US Ambassador slams conspiracy theorists

And still Egyptian media can not accept reality!

Issandr El Amrani

An editorial by US Ambassador David Welch published in Al Ahram of 20 September has irked Egypt’s journalists and highlighted US displeasure with repeated suggestions that someone other than Osama Bin Laden is behind last year’s attacks on America. The editorial, entitled "Time To Get The Facts Right," denounces the publishing of "incredible conspiracy theories without the slightest bit of evidence to back them up" in both state and opposition press.

"Leading Egyptian newspapers and magazines in the past two weeks alone have published columns by senior columnists who suggested governments or groups other than Al Qaeda were responsible," wrote Welch, urging editors to exercise better judgement. "Sadly, such disregard for the facts in such a serious matter can tarnish the reputation of the Egyptian media in the eyes of the world."

In his piece, Welch said that considering the "voluminous evidence" pointing to Al Qaeda involvement–including a confession by Al Qaeda members aired on Al Jazeera satellite channel–why Egyptian press reports continued to suggest that the US or Israel had staged the attacks were "difficult to fathom." Either Egyptian journalists are incredibly badly informed, he speculated, or they are "simply too upset with American policy on other issues to accept the reality on this one."

A riposte came quickly the next day, when a group of journalists, cartoonists and other "intellectuals" issued a joint statement calling Welch’s article "an American call for imposing restrictions on press freedom." They also asked the ambassador (whom they think the Bush administration should withdraw from Cairo) to "invite American mass media to seek facts and stop seeing the region through Israeli eyes only."

The US ambassador also took a swipe at AUC economics professor Galal Amin, although without naming him.

"A leading Egyptian professor of sociology, in a public lecture on September 11, spent nearly half an hour trying to cast doubt on Al Qaeda’s culpability and even went so far as to implicate the American government by asserting that America had benefited from the attacks," he wrote. Amin was the only "leading Egyptian professor of sociology" giving a lecture on the topic on that day.

The professor declined to comment to the Cairo Times, saying that he did not want the situation to "get any bigger."

Asked to clarify on why Welch chose this time to publish his editorial–after conspiracy theories are nothing new–US Embassy spokesperson Phil Frayne said that the ambassador had planned the article for a few weeks now, but that publishing it around 11 September seemed appropriate. He also denied that the lecture delivered by Amin, a respected (if occasionally quirky) academic, had sparked the idea.

"The Al Jazeera tapes should really put to rest all these conspiracy theories," Frayne said. "That’s seeing a camel where there’s only a donkey."

FBI Warns of Hizbullah Terrorism in America

Should Hizbullah terrorist strike the U.S., as suggested in this article, all hell will break out for countries supporting or housing this gang of butchers.

(IsraelNN.com) The FBI is warning that Islamic terror organizations, including Hamas and Hizbullah, are seeking out potential targets in the United States.

The US Senate Intelligence Committee has received a Justice Department report that Hizbullah operatives are already in America seeking out targets.

Can Palestinians govern a responsible state?

This is probably the wrong time to evict Yasser Arafat from Israel.

That concern seems to be a pivotal issue among Likud party-members as exemplified by Benjamin Netanyahu’s challenge to Ariel Sharon for Likud leader preceding the Jan. 28 elections to determine Israel’s next prime minister and the composition of the Knesset.

The question of whether Arafat should depart Israel pales in contrast to a deeper question: Are the Palestinians prepared to form and run their own independent state?

Two reasons cited for allowing Arafat to remain underscore the doubt over whether the Palestinians - as a group - are ready to take on the reins of
government.

Critics are concerned, and rightfully so, that Arafat will likely be replaced by someone just as bad if not worse, or Arafat’s ouster could incite even more reprisals by the Palestinians.

Either reason begs these questions: What kind of society is it that can’t produce someone better than Arafat as a leader? Why would any significant segment of Palestinian society rebel over the removal of a leader who betrayed his own people?

This is a society that engaged in a two-year war which left more than 600 Israelis and 1,800 of their own dead. What havoc would they wreak if they had their own organized entity?

More questions: How can the Palestinian people possibly be prepared for cooperative relations with Israel when many of their children are educated from birth to hate Israel and seek its destruction?

How can they devise an effective legal system when, during a trial of a suspected collaborator, a mob of onlookers rushed the defendant inside the courtroom and murdered him? When another mob broke into a prison and executed a Palestinian who was convicted of collaboration?

If a Palestinian state becomes a reality, will they continue to engage in blood feuds, a centuries-old personal form of vigilante justice?

What will become of honor killings, another centuries-old tradition when women can face execution from their own relatives for violating romantic mores such as having sexual relations outside of marriage, even if raped, or marrying without their father’s consent? Jordan’s Queen Rania, who is Palestinian, has made a priority of ending the honor killings in her country.

While Palestinian children starve, how can young terrorists afford to acquire cell phones?

If Arafat remains, what kind of leader will he prove to be? While his people continue to live in poverty, what did he do with money he received from foreign donors? As he has done on CNN at least twice, will he scream at reporters who dare pose legitimate questions?

Finally, how can Israel trust the Palestinians to end hostilities if a Palestinian state is formed?

Israel should remain open to the prospect of a Palestinian state, but its leaders have a responsibility to the Israeli people to confront their Palestinian counterparts with these questions and expect honest answers before taking any steps toward an independent state.

Contributed by Bruce S. Ticker, BRUCETIC@aol.com

Change in Government

M.J. Rosenberg in the Israel Policy Forum argues that the new Israeli government is a good thing rather than the chaotic mess that many believe a reconstituted government would bring about

The conventional wisdom has it that the collapse of Israel's national unity government is a setback to the peace process. The thinking goes that if negotiations were going nowhere with a government that included the moderate Labor party, they can only be utterly stymied when a right-wing government without Labor takes over.

Although this analysis sounds about right, one can make another case - that national unity governments smother opposing voices.

That is because the most powerful dissenters are in the government. Parties normally in opposition end up defending policies they do not really agree with, which has been the case with Labor since it joined Likud following Prime Minister Sharon's election in 2001. Labor ministers and backbenchers alike were constrained from action on issues like settlements and the lack of movement on the diplomatic track, leaving a large part of the populace without a voice in government. Anyone watching Foreign Minister Peres defend the government's handling of relations with the Palestinians understands this dynamic - even if Peres' presence in government may have had a moderating effect.

Then there were the deliberations over the budget. Prime Minister Sharon wanted to include $700 million in additional funding for the settlements. Labor opposed the measure, arguing that diverting funds to the settlers, when pensioners, students and others were hurting, was bad policy and nothing more than an attempt to buy off the settler vote in the next election. Sharon wouldn't back down, and the government fell.

This was the first time that the Israeli majority's view on settlements made a difference within the unity cabinet - and it was despite the fact that most Israelis are not fans of settlers or settlements. According to last week's Dahaf poll (and the other recent surveys), not only do most Israelis not want to spend more on settlements, most (78%) also are ready to "dismantle" them in the context of peace negotiations. But this majority was rarely heard within Israel or outside.

Suicide Bombing Attacks Against Israeli Civilians

This is the complete (172 pages) text of the Human Rights Watch report on terror attack upon Israeli civilians.

Hezbollah chief calls for more military operations against Israel

And since even before Balfour Day (see below) and till the present day, there are those who continue to seek the destruction of Jews and the state of Israel. Hezbollah may soon be in for a pounding when the Americans act against Iraq. Till such time Israel cooperative with the U.S. in order that Arab nations not be inflamed. And if Hezbollah truly believes the Palestinian peoples are better off now than they were when Intifada II began, then that group of murderers continues to live in make-believe world.

DAMASCUS (AFP) - The head of the Lebanese Shiite militia Hezbollah, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, called for armed operations against Israel to continue, during a rally at the Yarmuk refugee camp in Damascus.

Israel "wants to strike our will and our morale by murdering resistance fighters, but we will turn the blood into a cry of rage and of force" and carry out an "operation on the anniversary of the death of each martyr," he said.

Nasrallah, whose organization spearheaded a guerrilla campaign that drove Israeli troops out of southern Lebanon in 2000 after nearly two decades of occupation, was speaking at a joint rally with the radical Palestinian group Islamic Jihad.

Friday was the seventh anniversary of the death, attributed to Israel, of the late Islamic Jihad chief Fathi Shekaki and also the 17th anniversary of the creation of his group.

"The resistance in Palestine and Lebanon has made the murders costly" for Israel, Nasrallah continued.

Those murders "make us stronger," and "we should continue on the road of resistance," he said to an audience of around 1,000 people.

He said the Palestinian intifada which has been ongoing since September 2000 was "a victory for the Palestinian people and a defeat for the Zionists and their generals."

"The Lebanese should know that if they are drinking today water from the Wazzani (border spring), it is thanks to the youth who are carrying out martyrdom operations in occupied Palestine," said Nasrallah.

"I tell the Palestinians: those who will make your future are these youths," he said.

Nasrallah regularly makes fiery speeches to incite Palestinian armed groups to imitate his group's guerrilla tactics in their uprising against Israel, including "martyrdom operations," or suicide attacks.

Islamic Jihad secretary general Ramadan Abdallah Shalah also praised Nasrallah as the "master of victory" during the rally.

"The enemy thinks it can crush resistance movements by killing their leaders, but every time there are new leaders who appear," he said, adding: "the resistance has invented cloning, well before the United States."

Shalah said "the battle will continue ... and the Palestinian people will continue on the path of jihad (holy war) and martyrdom until victory."

He criticized Washington's foreign policy in the region "which has nothing humane," and said that "we cannot reconcile" with the United States.

He also denounced the recent formation of a new Palestinian government "when the (Palestinian) people are under an (Israeli) embargo and are drowning in blood."

Syria backs Lebanon's Hezbollah and a number of Palestinian groups which it considers liberation movements fighting against Israel's occupation of Arab territories.

November 2, 1917 - Balfour Declaration Day




"The establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish People"


The complete text of the Balfour Declaration is as follows:

His Majesty's Government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

Brief notes on the background to the Balfour Declaration

When the foreign minister of a major imperial power issues a major declaration, you can assume that preceding the declaration were endless disputes, discussions and considerations. The Balfour Declaration of Novermber 2, 1917, was no different.

An almost-comprehensive list of the British considerations that led to the Balfour Declaration is given in an essay posted by Ronald Stockton, Professor of Political Science, University of Michigan-Dearborn, from which the following quotation is extracted:

In America, President Wilson was reelected in 1916 on the slogan "He kept us out of war." Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan was an outspoken pacifist. American public opinion opposed entry into the war. The British wanted America in the war and were convinced that Jewish influence could make a difference.
In February 1917 the Russian Revolution occurred and the new government threatened to take Russia out of the war. (This was the first of two revolutions. The Second Revolution in November brought Communists to power). Russian neutrality would have allowed Germany to concentrate its armies on the Western Front, a disaster for the Allies. Many British leaders were convinced the Russian revolutionary government of Alexander Kerensky was run by Jews (Kerensky himself was Jewish) and that by appealing to them as Jews they could keep Russia in the war. They also feared Germany was about to declare support for a Jewish state.

In 1916, Britain began negotiating a deal with Zionists: British support for a Jewish homeland in exchange for Zionist support for the war. The Balfour Declaration was issued in November, 1917, pledging Britain to support a Jewish "homeland" in Palestine. What the word "homeland" meant was unclear since Britain also committed itself to protect the rights of non-Jewish inhabitants, including their "civil" rights, a term that implied the right to participate in political decisions.

Surely, considerations associated with WW I, which in 1917 was going very badly for the Allies, was the overriding consideration. But the picture is much more complicated, as detailed by David Fromkin in his book,

David Fromkin. A Peace to End All Peace. New York: Avon Books, 1989.

As told by Fromkin, there was a group among the British policy-makers who had genuine sympathy for the Jewish people and genuine empathy with the long history of suffering that the nations of the world inflicted on the Jews. Having become acquainted with the Zionist enterprise in Palestine, these policy-makers were impressed by its achievements and practitioners, a conspicuous example of a Jewish Palestinian Zionist being Aaron Aaronsohn: scientist, farmer and organizer of a spy-ring for the British.

This viewpoint of genuine sympathy gains credibility from the writings of Richard Meinertzhagen, a British intelligence officer on the staff of General Allenby, and later a London desk-officer with the British government (and a Christian of Danish origin).

As a public servant in the War Office, Meinertzhagen considered it his duty to execute the official British policy. At a meeting on February 7, 1918, he therefore queried Lord Balfour, the foreign minister, as to the meaning of the Balfour Declaration, which was issued only three months earlier. Meinhertzhagen recorded Balfour’s response and the subsequent discussion:

“[Balfour:] ‘Both the Prime Minister [David Lloyd George] and myself have been influenced by a desire to give the Jews their rightful place in the world; a great nation without a home is not right.' I said I was glad to hear that. I then asked, 'At the back of your mind do you regard this declaration as a charter for ultimate Jewish sovereignty in Palestine or are you trying to graft a Jewish population on to an Arab Palestine?' Balfour waited some time before he replied, choosing his words carefully. 'My personal hope is that the Jews will make good in Palestine and eventually found a Jewish State. It is up to them now; we have given them their great opportunity’.

[Quoted from p. 9 of:

Meinertzhagen, Colonel Richard. Middle East Diaries, 1917-1956. London: Crescent Press,1959.]

I emphasize this point because in the cynical world in which we live, not enough attention is paid to the small rivulets of genuine goodwill and support for the Zionist enterprise on the part of non-Jews. If channelled, these rivulets may amount to a mighty river.

No discussion of the Balfour Declaration, regardless of how brief, can conclude without reference to the anti-Zionist sentiments and obstruction on the part of certain segments of the Jewish population. Fromkin, p. 294, states:

[T]he proposal that Balfour should issue his pro-Zionist declaration suddenly encountered opposition that brought it to a halt. The opposition came from leading figures in the British Jewish community. Edwin Montagu, Secretary of State for India, led the opposition group within the Cabinet. He, along with his cousin, Herbert Samuel, and Rufus Isaacs (Lord Reading) had broken new ground for their co-religionists: they had been the first Jews to sit in a British Cabinet. The second son of a successful financier who had been ennobled, Montagu saw Zionism as a threat to the position in British society that he and his family had so recently, and with so much exertion, attained. Judaism, he argued, was a religion, not a nationality, and to say otherwise was to say that he was less than 100 percent British... It bothered Montagu that, despite his lack of religious faith, he could not avoid being categorized as a Jew. He was the millionaire son of an English lord, but was driven to lament that "I have been striving all my life to escape from the Ghetto.”

The evidence suggested that in his non-Zionism, Montagu was speaking for a majority of Jews. As of 1913, the last date for which there were figures, only about one percent of the world's Jews had signified their adherence to Zionism.

Eventually, Montagu’s opposition was overcome, but with a greatly watered-down version of the originally-drafted Declaration.

Nonetheless, the Balfour Declaration is a milestone in the process of the Jewish people rebuilding their nationhood. The Declaration was approved by the US government as well as by the governments of other principal countries. This meant that the movement of Jewish national revival was recognized internationally at the Paris Peace Talks, leading the way to the British Mandate over Palestine, and to the next phase of large-scale Jewish immigration to Palestine.

May Israel fourish.

Contributed by Joseph Alexander Norland

HRW Report on Suicide Bombing

Available here. It's 170 pages, but I'll read it this weekend and post some comments next week.

Shaul Mofaz

Israel's newest proposed defense minister is former army head Shaul Mofaz. Not many countries have foreign born defense ministers but leave it to Israel to break down barriers. Mofaz was born in Iran and moved to Israel at 9 years of age. I assume therefore that he speaks Persian. It would be interesting for Israel to put him on the shortwave beaming to Tehran and have Mofaz in Persian introduce himself to the Iranian people. He could tell them about how he enjoys living in a free country and invite Iran to make peace with Israel. He could also throw in how the Iranians should rise up and throw off their shackles. Maybe a few hints at to what Israel will do to Iran if threatened would be instructive as well. All of this should probably get the Mullahs wound up a bit. I believe outgoing Defense Minister Ben Eliezer was born in Iraq, is N. Korea next?

Israel admits capture of Hizbullah man

Big fish caught some time ago but just now revealed

Militant was seized with fake passport in June 2001
Israel arrested a senior member of Hizbullah last summer who had entered the Jewish state on a forged American passport to plot attacks against Israeli civilians, the Israeli Army said in a statement Thursday.
Fawzi Ayoub, 38, was captured in Israel in June 2001 after entering the country from a European country on a fake US passport, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s office confirmed.
“Ayoub’s mission to Israel is a new stage in the efforts which Hizbullah has invested in perpetrating terror attacks inside Israel,” the army said.
Contacted in Beirut, Hizbullah officials said they had no comment on the issue.
The Israeli Army described Ayoub as a Shiite Muslim from Lebanon and a veteran of Hizbullah, who “has taken part in various resistance operations and activities, and is responsible for numerous casualties among civilians.”
But the Jewish state did not say why news of the arrest was kept quiet until now.
Ayoub arrived in Israel in October 2000, shortly after the start of the Palestinian uprising, and spent time in Hebron in the southern West Bank where he made contact with at least one militant “who aided him in his missions,” which included scouting sites for hiding explosives, the army said.
Ayoub had spent several years in Canada as a Hizbullah operative before being transferred to Europe, where he received his forged documents to enter Israel, the army added.
­

Human Rights Watch: Suicide bombers guilty of war crimes

Finally!

