Friday, 13 February 2009

Israel Matzav: Oh joy! Time Magazine says Fatah weighing new intifadeh#links#links

Israel Matzav: Oh joy! Time Magazine says Fatah weighing new intifadeh#links#links

Israel Matzav: Pope meets with Jewish leaders at the Vatican#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Pope meets with Jewish leaders at the Vatican#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: But is it too late?#links#links

Israel Matzav: But is it too late?#links#links

Israel Matzav: Israeli television depicts Avigdor Lieberman as Darth Vader on election night#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Israeli television depicts Avigdor Lieberman as Darth Vader on election night#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Hamas web site shows kidnap of IDF soldier#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Hamas web site shows kidnap of IDF soldier#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Just like us?#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Just like us?#links#links#links

SAUDIS INFLUENCED MUMBAI MASSACRE



12 February 2009

The Saudi Connection to the Mumbai Massacres:


Strategic Implications for Israel
Col. (res.) Jonathan Fighel


The Mumbai attacks have been linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba and radical Islamic groups in Kashmir generally. Yet it would be a mistake to see Lashkar only as a local organization with only a local agenda.


Saudi Arabia has contributed very much to what Lashkar-e-Taiba looks like, how it thinks, its motivation, ideology, and funding. Saudi Arabia presents itself as the protector and the spearhead of the defense of Muslims around the world against what they define as the Western cultural attack.


The Saudis are very committed to recruiting, funding, and funneling ideology to embattled Muslim minorities, and use Muslim charities as their tool to implement this policy. The Saudi methodology is to take advantage of a humanitarian crisis to get a foot in the door. Who could be against assisting widows and orphans and setting up schools and clinics? Some of the money is indeed funneled to support terrorism - families of suicide bombers.


The notion of global Islam has also penetrated to Gaza and exists under the umbrella of Hamas, which is enabling a revival of global jihadi organizations there such as Jaish al-Islam and others. This phenomenon is radicalizing the already radicalized society in Gaza.


Hamas could agree to a hudna (calm) for fifty years, but there will be no recognition of Israel or a cessation of the struggle against it. If Hamas was ready to act pragmatically, it would no longer be Hamas. And then the frustrated factions within Hamas would break off and join up with the radical global jihadi organizations in Gaza.

The similarity of the November 2008 attack in Mumbai to the attack on the Savoy Hotel in Tel Aviv in 1975 was striking. At that time, a Palestinian organization based outside the borders of Israel, in a safe haven in Lebanon, had undergone months of specialized training. With a high level of prior intelligence, several very dedicated assault groups attacked a high-value target.


The Mumbai attacks were not a conventional suicide attack. Since 1998, al-Qaeda's hallmark has been suicide attacks, based upon the whole rationale of jihad, sacrifice and martyrdom. But the attacks in Mumbai did not resemble 7/7 in London or the attacks in Madrid or any other al-Qaeda-style attacks.


What Is Lashkar-e-Taiba?


The Mumbai attacks have been linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba and radical Islamic groups in Kashmir generally. Yet it would be a mistake to see Lashkar only as a local organization with only a local agenda.


The creation and flourishing of Lashkar-e-Taiba would not have been possible unless they were supported by three major elements. The first is the ideology of global jihad. The second is funding and support from external sources. And the third is a territorial base which enables them to conduct activities and maintain training camps.


What is Lashkar-e-Taiba and why is it relevant to the Middle East? Lashkar collects funds from Pakistanis and Kashmiris, as well as the Pakistani community in the Persian Gulf, in the United Kingdom, and elsewhere. Its website appears under the name of Jamaat ud Dawa and the group maintains ties to religious and militant groups around the world. The Jamaat ud Dawa website links directly to the Hamas website.


The Saudi Connection


Since the beginning of the 1990s, Saudi Arabia has contributed very much to what Lashkar-e-Taiba looks like, how it thinks, its motivation, ideology, and funding. Saudi newspapers at the time published calls for jihad to support all Muslim struggles around the world. Kashmir was seen as a place where jihad was taking place, so donations were solicited for the Muslims living there. Allah was said to bless the warriors of this financial jihad.


In August 1999, the Saudi newspaper Al Jazeera reported on a press conference conducted by the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), a Saudi-based charity supervised by the government. The group's secretary-general, Maneh al-Johani, praised the role played by Saudi Arabia in providing assistance to Muslims around the world, especially in Kashmir. Johani equated the Kashmir issue with the situation in Kosovo and Palestine, and called on Muslims to help the Kashmiri people.


Radical Wahhabi, Salafi, Saudi Islam sees the world in confrontation, with zones of jihad where Muslim minorities are struggling politically and religiously against other forces. The struggle can be with Israel, Serbia, India, or the Philippines. Saudi Arabia presents itself as the protector and the spearhead of the defense of Muslims around the world against what the former Supreme Religious Authority of Saudi Arabia, the late Sheikh Abdul Aziz Ibn Baz (Ben Baz), defined as the Western cultural attack.


This is the ideology behind Saudi politics. The Saudis are very committed to recruiting, funding, and funneling ideology to those Muslim minorities, and use Muslim charities as their tool to implement this policy. In September 2000, the Saudi newspaper Al Jazeera reported on an additional press conference by WAMY Secretary-General Johani, who discussed Saudi Arabia's role in providing aid to Kashmir and asked the Islamic countries to play an effective part in saving Kashmir's Muslims. Johani described the Kashmiri people's jihad and noted that they had suffered thousands of casualties. "The Kashmiri people want to protect their Islamic entity and we must help them," he concluded. Since the end of the war in Afghanistan in 1989, the Saudi contribution to entrenching the phenomenon of global jihad around the world has mushroomed, whether in Chechnya, the Philippines, Kosovo, or the Palestinian territories. Yet for all this, Saudi Arabia is not held accountable.


The Saudi methodology is to take advantage of a humanitarian crisis to get a foot in the door. Who could be against assisting widows and orphans and setting up schools and clinics? It is a methodology that has been duplicated all around the world. Since direct assistance to armed groups is problematic for Saudi Arabia, they use "charities," which are actually organizations that use the social network called the dawa to propagate their ideology through mosques, health clinics, and madrassas, to influence minds and recruit supporters to Wahhabi-style ideology and commitment. Some of the money is indeed funneled to support terrorism - families of suicide bombers.


It is now evident that the so-called Saudi non-governmental charities are closely monitored by the Saudi government. The Saudis have understood that they were under pressure from the West and so they were very willing to sacrifice the Al-Haramain charity. It was banned and dismantled, but other charities were not, like the Islamic Relief Organization (IRO). The Saudi charities just change names and, unfortunately, nothing concrete is being done. There is no all-out campaign to dismantle all those charities.


Training Camps in Pakistan


Lashkar-e-Taiba has created an infrastructure inside Pakistan which is relevant to struggles beyond the boundaries of Kashmir or India. It has created an operational capability in its training camps through the use of highly skilled instructors, veterans of the Afghan war. Some well-known terrorists have passed through those training camps before launching their attacks. The shoe bomber, Richard Reid, was trained in a Lashkar training camp, as was Dhiren Barot, a British subject and a Hindu who converted to Islam, who was the mastermind of a failed gas cylinder bombing plot in London and who also prepared detailed blueprints for al-Qaeda of the buildings in New York's financial district.


