Love of the Land: We’re all thrilled by Mossad the movie

We’re all thrilled by Mossad the movie

Of course we should condemn extrajudicial murder, but I still can’t help admiring Israel’s nerve


Melanie Reid
Timesonline.co.uk
18 February '10

(While misunderstanding some key points, this is not exactly what one normally hears from the U.K. and evidently she's not alone this time. A good read. Y.)

Steven Soderbergh, evidently, was only kidding when he said that there would be no Ocean’s 14. He’s plainly been hard at work filming in a hotel in Dubai, as we can see from the trailers running on News at Ten. With Mossad operatives filling in as movie extras.

Now I know we really, really shouldn’t joke about these things. I should be wearing black and have a long face and be uttering pieties about the disgraceful “extrajudicial” killing of the Hamas military chief Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, apparently by Israeli agents.

All nice people, quite rightly, are adopting the proper moral stance and expressing outrage and disgust at this affront to international law and justice. But the rest of us ... well, we simply can’t wait until the movie comes out. Largely thanks to the blurry CCTV pictures, there is an element to the assassination in Dubai that is appallingly irresistible. What the secret agents did — and, critically, what we saw them do — was compelling and breathtaking in its cleverness.

Box office, in other words.

(Read full story)

Love of the Land: We’re all thrilled by Mossad the movie

Love of the Land: How Naïve Westerners Exaggerate Middle Eastern Moderation: Today’s Example

How Naïve Westerners Exaggerate Middle Eastern Moderation: Today’s Example

Barry Rubin
The Rubin Report
18 February '10

How does a leading sponsor of terrorism cease being a sponsor of terrorism? By stopping the encouragement, organization, funding, logistical backing, and even ordering of terrorist attacks? No. By being given a free pass by its would-be victim who doesn’t see what is going on under its own nose—literally.

Consider U.S. Undersecretary of State Robert Burns. He was in Damascus to reestablish U.S. relations with Syria. Syria has paid nothing for its past involvement in terrorism. It is still backing terrorist attacks to kill Americans in Iraq. True, the U.S. government hopes that it will talk Syria out of this behavior. But that won’t happen, especially since it isn’t willing to threaten Syria when such attacks do occur.

Indeed, as Reuters reports, “Washington has muted its criticism of Syria's authoritarian system.” Needless to say, Damascus has not muted its criticism of the United States, and will never do so.

Burns gives a press conference in which he says that he “is under no illusions of the challenges ahead” but that his “meeting with President Assad has made me optimistic."

If you look at the video of the press conference you will see that one microphone on the right side is larger than the others and is placed by the Syrians above them, practically thrust into Burns’ face. It is the microphone of al-Manar, the Hizballah television station, famous for its anti-American diatribes and calls to kill Israelis.

As a close observer of Syria puts it: “I don't think that the al-Manar microphone was placed there by accident. It seems to me that there's a message being sent. The Middle East runs on metaphor, insinuation and symbols.”

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: How Naïve Westerners Exaggerate Middle Eastern Moderation: Today’s Example

Love of the Land: If Israel killed Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, Did It Have the Right To?

If Israel killed Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, Did It Have the Right To?

Alan M. Dershowitz
Hudson New York
18 February '10

I don’t know whether Israel did or did not assassinate the leader of the Hamas military wing, Mahmoud al-Mabhouh. But assuming for argument’s sake that the Mossad made the hit, did it have the right to engage in this “extrajudicial assassination?”

Not all extrajudicial killings are unlawful. Every soldier who kills an enemy combatant engages in an extrajudicial killing, as does every policeman who shoots a fleeing felon. There are several complex legal questions involved in assessing these situations.

First, was the person who was killed a combatant, in relation to those killed him? If Israel killed Mabhouh, there can be absolutely no doubt that he was a combatant. He was actively participating in an ongoing war by Hamas against Israeli civilians. Indeed, it is likely that he was killed while on a military mission to Iran in order to secure unlawful, anti-personnel rockets that target Israeli civilians. Both the United States and Great Britain routinely killed such combatants during the Second World War, whether they were in uniform or not. Moreover, Hamas combatants deliberately remove their uniforms while engaged in combat.

So if the Israeli Air Force had killed Mabhouh while he was in Gaza, there would be absolutely no doubt that their action would be lawful. It does not violate international law to kill a combatant, regardless of where the combatant is found, whether he is awake or asleep and whether or not he is engaged in active combat at the moment of his demise.

But Mabhouh was not killed in Gaza. He was killed in Dubai. It is against the law of Dubai for an Israeli agent to kill a combatant against Israel while he is in Dubai. So the people who engaged in the killing presumptively violated the domestic law of Dubai, unless there is a defense to such a killing based on international principles regarding enemy combatants. It is unlikely that any defense would be available to an Israeli or someone working on behalf of Israel, since Dubai does not recognize Israel’s right to kill enemy combatants on its territory.

(Read full article)

Related:Mahmoud al-Mabhouh: To Kill a Terrorist - Exclusive Analysis

Love of the Land: If Israel killed Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, Did It Have the Right To?

Love of the Land: Middle East Terror and Double Standards

Middle East Terror and Double Standards

P. David Hornik
Pajamasmedia.com
18 February '10

On Monday NATO announced that two errant rockets fired by U.S. forces the day before had killed 12 Afghan civilians, including six children, in a house in the Taliban stronghold of Marjeh. Afghan President Hamid Karzai expressed “sadness” and ordered an investigation. NATO is worried about the impact in terms of winning local support.

But there has been no outcry or condemnations, certainly not from democratic governments or even from the UN. The lack of an international response seems to reflect awareness that the killings were accidental and that it is intrinsic to the nature of war that such incidents occur.

But it was different back on November 8, 2006, when three misfired Israeli artillery shells hit a residential area in the town of Beit Hanoun in Gaza, killing 19 civilians. The shells were fired in a bid to prevent an imminent rocket attack on the Israeli city of Ashkelon, of which there had already been several. Israeli forces had been engaged in skirmishes in Gaza in a direct attempt to protect Israeli communities from the rockets — and it was all happening a year and some months after Israel had evacuated Gaza completely and put an end to what was called its “occupation.”