GAZA CITY (CNN) -- Those who plan and carry out suicide bombings that deliberately target civilians are guilty of crimes against humanity and must be brought to justice, a leading humanitarian watchdog group said in a report released Friday.

The 170-page report from New York-based Human Rights Watch assessed the suicide bombing operations of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), the groups that have claimed responsibility for most recent suicide bombings. The report says the leaders of such groups should face criminal investigation.

Human Rights Watch also said the Palestinian Authority and its president, Yasser Arafat, have failed to do all they can to stop suicide attacks or bring the perpetrators to justice, thus contributing to "an atmosphere of impunity" for such crimes.

"The people who carry out suicide bombings are not martyrs, they're war criminals, and so are the people who help plan such attacks," said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. "The scale and systematic nature of these attacks sets them apart from other abuses committed in times of conflict. They clearly fall under the category of crimes against humanity."

. . . Specifically, the group said Hamas' Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Khalid Mish'al and Islamic Jihad's Ramadan Shalah must face criminal investigation for their roles in such crimes. Criminal investigation is also warranted for the PFLP and Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, it said.

Some 30 links to Sharon and Israel...latest news.

At least they’ve heard me

This posting consists of three parts. The first is an e-mail I sent to the British High Commissioner (i.e., the British ambassador) in Ottawa; the second reproduces the article in Ha’Aretz that prompted the letter, and the third is the response from the High Commissioner. All three are reproduced here without any changes.

The import of this letter exchange is to make it clear to the EU-niks that we are looking over their shoulder. I encourage everyone to inundate the EU legations with letters of protest: firm, polite, and documented.

My letter and the relevant news story:

Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002
From: "Joseph Alexander Norland"
Subject: Israel - For the attention of the High Commissioner
To: generalenquiries@BritaininCanada.org

Ottawa, 16 October 2002

For the attention of the High Commissioner:

Sir,

I am writing to request that you convey the contents of this letter to your government.

I call your attention to a news report dated October 15, which I am enclosing below with the corresponding web address. The report contends, inter alia, that:

The British ambassador to Israel, Sherard Cowper-Coles, says he is "proud" of his comments that were published Monday and in which he described the West Bank and Gaza Strip as "the biggest detention camp in the world."

In the report, Cowper-Coles is attributed with accusing Israel of contravening the Geneva Convention and the Israel Defense Forces of displaying a "lack of professionalism," during a leaked conversation last week with IDF Major General Amos Gilad, coordinator of government activities in the territories.”

Coming on the heels of Mr Blair’s comments, in which he drew a parallel between Israel and Iraq, and coming on the heels of a series of measures to harass Israel economically, and coming on the heels of a virtual British embargo on the sale of military goods to Israel, I must express my profound disgust with your government.

I underscore that I am neither an Israeli citizen nor Jewish, but as a Canadian, I regard Israel as our sister-democracy. In conjunction with the EU’s hostility to Israel, shameful anti-Israeli steps taken by Britain amount to ganging up on the one democratic republic in the entire area, to the great delight of Arab autocracies and terrorists.

Considering Britain’s conduct in Ireland, and considering Britain’s role in the 1938 Munich betrayal of Czechoslovakia, I just have to wonder how your government musters the temerity to criticise Israel in her war of self-defence. I am also old enough to remember such anti-Semitic British ministers as Ernest Bevin, who brought disgrace not on Britain alone, but on the entire commonwealth, Canada included. And I have scarcely mentioned Britain’s outrageous conduct in the “Exodus 1947" affair, the photographs of which appeared in the International press. More significant still is the fact that the
current situation in the Middle East was created by Britain, as explained in detail by the British officer, Col. Richard Meinertzhagen, in his book, “Middle East Diaries”.

As a matter of common courtesy, please acknowledge receipt of this e-mail.

Sincerely yours,

Joseph Alexander Norland
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

-------------------------------------

www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=219937


UK envoy `proud' of critical comments made against Israel

By Charlotte Halle

The British ambassador to Israel, Sherard Cowper-Coles, says he is "proud" of his comments that were published Monday and in which he described the West Bank and Gaza Strip as "the biggest detention camp in the world."

In the report, Cowper-Coles is attributed with accusing Israel of contravening the Geneva Convention and the Israel Defense Forces of displaying a "lack of professionalism," during a leaked conversation last week with IDF Major General Amos Gilad, coordinator of government activities in the territories.

Cowper-Coles told Ha'aretz Monday that the comments, reported in the Yedioth Ahronot daily, were "exaggerated, but broadly true."

The ambassador also criticized Israel for continuing to build settlements, for "the unnecessary humiliation and harassment" of the local civilian population at checkpoints, unnecessarily uprooting trees and making life difficult for the international welfare organizations, according to the report.

Cowper-Coles says he did not regret his comments, which were made "in the spirit of friendship." He said he was "very shocked" by what he has seen in the territories, "as anyone else who visited there would be."

"Anyone who is a friend of Israel would say what I said," he told Ha'aretz, "because [it is clear the situation] is certainly not good for the Palestinians, or for Israel."

The comments reported in Yedioth Ahronot were made during a "private conversation," with Gilad, on instructions from London, and followed an earlier meeting with the Israeli general in the British capital last month, says Cowper-Coles.

He added the source of the leak - "the Foreign Ministry or someone" - was "very selective" in what he chose to reveal of the conversation with Gilad that lasted for more than an hour.

Cowper-Coles says his many references to the suffering of Israelis due to terrorism, security pressures and difficulties relating to pulling out of the territories were not conveyed. "It's a pity because it's not the whole truth." If it emerges that someone in the Foreign Ministry leaked the story, Cowper-Coles said, "it certainly won't increase my respect" of the ministry. "We don't believe in
megaphone diplomacy."

The ambassador, who has learned to speak a competent level of Hebrew since arriving here just over a year ago, has been widely interviewed on Israeli television and radio.

He was recently praised for the sensitivity he displayed when dealing with Israeli terror victims and their families.

On Monday, a Foreign Ministry spokesman said the ministry had adopted a "serious view" of Cowper-Coles's remarks.

The response of the High Commissioner:

From: Andrew.Burns@fco.gov.uk
To: dt804@yahoo.ca
Subject: RE: ISRAEL
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 17:42:35 -0000

FROM THE HIGH COMMISSIONER

SIR ANDREW BURNS



Dear Mr Norland,

RE: ISRAEL

I am writing in response to your email of 16 October expressing concern about remarks attributed to the British Ambassador to the State of Israel.

Representatives of the British Government regularly hold private and constructive talks with their Israeli counterparts. The private conversation reported was part of that dialogue and a continuation of a discussion that General Gilad held in London. The British Ambassador was raising concerns on instruction from London about the situation faced by Palestinians in the region.

More generally, I believe you have an incorrect view of UK policy in the Middle East. You may wish to read in detail the Prime Minister's speech to the Labour Party Conference. It can be located through the No 10 website (http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page1.asp). As the Prime Minister said at the Conference "what is happening in the Middle East now is ugly and wrong. The Palestinians living in increasingly abject conditions, humiliated and hopeless; Israeli civilians brutally murdered. I agree UN resolutions should apply here as much as to Iraq. But they don't just apply to Israel. They apply to all parties. And there is only one answer. By this year's end, we must have revived final status negotiations and they must have explicitly as their aims: an Israeli state free from terror, recognised by the Arab world and a viable Palestinian state based on the boundaries of 1967. "

You may also wish to glance at the section on the Middle East on the UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office website. This can be located at www.fco.gov.uk

Yours sincerely,

Andrew Burns
High Commissioner,
British High Commission, 80 Elgin St, Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5K7, Canada
Tel: (00) 1 613 237 1542 ext. 2365 Fax: (00) 1 613 567 8045
email: andrew.burns@fco.gov.uk website: http://www.britainincanada.org

P.S. I don’t think that either I or the High Commissioner have changed our views as a consequence of this letter exchange, but as I said: At least they’ve heard me.

The comic epilogue to this exchange is my response to the High Commissioner, in which I thanked him for the links he provided, and suggested to him in return to read IsraPundit...

Contributed by Joseph Alexander Norland

Israel's unity over Palestine will not crumble

While terrorist leaders try to convince themselves they are making headway with the Intifada, they are once again wrong

For two long and bloody years, Yassir Arafat and the Palestinian leadership have been waiting for an Israeli prime minister - first Ehud Barak and then Ariel Sharon - to make a fatal mistake that would lead to internal splits within Israel and ultimately to inter- national intervention. Yet in spite of dozens of terrorist bombings, the Israeli response can only be described as measured, unity has been maintained and it is Mr Arafat who has become isolated in the world.

If the Palestinians expect the break-up this week of Israel's coalition government and the increased influence of Israel's fringe rightwing parties to "unleash the real Sharon" and reverse this outcome, they will be disappointed: Mr Sharon, like many Israelis, understands the Palestinian strategy and he is not about to fall into the trap now. With or without Labour, the most likely direction is continuity in implementing effective responses to terror attacks, while carefully avoiding policies that would lead to discord and isolation. Mr Sharon's approach began immediately after his huge election victory in February 2001, when he opted for a broad coalition with the Labour party instead of a Likud-dominated government with a narrow agenda. He even brought in Shimon Peres, his former arch-rival and the architect of the disastrous Oslo process, to serve as foreign minister. Mr Peres and the Labour party were a moderating influence on the government, arguing against calls to send Mr Arafat packing. The need for compromise led to cancellation of military operations, such as the reoccupation of Gaza, and to the removal of unauthorised settlement outposts, in spite of the anguish among settlers.

Some now believe that Labour's exit from the coalition makes Mr Sharon dependent on the far-right parties to maintain a parliamentary majority. According to this view, pressure from the more confrontational members of his own Likud party (supporters of Benjamin Netanyahu, the former prime minister) will also increase. Furthermore, the appointment of Shaul Mofaz, a former army chief, as defence minister is seen by some as presaging unconstrained military activity against Palestinian terror cells, confrontation with Hizbollah guerrillas and a pre-emptive strategy against Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. In political terms, so the argument goes, discussions of the "road map" towards resuming negotiations with the Palestinians, even without Mr Arafat, are now off the agenda.

While plausible, this theory is also highly improbable. Israelis are aware of the Palestinian expectation of a repetition of the events during the Lebanese war, in which domestic conflict forced a unilateral retreat. And, for this reason, Mr Sharon and other Israeli leaders are determined to prevent it from happening again.

In addition, Mr Sharon has recognised the importance of good relations with the US and has avoided policies that might endanger them. Meanwhile, Mr Arafat has become persona non grata in the White House and President George W. Bush, in his June 24 speech, demanded extensive Palestinian reform and the replacement of Mr Arafat before moving forward with any renewed peace efforts.

Lebanese police storm anti-Syrian student demo, injure 18

Oh, THAT occupation. I guess the university students have no pro-Israel folks to shout about.

Lebanese police storm anti-Syrian student demo, injure 18
BEIRUT (AFP) - Eighteen Lebanese students were injured near here and another 16 were in custody after riot police swept in to prevent hundreds of them from taking an anti-Syrian demonstration off a university campus and into the street, a student spokesman said.

The incident came as hundreds of students held sit-ins on campuses in and around Beirut against the Syrian military presence in their country and the closure of the opposition television channel, MTV.

Baton-wielding police attacked around 800 students at the science faculty of Lebanese University, in Fanar, who tried three times to move off campus to a waiting mass of dozens of police. They were joined by civil defense trucks firing water cannons.

"Eighteen students were hurt by baton blows, of whom three are still hospitalized -- two young women and a young man," said the spokesman on condition of anonymity.

The spokesman said police initially seized around 150 students at dozens of blockades at exits from the campus. By Thursday evening, he said, 16 were still in detention after being held for an hour or two.

Thursday's demonstrations were mainly by supporters of the former head of a military government, general Michel Aoun, and the banned Lebanese Forces party.

A separate demonstration took place within the precincts of Saint-Joseph University in Beirut.

Demonstrators chanted the rallying cry of anti-Syrian Christians: "Liberty, sovereignty, independence."

Ben-Eliezer Signs 51 Demolition Orders

(IsraelNN.com) Outgoing Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer today signed demolition orders for 51 Arab homes throughout Judea and Samaria that were built illegally.

Lets see how many yahoos who want outposts dismantled are happy about this equal treatment.

What goes around comes around

Blasts at Militant's Gaza Home Kills 3 - Witnesses
A series of explosions tore through the home of a Palestinian Hamas militant in the Gaza Strip (news - web sites) on Thursday, killing at least three people and wounding three, hospital officials and witnesses said.

The cause of the blasts, which rocked a densely populated residential neighborhood of Palestinian-ruled Gaza City, was not immediately known.

The two-story home belongs to Salah Nassar, a Hamas member {i.e. non militant part] whose brother, Wael Nassar, is a senior official in the military wing of the Islamic militant group, local residents said.
[Here is evidence showing that the non militant part of Hamas is involved in terrorism. So now the French should shut done donations to this group. But in fact it is not a matter of evidence. The French like to see dead Jews]

Salah Nassar survived the explosions but was burned along with his father. His brother was not in the house at the time.

"We heard two big explosions inside the building on the first floor followed by a series of explosions," one witness told Reuters.

Police said they were investigating the cause of the blasts, which engulfed the house in flames. [As, always, despite the pressence in the house of suicide belts, will report that the zionists did it]

Hamas members accosted news cameramen filming at the scene. A Reuters cameraman was struck and his camera was seized and broken.
[Hamas guy must not have know reporter was Reuters]

Hamas is the main group behind a series of suicide bombings that have killed scores [HUNDREDS] of Israelis since the start of a Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation in September 2000.

Israel related sites

A nice collection of links to a wide variety of subjects about Israel.

The EU: "Israel must end its occupation to the Palestinian lands"

Question for EU: did the Germans in WWII leave your countries because you said they should leave? Occupation ended with a signed peace agreement between contending forces. No agreement as yet to meet the requirement for safe and secure borders for Israel. And where were thee guys when the land was 'occupied' by Jordan'.

Jericho July 5th 2002 Wafa; Meeting with Dr. Saeb Erekat the Palestinian Minister in Jericho yesterday, Mr. Miguel Angel Muratinos the European envoy to the peace process in the Middle East, reiterated the European stand towards the Middle East crisis of rejecting the Israeli occupation to the Palestinian Lands, demanding it to stop it.

Mr. Muratinos also stated that the EU does not refuse dealing with President Arafat, emphasizing the European positive position towards the peace process that will lead to establishing the independent Palestinian State with Jerusalem as its Capital according to the International legitimacy.

Harsh Lessons in Incivility

A magnificent article that addresses the charges and counter-charges of those who yell out Anti-Semitism and those who scream out about Palestinian rights and abuses. Dignified, well reasoned, Prof.AMITAI ETZIONI puts the harsh debates on American campuses into perspective and calms the troubled seas. Problem? Yes. He seems to ignore the simple fact that those in charge of Arab affairs do not seek the rational approach which he advocates.

This semester, the hottest class on campuses coast to coast is a course in incivility. Teaching it are thousands of professors involved in a vicious debate about Israel, the Palestinians, and anti-Semitism.

Any lessons one might hope to learn about rhetoric, logic, history, humility, or dignity won't intrude into this brawl, in which the sides demonize and attribute the worst possible motives to each other, and strike calculatedly provocative positions instead of making even halfhearted attempts to understand another point of view.

One camp charges Israel with apartheidlike oppression of Palestinians. The other says that such allegations are anti-Semitic. The first, exemplified by Elizabeth Spelke, a Harvard psychology professor, then claims that the anti-Semitism label is an attempt to suppress free speech.

Along those lines, critics of Israel, such as Michael Lerner, the editor of the left-liberal Tikkun, see themselves as subject to a new, Jewish McCarthyism. And, in turn, defenders of Israel, such as Ruth Wisse, a professor of comparative literature at Harvard, suggest that to acquiesce to anti-Israeli rhetoric is to prepare the ground for a new Hitler. And so it goes.

Stances in this debate are often so bereft of basic facts, and so grossly oversimplify the issues at hand, that scholars -- whatever their persuasion -- should be embarrassed to participate. Some of the confrontations take place in classrooms or op-ed pages, but many occur at campuswide meetings. The involvement at these meetings of faculty members, and not just student leaders, furthers the mis-educational impact.

