement, and to pressure our major ally in the Middle East and to push them to the wall at a time of great peril in the region.

Among all these writers, there is major agreement on the following: 1: All of Israel knows that the contemplated building is not controversial. The settlement freeze announced earlier did not apply to building in this area of Jerusalem, a stone’s throw from the Knesset. 2: While the Israelis have time and time again shown a commitment to obtaining peace with the Palestinians, both Fatah and Hamas have not produced any movement of substance to match very real Israeli moves of compromise. To the contrary, any movement by Israel has been met instead by more intransigence. 3: By singling out Israel alone for tough talk, and ignoring any similar harshness towards any of the Palestinian factions, the administration has made it harder for Mahmoud Abbas to accept any of Israel’s offers, since it would make him look weaker than the American President. 4: The President is clearly revealing that he is moving along the path announced last year in Cairo, when his words indicated an overwhelming desire to tilt in the direction favored by the Arab nations.

As the liberal Democrat Lanny Davis asked, referring to the recent announcement that the “settlement” construction had to be condemned, “How could the U.S. government use such language about a democracy that has been America’s most loyal ally in the world on virtually all issues, a nation that shares our core values — protecting civil rights, women’s rights, due process and free speech — not only for Israeli citizens, but for over 1 million Israeli Arabs as well?”

It is the question, and one answer comes from Marty Peretz, editor in chief of The New Republic, who both endorsed and campaigned for Obama during the campaign, and assured his readers Obama was a keen supporter of Israel and its alliance with the United States. Peretz makes the following startling statement. Rather than hope that the condemnation was a “temporary aberration,” as Davis thinks it might be, Peretz writes:

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Obama’s Position on Israel: Why Are We Surprised?

Love of the Land: AIPAC Panel: The Sands of Change Here in D.C.

AIPAC Panel: The Sands of Change Here in D.C.

Jennifer Rubin
Contentions/Commentary
21 March '10

A mesmerizing discussion Sunday afternoon was held among Elliott Abrams, Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal, and Asher Susser of the Moshe Dayan Center at Tel Aviv University as they examined the “sands of change in the Middle East.” Both Stephens and Susser traced the emergence of non-Arab states like Iran and Turkey (which is pivoting away from Europe as it becomes increasingly more Islamist in domestic policy and anti-Israel in its foreign policy), the decline of secular pan-Arabism, the tension between radicals and moderates, and the ascendancy of Shia regimes, which are displacing aging Sunni leaders as the region’s powerhouses.

Abrams made a different case: “The most important shift is in Washington.” He noted that in 1967, Israel won a tremendous, and the British left Aden, opening an era in which the U.S.-Israel alliance dominated the region. (”It took the 1973 war for the Arabs to learn that lesson.”) The question Arabs are asking now, Abrams said, is about what the American policy is on maintaining its dominance in the region. They want to know “whether the U.S. is prepared to maintain its position or let the region slip into a period of Iranian dominance.” On Iran’s nuclear ambitions specifically, Abrams reminded the crowd that the Obama administration says it is “unacceptable” if Iran gets a nuclear weapon. “But do they mean it’s unacceptable or just that it is a bummer?”

As for the Obami’s effort to separate the U.S. from Israel to increase our credibility with the Arabs, it is “no accident” Abrams said, that the Saudi’s 2002 peace plan, while not the basis for any viable peace agreement, would have ended with the recognition of Israel. When the Arab states realize that the U.S. commitment to Israel is unyielding and that they “can’t do anything about Israel, they begin to make peace.” If the U.S. should begin to change its position, Abrams cautioned, their attitude toward Israel will change as well. Then, Abrams added, citing Lee Smith’s book The Strong Horse, they will decide which is the weak and which is the strong horse in the region and act accordingly. How we act toward Israel affects how Arab states regard us. As we distance ourselves from Israel, the Arabs see that we “are proving to be an undependable ally.” So the place to determine the fate of the Middle East, he summed up, is “here.”

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: AIPAC Panel: The Sands of Change Here in D.C.

Love of the Land: Where does Egypt draw the line?

Where does Egypt draw the line?

Bataween
Point of No Return
20 March '10

Michael Slackman puts its finger on the paradox that is Egypt: on the one hand, formally at peace with Israel and flaunting its Jewish heritage - on the other, trying to make a bargaining chip out of 'normalisation'. Article in the New York Times:

The restoration project, and its muted unveiling, exposed a conundrum Egyptian society has struggled with since its leadership made peace with Israel three decades ago: How to balance the demands of Western capitals and a peace process that relies on Egypt to work with Israel with a public antipathy for Israel.

