WE'VE MOVED! IsraPundit has relocated to Click here to go there now.
News and views on Israel, Zionism and the war on terrorism.

December 07, 2002

Speaking of Warren...

Steve DenBeste reacts to Warren's article, which I have not read yet, but which allegedly posits that Muslims everywhere are experiencing a crisis in their faith. Warren is a Christian, thus his conclusion from this is pessimistic. Steve is an Atheist, and thus his conclusion is quite the opposite.

The problem I have with this whole discussion, is that it is based on the common assumption that the current confrontation between the West and the Muslim world has most of its roots in religion, i.e. Islam. Although many people, including Steve, are well aware of the socioeconomic aspect of the conflict (“they hate us because we are more successful”), still, I think that too much emphasis is being put on religion, and too little on something called “culture”. Although culture and religion in the Arab world are so closely knit together, that it is impossible to discuss them separately, they still are two different things.

There are certain phenomena in Arab culture that can be historically traced to the pre-Islamic period. One of them is the “blood feud”, which is really the most idiotic interpretation of the “eye for an eye” principle.
Anyone familiar with the Arab world witnessed this: families, clans and entire tribes are killing each other off one by one. Sometimes it can go on for years, with no one left who even remembers what started it in the first place.

Steve thinks that if the West defeats the Islamists, or Islam, physically and culturally conclusively enough, the West will also win conclusively. I am not so sure. For one thing, they were defeated physically long ago several times, and they are being defeated culturally every day, when they compare our living conditions to theirs. Why would next time be different? Moreover, I suspect that one of the many underlying reasons for their hatred of the West is that they have a score to settle with us. It is demonstrated very clearly in the Israeli-Arab part of the larger conflict: they were defeated, and defeated, and defeated, and they still keep trying.

Although I am not an atheist like Steve (more of an agnostic), my approach to this is just as utilitarian as his. But I am afraid I do not share his optimism on the subject.

(Crossposted here).


This is a breakthrough! The "Zionist entity" is not blamed! But note that Syria, occupying Lebanon, is working jointly with Lebanon to investigate, and the cleric worries about Lebanon's unity and security.
NICOSIA [MENL] -- Lebanese and Syrian authorities are investigating an explosion that destroyed a mosque in the Bekaa Valley.

Officials said 50 kilograms of TNT exploded in the 800-year-old Al Azeer mosque in the first such attack in years. They said the bombing in the town of Majdal Anjar appeared to connected to a land dispute between local Muslims and Armenians. Nobody was hurt in blast.

Muslim clerics convened on Wednesday, the night after the explosion, and termed it a provocative and unprecedented attack. They called on authorities to arrest those responsible and suggested that those behind the attack have been identified.

"The goal of the attack was to threaten the political, security and social unity of Lebanon," Sheik Khalil Miss, the chief cleric of the Bekaa area, said.
Palestinians: Israel Faked Gaza Al Qaeda Presence

A fun activity when the weather is bad and you stay at home: Compile a list of all the denials and odd claims made by the Palestinians that are later shown to be total nonsense. Do these guys use peyote for some ritualistic purposes?
RAMALLAH, West Bank - The Palestinian Authority accused Israel's Mossad spy agency on Saturday of setting up a fake al Qaeda cell in Gaza so that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon could justify Israeli attacks in Palestinian areas.

A spokesman for Sharon called the allegation "sheer nonsense."

The Israeli leader said on Thursday that Osama bin Laden's organization had established a presence in Palestinian-ruled areas of Gaza and in Lebanon, aiming to attack Israel. He gave no further details in his comments at an Israeli media lunch.

"It is a big, big, big lie to cover (Sharon's) attacks and his crimes against our people everywhere," Palestinian President Yasser Arafat told reporters at his headquarters in the West Bank city of Ramallah.

Palestinian Information Minister Yasser Abed Rabbo pointed to an alleged Israeli plot.

"There are certain elements who were instructed by the Mossad to form a cell under the name of Al Qaeda in the Gaza Strip in order to justify the assault and the military campaigns of the Israeli occupation army against Gaza," Abed Rabbo said.
And this is how they "prove" their claim:Palestinians arrest 'collaborators' posing as Al Qaeda operatives
Palestinian security forces have arrested a group of Palestinians for collaborating with Israel and posing as operatives of Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda terrorist network, a senior official says.

The arrests come two days after Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon charged that Al Qaeda militants were operating in Gaza and in Lebanon.

