Monday, 26 April 2010

PA Factions say No to Peace Talks - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

PA Factions say No to Peace Talks - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

British Ambassador in Yemen OK After Terror Attack - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

British Ambassador in Yemen OK After Terror Attack - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Obama Hosts Muslim Entrepreneurs - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Obama Hosts Muslim Entrepreneurs - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

IDF Kills Long-Wanted Terrorist Murderer in Hevron - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

IDF Kills Long-Wanted Terrorist Murderer in Hevron - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Orlev: Arab MKs Who Visited Libya Can't Serve in Next Term - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Orlev: Arab MKs Who Visited Libya Can't Serve in Next Term - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

IDF Foils Gaza Bomb Attempt - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

IDF Foils Gaza Bomb Attempt - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

A 'Ray of Hope'? Govt. May Approve Gush Etzion Community - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

A 'Ray of Hope'? Govt. May Approve Gush Etzion Community - Inside Israel - Israel News - Israel National News

Chesler Chronicles » I’m Gonna Love You, Come Rain or Come Shine: A NYC Pro-Israel Rally

Chesler Chronicles » I’m Gonna Love You, Come Rain or Come Shine: A NYC Pro-Israel Rally

RubinReports: Is the U.S. Diplomatic and Intelligence Community Being Brainwashed in Dealing with Islamism?

Is the U.S. Diplomatic and Intelligence Community Being Brainwashed in Dealing with Islamism?

Please be subscriber 11,000. Just put your email address in the box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.

We depend on your tax-deductible contributions. To make one, please send a check to: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th Street, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10003. The check should be made out to “American Friends of IDC,” with “for GLORIA Center” in the memo line.

By Barry Rubin

When I first heard the story that President Barack Obama was barring from national security documents the use of terms like "Islamism," "Islamic fundamentalist," "Islamic radicalism," or any reference of any connection between Islam and terrorist or revolutionary groups; al-Qaida, Hamas, and Hizballah; Iran's regime or al-Qaida, I said to myself, oh that's nothing new. That kind of policy started under Bush.

But then I realized--and this isn't obvious in the coverage but is the most important aspect of all!--that this policy applies to internal government documents not just public statements. That's both scary and shocking. Because the implication won't be lost on career officials that along with not using these words it isn't going to help their future prospects to use these concepts.

I don't want to overstate the situation. In internal government discussions, people do refer to "Islamic radicals," for example. It is the written work that is more likely to suffer. And are things going to tighten up under this administration in the years to come?

Suppose I'm an intelligence analyst in the State Department, Defense Department, armed forces, or CIA, and I'm writing about one of these groups or this ideology. How can one possibly analyze the power and appeal of this ideology, the way that ideas set its strategy and tactics, why it is such a huge menace if any reference to the Islamic religion and its texts or doctrines isn't permitted?

Indeed, it is worse. Can you refer to the claims of these groups about Islam, even while insisting that they are wrong? Remember it isn't just a matter of forbidding officials from doing something, they are going to get the signal that it is better for their careers not to do so.

And if one cannot talk about "Islamist" groups can you identify them as a huge threat or is the analyst tempted to suggest that they can be won over and moderated rather than they need to be combatted? Perhaps, say, the coming to power of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt might not be such a bad thing, or Hizballah is something the U.S. government can work with?

How could one even talk about a coherent Islamist movement, which is possibly the most single significant feature of international affairs today, at least in the Middle East--if I cannot use the "I" word even as part of a different word?

Suppose I'm reporting on the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Could I say without fear:

Yes, of course, Islam is a religion of peace but these people want to hijack and distort it. So what they do is look at certain basic texts and important Muslim theologians and interpet their statements to mean that ultimately no compromise is possible, Egypt must become an Islamic [oops] state, America is going to be their enemy, and Israel must be destroyed. Of course, this is just a distortion of Islam [which is a religion of peace] but many people believe it because they have been taught an interpretation similar to the one the Brotherhood is using.

Or would I have to say:

Since Islam is a religion of peace and is really moderate and there's nothing in it that lends itself to a radical [mis]interpretation, therefore, the Brotherhood will realize this and become moderate or the Muslim masses--who, of course, understand their own religion--will inevitably reject the Islamists [oops!] false interpretation. In short, no worries and every little thing's gonna be all right. [Footnote: Bob Marley.]

After all, this is the name of the doctrine that triggers so much terrorism; destroyed the World Trade Center; overthrew the shah of Iran; seized power in the Gaza Strip; is killing American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan; and is trying to mount revolutions in countries as far-flung as Morocco, Algeria, Yemen, and Somalia to India, Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia. Yet that reovlutionary Islamist doctrine itself is exploiting every advantage it can from the fervent belief of millions of people in Islam and the fact that its ideology arguably does coincide with some of that religion's most important features.

In contrast to the "official" view that Islam is a religion of peace which a few heretical desperadoes is trying to hijack, my image is one of a fight over the steering wheel between two rivals which each have a claim to ownership of the vehicle. We know who we want to win, but the battle's outcome isn't going to be determined by pretending that an Islamist ideology doesn't exist or that all the Muslim onlookers are laughing at the ridiculous pretensions of obviously outlandish heretics to their religion. After all, if that's true, the Islamists have no chance of gaining power, right?

But while the Islamists are not "the" or the only embodiment of Islam, they are an embodiment of Islam who can make their case for legitimacy, and must be understood as such. The danger is that the Islamists will in future be accepted as the definers of Islam by huge numbers of people. The Islamists may disillusion people if they become rulers--as did the Communists--but once they have control over a country and its weapons it's too late to debate them into defeat.

I'm less bothered by the fact that the U.S. government won't allow officials to speak that way publicly. There are two arguments for this stance: so as not to "insult" Muslims by associating them with Islamists and to avoid giving Islamists legitimacy as claimants to being normative Muslims. Both have a certain public relations' value but are sort of silly at the same time since many Muslims embrace Islamism while Muslims don't care what non-Muslims think about anyone's credentials. At any rate, these don't apply so much to the phrase "revolutionary Islamist" for example.

Those of us who know how government bureaucracy works understand that officials don't do things that jeopardize their careers and promotion hopes. For example, few in the U.S. army are going to look seriously for budding Islamist terrorists in their own ranks because--despite the Fort Hood massacre--to do so risks being called racist, Islamophobe, and--worse, lieutenant-for-life. And--may I be blunt here?--if officer bureaucrats and officials have to choose between getting into trouble and endangering lives, a lot of them will choose the latter.

For without an ability to discuss these matters frankly, analysis and reporting cannot be accurate. In effect, whole arguments and ideas will be swept from people's minds. Already, the U.S. armed forces is too intimidated (and individuals too concerned about their careers) to examine soberly and seriously the potential development of Islamist terrorists in its own ranks. My sources tell me nothing has improved in this respect since the Fort Hood massacre.

To extend this intellectual malpractice further to international affairs and intelligence reporting within the government may go down in history as the most dangerous thing the Obama Administration has ever done. Imagine trying to analyze the USSR without being able to talk frankly about Communism; Nazi Germany without a serious analysis of its fascism. The analysis of samurai culture and the sanctity of the emperor in Japanese religion were absolutely vital for the U.S. conduct of World War Two.