The efforts to restore the synagogue but keep it quiet illustrate the contortions of a government that often tries to satisfy both demands simultaneously.

“This is an Egyptian monument; if you do not restore a part of your history you lose everything,” said Zahi Hawass, the general secretary of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, which approved and oversaw the project. “I love the Jews, they are our cousins! But the Israelis, what they are doing against the Palestinians is insane. I will do anything to restore and preserve the synagogue, but celebration, I cannot accept.”

Israel opened its embassy in Cairo just over 30 years ago. In that time, the debate over how to deal with Israel has grown more complicated, at times more nuanced, as the government and intellectuals try to navigate between a desire to preserve a cold peace while also bending to pragmatic economic, social and political realities, political analysts said.

There is no appetite in Egypt for normalization of relations. But there has never been a firm definition of where the line should be drawn, and that is where the debate often falls.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Where does Egypt draw the line?

Love of the Land: The bunker-buster story

The bunker-buster story

Fresnozionism.org
21 March '10

British newspapers have been credibly reporting for about of week that the US has shipped 387 bunker-buster bombs to a US base on the British possession of Diego Garcia, an island in the Indian Ocean.

There are at least two possible interpretations. One is that the US is planning to attack Iran (some Brits are very upset about this possibility), or at least to make a strategic move designed to show the Iranians that they mean business. Some air attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan have originated on Diego Garcia. That’s the good interpretation.

The other one is that the bombs were intended to be sent to Israel, but were diverted to Diego Garcia to prevent Israel from using them against Iran, or, worse, to punish Israel for its insouciance in building apartments in Jerusalem:

In 2008, the United States approved an Israeli request for bunker-busters capable of destroying underground facilities, including Iranian nuclear weapons sites. Officials said delivery of the weapons was held up by the administration of President Barack Obama, Middle East Newsline reported.

Since taking office, Obama has refused to approve any major Israeli requests for U.S. weapons platforms or advanced systems. Officials said this included proposed Israeli procurement of AH-64D Apache attack helicopters, refueling systems, advanced munitions and data on a stealth variant of the F-15E.

“All signs indicate that this will continue in 2010,” a congressional source familiar with the Israeli military requests said. “This is really an embargo, but nobody talks about it publicly.”

Under the plan, the U.S. military was to have stored 195 BLU-110 and 192 BLU-117 munitions in unspecified air force bases in Israel. The U.S. military uses four Israeli bases for the storage of about $400 million worth of pre-positioned equipment meant for use by either Washington or Jerusalem in any regional war…

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: The bunker-buster story

Love of the Land: Gazans Again Committing War Crimes, Killing Israeli Civilians In Rocket Attacks

Gazans Again Committing War Crimes, Killing Israeli Civilians In Rocket Attacks

Omri
Mere Rhetoric
20 March '10

The first, tragic casualty of the Obama Intifada?

Thursday's brief afternoon rain could not wash the blood out of a small pile of sand, where hours earlier the body of Thai worker Mane Singauephon had lain. He was killed around 11 a.m., when a rocket fell through the roof of a hothouse where he worked on the border with Gaza... He had come to the small community of Netiv Ha'asara more than three years ago to support his wife and child back home. "Ten workers witnessed the death of their friend," said Yair Farjun, head of the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council... Singauephon had been hit in several parts of the body, including his head, back and left arm.

The geopolitical upshot is that the post-Cast Lead deterrent which had kept peace in the south of Israel is breaking down. Emboldened by - achem - international anti-Israel diplomacy, and knowing that Israel's options are constrained by a potential Goldstone II, Hamas is back to genocidal incitement against Israeli civilians:

As noted, the IDF has thus far shown relative restraint in its response to attacks directed at our territory. One of the important reasons for this is the criticism leveled at Israel internationally because of the Goldstone Report and Gaza blockade.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Gazans Again Committing War Crimes, Killing Israeli Civilians In Rocket Attacks

Love of the Land: Miraculously Beautiful, Tel Shiloh in the Jewish Month of Nissan

Miraculously Beautiful, Tel Shiloh in the Jewish Month of Nissan

Batya Medad
Shilo Musings
21 March '10

Yes, it looks like a miniature lake. But there's neither a lake nor a pond at Tel Shiloh. This is no more than a giant puddle. Unless G-d blesses us with more rain, it will soon dry out.