"The Palestinian Authority arrested a group of collaborators who confessed they were working for Israel, posing as Al Qaeda operatives in the Palestinian territories," the official said, on condition of anonymity.

He said the alleged collaborators sought to "discredit the Palestinian people, justify every Israeli crime and provide reasons to carry out a new [military] aggression in the Gaza Strip."

Somehow, you just know that those "arrested" are now free and counting the extra pay they got for "confessing."

Got a rally? Get some flyers

It's easy. Just Check out the files below. If you need a closer look, click to enlarge the image.
Print copies of the flyers you want. (Everything is in PDF.)

Photocopy as many as you need.

Flyers & Signs

source (StandWithUsCampus)

We will just have to hit back harder

The unyielding anti-Israeli obsession of the Palestinian-Arabs and their supporters has a thousand and one faces. One of the pettier facets is of the type reported the other day on SF Gate:
Rainbow Grocery's ban on carrying certain Israeli-made goods has angered some customers and prompted the Jewish Community Relations Council in San Francisco to demand that the Mission District co-op reverse its boycott immediately.

The worker-owned store is losing business over its decision to remove Israeli products from two of its largest departments, packaged foods and bulk foods, a Rainbow spokesman said.
Israel’s supporters have little choice other than to hit back at every turn. When it smarts enough, they’ll get smart.

Current news items about Israel/Palestinians: 13 links
Source Articles:
Sharon outlines his peace vision (BBC News 12/05/2002)
Israel says al-Qaeda active in Gaza (BBC News 12/05/2002)
Members of Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network have infiltrated the Gaz... (NY Post 12/06/2002)
Al Qaeda May Be Moving In On Israel (CBS News 12/05/2002)
Israel Several members of Usama bin Laden's Al Qaeda network have infi... (FOX News 12/05/2002)
Gaza killings prompt Palestinian rage (BBC News 12/06/2002)
Ten dead in Gaza shelling (BBC News 12/06/2002)
BUREIJ, Gaza Strip - Israeli troops, backed by tanks and helicopters, ... (NY Post 12/06/2002)
Israeli tanks and troops raided a Gaza refugee camp in the dead of nig... (CBS News 12/06/2002)
Gaza Strip Israeli troops backed by tanks and helicopter gunships hunt... (FOX News 12/06/2002)
Israel's Top General Denies Remarks (CBS News 12/04/2002)
Israel investigates Arafat funding (BBC News 12/05/2002)
JERUSALEM - An Israeli businessman who said he couldn't live with the ... (NY Post 12/06/2002)
The Numbers Tell The Story: The Myth of Zionist Colonialism

The following, a lesson in history, puts the lie to the notion that Israel was created out of land occupied by Palestinians, who were forced to flee in order for the newly UN sanctioned state to become a reality.
One of the most powerful and widespread arguments against Zionism and the State of Israel has been the claim that Jewish settlement in Palestine led directly to the displacement and exploitation of the land`s long-established Arab population. In 1939, on the eve of the Holocaust and at the height of British attempts to divide the region into separate Arab and Jewish states, Jamal Husayni, spokesman for the effective government of Palestinian Arabs, forcefully raised this very argument against the Jewish national home:

``Is it in any way just, that the Arabs, who have lived on this land uninterruptedly for 1300 years, and whose lives are rooted in its soil, should be dispossessed by force, should be pushed aside, and should be blackmailed to enable the Zionist Jews to fashion a Jewish National Home on this land? That`s the problem...``

This was also the claim made by five Arab states to justify war against the State of Israel in 1948, just one day after it had declared its independence. According to this view, Jews had been absent from the land of Israel for too long to claim their right to return. In their absence, another group of people had come to occupy the land, and thus the Zionist movement could succeed only at this people`s expense. The West, embarrassed by the horrors of the Holocaust, had founded the State of Israel to clear its conscience, and the Arab residents of Palestine were forced to pay the price. The creation of the Jewish state was thus an outrage, according to this argument, because the very settlement of the land by Jews was illegitimate.

Yet the argument rests on an inaccurate description of the country`s history; namely, a mischaracterization of the demographics of Palestine before 1948.
click here
Canadian Jews target Hezbollah

If Hezbollah is not a terrorist group, then there is no such thing as terror groups. But it must be proven in court, it seems.
TORONTO, Dec. 6 (UPI) -- Under the spotlight of a well-publicized lawsuit, Canadian leaders are accelerating their examination into whether fundraising by the Hezbollah should be allowed to continue or be banned.