Nevertheless, in this case there was an international response. The then-external relations chief of the European Union, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, said, “The killing this morning of so many civilians in Gaza, including many children, is a profoundly shocking event. Israel has a right to defend itself, but not at the price of the lives of the innocent.” The then-Italian foreign minister, Massimo D’Alema, had harsher words: “This morning 18 people, women and children, were massacred … [in] an escalation of violence I think is unacceptable.” Turkey’s Foreign Ministry came out with: “The Israeli attack is a blow to regional peace efforts and will create a cycle of violence.”

The then-UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan called the incident “shocking” and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas — touted to this day as Israel’s peace partner — called it an “ugly massacre committed by the occupation against our children, our women, and elderly.” On November 15 the UN Human Rights Council met in Geneva and resolved to send a “fact-finding commission” to Beit Hanoun consisting of Archbishop Desmond Tutu and British academic — and later member of the Goldstone “fact-finding commission” — Christine Chinkin.

Page 1 of 2 Next ->

Related: Double Standards? Nato's Afghan Errors


Love of the Land: Middle East Terror and Double Standards

Israel Matzav: Someone in England admires us

Someone in England admires us

We have an admirer. She is Melanie Reid and she writes in Thursday's Times of London.

It is an unfashionable thing to say, but I have a considerable admiration for the Israeli way of doing things. They want something, they get it. They perceive someone as their deadly enemy, they kill them. They get hit, they hit back. They don’t waste time explaining or justifying or agonising; nor do they allow their detractors to enter their country and then afford them generous welfare payments. They just act. No messing. No scruples. Not even a shrug and a denial, just a rather magnificent refusal to debate anything.

This absolutism, based on their history, carries its own moral weight; one that is rather electrifying in a Western world grown flabby with niceties. Clearly, the Israelis could defend their policies if they wanted to, but they quite simply can’t be bothered. It’s a waste of breath. One admires them for that, too.

I’ve felt this way ever since the Entebbe raid in 1976, an occasion when the Israelis showed Hollywood a thing or two. After two Palestinians and two Germans had hijacked an aircraft on a flight that had originated in Israel, the Israeli army simply swooped in, killed the hijackers and freed all but three of the hostages. It was decisive, bloody and clever. Lieutenant-Colonel “Yoni” Netanyahu, the older brother of the present Prime Minister, Binyamin, was the only commando killed in the fighting.

They also outdid fiction after the massacre at the Munich Olympics in 1972, when they hunted down 11 Palestinians who were responsible and eliminated them wherever they were in the world. Aided by fake passports and disguises, Mossad agents employed methods including a booby-trapped telephone, a bomb planted in a bed and a raid in Beirut in which the present Defence Minister, Ehud Barak, dressed as a woman. Nobody caught it on CCTV, but on the ground that human nature can never resist this kind of stuff, Steven Spielberg made it into the Oscar-nominated 2005 movie Munich.

Maybe, as the West becomes increasingly gentle and polite, and pays those monthly direct debits to Amnesty International, we need the Israelis to remind us that the world is not made according to our template. Maybe that is why we are drawn towards tales of uncompromising, ruthless derring-do. How else to explain the veneration of the SAS, the worldwide glut of books and movies on covert operations?

One last point. Usually, in comedy heist movies, no one gets killed. Somewhere a family is weeping at the death of Mr al-Mabhouh and no one takes any pleasure from that. But the people who die in Mossad operations tend to be, like the Hamas leader, morally compromised. There’s a side to us that acknowledges that some assassins’ victims may have had it coming to them. So we’re appalled, but not so appalled that we don’t look forward with relish to the sequel. Ultimately, this is less about siding with the Israelis than loving winners.

If only we treated the terrorists in Judea, Samaria and Gaza the same way.

Read the whole thing. It's the first thing I've read out of the UK mainstream media in a long time - other than Melanie Phillips columns - that was not overdone with political correctness. Maybe there's something about British women named Melanie that gives them perception and common sense that are lacking in the rest of the British mainstream media?

Israel Matzav: Someone in England admires us

Israel Matzav: Two Fatah operatives arrested in Mabhouh case

Two Fatah operatives arrested in Mabhouh case

Buried in the middle of this Haaretz article are details of the two 'Palestinians' who were extradited from Jordan to Dubai last week in connection with the liquidation of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh.

Haaretz earlier Thursday learned the identities of two Palestinians arrested in Jordan in connection with the January 20 killing at a Dubai hotel.

Ahmad Hasnin, a Palestinian intelligence operative, and Anwar Shekhaiber, an employee of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah, were arrested in the Jordanian capital Amman.

Jordan on Tuesday confirmed it had extradited the two to Dubai.

The two were residents of the Gaza Strip until Hamas seized control there in 2007, a Hamas source told Haaretz.

Both moved to Dubai, where they were employed by a real estate company belonging to a senior official of Fatah, the political faction headed by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

So let's recap. The three suspects who have been arrested are a 'Palestinian intelligence operative' and a 'Palestinian Authority employee in Ramallah,' both of whom were apparently living in Dubai for some time, and a Hamas collaborator in Damascus, who apparently spent some time with Mr. Mabhouh in Dubai on the day he was liquidated.

So why does everyone seemingly assume that the Mossad is responsible for this? Because no one believes the 'Palestinians' are sophisticated enough to pull off the rest of it.

Hmmm.

Israel Matzav: Two Fatah operatives arrested in Mabhouh case

Israel Matzav: Is there a plastic surgeon in the house?

Is there a plastic surgeon in the house?

What do you do if you need to find someone and you have their pictures with someone else's name? If you're Interpol, you put the pictures and the names on the Internet, tell people that only the pictures are real (are they?) and then hope that the group that liquidated the target - Mahmoud al-Mabhouh - doesn't include a plastic surgeon.

The individuals who were charged by Dubai police as responsible for the killing of Hamas commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouhhttp://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=20498788 were tagged with "Red Notices," according to the Interpol's official website.

The website also specifies that Interpol chose to publish the photos of the suspected assassins since the identities the perpetrators allegedly used were fake, using fraudulent passports to aid them in accomplishing their aim.