Lashkar-e-Taiba is headed by Muhammad Saeed, who plays a key role in the group's operational activities, terrorist training camps, ideology, and in its worldwide activities. Saeed was reportedly arrested in Pakistan in February 2009. Saeed determines where the graduates of the Lashkar camps in Pakistan are sent to fight and in 2005 he personally organized the infiltration of Lashkar militants into Iraq. He was in Saudi Arabia at the time, with the knowledge of the Saudi government (you cannot enter Saudi Arabia without permission). He also arranged for Lashkar operatives to be sent to Europe as fundraising coordinators. So Saudi Arabia again was a launching pad for sending highly-trained mujahidin to the war against the Americans in Iraq. This shows the global nature of Lashkar-e-Taiba. It is not just a provincial organization but one that has a global reach.


Haji Mohammad Ashraf has been Lashkar's chief financier since 2003, expanding the organization and increasing its fundraising activities. Mahmoud Mohammed Ahmad Ba'aziq, a Saudi national, served as the Lashkar leader in Saudi Arabia during the 1980s and 1990s, before Ashraf, and coordinated fundraising activity with non-governmental charities and businessmen in Saudi Arabia. The Saudi regime is aware of the money going to Lashkar in Saudi Arabia for its activities around the world.


Lashkar operations chief Zakir Rehman Lakvi was also reportedly arrested in a Pakistani raid on a Lashkar training camp. He was one of the masterminds of the Mumbai attack and was in constant cellular phone contact with the attackers. Lakvi has been very much involved in military operations in Chechnya, Bosnia, and Iraq.


Lashkar-e-Taiba would not have evolved to the scale they have reached without Saudi assistance. One key Saudi who helped build Lashkar into such an efficient and highly-trained organization is Abdul Aziz Barbaros. Barbaros, whose real name is Abdul Ahman el-Dosfari, fought with al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He was one of the founding members of Lashkar in Kashmir after the end of the Afghan war. He also traveled to Bosnia to assist the al-Qaeda-oriented mujahidin brigades there. During the 1980s and 1990s Barbaros served as a critical link between Lashkar, wealthy and pious Saudi financiers, and Pakistani and Muslim fanatics around the world.


Hamas leader Sheikh Yassin in Gaza routinely delivered speeches addressed to Lashkar-e-Taiba militant rallies in Kashmir and Pakistan. This is an example of the general mindset of radical Islamic solidarity. The Hamas leader in Gaza showed that he cared about what was happening with other Muslim minorities around the world, as they should care about what is happening in Gaza or the West Bank. This is not necessarily directly connected to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In Iraq, this is seen as a struggle against the American "Crusade occupation." This reflects Bin Laden's 1998 declaration of jihad, when he spoke of the Islamic front against the Crusaders and the Jews. So everything is linked and what happened in Mumbai has a wider perspective.


Global Islam Penetrates Gaza


The notion of global Islam has also penetrated to Gaza and to some extent in the West Bank. This phenomenon exists under the umbrella of Hamas, which enables a revival of global jihadi organizations in Gaza such as Jaish al-Islam and others. The emergence of these groups is worrying because they are very much inspired by the global jihadi, Saudi Wahhabi ideology - a strict interpretation of Islam which is being interpreted into political and terrorist activity. What is important in this phenomenon is the radicalization of the already radicalized society in Gaza.


The bottom line is that we are seeing the same pattern of global jihad-oriented groups starting to be active in Gaza. They have carried out some attacks, mostly directed against foreign, Western institutions like the YMCA and the American School. Yet they have played only a marginal role in attacks against Israeli targets.


Hamas in Gaza


I think the situation of Hamas control in Gaza is irreversible. From my reading of Hamas publications in Arabic, it is clear that there is no way back, only ahead, to take control in the West Bank if they become strong enough. Hamas could agree to a hudna (calm) for fifty years, but there will be no recognition of Israel or a cessation of the struggle against it.


If Hamas was ready to act pragmatically, it would no longer be Hamas. It would be something else. And then the frustrated factions within Hamas would break off and join up with the radical global jihadi organizations in Gaza. Those organizations hope to provide a refuge for Hamas radicals who believe that any normalization or pragmatism would be harmful to the Hamas cause.


This is not just my hypothesis. The declarations of Hamas leaders Zahar and Siam have hinted that if Hamas were to lose its real identity, people would shift their loyalties and activities to a more genuine Islamic organization, not a pragmatic, opportunistic, hudna-style one.


Should we talk with Hamas? Is the international community ready to sit down with al-Qaeda? There is no difference. It is a total misrepresentation to say Hamas is like the IRA. There is no political wing of Hamas disconnected from the operational wing. There are no pragmatists to speak to. At the end of the day, those who believe that trying to talk to Hamas is the right way to conduct business here in the Middle East will be in for a big disappointment.


* * *
Col. (res.) Jonathan Fighel is a senior research scholar at the International Institute for Counter Terrorism (ICT). He is also a member of the International Academic Counter Terrorism Community (ICTAC) and serves as a consultant and expert witness for the U.S. Department of Justice on Hamas trials, as well as to private U.S.-based law firms in cases of prosecuting al-Qaeda terrorism. His expertise also includes the Palestinian Authority, Islamist terror groups (Hamas, PIJ, al-Qaeda), funding, Palestinian terrorism and the Palestinian suicide terrorism phenomenon. This Jerusalem Issue Brief is based on his presentation at the Institute for Contemporary Affairs in Jerusalem on December 9, 2008.
taken from : B'NAI ELIM (http://bnaielim.blogspot.com/)

COLE CHOPS LOGIC



Juan Cole gives his subjective and factually questionable take on the results of our elections. As regular readers will be aware, Cole is not the best place to go for informed content, in spite of the title of his blog, but it can be a fine place to go for the gags. Today's post contains this one:


Israel is 20% Arab, which should yield 24 seats in the Knesset, but only 9 were apparently elected, down from 12. Attempts were made to disqualify some Arab parties from running, but the Supreme Court struck them down.


Let's see: If 20% of Israelis are Arabs, while the Arab parties only gleaned 7-8% of the votes, and the point of our post is to make sure everybody understand how bad Israel is, let's create the impression that most Arabs were disqualified from voting. There, that ought to work, as long as no one really stops to think about what I just said...


By the way, the reality is even further from Cole's thesis. Something like one of the eight percent of votes garnered by the Arab parties came from the far-left Jews who voted for Hadash, a sort of communist party which has one Jewish MP on its list to prove its cross-national solidarity, and indeed he attracts cross-ethnic votes. Which means that at the very most 40% of the Arabs voted for Arab parties. The proportion of abstainers was a bit higher among the Arabs, but even so it looks like a majority of the Arabs voted for regular Zionist parties; they didn't even converge on the Left-wing Meretz party, which almost disappeared for lack of votes across the board. In the past, when the Haredi Shas party used to control the Ministry of the Interior and its control of funds for the municipalities, one of their MKs was voted in by Arabs, but that wasn't the case this time. Looks like the Arabs voted for Labor, Kadima, Likud.... Lieberman?
taken from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations (http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/)

Israel's Design Hot Spots: Nahalat Binyamin - Israeli Design Blog - Coolil.com

Israel's Design Hot Spots: Nahalat Binyamin - Israeli Design Blog - Coolil.com

Posted using ShareThis

ISLAM CONTROLS THE HOUSE OF LORDS ?