The issue came to a head last week when Canada placed six groups, including the Palestinian-based Hamas on its list of banned terrorist organizations, but excluded Hezbollah.

That prompted a lawsuit against the government by the Jewish organization B'nai Brith, claiming that parliament was acting in contravention of its own anti-terrorism act.

Adding to the acrimony between Canadian Arabs and Jews, a registered Jewish charity, Magen David Alom, also came under government scrutiny. The group's charter states its purpose as raising funds to supply medical equipment and ambulances to Israel.

Although the organization has not been banned, Jewish groups worldwide posted protests on Web sites and with an e-mail campaign.

The Lebanese-based Hezbollah has two primary arms, the first being a humanitarian operation that funds and runs schools and hospitals in southern Lebanon, and the second being both political and military in nature, including the "External Security Organization," known for terrorist acts.

The United States has banned all fundraising by groups associated with Hezbollah, while Canada and Britain have only banned the military wing. The United Nations includes all of Hezbollah on its list of 200 known terrorist operations.

Until now, the Canadian government's position has been that apart from its humanitarian work, Hezbollah is a valid political party in Lebanon, with 12 elected members in its National Assembly. But Frank Dimant, executive vice president of B'nai Brith told the Globe and Mail that position is absurd.

"The Nazis were also elected and had social services and a youth wing," he said.
Israeli hunt for suspect leaves 10 dead in camp
Two U.N. workers killed as Palestinians fight back; alleged militant not found

I am sure we will hear about the 10 killed but little about the armed Palestinians protecting the Hamas operatives.
BUREIJ REFUGEE CAMP, Gaza Strip - The Israeli army had clear goals for its attack here yesterday: Hunt down a fugitive Palestinian militant and blow up his house. But nothing is straightforward in this camp's tangle of alleys.
Palestinians armed with machine guns and hand grenades tried for three hours to stave off the soldiers' attack, which was backed by two dozen tanks and an Apache helicopter. In the end, 10 Palestinians were killed, and the army pulled out after destroying the two-story home it had targeted but without capturing the man it sought.

It was difficult to determine how many of the dead, nine of them men and all between 20 and 35, were gunmen. The army said that most of those killed were armed and that at least five were militants with the radical Hamas group. Palestinian doctors said several civilians were among the dead, including two United Nations two United Nations school workers.

Later yesterday, a mass funeral procession wound its way along the streets of this camp of about 30,000 people. The bodies were held aloft as militants, their faces covered with black ski masks, fired guns into the air and vowed revenge.

Hardly a tear was shed, and that seemed another product of the long, violent conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. Aisha Bahar, 60, sat on the cold stone floor of her one-room house, its makeshift roof a piece of corrugated tin. She last saw her 30-year-old son, Abdel Menem Bahar, as he raced outside and into the battle, where he met his death.

"I said, 'Thank God my son is a martyr,'" Bahar recalled. She said Abdel, a street vendor, was simply curious about what was happening.

The dead man's wife, Rola Bahar, 29, cradled their newborn daughter and gazed at her three young sons. "I am proud of him, and I hope that my sons will follow their father," she said.
Bid to oust Arafat takes back seat
Policy on new leadership softened in 'roadmap' for Mideast peace process

A policy shift that had not been announced, it seems.
WASHINGTON - Five months after President Bush called for new Palestinian leadership untainted by terror - a clear signal that perennial survivor Yasser Arafat had to go - U.S. officials are now playing down that demand in a bid to revive the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

American officials insist that their determination to see Arafat stripped of power has never flagged and say that they recognize the peace process is likely to go nowhere while he controls the Palestinian Authority.

But they say that making him a target could merely boost his popularity and prevent the emergence of the kind of reform-minded leaders that both Americans and Israelis are demanding - leaders who could quell violence against Israelis and become credible negotiating partners for Israel.

"When you target Arafat, you reinforce him," a State Department official said. "He's been synonymous with the Palestinian cause for 30 years. By making him the center of debate, you render impotent the people who could work for a new dynamic" among Palestinians.
U.S.: Palestinians have violated accords

Does this report, critical of the Palestinians, mean anything?
WASHINGTON, Dec. 3 (JTA) -- For the first time, the White House has officially determined that the Palestinians are not in compliance with the agreements it has signed with the United States and Israel.