Oh, and now they're claiming they have retinal scans.

According to Palestinian news agency Ma'an, Dubai police said Wednesday that they hold retinal scans of the suspected assassins, which they plan to publish through international police intelligence service Interpol.

Airport officials carried out routine retinal scans on 11 suspects sought by Dubai when they entered the country in the days before the hit. An unnamed Dubai official said on Thursday that the investigation has now widened, with police seeking a further seven members of the assassination team - making 18 in all.

A retinal scan requires that the person being scanned stand still for 10-15 seconds and costs about $220. I found it hard to believe that the government of the United Arab Emirates routinely scans every person who arrives at the airport in Dubai. But apparently they do. Just one problem: The retinal scans don't match the suspects' names.

Hmmm.

Israel Matzav: Is there a plastic surgeon in the house?

Israel Matzav: Confirmed: Iran enriched uranium to 20%

Confirmed: Iran enriched uranium to 20%

The International Atomic Energy Agency has confirmed that - contrary to American claims - Iran has enriched uranium to the 20% level. Now, the feckless international regulator (whose current chairman inherited this mess from his conniving predecessor) fears that Iran will develop the capability of delivering a nuclear-armed missile.

"We do not believe they have the capability to enrich to the degree they say they are enriching," White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said at last Thursday's daily briefing.

But the IAEA report, a confidential document obtained by the Associated Press, said that Iran had hit 19.8 percent enrichment on two days last week.

"I think the conclusions of the report are consistent with what the secretary was saying in the region this week," State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said Thursday. "We have ongoing concerns about Iran's activities. We cannot explain why it refuses to come to the table and engage constructively to answer the questions that have been raised, and you have to draw some conclusions from that."

The report by the new head of the IAEA, Yukiya Amano, appears to raise greater concerns about Iran's capabilities than the assessments of his predecessor, Mohamed ElBaradei.

"Altogether, this raises concerns about the possible existence in Iran of past or current undisclosed activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile," said the report, according to the AP.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: Confirmed: Iran enriched uranium to 20%

Israel Matzav: Why it might not have been the Mossad

Why it might not have been the Mossad

Here are some weak points in the case that claims that the Mossad was behind the liquidation of Hamas terrorist and arms dealer Mahmoud al-Mabhouh. Tom Gross:

* There seems a very real possibility that Israel is being set up. Airlines keep detailed passenger records these days and anyone could have got the flight manifestos of British and other passport holders who have flown to Israel in the past and then used these names in a deliberate attempt to point the finger of blame at Israel.

* The Dubai authorities have provided no forensic evidence that points to Israel, only a series of photos and videos of random hotel guests who may or may not all know each other. In any event, the persons shown in these photos and videos are not shown committing any crime. It would be very easy to frame Israel, using the identities of six randomly-chosen Israelis based on flight manifestos. This could have been done by anyone – and especially by persons who wanted to avoid being suspected of this action by blaming the Israelis and diverting attention from the real perpetrators.

...

* It is not necessarily a Middle Eastern actor that is behind what The Daily Telegraph called a “ruthlessly efficient assassination” and “a meticulously-planned operation.” In this atmosphere of hypertension, where governments are fighting battles with terror organizations (often clandestinely) in many locations around the world, the intelligence agencies of many countries have created data banks of identities using flight lists and other sources. Persons with longstanding familiarity with intelligence matters tell me that many governments – and not just the European ones – use European operatives to carry out their killings, including in the cases of other previous assassinations in Dubai.

* It would be uncharacteristically stupid of Mossad operatives if they had in fact so easily allowed themselves to be filmed, and Mossad operatives are not stupid.

* Mabhouh entered Dubai on a fake passport and it may have been difficult for the Mossad to follow his footsteps and synchronize any assassination with his travel schedule. But Hamas knew his whereabouts and plans at all times, and so did the Iranians and presumably the Syrians.

I reported earlier that a high-ranking Hamas security officer is being questioned in connection with al-Mabhouh's liquidation, and at least one report indicates that - despite earlier reports that Mabhouh was traveling alone - this Hamas security officer was with him shortly before his death.

Read it all.

Noah Pollak adds:

You, the reader of this post, will be captured on CCTV a dozen times today simply going about your business. The people calling the operation “sloppy” and a “debacle” seem to actually believe that the Mossad is unaware that there are video cameras in airports and hotels today, or that the passport photos of the agents would not be revealed to the public. Really.

More important, the fact of the matter is that the team got into Dubai, rubbed out a bad guy, and got out. No drama, nobody was captured, and nobody knows the real identities of the team or where they are now. Given the extraordinary risk and complexity of the operation, that’s a win in my book. And now the Iranians, Syrians, and their terrorist clients have been given another reminder that their people aren’t safe anywhere — even in the heart of the Arab world.

And as for the people who are whining about “passport fraud” misdemeanors while ignoring the felony staring them in the face: what do you say about the fact that the terrorist in charge of illegally smuggling missiles from Iran to Hamas apparently had an open invite to hang out in Dubai? This isn’t a problem?

Indeed.

More from Soccer Dad here.

Nevertheless, Dubai's police chief, Dahi Khalfan Tamin, has already concluded that the Mossad is responsible, and has called for the arrest of Mossad Chief Meir Dagan. An unnamed 'senior Israeli official' laughed off Tamin's call (Hat Tip: NY Nana).

A senior Israeli official who wished to remain anonymous told ABC News that if Dubai asks for the arrest of Mossad chief Meir Dagan, "They will be the laughing stock of the international police community."

"They obviously don't have a shred of evidence against Mossad," said the official, "and if they push forward they will be ridiculed by every police force around the globe."

Besides, someone better tell Tamin that Dagan has bigger fish to fry.

Israel Matzav: Why it might not have been the Mossad

Israel Matzav: Israeli ambassadors respond to questions on passports

Israeli ambassadors respond to questions on passports

The Israeli ambassadors to the United Kingdom and Ireland responded to foreign ministry questions in their respective postings regarding the use of British and Irish passports in Dubai in connection with the liquidation of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh.

Let's go to the videotape.