Worst of all, death threats and other forms of intimidation have been directed against quite a few of the professors and student leaders involved. During Passover last year, a cinder block was thrown through the front door of the Hillel building at the University of California at Berkeley. Also last spring, pro-Israel demonstrators at San Francisco State University were surrounded by people who harassed them with chants like "Hitler didn't finish the job." When more than 300 college presidents signed a letter calling for intimidation-free campuses, rather than jumping to endorse the letter, both sides criticized it, saying it overplayed the intimidation suffered by one side and minimized that suffered by the other.

The situation could be studied by some group of neutral social scientists, except where would you find them? Surely not in Europe, where the venom on this issue is even more poisonous than in the United States, and where one hears references to the "Zionist SS" and calls for "Death to Jews," or stereotyping of all Muslims as followers of Osama bin Laden.

Frankly, it is my impression that to the extent that Muslim students in the United States are intimidated, it usually is not by Jews and not related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but rather by a variety of Americans hostile to a religion they don't understand and with which they associate Islamist terrorism.

The Swastika & the Crescent

This author makes an interesting connection bgetween Hitler's fascists during the Nazi period of WWII and Islam and the ongoing connection even unto today.

[....] Perhaps the best contemporary snapshot of this Nazi-Islamist extremist axis comes in the person of one Ahmed Huber, a neo-Nazi whose home in a suburb of Berne was raided by Swiss police on Nov. 8, after U.S. officials had identified him as a linchpin in the financial machinations of Osama bin Laden. The raid was part of a coordinated law enforcement dragnet that seized records from the offices of Al Taqwa, an international banking group. Al Taqwa, which literally means "Fear of God," had been channeling funds to Muslim extremist organizations around the world, including Hamas, a group active in the Israeli-occupied territories.
Huber, a former journalist who converted to Islam and changed his first name from Albert, served on the board of Nada Management, a component of Al Taqwa. After Swiss authorities froze the firm's assets and questioned Huber, the 74-year-old denounced Washington for doing the bidding of "Jew Zionists" who "rule America." In January, Nada Management announced that it had gone into liquidation.
A well-known figure in European neofascist circles, Huber "sees himself as a mediator between Islam and right-wing groups," according to Germany's Office for the Protection of the Constitution. Portraits of Hitler and SS chief Heinrich Himmler adorn the walls of Huber's office, alongside photos of Islamic political leaders and a picture of Jean-Marie Le Pen, the present-day boss of the French Front National.
In accordance with his self-proclaimed mission to unite Muslim fundamentalists and extreme right-wing forces in Europe and North America, Huber has traveled widely and proselytized at numerous gatherings. In Germany, he speaks often at events hosted by the neo-Nazi National Democratic Party, which publicly welcomed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Huber also befriended British author David Irving and other Holocaust deniers while frequenting "revisionist" conclaves.

The West Duped: Iraq, Korea, “Palestine”

The case of Iraq is straightforward: using deception and obstruction, Iraq has violated the conditions under which the 1991 War was halted. Even though the events of 1991-1998 (when the UN inspectors were compelled to leave Iraq) are well known, the following brief review may be useful for documentation purposes; the review is extracted from the GlobalSecurity site.

Under UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 687 (April 1991), which set out the cease-fire terms for ending the Gulf War, Iraq is obliged to: (a) accept the destruction, removal, or rendering harmless of all its - nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, and ballistic missiles with a range over 150 kilometers; and - research, development, and manufacturing facilities associated with the above; and (b) undertake not to develop such weapons in the future. The United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) oversees these processes. Iraq must give full cooperation, in particular immediate, unrestricted access to any site UNSCOM needs to inspect.

Iraq has consistently tried to evade its responsibilities. Its required full disclosure document on missiles was not produced until July 1996, five years after it was demanded. It has so far produced three versions on chemical weapons and four on biological weapons, all shown to be seriously inaccurate.

Iraq consistently denied UNSCOM inspectors the access they need to follow up these and other concerns and locate both WMD capabilities and documentation which might reveal more about Iraq's WMD programmes. Documents and material have been removed from and destroyed inside sites while UNSCOM inspectors have been held outside prevented from entering. The pattern of defiance worsened over time.

1998 -- The tensions that began in October 1997 continue. In February, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan works out an agreement with Iraq that resumes weapons inspections. In turn, Iraq receives promises the United Nations will consider removing its economic sanctions. Inspections continue into August, when Iraq cuts ties with weapons inspectors, claiming it has seen no U.N. move toward lifting sanctions.
October 31, 1998 -- Iraq cuts off all work by U.N. monitors. The United States and Great Britain warn of possible military strikes to force compliance. A renewed military build-up in the Persian Gulf begins.
November 5, 1998 -- The U.N. Security Council condemns Iraq for violating agreements signed after the end of the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
November 11, 1998 -- The United Nations withdraws most of its staff from Iraq.
November 14, 1998 -- With B-52 bombers in the air and within about 20 minutes of attack, Saddam Hussein agrees to allow U.N. monitors back in. The bombers are recalled before an attack occurs. Weapons inspectors return to Iraq a few days later.
December 8, 1998 -- Chief U.N. weapons inspector Richard Butler reports that Iraq is still impeding inspections. U.N. teams begin departing Iraq.
December 15, 1998 – A formal U.N. report accuses Iraq of a repeated pattern of obstructing weapons inspections by not allowing access to records and inspections sites, and by moving equipment records and equipment from one to site another.
December 16, 1998 -- The United States and Great Britain begin a massive air campaign against key military targets in Iraq.

There have been no inspectors in Iraq since then. In retrospect, having ever assumed that Iraq would abide by the cease fire agreement was utterly naive; Iraq has deceived the UN inspectors all along.

By now, anyone who is not hopelessly naive also knows that North Korea pulled the wool over the eyes of the US administration for many a year.

The story broke on October 17, with news stories such as the following one, cited from the BBC:

American officials said the North Koreans told a visiting US delegation earlier this month that they no longer felt bound by a 1994 accord, under which they agreed to halt their suspected weapons programme in return for American aid.

The North Korean confession made the US administration conclude that negotiations with Pyongyang were impossible for the moment, US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said.

The awakening was immediate. For example, a National Review article by Victor Davis Hansen, entitled, A Funny Morality - North Korea as metaphor of the times and dated October 25, 2002, opens with the lines,

The disclosures of North Korean duplicity in acquiring nuclear weapons were disturbing for a variety of reasons, involving more than our national security. That Pyongyang had been lying and cheating all along since President Clinton's accords of summer 1994 was most galling because it seemed to discredit a number of the comfortable American assumptions that lay behind our past bewildering trust in compliance, inspections, dialogue, and safeguard agreements. The current efforts to spin the frightening revelations — perhaps the accords prevented even more nukes being produced, perhaps otherwise we would have had a million dead in a war in 1994, perhaps President Bush knew about this for months, perhaps we should now try the same diplomatic means with Saddam Hussein that we are using to salvage the situation in Korea — only show that we have learned nothing from the past.

James Baker III wrote in a Washington Post editorial:

North Korea signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 1985. That treaty required Pyongyang within 18 months to sign a safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency and allow inspection of its nuclear facilities at Yongbyon. Instead, North Korea secretly escalated its nuclear weapons development program.

Little-noticed but intensive diplomacy by the first Bush administration forced the North Koreans on Dec. 26, 1991, to end six years of intransigence on signing the safeguards agreement and allowing inspections. In a follow-up meeting in January, the United States bluntly warned Pyongyang that it either had to live up to the international agreements it had just signed or face further isolation and economic deprivation.

Pyongyang then refused to live up to the agreements it had signed and -- after a change of U.S. administrations -- threatened to withdraw from the nonproliferation treaty and, worse, to turn Seoul into a "sea of fire." That's when the Clinton administration signed the 1994 Framework Agreement. "This agreement will help achieve a longstanding and vital American objective," President Clinton said at the time, "an end to the threat of nuclear proliferation on the Korean peninsula."

But in reality, our policy of carrots and sticks had given way overnight to one of carrots only -- fuel oil to help run North Korea's beleaguered economy, two new nuclear reactors and diplomatic ties. Moreover, Pyongyang was given another five years to do what it had already agreed to do in 1991 -- allow a full inspection of its nuclear facilities.

This agreement was an abrupt policy flip-flop, and in the end has, in my view, proved to be a mistake that has made stability on the Korean peninsula less, not more, likely.

Given their track record before 1994, there was substantial reason to question whether the North Koreans would ever keep their side of the Framework Agreement. The worst part is that it sent this dangerous message to other would-be proliferators in capitals such as Tehran and Baghdad: "Sometimes crime pays."

With these comments in mind, consider the attempts by the Quartet to impose on Israel a second Palestinian-Arab state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (“Yesha”). The history of the PA since the Oslo Accords is the history of deception and violating agreements in the best tradition of Iraq and North Korea. The Accords called for disarming terrorists and keeping the “legal” armed Palestinian police to an agreed-upon level. Instead, the PA has been smuggling heavy arms, as the case of the arms ship Karine A proved. As to terrorism, the PA used the terrorist gangs affiliated with it (Force 17, Al Aqsa Brigades, etc) to augment the terrorism of the PA rivals (Hamas and Islamic Jihad). The deception and agreement violation of Iraq and North Korea are at least met with a measure of verbal opposition on the part of the West, even if action is a wee difficult to discern. But in the equivalent case of the PA, the Quartet, with US support, wishes to reward the rogue regime with a sovereign state, and one that is sure to spell the demise of the one democracy in the entire region. Not only have we not learnt a thing from the past, we don’t even learn a lesson from the present: even as our hands are getting burnt, we still shove them into the oven!

How can we possibly teach our children that we live in a rational world?

Contributed by Joseph Alexander Norland

Chechen Terrorists To Be Buried In Pigskin

This made me smile.

(Arutz Sheva) According to the Moskovski Komsomol newspaper, Russian security forces have decided to bury the terrorists from last's week's hostage siege wrapped in pig's skin. The aim is to deter potential Islamic terrorists from future attacks.

Shahidi (Jihad martyrs) believe by their nefarious acts that they ascend immediately to heaven. Using their beliefs against them, wrapping their corpses in 'unclean' pigskin prevents them from entering heaven for eternity.

Israel holds Canadian as terror suspect

Aren't there sufficient terrorists in the ME without these folks flying over to take a vacation and blow up innocents?

A Canadian man is being held without charge in Israel, suspected of teaching Palestinian extremists bomb-making techniques, Israel Radio reported Wednesday.

The Israeli intelligence agency Shin Bet is said to have arrested the man — who goes variously by Fawzi Ayoub and Abu Achmed — during a raid in the West Bank city of Hebron four months ago.

The Israeli government suspects the man of having been recruited by the Canadian wing of the armed group Hezbollah. If true, revelations that a Canadian was recruited on his home soil by Hezbollah could seriously embarrass the federal government, which has refused to ban the group outright on the grounds that it has nonviolent wings that perform important social and charity work.

Labor Quits Government - What Happens Now

Contrary to press reports which have been indicating while discussing this Labor Party created war time crisis that election will occur, this is probably not so.

Sharon will probably form a narrower right wing coalition government and there will not be elections. Although, if there are elections now, Likud and the right wing parties are estimated to pick up a bunch of seats and Labor lose seats. I think Sharon will form a new government but may go for elections if this would stave off an attack from Netanyahu.

Sharon is still the Prime Minister so now he can do what he wants politically. The budget that Labor resigned over passed anyway 67 to 45 which is an indication that Sharon will be able to form a new government. He needs parties representing 60 knesset members supporting him. I find the Haaretz and Jpost reporting very weak in that none give party numbers and discuss scenarios on forming a more narrow coalition. Ben Eliezer is pulling this stunt to try to reinvigorate his image since he is currently third in polls for head of the Labor Party behind Mitzna and Ramon.

Current parties:
One Israel 25, Likud Party 19*, Shas 17*, MERETZ 10, National Unity Israel Beitenu 7*, Shinui 6, Center Party 6*, National Religious Party 5*, United Torah Judaism 5*, Yisra'el Ba'Aliya 4*, Democratic Front 3 (arab), Hadash 3 (arab), Democratic Choice 2* , Gesher 2*, One Nation 2, National Arab Party 2, Arab Movement 1, Heirut 1*, National Democratic Allliance 1 (arab).
* indicates parties which could be used to form a new coaltition

Labor Quits Government

(Arutz Sheva) The national unity government was dismantled this evening - Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer submitted his resignation just before 6 PM this evening - but the national budget passed its first reading in the Knesset tonight, 67-45. The Labor Party MKs voted against it, leaving them no way back to return to the government. This is due to the fact that Prime Minister Sharon made it clear that a nay vote against the budget by coalition members is akin to leaving the government. In order to avoid being fired, the Labor ministers handed in their resignations this evening. The government still stands, but no longer as a "unity" government, as one of the two major parties is not a member.

Both Likud and Labor blamed the other for refusing to agree on just "one word" in a final agreement between the two. Ben-Eliezer demanded that the final agreement stipulate that funds be transferred from "settlements" to other sectors - while Sharon refused to agree to this formulation. Though it appeared that Shimon Peres and other Labor leaders were willing to cede this point and write instead "equality among sectors," Binyamin Ben-Eliezer refused.

Prime Minister Sharon began his Knesset speech this evening by angrily expressing his "tremendous shame" at being involved in discussing "such nonsense" on a day when two teenage girls were being buried after having been murdered by a terrorist. He also noted that the formulation that Ben-Eliezer refused to sign was "almost exactly the wording of the national unity government guidelines." Banging on the rostrum, Sharon asked Ben-Eliezer, "For what are you dismantling this national unity government? For what?!"

MK Michael Eitan (Likud), speaking at the Knesset rostrum this afternoon, said, "It is being said that the government was toppled over one word - and that's true. But the word is not 'settlements,' but rather something else: 'Primaries!'" Eitan thus accused Ben-Eliezer of toppling the national unity government because of his personal interest in winning the upcoming primaries race for Labor Party leader against MK Chaim Ramon and Amram Mitzna. Ben-Eliezer later responded to this charge by saying that all his advisors had recommended that he go to the primaries as Defense Minister (and not as leader of the opposition). Knesset Speaker Avraham Burg, also of Labor, then said, "You should switch your advisors."

President Moshe Katzav and Oded Tira, President of the Industrialists Association, were two of many who had called upon Labor to remain in the government at this time of national need. Tira warned that a budget crisis could put Israel's economy into enter a period of total chaos.

The Labor ministers' resignations will go into effect 48 hours after they were submitted. Culture Minister Matan Vilnai, who is not a Knesset Member, will have no official title at all, while the other ministers will retain their status as Knesset Members. Ben-Eliezer will replace Meretz MK Yossi Sarid as opposition leader, as Labor is larger than Meretz. Prime Minister Sharon will have to decide whether to form a narrow right-wing government, or to call new elections.

A Joke, But Just Barely

Not that the UN needs parody, but the Onion this week does a pretty good job, with UN Criticizes U.S. Detention Policy

With one in 25 students currently in detention, on suspension, or otherwise held after school on charges, the U.S. leads the world in disciplinary action against schoolchildren, the U.N. Human Rights Commission reported Monday...The American educational justice system is deeply flawed, perhaps beyond repair," said Roberta Leigh of Amnesty International. "Fifteen percent of U.S. students are African-American, but they make up more than half of all detained students. The U.S. expulsion rate is six times that of Canada and 15 times that of Japan. How can we call ourselves the world's leading democracy in the face of those figures?"

I'm pretty sure the UN is actually planning such a report...

A friend in need - Revised

The following is quoted from the Jerusalem Post, 27 October, 2002:

The leadership of the US Christian Coalition is heading to Israel for its first-ever solidarity mission at the invitation of the Tourism Ministry, the group announced over the weekend.

The five-day mission will be headed by Christian Coalition president Roberta Combs. According to Combs, the group decided to schedule the mission after thousands of supporters turned out for a pro-Israel rally in Washington on October 11.

"We urge all friends of Israel to visit and stand with Israel during these difficult times," she said.

The group plans to meet Israeli officials and terror victims and visit holy sites and Jewish communities in the West Bank.

But, of course, support for Israel among North American non-Jews is not confined to “the Christian Right”. Jean Kirkpatrick is another staunch supporter of democratic Israel. (For four years, 1981-85, Jean Kirkpatrick was US Ambassador to the UN under Ronald Reagan.)

The Jerusalem Post, October 28, 2002,reports:

"The United Nations hasn't really improved much in the years since I was there, and it hasn't really improved much at all with respect to Israel," said Kirkpatrick. She said that when she first began attending Security Council and General Assembly sessions as America's ambassador, "I was very deeply shocked by the simple anti-Semitism that pervaded the place." The anti-Semitism and anti-Israel sentiment she was exposed to at the world body was "mysterious," and "very, very strange," she said.

"We need to speak out about the calumny spoken at the UN," she said, noting that in addition to condemning anti-Jewish hatred emanating from Arab countries, Western European nations, such as France, should be taken to task for failing to halt anti-Semitism at home.