But despite the determination, President Bush immediately waived any sanctions required by law, invoking national security as the reason.

The president's findings coincide with the release of the State Department's semiannual report on Palestinian compliance.

The report, obtained by JTA on Tuesday, says the Palestinians have not complied with several elements of its agreements, including recognizing the right of Israel to exist in peace and security, solving all disputes through negotiation and peaceful means and renouncing the use of violence.

Because of the sanction waiver, Monday's actions have no concrete effect.

Some American Jewish organizational officials and lawmakers are nonetheless praising the symbolic gesture of chastising the Palestinians for their noncompliance, but are criticizing the president's waiver of the sanctions.
Bush names Iran-Contra figure his Mideast chief
Abrams' rise thrills Israel's supporters

This appontment sends a signal that is loud and clear to Israeli supporters.
Washington -- Elliott Abrams, a pugnacious conservative and passionate advocate of Israel, is no stranger to Washington's policy wars.

But Abrams' selection this week as President Bush's director of Middle Eastern affairs at the White House plunged him into one of the sharpest disputes in the nation's capital -- the one within the administration over how to deal with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Abrams' appointment thrilled those who had criticized the administration for being too tough on Israel and too deferential to the Palestinians. But it dismayed those, especially at the State Department, who want Israel to ease its crackdown in the West Bank and Gaza.

An administration official said that Abrams' ascension has created "serious consternation" at the State Department. It is seen there, he said, as likely to impede the efforts of Secretary of State Colin Powell to work with European nations to press Israel and the Palestinians to adopt a staged timetable leading to creation of a Palestinian state in three years.

The timetable, known as a road map, has been criticized by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, though he endorsed it in principle this week. Supporters of Israel in Congress, who have also criticized the road map approach, welcomed the appointment of Abrams'.

"There are two foreign policy teams in this administration on a lot of issues," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who went to Harvard with Abrams in the 1960s. "Clearly Elliott is coming out of the hard-line team. But that is where Bush's heart is."

Many Palestinians Rethinking Violence

It's hard to see how the current intifada can be characterized as anything other than a complete failure. Aside from upping their kill ratio -- and destroying whatever moral credibility they might have had by embracing suicide bombing -- they're no closer to having a Palestinian state than they were two years ago. Indeed, they're farther from the goal because a peace plan was on the table two years ago and now there's only a "road map" which President Bush has shown little interest in lately. He still hasn't met with Arafat and likely never will.
After more than two years of silence, a slowly swelling chorus of Palestinian leaders and opinion-makers says taking up arms against Israel was a mistake and must stop.

The latest voice is that of Jibril Rajoub, once the most powerful security chief in the West Bank. Rajoub now says he warned Yasser Arafat in a strategy session 10 days after the start of the uprising that allowing armed gangs to take over would lead to disaster.

Rajoub's forecast has proven chillingly accurate: 26 months later, nearly 2,000 Palestinians and nearly 700 Israelis are dead, the Palestinian economy is crushed, Israel has reoccupied the West Bank and Israeli travel bans have turned many Palestinian towns into virtual prison camps.
The most surprising apsect of this whole mess is that Arafat and the assorted terrorist groups thought it would work in the first place.

I don't know. Maybe rational thought isn't taught in madrassas -- in fact, it isn't -- but there is no way any sensible opponent would allow tactics such as suicide bombings and targeting civilians to succeed because we would never see the end of it if it did. The only choice once those tactics are embraced is how to fight, not whether.

Even Colin Powell, who has been entirely too keen on negotiations when military action is appropriate, is calling the intifada a mistake:
Secretary of State Colin Powell said Wednesday he believes the current Palestinian uprising against Israel is "a mistake."

"It has not brought the Palestinian people any closer to a state of their own or to peace, and I think the sooner that terrorism and violence of this nature is ended, the more likely we are to move forward on the vision that President Bush laid out in his 24 June speech for two states living side by side in peace with each other," said Powell in a press conference with Greek Foreign Minister George Papandreou in Washington.
If there's to be a Palestinian state, the circumstances have to be such that Israel can feel secure within its own borders and acts of terror are not tolerated by the new state, much less encouraged.

Cross-posted on NNP.