I've been making a point of going to Tel Shiloh for Rosh Chodesh Prayers for over two years already, and month after month I'm WOWed by the beauty. Rosh Chodesh Nissan was stupendous, rich green leaves covering the earth and branches, wild wheat blowing in the wind like the most luxurious velvet, juicy almonds waiting to be picked and eaten and the colorful wildflowers sparkling like precious stones.



(More)

Love of the Land: Miraculously Beautiful, Tel Shiloh in the Jewish Month of Nissan

Love of the Land: A Peace of Obama's Mind

A Peace of Obama's Mind

Jay D. Homnick
American Spectator
19 March '10

There is a wall of sorrow
Standing in Jerusalem
Repentance, joy and knowledge
Are her adornments, her refrain,
You can build yet upon her
The foundations deeply lain
Though she's all that does remain…
The many travelers near her
Taking pictures, going home
Never see her sorrow
Never hear her moan
I've been to her midst darkness
And I almost passed her by…
She is our reminder
Her expression not quite stone
Her silence is her beauty
And her sorrow is our own…

-- Avraham Rosenblum
The Kotel Song, 1980

The last time I said Kaddish at the Holy Wall
I looked at those stones
At those holy stones
And I realized those stones are not made out of stone.
The holy stones are made out of tears
Tears of my father
Tears of my grandfather
And I looked at those holy stones and I saw six million little tears…

-- Shlomo Carlebach
I Heard the Wall Singing, 1968

Jerusalem is in the news again. Something to do with a few housing units being announced in a way calculated to anger Vice President Biden upon his arrival in Israel. An insult, said Joe, echoed by Hillary, amplified by Gibbs, magnified by Axelrod. No thought of the insult expressed by the visit of Biden, with Obama still loath to come in person after 15 months in office.
Putting the proximate cause of strife aside, a much larger issue emerges from this event. It is of utmost historical significance and is ignored at the peril of reality.

It is the notion that Jerusalem will be divided in a final peace treaty. This is now just short of explicitly accepted in all government and media discussions of the negotiating process. What is more, diplomats, bureaucrats and pundits have now begun to signal comfort in the expectation that the Arab half of Jerusalem will then become the capital of the Palestinian state.
This is one of those classic bits of myth that lodge themselves into otherwise reasonable crania but explode upon the minutest examination.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: A Peace of Obama's Mind

Elder of Ziyon: Abbas meets Mitchell - and says he supports violence

Abbas meets Mitchell - and says he supports violence

From Albawaba (also reported in Palestine Press Agency): Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on Monday said that "popular resistance" is the legitimate right of the Palestinian people under international conventions and international law. Speaking after his meeting with George Mitchell, the American envoy to the Middle East, he said: "The Israelis must pay attention not to drag us to what we don't love and accept, and what they do not like and pleased with." Just to be clear, Abbas' idea of "popular resistance" includes Palestinian Arabs hurling boulders through the windows of innocent civilians in cars. Would Abbas' call for violence immediately after meeting Mitchell be considered a slap in the face of the United States, or will it be ignored by the same people who were so keen to find Israelis announcing long-term civic plans a direct insult to the US?