"We must tell the truth. We must tell the world about what happens that is dangerous to the people of Israel and the Jews of the world." Kirkpatrick praised Israel for taking risks for peace numerous times during its half-century history. "The state of Israel has taken more risks for peace than any state in the world, and has received very few rewards for those risks for peace," she said.
...
Kirkpatrick noted that she had doubted the effectiveness of the Oslo Accords in bringing peace to Israel from the time of their singing, in 1993. Oslo, she said, entailed "large risks from the people of Israel and little promise. Really, nothing occurred to make Israel stronger or better situated to face the future," she said.

She urged the hundreds of guests who turned out for the dinner to continue their support for Israel.

"With peace, the whole area could enjoy a better life. That should be our hope, that should be our prayer, and that should be our American policy wherever we can make that our policy."

Many non-Jewish organizations support Israel, and the web sites of these organizations are loaded with vital information relevant to pro-Israel advocacy. Examples include:

Christian Action For Israel (CAFI), Ayn Rand Institute (ARI), Empower America (whose board includes Jean Kirkpatrick, Jack Kemp and Bill Bennett), and the International Christian Zionist Center (ICZC), located in Jerusalem.

Israel also enjoys the support of certain non-Jewish web-based news outlets, a category in which WorldNetDaily , and particularly Joseph Farah’s articles, are conspicuous.

Similarly, there are many non-Jewish bloggers who support Israel. Noteworthy in this category is my colleague Dawson Jackson, A BISI member, who not only runs a pro-Israel web site, but who also opened his site to me for posting before the creation of IsraPundit.

Why do all these non-Jewish individuals and organizations rush to support Israel? There may be, of course, reasons specific to each individual and organization, including religious reasons. But polls indicate that the overarching consideration is solidarity with a republic whose values of democracy and freedom are identical with ours. In fact, after July 2000 (when Arafat walked away from Barak’s peace proposal), as I first got involved in a close examination of the Israel-Arab conflict, this was the principal consideration that ultimately led me to support pro-Israel advocacy.

May Israel flourish.

Addendum, 11:00 am, EST:

Subsequent to posting the article above earlier today, I came across a Jerusalem Post article by Yechiel Eckstein, dated 29 October, 2002, and bearing the title Friends in Deed. Eckstein, founder and president of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews and Stand for Israel, writes, inter alia:

On October 20, more than five million people across America stood in solidarity with the beleaguered State of Israel and prayed for peace in the Holy Land. Most remarkably, this massive show of support was made not by Jews, but by Christians.

I led prayers for Israel at Mount Paran church in suburban Atlanta, together with thousands of Christians who chose to dedicate their Sunday prayers to this lofty - and I believe, most noble - cause.

The good people of Mount Paran were far from alone. Theirs was one of nearly 20,000 churches across the United States that joined in this very special Day of Prayer and Solidarity with Israel, sponsored by the Stand for Israel project of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews.
...
This remarkable national effort, slated to be an annual event on the American Christian calendar, came on the heels of a new poll we commissioned that sought to understand Evangelicals' motivation for supporting Israel...

Among Evangelicals who expressed support for Israel, well over half attributed their support to non-theological factors such as Israel's democratic system of government and the value it places on freedom, the country's status as a long-standing ally of the US in the war against terror, or the fact that Jews have been persecuted for centuries and need a homeland.
...
Far more Evangelicals support Israel because of its role in advancing freedom and democracy in the world today than because of any theological reasons. And even when they cite the chief theological basis for supporting Israel, nearly twice as many cited the book of Genesis as opposed to the book of Revelation.

Heartening news indeed.

Contributed by Joseph Alexander Norland

Slide Show on PA Plans for Destruction of Israel

From Frontpage Magazine

Divest from Europe

A new petition:

To: U.S. Congress
The multi-governmental entity known as the European Union (EU) has a long track record of supporting the terrorist organization known as the Palestinian Authority (PA) and defense of the terrorist leader Yasser Arafat. In its latest outrage, it has pledged 29 million Euros (approx. $28.5 million) to the PA. History has shown us that the money sent to the PA will largely be spent either in the pursuit and/or encouragement of terror or to personally enrich Arafat and his cronies.

With the United States having declared war upon global terror, it is inappropriate for citizens of the United States to support a group that supports terror. We hereby urge corporations headquartered in the USA to divest themselves of their holdings in the nations of the EU and for the United States government to use all political pressure to force the EU to abandon its terrorist ally.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

From UN Watch

UN Watch is an excellent organization. This is from their weekly report, and I recommend e-mailing it around to anyone interested in Israel issues:


THE WEDNESDAY WATCH
ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY FROM UN WATCH IN GENEVA
Wednesday, 30 October 2002
Issue 89

NEWS:
UN Special Rapporteurs are mandated to conduct fact-finding missions and
bring to the United Nations informed and independent judgments. On November
5, Mr. John Dugard, the UN's Special Rapporteur for issues of human rights
in the West Bank and Gaza, will present to the UN General Assembly a report
that omits crucial and obvious facts and contradicts UN reporting policy on
terrorism.

ANALYSIS:
One day before the first anniversary of the September 11 attacks, the United
Nations' Policy Working Group on the United Nations and Terrorism issued a
report that included the following statement: "In its public pronouncements,
the United Nations should project a clear and principled message,
underscoring the unacceptability of terrorism ... These messages must be
targeted to key audiences -- particularly to achieve a greater impact in
dissuading would-be supporters of terrorist acts."

An advance copy of Mr. Dugard's report shows utter disregard for UN policy
as well as common sense. He demonstrates such willful ignorance of the
threat and motivation of Palestinian terrorist organizations that the report
could only have been written in bad faith.

Mr. Dugard's most recent trip to Israel and the West Bank took place August
25-30. Four days before he arrived, two car bombs were intercepted by
Israeli soldiers near Jenin. This security operation was reported in The
Jerusalem Post, a leading English-language Israeli newspaper. Four days
after Mr. Dugard left, a car bomb containing 600 kg of explosives was
stopped at a roadblock. This incident was reported by the BBC. Ignoring
these incidents, Mr. Dugard describes Israeli closures as "so
disproportionate, so remote from the interests of security, that one is led
to ask whether they are not in part designed to punish, humiliate, and
subjugate the Palestinian people." As for the roadblocks themselves, he
fails to make even one mention of the fact that they have thwarted dozens of
suicide bombings this year, though media reports to substantiate these facts
are easily accessible in English for anyone inclined to look. Instead Mr.
Dugard offers only three sentences, written more in the style of an aspiring
novelist than a fact-finder: "A group of young soldiers, with the arrogance
of adolescence or its immediate aftermath, in dusty uniforms with ominous
rifles over their shoulders, entrusted with arbitrary power over the
movement of the people of Palestine. Long lines of vehicles or people
presenting papers to soldiers behind concrete blocks, all aware that their
movement is completely in the hands of these young foreign soldiers. The
arrogance of the occupier and the humiliation of the occupied." That's all.

To explain and excuse Palestinian terror, Mr. Dugard postulates that it is
"the hopelessness of despair which leads inexorably to suicide bombings."
While the admittedly miserable situation of the Palestinians may generate
more recruits for Islamic terror organizations, clearly the ideology of
jihad is the motive of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Again Mr. Dugard ignores
readily available documents and statements of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the
main perpetrators of suicide bombings. Easily found on terrorism-related web
sites, the English translation of the Hamas Charter states: "To face the
usurpation of Palestine by Jews, we have no escape from raising the banner
of Jihad." Mr. Dugard also managed to overlook a Hamas statement, after the
Hebrew University bombing on August 1, that Jews should leave Israel and
"return to where they came from." And this statement was reported in the
English-language press. Only gross incompetence or willful ignorance can
explain Mr. Dugard's omission of these facts.

Mr. Dugard's report is a disgrace to the institution of UN Special
Rapporteurs. In addition, his "see no evil" approach to Palestinian terror
contradicts each of the UN Policy Working Group's criteria for UN statements
on terror: clarity, principle, unacceptability of terrorism, and dissuasion.
Mr. Dugard should resign without delay.

The Temple Mount

Here is a good post from In Context pointed out by the musical Tonecluster on the immanent collapse of part of the Temple Mount

Excerpts from the New Hamas Comic; Praising Terrorism To Children

No Batman and Robin for these kids. Getting the children ready for meeting virgins soon.

Hamas has launched a new comic for children, al-Fateh (http://www.al-fateh.net). The second edition, (Oct. 2002) as published on the Internet site of the Hamas movement, lashes out against the "Jewish enemy" and the other countries that assist it against the Palestinians.

The newspaper also attacks those assisting the "Jewish enemy" from within the Palestinian population, portraying them as traitors who sell themselves to the Jews. The newspaper connects the Jihad and the religion of Islam. It calls upon children to educate themselves according to Islam, in order for them to become Jihad fighters and assist the Palestinians. Below the headline, "Why is Darer Furious?" - Darer is the name of one of the children - is a dialogue between two Palestinian children. The dialogue indicates that children are integral participants in the Palestinian Intifada. The children complain of the silence of the Arab world regarding the current events in the region and they mention their own never tiring activity on behalf of the Intifada: "We, the children of Palestine, take part in the national struggle and encourage our heroes… We observe the actions of the settlers and of the soldiers of the occupation, and report it to our heroes…"

One of the children seeks justification for his claims from within Islamic tradition. "Our expectations will not be fulfilled until we fight and kill the Jews, especially as we are standing east of the river [of Jordan] with the Jews still standing west of the river of Jordan; and until the rock and the tree says, 'woe Muslim, woe subjects of Allah, here is a Jew [hiding] behind me. Come and kill him…' "

A Suicide Bomber Was Caught En Route To An Attack After His Name Was Accidentally Published

Seems an endless supply of scum looking to hook up with virgins in the afterlife

In its announcement taking responsibility for the terrorist attack at Ariel (27 October 2002), the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade mistakenly indicated that its operative Muhammad Shakir had carried out the attack at Ariel. It turns out that Shakir was not the suicide bomber involved in the Ariel attack, but he was planning to commit a different suicide attack in Israel. The erroneous announcement exposed Shakir, and early this morning IDF forces arrested him in Nablus.

Early this morning, IDF forces operating in Nablus arrested Muhammad Shakir, an activist in the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade who planned to carry out a suicide bombing. Shakir's name was published by accident when the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade claimed responsibility for the terrorist attack at Ariel. The Al-Aqsa operatives mistakenly believed that Shakir had carried out the attack at Ariel, and their blunder exposed him. The security forces conducted a manhunt after him, and early this morning he was arrested together with 13 other wanted individuals.

The IDF arrested 14 wanted individuals during the night (28 October 2002)

Why Arafat Should be Killed

Arafat is the Svengali of the Palestinian people. His bug eyed, glassy gaze puts the Palestinian people in his total control. They melt in his arms like a young lover in the arms of Don Juan.

If Arafat was a constructive leader, this control would be a good thing. Unfortunately, Arafat is a cancer for his people. He is not a nation or institution builder, he is a perpetual revolutionary, a destroyer of nations and institutions.

The Palestinians are once again in the position to have a state. This is a great accomplishment for the newest ‘people’ on the earth who they themselves did not know were a ‘people’ not very long ago.

But Arafat, and therefore the Palestinians, are pathologically unable to grab this offering. Such a grasp causes Arafat’s raison d’etre and therefore Arafat to disappear. As a matter of self preservation, Arafat is unable to extend his hand.

It would be best for the Palestinian people, if Arafat did not have this destructive power over the Palestinians. The only way to break Arafat’s strangle hold is to kill him. Exiling him would just cause him to exert this power from abroad. He needs to be killed.

There Should be No Easing of Restrictions on the Palestinians

The world cries for the plight of the Palestinians, locked in their homes, road blocks, etc. At the same time we here that Arafat is the legitimate leader of the Palestinians (even though his term of office expired a few years ago.

Well, Arafat, as leader of the Palestinians, has declared war on Israel and most often undertakes that war with means which violate international law such as suicide bombing.

As a result of this war declared by the Palestinians, the Israelis suffer. This is the goal of the Palestinians, to make the Israelis suffer so much that they will give in and move.

There is an asymmetry in this battle though that makes it very difficult for Israel to ever win. While the Israelis are made to suffer, and most of the world does not have much of a problem with this, the world at the same time screams that the Palestinians can not be made to suffer, the U.S. pushes this point and even Sharon seems to pay lip serves to this idea.

If the Palestinians are not made to suffer very much, why should they end the hostilities? Their standard of living has decreased at a faster rate than it had been decreasing but such decrease was expected and their standard of living should decrease to the levels of other backward non-oiled Arabs. meanwhile, foreign aid is flowing in which allows the people to drop the much abhorred physical labor and set hours and other manifestations of modernity.

The Palestinians understand the if the Israelis are made to suffer enough, the Israelis will through in the towel. The Israelis, unfortunately, have not realized the same thing. Israel needs to cause the situation of the Palestinians to be as bad as possible so that they will be incentivised to force their leadership to end the war. So long as their living situation is tolerable (and it currently is as they demonstrate), and it has not been getting worse recently, their is no reason for them to oppose the killing of Israelis.

Israel need to reintroduce symmetry into the equation. Israel needs to cause the Palestinian populace to feel the ill effects of its 'chosen' leadership.

Israel should stop the flow of humanitarian aid and all other aid into the area since it supports the enemies of Israel. No Palestinian workers should be allowed into Israel. All phone lines, etc to the area should be cut as well as travel.

To the extent that it can be argued that the people have no say in th matter, the leaders who have robbed the people blind, should also be specifically targetted. All of the huge villas built by Arafat's cronies should be levelled, their businesses destroyed, etc.

Until Israel acts like it is in a war as opposed to just in an inturlude before peace appears, it will not be able to stop the violence.

Arafat's 'reform' Cabinet: more of the same

The more things alter the more they stay the same. Even more so

JERUSALEM — Turning aside calls for a shake-up of his government, Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat named a new Cabinet yesterday that closely resembles his old one.
"I'm proud of the Palestinian democratic process. This is a victory for the Palestinian people," Arafat said. "It is a step toward reform."

At the same time, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was embroiled in a political battle within his ruling coalition that could lead to its dissolution and bring about early elections. But intense maneuvering was taking place in advance of a showdown vote scheduled today on the national budget.

Palestinian legislators, meeting in the West Bank city of Ramallah, approved the new Cabinet lineup by a 56-18 vote. Dissenters complained that by retaining several ministers accused of corruption, Arafat showed he was not serious about reforms or willing to accept curbs on his own powers

Arafat Wins Parliament Approval, Faces Critics

The challenge: read this entire article--it is short--and ask yourself what the hell Arafat is saying in the concluding paragraph. Talk about Orwellian "doublespeak."

RAMALLAH, West Bank (PINA) - “Today was a promising day for Palestinian democracy,” unnamed Palestinian Parliament member commented after a vote of confidence that approved Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat’s new cabinet on Tuesday.

Last month, the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), or Parliament refused to ratify a cabinet, selected by Arafat in what was seen as the Palestinian leader’s greatest political setbacks for years.

The PLC’s action had then strengthened the Israeli and American efforts to sideline the Palestinian President, although the PLC’s rejection of the cabinet was provoked by complaints of corruption, and by Arafat’s alleged failure to share power. Both Israel and the United States however are seeking a cabinet that would “guarantee the security of Israel” and subsequently end a two-year-old uprising against the Israeli occupation.

Today however, triumphant Arafat regained some of his old status and once again emerged on top. With a 56-18 vote, a new Palestinian cabinet was approved. Cheering members of the council sang a national song, as others clapped and some embraced. But the critics, who maintain that the new cabinet is hardly up to the challenge was also loud.

500 engineers turn out for anti-normalisation committee meeting


And this is what is going on in an Arab country that has signed a peace agreement with Israel. Is there any end to Arab hatred of Israel?

AMMAN — More than 500 engineers attending the first meeting of the expanded Jordanian Engineers Association's (JEA) anti-normalisation committee pledged to continue the anti-normalisation with Israel drive, saying it protects the Kingdom from “Zionist threats.”
In a statement made available to The Jordan Times, JEA President Azzam Hneidi said those present at the meeting announced they would not succumb to pressure and rescind the professional associations' campaign to counter normal relations with the Jewish state.

Last week, the JEA announced plans to open the door for membership to those interested in joining its anti-normalisation committee.

The association said it intends to reach a minimum of 500 members, with former committee membership standing at 25.

Rabbis for Olive's Rights? Terrorist Exploits Olive Trees To Murder Three

More blood on the hands of the anti-Israel left.

(IMRA) Israel Radio reported this morning that the terrorist who murdered two girls (12 and 14) and a woman in Hermesh exploited the olive trees that reach up to the community located between Mevo Dotan and Baka al-Gharbiya some 6 kilometers west of the Green Line in northern Samaria.

The trees provided cover to approach the community and made it possible for the terrorist to reconnoiter the area in advance, as an olive harvester. The terrorist slipped under a small gap that the terrorist located at a point in the security fence between the fence and the ground.

It should be noted that many Jewish communities have warned that the olive tree harvest campaign sponsored by the Israeli Left that includes harvesting in "off limit" areas up to the edge of Jewish communities endangers those communities by providing a framework within which terrorists can scout the Jewish communities and prepare for terrorist attacks.