How can one have a good discussion of what differentiates moderates from radicals or whether, say, Turkey's government is a center-right family-values' regime or an Islamist one? In what manner can somebody understand how a revolutionary Islamist group might quickly pick up support from millions within a country by using Islamic concepts and texts to justify itself in a persuasive manner? How can you figure out how to dispute Islamist claims if you don't even acknowledge their existence and at least partial validity?

The above probably overstates the case. For example, there is still plenty of talk about "Islamic radicals" but very little longer-range or broader conceptualizations of what it all means. If you were a diplomat or intelligence analyst would you write a dispatch or report, for example, saying that the gaining of power in any Middle East country by revolutionary Islamist groups is a threat to U.S. national interests?

Yet the pressure is on for them to treat Islamist regimes and movements as rational, realist, national-interest-oriented, pragmatic entities whose ideas, methods, and behavior have nothing to do with Islam. Or, in the case of al-Qaida and others, the alternative is that they are insane heretical groups that have nothing to do with Islam?

Will officials be intimidated into shutting mouths and minds, altering strategic proposals, censoring out timely warnings? And that is a potential catastrophe for U.S. interests and is possibly going to be very costly in lives lost.

RubinReports: Is the U.S. Diplomatic and Intelligence Community Being Brainwashed in Dealing with Islamism?

RonMossad: Revolution Muslim VS South Park update: converts, tolerance, Ibrahim Hooper and self-responsibility

Revolution Muslim VS South Park update: converts, tolerance, Ibrahim Hooper and self-responsibility

A few updates and additional thoughts on the Revolution Muslim VS South Park saga which is still continuing to develop and still getting no real reaction from anyone important.

First from foxnews.com there is some background information on the group and the guy who allegedly made the threat against Matt Stone and Trey Parker.

From the article:

By all appearances, Zachary Adam Chesser was the boy next door. He played football and was on the crew team at one of the best high schools in the country. He even studied Japanese. He was hardly the sort of boy you'd expect would suggest on a radical Islamic website that the creators of the edgy cartoon series "South Park" will be targeted for death...

Two years later, Chesser is literally a changed man. He now uses an alias and has a new set of hobbies. He now likes to be called Abu Talhah Al-Amrikee, and his primary interest in this world appears to be Islamic radicalism.

Excellent! Another lost soul who converted to Islam because he probably didn't get enough of an education in his own religion/culture from his parents. In fact, if you look at the other public members or former members of the group, they're ALL converts from various religions.

Take this story from The Brooklyn Ink on the founder of the site, a man named Yousef Al-Khattab - born Joseph Cohen:

Born Joseph Cohen, Khattab says he converted to Islam after coming across a Muslim from the United Arab Emirates in a Jewish chat-room while in Netivot, Israel in 1998. Their to and fro on religion lasted two years, and for Khattab, the exchange confirmed previous doubts about Judaism and eventually prompted him to embrace Islam after reading an English translation of the Quran. The exchanges, he says, reaffirmed his belief that rabbis use deception to keep Jews subservient to them...

Ok, terrific! According to Khattab's bio on an Islamic website he was "born to a Secular Jewish family, and at the age of 18 years old decided to look 'deeper' into belief in God," eventually he "entered a Yeshiva and started [his] journey into the Orthodox Rabbinical racist cult." I would highly encourage you to check out the rest of his post before it's inevitably taken down - it is quite the trip. In fact, I'll copy/paste it into the comments section of this article to ensure it never goes away.

As for the guy in the video seen berating people on the streets of New York from the last post, Younes Abdullah Muhammad, there were several references all over the internet to his being a convert as well. For better or worse though, he's done a better job of keeping his pre-terrorism life private.

So what we have here is yet another example of people who were seemingly normal Americans growing up to become significantly ABNORMAL pro-al Qaeda extremists. This is not the first time this topic has been covered here. Back in 2007, I wrote about Daveed Gartenstein-Ross and his journey from secular Jew to radical Muslim to Christian anti-terrorism consultant. And of course by now you're familiar with Adam "Yahiye Gadahn" Pearlman and John Walker Lindh - both Americans, who came from seemingly normal homes but ended up being sucked into al Qaeda.

These (along with the Revolution Muslim guys) are obviously extreme examples the American melting pot gone terribly wrong, but let's be honest with ourselves, you only need to go as far as your nearest college campus to see thousands of young Americans protesting against the very country that gave them the ability to protest it. Obviously, it's not the same thing - but there is this tremendous undercurrent of self-hatred in this country that if left unchecked can turn into outright extremism and death threats against cartoons.

Without exception every single one of these extremists absolutely shatter the absolute myth that in order to become a terrorist you must grow up in a closed, poverty-stricken society. Sorry Chomsky, sorry ANSWER Coalition, sorry International Solidarity Movement, sorry Daily Kos, but none of these guys had their land "stolen" by Zionists. None of these guys were the subject of "evil" American foreign policy. None of these guys were disenfranchised minorities. They were people who were raised in exactly the type of environment you WANT them to be raised in and look what it got them. Look what it got all of us.

Why does this happen? What causes people to go from being normal, often very liberal Americans and turn into something like this?


Declaring jihad against the "Joos" - executives at Tropicana and Minute Maid express serious concerns

It all comes down to the fact that we simply do not prepare our children to deal with the people that would seek to convert and take advantage of them. While it's very good to accept people of different faiths, religions, ethnicities - if you do not make it very clear to your children what YOU believe and what YOU feel they should believe in as well, they're going to be open to someone ELSE who will make it clear to them what THEY think your child should believe in. It's all about the foundation you lay for your children. If you don't provide a strong example for them, someone or something else will. Education starts at the home because the minute your children walk out that door there are literally thousands of people, groups, companies and movements competing for their attention.

You see, there is a limit to tolerance, that when reached it begins to foster intolerance. By tolerating the ability of groups like Revolution Muslim to target your children and convert them to their cause you are allowing the most INTOLERANT people in the world to succeed. And believe me, once that line is crossed, once your child has turned into an Al-Amrikee or a Gadhan not only will you weep for your child that you've lost...you will bear the responsibility for anyone your child's intolerance has brainwashed or assaulted.

The problem with accepting these kinds of groups is that THEY will NOT accept YOU. They will NOT accept the television shows you watch. They will NOT accept your inter-faith dialogues and marriages. The only thing they will tolerate is their own extremist viewpoints and the only time they will accept you is when you've been converted to their cause as well.

We as private citizens cannot do anything about al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, that's a job for the military. We need to do our part here at home by taking responsibility for ourselves and our families. We must provide a strong alternative to extremism by showing our youth that we too have a culture that's deeper than just "Dancing with the Stars" and Walmart.

Finally on the subject of responsibility, at the same time we are taking ownership of our own communities, it is imperative that we call out those people who continually to refuse to do the same for their own communities.

From the original Fox News article on Al-Amrikee:

Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, characterized Revolution Muslim as a loosely-organized group with such outrageous beliefs he believes it may be a "setup" to smear Islam.