Thanks to Nikon-Man for his post of this video on his blog

I agree with his words:

With Mr.Geert Wilders safely back in the Netherlands (having failed in his attempt to open British Parliamentary eyes to the danger of Radical Islam ), Lord Ahmed must be hugging himself crazy by now !!.
Not Since the rise of Nazism have such bully-boy tactics been so well employed .Had Mr.Geert Wilders come to talk about say "Israeli war crimes in Gaza " , I'm quite sure there would have been a different outcome to this story .
now the video



Thursday, 12 February 2009

"NAZIS NEEDED" - ANTI-SEMITISM UNDER AUTHORITIES INDIFFERENCE




The Age‘s elevated shot doesn’t reveal such fascinating detail. AAP merely describes people “carrying placards calling for an end to what was described as a ‘massacre’”. Meanwhile, in Paris:

Vandals hurled Molotov cocktails at a synagogue in a Paris suburb yesterday in the latest outbreak of anti-Semitic violence in France since the start of Israel’s Gaza offensive ...

Home to Europe’s biggest Muslim and Jewish populations, France has recorded more than 55 anti-Semitic incidents since Israel launched its Gaza offensive last month, drawing appeals for calm from politicians and religious leaders. Three other synagogues have been firebombed in the past two weeks and vandals have sprayed anti-Israeli graffiti on at least two other Jewish places of worship.

Jews haven’t been so vilified since Islamists attacked the US on 9/11.

UNIVERSAL TORAH: YISRO

UNIVERSAL TORAH: YISRO


By Rabbi Avraham Greenbaum


Torah Reading: YISRO Exodus 18:1-20:23Isaiah 6:1-7:6, 9:5-6 (Sephardi ritual: 6:1-13).


WE ARE ALL CONVERTS


It is fitting that the parshah which tells of the Giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai is named after Yisro (Jethro), Moses' father-in-law -- a convert. Indeed, all those who witnessed the Giving of the Torah were "converts". Thus (as noted in the commentary on Parshas SHEMOS) the Covenant at Sinai was accompanied by the three components of conversion: circumcision (Rashi on Ex.12:6), ritual immersion in the waters of the Mikveh (Ex. 19:10) and burned offerings (Ex. 24:5). For before G-d, we are all converts -- GERIM, "dwellers" in a land and on an earth that is not ours but G-d's. We are all here only by the grace of G-d, utterly dependent upon His kindness and compassion.


Thus no one can claim that the Torah belongs to him by right through ancestral or other merit. There is no room for pride, arrogance or the exploitation of the Torah for worldly advantage. The Torah is not the property of an exclusive caste. It "belongs" only to one who keeps it. The Torah was given in the Wilderness, no man's land, on the lowest of all mountains -- Sinai, the eternal symbol of humility. For only through humility can we "receive" and accept the Torah, which belongs to G-d alone. Receiving the Torah means having the humility to accept it as it is, the way it has come down to us, without trying to "modify" it according to our own ideas and wishes.


And when we are willing to accept and follow the Torah as it actually is -- fulfilling NA'ASEH VE-NISHMAH, "we will (first) DO it and (then) HEAR (and understand) it" (Ex. 24:7) -- then we can come to understand how the Torah lifts us out of our slavery to this-worldliness, with its many false gods. Then we can hear the voice of redemption that calls to us every day: "I am HASHEM your G-d who brought you out of the land of Egypt, from the house of slaves" (Ex. 20:2).


Slavery to the idols of the mundane world is ignominious. Yet the Torah accords the greatest honor to those who have the courage to leave this servitude behind and "go out into the wilderness" in search of G-d -- like Jethro. According to tradition, Jethro had investigated every conceivable way of interpreting and living in this world, every world-view and "lifestyle". Only when Jethro came to HaShem and His Torah did he know he had found the truth. "Now I KNOW that HaShem is great above all the gods" (Ex. 18:11). The Zohar comments: "When Jethro came and said, 'Now I know that HaShem is great.' then the Supreme Name was glorified and exalted" (Zohar, Yisro 69). In other words, the revelation of G-d's light and power is greatest precisely when it comes out of darkness and concealment. Only when we have seen evil and know its power can we understand the greatness of G-d's saving hand. Only one who was a slave truly understands what it means to have been freed. This is "the superiority of the light that comes out of darkness" (Ecclesiastes 2:13).


Thus Jethro the Convert was accorded the honor of having the parshah narrating the Giving of the Torah named after him, and of contributing the hierarchical system of "captains of thousands, captains of hundreds, captains of fifties and captains of tens" through which the Children of Israel are governed. Jethro's name also contains and alludes to the name of another humble convert who was accorded the greatest honor: Ruth the Moabitess, who was the great grandmother of King David, MELECH HAMASHIACH.


* * *


TWO MILLION PROPHETS


Rambam (Maimonides) in "Foundations of the Torah", the opening section of his comprehensive Code of Law, explains the significance of the revelation at Sinai, which was witnessed by at least two million people:


"The people of Israel did not believe in Moses our Teacher because of the signs he wrought. For one who believes on account of signs always has some residual doubt in his heart that maybe the sign was brought about through magic and witchcraft. All the signs that Moses performed in the wilderness were performed to meet specific needs, not to bring proof of his prophecy.


"Then how did they come to believe in him? The answer is: At Mount Sinai, where we ourselves (not a stranger) saw with our own eyes and where we ourselves (not someone else) heard with our own ears the thunderous sounds and flashing lights and how Moses approached and entered the thick cloud. We heard The Voice speak with him as we listened: 'Moses, Moses, go and say to them.' From where do we learn that the Assembly at Mount Sinai and that alone is the final proof of the truth of Moses' prophecy -- proof that leaves no room for further doubt? As it says, 'Behold I am coming to you in the thickness of the cloud in order that the people may hear when I speak with you and also they will believe in you forever' (Ex. 19:9).


"It follows that the very ones to whom he was sent were the witnesses to the truth of his prophecy, and he had no need to perform any further sign, since he and they were both witnesses to the matter. It is like two witnesses who both saw the same thing. Each one is witness that his friend is telling the truth. Neither witness needs further proof of what his friend is saying. Similarly, all Israel were witnesses to the truth of Moses' prophecy and he had no need to perform any sign. For one who believes on account of signs still entertains doubts in his heart.
"Accordingly if a prophet arises and works great miracles and wonders and seeks to deny the prophecy of Moses our Teacher, we do not listen to him and we know clearly that those signs were brought about through magic and witchcraft. For the prophecy of Moses does not depend upon signs, such that we should compare the signs of one prophet to the signs of another. We ourselves saw it with our own eyes and heard it with our own ears. The prophets who deny the truth of Moses' prophesy are like witnesses who tell a person who saw something with his own eyes that it was not as he saw it. The person simply does not listen to them, for he knows for certain that they are false witnesses." (Rambam, Yesodey HaTorah 8:1-3).


* * *


"AND ISRAEL ENCAMPED"


"And Israel encamped there, facing the mount" (Ex. 19:2) -- the Hebrew verb VAYICHAN ("encamped") is in the singular. They encamped "as one man with one heart" (Rashi ad loc.) -- united. Observing today's rainbow variety of jostling Israelites -- ever-critical, argumentative, obstinate and apparently incapable of agreeing about anything -- it is hard to imagine how all the Children of Israel actually did unite at Sinai to receive the Torah.


This is particularly difficult to imagine for those who have delved into the intricacies of Talmudic law and reasoning, and who know how the Torah repeatedly seems to fly completely in the face of reason and good common sense. How could those two million Israelites collectively agree to accept this elaborate, complex, reason-defying code in all its minute details? What brought them to do so? And the fact is that today's observant descendents of those Israelites, despite the fact of having come from communities spread out all over the world, still all fundamentally agree to accept this code without changing a letter!