I know nothing. I see nothing. I hear nothing.

Heh.

Israel Matzav: Israeli ambassadors respond to questions on passports

Israel Matzav: Hamas leaders poison Hamas leader?

Hamas leaders poison Hamas leader?

In my previous post, I reported on the apparent involvement of a senior Hamas security officer in the liquidation of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai. Apparently there's more infighting in Hamas. Elder of Ziyon reports that a senior Hamas leader was rushed to Gaza's Shifa Hospital shortly after he was visited by several other senior Hamas leaders. The victim is clinically dead; apparently he was poisoned.

Hmmm.

Israel Matzav: Hamas leaders poison Hamas leader?

Love of the Land: Is Barack Obama the Last Best Hope of Hamas?

Is Barack Obama the Last Best Hope of Hamas?

Jonathan Tobin
Contentions/Commentary
18 February '10

Barack Obama’s belief in “engagement” with America’s enemies hasn’t worked out too well with Iran but that doesn’t stop his No.1 fan at Time magazine from encouraging the president to try his luck with Tehran’s ally Hamas. That’s the upshot of Joe Klein’s lament, in which he criticizes Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s tough talk with the Arab world at the Brooking Institution’s U.S.-Islamic World Forum in Qatar. Klein, along on the junket with Hillary, wasn’t terribly interested in the secretary’s obituary of Obama’s failed outreach to Iran. But he did have harsh words for her summary of the situation in Gaza, which she rightly blamed on Hamas’s violence. The fate of Gaza, solidly in the hands of Iran’s terrorist proxy, would, she said, have to await a comprehensive settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Indeed, as long as an Islamist rejectionist group controls Gaza, nothing can be done about the place.

That answer pleased neither the Arabs nor Klein. The writer places the blame on Israel for Obama’s acknowledged failure in the Middle East, while ignoring the fact that neither the supposedly moderate Palestinians of Fatah nor the extremists of Hamas have any interest in learning to live with a Jewish state, no matter where its borders are drawn.

Yet rather than concentrating our energies on preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons — a development that would undermine the security of most of the Arab world as well as present an existential threat to Israel — Klein wants the United States to concentrate its energies on finding a way to lift the partial international blockade on the terrorist state in Gaza.

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: Is Barack Obama the Last Best Hope of Hamas?

Israel Matzav: Hamas collaborator played key role in Mabhouh liquidation?

Hamas collaborator played key role in Mabhouh liquidation?

Authorities in Dubai say as many as six more people may have been involved in the liquidation of Hamas terrorist and arms dealer Mahmoud al-Mabhouh. And that's just among the people who were in Dubai. In Damascus, a Hamas security official is being questioned regarding involvement in Mabhouh's liquidation, while details have started to emerge regarding two 'Palestinians' who were arrested and extradited from Jordan to Dubai in the days after Mabhouh's death - they may be connected to the 'Palestinian Authority.' This is from London's Guardian.

Massoud's name first surfaced in the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Siyasah which quoted "a well-informed source" in Dubai as saying he had been with Mabhouh until he was killed, raising questions about his involvement.

"Hamas suspects that he [Massoud] passed on the information that led to ­Mabhouh's killing," a senior ­Palestinian source told Israel's Ma'ariv newspaper. Massoud, a commander of Hamas's armed wing, the Izzedine al-Qassam brigades, fled from Gaza to Egypt where he was detained but released in late 2007, to the fury of the western-backed Palestinian Authority, run by Hamas's rival, Fatah.

JPost adds:

The PA in past years accused Massoud of being behind the assassination of Col. Muhammad al-Musat, commander of the PA's Military Intelligence Force in the northern Gaza Strip.

Massoud was also wanted by Israel for his role in a series of terror attacks. Two of his brothers, Khaled and Tito, who were also members of Hamas, were killed by the IDF.

The Times of London has managed to put together the most detailed chronology of the liquidation that I have seen yet (is there no other news to report in England?).

Security footage of the killers’ movements during the afternoon, released by police in Dubai yesterday, underlines the professionalism of the operation. The group switched hotels several times and wore disguises including false beards and wigs, while surveillance teams rotated in pairs through the hotel lobby, never hanging around for too long and paying for everything in cash.

Folliard and another member of the party carrying an Irish passport in the name of Kevin Daveron were operating as spotters on the second floor of the hotel when the murder was committed. Both switched hotels that afternoon and dressed smartly to pose as hotel staff. The bald Daveron donned a dark wig and glasses, while Folliard appears to have removed a blonde wig to reveal dark hair.

Throughout the operation, none of the suspects made a direct call to any another. However, Dubai police traced a high volume of calls and text messages between three phones carried by the assassins and four numbers in Austria where a command centre had apparently been established.

To co-ordinate their movements on the ground, the team used discreet, sophisticated short-range communication devices as they tracked their victim.

Al-Mabhouh touched down in Dubai at around 3pm from Damascus to arrange a shipment of weapons to Gaza. Hamas has not explained why one of its senior commanders, a marked man with several assassination attempts against him already, should have arrived alone without any security.

Clearly, though, his mission was compromised long before his arrival in Dubai. The assassination team were waiting for him at the terminal. CCTV footage shows al-Mabhouh passing within metres of one of his killers. As the Hamas commander approaches the taxi rank outside the terminal, a spotter from the team can be seen sidling into shot behind him, speaking on a mobile phone to confirm the Palestinian’s arrival.

Read the whole thing. James Bond could not have done it better.

Israel Matzav: Hamas collaborator played key role in Mabhouh liquidation?

Israel Matzav: Overnight music video

Overnight music video

Here's Yaakov Shwekey at the Los Angeles Purim fest 2009. When he starts singing (around the 1:45 mark), he' singing a song from the Grace After Meals in which we ask God to provide us with our sustenance so that we have no need to be embarrassed by having to ask others to help us. A great prayer, especially for this economic environment.

By the way, I'm going to guess that most of the people you see on the dance floor are at least somewhat drunk (I've never been to the Los Angeles Purim fest but if it's held on Purim, they're probably drunk).

Let's go to the videotape.