"They say wild and irresponsible things periodically," Hooper told FoxNews.com. "There's a strong suspicion that they're merely a setup to make Muslims and Islam look bad. They say such wild and crazy things that you have to wonder."

THIS. Right HERE is where as a society we LOSE. Really Ibrahim? They're "setup" are they? Setup by whom? Why can't Hooper, along with the rest of the terrorist apologists just accept the fact that there are a LOT of Muslim extremists? If Islam is as peaceful a religion as you say it is - then why not CONDEMN these extremists in ISLAMIC terms.

Recently in my non-blogging life, I've come across quite a few Muslims who have presented compelling ISLAMIC cases for why the terrorists are wrong. In fact, just recently the highly respected, internationally-known Shaikh Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri issued a FATWA AGAINST TERRORISM.

Why do people like Hooper and the Council on American-Islamic Relations insist on making excuses instead of following ul-Qadri's example and CONDEMNING people like Revolution Muslim for what they are? I myself have no problem calling out members of the Jewish community that I disagree with and have done so on numerous occasions in the past. What's this guy's problem? Does it have something to do with the fact that like Revolution Muslim, Hooper is himself a convert?

You know how you shut up a religious extremist? You find an even MORE religious guy who disagrees with their views and uses their own religious logic AGAINST them. You certainly don't apologize and make excuses for them or worse ignore responsibility completely by acting as if this is some kind of bizarre conspiracy to defame you! It is very telling and disappointing that a Pakistani cleric is more solid on anti-terrorism than Americans like Hooper.

In fact it is exactly this kind of tolerance of terrorism by people like Hooper that fosters the malaise that drives people like Zachary Chesser and Joseph Cohen to morph into Abu Talhah Al-Amrikee and Yousef Al-Khattab respectively. Actually it's probably what turned "Doug" Hooper into "Ibrahim" Hooper as well. So of course he doesn't know how to handle the extremists - he is a product of the same society that created them and is basically one himself!

In the end what needs to happen if we are going to put a stop to this extremely disturbing trend in our society is the following:

1. We must take responsibility for ourselves and our communities by presenting a very clear vision of what we believe and why we believe it. And if you aren't sure what you believe in yet...don't have children and bring them into your world of confusion.

2. We cannot have any tolerance for nations, communities or people who do not respect our right to live in the way we choose to. Simply saying "it's their culture" provides a justification for their actions and gives extremists like Revolution Muslim the ability to be intolerant towards us.

3. We must DEMAND that other communities take the same responsibility for their actions and police their own the way we are expected to police our own. The same way that it's wrong for a non-Muslim to say "all Muslims are terrorists" is the same way that it is wrong for a Muslim to say "all non-Muslims are must be terrorized". Furthermore, any member or self-declared leader of their community who attempts to justify this position or shirks responsibility for it is no better than the person making that statement.

This is a very basic, very simple concept...you can say and think whatever you want, but the minute you begin forcing your beliefs on others - that is where you cross the line and lose your right to do so. If we do this, if we train our youth to do this we will be arming them against these fanatics and giving them the tools to build the kind of life we wish for them.

But if we don't do this...



Well, the results pretty much speak for themselves.

RonMossad: Revolution Muslim VS South Park update: converts, tolerance, Ibrahim Hooper and self-responsibility

Sunday, 25 April 2010

RubinReports: The U.S.-Israel Crisis May Be Over and We Can "Celebrate" the Achievement of Nothing?

The U.S.-Israel Crisis May Be Over and We Can "Celebrate" the Achievement of Nothing?

Please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.

We depend on your tax-deductible contributions. To make one, please send a check to: American Friends of IDC, 116 East 16th Street, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10003. The check should be made out to “American Friends of IDC,” with “for GLORIA Center” in the memo line.

By Barry Rubin

Something very interesting is happening very quietly. The Obama Administration appears to have forgotten about its quarrel with Israel, even though it is being reported with increasing reliability that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has refused to suspend all construction in eastern or northern Jerusalem outside the 1967 lines. Maybe he has given an assurance to slow things down and avoid anything the U.S. government considers provocative.

Yet the fact is that Netanyahu has not bowed to U.S. pressure in a meaningful way, and the Obama Administration has decided to ignore it and pretend it now has a formula for getting talks going again. Yes, folks, they're coming any moment now. One day.

Goodness, gracious! This administration's great achievement isn't going to be making peace in the Middle East but succeeding in achieving Israel-PA negotiations! I can practically hear the 2012 presidential election ads now: President Obama Got the Israelis and Palestinians Talking!

Sometimes this administration's foreign policy seems like a man who wants a glass of water, exits the building instead of going to the water cooler, gets lost, falls into several holes, narrowly escapes being hit by some cars, and finally arrives home after a very long time. He takes a look at the empty glass in his hand, looks into the camera, and then confidentally announces to the audience: "Now, I am going to get a glass of water!"

A large, albeit diminishing, portion of the audience cheers, while pundits announce that he is really working hard on getting that glass of water, has a terrific strategy, doubt he will soon be sipping away, and everyone sure likes him!

I'm not in the audience booing. I'm shouting: Please, for goodness sakes, pull yourself together and do better!

But I digress. Clearly, for the moment, the White House has realized that it has gone too far. Three different polls show large numbers of Jewish voters saying they are very unhappy with Obama and that Americans as a whole regard the bash-Israel behavior as the most negative aspect of the president's foreign policy. Members of his own party in Congress are revolting against it, as well as against his strategies on Iran and Syria.

Obama no longer "owns" the Democratic party and November elections are looming up to reinforce that lesson by showing Democrats the cost of his mistakes for themselves personally.

And, of course, once again the administration has painted itself into a corner on the "peace process" issue and has nothing to gain.

So now there is talk about all sorts of gimmicks to get negotiations going between Israel and the Paleestinian Authority (PA). I won't go into these since none matter unless actually offered formally. What is important, however, is going to be whether the PA wants to talk, directly or indirectly, as well as whether the administration is going to do anything to push them. Israel has been, and for the last year made it clear, ready and eager to talk.

Perhaps you've heard the expression, "We can do this the hard way or the easy way." The implication is that if the person spoken to decides to cooperate all will be fine but if they don't things can get unpleasant. Despite very occasional exceptions--which usually seem directed at Israel--the Obama Administration does this to itself, chooses the hard way, and still doesn't get anywhere.

Things could have been quite different. A year ago, the White House could have played it smart and been playing host and facilitator for Israel-PA negotiations all this time. Sure they wouldn't produce a lot but would gain a little, kept things peaceful, and make the White House look good. Instead, there's been one mess after another.

For the moment, the government seems to want to move out of Mess Mode. It has Iran to deal with, growing domestic discontent, and an economy that is responding far worse than the media cheerleaders claim. So it needs to back off confrontation with Israel.

Here's what I think, is an extraordinarily important point. The Obama Administration is neither radical satanic nor moderately pragmatic in doing foreign policy. It is rather fettered by a set of ideas, lack of skills, and close-mindedness to criticism that make for an inept approach which is not meeting the needs of U.S. interests. Through action, the Obama administration has not done one big bad thing internationally. The problem stems from its frustrating inactions, misleading words, and dangerous ideas.