Elder of Ziyon: Abbas meets Mitchell - and says he supports violence

Elder of Ziyon: Lady Ashton's cluelessness, part 2

Lady Ashton's cluelessness, part 2

If the first paragraph of Lady Catherine Ashton's NYT op-ed was the only problem, it would be bad enough. Unfortunately, it is only the beginning of a series of false facts that are considered received wisdom by many well-meaning Westerners. For example: What I found in Gaza confirmed my strong view that we must act now — not just to end the violence, but because peace will bring prosperity in Gaza and in the region. It will open up opportunities for growth and regional integration, the best antidote against the radical groups. That is the real prize. While "occupation" has turned into a dirty word that is considered to be one of the worst injustices that man can be guilty of, Ashton is speaking specifically of "growth" and "prosperity" as being an inevitable outcome of an independent Palestinian Arab state that includes Gaza. There is only one period of time over the past millenium when Gaza's economy improved significantly, and that was during the 38 years that Israel controlled the territory. It was during that time that Gaza's mortality rate plummeted and its life expectancy soared. It was while under Israeli control that an infrastructure was built - for water, electricity and fuel. Similarly, in the West Bank, Israel's policies during "occupation" has resulted in huge growth in the economy of the Palestinian Authority. The only pauses in the West Bank's economic success since 1967 have been when Palestinian Arab leaders supported terrorism. Once one wipes away the pejorative word "occupation" as inherently evil and looks at the actual quality of life of individual Palestinian Arabs - which should be, after all, the real goal - the golden age of Palestinian Arabs were while they were under Israeli responsibility. To be sure, mistakes were made and Israel could have done better, but the only metric that matters is how well individual Palestinian Arabs fared. When terror reigns, whether it was 1936 or 2002, their lives took a turn for the worse; when their leaders act in ways approaching maturity and responsibility, their people benefited - and the Zionists were more than happy to contribute to the better economic good of all. A clear look at history shows that the Zionist leaders invariably look to find win-win solutions, while the Arab leaders look at it as a zero-sum game where any Zionist success is by definition at the expense of the Arabs. This zero-sum mentality might be difficult to erase from the Arab psyche but there is no excuse for supposedly knowledgeable Westerners to accept it as fact. If prosperity is the "real prize," then the real solution is to treat Arab terror and intransigence as the most fundamental threat to that goal. Extremism grows in rubble and refugee camps. These provide fertile territory not just for local warlords but for all those in the region with their own agendas, who profit from instability and assist it with shipments of arms. "Local warlords"? What local warlords? Hamas has been controlling Gaza with an iron fist since its violent coup, and the other terror groups like Islamic Jihad and PFLP are cooperating with Hamas. There has been some infighting but Gaza, and a little trouble from so-called Salafist groups who disagree with Hamas from a religious perspective, but no part of Gaza is controlled by anyone besides Hamas. Gaza is not Somalia and Ashton does not seem to be able to even understand the basics about Hamas - a quasi government that she doesn't even deign to mention once in the entire op-ed about Gaza. Throughout the region, from Egypt to Syria, from Lebanon to Jordan, I heard the same message from presidents, prime ministers and a king, and from ordinary people, too — they want their economies to grow, their people to prosper, their children to be educated. To achieve that, we need peace in the Middle East. Ashton now accepts, without any critical thought, the idea that somehow peace in Iraq and Afghanistan and Lebanon depends on Palestinian Arabs being happy. The number of intra-Arab conflicts since 1948 shows this to be utterly false, but it is another example of how Arab leaders, by repeating the same lies over and over, eventually get credulous Westerners to believe them. One factor that Ashton does not dare to even consider is how Arab leaders have treated their Palestinian Arab "brothers." The institutional discrimination against Palestinians, especially in terms of naturalization and citizenship, is only the most egregious example of this. Ashton, who is claiming that economic prosperity is the goal, should consider how many Palestinian Arabs would freely choose to move to Gulf states and get out of the limbo of statelessness. Not to mention the benefits that these new, hardworking and educated citizens would bring to their adopted countries. Yet that idea is never on the table - because the same Arab leaders who insist that all roads lead through Palestine are the ones who work hardest to ensure that they will keep their Palestinian brethren stateless and miserable for generations to come, just to pressure Israel. We know the elements that are needed. The European Union set out its position in a statement of principles last December. A two-state solution with Israel and Palestine side by side in peace and security. No, these aren't the elements that are needed - these are the elements that have been rejected by the Palestinian Arab side, again and again. Chaim Weizmann once famously said that the Jews would accept a state that was the size of a tablecloth. The fact that a supposedly disadvantaged Palestinian Arab people vetoes every offer given them without even a counteroffer indicates that, just perhaps, a state is not their end goal. Their maximal demands have not changed one iota since before Oslo, in the same time period that Israel has given up Gaza and large areas of the West Bank. This simple fact shows that it is not Israel that is the intransigent party and it is not Israel that is seeking to perpetuate the conflict. It is way past time for the West to wake up and start to pressure the Palestinian Arabs, and the Arab nations as a whole, to do their part to end the conflict. Op-eds like these, rather than contributing to a solution, are a large part of the problem.

Elder of Ziyon: Lady Ashton's cluelessness, part 2

Elder of Ziyon: Fatah celebrates Mothers Day by praising moms of "martyrs"

Fatah celebrates Mothers Day by praising moms of "martyrs"

Yesterday was the Arab world's Mothers Day. Fatah, that supposedly moderate movement that never seems to get any criticism from the enlightened Western world, put out a statement in praise of Palestinian Arab mothers. The Palestinian mother has kept generations of Palestinians, generation after generation; they have strengthened the spirit of loyalty, dedication and sacrifice for the sacred homeland Palestine.... Go pay tribute and admiration for the mothers of martyrs and prisoners who walk on hot coals and their children who are enlightened through the blood and sacrifices of freedom for their people through an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.