The very faith of Jews in the Torah for thousands of years in the face of almost constant adversity and persecution is itself proof of the uniqueness of the Assembly at Sinai, when we all collectively witnessed the same one truth of G-d and agreed to accept the Torah. Only a completely unique divine revelation could have been powerful enough to instill in two million people a faith that has lasted for thousands of years, a faith for which, over the generations, many millions laid down their very lives.


It is ironic that many people today question the historicity of the revelation at Sinai. We live in an age that prides itself on instantly recording its own daily history in the form of incessant news in the press, on TV, radio and Internet. And we are witnesses to the way in which the media have become manufacturers of endless streams of idolatrous images that totally distort the meaning of the world they supposedly reflect.


If we are to begin to internalize the magnitude of the Giving of the Torah, which took place without media coverage, we must try to think ourselves out of our own noisy, sophisticated world. We must try to project ourselves back into the stark, awesome, silent grandeur of the "wilderness", the MIDBAR, where man's existential reality as a GER, a wanderer and a stranger in this world, is writ large. Out of the silence of the MIDBAR spoke a voice: MEDABER. And the voice was forever inscribed in the hearts of those who heard it and taught it to their children from generation to generation.


* * *


THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PERSON AND A STATUE


In the above-quoted passage from Rambam about the uniqueness of Moses' prophecy, he states that "the prophets who deny the truth of Moses' prophecy are like witnesses who tell a person who saw something with his own eyes that it was not as he saw it."


The prophets to whom he is referring include those who founded the two major world religions which are rooted in and yet deviate from the Torah: Christianity and Islam. Both drew the bulk of their teachings from the Torah. Yet both implicitly and explicitly deny the finality of Moses' prophecy, seeking to "undo" the laws of the Torah (such as circumcision, the dietary laws, complete Sabbath observance and many others).


The relaxation of the stringencies of Torah law by these man-made religions made them more acceptable to the non-Israelite nations. As Rambam states at the very end of his Code of Law (Hilchos Melachim 11:4 uncensored version): "Man does not have the power to grasp the thoughts of the Creator of the Universe. For our ways are not His ways, nor are our thoughts His. All that happened in the wake of Yeshu of Nazereth and that Ishmaelite who arose after him came only to straighten the way for Melech HaMashiach and to rectify the entire world to serve HaShem together. Thus it is written: 'And then I will turn to all the nations a pure language so that all of them will call upon the name of HaShem and serve Him with one accord' (Zephaniah 3:9). The whole world has thus become filled with the knowledge of the Torah and the commandments. This knowledge has spread to the farthest islands. And when the true MELECH HAMASHIACH arises and succeeds, they will all immediately know that 'their fathers inherited falsehood' and that their prophets and their fathers deceived them."


Despite the attraction of the two new religions for non-Israelites, neither one of them ever made serious inroads among the Jews. Indeed it was precisely because the founders could not attract the Jews that they turned to the non-Jews for recruits.


In Rambam's IGERET TEIMAN (letter to the Jews of Yemen written in 1172 C.E. encouraging them to reject the forced conversion to Islam to which they were being subjected), he explains why the two new religions held no attractions for those who understood the intricate depths of the Torah:


"Their only wish was to compare their lies to the Law of HaShem. But the work of G-d bears no comparison to the work of man except in the eyes of a little child who has no understanding of either. The difference between our religion and the other religions that seek to compare themselves to it is like the difference between a living, conscious man and a statue. The statue is carved out of a piece of wood overlaid with gold or silver or chiseled out of a piece of marble and made to look like a man. An ignorant fool does not know the difference between G-dly wisdom and this artifact made in the form of a man. The statue looks like a man in its structure and outward appearance. But it only seems like a man because the ignorant onlooker doesn't know what is inside either a man or a statue. However, the wise man knows the difference between what is inside the two. The wise man knows that inside the statue is nothing, while the inside of the living man, ADAM, is filled with truly amazing wonders and works that testify to the wisdom of the Creator -- the nerves, the flesh, the bones, the bodily limbs and their all their interconnections."


Shabbat Shalom!


Avraham Yehoshua Greenbaum


--


AZAMRA INSTITUTE
PO Box 50037 Jerusalem 91500 Israel
Website: www.azamra.org

PLAYING TO WIN



Imagine a game with two players. One player is playing to win, the other is playing to a draw, without actually going in for the kill. Even if the first player is weaker than the second player, if the game goes on long enough the odds are on his side... because he is playing to win.


Einstein famously said, "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."


Like many pacifists, Einstein assumed that war would become more destructive. Instead the Western powers have long ago stopped fighting to win, and rather than unleashing their full strength, chose to begin fighting to a draw, or to maintain a slightly improved balance of power vis a vis the enemy.


While some believed that this style of limited warfare is the product of the Cold War's Mutually Assured Destruction, in which war had to be scaled down for fear of unleashing a nuclear armageddon... this inability to finish the fight has become most pronounced when Western powers fight conflicts with third world guerrillas or terrorists.


There are several factors that explain why we stopped playing to win, and accordingly have begun slowly losing.


1. Instant Communications - Like sausage, wars used to be 'made' mostly out of sight. Individuals might have personal experience of a battlefield, but few outside the military would have much visceral interaction with the war itself. With the American Civil War and the Crimean War that began to change. Photography and popularized first person accounts began the process of bringing war into the "living room", horrifying and repulsing millions.


By the time the technology had developed to the point where video broadcasts could be conducted from the field, or any civilian could capture some of the action on a cell phone, the barriers had been breached.


Naturally it would be the more civilized countries which placed a higher value on life and did not censor their media, that would receive the worst of this exchange. While the guerrillas and terrorists can always intimidate and silence, and in any case tend to operate in cultures with higher mortality rates that place less value on human life, Western nations cannot and do not function so.


The result is that civilized countries begin practicing excessive restraint on the battlefield, this not only gives the enemy more freedom of movement, it creates an entirely new strategic doctrine that involves using civilians as human shields, hospitals and civilian areas as bases, and even deliberately generate atrocities in order to foster propaganda victories.


In this environment, propaganda victories become real victories if they harm the morale of a Western power. The more the civilized side restrains its forces, the more power and territory, the enemy gains.


2. Liberalism - While the welfare of civilians on the enemy side was a legitimate concern, it was never supposed to be a greater concern than the lives of our own soldiers. Yet Liberalism has managed to accomplish exactly that as on the battlefield, with civilized nations putting the lives of soldiers at risk to protect enemy civilians.


This development has turned the human shield from a punchline, into a potent defensive measure, and a propaganda offensive tool. As liberalism routinely assumes that their home society is usually at fault, and that the stronger party is also the guilty party, a liberal culture cripples the very military that seeks to defend it.
A liberal culture propounds that the only legitimate cause for waristhe defense of a weaker party against a stronger party. This paradox necessitates wars that are no longer defensive wars, but nation building wars to tear down a sovereign nation, on behalf of an oppressed populace or minority within its borders.

Such wars may be legitimate or not, on an individual basis, but they bury the primary justification for war, that of self-defense or the suppression of a vital and active threat. By doing so they also shift the priority from the military to the diplomatic, and from military accomplishment to nation building through winning the hearts and minds of the enemy civilian population-- an approach destined to undermine any purely military approach. Wars are no longer fought in pursuit of victory, but in order to build a better world... and we stop playing to win.