It remains to be seen if Rabbis for Human Rights and the other Leftist organizations associated with the olive harvest campaign will make any remarks about the murder of the Israelis. It also remains unclear if any politicians from the Left will publicly take Yasser Arafat and the PA to task for declining to restrict terror attacks against Israelis beyond the Green Line.

A Vision For Israel

Since this will be my first post as a member of Bloggers In Support of Israel (BISI), I thought it would be best to start with my views on Israel.

Unlike other countries in the region, Israel is a liberal democracy like America and we have many shared values. They have taken a barren desert and turned it into thriving country, especially in comparison to the Arab countries that surround Israel. Through their industry they have created an economy with a per capita GDP around $18,000 as compared to an average of $2500 per capita in other Arab states. They don't wallow in misfortune or blame others for problems of their own making. They solve problems. Recently I blogged about some new technology they developed for desalinization that they expect to deploy in the next couple of years. That's a single example of Israeli industry that has amazingly managed to thrive in an environment of terror.

Their opponents are clearly terrorists. They don't wear uniforms and target civilians in their suicide bombings. The fact that they don't wear uniforms especially irks me. Soldiers wear uniforms to protect civilians. It identifies them for their opponents -- they know who to shoot -- and therefore protects civilians. Recently Kofi Annan "deplored" civilian deaths when Israel went after a known terrorist leader. My response was that I'll "deplore" Israel's accidental killing of civilians when the terrorists start wearing uniforms and quit holing up with civilians.

As for a solution to the violence, I don't have one other than building a wall around the West Bank. I do have a vision for what the area should look like when all of the disputes have been settled. There would be two states that are contiguous on land and in the air. That means Israel would get Gaza, not because they would want it but because it would remove a source of irritation and put them closer to a real solution. A like amount of land would be provided to the Palestinians to augment the West Bank.

A wall would be built around this new Palestinian state, draped in razor wire if need be, to prevent bombers from being able to enter Israel. This might not prevent any violence between Israel and the new Palestinian state but it would bring the violence out into the open. There would be points of ingress and egress that allowed Palestinians through that included explosives detectors.

Jerusalem would be the capitol of the Israeli state. No shared sovereignty but with Israel making accomodations to Muslims in the same way they have made accomodations to Christians. Muslims would manage their holy places as Christians manage the churches in Jerusalem. As for places that are holy to both Jews and Muslims, I don't know and am open to suggestions.

There you have it. I have no idea how to get from where we are now to this solution but it seems optimal given everything I've been able to learn about the Arab-Israeli conflict over the years. I'm, of course, open to suggestions and look forward to posting on Israpundit many times in the future.

Gas the Jews - Hitler Did Not FINNISH the Job

Finland will not export gas detection equipment to Israel. The email address given does not seem to work. Israel should announce patents on items which are refused to Israel will not be valid in Israel and Israel will copy such products (unless it would damage Israel too much).

FINLAND REFUSES TO SELL GAS KITS TO ISRAEL
Finland refuses to sell to Israel what are considered to be the best
gas-detection kits in the world, despite widespread evaluations that Iraq
may attack Israel with poison chemical weapons. The computerized kits
accurately identify chemical warfare materials, but Finland claims that the
European Union forbids the export of dual-use equipment to countries in
conflict. A speech by Finnish Foreign Minister Erkki Tuominioja provides
some "background" to the decision, however. "I am appalled at the Israeli
policy of suppression, humiliation, subordination and impoverishment
towards the Palestinians," he said, revealing what could be Finland's true
feelings about Israel. Tuominioja's e-mail address is
"Erkki.Tuominioja@formin.fi".

Correction [by JA Norland]: The name of the Finnish FM is actually Erkki Tuomioja, and not as shown above. His e-mail address is Erkki.Tuomioja@formin.fi.

Pro-Islamic Hackers Gear Up for Cyber War, Say Experts

Opening another front. But of course two can play that game

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Pro-Islamic hackers are on the frontline of a potential new cyber war after the end of a cease-fire by "hacktivists" and virus designers that followed the September 11 attacks on the United States, Internet experts say.

Pro-Islamic hackers are escalating attacks against countries backing the U.S. war on terror and its campaign against Iraq, while the "Bugbear" worm and last week's strike on the Internet backbone signal that cyber villains are again on the prowl.

London-based computer security firm mi2g said on Tuesday that October had already qualified as the worst month for overt digital attacks since its records began in 1995, with an estimated 16,559 attacks carried out on systems and Web Sites.

The firm which advises banks, insurance and reinsurance firms on security said politically motivated attacks had risen "sharply."

"We have noticed that more and more Islamic interest hacking groups are beginning to rally under a common anti-U.S., UK, Australia, anti-India and anti-Israeli agenda," it said.

According to the zone-H database, an independent site which monitors hacker activity, politically motivated Web Site defacements make up around 11 percent of the total.

Most hacking is attributable to "script kiddies" from Brazil to Germany "bragging and strutting," said Dean White, the SANS Institute Internet Storm Center coordinator for the Asia Pacific.

But real-life events like the September 11 anniversary, simmering violence in Israel, bombs in the Philippines or the October 12 blasts that killed 180 people on Indonesia's island of Bali all could be expected to serve as inspirations on the Web.

SOMETHING AROUND THE CORNER

"We were saying we have to be ready and we have to be prepared, it's been quiet for too long, there's going to be something around the corner," White told Reuters.

News from Israel

Here are many links to articles of current interest about Israel and surrounding the area. You can pick and choose among over 20 news items

Mideast expert shares view of terrorism, Islam

This is indeed good news! Expert says that a mere 130 million believers in Islam side with the fundamentalists and anti-Westerners.

America needs to know who it's fighting in its war on terror, Mideast expert Jonathan Schanzer said in a speech Sunday at the Pensacola Cultural Center.

Schanzer, who spoke to about 70 people for the Pensacola Jewish Federation's Distinguished Speaker Series, said that ideas of battling Islam are mistaken.

All 19 hijackers of the September 11 terrorist attacks were Muslims, and so are all 19 of the FBI's most wanted terrorists. But with 1.3 billion Muslims estimated worldwide, there is only a small, but growing faction of what he calls "Militant Islam" spreading an "epidemic" of terror.

"This is the most confusing war America has gotten into. When you say you're fighting terrorism, you're fighting a tactic. It's like fighting against trench warfare. We don't exactly say who it is we're fighting," Schanzer said. "Islam is many things - just like Christianity. This small offshoot of 10 to 15 percent is making the most noise."

He estimates 130 million people share the views of Militant Islam, spouting a bitter hatred for Western ideas, including capitalism, individualism and consumerism. It has strongholds in Algeria, Egypt, Somalia, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, the Palestinian territories, Lebanon, Jordan, Yemen, Malaysia, the Philippines, Indonesia, Nigeria and Pakistan.

The terror groups spawned by Militant Islam include al-Qaida, an umbrella group for 27 other groups, orchestrating operations of Islamic militants around the globe.

Arafat Names New Cabinet; Israeli Coalition Creaks

Here is the overview: Suicide bombers murder Israelis. Israel invades Arab areas to nab terrorists. Arafat says he is unable to do much because of Israel incursions. The US tells Israel to ease off. The suicide bombers reemerge to start their killing again. Arafat denounces terror and on and on and on.

Yasser Arafat named a new Palestinian cabinet and extended an olive branch to Israel on Tuesday as Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon grappled with his worst political crisis since coming to power.

Arafat, under pressure at home and abroad for sweeping reforms, unveiled his new government in a speech to the Palestinian parliament that was at times defiant and conciliatory toward Israel after two years of bloodshed.

Arafat's speech coincided with a political fight in Israel that has brought Sharon's broad-based coalition close to collapse in a row over government funding for Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

"They reoccupied our land and cities but failed to occupy our awareness, our determination, or to break our will or our souls," Arafat said at his battered headquarters in the West Bank city of Ramallah.

But the Palestinian president also repeated his condemnation of "all terrorist acts that harm civilians" and said the Palestinians had chosen peace as their "strategic option."

"So here we extend our hand to you in reconciliation and we extend the olive branch to resume the path that we began in Madrid and Oslo," Arafat said, referring to venues for peace talks that led to a historic interim accord with Israel in 1993.

Despite Arafat's words, his actions appeared unlikely to satisfy the United States or Israel. Both have called for a sweeping overhaul of the Palestinian Authority and have tried to sideline the Palestinian leader.

Israel claims it holds 175 Palestinians as suicide terrorists.

At the rate Israel is capturing terrorists, there will soon be a Return--Palestinians imprisoned within Israel. Meanwhile, Arafat mouths same cliches.

RAMALLAH, West Bank -- Israel has captured 175 Palestinians suspected of plotting suicide bomb attacks, officials confirmed Monday, saying the figure shows that Palestinian militants are relentless in trying to attack Israelis.
Since Sept. 2000, 83 Palestinians have blown themselves up, killing 296 Israelis on buses, in malls, at gas stations and in cafes.

The Palestinians say harsh Israeli military strikes and strict travel bans in the West Bank and Gaza Strip provoke further bombings and shootings.

Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat has denounced attacks on civilians, and was to repeat such a condemnation today, in a speech to the Palestinian parliament.

"Such attacks do not help our national interest in having our independent state, nor the Israeli interest of having security and peace," said a draft of the Arafat speech obtained by The Associated Press.

Why one should oppose a second Palestinian-Arab state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza - Part 11 of 23

This piece continues a series of which the first ten parts were posted on September 8, 9, 11, 17, 20, 22, 23, and October 7, 24, and 28, 2002. The object of the series is to provide a database that is not only reliable and well-documented but also one for which documents are easily accessible, preferably from web resources. The term "second Palestinian-Arab state" is used in order to underscore that one Palestinian-Arab state already exists: it's called Jordan, and it is located in that part of Eastern Paletsine that was originally to have been part of the Jewish National Home.

11. Creation of a second Palestinian Arab state and will not pacify the region. Destabilizing internecine wars among the region's countries, such as the Iran/Iraq or the Iraq/Kuwait wars, are unrelated to the Israeli/Arab conflict or to the absence of a second Palestinian-Arab state.

On February 14, 1984, President Ronald Reagan welcomed King Hussein of Jordan and President Mubarak of Egypt to Washington. Following Reagan’s comments, Mubarak said:

The Lebanese crisis is a stark reminder of the centrality of the Palestinian problem. That question must be addressed frontally and without delay.

Shoretly after 9-11, The Guardian wrote:

[T]he Bush administration is reportedly preparing to pressure Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon to accept a viable Palestinian state including a shared Jerusalem...

All this comes close to recognition, by the two leaders of the war against terror, of the centrality of the Palestinian question.

Thess are but two examples to illustrate a spectacular achievement of the Arab propaganda machine: pulling the wool over our eyes, the Arabs have succeeded in convincing the West of the “centrality of the Palestinian problem”, with the concomitant conclusions that the West should extract from Israel concession after concession.

The British-Irish quagmire has festered for 700 years, but never attained the status of “centrality”; the Balkans have been simmering for even longer, but never attained the status of “centrality”. The Palestinian Arabs alone have succeeded in pushing their way to the head of the historical queue and convince the world of their “centrality”. Their success is a badge of dishonour for the West that has allowed itself to be had.

One of the corollaries of the “centrality” hoax implies that the way to solve the Middle East conflict is by granting the Palestinian Arabs a sovereign state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (“Yesha”). The object of this article is to argue that the Israeli-Arab conflict is a minor, compared with other Middle-East problems, and that consequently, creating a sovereign Palestinian-Arab state in “Yesha” will solve nothing, even had such a state been a solution to the Israeli-Arab conflict. The argument is based on two elements: (i) the historical record proves that the Israeli-Arab conflict is indeed a minor conflict in relation to the conflicts among the Middle East and Arab nations overall; (ii) the Israeli-Arab conflict has nothing to do with the real problems of the Middle-East and Arab nations, such as oppressing minorities, oppressing their own masses and squelching development.

To demonstrate that the Israeli-Arab conflict is minor compared with the conflicts among the Middle East and Arab nations overall, we recall firstly the two major regional wars that took place during the last 25 years, namely, the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-89 that cost one million lives, and the Iraq-Kuwait war of 1990-1991.

The question arises: since these are the major regional conflicts in terms of casualties and/or international involvement, and since Israel had nothing at all to do with igniting these flames, how would have a second Palestinian state prevented these truly “central” events?

The foregoing discussion dealt with the two major conflicts in the area, but the region and the Arab countries generally have seen many more conflicts and wars. An article posted by the International Christian Embassy, Jerusalem, provided the following relevant details about war casualties:

Arab-Israeli dispute (over 5 decades)... ..70,000

Algerian civil war (1954-62)... ... ... 1,000,000
Egypt's invasion of Yemen (early 60s).... 250,000
Lebanese civil war (1975-76)... ... ..... 150,000
Libya's invasion of Chad (1977-87)... ... 100,000
Iran-Iraq War (1980-88)... ... ... .... 1,000,000+
Sudanese civil war (1988-present) .. .. 1,000,000+

Once again: how would have a second Palestinian-Arab state in Yesha prevented any of this inter-Moslem carnage?

The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) ran an article listing recent international conflicts, both those that are ongoing and those that have ended. The list includes, among others, the following conflicts that involve Arab or Moslem countries:

Afghanistan Civil War .....1989 -->
Algeria FIS / GIA Struggle 1992 -->
Ethiopia Eritrea War ......1998 -->
India Kashmiri Uprising ..1970s -->
Indonesia ...........Aceh 1986 --->
Indonesia .....Kalimantan 1983 --->
Philippines Moro Uprising 1970s--->
Russia Chechen Uprising ..1992 --->
Somalia Civil War ..........1991-->
Sudan Second Civil War ....1983 -->
Turkey Conflict with Kurds 1984 -->

Albania Civil War .................1997
Bosnia Civil War ..................1992-1995
Chad Civil Wars ...................1960s-1990s
Cyprus Civil and Turkish Invasion .1970s
Eritrea War for Independence ......1958-1991
Ethiopia First War with Somalia ...1977-1978
Ethiopia Second War with Somalia ..1998-1999
India War with Pakistan ...........1965
India Bangladeshi Independence War 1971
Indonesia East Timor ..............1974-1999
Iran Iran-Iraq War ................1980-1989
Iraq Kurdish Rebellions ...........1960s-1990s
Iraq Gulf War .....................1990-1991
Jordan Civil War ..................1970
Lebanon Civil Conflict ............1958
Lebanon Civil War .................1975-1990
Libya War with Chad ...............1986-1987
Russia Chechen Uprising ...........1994-1996
Serbia-Kosovo Secessionist Movement 1990-1999
Somalia .........................1980-1984
Somalia .........................1984-1989
Sudan First Civil War .............1955-1972
Tajikistan Civil War ..............1992-1997
West.Sahara Polisario-Moroccan War 1975-1991
Yemen Civil War ...................1960s-1980s
Yemen ...........................1990-1994
Yemen AR ..........................1960-1964
Yemen PR ..........................1984-1989

Another way to look at the “centrality” thesis is by reviewing the history of the Mid-East countries over the last generation or two. Because of space constraints, the following text refers to Syria and Iraq only, using the brief review given in the Web version of Encarta; reporting the entries for Algeria, Libya, Sudan, etc. had to be omitted.
Syria:

As it became clear in 1975 that Egypt would pursue a bilateral agreement with Israel, Syria forged closer ties with Jordan. The following year, Syria intervened in the Lebanese civil war and subsequently became mired in the continuing conflict. In 1980 Syria signed a 20-year treaty of friendship and cooperation with the USSR...

Domestically, Assad’s regime was shaken by growing civil disturbances. An extremist group called the Muslim Brotherhood was accused of several assassinations. In 1982 government troops suppressed a full-scale rebellion by the brotherhood in and around Hamah, reducing much of the city to rubble. In 1986 the United Kingdom broke diplomatic relations with Syria and the United States imposed sanctions, both accusing Syria of sponsoring international terrorism.

Syria has been considered an occupying force within Lebanon since the mid-1970s, when it sent thousands of troops there. In February 1987 Syria ordered a force of 7,000 into the Muslim sector of Beirut in an attempt to restore order between warring factions. In October 1990 a Syrian-led assault crushed resistance in East Beirut, reuniting the Lebanese capital. Although most of the fighting in Lebanon ended in 1990, and Syrian and Lebanese forces signed a friendship treaty in May 1991 calling for mutual cooperation, Syrian forces remained in the country. As of mid-1996 Syria still had an estimated 35,000 or more troops stationed in Lebanon and continued to exercise significant control over Lebanese politics...

Syria also has had a long and troubled history with neighboring Iraq. Syria was one of the few Arab nations to support Iran during the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988).
...
Although the United States removed Syria from its list of major drug-producing and drug-trafficking countries in 1997, it did not lift restrictions on economic aid and exports to Syria, because it still considered it a nation that encouraged terrorism.