December 06, 2002

Anti-Semtism Watch

Hundreds of skinheads disrupted a public candle-lighting and Chanukah celebration of the Jewish community in Budapest, Hungary, Wednesday night. The skinheads, members of the Hungarian Revisionist Party, menacingly gathered near the dias where the ceremony was taking place and chanted, "Hungary is ours!" Hungarian police did not intervene, as both groups had been issued permits for use of the public square. Police later apologized for the oversight in issuing the permits to both groups for the same night and location.

German neo-Nazis have vowed to stage a demonstration when Israeli President Moshe Katzav arrives in the country next Tuesday on a state visit. The neo-Nazis are demanding that Germany cease supplying military equipment to Israel, and have paraded in the past under the banner, "Get Their Hands Out of Palestine." The city of Berlin issued a permit for the Tuesday demonstration, and the tiny Jewish community of Berlin has promised a counter-demonstration.

Judeophobia in Europe

In a very important interview, Pilar Rahola explains what drives the pro-Palestinian hysteria of the European Left.

She is the second Oriani Falacci. Three cheers for both of them
A former parliamentarian, Pilar Rahola sat in the national legislature in Madrid for eight years, first as part of the republican left, then as the founder of the Independence Party.

She decided to step forward to denounce the flagrant imbalance in the handling of information from the Middle East. Her most recent piece, “In Favor of Israel,” is to be published in a book in which fifteen Spanish intellectuals, including Jon Juaristi, president of the Cervantes Institute, and Gabriel Alviac, a well-known journalist with El Mundo [translator’s note: a Spanish daily newspaper], seek to reestablish the facts.
If you want to understand where the European Left is coming from, this interview is a good place to start.

Ted Belman

Discordia at Concordia

For information on the Concordia campaign against Hillel (the Jewish student group), see Sari's site.

Think about it...

Two missiles were fired at an Israeli jet in Mombasa and everyone was shocked, appalled etc like it was the first time.

Wasn't an Siberian passenger jet filled with Israelis shot down in the Ukraine by an alleged Ukrainian missile.

Wasn't there some evidence, quickly denied, of a missile when the TWA passenger jet went down off Long Island.

Think about it.

Ted Belman,


The Sites of the Week this week features one information site and five blogs all from the Holy Land. On the left is a section linking to these sites. Visit them, they are worth the read.

Independent Media Review Analysis from Israel. Puts up ten to twenty Israel related stories a day. You can have them emailed to you.

Here are some very good and popular blogs all from Israel. They tend to be a bit to the left of many of the contributers to Israpundit. If you have time after reading Israpundit these are some sites you may like.

Balagan - A Brazilian woman who recently moved to Israel

The Israeli Guy Gil Shterzer

Not A Fish Nor Gefilte Fish

Ribbity Frog Blog

Tal G. in Jerusalem

Elliot Abrams, Mr Rice Guy

Back to the Bush's "vision" speech of June. Sharon's recent speech also embraced these concepts and not the hated "road map".
SOMETIMES the Washington
presscorps reports a story, but entirely misses its significance. This was the case with last week's naming of Elliott Abrams to the position of senior director for Near East and North African affairs on the National Security Council staff at the White House. The job makes Abrams a major player in setting policy on Israel and the Palestinians. And Abrams's view of the right policy is quite different--more pro-Israel, less solicitous of Palestinians--from that of Secretary of State Colin Powell and the permanent cast of characters at the State Department.

Abrams's job is to make certain that the conditions and guidelines laid down by President Bush in his speech last June 24 are not watered down or ignored by the Powell forces.

The appointment of Abrams, 54, is an important statement by national security adviser Condoleezza Rice--and by Bush--that the White House will not cede control of Middle East policy to Powell.

At the moment, the White House plans to implement the Bush guidelines from his speech last June. Among these are the easing aside of Arafat, the end of Palestinian terrorism against Israel, and reform of the Palestinian Authority.

Joseph Alexander Norland can relax. All is not lost.

Editorial: Mideast mixed signals

Worthwhile editorial wonders who represents the Palestinians and their views.
Who speaks for Palestinians? Yasser Arafat and his moderate-sounding aides, or the terrorists who murdered innocent Israelis this past week in Israel and Kenya? The 56 per cent of Palestinians who shrink from attacks inside Israel or the large minority who still cheer them?

The world needs to know.

Brutal attacks on Israeli voters, holiday-goers and air travellers a few days ago coincided with news reports that Arafat's top deputy Mahmoud Abbas has denounced the two-year Palestinian campaign of violence as a tragic error and a dead end. "We should ... ask ourselves where we are headed," he told Fatah party activists at a closed-door meeting. "What happened in these two years ... is a complete destruction of everything we built."