What might be called the administration's glamor masks the fact that Obama is in the Gerald Ford-Jimmy Carter-George W. Bush class of president regarding competence. He is not in the Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, etc., category.

Adherents can boast that Obama kept us out of war and unpopularity, though perhaps he is laying the basis for such things in future, as tends to happen when international affairs are not well conducted.

So the great Jerusalem construction affair seems to be over. But where does that leave us? After a lot of shouting and wandering around, right back at the beginning.

Thanks for reading this far. Since this is a long article, you can stop now or continue on to:

Optional satirical section with clever ending:

Or, in the words best sung by Tennessee Ernie Ford (albeit slightly altered here) in that great coal-mining song, "Sixteen Tons":

You wait sixteen months
an' what do you get?
Another month wasted, enemies stronger yet.
Ahmadinejad don't you get nukes cause I can't do,
Anything effective to prevent you!

There is another verse which, left in the original words of the song, give some good advice about an important part of conducting foreign policy. Some have depended too much on this approach but the Obama Administration would be well-advised to add it to its repetoire (and also thing of using it against enemies rather than friends):

"Well, if you see me comin',
better step aside.
A lotta men didn't, an' a lotta men died.
One fist of iron, the other of steel.
If the right one don't get you,
then the left one will."

Yes, the "left" fist of America, that is liberal Democrats historically, knew how to be tough on enemies and stand up for U.S. interests, too. What's really important in this regard is not that the president of the United States be a white man or a black man, a glib man or an inarticulate man, or even a man at all (in gender terms). What's necessary in a time like this is that the chief executive be a Truman.


RubinReports: The U.S.-Israel Crisis May Be Over and We Can "Celebrate" the Achievement of Nothing?

Friday, 23 April 2010

Israel Matzav: Sabbath music video

Sabbath music video

Here's Yaakov Shwekey singing Eisheth Chayil, the song we sing on Friday night to our wives (it translates "Woman of Valor").

Let's go to the videotape.



Shabbat Shalom everyone.

Israel Matzav: Sabbath music video

Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations: An Odd Rumor About America's Jews

An Odd Rumor About America's Jews

A fellow I know who is normally a reasonable chap, well respected in his profession, good sense of humor but serious when called for, politics a bit to the left of what intelligent folks ought to think but generally an upright citizen, recently told me a very outlandish tale. He insists it's true, and claims to have seen part of the documentation.

Apparently someone did a large survey not long ago and found that about one third of American Jews, i.e. more than one and a half million people, might consider moving to Israel; of that third, a third (so, a number above 500,000) would be actively willing to discuss how such a move might be realized. The Jewish Agency knows about this survey, but is keeping mum rather than running with it, out of fear their donors will be peeved, since many of the donors wish to strengthen American Jewry, not see Jews move to Israel.

How plausible is any of this? Not very, to my mind. Over the past 62 years there probably haven't been 100,000 American Jews who moved to Israel and stayed. It's a free country (both), so if they wanted to, no one would stop them; even Icelandic volcanoes don't get in the way since it's possible to fly further south. I rather doubt there are 500,000 American Jews who give much thought to Israel in their daily lives; 1,500,000 willing to consider moving here sounds outlandish; even more so as at least 75% of American Jews have never visited Israel, ever.

It doesn't make sense - even though we do have cheap universal health care that keeps Israelis alive (statistically) longer than Americans. The part about the Jewish Agency suppressing the survey, though, for fear of causing a rumpus: that part is of course easily believable. The Jewish Agency is not the force it once was, when David Ben Gurion was its boss.

So that's the story. If any of you can add anything to substantiate or disprove this new urban legend, feel free. Even if not, perhaps the mere spreading of the legend will make people think about it.


Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations: An Odd Rumor About America's Jews

Elder of Ziyon: Jew-hating blogger kills wife, self

Jew-hating blogger kills wife, self

Once upon a time, when I would browse hate sites for easy blog material, I came across someone named Curtis Maynard.

Back in 2006 Maynard wrote an explicitly anti-semitic article for Mathaba.net. I also have posts about a pseudo-scholarly article justifying Jew-hatred he wrote for "The People's Voice."

His repertoire didn't end there, of course. He wrote for such esteemed outlets as Vanguard News Network and Rense.

Not surprisingly, his bizarre mindset affected his personal life as well, and when his wife sued him for divorce, he created blogs about her as well. (Also, his wife was Mexican, and his white-power friends had a field day making fun of him for that. I also see mention that he claimed to get STDs from his wife - and he posted pictorial proof on his wife-hate blog. Yecch.)

During the divorce drama, one of the people who followed bigots like Maynard in a forum wrote: "I would not be surprised if Maynard loses it and decides to go on a "spree" and harms a bunch of innocent people."

The dude was a prophet.

A couple of days ago, this pathetic excuse for a human being killed his wife and, during a police chase, killed himself:

LAKE JACKSON - A battle between divorcees turned deadly Wednesday night in Lake Jackson when a man killed his ex-wife and wounded his ex-step-daughter, then killed himself, police said.

Neighbors reported hearing shots fired at about 8:20 p.m. Wednesday in the 100 block of Post Oak. While Lake Jackson Police were en route, they learned that two people had been shot and the shooter had fled in a vehicle that was being followed by one of the neighbors.

The pursuing neighbor led police to their location with updates on his cell phone, officials said. The chase ended when the shooter – identified as 42-year-old Curtis Maynard – turned the gun on himself while driving, police said.

Officials said Maynard's vehicle left the roadway, swerved back and struck another vehicle, then came to rest on the opposite side of the highway at 499 Highway 288 North.

Back at the home in the 100 block of Post Oak, investigators found two victims. Maynard's ex-wife – 34-year-old Melissa Meza – was dead with multiple gunshot wounds, police said. Meza's 16-year-old daughter was also shot. She was life-flighted to Memorial Hermann Hospital in critical condition, police said. According to officials, her condition had stabilized Thursday.

I feel sorry for the wife and step-daughter as well as the other kids who were in the house.

Maynard's death doesn't bother me one tiny bit.

(h/t BEAJ, who was the subject of another of Maynard's rants on Rense. Sorry, I will not link to Rense.)



Elder of Ziyon: Jew-hating blogger kills wife, self

Elder of Ziyon: PalArabs skeptical about Hamas/Fatah unity

PalArabs skeptical about Hamas/Fatah unity

Even though there are regular stories in the Palestinian Arabic press that Hamas and Fatah are close to reconciliation, they are all a sham, according to Palestine Today.

For years now there have been regular stories about Hamas and Fatah being close to a deal, sometimes facilitated by Egypt or Turkey. Leaders of both movements have also publicly said that a unification deal is very close, all while blaming the other side for their intransigence.

The newspaper says that while there are regular "leaks" about secret meetings between the two sides, they are only made for media consumption and reflect wishful thinking rather than reality.