Elder of Ziyon: Fatah celebrates Mothers Day by praising moms of "martyrs"

Elder of Ziyon: Ashton in Gaza: When the "experts" are clueless

Ashton in Gaza: When the "experts" are clueless

One of the more frustrating parts of watching the Middle East is when one sees that people who should have some basic knowledge, who present themselves as experts, and who urge actions based on their experience and expertise, are completely clueless. Meet Catherine Ashton. Lady Ashton is the high representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and vice president of the European Commission. She visited Gaza last week, and, armed with the latest on-the-ground intelligence, wrote an op-ed for the New York Times describing exactly what needs to be done to make the Middle East a happy place again. Here is her first paragraph: It is the process of entering the Gaza Strip that strikes you most. At the Erez checkpoint you go into what looks like a modern airport terminal. Leaving it you move through a winding maze of gates and walls and emerge, like a time-traveler transported backwards, on a dirt track. This is where the industrial center of Gaza used to be, before the shelling just over a year ago. Now, people with donkeys and carts carry stones from the rubble. Ashton is stating as fact that the heartless Israelis, for no discernible reason, reduced the Erez area to rubble during Operation Cast Lead and bombed the formerly prosperous industrial area to the stone age. The Erez Industrial Zone was a joint Israeli/Arab project that started in 1970, a scant three years after Israel took over Gaza in the Six Day War. It predated any negotiations. It started when the PLO was universally recognized as a purely terror organization. In other words, it was a triumph of Israeli optimism that was an early success in working together with the Palestinian Arab population under Israeli control. It provided thousands of jobs for Gazans - jobs that did not exist when they were under Egyptian control. It was an economic win-win. By 2001, there were 187 businesses at Erez - carpentry shops, textile factories, metal works and garages, employing some 5000 Arabs who were able to provide for their families in dignity. Then came the Intifada. Between 2001 and 2004, at least 11 Israelis were killed at Erez by terror attacks. Hamas and Islamic Jihad specifically targeted this successful symbol of cooperation and peace. The companies that were there found it more and more difficult to keep their businesses open while providing a safe environment for their employees. Millions of dollars were lost because of the terror attacks. Finally, in 2004, the Israeli government announced that it could no longer keep the industrial area open, and all Israeli companies withdrew. Hamas terror was successful, and in the years since, the Erez industrial zone has fallen into disuse. Some 500 mortars and rockets were shot from and to the area. A truck bomb caused millions of dollars worth of damage. Of course, Gaza could still have grown economically even after the Israelis withdrew their citizens from the area. Read this optimistic editorial from Ma'an in 2005: Nothing can stop in front of the strong will speaking through a number of voices; the occupation of Gaza is almost over, it will be as free as an unbound Arabian horse two weeks from now. Theoretically, Gaza will be supported by $3 billion in assistance from donor countries. If this amount of money, "$3 billion," is used for national investment, in an honest and decent way, through professional hands, it will be enough to transform the economic situation in Gaza in a remarkable way. Gaza is capable of producing agricultural products sufficient enough to supply both itself and the entire West Bank. Bearing witness to this is the fact that while Israel exports 1,500 tons of strawberries, Gaza exports 7,500 tons of them. According to the numbers, greenhouses in Gaza have nearly the same productive capability as all those in Israel, Syria and Jordan combined. Also theoretically speaking, Gaza will have the industrial areas of Erez and Karni, which will allow for the creation of thousands of jobs, in addition to those jobs that will be created by the Gaza sea and airports. Theoretically, Palestine will be supported by other Arab nations in the Gulf and throughout the Middle East in addition to a number of European countries. It is believed that many people will the wish to assist in the rebuilding of Gaza. Officials will be receiving a marvelous area for investment and the Palestinian people are diligent workers, with their small population equivalent to that of Kuwaitis. Practically, we will see, and we will witness that history will condemn those who place obstacles in the way of the area's development, and will write in golden letters about those who built the future of Gaza. Unfortunately, the Erez Industrial Zone had not turned into an example of a self-sustaining Gaza business model. In fact, within a short time after Israel's withdrawal from Gaza, it had ceased to be a serious source for employment. The same forces that destroyed Erez now control Gaza. Yet the EU foreign policy chief does not know these basic facts, and blames Israel for the economic problems of Gazans. The rest of the op-ed betrays the same kind of ignorance and naivete that we see in the first paragraph. Arrogant diplomats prescribe the solution that "everyone knows" is the only possible one, without having a clue of the history of the area and who was responsible for previous failures. It is a stunning combination of hubris and willful blindness that is all too common from diplomats whose desire for "peace" trumps their ability to see simple facts.