How would a second Palestinian-Arab state in Yesha put an end to Syria’s occupation of Lebanon, the support for international terrorism, the internal repression, and what Encarta calls Syria’s “long and troubled history”?

From the same encyclopaedia, here is Iraq’s history, 1975-2000, in a nutshell:

In early 1974 heavy fighting erupted in northern Iraq between government forces and Kurdish nationalists, who rejected as inadequate a new Kurdish autonomy law based on the 1970 agreement. The Kurds, led by Mustafa al-Barzani, received arms and other supplies from Iran. After Iraq agreed in early 1975 to make major concessions to Iran in settling their border disputes, Iran halted aid to the Kurds, and the revolt was dealt a severe blow. In July 1979 President Bakr was succeeded by General Saddam Hussein, a Sunni Muslim and fellow member of the Arab Baath Socialist Party.

In 1979 Islamic revolutionaries in Iran succeeded in overthrowing the country’s secular government and established an Islamic republic there. Tension between the Iraqi government and Iran’s new Islamic regime increased during that year, when unrest among Iranian Kurds spilled over into Iraq. Sunni-Shia religious animosities exacerbated the conflict. In September 1980 Iraq declared its 1975 agreement with Iran, which drew the border between the countries down the middle of the Shatt al Arab, null and void and claimed authority over the entire river. The quarrel flared into a full-scale war, the Iran-Iraq War. Iraq quickly overran a large part of the Arab-populated province of Khuzistan in Iran and destroyed the Abadan refinery... In early 1982 Iran launched a counteroffensive, and by May it had reclaimed much of the territory conquered by Iraq in 1980. In the ensuing stalemate, each side inflicted heavy damage on the other and on Persian Gulf shipping. After a ceasefire with Iran came into effect in August 1988, the Iraqi government again moved to suppress the Kurdish insurgency. During the late 1980s the nation rebuilt its military machine, in part through bank credits and technology obtained from Western Europe and the United States.
...
In 1990 Iraq revived a long-standing territorial dispute with Kuwait, its ally during the war with Iran, claiming that overproduction of petroleum by Kuwait was injuring Iraq’s economy by depressing the price of crude oil. Iraqi troops invaded Kuwait on August 2 and rapidly took over the country. The UN Security Council issued a series of resolutions that condemned the occupation, imposed a broad trade embargo on Iraq, and demanded that Iraq withdraw unconditionally by January 15, 1991.

When Iraq failed to comply, a coalition led by the United States began intensive aerial bombardment of military and infrastructural targets in Iraq and Kuwait in January 1991. The ensuing Persian Gulf War proved disastrous for Iraq, which was forced out of Kuwait in about six weeks. Coalition forces invaded southern Iraq, and tens of thousands of Iraqis were killed. Many of the country’s armored vehicles and artillery pieces were destroyed, and its nuclear and chemical weapons facilities were severely damaged. In April, Iraq agreed to UN terms for a permanent ceasefire; coalition troops withdrew from southern Iraq as a UN peacekeeping force moved in to police the Iraq-Kuwait border. Meanwhile, Hussein used his remaining military forces to suppress rebellions by Shias in the south and Kurds in the north. Hundreds of thousands of Kurdish refugees fled to Turkey and Iran, and U.S., British, and French troops landed inside Iraq’s northern border to establish a Kurdish enclave with refugee camps to protect another 600,000 Kurds from Iraqi government reprisals. In addition, international forces set up “no-fly zones” in both northern and southern Iraq to ensure the safety of the Kurdish and Shia populations...

In June 1993 the United States launched a widely criticized cruise missile attack against Iraq in retaliation for a reported assassination plot against former U.S. president George Bush...

In 1994 Iraq continued its efforts to crush internal resistance with an economic embargo of the Kurdish-populated north and a military campaign against Shia rebels in the southern marshlands. The Shias were quickly crushed, but the crisis in the Kurdish region, which had long suffered from internal rivalries, was prolonged...

Hussein’s interference with UN weapons inspectors nearly brought Iraq into another military crisis in early 1998. However, UN secretary general Kofi Annan negotiated an agreement that secured Iraq’s compliance and averted military strikes by the United States and its allies. In December of that year, in response to reports that Iraq was continuing to block inspections, the United States and Britain launched a four-day series of air strikes on Iraqi military and industrial targets. In response, Iraq declared that it would no longer comply with UN inspection teams, called for an end to the sanctions, and threatened to fire on aircraft patrolling the “no-fly zones.” Through 2001, Iraq continued to challenge the patrols, and British and U.S. planes struck Iraqi missile launch sites and other targets.

How will the creation of a second Palestinian-Arab state solve the problem of a predatory regime that has fought savage wars with its Arab neighbours? How will the creation of a second Palestinian-Arab state stop the regime from oppressing its Kurdish and Shite minorities, including the use of gas?

The documentation cited has dealt with wars launched by Arab or Moslem countries and with internal repression of minorities and dissidents. As to the issue of squelching development, suffice it to refer to the UN study on development in Arab countries (an article I posted on the topic on July 18, 2002, resides at the CitCUN site.)

The UN study reports that:

* Arab societies are being crippled by a lack of political freedom, the repression of women and an isolation from the world of ideas that stifles creativity.

* Governments in the Arab countries are not accountable to the people and unrepresentative of them.

* Out of the seven regions of the world, Arab countries had the lowest freedom score in the late 1990s: On international measurements of government accountability, civil liberties, political rights and media freedom, Arab countries score lower than any other region in the world..

* Per capita income growth has shrunk in the last 20 years to a level just above that of sub-Saharan Africa. Productivity is declining.


* The real income of the average Arab citizen was just 13.9% that of the average citizen of Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] countries.

* Research and development are weak or nonexistent. Science and technology are dormant.

* Intellectuals flee a political and social environment that is stultifying — if not repressive.

* Arab women are almost universally denied advancement. Half of them still cannot read or write. Only 3.5 percent of all parliamentary seats in Arab states were filled by women. Arab women also suffered from unequal citizenship and legal entitlements.

* Maternal mortality is double that of Latin America and four times that of East Asia.

* The Internet usage is low.

* Filmmaking appears to be declining. There is a severe shortage of new writing and a dearth of translations of works from outside. The whole Arab world translates about 330 books annually, one-fifth the number that Greece translates. In the 1,000 years since the reign of the Caliph the Arabs have translated as many books as Spain translates in just one year. [But, as the report forgot to underscore, they did translate the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, didn’t they?]

* Most Arab countries are providing both too little education and the wrong kind. Only South Asia has a lower adult literacy rate.

In the same vein, Prof. Ajami of John Hopkins University, a Lebanese-born Shia Moslem, wrote:

The gap between Egypt's sense of itself and its performance is impossible to ignore... A country of 69 million people, the weekly magazine al Mussawar recently revealed, now produces a mere 375 books a year. Contrast this with Israel's 4,000 titles, as the magazine did, and it is easy to understand the laments heard all around.

[Quoted from p. 221 of:
Ajami Fouad. The Dream Palace of the Arabs. NY: Phantom Books, 1998.]

How will a second Palestinian-Arab state correct these deficiencies which are truly “central”?

A final note about the “centrality” thesis and its corollaries. The notion was absurd even during the 1970s and 1980s, when this propaganda trick was in its infancy, but today it cannot even pass the Straight Face Test. Over the last weeks the world has been treated to Islamist attacks in Moscow, in the Phillippines, in Indonesia’s Bali, in Pakistan and in Yemen (the French ship Limburg). And with this international record the Arabs try to convince us of the “centrality of the Palestinian problem!” What Chutzpah!

It gets worse. The Arabs have an old tradition of blaming others for their failings (see my quotation from Bernard Lewis’ works). Even in the UN report quoted above, where Arab scholars openly admitted the sorry state of their countries, one still encounters the blame routine:

Israel’s illegal occupation of Arab lands is one of the most pervasive obstacles to security and progress in the region geographically (since it affects the entire region), temporally (extending over decades) and developmentally (impacting nearly all aspects of human development and human security, directly for millions and indirectly for others). The human cost extends beyond the considerable loss of lives and livelihoods of direct victims. If human development is the process of enlarging choices, if it implies that people must influence the processes that shape their lives, and if it means the full enjoyment of human rights, then nothing stifles that noble vision of development more than subjecting a people to foreign occupation.

It is this very tendency that should be recognized as “centrality”.

Contributed by Joseph Alexander Norland

Israel digs trenches to thwart bombers

Digging in for the long haul.

JERUSALEM (AP) — The Israeli military is digging trenches around Jenin and Nablus, two West bank cities known as strongholds of Palestinian militants, according to an army magazine published this week.

The military spokesman's office could not comment on the report, but the Palestinian governors of Nablus and Jenin confirmed Sunday that ditches were being dug around their towns.

Col. Yehuda Katorza, head of the Central Command's engineering unit, was quoted by the weekly Bamachane magazine as saying the trenches are designed to keep Palestinians from driving explosives-laden vehicles from the towns to Israel.

The move was in line with previous policy, as Israel last year encircled part of the West Bank town of Jericho with trenches. But Katorza said previous efforts were ineffective because the army did not completely encircle the towns and Palestinians filled the ditches with dirt and drove over them.

The intention this time is to encircle the towns completely with larger ditches, he said, but the effort has been slowed by a lack of bulldozers.

Ransom by any other name

The hypocrisy of a double standard

[...]

Living in the greater Washington, D.C., area for the last three weeks, I hardly need any reminders about the terror residents have experienced as a result of the sniper attacks.

It was the first thing everyone in the area talked about. It was on the front page of the local newspapers. It was covered wall to wall by the cable news channels. And it was the subject of news and talk radio all day long.

Last week, I had to take a trip to Canada for a few days. Much to my surprise, I couldn't escape the talk about the D.C. sniper or snipers.

It was front-page news every day in Toronto and Montreal. This was not just a big local story. It was not just a huge national story. It was a huge international story.

There were 13 single-shot attacks on people in Maryland, Washington and Virginia over the last three weeks. Ten of those attacks resulted in deaths.

That's a lot of death. That's a lot of fear.

Yet, last Monday, more people died in one suicide bomb attack in Israel than in all of these murderous attacks combined. And Monday's attack in Israel wasn't even one of the largest and deadliest of nearly daily suicide terror attacks in the Jewish state over the last year or so.

We now have reason to suspect the sniping attacks on Americans in the Washington, D.C., area were, in part, motivated by the same kind of hate that prompts suicide bombings in Israel.

It's part of a war against Western civilization.

That's what motivates the terrorists in Israel. It's not about creating a Palestinian state. It's about ending a Jewish state – a Jewish state that represents freedom in a sea of totalitarianism.

Yet Israel is still told by the world – even by many in the United States – to negotiate a settlement, to compromise with the terrorists, to meet the bombers half-way.

SITES OF THE WEEK

Israpundit has started a new feature, Sites of the Week, which will shine a spotlight on five or so sites a week which we feel deserve a look. This week we are focusing on four blogs all beginning with the letter “a” and one news site. The blogs are described below. Take a look.

On the left is a section linking to these sites.

Ad Orientem
“My weblog, Ad Orientem, might be described as a High Church warblog: Hilaire Belloc gone Zionist. Favors smells and bells in religion, anti-idiotarianism in politics. ”
Alisa In Wonderland
“The world according to an Israeli-American soccer mom. She is still chasing that rabbit...”
American Kaiser
Warblog – “Because nobody else receives threatening hatemail after only thirteen days.”
Amish Tech
"Amish Tech Support: three parts humor, one part hate. Stir for 1 minute.
Serves all.” One of the funniest guys on the web.

News : Israel Insider

Massive Multi-National Naval Hunt for al Qaeda Ship

Debka, repeating this story, would seem credible on this account as terror attempts heat up.

NATO, Greek and Israeli navies are scouring three seas - the eastern Mediterranean, the Black Sea and the Aegean - for a cargo ship, the 1,600-ton Tonga-flagged Cristi, which is believed to be carrying a band of al Qaeda terrorists to a fresh target.

Greek and Israeli authorities are on high alert.

DEBKAfile’s maritime and counter-terror sources report that the Cristi , like the Sara, which was detained in Italy carrying suspected Pakistani terrorists, and another suspect vessel, Twillinger, is owned by the Greek ship-owner, Dimitris Kokkos, and a Pakistani-American, Rifat Muhammed.

Kokkos, who also owned the Palestinian arms-smuggling ship Karine-A captured last January by the Israel Navy, is said to live in Romania. He is wanted by the Greek authorities for smuggling.

Our investigation reveals that the pair head Nova Spirit Inc., a company registered in Delaware, US, which runs al Qaeda’s shipping operations from the Romanian Black Sea port of Constanza and Nador on Morocco’s Mediterranean coast.

Kokkos and Muhammed both vanished after the true functions of their known fleet of four vessels came to light.

But these ships appear to be only a fraction of the clandestine terrorist naval force prowling the region. Our maritime expert has so far uncovered another at least eight made-over terrorist vessels owned by different Middle East owners, some traced to Syria, which elude discovery by constantly changing flags and identities. They are believed to be bound for terrorist missions on European and Israeli shores, as well as American naval and military targets.

Israel destroys homes of three Palestinian activists in Jenin

JENIN, West Bank, Oct 28 (AFP) - Israeli troops destroyed the homes in Jenin and the city's refugee camps of four Palestinians implicated in anti-Israeli attacks, a Palestinian security source and Israeli radio said.

The soldiers dynamited and bulldozed the house of Alis Afouri, a local leader of the Al-Qods Brigades, the armed branch of the radical Islamic Jihad movement, and the home of Abdel Karim Awes, an official of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, an armed group linked to Yasser Arafat's mainline Fatah movement.

The third house to be razed was that of Mohammed Hassanein, a member of the Al-Qods Brigades and one of the two suicide attackers who used a car bomb to destroy an Israeli bus on October 21 killing 14 Israelis.

Israeli public radio said that the house of Hassanein's companion, Ashraf al-Asmar, 17, was also torn down by the army.

The Israeli army considers the destruction of activists' homes a means of "dissuasion and fighting against Palestinian terrorism."

More than 50 houses have been razed since the start of August. Human rights organizations have hit out at the policy as "collective punishment."

“Special Units” Assassinate Two Palestinians in Nablus, Third Killed in Jenin


Via the Arab press, which seems to feel there is something unfair about Tit for Tat.

NABLUS, West Bank (PINA) - Israeli soldiers, disguised as Arabs, opened fire at a group of Palestinian activists in the West Bank town of Nablus, killing two and injuring three, including a child, eyewitnesses in the town said.

Israeli army sources conveyed that the raid was a routine clash with “Palestinian terrorists” which also resulted in the wounding of an Israeli soldier.

However, eyewitnesses in Nablus said that a taxicab, with a Palestinian license plate approached a group of activists in Nablus, and Israeli soldiers opened fire from inside teh vehicle, killing two and injuring others.

Israeli army “special units” often resort to such tactics to assassinate “wanted” Palestinians accused of launching attacks against Israeli targets.

Arafat to oust reform minister

On the streets of New York City, this scam is called three-card monte

JERUSALEM — Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat is expected to replace his reform-minded security minister with a longtime loyalist in a Cabinet reshuffle as early as today. Top Stories
On the way out is Security Minister Abdel Razak Yehiyeh, who was brought to Mr. Arafat's Cabinet five months ago and turned out to be a reformer determined to halt participation by Palestinian security officials in attacks on Israelis.
He is to be replaced by Hani el Hassan, 69, a veteran leader in Mr. Arafat's Fatah faction of the Palestinian Authority.
"[Mr. Yehiyeh] was overambitious. He didn't know where the red lines were," said one aide to Mr. Arafat. "He was angering people inside the PA and the security forces. He wanted to bash all the Hamas cells and disarm all the Fatah gunmen."

German embassy invites Israeli officers to ceremony honouring Third Reich soldiers

If you are asked th meaning of the word chutpah, use this as an example

The German embassy in Tel Aviv has adopted a novel approach to atoning for Nazi crimes by inviting Israeli army officers to attend a ceremony in honour of the Third Reich's fallen soldiers, including SS units.
The German military attaché compounded the blunder as he tried to defend the invitations by saying that some SS soldiers were victims not criminals, and that the dead should not be divided into good and bad.

While such views might be the subject of debate elsewhere, they have been taken as insensitive, at best, coming from a German soldier posted to a country of Holocaust survivors and relatives of the murdered.

The ceremony is to be held next month at a cemetery in Nazareth for Germany's first world war dead. The military attaché, Colonel Ernst Elbers, dispatched a number of invitations to Israeli reserve army officers who are involved in research into the 1914-18 war.

They initially assumed the ceremony was limited to remembering those who died in that conflict and were horrified to discover that the memorial will be to "honour the memory of the fallen and missing servicemen in both world wars".

US diplomat shot dead in Jordan

After all the many Arab complaints of the US nmopt being even handed toward Arab countries this is not going to help their cause

Gunmen killed an American diplomat today as he walked to his car at his home in a middle class neighbourhood in Jordan's capital, Amman.
The diplomat, identified by Jordanian security officials as Laurence Foley, had responsibilities in aid matters. The attack took place at about 7:30am local time (05.30 GMT).