Yes it is. Some 2,700 people have died, Arafat's credibility has been shattered, his Palestinian Authority all but destroyed, statehood has been put on hold and tens of thousands have sunk into poverty.

A rethinking of Palestinian strategy is overdue. But Arafat himself, not an aide, should have shouted this message from the rooftops. Then fewer ordinary people might still cling to the contemptible fiction that terror is justified.

If Arafat cannot bring himself to challenge this view, publicly and forcefully, he should bow out. To be credible peace partners Palestinian leaders must make themselves heard for peace above the noise of rockets, bombs and guns. They haven't yet.
Sharon breaks with political allies, backs 'Bush formula'

HERZLIYA, Israel — Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has endorsed the U.S. plan for an interim Palestinian state. The so-called "roadmap," sets a timetable for an interim Palestinian state in 2003 and a country with permanent borders in 2005.

Sharon said he will obtain formal approval for the plan drafted by the United States, United Nations, European Union and Russia should he win parliamentary elections on Jan. 28.

It was the first time he has publicly detailed his views on the plan which differ significantly from those of the Palestinian Authority and are opposed by his own political allies in the current government, Middle East Newsline reported

"It is a logical, wise plan that can be implemented," Sharon said. "We accepted in principle the Bush formula. Israel will not return to control territories from which we withdrew in political settlements."

Sharon said the Palestinian state would be demilitarized and be ruled by a democratic regime. He said this would involve the removal of Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat from decision-making and Palestinian elections.

At the same time, Sharon said, the Palestinians would be forced to dismantle what the prime minister termed all of their security organizations. They would be replaced by two or three new agencies, which will be comprised of a police force and security bodies and cooperate with Israel. Sharon said terrorism would be outlawed and a new Palestinian interior minister would be responsible for collecting illegal weapons and transferring them to a third party. At that point, the weapons would be removed from Palestinian areas and destroyed.

After this process, Sharon said, an interim Palestinian state will be completed and contain at least 40 percent of the West Bank. He said Israel would control passages to the Palestinian state as well as control its air space. The new Palestinian state will not be allowed to form alliances with Israel's enemies.

"No progress will be made from one phase to the next until such time as quiet has been restored, Palestinian rule has undergone fundamental changes, and coexistence is ensured," Sharon said.

In the first stage, Israel will agree to contiguity between areas within the West Bank and Gaza Strip. But Israel will not allow contiguity between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

Sharon's vision differed sharply with those of his allies in his current right-wing government. National Infrastructure Minister Effie Eitam said, head of the National Religious Party, said Israel would quickly lose all control of the process of establishing a Palestinian state. He expressed skepticism whether Israel could ensure that a Palestinian state would be demilitarized or democratic.

"The minute that Israel utters the word 'Palestinian state' the international community and the Palestinians will understand that the conflict has been decided." Eitam said. "He [Sharon] is saying that historically and strategically you have won."
Middle East angst erupts again in Concordia's halls

The school with the most pro- and anti-Israeli clashes amongst it students does it again. But look who leads the anti-Israeli students!
MONTREAL -- Concordia University's student union has voted to suspend privileges of the campus's main Jewish club, sparking renewed turmoil at the university days after administrators lifted a ban on activities related to the Middle East.

The student body passed a motion this week demanding that Concordia Hillel apologize for placing pamphlets on an information table that sought volunteers for the Israel Defence Forces.

The Concordia Student Union, known for its pro-Palestinian positions in the past, said the Jewish group broke federal law because it was recruiting Canadians to join a foreign army.

"We treat one group just like we treat another group," Sameer Zuberi, a member of the student executive, said yesterday. "Had it been . . . people recruiting for the Iraqi army or the Saudi Arabian army, they would have been treated in a similar fashion."

The continued conflict at Concordia reflects increased tension at several university campuses.
Ten dead in Gaza shelling

There would seem to be some oldfashioned notion that an army seeking its enemies ought not to go into any area that may house civilians who are not directly involved in killing activies, despite the fact that the killers do not wear uniforms, hide among civilians, and amidst the non-involved. Thus, when innocents get killed, it is the "fault" of soldiers in uniform carrying out their duties who are denounced by those allowing killers to hide out.
Palestinian homes were targeted in the raid.