PalToday also interviews the editor of Ma'an, Nasser al-Lahham, who says that the Palestinian Arabs are not fooled and quite aware that real conciliation between the two sides is "almost impossible."

al-Lahham said that he doesn't want a unification agreement - he wants elections that would determine who should lead the Palestinian Arabs, as neither side has any legitimacy and both of them remain in power through force, not through popular will.

Palestinian Arab territory-wide elections, of course, are not happening any time in the foreseeable future.

It's really sad that such obvious facts - a major elephant in the room that is a prerequisite to any peace agreement - are continuously skated over by the West in their quest for the holy "peace process" that has nothing to do with peace.



Elder of Ziyon: PalArabs skeptical about Hamas/Fatah unity

Elder of Ziyon: Jenny Tonge quits Palestine Telegraph over KKK video

Jenny Tonge quits Palestine Telegraph over KKK video

From The JC:

Baroness Jenny Tonge has withdrawn her patronage of the Palestine Telegraph after the paper posted a video of former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke claiming that Israel is a terrorist threat to America.

The LibDem peer has often been attacked for her patronage of the Palestine Telegraph, which has previously linked IDF doctors to organ theft in the aftermath of the Haiti earthquake.

Baroness Tonge’s name has been removed from the website. Press TV journalist and sister of Cherie Blair, Lauren Booth, Respect MP George Galloway and Luisa Morgantini, Vice President of European Parliament all remain patrons. The former LibDem MP is believed to have emailed the newspaper to say that she no longer wishes to be a patron.

The video, featuring Mr Duke, an American white nationalist, with the headline “Israel’s terror against America”, was on the front page of the Palestine Telegraph’s website.

Mr Duke has published two antisemitic books, one of which is titled Jewish Supremacism: My Awakening on the Jewish Question.

Matthew Harris, the Lib Dem candidate for Hendon said: “I have received definitive confirmation that Jenny Tonge has emailed the Palestine Telegraph stressing that she no longer wishes to be a patron.

I briefly followed a blog war between Peter Eyre of the Palestine Telegraph who is convinced that Israeli soldiers steal organs from Palestinian Arab children and the Harry's Place blog, which appears to have been the first to notice the David Duke video. I posted a link to the TongeLashing website in the comments to explain to Mr. Eyre why the blood-libel accusations are absurd, but for some reason they never posted my comment.

Instead, they posted a comment that says that the Talmud allows Jews to kill Gentiles with impunity and that Jews were behind the Armenian genocide.

Nice!



Elder of Ziyon: Jenny Tonge quits Palestine Telegraph over KKK video

Elder of Ziyon: Friday Quickies

Friday Quickies

I am not as enamored of the "Palestinian Zionist Organization" as others seem to be. From what I can tell, it is one guy with a website, and hardly the harbinger of major change.

Similarly, the new book "Cracking the Quran Code" that finds Quranic support for Jewish claims to Israel might be embraced by many Zionists but to me it is like Arabs using the Neturei Karta as proof that the Torah is against Zionism. The Quran has many contradictory passages and if the vast majority of Muslim scholars disagree violently with the book's thesis, it is not going to change any minds. (Although I would love to see Islamic scholarly criticisms of that book.)

Plenty of people are discussing the newly-censored South Park Mohammed episode. It's in my queue to watch the entire thing; so far I've only seen bits and pieces.

The “Zionist Hindu Crusader” Alliance Marches On

Israellycool reveals the secret Zionist war against the animal kingdom. Apparently, we arrest cats and donkeys.

NY senator Chuck Schumer piles on to the criticism of the White House policy towards Israel, the most prominent Democrat to do so.

A Quinnipiac University poll shows that Americans don't think that Obama is handling Israel very well, and two-thirds of Jews don't approve of the administration policies on Israel. Jonathan Tobin comments here and Jennifer Rubin is upset at the number of Jews who still support Obama.

Guess where Mahmoud Abbas will spend this weekend? At the Fatah Revolutionary Council meeting! Just the thing you would expect from a moderate, pro-Western peace partner.

Some Brandeis University students are criticizing the choice of Israeli ambassador Michael Oren as the commencement speaker this year.



Elder of Ziyon: Friday Quickies

Elder of Ziyon: Prominent sheikh says other sheikhs suffer from mental disorders

Prominent sheikh says other sheikhs suffer from mental disorders

Sheikh Ahmed Kubaisi, whose Friday sermons out of Dubai are watched by tens of millions of people, has stated that some of the more recent rulings of other sheikhs show that they have mental disorders.

He specified the Saudi cleric Yousef al-Ahmed, who called for the destruction of the Grand Mosque in Mecca because men and women are together.

He also mentioned Sheikh Mohammed al Areefi who said he would go to Jerusalem to broadcast his show before caving to pressure to cancel his plans.

Interestingly, he also said that the minaret ban in Switzerland was no big deal, as minarets are not obligatory under Islamic law.

In the same interview he also said that the "torment of the grave," an expression of Islamic hell or purgatory, is not literally taking place in the ground but rather in the afterlife.

Finally, he stated (if I am reading it correctly) that misyar marriages are not only permissible but admirable as they reduce spinsterhood.

Misyar marriages are marriages where the bride voluntarily gives up on some of her marriage rights. While it appears to be permissible under Islamic law, it has been abused in some places as de facto prostitution.


Elder of Ziyon: Prominent sheikh says other sheikhs suffer from mental disorders

Elder of Ziyon: Who paid for Mabhouh's 5-star hotel room?

Who paid for Mabhouh's 5-star hotel room?

Forbes' Claudia Rosett asks a good question:

When I dropped by the Al Bustan Rotana during a recent trip to Dubai, it struck me that the luxuriousness of the hotel has not been fully conveyed. That matters. The opulence with which al-Mabhouh surrounded himself on his fatal trip underscores some big unanswered questions, not about the alleged killers (whose trail has received plenty of official attention) but about al-Mabhouh (whose doings in Dubai have yet to be explained).

Al-Mabhouh was, after all, a senior member of Hamas--a Palestinian organization that expects of its underlings an austere dedication to Islamic law and tutors them to sacrifice everything for such Hamas charter causes as the destruction of Israel. Al-Mabhouh, like a number of other Hamas leaders, was based in Damascus. But he was a big cog in a Hamas system that in 2007 seized complete control of Gaza and with the backing of Iran has made it a priority to saturate Gaza with weapons, while the population lives in poverty...

When al-Mabhouh arrived in Dubai from Damascus on Jan. 19, it seems that austerity was not on his agenda. He checked into a plush hotel, geared to cosmopolitan pleasures. Though rates fluctuate with the season, rooms at the Al Bustan go for hundreds of dollars per night, sums that for the average resident of Gaza would represent quite a windfall.

Guests of the Al Bustan enter a huge marble-floored lobby, with a lofty atrium, tiled fountains and indoor palm trees. The arcade sells designer clothes. Restaurants on the premises offer everything from pan-fried Hokkaido scallops to "the most tender cut of corn-fed beef."