3. The Supremacy of Diplomacy - War becomes a means of enforcing a diplomatic objective. When diplomacy fails, we go to war. When the enemy meets our demands, we end the war. Then we rinse and repeat the whole cycle all over again.


Since modern diplomacy was envisioned as a peacemaking tool, these demands must be peacemaking demands as well. This makes war inherently contradictory and disreputable, and creates situations in which we endlessly pursue peacemaking diplomacy to avoid war, only to be tricked, and then restart the peacemaking cycle again. When we finally try to break the cycle of hollow diplomatic charades with war, universal condemnation follows.


War then becomes a halfhearted effort to hurt the enemy just enough to convince them to give in to our peacemaking demands. Unfortunately when the enemy has no interest in giving in, the military campaign quickly becomes a painful bloody drawn out mess with no real objective except buzzwords such as "Stabilization" and "Reining in the Extremist Elements Who Stand in the Way of Peace."
The latest example of such a misguided military campaign could be seen in Gaza, but it can just as well be seen in Iraq, and for that matter Vietnam. If you're not playing to win, but assuming that the enemy will give up and come to the negotiating table, then you're playing to lose... particularly against an enemy who knows how the game is played, and knows that all he needs to do is stay alive long enough for you to give up and go away.
4. Forgetting How to Fight - When the USSR was dismantled, the Yeltsin government attempted to give away land to farmers, only to discover that after generations of collectivization, too few knew how to farm anymore.
So national skills can disappear under the boot of socialism. There was a time in American history when the instinctive response to an attacker was force. Today the instinctive response is to run away and wait for the police to take care of it.
After a generation we have very nearly forgotten what war is, and what it's for. Afghanistan and Iraq proved that our soldiers still know how to fight, but our politicians and military command have often forgotten. As war becomes subservient to diplomacy, as the culture of liberalism and instant communications bring war into the living room and treat all military actions as atrocities-- we lose the ability to play to win and to fight to win, instead snatching diplomatic defeat from the jaws of a military victory.
But Playing to Win is the only real game in town. As Western powers and civilized nations stop playing to win, the terrorists who do play to win, begin winning. Our advantages in resources, organization and numbers can only hold out for so long unless we too begin playing to win.

Israel Matzav: Not so stunning#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Not so stunning#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Obama pressing Peres to choose Livni? UPDATE: Yes, he did#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Obama pressing Peres to choose Livni? UPDATE: Yes, he did#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Lebanese television host and terror victim May Chidiac calls it quits in a tearful farewell, live on television#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Lebanese television host and terror victim May Chidiac calls it quits in a tearful farewell, live on television#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Who should be Israel's next foreign minister?#links#links

Israel Matzav: Who should be Israel's next foreign minister?#links#links

Israel Matzav: Is A.Q. Khan on the Mossad's hit list?#links#links

Israel Matzav: Is A.Q. Khan on the Mossad's hit list?#links#links

Israel Matzav: Glick: Israel must follow India's example#links#links

Israel Matzav: Glick: Israel must follow India's example#links#links

Israel Matzav: A game plan for Netanyahu#links#links

Israel Matzav: A game plan for Netanyahu#links#links

Israel Matzav: A curveball from Washington?#links#links

Israel Matzav: A curveball from Washington?#links#links

Roadside Rambles: Note to Self

Roadside Rambles: Note to Self

TERRROR AND ANTI-SEMITISM NOW THE "NORM"



Who will say “NO” to evil?


Why are terror and anti-Semitism now accepted by politicians, pundits and academicians?


February 10, 2009


Does it outrage you, as it does us at FLAME, that an openly Islamist-terrorist group like Hamas can be actively supported with hundreds of millions of dollars from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA)---an organization funded in part by $89 million dollars a year of U.S. taxpayer dollars? Are you shocked, as we are, to see thousands of demonstrators in the United States carry banners that say "Zionism = Nazism" or even "Jews are Terrorists"?


Okay, perhaps you are no longer surprised by the anti-Israel machinations of the UN or the anti-Semitic slogans of ultra-leftists. But what of former President Jimmy Carter, who accuses Israel of apartheid and tacitly supports Hamas's rocket attacks on Israeli civilians . . . at least until the "occupation" ends? How did you like the dozens of media reports during the recent Gaza war that chastised both Israel and Hamas equally by referring to a morally neutral "cycle of violence" or those that condemned Israel for "disproportionate" use of force?


This week's Hotline article, by Judah Pearl, father of the slain Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, decries the increasing acceptance---even celebration---of evil, here in the United States and abroad. Read his choice words for politicians like Jimmy Carter, media pundits like Bill Moyers, and academics on our college campuses. As for the latter, Mr. Pearl is a professor of computer science at UCLA and knows whereof he speaks. (He is also president of the Daniel Pearl Foundation, established in memory of his son to promote cross-cultural understanding.)


Pearl's words are refreshing to those of us who are still disgusted by bad people and evil deeds. They are also a call to action to continue our insistence on telling the truth in the press, in our churches and synagogues, and in our classrooms.


Best regards,


Jim SinkinsonDirector, FLAME


P.S.


Since Jimmy Carter is on a new book tour and again touting his bizarre analysis of the Middle East, I refer you to the FLAME position paper published in response to his last tome. I think you'll agree that the FLAME piece, which appeared in scores of publications nationwide and reached millions of Americans, makes short work of the Carter argument . . . simply by laying out the facts and logic, tools that Carter has little use for. Please see this position paper---"Jimmy Carter, Israel and the Jews: Is our former President ignorant, malevolent---or both?"---and pass it along to friends and colleagues. I also commend you to a recent article FLAME posted in the Outstanding Articles section of its website: "Using the Holocaust to Attack the Jews" by Walter Reich, which appeared recently in the Washington Post. It's excellent. Of course, if you agree that FLAME's outspoken brand of public relations on Israel's behalf is critical, I urge you to step up and support us. Remember: FLAME's ability to influence public opinion---to stand up against Islamist terror and anti-Semitism---comes from Israel's supporters like you, one by one. I hope you'll consider giving a donation now, as you're able---with $500, $250, $100, or even $18. (Remember, your donation to FLAME is tax deductible.) To donate online, just go to http://www.factsandlogic.org/make_a_donation.html. Now more than ever we need your support to ensure that Israel gets the support it needs---in the face unrelenting criticism at the U.N and under continued attacks from Hamas in Gaza.


Daniel Pearl and the Normalization of Evil


When will our luminaries stop making excuses for terror?


By Judah Pearl, February 3, 2009, Wall Street Journal


This week marks the seventh anniversary of the murder of our son, former Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. My wife Ruth and I wonder: Would Danny have believed that today's world emerged after his tragedy?


The answer does not come easily. Danny was an optimist, a true believer in the goodness of mankind. Yet he was also a realist, and would not let idealism bend the harshness of facts.


Neither he, nor the millions who were shocked by his murder, could have possibly predicted that seven years later his abductor, Omar Saeed Sheikh, according to several South Asian reports, would be planning terror acts from the safety of a Pakistani jail. Or that his murderer, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, now in Guantanamo, would proudly boast of his murder in a military tribunal in March 2007 to the cheers of sympathetic jihadi supporters. Or that this ideology of barbarism would be celebrated in European and American universities, fueling rally after rally for Hamas, Hezbollah and other heroes of "the resistance." Or that another kidnapped young man, Israeli Gilad Shalit, would spend his 950th day of captivity with no Red Cross visitation while world leaders seriously debate whether his kidnappers deserve international recognition.