Jordan's information minister, Mohammed Affash Adwan, told the Associated Press: "Gunmen sprayed the diplomat with several shots, killing him instantly."

Mr Adwan declined to speculate on whether the attack was a terrorist incident but he said: "This attack, regardless of its motives and reasons, is an aggression on Jordan and its national security ... we will not tolerate that at all."

US embassy officials were not answering telephone calls but security officials said Mr Foley's wife had alerted police after the attack outside his home on Abdullah Ghosheh street, which is in a well-off district of Amman.

Why one should oppose a second Palestinian-Arab state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza - Part 10 of 23

This piece continues a series of which the first nine parts were posted on September 8, 9, 11, 17, 20, 22, 23, and October 7, and 24, 2002. The object of the series is to provide a database that is not only reliable and well-documented but also one for which documents are easily accessible, preferably from web resources.

10. Palestinian Arab spokesmen leave no doubt about their intention to destroy, annihilate and eliminate Israel; therefore, creation of a second Palestinian Arab state will not solve the Israeli/Arab conflict.

Of all the arguments presented in this series, the present argument is the easiest to substantiate, for it requires no more than quoting the Palestinian Authority (PA) representatives themselves . Citing recent results from Palestinian-Arab opinion polls adds to the wall of proof, but the actions of the PA speak louder than any words. In this article we will discuss each of these three topics in turn.

Prior to reading the evidence, recall that before the 1993 Oslo Accords, the destruction of Israel was the official policy of the PLO, enshrined in its Charter. In 1974, after the 1973 Arab defeat made it clear that Israel could even withstand a surprise attack, the PLO formulated the “Phased Plan”, which essentially called for the annihilation of Israel piecemeal. With the 1993 Oslo Accords, Israel took an enormous risk; in retrospect, taking this risk has proved a major error, as the statements of the PA representatives attest.

The Oslo accords of September, 1993, and particularly the Rabin-Arafat letter exchange, were supposed to put an end to the PLO’s declared objective of annihilating Israel. The Arafat-to-Rabin letter stated:

The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security.

The PLO accepts United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.

The PLO commits itself to the Middle East peace process, and to a peaceful resolution of the conflict between the two sides and declares that all outstanding issues relating to permanent status will be resolved through negotiations.

The PLO considers that the signing of the Declaration of Principles constitutes a historic event, inaugurating a new epoch of peaceful coexistence, free from violence and all other acts which endanger peace and stability. Accordingly, the PLO renounces the use of terrorism and other acts of violence and will assume responsibility over all PLO elements and personnel in order to assure their compliance, prevent violations and discipline violators.

But as early as May 10, 1994, Arafat made it clear in a public speech that he has changed nothing in his Phased Plan. On that day, Arafat gave a speech in a Johannesburg mosque, a speech in which he referred to the Oslo Accords, saying (in what is Arafat’s personal version of the English language, grammar and syntax):

This agreement, I am not considering it more than the agreement which had been signed between our prophet Mohammed and Koraish, and you remember the Caliph Omar had refused this agreement and [considered] it a despicable truce.

But Mohammed had accepted it and we are accepting now this peace offer. But to continue our way to Jerusalem, to the first shrine together and not alone.

[The foregoing document comes from the site of Information Regarding Israel's Security (IRIS), “an independent organization dedicated to informing the public about the security needs of the State of Israel, especially vis-a-vis the current peace process”.]

In his thinly coded message, Arafat was referring to the Khudaibiya agreement made by Mohammed with the Arabian tribe of Koraish, which allowed Mohammed to pray in Mecca, then under Koraish control. The pact, slated to last for ten years, was broken within two years, when the Islamic forces - having used the peace pact to become stronger - abrogated the agreement and conquered the Koreish tribe. Mohammed then slaughtered the tribe of Koraish and conquered Mecca. Thus, the reference to Koraish implies a tactical agreement of convenience, e.g., the Oslo Accords, which Arafat never intended to keep.

Arafat referred to the analogy with the phoney Koraish agreement in a later interview as well, this time in Arabic, on the Egyptian Orbit TV, on April 18, 1998. As reported by IRIS, Arafat said:

Q: How do you explain that you occasionally ask the Palestinian street not to explode?

Arafat: When the prophet Muhammad made the Khudaibiya agreement, he agreed to remove his title "messenger of Allah" from the agreement. Then, Omar bin Khatib and the others referred to this agreement as the "inferior peace agreement." Of course, I do not compare myself to the prophet, but I do say that we must learn from his steps and those of Salah a-Din. The peace agreement which we signed is an "inferior peace".

In this piece, Arafat also refers to Salah a-Din, the Muslim leader who, after a cease-fire, declared a jihad against the Crusaders and captured Jerusalem. This reference can hardly be considered a hint - it is more like an overt declaration of intent to destroy Israel.

In a similar vein, the New Yorker magazine, 9 July 2001, published an article by Jeffrey Goldenberg about his interviews with Barghouti and other PA officials. The web version of the article was posted on the AIJAC site from which we quote this excerpt:

During the interview, I asked Barghouti an obvious question: What would Israel have to do to bring an end to the uprising?

"We need one hundred per cent of Gaza, one hundred per cent of the West Bank, one hundred per cent of East Jerusalem, and the right of return for refugees," he said. I pointed out that former Prime Minister Ehud Barak had, at the Camp David summit last year, offered the Palestinians a series of dramatic concessions: a free Gaza, around ninety per cent of the West Bank, a capital in East Jerusalem, and so on. "No!" Nothing less than a hundred per cent is acceptable, he said. And if you get a hundred per cent? Will that end the conflict? Barghouti smiled, and then said something impolitic for a Fatah man. "Then we could talk about bigger things," he said. Such as? "I've always thought that a good idea would be one state for all the peoples," he said. A secular democratic Palestine? "We don't have to call it Palestine," he replied. "We can call it something else."

Feisal Husseini was another PA leader to whom the foregoing article refers:

[I]n his last months Husseini spoke at a conference in Teheran which brought together leaders of Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad. And in a speech delivered in Beirut in April he said, "We may lose or win, but our eyes will continue to aspire to the strategic goal; namely, Palestine from the river to the sea" - from the Jordan to the Mediterranean. "Whatever we get now cannot make us forget this supreme truth."

Yet another relevant quotation comes from MEMRI, in the Special Dispatch Series, No. 138, dated October 13, 2000. The Dispatch provides a transcript of a PA TV broadcast of a Friday sermon in the Zayed bin Sultan Aal Nahyan mosque in Gaza. The sermon was broadcast live on the official Palestinian Authority television. The speaker is Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya, Member of the PA appointed "Fatwa Council" and former acting Rector of the Islamic University in Gaza:

"Even if an agreement of Gaza is signed - we shall not forget Haifa, and Acre, and the Galilee, and Jaffa, and the Triangle and the Negev, and the rest of our cities and villages. It is only a matter of time. The weak will not remain forever weak, and the strong will not remain forever strong... If we are weak today ... and we are not able to regain our rights, then at least we have to pass on the banner - waving high - to our children and grandchildren..."

IRIS has also posted the following selection of relevant quotes:

"The failed attempt to achieve peace made us realize that the only way to solve the Palestinian problem in a just and comprehensive manner is to implement the PLO's covenant... meaning a return to the armed struggle, which is the only language the Israelis understand....

"The Fatah movement will not allow the continuation of a situation which is neither war nor peace, imposed on the region by the Israeli and American governments.... The Palestinian people are ready for war. As much as they are experienced in peace, the Palestinian people are experienced in war, where they have yet to fail."

Ruhi Fatuh, Secretary General of the Palestinian Legislative Council and member of the Revolutionary Council of Fatah, Yasser Arafat's mainstream faction of the Palestine Liberation Organization. Fatuh said the return to armed struggle should take place if a Palestinian state is not established by 5 May 1999, when the Israel-PLO accords expire. (Al-Ayyam, 12 June 1998. Translation courtesy of Middle East Media and Research Institute - MEMRI)


"We will turn the territories of the [Palestinian] Autonomy into [the Israelis'] graveyard. This will be the beginning of the end and a regression to a state of overall explosion, for which Israel will be held responsible, as it is responsible for the failure of the peace process today."

Chief Palestinian negotiator Sa'eb Ariqat, saying that if the Israelis try to re-enter areas under the Palestinian Authority they would not get out alive. (Al-Manar, 8 June 1998. Translation courtesy of MEMRI.)


"Defining the situation with Israel today as peace is a mistake. There is no peace with Israel, which is an imperialistic state by nature.... Rather, it is a truce, mainly because Israel wants to dominate the region and shuns peace with its neighbors. Such was revealed when the idea of a Middle East [economic] market was raised [by Israel]."

Senior advisor to the PLO Executive Committee Jamal Al-Sorani. (Al-Bayader Al-Siasi, 13 June 1998. Translation courtesy of MEMRI.)


On the Palestinian Covenant:
"...The [Palestinian] National Council did not vote to annul the [Palestinian] Covenant, but rather announced its readiness to change the Covenant under certain terms. If the terms are met, it will be amended. Otherwise, the Covenant will remain as is. The Covenant has yet to be changed, and this is better understood by the enemy than by our own people...."

Secretary General of the Arab Liberation Front Mahmoud 'Abbas, otherwise known as Abu 'Abbas. The Israel-PLO Accords of 1993 required the Palestinian National Council to amend the Covenant, which calls for Israel's destruction, with no further conditions attached. (Al-Bilad, 11 June 1998. Translation courtesy of MEMRI.)

On October 13, 2002, F. David Radler, the publisher of the Chicago Sun-Times, wrote about Feisal Husseini, one of Arafat’s ministers:

The late Faisal Husseini, as reported June 24, 2001, by Al-Arabi in Egypt, said: “Had the U.S. and Israel realized, before Oslo, that all that was left of the Palestinian National movement and the Pan-Arab movement was a wooden horse called Arafat or the PLO, they would never have opened their fortified gates and let it inside their walls.” He also stated: “The Oslo agreement, or any other agreement, is just a temporary procedure, or just a step towards something bigger... We distinguish the strategic, long-term goals from the political phased goals, which we are compelled to temporarily accept due to international pressure... [Palestine] according to the higher strategy [is]: ‘from the river to the sea’.”

Another relevant, recent quotation comes from the Palestinian Authority Imam Sheikh Ibrahim Madhi at the Sheikh 'Ijlin Mosque in Gaza City, broadcast live on April 12, 2002 by Palestinian Authority television:

We are convinced of the [future] victory of Allah; we believe that one of these days, we will enter Jerusalem as conquerors, enter Jaffa as conquerors, enter Haifa as conquerors, enter Ramle and Lod as conquerors, the [villages of] Hirbiya and Dir Jerjis and all of Palestine as conquerors, as Allah has decreed… 'They will enter Al-Aqsa Mosque as they have entered it the first time…'
...
A reliable Hadith [tradition] says: 'The Jews will fight you, but you will be set to rule over them.' What could be more beautiful than this tradition? 'The Jews will fight you' – that is, the Jews have begun to fight us. 'You will be set to rule over them' – Who will set the Muslim to rule over the Jew? Allah… Until the Jew hides behind the rock and the tree.

But the rock and tree will say: 'Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, a Jew hides behind me, come and kill him.' Except for the Gharqad tree, which is the tree of the Jews.

In considering these statements, one should recall that Arafat, the PA and the appointed clerics have to conceal their intentions as best they can; if this is what is said after attempted concealment, one can easily imagine what they really think. Indeed, an idea of what “they really think” may be deduced from what their people think, as revealed in opinion polls.

As one can well surmise, opinion polls do not ask directly whether the Palestinian Arabs intend to eradicate Israel, but proxy questions serve as a good indication of such intent. The following opinion-poll data are extracted from the site of the Jerusalem Media and Communication Center (JMCC), which presents itself as an organization “established in 1988 by a group of Palestinian journalists and researchers to provide information on events in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip.” The data refer to the JMCC opinion-poll data for September 21 - 25, 2002.

As the figures below indicate, a majority of Palestinian-Arabs who had an opinion on the topic (i.e., excluding “no answer”, “don’t know”, etc) oppose “peace negotiations between Palestinians and Israel” (Q2); oppose the “Oslo agreement” (Q4); disagree with the statement “that at a certain point peace will be achieved between Palestinians and Israelis” (Q5); support “the continuation of the al-Aqsa Intifada in the West Bank and Gaza Strip” - by a majority of over 80%! (Q7); “support the resumption of the military operations against Israeli targets as a suitable response within the current political conditions” (Q13); and support “suicide bombing operations against Israeli civilians” (Q15). Does one need better proof than Q2 and Q4 to substantiate that the Palestinian-Arab “street” is hell bent on annihilating Israel? How would creating a second Palestinian-Arab state in Yesha change this 120-year tradition of fighting Zionism?

[The numbers in the following tables indicate percentages.]

Q.2 In principle, do you strongly support , Somewhat support, Somewhat oppose, or Strongly oppose peace negotiations between Palestinians and Israel?

Strongly support.....7.4
Somewhat support ...39.1
Somewhat oppose ....23.4
Strongly oppose ....28.5
No answer ...........1.6
...
Q4. What do you think of the Oslo agreement? Would you say you strongly support, support, oppose or strongly oppose it?

Strongly support ......3.4
Support ..............25.1
Oppose ...............35.5
Strongly oppose ......30.8
No answer .............5.2

Q5. Do you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree that at a certain point peace will be achieved between Palestinians and Israelis?

Strongly agree ......6.0
Somewhat agree .....34.0
Somewhat disagree ..30.1
Strongly disagree ..23.2
No answer .......... 6.7
...
Q7. Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose the continuation of the al-Aqsa Intifada in the West Bank and Gaza Strip?

Strongly support ...44.1
Somewhat support ...36.5
Somewhat oppose ....11.7
Strongly oppose .....4.7
No answer ...........3.0
...
Q.13 Do you support the resumption of the military operations against Israeli targets as a suitable response within the current political conditions, or do you reject it and find it harmful to Palestinian national interests?

A suitable response within the current political conditions ... ... ... ... .... ... .... ... ... ... ...69.5
I reject it and find it harmful to Palestinian national interests ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... 23.2
Others .... ... ... ..... ... ... ... 0.9
I don’t know... ... ..... ... ... ... 5.4
No answer ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 1.0

...
Q.15 What is your feeling towards suicide bombing operations against Israeli civilians, do you support it or oppose it?

Strongly support ........ 35.1
Somewhat support .........29.2
Strongly oppose ..........18.3
Somewhat oppose .......... 9.4
I don't know/No opinion ...5.9
No answer .................2.1

In the final analysis, what counts is not so much what the leader say or what the people think but what the regime actually does. And here the evidence is quite clear. Suffice it to mention that the PA violated every part of the Oslo Accords, especially the articles that prohibit incitement and require termination of terrorism. The arms ship Karine “A”, loaded with military equipment as she was, is proof enough of the PA’s true intentions. (With regard to the capture of Karine A in January, 2002, and proof of its connection to the PA, see, for example, Jerusalem Post or the IDF site. A google search under “Karine A” yields over 8,600 hits.)

Once again the question must be asked, how will any solution emerge from a second Palestinian-Arab state in Yesha, when the PA pronouncements, public opinion and the PA actions all point to annihilation of Israel as their goal?

Contributed by Joseph Alexander Norland

The Syria Accountability Act and Lebanon

The occupation the Arabs do not want to talk about

Last month, the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia voted overwhelmingly to endorse the Syria Accountability Act (SAA), a draft bill mandating economic sanctions against Syria if it does not end its sponsorship of terrorist organizations, discontinue its development of weapons of mass destruction, refrain from violating UN sanctions on Iraq and end its military occupation of Lebanon. Although it evoked sharp protests from the Bush administration and has passed only the first of many hurdles in the legislative process, its impact is already being felt in Lebanon.

Few in Lebanon took notice of the draft bill until June, when Lebanese Christians from around the world convened at the International Maronite Congress in Los Angeles and approved a resolution to "support those elements of the Syria Accountability Act that pertain to the withdrawal of Syria from Lebanon." Unlike previous events organized by the Lebanese Diaspora, the Los Angeles conference attracted a substantial number of prominent Lebanese Christians, including seven bishops, three members of parliament, and the editor of Lebanon's largest newspaper.

Those who left Lebanon to attend the conference were denounced upon their return by the pro-Syrian political establishment and pressured to distance themselves from both the conference and the bill, as was Maronite Christian Patriarch Nasrallah Boutros Sfeir, who had endorsed the Los Angeles conference and sent his personal representative.