Israel Matzav: Overnight music video

Israel Matzav: The Demon Sheep loves Jihadists

The Demon Sheep loves Jihadists

Remember the Demon Sheep ad? The target of that ad was Tom Campbell, currently the front runner for the Republican nomination for US Senator from California. The ad was put out by Carly Fiorina, the former President of Hewlett-Packard, who is running against Campbell for the nomination.

In a previous post, I noted that Campbell is not a supporter of Israel, and that Fiorina was starting to harp on that. But Campbell's story gets worse. Philip Klein and Jennifer Rubin disclosed on Wednesday that Campbell took campaign donations from none other than Sami al-Arian, who pleaded guilty in 2005 to soliciting contributions for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist organization in the United States. This is from Klein:

I double-checked the Federal Election Commission database, and was able to confirm that on May 2, 2000, Al-Arian made two donations totaling $1,300 to Campbell's Senate campaign. At the time he made the contributions, as he admits in his plea agreement, Al-Arian was engaged in "Conspiracy to make or receive contributions of funds, goods or services to or for the benefit of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a Specially Designated Terrorist..."

In defense of Campbell, one could argue that the donations were made prior to Al-Arian's guilty plea. But with that said Al-Arian was already under investigation by the government in 2000 and his publicly radical views were known. Also, it's kind of random for an Islamic radical in Florida to contribute to a Republican Senate campaign in California. The only other political donations listed from Al-Arian were made to Democrats: David Bonior, Jim Davis, and Cynthia McKinney -- none of them fans of Israel, and in McKinney's case, a 9/11 truther.

...

Later in 2000, Campbell wrote a letter to an immigration judge on behalf of Mazen Al-Najjar, Al-Arian's brother-in-law and collaborator, protesting the fact that the government was going to use classified evidence against him.

Campbell responded to Klein's article and Campbell's response, which Klein reproduces in full, only makes matters worse. Here's Klein's summary of Campbell's response.

Campbell acknowledges not only that Al-Arian donated money to his campaign, but that he visited Al-Arian's brother-in-law (himself associated with Palestinian Islamic Jihad) in prison. Campbell writes that Al-Arian was "instrumental in asking others in his community to contribute to my 2000 Senate run. I have always stated that fact plainly; and I bring it up so no one can claim I am attempting to hide it." At the time, he argues, he was taking a principled stand against the use of secret evidence and indefinite detention.

If you're voting in the California Republican primary, please consider voting for someone other than Tom Campbell.

Israel Matzav: The Demon Sheep loves Jihadists

Love of the Land: Joyce Kaufman. The 7 Reasons to Support Israel

Joyce Kaufman. The 7 Reasons to Support Israel

Channel 1 Images
18 February '10

(Wow! What a speaker!)

At an event commemorating the first full year of weekly rallies in support of Israel held at Broward Boulevard and Northeast Third Avenue in Fort Lauderdale Florida keynote speaker Joyce Kaufman a WFTL 850 talk show host details "The 7 Reasons to Support Israel."

Love of the Land: Joyce Kaufman. The 7 Reasons to Support Israel#links#links#links#links

Israel Matzav: The new US ambassador to Syria

The new US ambassador to Syria

After commenting that he's not sure the US should be sending an ambassador to Syria at all (I believe that they should not be), Max Boot has this to say about new American ambassador designate Robert Ford.

That said, if we are going to send an ambassador to Damascus, it is hard to think of a better choice than Robert Ford. He is currently deputy chief of mission in Iraq, and it was in that capacity that I met with him on my visit to Baghdad last fall. I came away extremely impressed by this career diplomat, who speaks fluent Arabic and has previously served as the U.S. ambassador in Algeria. I realize that State Department Arabists have a checkered reputation — see Robert Kaplan’s fine book on that subject, which makes it clear that too often the Arabists have adopted a “see-no-evil attitude” toward the Arabs while displaying unremitting hostility to the Israelis. Bob Ford isn’t like that at all. I found him to be a singularly shrewd, insightful, and clear-eyed analyst of Iraqi politics. In fact, I left his office wondering why he wasn’t appointed ambassador in place of Chris Hill, who has no background in the Middle East.

Ford will be the best possible American representative in Damascus. I just hope he will not be forced to front for an Obama-esque policy of appeasement. It is possible that after the failure of engagement in Iran, the administration will now redouble its efforts to reach some kind of accommodation with Syria that will enhance rather than diminish the troublemaking capacity of the Alawite clique at the center of Syrian politics.

I know nothing about Ford. But I am almost positive that he will be asked to front for a policy of appeasement in Damascus. And I question whether any State Department Arabist can or will give Israel a fair shake.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: The new US ambassador to Syria

Israel Matzav: The West covers for the 'Palestinian Authority'

The West covers for the 'Palestinian Authority'

I have discussed the 'Palestinian' corruption scandal exposed by whistleblower Fahmi Shabaneh (pictured), including its related sex scandal, several times over the last few weeks.

The last six and a half minutes of this video interview with Caroline Glick discuss the 'Palestinian' scandal. I urge you to watch the video, but here are some highlights you may not have heard (and have not read) in my posts linked above.

First, surprise, surprise, the woman that Rafiq Husseini was trying to force to have sex with him was a Christian. It's doubtful whether a Muslim woman would have been treated with such contempt (maybe they would have, but they would have been murdered afterward for 'honor').

Second, your tax money is funding prostitution rings and palatial villas for inciters of anti-Semitism who run the 'Palestinian Authority.'

Third, the American and European media weren't interested in the story, and would not publish it, because they would have lost their access to the 'Palestinian Authority.' So the story was exposed in the Israeli media instead.

Khaled Abu Toameh, who broke the story, notes that the 'Palestinians' are blaming Israel for trying to undermine Abu Bluff by exposing the scandal.

Blaming Israel and the Jews for everything that goes wrong has long been the accepted norm in the Arab and Islamic world. This is how Arab dictators divert attention from the real problems at home. If the economy in an Arab country is bad, then it’s because of Israel and the Jews. If there is no democracy and stability, then its Israel’s and the Jews’ fault, too.