Elder of Ziyon: Ashton in Gaza: When the "experts" are clueless

Elder of Ziyon: Details on the "sorceror" sentenced to death

Details on the "sorceror" sentenced to death

I recently reported about a Lebanese man who was sentenced to death by a Saudi court for "sorcery." Amnesty International has details about the case. It turns out that the man is not Saudi, but Lebanese - and he was arrested while doing a religious pilgrimage to Medina! That's right - Saudi religious police might arrest you if you are in the country for a pilgrimage and you are suspected of "black magic," but other types of criminals can come and go to the anti-Magic Kingdom all they want.

Elder of Ziyon: Details on the "sorceror" sentenced to death

Elder of Ziyon: "Siege" news: Israel allows construction material into Gaza

Elder of Ziyon: "Siege" news: Israel allows construction material into Gaza

Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations: UNI=United Nations Idiocy

UNI=United Nations Idiocy

Barry Rubin has a fine example of how utterly idiotic the United Nations can be. It has nothing to do with Israel this time (though lots of the neighbors are involved); I'm posting because if not for Barry's noticing, it's a story none of us would likely ever to have come across.

Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations: UNI=United Nations Idiocy

Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations: Three Periphal Comments to Obamacare

Three Periphal Comments to Obamacare

Over the past few weeks we've had the need for a number of medical interventions a notch more serious than sniffles and sore throats. Nothing major, thankfully, but the sort of things that happen in life. In each case we were struck by the degree to which the level of service is improving over time. The intelligent application of technology to health service in a universal system makes life better, it's that simple.

Over the past 18 months or so I've made the mistake, three or four times, of putting a toenail in the general proximity of the American health care discussion. I was pleased to see that there are readers of this blog from both sides of the Great Political Divide of American politics, so in each case I was treated to torrents of - well, it wasn't abuse, but it certainly was reprimands for having got it all wrong. I should probably simply shut up this morning, the day after Obama passed a health insurance law, or Congress did at his behest, or something. But we bloggers, we talk too much by definition, else we wouldn't blog.... so here goes.

1. A rich society - and America is - should be able to protect its members from the harm of not having reliable health insurance. There are different ways of reaching that goal, but since I'm an firm believer in democracy, my fundamental belief is that democratic societies mostly figure out reasonably correct means to achieve the common goals. So if the United States is now a bit closer to being a good society (no society is ever near perfection), in the long run this should make America stronger. Given the alternatives, a strong America based on a healthy American society is good for the world (and good for Israel). So yesterday's legislation, I hope, is more a good thing than a bad thing.

2. It is hugely ironic that on the day of his historic achievement, Obama is being compared favorably to Lyndon Johnson. I'm old enough to remember how LBJ was literally drummed out of town by the political forebears - indeed, in many cases, by the very same individuals - who today are crowing over Obama's political victory. What can I say? Hee hee hee.

3. World history and the Jewish question. After all, at the end of the day we all ask ourselves what world history does for us. There can be no doubt that when Netanyahu meets Obama tomorrow, the meeting will be different for the outcome of yesterday's vote. Perhaps even dramatically so. Yet if there was one irrevocable thing I learned from the disintegration of my worldview in late 2000, when the political positions I had believed in and preached for my entire adult life came crashing down about me, it was that reality is stronger than any conceivable spin machine. The president has just had a political victory at home. This doesn't make his ineptitude in the Middle East any different than it was last week. Many Americans may or may not be impressed by his ability; the rest of the world is still the same complicated world.

Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations: Three Periphal Comments to Obamacare

Father & Daughter Nearly Lynched in Wadi Joz - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Father & Daughter Nearly Lynched in Wadi Joz - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

IAF Blasts Gaza Smuggling Tunnel - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

IAF Blasts Gaza Smuggling Tunnel - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Former Obama Aide New Head of AIPAC - A7 Exclusive Features - Israel News - Israel National News

Former Obama Aide New Head of AIPAC - A7 Exclusive Features - Israel News - Israel National News

Rally to Demand Jewish Prayer on Temple Mount - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

Rally to Demand Jewish Prayer on Temple Mount - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

State: Passover Sacrifice Would Provoke Muslims - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

State: Passover Sacrifice Would Provoke Muslims - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

First Sabbath at the Hurva: Then and Now - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

First Sabbath at the Hurva: Then and Now - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

Supreme Court Accused of Delaying Justice for 'Freeze' Victims - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

Supreme Court Accused of Delaying Justice for 'Freeze' Victims - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

Love of the Land: Will Obama Reopen the U.S. Embassy in Damascus?