No. Those around the world who mourned for Danny in 2002 genuinely hoped that Danny's murder would be a turning point in the history of man's inhumanity to man, and that the targeting of innocents to transmit political messages would quickly become, like slavery and human sacrifice, an embarrassing relic of a bygone era.


But somehow, barbarism, often cloaked in the language of "resistance," has gained acceptance in the most elite circles of our society. The words "war on terror" cannot be uttered today without fear of offense. Civilized society, so it seems, is so numbed by violence that it has lost its gift to be disgusted by evil.


I believe it all started with well-meaning analysts, who in their zeal to find creative solutions to terror decided that terror is not a real enemy, but a tactic. Thus the basic engine that propels acts of terrorism -- the ideological license to elevate one's grievances above the norms of civilized society -- was wished away in favor of seemingly more manageable "tactical" considerations.


This mentality of surrender then worked its way through politicians like the former mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. In July 2005 he told Sky News that suicide bombing is almost man's second nature. "In an unfair balance, that's what people use," explained Mr. Livingstone.


But the clearest endorsement of terror as a legitimate instrument of political bargaining came from former President Jimmy Carter. In his book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," Mr. Carter appeals to the sponsors of suicide bombing. "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Road-map for Peace are accepted by Israel." Acts of terror, according to Mr. Carter, are no longer taboo, but effective tools for terrorists to address perceived injustices.


Mr. Carter's logic has become the dominant paradigm in rationalizing terror. When asked what Israel should do to stop Hamas's rockets aimed at innocent civilians, the Syrian first lady, Asma Al-Assad, did not hesitate for a moment in her response: "They should end the occupation." In other words, terror must earn a dividend before it is stopped.


The media have played a major role in handing terrorism this victory of acceptability. Qatari-based Al Jazeera television, for example, is still providing Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi hours of free air time each week to spew his hateful interpretation of the Koran, authorize suicide bombing, and call for jihad against Jews and Americans.


Then came the August 2008 birthday of Samir Kuntar, the unrepentant killer who, in 1979, smashed the head of a four-year-old Israeli girl with his rifle after killing her father before her eyes. Al Jazeera elevated Kuntar to heroic heights with orchestras, fireworks and sword dances, presenting him to 50 million viewers as Arab society's role model. No mainstream Western media outlet dared to expose Al Jazeera efforts to warp its young viewers into the likes of Kuntar. Al Jazeera's management continues to receive royal treatment in all major press clubs.


Some American pundits and TV anchors didn't seem much different from Al Jazeera in their analysis of the recent war in Gaza. Bill Moyers was quick to lend Hamas legitimacy as a "resistance" movement, together with honorary membership in PBS's imaginary "cycle of violence." In his Jan. 9 TV show, Mr. Moyers explained to his viewers that "each [side] greases the cycle of violence, as one man's terrorism becomes another's resistance to oppression." He then stated -- without blushing -- that for readers of the Hebrew Bible "God-soaked violence became genetically coded." The "cycle of violence" platitude allows analysts to empower terror with the guise of reciprocity, and, amazingly, indict terror's victims for violence as immutable as DNA.


When we ask ourselves what it is about the American psyche that enables genocidal organizations like Hamas -- the charter of which would offend every neuron in our brains -- to become tolerated in public discourse, we should take a hard look at our universities and the way they are currently being manipulated by terrorist sympathizers.
At my own university, UCLA, a symposium last week on human rights turned into a Hamas recruitment rally by a clever academic gimmick. The director of the Center for Near East Studies carefully selected only Israel bashers for the panel, each of whom concluded that the Jewish state is the greatest criminal in human history.


The primary purpose of the event was evident the morning after, when unsuspecting, uninvolved students read an article in the campus newspaper titled, "Scholars say: Israel is in violation of human rights in Gaza," to which the good name of the University of California was attached. This is where Hamas scored its main triumph -- another inch of academic respectability, another inroad into Western minds.


Danny's picture is hanging just in front of me, his warm smile as reassuring as ever. But I find it hard to look him straight in the eyes and say: You did not die in vain.
taken from : B'NAI ELIM (http://bnaielim.blogspot.com/)

Wednesday, 11 February 2009

TU B' SHVAT - THE NEW YEAR OF THE TREES


Just a (one more) beatiful photo published in "Simple Photography"

LEARNING HOW TO BE FUTURE MURDERERS







GEERT WILDERS BANNED FROM THE U.K.



This afternoon Mr. Wilders received a letter from the British ambassador to the Netherlands saying that he is a “persona non grata” in the United Kingdom. The ambassador told Mr. Wilders that he is a threat to public security and public harmony because of the controversy created by Fitna. Mr. Wilders intends to go to London anyway. “Let them arrest me in Heathrow,” he says.


If Mr. Wilders is denied entry to the United Kingdom, it will be the first time that Britain refuses entry to an elected politician from another member state of the European Union. The Dutch government has lodged formal objections with the British government over the unprecedented barring of an EU parliamentarian by another EU country.


The meeting of Mr. Wilders and members of the British Parliament had originally been planned for 29 January, but was postponed. Lord Nazir Ahmed, a Muslim member of the House of Lords (Labour), had threatened to mobilize 10,000 Muslims to prevent Mr. Wilders from entering the British Parliament. Lord Ahmed boasted in the Pakistani press that the cancellation of Mr. Wilders’ visit was “a victory for the Muslim community.”


Lord Pearson could not bear the thought that the “mother of all parliaments” might be perceived as giving in to threats. Hence he decided to reinvite Mr. Wilders.


Black Rod, the head of security at the House of Lords, has ordered extra security for the event.


Here's the letter from the dhimmi office of the UK Home Secretary Jacqui Smith (video of her here):


Home Office
UK Border Agency


Mr Geert Wilders
For delivery via British Embassy in The Hague


Dear Mr Wilders


The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the Secretary of State is of the view that your presence in the UK would pose a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat to one of the fundamental interests of society. The Secretary of State is satisfied that your statements about Muslims and their beliefs, as expressed in your film Fitna and elsewhere, would threaten community harmony and therefore public security in the UK.


You are advised that should you travel to the UK and seek admission an Immigration Officer will take into account the Secretary of State's view. If, in accordance with regulation 21 of the immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006, the Immigration Officer is statisfied that your exclusion is justified on grounds of public policy and/or public security, you will be refused admission to the UK under regulation 19. You would have a right of appeal against any refusal of admission, exercisable from outside the UK.


Yours sincerely,


Irving N. Jones


On behalf of the Secretary of State for the Home Department


**Hardly surprising we accept every gun totting savage from Ragheadistan, terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay and allow mad ass mullahs and sweaty arsed savages from stone age Saudi Arabia to threaten our people here in the UK.


Our government even defends the torturers of Saudi in the courts against our own citizens when they fall fowl of the barbarians of Arabia.


David Milliband the craven coward does nothing when a woman is held in the Sudan on teddy bear crimes, they declare him “persona non grata”, well fuck them I declare this fucking government “persona non grata” as far as I am concerned.


Craven dhimmis unable to raise their heads from the sand other than to kiss the feet of their barbaric islamic masters.


Well done the Home Office, if they wanted to expand the voter base of the BNP they have just handed them a huge PR result and shown the cowardice in UK politics towards standing up to islamic savagery and barbarism.