How was al-Mabhouh paying for his five-star lodgings in Dubai? That may be the least of the questions pertaining to his activities. But let's start somewhere. Could the UAE authorities please enlighten us on such basic matters as how al-Mabhouh arranged to pay for his luxury stay on their turf, what he did there and whether he had visited before? And with all the resources of the Arab League now on the case, would it be too much to ask for full details--whether from Damascus, Dubai or anyplace else that played host to al-Mabhouh--of who was picking up the tab for his travel, and why?


UPDATE: Commenter Sshender asked whether this hotel was not that expensive in comparison with other Dubai hotels. I just did a quick check and the al-Bustan Rotana is relatively inexpensive for a five-star hotel - mid week rates are about $180 a night. On the other hand, other 5-star hotels range from $100 a night to well over $1000. And Dubai does have budget hotels at around $50 a night.


Elder of Ziyon: Who paid for Mabhouh's 5-star hotel room?

Netanyahu Reassures Public: No Freeze in Jerusalem - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Netanyahu Reassures Public: No Freeze in Jerusalem - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

US Envoy Mitchell Makes Surprise Visit - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

US Envoy Mitchell Makes Surprise Visit - Politics & Gov't - Israel News - Israel National News

Report: PA Forces Turn to Hamas - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Report: PA Forces Turn to Hamas - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Washington Think Tank Predicts New Mideast War - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Washington Think Tank Predicts New Mideast War - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Report: Egypt Asks UN to Pressure Israel on Nukes - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Report: Egypt Asks UN to Pressure Israel on Nukes - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Does the World Need Another 9/11 to Wake Up? - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Does the World Need Another 9/11 to Wake Up? - Defense/Middle East - Israel News - Israel National News

Ed Koch Predicts Anti-Democrat 'Tsunami' in November - Jewish World - Israel News - Israel National News

Ed Koch Predicts Anti-Democrat 'Tsunami' in November - Jewish World - Israel News - Israel National News

RonMossad: South Park and Revolution Muslim: Freedom of Speech suicide bombed by Muhammad again

South Park and Revolution Muslim: Freedom of Speech suicide bombed by Muhammad again

Wow.

There sure have been a lot of changes in this country over the past couple of years. We have nationalized banks, nationalized car companies, nationalized health insurance and pretty soon it looks like nationalized stock trading as well. We have an administration that has significantly altered the USA's approach to the Middle East...in a way that they now regularly make demands of sovereign, democratic allies while giving hostile, terrorist entities a free pass. The America we live in today is a vastly different place than it was just two years ago.

And now we have entered the realm of speech as well.

If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.
--George Washington


One week ago, the creators of South Park aired their 200th episode. In the episode they attempted to poke fun at the ridiculous idea that you can make fun of every topic, every human being, every leader, every celebrity, every religious figure...everyone except for the Prophet Muhammad.

South Park's relationship with the Prophet goes back a while...he actually appeared in an episode from nine years ago that involved many major religious figures or gods (think Jesus, Moses, Krishna) teaming up in as Power Rangers-style super heroes and fighting crime. Then, in a rather brilliant statement on censorship and Muhammad, the created a storyline where al Qaeda threatens to attack the United States if an image of Muhammad is aired on Family Guy. In the end, the terrorist "retaliation" turns out to be one of the most insane segments of television ever aired, as Jesus, George W. Bush and several stereotypical Americans are shown performing some pretty disgusting acts.


WARNING: THE FINAL MINUTE OF THIS IS PRETTY GRAPHIC AND DUE TO ITS CONTENT SHOULD NOT BE VIEWED BY ANYONE



Personally, I thought it was a very funny and poignant statement on how absurd we'd gotten in this country when one religious figure (as well as the president and the American flag) can be the subject of some (literal) toilet humor while another one isn't even allowed to be shown at all.

At the time, the scene with Muhammad did not air. Instead the screen went dark and said that Comedy Central (the channel that airs South Park) refused to allow an image of Muhammad on their network. At the time it aired - which was in the wake of the Muslim cartoon riots - it looked like an elaborate joke. Unfortunately though, it wasn't...Comedy Central gave into intimidation. Furthermore, it appears at this time that they've forced South Park to take down the streaming access to the original "Super Best Friends" episode from 2001 that had the Muhammad character.

Well, last week South Park was at it again. This time, to get around the censorship issue, they decided to hide Muhammad in a giant bear costume. Unfortunately for our old lunatic friends from revolutionmuslim.com this wasn't good enough and they responded with the following statement:

"We have to warn [South Park creators) Matt (Stone) and Trey (Parker) that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show,"

Theo Van Gogh for those keeping score at home, was murdered by an Islamic extremist for speaking out against the awful treatment of women in majority-Muslim countries. Essentially, the Revolution Muslim people were telling Parker and Stone that if they followed through with showing Muhammad in the next episode, bad things would be visited upon them, Allah-willing. To further drive the point home, they included an address where you could find the duo.

Also for those keeping score at home, this is the second time this site has had to deal with these Revolution Muslim fanatics. These are the same people that applauded Nidal Malik al-Hasan as a hero for blowing away his friends and co-workers during the Fort Hood terrorist attack.

So, all eyes were on South Park this week to see what would happen. Would Comedy Central again give in and try to appease a bunch of radical Muslims?

Unfortunately, when this week's episode aired, not only was Muhammad's image not shown but any mention of the word "Muhammad" was bleeped out. And at the end of the episode, an entire speech from one of the characters about the situation was also bleeped out.

This

is

a

DISGRACE.

What has happened to us? How isn't the entire country in a massive uproar today? This is not a matter of South Park being "Islamophobic" or somehow targeting Muslims...their entire M.O. is to satirize anything and everything in society. Religious figures, political figures, celebrities, silly fads and social issues of every possible type have been targeted over the show's 14-season run. Even MUHAMMAD HIMSELF was playfully mocked before the pre-9/11 fear-fest that has descended upon the world.

In fact, here in no particular order is a non-comprehensive list of the topics South Park has mocked in the past that have not resulted in barely-veiled death threats:

Jesus. Moses. Mormons. Scientologists. George W. Bush. Bill Clinton. John McCain. Barack Obama. Saddam Hussein. The devil. God. Heaven. Hell. The war in Iraq. Osama Bin-Laden. The anti-war protesters. The pro-war protesters. Rednecks. Mormons. Tom Cruise. Rosie O'Donnell. Movies that deal with time travel. 80's movies. Action movies. Japanese people. Pokemon. Catholics. Santa Claus. The Pope. The Catholic League. Jews. Judaism. Jewish mothers. Black people. Former cast member Isaac Hayes. Women. Men. Old people. Gay people. Straight people. Metrosexual people. Republicans. Democrats. Mexicans. Americans. Canadians. Orphans. Paris Hilton. Girls who like Paris Hilton. Mel Gibson. Child molestation. Chinese people. Young people. Michael Richards. Gary Condit. Steroids. The Special Olympics. Religious fanatics. Ethiopians. Sally Struthers. And on. And on. And on...

But Muhammad isn't allowed to be even just be shown on-screen??