At least 10 Palestinians have been killed in a gun battle triggered by an Israeli armoured incursion into a refugee camp in the Gaza Strip.
Palestinian witnesses said the Israeli troops entered al-Bureij camp in about 40 tanks and other armoured vehicles, triggering heavy exchanges of fire with Palestinian gunmen.

It was as if the doors of hell were opened in our camp by the helicopters and the tanks

Witness Mohammed Al-Maqadama

They accused the Israelis of firing indiscriminately, and said that some of the casualties were caused when a tank shell hit a house, but Israel has strongly denied this.

The Israeli army said all of the victims were militants - at least five of them from the Islamic group Hamas - but Palestinians say all but two were civilians.

Local hospital officials said another 10 people - including a family of five - were wounded before the Israeli troops pulled out.

The Israeli Defence Force said its troops - who were backed up by helicopter gunships - came under intense fire from close quarters during the operation against "terrorist targets and infrastructure" in the area.

The incursion came hours after Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said that militants from Osama Bin Laden's al-Qaeda network were active in Gaza - a claim derided by Palestinians.

'Continuation of massacres'

Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat described the incursion as "Israeli terrorism".
PA Reforms and The Arab Tradition of Out-manoeuvring the West

On June 24, 2002, Bush made the famous speech in which he demanded that the PA reform, spelling out specific steps to be taken:

My vision is two states, living side by side in peace and security.
I call on the Palestinian people to elect new leaders, leaders not compromised by terror. I call upon them to build a practising democracy, based on tolerance and liberty. If the Palestinian people actively pursue these goals, America and the world will actively support their efforts.
True reform will require entirely new political and economic institutions, based on democracy, market economics and action against terrorism.
A Palestinian state can only serve its citizens with a new constitution which separates the powers of government.
And the United States will not support the establishment of a Palestinian state until its leaders engage in a sustained fight against the terrorists and dismantle their infrastructure.
I've said in the past that nations are either with us or against us in the war on terror. To be counted on the side of peace, nations must act. Every leader actually committed to peace will end incitement to violence in official media, and publicly denounce homicide bombings.
Since the “vision thing” speech was made, the ZOA has been keeping tabs on the progress made with regard to the four point highlighted above; the weekly reports are reproduced by IMRA on a regular basis. The last of these reports was posted by IMRA on December 3, 2002. It concludes as follows:
[On dismantling terrorist infrastructure]: No Terrorists Arrested...No Terrorists Extradited...No Terror Groups Outlawed...No Terrorists' Weapons Seized...No Closing of Bomb Factories...No Punishing of PLO Terror Factions...

New Terrorist Attacks ...during Nov.16-Dec.1, 2002, there were at least 48 terrorist attacks or attempted attacks, in which 17 people were murdered and
93 wounded...
[Re End Incitement:] The PA's official newspapers, television, and radio continued to broadcast a steady stream of anti-Israel, anti-American, and pro-violence incitement, and PA officials continued to make inciting statements.

[Re Elect New Leaders Not Compromised by Terror]: The PA has announced that it will hold elections for chairman of the PA and members of the Palestinian Legislative Council on January 20, 2003, if Israel withdraws from various parts of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza.

[Re Build Democracy Based on Tolerance and Liberty]: The PA continues to claim that it is in the process of implementing what it describes as its "reform plan," but experts doubt that the reforms will be genuine. Robert Satloff of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy said of the plan: "While it offers promising elements of change, the plan is only likely to strengthen the unacceptable status quo." On October 29, 2002, Arafat announced the appointment of a new cabinet; however, 16 of the 19 cabinet members had likewise been members of the outgoing cabinet.

Furthermore, on October 29, 2002, the PA announced it had condemned to death an Arab human-rights worker (Heidar Mahmoud Hussein Ghanim, an employee of the leftwing Israeli group Btselem) for "spying for Israel."
It is hardly surprising that no progress is made, since the EU and the US continue to subsidize and support the Palestinians anyway. Indeed, just the other day we learnt that Bush declined to apply sanctions for PA non-compliance, as reported by Ha’Aretz on December 5, 2002:
President George Bush decided Monday to impose sanctions on the Palestinian Authority for not fulfilling its obligations to fight terror, but the president has frozen their implementation for the time being.
The complicated wording of the White House decision is meant to convey dissatisfaction with the Palestinians, but without imposing any kind of punishment that would be problematic for the administration.
One has to conclude that the PA has succeeded once again in manipulating the West into supporting it without giving up anything in return: Teflon-Arafat is firmly placed at the head of the PA, terrorism against Israel continues on a daily basis, and the Gang of Four (“Quartet”) continues its unrelenting effort to “destroy Israel by other means”.