J P F O



YOU KNOW IT’S COMING


By Kirby Ferris
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership.
© JPFO 2009


Presently in this country, an objective observer would have to acknowledge that a distinct (but far too quiet) majority of Americans do not want any further “gun control”. However, this “soft” opinion is malleable.


Americans watched Hurricane Katrina and realized that the armed citizen was very likely safer than the disarmed victims of plunder and rape. And then Americans watched New Orleans police disarm law abiding citizens. This cannot have set well in the common sense area of most peoples’ brains.


Virginia Tech horrifically showcased the disarmed victim. While anti gun politicians got on the gun grabbing bandwagon, bundling their malicious conniving in pages of “feel good” legislation, many States and municipalities judiciously instituted “right to carry” laws. And now, low and behold, violent crime is dropping in nearly all those locales.The “real” America has actually been growing away from the delusions of personal disarmament. The “ivory tower” America keeps pounding the drums for more “gun control”. Truth be known? The anti gun elitists know that their strategies have somewhat stagnated.


They desperately need an event, a gory spectacle, to fuel their wish list of draconian legislation.


Years ago, I asserted that the elitists and authoritarians in Congress and elsewhere did not actually care all that much about handguns. Handgun laws are a wedge, a lubricant, into a deeper scheme. When Patrick Purdy shot up a Stockton, California school yard, and many semi automatic rifles become illegal to purchase in that State, quite a few gun owners began to sense a hidden agenda underlying the gun grabbers’ legislative feeding frenzy. It cannot be said too often: Registration leads to confiscation. It has happened too many times in the last one hundred years for any sane person to ignore ... see


It only made sense that our enemies (and that is exactly what they are, because they are the enemies of personal self defense) would actually want the semi auto rifles more than the handguns.


Ask yourself: Why would wannabe dictators and petty tyrants seriously fear handguns when their police forces and soldiers routinely now carry fully automatic rifles? Handguns are primarily a defense against crime. A large capacity semi auto rifle is primarily a defense against tyranny. As bad as street crime has become, we should fear tyranny far more. The historical record is inarguable ... see
Now stay with me: Way back in 1947 a psychologist named J.G. Watkins performed an experiment in hypnosis. He was working with the U.S. military at the time. Basically, he and his commanding officers wanted to know if someone could be hypnotized and directed to do something that was innately against the subject’s will.


Watkins hypnotized an upright, patriotic soldier and told him he was going into a room that contained a murderous Japanese soldier. The American soldier went into the room and hallucinated that his own commanding officer was this Japanese soldier! The American soldier pulled a pocket knife from his pants (no one had thought to frisk him) and dove at his commanding officer, fully intent on gutting a fellow American! Luckily, a couple of MPs were standing by and saved the commanding officer’s life. 1


This experiment in hypnosis, and the further research that followed, was the stimulus for the novel “The Manchurian Candidate”… and the terrific movie based upon the novel. (A movie, I might add, that was taken completely out of circulation for thirty years. I wonder why.)


Where is this leading? I sadly must predict that we are going to see another major massacre with an “assault rifle” in America. Whether it is the work of a programmed “zombie” or an off-the-radar malcontent, the victim disarmament crowd is poised, some with bated breath, in the wings. Don’t you see? Such a tragedy, either hypnotically orchestrated or “the random act of a lone gunman”, would be a hugely significant win/win situation for them.


Before you start muttering “conspiratorialist”, let me bluntly remind you that “gun control” legislation in America has always been ushered in by either one, or a series, of murderous events.


The Gun Control Act of 1968 (directly copied from Nazi gun laws, it should be noted - read "Gateway to Tyranny") was fueled by the assassinations of JFK, RFK, and MLK. Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, and James Earl Ray were all oddly amorphous perpetrators.
In no particular order, bring on Hinckley (Reagan attempt and the birth of Sarah Brady’s Handgun Control Inc.), Mark David Chapman (John Lennon), and Colin Ferguson (and the birth of Carolyn McCarthy’s hysterical anti gun political career).


But Patrick Purdy (with a semi auto rifle) really set the stage. And then Columbine? Columbine, Colorado, less than a week before the NRA’s National Convention in Denver? And Columbine is nearly a suburb of Denver? Please.


Yes, sadly I will predict that something “big” is coming. The perpetrator will be a white male and the targets will be mostly white. This is because the critical “soft” majority of present pro gun ownership opinion falls in that demographic. These “soft” pro gunners can be redirected towards gun bans if their fear buttons can be pushed.


Next in probability is a white perpetrator against black innocents. This would enflame the “redneck racist gun nut” stereotype bandied about so easily by our opponents. This tactic would use white guilt to expand gun bans.


And what can gun owners do about it if/when it happens? Petition a President who is likely the most anti gun in the history of our nation? Petition a Congress that you already know will sign off on nearly any anti gun ownership law? Petition the Board of Directors of the NRA, knowing full well that (because they have surrendered the high ground for decades) their shopworn schmoozing and lobbying will be for naught?


Each of you reading this must bring one other person into our camp. If every ardent gun owner brings another citizen over to our point of view we will have the ingredients for a lasting victory. I strongly encourage you to direct “fence sitters” to JPFO’s terrific documentary on the Second Amendment. “2A Today for the U.S.A.” can be downloaded for free from JPFO’s website.


Immediate advice? Buy a semi automatic rifle and ample ammunition while you legally still can. To do so is morally correct, if not politically correct. It is also a way of emphatically voting your beliefs. The thugs in the BATFE ... see "The Gang Movie" , report the sales volume (but, as yet, not your name) to their two-faced masters.Obama knows that we are on to him. Let’s not let him forget it.


Blogmaster's Note: The best investment you can make to stay informed on issues of Gun Control is to become a member of JPFO. Click on the logo below, sign up for their free email reports and apply for membership today.
taken from : B'NAI ELIM (http://bnaielim.blogspot.com/)

AN ANTISEMITE AT THE FOREIGN OFFICE



Top ranking British diplomat Rowan Laxton doesn't like Jews.


Middle East expert Rowan Laxton, 47, was watching TV reports of the Israeli attack on Gaza as he used an exercise bike in a gym.


Stunned staff and gym members allegedly heard him shout: 'F**king Israelis, f**king Jews'. It is alleged he also said Israeli soldiers should be 'wiped off the face of the earth'.

My italics.


Haaretz adds


The Daily Mail said that in response to a query on Monday, Laxton denied that his comments were anti-Semitic, but dodged answering whether they were anti-Israel.


He denied.


The Guardian and BBC websites haven't heard of the case, if you believe their search engines.


taken from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations (http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/)

REPORT FROM SDEROT AND THE GAZA BORDER



Michael Totten has put up a long report. Michael is refreshingly not top-notch international media outlet such as the BBC, which is why it's interesting to read his reports.
taken from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations (http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/)

THE BBC REPORTS ON LIEBERMAN



The BBC is one of the world's top media outlets; some would simply say it's the top. It's not some blog some fellow uses to bloviate. It's a serious place.


Here's what its website has to tell us about Avigdor Lieberman's party today:


Meanwhile, far-right winger Avigdor Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu party may beat Labour into third place...


Mr Lieberman says he is opposed to the principle of "land-for-peace", on which the two-state solution is based. He wants a "land-for-land" swap - the transfer of areas in Israel currently populated by Israeli-Arabs to the control of the Palestinian Authority, in exchange for Israeli control of major Jewish settlement blocs in the West Bank...


Although described as "far right", Mr Lieberman has backed giving some predominantly Arab areas of East Jerusalem to the Palestinian Authority as part of a land swap deal, but says he is opposed to any sharing of the holy sites in the Old City...