What is going on here?! Honestly...how can we let this happen to our country and our society? How can we let one group, just one group dictate to us what we are and aren't allowed to talk about? Where is the outrage? Where are the liberals? Where is the ACLU? Moderate Muslims? Congress? The President? Anyone???

Several months ago, I wrote about Michael Savage being banned in Britain also as a result of some controversial things he has said and as far as I know, to this day still no one of any real importance has come to his defense. Here is another example, this time of Americans being censored IN AMERICA due to THREATS of VIOLENCE by OTHER AMERICANS.

This too adds a whole different dimension to the issue - the Revolution Muslim guys are AMERICANS. They live and operate in the New York area where they frequently terrorize locals (especially people who they perceive as moderate Muslims) with their rantings and ravings against the United States, Israel, Jews, Christians, unbelievers, Obama...you know, maybe they have more in common with South Park than they think...



...or maybe not. This is what we are tolerating everyday on our streets. This is what is dictating our television shows to us now. Are we really going to live like this? Are we really letting this happen?

It is entirely unacceptable and we cannot allow it to continue. But I've already weighed in several times on where this censorship road is taking us...there are only so many ways to say that this is a disgrace without being repetitive.

So here's what I'm going to do - and I encourage everyone else to do the same:





That's an image of Muhammad from the 2001 episode of South Park.





Here it is again.





And again.





And again.




"The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law."
--Declaration of the Rights of Man, Article 11

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
--The First Amendment to the United States Constitution


This is AMERICA for God's sake. We cannot let a bunch of fringe religious fanatics dictate our lives to us.


RonMossad: South Park and Revolution Muslim: Freedom of Speech suicide bombed by Muhammad again

Each Drop is Precious | Tzipiyah.com

drop

Though we just celebrated 62 years since the establishment of the sate of Israel which is definitely a momentous occasion to celebrate, we can’t forget that we are still in a time of mourning. Thousands of years later we are mourning the 24,000 students of Rabbi Akiva that died in a plague. It is customary during this time not to listen to music and have weddings as a symbol of our mourning. Through the ages during this time many other terrible decrees have been made against the Jewish people. It has always amazed me how in Judaism we are constantly trying to keep the balance between times of sadness and mourning and times of joy and celebration. As we see between the mourning of Rabbi Akiva’s students and celebrating the state of Israel. Though thousands of years separate these two events, I think that there is a strong connection between them.

Though Rabbi Akiva tragically lost many of his students, he was still able to rebuild his yeshiva from his five students that were left. His students were not just ordinary students but they were some of the greatest Torah scholars in Jewish history. They were Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Yehudah, Rabbi Shimon, Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Nechemia. It was to their credit that we have the Talmud today. How was Rabbi Akiva able to get over this great loss and rebuild his yeshiva and what can we learn from him? I read an interesting answer to this question. Rabbi Akiva got his strength to continue on teaching Torah to his five remaining students from the same thing that brought him to Torah observance, a single drop of water. The way Rabbi Akiva first began to embrace Torah was when he was 40 years old and one day while he was tending to his sheep, he saw a rock and he noticed a cavity in it. He wondered what was so powerful that could cause this cavity. Then he looked up and saw a drop of water falling from the mountain and he realized that overtime this drop of water had affected the rock. He then reasoned that if a drop of water could make an impression on a hard rock, then so to can Torah penetrate his mind. It was after that incident that Rabbi Akiva began his journey towards living a Torah lifestyle and he eventually became one of the Torah leaders of his generation.

So we can ask why did this incident cause Rabbi Akiva to change his whole life around ?
What was so special about that single drop of water and how did Rabbi Akiva identify with it? When Rabbi Akiva saw what a difference one drop of water made to the rock, he understood how much power and potential each individual has. He realized that what he did and how he reacted to life mattered and how his decisions could affect the world. So when his 24,000 students died he thought back to that day that first gave him strength to take something that before seemed unreachable and impossible and it strengthened him once again to move forward.

Now, fast forwarding thousands of years later lets try to find the connection between Rabbi Akiva and modern times. I believe that just like Hashem gave Rabbi Akiva with the strength to spread his Torah wisdom to his five remaining students, Hashem also provided the Holocaust survivors with the strength and will power to rise above the nightmares they experienced and helped them rebuild their lives in Israel. It was because of each one of the pioneer’s individual will power and perseverance, that we can now celebrate 62 years of the state of Israel. As we celebrate this milestone with joy we can’t forget how Hashem has always and will always help us rise above our persecution and will eventually fully redeem us with the coming of the redemption. May we see it speedily in our days. Amen!



Each Drop is Precious Tzipiyah.com

Love of the Land: Arab Refugees: The Real Story

Arab Refugees: The Real Story


Abba Eban
The Jewish Press
Posted: 14 April '10

Editor's Note: Tuesday, April 20 was Yom Ha'atzmaut, Israel's Independence Day. To mark the occasion, we've excerpted portions of an address by then-Israeli Ambassador Abba Eban to the UN General Assembly's Special Political Committee on November 17, 1958. The speech makes for remarkable reading, as it was written and delivered just ten years after Israel's founding. The events described were still fresh in people's minds; the historical distortions popularized by the ensuing decades' relentless drumbeat of anti-Israel propaganda had yet to gain traction.

The Arab refugee problem was caused by a war of aggression, launched by the Arab states against Israel in 1947 and 1948. Let there be no mistake. If there had been no war against Israel, with its consequent harvest of bloodshed, misery, panic and flight, there would be no problem of Arab refugees today.

Once you determine the responsibility for that war, you have determined the responsibility for the refugee problem. Nothing in the history of our generation is clearer or less controversial than the initiative of Arab governments for the conflict out of which the refugee tragedy emerged.

The origins of that conflict are clearly defined by the confessions of Arab governments themselves: "This will be a war of extermination," declared the secretary-general of the Arab League speaking for the governments of six Arab states, "it will be a momentous massacre to be spoken of like the Mongolian massacre and the Crusades."

The assault began on the last day of November 1947. From then until the expiration of the British Mandate in May 1948 the Arab states, in concert with Palestine Arab leaders, plunged the land into turmoil and chaos. On the day of Israel's Declaration of Independence, the armed forces of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq, supported by contingents from Saudi Arabia and the Yemen, crossed their frontiers and marched against Israel.

The perils which then confronted our community; the danger which darkened every life and home; and the successful repulse of the assault and the emergence of Israel into the life of the world community are all chapters of past history, gone but not forgotten. But the traces of that conflict still remain deeply inscribed upon our region's life. Caught up in the havoc and tension of war; demoralized by the flight of their leaders; urged on by irresponsible promises that they would return to inherit the spoils of Israel's destruction, hundreds of thousands of Arabs sought the shelter of Arab lands.

(Read full article)


Love of the Land: Arab Refugees: The Real Story

Israel Matzav: Overnight music video

Overnight music video

I mentioned earlier this week that the period between Passover and Shavuoth is a period of mourning. The reason is that during this period, thousands of students of the great Rabbi Akiva died. We are told that the reason for their deaths was that they did not internalize the lessons of their great Rabbi: You shall love your friend as you love yourself.