Will Obama Reopen the U.S. Embassy in Damascus?

Israel gets an ultimatum; Syria gets an ambassador.


John Noonan
The Weekly Standard
21 March '10

In 2005, Syria's Ba'athist dictatorship was accused of supporting the assainination of Rafik Hariri, who was then the prime minister of Lebanon. Hariri's death sparked an internal anti-Syrian uprising in Lebanon--the Cedar revolution--which was both supported vocally by the Bush administration and tangibly when the State Department yanked its ambassador from Damascus.

Now the Obama administration wants to send the State Department back, claiming that U.S. foreign policy objectives would be better served through a locally assigned embassy and ambassador. Both the White House and congressional allies are talking up the qualifications of Robert Ford, Obama's pick for a potential Syrian posting. Ford is a long time State Department veteran who served as ambassador to Algeria and more recently deputy chief of the U.S. mission in Iraq -- neither easy diplomatic postings.

But the debate isn't about Ford's qualifications. Syria's brutal Ba'athist regime is a habitual human rights offender with multiple priors -- and a fanatical enemy of the United States.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Will Obama Reopen the U.S. Embassy in Damascus?

Israel Matzav: And you thought people who went to AIPAC conferences get it?#links#links

And you thought people who went to AIPAC conferences get it?

Jennifer Rubin reports from the AIPAC conference.

I spoke to a rabbi of a New Jersey Conservative synagogue and a group of his congregants. They had 65 attendees before the Obami’s war of words. That number went up to 76. What was their reaction to the Obami offensive? “Disappointed,” responded several in the group. One congregant said, “This is going to have to blow over. Everyone understands East Jerusalem is not negotiable.” I asked, “You think the administration does?” He replied, “This is just to show the Arabs how tough he is.” I asked if they were concerned about the administration’s approach on Iran. “This has all been a step backward,” another answered. “The blowup is to distract attention from the fact we’ve done nothing on Iran.” And how will they greet Hillary Clinton on Monday? The rabbi said with great deliberations: “With respect.” Another added, “She’s not getting a standing ovation.”

Unfortunately, anyone who thinks Obama is doing this for show is fooling themselves.

Israel Matzav: And you thought people who went to AIPAC conferences get it?

Love of the Land: On PA television for kids, Israel is only a fairy tale

On PA television for kids, Israel is only a fairy tale

Program teaches children about different areas of Palestine, using a map that includes all of Israel but is simply labeled "Palestine."


Ben Hartman
Palestinian Media Watch (PMW)
First published in JPost
18 March '10

Palestinian Authority television is broadcasting a new children's show that shows a map of "Palestine" that covers the entire territory of the State of Israel, the group Palestinian Media Watch reported on Tuesday.

According to PMW, the program Chicks features a recurring segment that teaches children about different areas of Palestine, using a map that includes all of Israel but is simply labeled "Palestine."

Next to the map is written in English and Arabic "Explore Your Country."

Founder and director of Palestinian Media Watch, Itamar Marcus, said the PMW report was released as part of a campaign to highlight the reinforcement of such messages of delegitimization of Israel that are endemic to Palestinian Authority broadcasting.

Marcus said the maps used by official PA bodies are no different from those used by terror groups, saying "if you look at Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Aksa Martyrs Brigades, all of these terror groups use the exact same maps as the PA. The only difference is the PA map doesn't have rifles on it."

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: On PA television for kids, Israel is only a fairy tale

Israel Matzav: Overnight music video

Overnight music video

My kids have been singing this song all week - I think they were actually taught it at their nephew's Shalom Zachor (a party held the first Friday night after a baby is born) a couple of months ago. The song, which is called Anovim, is about the Messiah's imminent arrival, God willing. This is a particularly pertinent theme for Passover because the Talmud says that we were redeemed (from Egypt) in the Jewish month of Nissan and we will be redeemed (by the Messiah) in the month of Nissan.