Rafik Husseini was caught with his pants down in the bedroom of an Arab woman and, of course, it’s the Jews’ fault. Never mind that he was caught red-handed soliciting sex from the woman by members of his own security forces, who also filmed him while he was bad-mouthing Abbas and his predecessor, Yasser Arafat. Instead of responding to the charges made by Shabaneh, the Palestinian Authority rushed to accuse him of “collaboration” with Israel. The official Palestinian version is that the Israeli government had recruited the whistle-blower to incriminate Abbas because of his refusal to return to the negotiating table with Israel.

So what if Shabaneh has all the evidence to prove that he was acting on direct instructions from his boss, Tawfik Tirawi, former head of the Palestinian General Intelligence Service. And so what if Abbas knew about the sex scandal more than a year ago, when Shabaneh presented him with all the material he had collected during his work as head of the anti-corruption unit in the Palestinian security forces? If anything, the “Fatahgate” scandal shows that the Palestinian leadership is not different from the rest of the Arab world’s dictatorships. Under these regimes, the authorities often seek to discredit critics and political opponents by accusing them of working for the Israeli enemy.

Instead of coping with charges of corruption, Arab rulers and governments find it easier to direct a blaming finger at Israel. This anti-Israel incitement has resulted in the emergence of an entire generation or two of Arabs and Muslims who are convinced that Jews are behind all evils and should therefore be fought against or even eliminated.

And Obama thinks he's going to have a 'peace process' with these people? You've got to be kidding.

Israel Matzav: The West covers for the 'Palestinian Authority'

Chester Chronicles - An American Muslim Hero: Dr. Ali Alyami

Chester Chronicles - An American Muslim Hero: Dr. Ali Alyami

DoubleTapper: IDF Women

IDF Women

DoubleTapper: IDF Women

Israel Matzav: Regime change the only answer in Iran?

Regime change the only answer in Iran?

Davis Lewin argues that regime change is the only answer in Iran and has been for the last 30 years.

To call for regime change is neither simplistic nor imperial. For those of us blessed with freedom, it is a mere resignation to hard truth in the face of oppressive evil. For those Iranians with their throats under the boot of the Basij - the mothers, fathers and children choking on Khomeini's self-serving fantasies - it is bravery beyond what we could know.

No deal must be struck with the Mullahs. The Islamic regime's hegemonic desires will not be allayed by treaty, and the West must never betray the people of Iran by legitimising the very leaders they are - in too many cases literally - dying to shake off.

A question remains only over the means, not the necessity. Regime change is the only option to deliver the change the Iranian people both desire and deserve.

Iran needs America's help to achieve change its sons and daughters can believe in.

I'm all in favor of regime change in Iran. And as between Ahmadinejad and Khomeni on the one hand and anyone else on the other hand, I agree that the Iranian people are likely better off with anyone else. I'm just not convinced that regime change is going to end Iran's nuclear weapons program. So I'm not banging down any doors to accomplish it.

Israel Matzav: Regime change the only answer in Iran?

Israel Matzav: Napolitano goes into partnership with Islamic terrorists

Napolitano goes into partnership with Islamic terrorists

In the early days of Oslo, when Yasser Arafat wanted to convince everyone that he was fighting terror without fighting terror, he claimed that the best way to stop the terrorists was to turn them into terror fighters. So he made them all 'Palestinian policemen' and put them on the 'Palestinian Authority' payroll. We all saw what a disaster that was when the 'intifadeh' - led by 'Palestinian police' - started in earnest in 2000. Worse, the Israeli security forces cooperated with the 'Palestinians' in joint patrols and information exchanges that blew up in our faces when the 'intifadeh' started. It took four years of terror bombings before the Israeli security forces recovered.

US Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano has been suckered (I hope and not that she's doing it on purpose) into trying something similar. Napolitano met last month with some of the leaders of Islamist terror organizations to try to convince them to 'partner' with the US government. Unfortunately, no, I'm not kidding.

Although there is no evidence of an exchange of classified information, this meeting was the beginning of an Obama administration program aimed at devising a new information-sharing framework with the Muslim organizations — some of them regarded as extremist because of their ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. The group is to meet regularly with DHS senior aides and with Napolitano. This program was imported from the United Kingdom. The Obama administration has decided to replicate the UK program to win over Muslims and to get them to collaborate with the federal government.

Although Matthew Chandler, deputy press secretary and spokesman for Secretary Napolitano, refused to comment on the meetings or identify the groups that attended the two-day session, Pajamas Media has learned the identities of a number of the participants and interviewed them — including those linked to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The program requires bringing in Muslim groups as “partners” in a two-way information sharing program.

It gets worse.

Read the whole thing.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: Napolitano goes into partnership with Islamic terrorists

Israel Matzav: Would the Mossad use Israelis' foreign passports?

Would the Mossad use Israelis' foreign passports?

If the Mossad wanted to liquidate Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, would it have given its agents foreign passports with the names and details of Israeli citizens? Many Israelis who were once part of the security establishment say no, and believe that the fact that those passports were used is a reason to be cautious about blaming the Mossad for Mabhouh's liquidation.

Like Lieberman, Israeli security analyst Ephraim Kam said the use of Israeli identities did not prove the Mossad killed Mabhouh.

"I cannot see a reason why the Mossad would use the names of Israelis here or citizens who live here," Kam said.

Rafi Eitan, a former Cabinet minister and Mossad agent who took part in the capture of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann, thought Israel's foes were trying to frame it by using the identities of Israelis.

"It means some foreign service, an enemy of Israel, wanted to taint Israel. It took the names of Israeli citizens, doctored the passports ... and thus tainted us," Eitan said.

Lawmaker Yisrael Hasson, a former deputy commander of Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency), said he would ask to convene a meeting of the Israeli parliament's powerful foreign affairs and defense committee to discuss the matter.

"No one should use someone's identity without his permission or without his understanding in some way what it is being used for," Hasson told Israel Radio.

...

Kam, the security analyst, said the people whose identities were released could be in danger from Hamas.

"I think they should be careful," he said.

There are an awful lot of people in this country who carry two passports. Including yours truly. Hmmm.

Israel Matzav: Would the Mossad use Israelis' foreign passports?