Mr Lieberman lives in a settlement himself. His land swap plan would also involve Israel relinquishing parts of the West Bank - presumably including the settlers on them - but it is assumed this would be less than under Ms Livni or Mr Barak's two-state solution, as some areas would be kept in exchange for Israeli-Arab areas of Israel...

Mr Lieberman advocates totally severing links with Gaza - for example tightening the blockade by closing all the crossings in and out of the Strip and ending the transfer of humanitarian goods through Israeli ports and territory...


As Mr Lieberman is opposed to the concept of "land-for-peace", he objects to the type of deal Ms Livni and Mr Barak would pursue. He says Israel should hit back at Syria if it is attacked from Lebanon, and backs what he describes as a "peace-for-peace" deal where Syria would gain recognition and economic aid from the international community in exchange for accepting an Israeli presence in the Golan on a renewable 99-year lease...


Back when I taught 7th graders, I assure you I would have flunked any student who had written such a description. I'm not talking about adherence to facts, mind you, though one might expect that, too, from a reputable media outlet. I'm talking about simple coherence, such as if Lieberman is or isn't willing to hand over control of territories to Palestinians. Or if he is center, right, far right, or anything else, and what the criteria for the depiction are. Simple things like that: that's all I'd like to have from someone telling me stuff.
taken from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations (http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/)

Israel Matzav: 'Palestinian' women urged to sacrifice their children#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: 'Palestinian' women urged to sacrifice their children#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Amnesty accuses Hamas of 'eliminating' rivals, calls on Hamas to allow 'investigation'#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Amnesty accuses Hamas of 'eliminating' rivals, calls on Hamas to allow 'investigation'#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Arab newspapers view all candidates as 'extremists'#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Arab newspapers view all candidates as 'extremists'#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Israel's Alabama moment#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Israel's Alabama moment#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: What if there were rockets in Judea and Samaria#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: What if there were rockets in Judea and Samaria#links#links#links

Tuesday, 10 February 2009

Israel Matzav: The price for Shalit goes up again#links#links

Israel Matzav: The price for Shalit goes up again#links#links

Israel Matzav: Iraqi MP: 'Only nations living in the past produce martyrs'#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Iraqi MP: 'Only nations living in the past produce martyrs'#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: Boy Scouts of Hezbullah#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Video: Boy Scouts of Hezbullah#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: British diplomat arrested after expletive-laced tirade against Jews#links#links

Israel Matzav: British diplomat arrested after expletive-laced tirade against Jews#links#links

Israel Matzav: Another myth exposed: Most Israelis oppose a 'Palestinian' state#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Another myth exposed: Most Israelis <i>oppose</i> a 'Palestinian' state#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Pallywood 1948#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Pallywood 1948#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Hopenchange for Syria#links#links

Israel Matzav: Hopenchange for Syria#links#links

Israel Matzav: Shalit exchange means the end of Fatah?#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Shalit exchange means the end of Fatah?#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: Shiny Happy Dhimmi#links#links

Israel Matzav: Shiny Happy Dhimmi#links#links

Israel Matzav: Gaza in Malmo#links#links

Israel Matzav: Gaza in Malmo#links#links

Israel Matzav: Clenching Israel's fists#links#links

Israel Matzav: Clenching Israel's fists#links#links

EDUCATION IS ALL IN OUR MIND



I spent eight years of my early adulthood teaching high school - long enough to prove I could do it without the students cowing me, a real problem in Israeli schools full of cocky adolescents with zero tolerance for their elders. Actually, once I got the hang of compelling them to listen long enough that they started to learn, I mostly enjoyed it, and in all the years since have never again encountered such a concentration of fine minds as the more unruly 11th or 12th graders I used to confront.


So I'm not automatically into educational policies based on what you might call touchy-feely tactics of making the students feel good about themselves and what have you. Find the way to challenge them, and then never stop doing it, if you ask me. Ah, and employ fine teachers, who know their material and know their trade (or art, more likely).


Still, Richard E. Nisbett's op-ed column in the NYT explains why with some groups, a little bit of that is exactly what's needed - and not the large expensive and grandiose programs. I think his point is that with some groups, there's a societal handicap that convinces the kids they can't learn and succeed, so they don't; remove that by suggesting it's all about their efforts, not their identity, and they'll flourish. Sounds reasonable to me: set it up so they decide to learn, and they will.
taken from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations (http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/)

JUST JOURNALISM



While I'm linking to stuff without seriously reading it, Gavin sends us to the Just Journalism report on the Gaza Operation. Just Journalism is an outfit that has taken upon itself the hopeless and thankless task of holding British journalism to its own professional standards on issues of Israel and its neighborhood. I get bellyaches from doing this as a hobby; these folks deserve either a medal or a straitjacket, or both. Anyway, their Gaza report is here; if you ever get up in the morning with a feeling of unwanted elation, this will do the trick to get you back to normal.
taken from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations (http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/)

UNRWA



John Lindsay, who was apparently the top lawyer at UNRWA from 2002-2007, isn't exactly the type of person you'd expect to find at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Still, someone had the inspired idea of hosting him, and the result seems to have been worth the effort. He has recently published a paper about what UNRWA does and what it could do better. I have so far only read the first few pages, in between other more pressing activities, but it certainly seems an item we need to be looking at (p. xi):


The most important change, the one mostrequired and least subject to rational disagreement,is the removal of citizens from recognized states—persons who have the oxymoronic status of “citizenrefugees”—from UNRWA’s jurisdiction. This wouldapply to the vast majority of Palestinian “refugees”in Jordan, as well as to some in Lebanon. If a Palestinianstate were created in Gaza and/or the WestBank, such a change would affect Palestinian refugeesin those areas. Meanwhile, for those who are stilldefined as refugees, UNRWA’s move toward greateremphasis on need-based assistance, as opposed tostatus-as-refugee-based assistance, should be accelerated.No justification exists for millions of dollarsin humanitarian aid going to those who can affordto pay for UNRWA services. In addition, UNRWAshould make the following operational changes: haltits one-sided political statements and limit itself tocomments on humanitarian issues; take additionalsteps to ensure the agency is not employing or providingbenefits to terrorists and criminals; and allowthe UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization(UNESCO), or some other neutral entity, toprovide balanced and discrimination-free textbooksfor UNRWA schools.
With the above changes, UNRWA would be betteraligned with what should be its ultimate objectives.For the Palestinians it serves, this means ending theirrefugee status and returning, after nearly sixty years, towhat most of them so desperately seek: normal lives.


According to Haaretz, the report is predictably raising hackles at UNRWA itself:


An UNRWA spokesman slammed the report, accusing the author of bias and a failure to employ a sufficiently wide range of sources.


"The agency is disappointed by the findings of the study, found it to be tendentious and partial, and regrets in particular the narrow range of sources used," Andrew Whitley, director of the UNRWA representative office at UN headquarters in New York, said.


"The study ignores the context in which UNRWA operates and the tight line the agency walks due to various pressures," Whitley said. "Someone reading this paper with no background would assume that the Israeli government was a benign actor. No mention is made of the occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip."


Here's a proposed translation: Lindsay doesn't realize we're beholden to the Arab version of the story ("various pressures"), and his starting point isn't that Israel is the source of all evil. Sniff.


If I ever find the time I'll read and report, but now you know it's there, feel free not to wait for me. Go ahead, by all means.
takem from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations (http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/)
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...