This version is from Mordechai Ben David (whose song it originally was) and Yossi Green. If you like it, I can post a few more versions this week.

Let's go to the videotape.

Israel Matzav: Overnight music video

Israel Matzav: Dude, get an editor

Dude, get an editor

Heh.

Now that I think about this, I'm not sure an editor would help. An editor only helps when the writer wishes to be accurate. In this case, the writer doesn't care about accuracy. He's got an (anti-Israel) agenda to push.

Israel Matzav: Dude, get an editor

Israel Matzav: Khameni spits in Obama's face again

Khameni spits in Obama's face again

Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khameni has once again responded to President Obama's outstretched hand with a clenched fist and a little bit of rain.

Iran's supreme leader sharply denounced the United States on Sunday, accusing it of plotting to overthrow its clerical leadership, in a chilly response to an overture by President Barack Obama for better cultural ties with Iran.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei did not outright reject Obama's offer, saying Iran would keep an eye on Washington's intentions. But the supreme leader said that so far, Washington's offers of engagement with Teheran have been a deception.

The exchange was a sign of how Obama's hopes for dialogue with Iran have broken down amid Teheran's rejection of Western demands over its nuclear program and its heavy crackdown on the opposition following disputed presidential elections last June.

In his message, released Friday night to coincide with the Iranian new year, Nowruz, Obama told the Iranian people that the Americans want better cultural exchanges with Iran — but he also criticized the Iranian leadership for "turning its back" on US overtures.

Khamenei, who has the final say on all political matters in Iran, lashed back in a nationally televised address in an annual provincial visit to his hometown, Mashhad, telling the Americans, "You cannot speak about peace and friendship while plotting to hit Iran."

If only they were....

Someone really needs to teach Obama that Einstein quote about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: Khameni spits in Obama's face again

Love of the Land: Bullying the neighborhood bully

Bullying the neighborhood bully

Soccer Dad
19 March '10

Well, the chances are against it and the odds are slim That he'll live by the rules that the world makes for him, 'Cause there's a noose at his neck and a gun at his back And a license to kill him is given out to every maniac. He's the neighborhood bully.
Neighborhood Bully - Bob Dylan

Scott Wilson writing on the web for the Washington Post posits that Israeli leaders are not likely to win diplomatic battles with the United States.

Next, think back to 1992. Picking a fight with the Bush administration cost Shamir his job. Who succeeded him as prime minister?
Rabin, who immediately pledged to cease construction of what he called "political" settlements in the territories. Perhaps he, too, remembered 1975.

Of course one could also point to Ehud Barak who did all he could to cooperate with the Americans to the point of making an unprecedented offer to Yasser Arafat at Camp David in 2000. Arafat rejected the offer and, two months later, launched a war against Israel. None of President Clinton's goodwill towards Barak helped him as months later he went down to the worst electoral defeat in Israel's history.

The two previous paragraphs, though, give a hint to Wilson's premises and the limitations of his analysis.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Bullying the neighborhood bully

Love of the Land: Obama and Israel: Making the Same Mistake Again and Again

Obama and Israel: Making the Same Mistake Again and Again

Jeffrey Dunetz
American Thinker
20 March '10

The Bible says that the Jews are descended from twelve brothers, and they have always acted that way. Throughout recorded history, Jews have spent almost as much time fighting each other as they have fighting their enemies. Yet each time they are attacked from the outside, they coalesce and support their brothers like a close-knit family. And that pattern goes double for the multi-party world of Israeli politics.

Last time I checked, there were twelve different political parties that received enough votes to be part of the Knesset, and many of those parties are part of the governing coalition. The different parties, though they may be serving in the same government, remain very partisan. When you add to that the fact that cabinet ministers have a lot more independent authority than what you would see in an American president's cabinet, you can see how the results become very wild at times. But when their nation is under attack, either militarily or simply via international political pressure, the various parties in an Israeli cabinet coalesce to fight off the threat.

If Barack Obama bothered to take the time to understand the "soul" of the Israelis, he might be much closer to restarting talks between Israel and the Palestinians than he is today. His own arrogance, however, and his refusal to believe that anybody would not see the world as he does, prevents him from achieving progress in the region. Obama's arrogance is so strong that last week, he made the exact same mistake on the settlement issue as he made just four months ago.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Obama and Israel: Making the Same Mistake Again and Again

Elder of Ziyon: Fatah chides Hamas for not being pro-terror enough

Elder of Ziyon: Fatah chides Hamas for not being pro-terror enough