Israel Matzav: El Al's loss leader

El Al's loss leader

A loss leader is a product sold at a low price (at cost or below cost)[2] to stimulate other, profitable sales. It is a kind of sales promotion, in other words marketing concentrating on a pricing strategy. The price can even be so low that the product is sold at a loss. A loss leader is often a popular article. Sometimes leader is now used as a synonym for loss leader and means any popular article, in other words one sold at a normal price.[3]. Here's El Al's loss leader. Sorry, not New York, LA, London or Paris.

Israel Matzav: El Al's loss leade

Israel Matzav: Iran's Emily Latella moment

Iran's Emily Latella moment

On Wednesday, I reported that Iran had invited UN 'Human Rights Commissioner' Navi Pillay to visit - the first time since 2005 that Iran had expressed a willingness to allow anyone from the 'Human Rights Council' to visit their country. But Pillay said that she is 'too busy' and would not have time to visit before 2011.

At the time, Iran had also invited a torture investigator to visit, but now... never mind....

Iran has backtracked on a pledge to invite a UN torture investigator to visit the country. Iranian officials in Geneva say they rescinded the invitation because Western countries used "poisonous language" at a UN debate Monday on the Islamic Republic's human-rights record.

Iran on Wednesday rejected 43 other recommendations made during the Human Rights Council's first review of its rights record. They included ending discrimination against women, releasing political prisoners and stopping harassment of journalists and bloggers.

Prediction: The 'Human Rights Council' will drop Iran from the agenda and go back to Israel. And Iran will be elected a member of the Council in a few months. Trust me on this.

Israel Matzav: Iran's Emily Latella moment

Israel Matzav: Iran: Clinton takes the military option off the table

Iran: Clinton takes the military option off the table

Remember how Hillary Clinton was the one who was supposed to be tougher on Iran? The New York Times even reported on Tuesday that the Obama administration's 'tougher' line on Iran was more in line with Clinton's views than with those of Obama who favored 'engagement.'

Well, consider this from Clinton's interview on Monday with al-Jazeera:

MR. FOUKARA: So, Madam Secretary, now you are saying there is no plan on the part of the United States to launch an attack? Not in the immediate future, not in the middle term, not in the long term?

SECRETARY CLINTON: We are interested in changing Iran’s behavior and — now, we will always defend ourselves, and we will always defend our friends and allies. And we will certainly defend countries here in the Gulf who face the greatest immediate nearby threat from Iran. But we have pursued a dual track, not a triple track, but a dual-track approach of engagement and potential pressure, and that is what we’re focused on.

More from Abe Greenwald here.

Some of you will look at this and say, "wow, Clinton's softened on Iran too." But the truth is that she has not, and that what she's saying is entirely consistent with what she said during her debate with Obama in April 2008 - if only anyone had been listening.

Take, for example, the different responses from Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama on whether they would view an attack by Iran on Israel as an attack on the United States. (Mrs. Clinton said such an attack would result in “massive retaliation from the United States,” while Mr. Obama said such an attack would be “unacceptable” and would lead him to take “appropriate action.”)

For Clinton, while there always was (and probably still is) a military option on the table, it was retaliatory. For Obama, there was never a military option on the table at all. But neither of them ever supported a pre-emptive attack on Iran that could actually stop the development of an Iranian nuclear weapon.

And 78% of American Jewry voted for the Obama - Clinton ticket anyway. With their eyes and ears closed so that they would not have to even consider voting for a Republican.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: Iran: Clinton takes the military option off the table

Israel Matzav: Brits threaten Israel over passports

Brits threaten Israel over passports

London's Daily Telegraph reports that Britain has threatened to suspend intelligence cooperation with Israel if it turns out that the Mossad stole the identities of British passport holders.

All of the British passport holders whose identities were stolen live in Israel, meaning Mossad would have had ready access to copies of their travel documents.

A senior Foreign Office source told The Daily Telegraph: “If the Israelis were responsible for the assassination in Dubai, they are seriously jeopardising the important intelligence-sharing arrangement that currently exists between Britain and Israel.

“If it transpires that Israel has been using British passports to assassinate its opponents, the British government will need to give serious consideration to any future cooperation.

“Britain has cut ties with Mossad in the past, and will do so again if the Israelis are found to be acting against British interests.”

Britain’s relationship with the Israeli security service reached an all-time low in 1986, when the then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher closed down Mossad’s UK operation in response to a series of incidents including the discovery of a bag of forged British passports which had been lost by a Mossad agent.

Mossad was only allowed to re-establish its presence in the UK after it promised not to abuse British passports in the future.

Its intelligence-sharing relationship with the security services over such sensitive issues as Iran is now more important than ever, but the Foreign Office source said: “In the past Israel has had a reputation for making life difficult for its friends. It is sincerely to be hoped that this is not the case in this instance.”

If the Mossad is behind this, I don't understand why they didn't take dead people's identities. Unless the whole point was for people to look at what happened and say that the Mossad would never do something so 'stupid' as to endanger Israelis this way.

Of course, there's one small catch to this: To prove that it was the Mossad that stole the passports, they would also have to prove that the Mossad carried out the assassination. And so far, it seems unlikely that anyone will be able to do that.

Heh.

Israel Matzav: Brits threaten Israel over passports

Israel Matzav: Sweeter: Shahar Pe'er reaches Dubai semifinals

Sweeter: Shahar Pe'er reaches Dubai semifinals

Sweet - er.

Israeli tennis player Shahar Peer reached the semifinals of the Dubai Open after her Chinese rival Li Na quit in the middle of the second set. Peer was leading 7:5, 3:0.

Recall that last year, they wouldn't grant her a visa to play.

Think Hitler and Jesse Owens. Okay - this isn't being played in Iran, and Pe'er is an Israeli and not a black American, but it's about as close as you're going to get. Well, maybe.

Israel Matzav: Sweeter: Shahar Pe'er reaches Dubai semifinals

Israel Matzav: Change?

Change?

I don't know about the rest of you but I could have (and did) predict this.