This song combines "You shall love your friend as you love yourself," with another famous saying "All Jews are responsible for one another." It's called "Areivim Kol Yisrael" and it's sung by Yaakov Shwekey.

Let's go to the videotape.

Israel Matzav: Overnight music video

Israel Matzav: From bad to worse in the UK?

From bad to worse in the UK?

There's a general election in England in two weeks. Nick Clegg (pictured) is the leader of the Liberal Democratic party, and is currently leading both Gordon Brown (Labour) and David Cameron (Conservatives) in the polls.

If Clegg wins, the UK's policy on Israel could go from bad to worse:

5. Clegg harbors strong anti-Israeli views.

To describe Clegg as a vociferous opponent of Israel would be an understatement — I’ve written in greater detail on this issue here. Clegg has penned a number of articles condemning Israel’s handling of Gaza, and has been the most prominent British critic of Israel’s response to Hamas attacks. He has alleged that the Israeli government “continues to imprison 1.5 million Palestinians and prevent the rebuilding of its shattered infrastructure,” and supports the U.N.’s use of the highly offensive term “collective punishment.” Clegg has drawn parallels between Israel’s defensive actions and the terrorist campaigns of groups such as Hamas, and has urged the European Union in the past to isolate and even sanction Israel.

What could go wrong?


Israel Matzav: From bad to worse in the UK?

Israel Matzav: Trash talking

Trash talking

As most of you know already, I'm a fan of American team sports. The one thing your coach always tells you is not to talk trash before a game because all you do is get the other team mad and riled up to play. Trash talk before a game is usually a sign of overconfidence.

Iran has been doing some trash talking.

Iranian Minister Ahmad Vahidi said that because of Israel's diplomatic isolation, it is unable to attack Iran.

Vahidi said Wednesday evening that, "Given the political isolation of the Zionist regime, they do not have the courage to attack, and they are unable to open war with our armed forces."

Vahidi is under an international arrest warrant for being responsible for the Jewish Community Center bombing in Buenos Aires in 1994. It would be a pity if something happened to him. Wouldn't it?

Heh.


Israel Matzav: Trash talking

Israel Matzav: Seize the initiative

Seize the initiative

The following is a guest post from Michael Fenenbock.

In Los Angeles recently Daphne and I had an opportunity to breakfast with Martin Sherman.

Professor Sherman has proposed a compelling, workable, pragmatic alternative to 2-State. And his proposal has an eye-catching curtain raiser – get rid of UNRWA.

My view is we must forcefully project an alternative vision of the future, a pragmatic option to 2-state. And now more than ever.

The current state-of-play is alarming. The situation is dire. The threat to the Zionist enterprise from the imposition of 2-State is immediate. The unceasing pressure from the Obama Administration on the Jewish State is myopic. The need to respond is urgent.

Very soon the Obama Administration plans to submit a “peace plan” centered on 2-state and calling for a partition of Jerusalem. They have already sent former President Bill Clinton out front to clear the way. Publicizing Senator Kerry’s negotiation with Damascus to halt a missle allocation to Hezbollah is part of the game plan. Spin designed to neutralize Jewish American resistance to the Obama plan. And President Obama’s smarmy letter to Alan Solow, an Obama supporter and chairman of the Conference of Presidents, of is more of the same.

Believe it. The train to 2-state is roaring down the track and its due date is before the November American election. 2-state is the sin qua non of their foreign policy.

Unless we propose – and seriously market to the world - alternatives to 2-state we will continue be labeled by world opinion as obstructionist.

The stakes could not be higher. If we fail to stop the rush to 2-state we will certainly forfeit the central touchstone of our history our culture and our religion – we will lose Jerusalem.

While differing in detail with alternatives to 2-state advanced by Arieh Eldad and Benny Elon, the important fact is Martin Sherman has placed on the table a rational alternative.

Much of this looming tragedy is of our own making. Leaders in Israel and the Diaspora continue to publicly position themselves as in support of a 2-state solution. The Prime Minister finds himself locked in this in this dead-end trap.

And while I applaud Ron Lauder’s recent statement it repeated the party line on 2-state.

This course of action, saying we are for 2-state, must be reversed.

Those of us who oppose 2-state must make our voices heard and if we do friends will join our fight.

Promoting rational, pragmatic alternatives to 2-state arms us with a powerful political weapon in this battle. It allows us to seize the initiative in the debate. It provides an opportunity to reclaim lost momentum. It means we can go on the offensive.

If we call for an alternative view we will have friends who will stand with us in opposition to the imposition of 2-state. Powerful friends.

I recommend Martin Sherman and his work personally. And I strongly associate myself with the need to present to the world a rational 2-state alternative.

Those of us who are of a disposition to fight 2-state and to do our best to see the culmination of the Zionist dream have a responsibility to our history and a duty to future Jewish generations. We can only benefit by uniting our efforts and pooling our resources.

Standing together it is possible to make our voices heard.

Michael Fenenbock

New York

April 22, 2010

Indeed.

And the biggest argument for two-state - which is a lie - is the so called 'demographic threat.' I've done lots of posts about why that's a lie. Search the archives (mostly under the name "Yoram Ettinger" who has done most of the work on that issue).

Israel Matzav: Seize the initiative

Israel Matzav: "I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you.”

"I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you.”

Dennis Prager cites a reason that many Americans support Israel which many Israelis will find hard to believe: The Bible.

There is a fifth reason tens of millions of Americans, including many conservative commentators, support Israel and worry about America as American support for Israel wanes. To the Left in America and around the world, this reason is dangerous nonsense. But for a vast number of America’s Christians, for many Jews, and even many non-religious conservatives, it is deeper than any military or political reason. The reason is based on a verse in Genesis in which God, referring to the Jewish people, says to Abraham: “I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you.”

One need not be a Jew or Christian or even believe in God to appreciate that this verse is as accurate a prediction as humanity has ever been given by the ancient world. The Jewish people have suffered longer and more horribly than any other living people. But they are still around. Its historic enemies are all gone. Those that cursed the Jews were indeed cursed.

And those who blessed the Jews were indeed blessed. The most blessed country for over 200 years has been the United States. It has also been the most blessed place Jews have ever lived in. Is this a coincidence? Many of us think not.

Those who curse the Jews still seem to be cursed. The most benighted civilization today is the Arab world. One could make a plausible case that the Arab world’s preoccupation with Jew-hatred and destroying Israel is a decisive factor in its failure to progress. The day the Arab world makes peace with the existence of the tiny Jewish state in its midst, the Arab world will begin its ascent.

The converse is what worries tens of millions of Americans — the day America abandons Israel, America will begin its descent.

For years, Israel's talking heads have been telling us not to make the argument that Israel is 'entitled' to Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria because God gave them to us. It seems that all those people were wrong. It goes without saying that I believe that God has given us this land. Unfortunately, it doesn't follow that we get to live on all of it now. We have to behave ourselves. But the Torah forbids giving away whatever parts of Israel God has given us.

Hmmm.

By the way I got this post from a tweet from one of the Lefties I follow (I forget who). It came with a nasty comment. He'll be sorry.


Israel Matzav: "I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you.”
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...