As the bill gained more and more sponsors in both the House and the Senate, the Syrians began to issue warnings. In August, Syrian Vice-president Abdul Halim Khaddam complained that "some Lebanese have not learned from past experiences, as they continue to bet wrongly on imaginary foreign support" (an apparent reference to American peacekeeping troops stationed in Lebanon in 1983 and driven out the following year by Syrian-backed groups). "Some people bet on the support of the US Congress through a law that calls Syria to account in Lebanon, the Syria Accountability Act. But this bet is a losing gamble that will backfire. Even the United States will lose in Lebanon if it responds and tries to take this road."1 Khaddam's dual warning - to the Lebanese, not to accept foreign support, and to the Americans, not to offer it - underscores that Damascus was concerned less about the stipulations of the bill or its possibility of becoming law, than about its impact on Lebanese opposition to the Syrian occupation .

Hitler Targeted Palestine Jews

These early records, now revealed, indicate that Hitler knew what Arabs now deny: kill Jews

The Nazis plotted to extend their policy of genocide to the Jews of Palestine, according to evidence released by the Public Records Office last week.

Hitler’s Nazi hierarchy ordered that Arab help be enlisted to attack Jewish communities in the region with “incendiary bombs in Jewish shops and bombs in synagogues”.

In a bizarre scheme - known as Operation Atlas, these attacks were to be organised by a band of three German officers and two Arabs, who were parachuting into Palestine from a captured B17 bomber in October 1944.

The five-man mission was to train the Arabs in guerrilla warfare and to supply them with money, arms and sabotage equipment.

The unit, led by Lt. Kurt Wieland of the Luftwaffe was also told to spread “pro-German propaganda amongst the Arab population” and they took with them arsenic to deal swiftly with Arabs who refused to act against the Jews.

The plot, which Wieland later revealed had been designed to do the “greatest possible damage to all the common enemies” including the English who governed Palestine, comprehensively failed before it began when the team were separated by strong winds after having parachuted too high and too early.

Checkmating Iraq

If you have the tummy for it, read this piece by a woman described as an "arabist." You could go through the article paragraph by paragraph and make notes on how wrong, one-sided, and foolish she is. Not once is there the possibility that she has thought of positions other than her own. That Bush the Son is evil because he will allow Israel to defend itself is conrasted with Bush the Father who admonished Israel not to strike back. A grossly incompetent piece from the Far Left worth reading just to note how reality can be distorted.

As Washington does a soft shoe shuffle to appease its detractors in the United Nations Security Council and agrees to changes in the wording of the proposed new Iraq resolution, American President George W. Bush considers an Israeli proposal to destroy Iraqi missiles in Iraq's western desert.

The proposal involves a joint U.S.-Israel mission whereby American Special Forces would be used, backed by Israeli intelligence, and is said to have been put to the U.S. administration by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon during his recent visit to the American leader in Washington.


Israel is actively encouraging the U.S. to invade Iraq and has threatened to retaliate should it be the recipient of Iraqi missiles as it was in the 1991 Gulf War. But, unlike his father, who managed to restrain the Israeli government of the day, Bush junior appears to have given Sharon the green light to enter the fray.

Taking The Law Into Their Own Hands

Is this the basis for the reforms called for?



Gunmen representing Yasser Arafat's Al-Aksa Brigade executed an Arab woman in Shechem on Friday night who they say worked as a "collaborator " for Israel. The woman, Haifa Sultan, 39, was dragged out of her home and into the street and then shot in the head. The terrorists then shot Haifa's younger sister Adibeh in the legs, wounding her severely.

The Israel Law Center (Shurat HaDin) released a statement condemning the killing.
The group says that Sultan is the third women to be murdered by Fatah gunmen in
recent months. According to Israel Law Center Attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, members of Fatah are roving PLO-controlled areas killing their fellow Arabs with impunity. Darshan Leitner says that, "Even after the years of murders of hundreds of suspected "collaborators" by Fatah, there is yet to be one arrest, one indictment or one trial."

The New palestine Dictionary (Unabridged)

Author Berger while having "fun" with his definitions is also of course making very serious points in how language is abused for political purpose. Reminds me of the classic essay by George Orwell, Politics and the English Language.

Having invented a mythical country called, 'palestine,' and having re-invented world history through the lenses of CNN, the Arabs have decided to rewrite the English language. It must be difficult to find meaningful slogans and catch phrases to describe suffering which is either self-created or non-existent. And so, the good folks who gave us hijacking and suicide bombing have turned to stealing the misery of other peoples. Suddenly, we hear of 'the palestinian holocaust,' 'apartheid' and 'bantustans' on the West Bank, and other carefully rehearsed sound bites from AAA (Ashwari Arikat and Arafat). For example...

Anti-Semitism (an-ti-'se-m&-"ti-z&m) noun. Hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group

AAA: "Arabs are also Semites, and therefore also victims of anti-Semitism"

Study the above definition from Merriam-Webster. Is there anything in the words, "..against Jews.." that I don't understand ?!? The word 'anti-Semitism' was invented by a German journalist in the 19th century, to express his hatred of Jews - the man never even met a Moslem. If we play semantic games, and define the word as [anti] = against + [semitism] ALL semites .. then we must also define antibiotic as [anti] = against + [bios] ALL life .. in other words, penicillin is a deadly poison. Hitler's best friend in the Mideast was Haj Amin el Husseini, that noted semite and murderer of [semite] Jews. Iraq [a semitic nation] formed a nazi government in 1941, headed by Rashid Ali - a noted semite. When the Nazis [anti-Semites] occupied [semitic] North Africa during the war, they never sent a single Arab [semite] to a gas chamber or concentration camp.

Is There Anti Semitism in The Quran?

This a tough one. But here is my reading. Please note that I am not a scholar in these matters. The author prefaces his piece with "Anti-Semitism is bigotry and racism. Like all racism it is wrong and it has no place in Islam or in Islamic scripture. The Quran does not allow hate against any race, nationality or color." A noble sentiment, doubtless. However, he then cites passages and employs the old device: things must be taken in context. Right, like Mein Kampf. He notes the passages in the Jewish bible that speak ill of the Jews, failing to note of course that the admonitions both here and in the New Testament are for those who have departed from righteousness and not a general curse upon an entire people. In sum: for me this article is an attempt to make the Koran seem no better or worse than other biblical texts. For me, it just doesn't work.

Anti-Semitism means condemning and hating a people because of their Semitic race. Anti-Semitism is bigotry and racism. Like all racism it is wrong and it has no place in Islam or in Islamic scripture. The Qur'an does not allow hate against any race, nationality or color. God says in the Qur'an: "O people, We have created you from a male and female and made you into races and tribes so that you may know each other. Indeed the noblest of you in the sight of God are those who are the most pious among you. And Allah knows every thing and is aware of every thing." (49:13) Throughout the history of Islam, Muslims have never used passages from the Qur'an to justify acts of anti-Semitism. The ill-effects of racism, including ethnic cleaning, genocide and Holocaust, which has been suffered by Jews and non-Jews alike over the past several centuries, has never been done under the banner of any passages from the Qur'an. Jews were among the earliest converts to Islam (in Medina) and, throughout the Middle Ages, Jews found sanctuary to practice their own religion under Islamic rule. It is truly disappointing and naive to ignore more than 1400 years of history and learned discourse on the Qur'an and argue that the current political situation in the Middle East has its roots in passages from the Qur'an.

More Lies

The blog Incontext.com offers a concise review of a book asserting that Israel and not the Arabs are the ultimate source of terrorism, a terrorism going back to the days of the Mandate. Incontext shows the virulent anti-Israli sentiments underlying this book

Friday, H.D.S. Greenway reviewed (sort of) Caleb Carr’s “new book” in the Boston Globe. The “review” didn’t show up in the Books section, though. It appeared in Greenway’s old stomping grounds, the Globe editorial page.

”The Lessons of Terror: A history of warfare against civilians - why it has always failed and why it will fail again,” (whew!) isn’t exactly hot off the presses. It was released last January and was reviewed in the Jerusalem Post in March (in the Books section). But it obviously provides fair cover for Greenway to indulge in one of his periodic Israel-bashing sprees, so here we are.

I haven’t read the book (and don’t intend to) but I have read Mr. Greenway’s editorial. Or semblance thereof. Greenway prefers to do his most of his sniping in this piece from the dubious shelter of Carr’s delusions, seldom speaking in his own voice.

His explicit point: terrorism is self-defeating.

His implicit point: Zionism is the ultimate source of terrorism.

His evidence:

Israel Army Reoccupies Jenin as U.S. Mission Ends

Here you will find a summary of recent news items (does not include the very recent suiicde bombing, for which see this morning's news), and a summary of these links.

Summary:
Israeli forces dug into the West Bank city of Jenin on Saturday, taking over dozens of buildings and arresting suspected militants. Israel took over the Palestinian town of Jenin on Friday in one of the largest raids in months? a delayed response to a deadly bus bombing? but pulled some troops out of another West Bank town. Israeli troops searched the West Bank town of Jenin on Saturday for Palestinian militants involved in a suicide bombing, and a U.S. envoy left the region with neither side optimistic about the latest peace proposal. Israeli forces tightened their grip on Jenin Saturday, detaining more than a dozen people in house - to - house searches for Palestinian militants responsible for suicide bombings. envoy William Burns has told senior Palestinian officials that while Washington recognises the plight of the Palestinians, progress towards statehood can only come through reform and an end to violence.

Source Articles:
Israel tightens grip on Jenin (BBC News 10/26/2002)
Israel's West Bank Give And Take (CBS News 10/25/2002)
Israeli troops searched the West Bank town of Jenin on Saturday for Pa... (FOX News 10/26/2002)
Israel Army Reoccupies Jenin as U.S. Mission Ends (Reuters 10/26/2002)
US envoy urges Palestinian reforms (BBC News 10/24/2002)
Hundreds of Israeli forces enter Jenin (CNN 10/25/2002)
Palestinian sentenced to death for helping Israel (CNN 10/25/2002)
For 10 months, "Golan Cohen" (NY Post 10/26/2002)
Israel Cafe Guard Against Bombers Was Palestinian (Reuters 10/25/2002)

Terrorism's missing link

Connecting the dots: Iraq, state sponsored terrorism, Israel and the U.S. This article explores Saddam's connection to terrorism. A very useful read.

It is one of President George Bush's regular arguments for ousting Saddam Hussein: the Iraqi dictator has ties to the Al Qaeda network, providing them with training and safe havens and, potentially, weapons of mass destruction.

Yet despite some intriguing leads, US intelligence officials say they haven't found the hard evidence of an active link.

Instead, Hussein's history offers a clear pattern of dabbling in terrorism - but terrorism of a different variety. He has a pattern of consorting with groups whose regional goals could enhance his stature in the Middle East and with homegrown agents he can keep on a short leash, which hasn't been the hallmark of Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda.

Hussein has a record of attacking Iraqi exiles overseas. He has funded Palestinian extremists - lately by paying $25,000 ($45,000) rewards to the families of suicide bombers. He has sponsored an anti-Turkish Kurdish group in northern Iraq, Marxist paramilitaries trying to overthrow Iran's Islamic government and terrorist campaigns against Syria. He did attempt to use proxies to strike the US during and immediately after the first Gulf War, but those were inept failures. And there is little evidence that he has been willing so far to share his biological or chemical weapons with his partners in terror.

Israeli expert says nerve gas may have been used in Moscow theater assault

This Israeli conjecture is interesting. In another report today see (Drudge) that the Russian government has found among those terrorists captured men from Saudi Arabia and from Yemen

JERUSALEM (AFP) - An Israeli expert said in remarks published here that nerve gas may have been used during the bloody assault of a Moscow theatre that left more than 90 hostages and 50 of their Chechen captors dead.

"There is no sleeping gas which can be brought into a theater to neutralize people quickly," said an anesthesia specialist from Jerusalem's Hadassah University hospital, quoted by the Israeli daily Haaretz.

"It seems to me that the substance used has no connection to anesthetics ... the only thing that seems plausible is that they used nerve gas -- that explains the patients' bad condition and the need for respiration", said Professor Yoel Donchin.

Russian authorities said sleeping gas had been pumped into the theatre to neutralize the Chechen rebels who had reportedly rigged the theatre with explosives which hostages said were to be set off in the event of an attack.

Official sources initially said "up to 30" hostages had died in the special forces assault but the toll increased sharply to "more than 90" captives.

They said 349 people were being treated at a local hospital after having been exposed to the gas, some of them in serious condition.

But a Russian doctor quoted in Haaretz also speculated the soldiers had used "low concentrations of nerve gas," while other experts said "new chemical substances that featured hallucinogens, perhaps even LSD," may have been used.

Haaretz speculated that the refusal by Russian authorities to allow visitors into the hospitals after the hostages were rushed there for treatment may have been a bid to hide the agent they had used in the storming.

Among the survivors was Israeli woman Valeri Lisanskia, 45, who told Haaretz the doctors refused to tell her what she was suffering from.

Israel offered to send a team of psychologists to help the freed hostages recover from their trauma, the Israeli daily Maariv reported Sunday.

A team consisting of mental health workers with expertise in child and adult victims of terror is to be dispatched imminently, said the paper.

Russia has been at war with the Chechens for the past three years and refuses to cede to their demands for independence.

Other opinions

As we all know, pro-Israeli advocates come in many sizes and colours. It just so happens, that the vast majority of posts on this site reflect slightly different shades of essentially the same colour. To post other opinions on this site, I have to delve into articles posted by other bloggers, and Gil’s Israeli Guy site is a case in point.

On Thursday, October 24, 2002, Israeli Guy posted his Mideast credo, under the heading “basic stuff”. It reads as follows:

1) There are around 3 millions Palestinians living in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Soon there will be many more.

2) Israel is not going to deport 3 million people.

3) As any other people on earth the Palestinian [sic] deserve their own state.

4) Israel does not want to annex the Palestinian areas, give all the Palestinians citizenships and lose its Jewish majority.

5) Israel will not annex the Palestinian territories and won’t give the Palestinians a citizenship, thus making Israel an apartheid state.

6) Israelis do not wish to control other people.

7) All of the above lead to a creation of an independent Palestinian state on almost all of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

8) Israelis want peace and want to put an end to the 100 years of Arab – Israeli conflict.

9) There are around 5.5 million Jews living today in Israel and they are not going anywhere.

10) Israel was always flexible and chose the practical solution, the Arabs/Palestinians always banged their heads to the wall hoping that will lead them somewhere – it didn’t. Israel needs to avoid from adopting this Arab tactic.

Let us examine each of these tenets.

One can accept the demographic Statement (1) and its corollary, (2). But what is the basis of Statement (3), “As any other people on earth the Palestinian deserve their own state”, other than Arab propaganda? Who says that the “Palestinians” are a “people” (i.e., nation), as distinct from other Arab “peoples”, such as the Jordanians and Iraqis? Who says that “any other people” deserve “their own state”? Does that apply to such “peoples” as the Corsicans, the Basques and China’s Uighurs, to mention but three random examples? (And, a propos, if this principle is so sacred, where are the EU hypocrites when it comes to the Tibetan people?) My final question regarding this statement: why is one Palestinian-Arab state, namely, Jordan (really, East Palestine), not enough? Why do we need two Palestinian-Arab states, one in East Palestine and one in West Palestine?

Statement (4), namely "Israel does not want to annex the Palestinian areas, give all the Palestinians citizenships and lose its Jewish majority” also raises questions: why confuse annexation of territory with annexation of inhabitants? The solution I support, autonomy for the Palestinian-Arabs in Judea, Samaria and Gaza ("Yesha”) under Israeli sovereignty, will give the Palestinian-Arabs all the “civil and religious rights” (to quote the Balfour Declaration), while giving Israel the sovereignty of the territory. The Palestinian-Arabs could exercise their right to self-government (as promised in the Oslo Accords), by voting for a legislative branch of limited powers, without jeopardizing Israel’s security. The question of losing the Jewish majority will not arise, nor does the “apartheid” accusation mentioned in Gil’s Statement (5) apply. Of course, it would have been preferable to give the Palestinian-Arabs the right to vote for the Israeli parliament, but the Palestinian Arabs will just have to pay the price for 120 years of hostility towards Zionism (contrary to popular belief, the hostility did not start with the British Mandate - it started during the Ottoman rule; Arab and Moslem hostility towards the dhimmi Jews, on the other hand, goes back centuries, with short, intermittent breaks).

I can accept Statement (6), “Israelis do not wish to control other people” but I totally disagree with following Statement (7), “All of the above lead to a creation of an independent Palestinian state on almost all of the West Bank and Gaza Strip”. I submit that the conclusion does not necessarily follow, and that the autonomy solution I support applies just as well. On the other hand, the perils involved in the sovereignty solution are not dealt with in Gil’s presentation, while the autonomy solution obviates these perils.

The last Statements (8) to (10) add nothing to the issue of solutions, and need not be discussed here further.

What upsets me most about Gil’s presentation is the fact that an intelligent, erudite, young Israeli has swallowed the Arab propaganda hook, line and sinker.

Gil has gone one step further and invited readers to post solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the comments section; these comments, under the article, Let’s hear Ya, make for interesting reading and I encourage readers to check them out.

Contributed by Joseph Alexander Norland