Several weeks ago, the chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, discussing his pending legislation for broad-based sanctions, noted that there are “no sanctions strong enough to dissuade the Iranian regime from its nuclear course that would not impinge on the quality of life of average Iranians.” The administration does not even purport that its targeted sanctions would be “crippling” — a word that has disappeared from its vocabulary.

President Obama has yet to deliver the “tough, direct message to Iran” that one of the presidential candidates in the October 7, 2008, debate proposed: “If you don’t change your behavior, then there will be dire consequences,” starting with crippling sanctions – “never taking military options off the table” or providing “veto power to the United Nations or anyone else in acting in our interests”:

… if we can impose the kinds of sanctions that, say, for example, Iran right now imports gasoline, even though it’s an oil-producer, because its oil infrastructure has broken down, if we can prevent them from importing the gasoline that they need and the refined petroleum products, that starts changing their cost-benefit analysis. That starts putting the squeeze on them.

The candidate who promised that approach was Barack Obama, less than a month before he was elected. Sixteen months later, he can no longer muster even the rhetoric, much less the reality, of what he promised. He does not appear to be the person the country thought it knew.

There's no change here. The country was duped. Why didn't you listen when we warned you?

Israel Matzav: Change?

Israel Matzav: Your government radio station at work

Your government radio station at work

It's no secret that Israel's government-funded public radio station is sharply biased to the Left. Still, it's at least somewhat surprising that something as blatant as this happened.

Public radio host Keren Noibach, who hosts the Voice of Israel's main news program, said on air that Israel kills Arabs for no reason.

After the remark caused an uproar, the station demanded Noibach publicly apologize, which she did.

Noibach hosts a program called Seder Yom (agenda) between 8:00 - 10:00 am Sunday, Monday, Wednesday and Thursday. I used to listen to it on the way back from driving the kids to school back in the days when our car radio worked. Note - no other action taken by the government-owned radio station.

What could go wrong?

Israel Matzav: Your government radio station at work

Israel Matzav: Hussain's cover-up

Hussain's cover-up

In an earlier post, I reported on the connection between Rashad Hussain, President Obama's appointment to be his representative to the OIC, the Organization of Islamic Countries, and Sami al-Arian, the former Florida professor who pleaded guilty to being a fundraiser for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terror organization.

Robert Spencer reports that before the story came out, there was a rather clumsy attempt by someone to cover it up (Hat Tip: Pamela Geller).

In 2004, Rashad Hussain, then a Yale law student, declared that the investigation and prosecution of University of South Florida professor Sami al-Arian, who ultimately pled guilty to charges involving his activities as a leader of the terror group Palestinian Islamic Jihad, was a “politically motivated persecution” designed “to squash dissent.”

Journalist Patrick Goodenough of Cybercast News Service reports that Hussain’s remarks in support of Al-Arian were published in the jihad-enabling Washington Report on Middle East Affairs in November 2004. But now all that has gone down the memory hole. The Washington Report’s archived version of this November 2004 article lacks two paragraphs that were included in the original version: the ones quoting Rashad Hussain. Otherwise the article is unchanged.

The Washington Report editors, caught red-handed, decided to brazen it out, and blame their accusers – a tried-and-true tactic that is also frequently employed by jihadists in the West. They insist that there was no cover-up, and anyone who thinks otherwise is a venomous Islamophobe: according to Goodenough, “WRMEA news editor and executive director Delinda Hanley denied there was a ‘cover-up,’ and implied that anti-Muslim discrimination was behind the fact this was now being raised.”

Sure. It’s just “anti-Muslim discrimination” to be concerned about Rashad Hussain’s support for Al-Arian, a vicious suicide-bombing supporter who chanted “Death to America” and “Death to Israel,” and clearly meant it. When two Islamic Jihad suicide bombers killed eighteen people in Israel in 1995, Al-Arian called them “two mujahidin martyred for the sake of God.”

But there was no cover-up! It was all a mistake, you see: according to the Washington Report now, Sami Al-Arian’s daughter, Laila Al-Arian, actually said the words that were attributed to Rashad Hussain.

But this explanation doesn’t make sense, since the article was altered just to remove the quotes, not to change the name of the person quoted. Also, the author of the original story, Shereen Kandil, contradicts the Washington Report’s explanation, telling Goodenough:

“When I worked as a reporter at WRMEA, I understood how important it was to quote the right person, and accurately. I have never mixed my sources and wouldn’t have quoted Rashad Hussain if it came from Laila al-Arian. If the editors from WRMEA felt they wanted to remove Rashad Hussain from the article, my assumption is that they did it for reasons other than what you’re saying. They never once contacted me about an ‘error’ they claim I made.’”

Was the Washington Report covering for Rashad Hussain at its own discretion, or at the behest of someone else? Did Barack Obama himself know about this cover-up? Did someone in the White House or the State Department find out about Hussain’s defense of Al-Arian, and act to cover for the bright young special envoy before this defense was discovered and he became known as a terror apologist?

Read the whole thing. Pamela has some video too.

Scott Johnson notes that Hussain has not denied making the comments (Hat Tip: Instapundit).

What does Hussain say? Hussain does not deny the remarks. A White House official who talked with Hussain on Tuesday said he acknowledged attending the event to discuss civil rights in a post-9/11 world but has "no recollection" when it comes to the comments attributed to him. He has not (yet) sought to explain away the remarks away as a youthful indiscretion. What does Hussain think of Sami al-Arian today? The White House doesn't say.

Scott's co-blogger, Paul Mirengoff, adds:

The striking thing for me is that President Obama made Hussain his deputy associate counsel at a time when, as best I can tell, he had maybe a year of experience as a lawyer (plus some time as a House Judiciary Committee staffer). And now, a year later, he has given Hussain what appears to be a reasonably significant diplomatic-type job.

I guess there's a fast track for Muslim-American lawyers, at least those with connections to Paul Soros [note: also a prominent liberal, Paul is the brother of George; I'm only speculating that Hussain's connection with him is relevant] and sympathy for Palestinian jihadists.

It sounds like Washington has discovered what's known here as Vitamin P (for 'protectzia'). Either that or there's a new affirmative action program for Muslims and they are having trouble filling positions.

Read the whole thing.

Israel Matzav: Hussain's cover-up