Horror of horrors, Sharon himself has endorsed the creation of a second Palestinian-Arab state, as documented by an IMRA report, December 4, 2002, quoting Sharon’s words:
As I have promised in the past, President Bush's sequence will be discussed and approved by the National Unity Government which I intend to establish after the elections, and I will do my utmost to establish as broad a National Unity Government as possible.
Anyone who believes that in the end, Sharon will out-smart Arafat and will not permit a second Palestinian-Arab state without adequate guaranties, indeed, anyone who believes that in the end, the West will see the light and out-manouevre the Palestinians, should look into history to learn about the phenomenal success of the Arabs in turning the tables and out-manoeuvring the West. Let me cite but one example which concerns the way in which King Abdullah outwitted Churchill and the British government in the 1920's.

If one reads popular versions of Jordanian history, as presented, for example, on the Focus site, one is led to believe that Jordan (formerly, Tansjordan) came into being like Athene out of the head of Zeus:
Transjordan was incorporated into Britain's League of Nations' mandate of Palestine. Transjordan was treated separately from Palestine, however, and its residents were assured that it would not be affected by the establishment of a Jewish homeland in the future. His majesty king Abdullah, Faisal's brother, was chosen to rule over Transjordan in 1921. He cooperated closely with the British, who helped create the Arab Legion, a small army later commanded by Sir John Glubb. In 1928 a treaty with Britain made Transjordan a constitutional monarchy. A second treaty with the British on Mar. 22, 1946, created the Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan.
But quite a different picture emerges from detailed, scholarly works, such as:

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

Fromkin's research, together with material culled from additional sources, indicates the following chain of events.

In March, 1920, the Emir Feisal, son of Hussein king of Hejaz, was crowned King of Syria, Feisal having marched into Syria with his armed followers. In April, 1920, the San Remo conference confirmed the mandates allocation, according to which Britain would receive the mandate over Palestine (which would include both banks of the Jordan), and France would received the mandate over Syria/Lebanon. To France, the latter decision was incompatible with Feisal ruling as Syria’s king; the French solution was to occupy Syria/Lebanon and expel Hussein (July 1920).

But Arab attacks on the French continued, and Britain was concerned that France would use the hostilities as a pretext to invade Palestine. This issue was one of many Middle East problems that Churchill (as colonial secretary, 1921-1922) had to deal with. To discuss these issues, Churchill called the “Cairo Conference” for 12-22 March, 1921. While the Conference was ongoing, news arrived that Abdullah, brother of the deposed King Hussein of Syria, arrived in Transjordan at the head of two hundred Bedouin warriors. It was believed that Abdullah intended to go to war on the French and reinstate his brother as king of Syria. Alarmed, Churchill proposed to offer Abdullah the following deal: in return for Abdullah agreeing not to attack French Syria, Churchill would appoint Abdullah as temporary ruler of eastern Palestine, with the express mandate of establishing order and preventing attacks on the French in Syria/Lebanon.

Herbert Samuel and Wyndham Deedes, respectively, the High Commissioner and the Chief Secretary for Palestine, objected to this proposal on the grounds that Eastern Paelstine was included in the League of Nations mandate for Palestine, and that Churchill could not change the terms unilaterally. But Churchill argued that Abdullah’s position would be temporary, for a few months only, and with this argument succeeded in persuading the British cabinet.

As the Cairo Conference closed on March 22, 1921, Churchill travelled to Jerusalem and met Abdullah in person. In these meetings, Abdullah agreed to govern Transjordan for six months, with the advice of a British chief political officer and with a British financial subsidy.

Within weeks it became clear that Abdullah was unable to either quell the internal fighting among the local tribes or to prevent attacks on the French in Syria. But when summer turned to fall and the British doubts about Abdullah became clear, he simply made it know to his British handlers (especially to TE Lawrence “of Arabia”) that he would not leave. Abdullah knew that the Arabists in the British Colonial Office would prefer to see him installed permanently under their tutelage, rather than eject him by force of arms, and he was right: Abdullah had succeeded to out-manoeuver Churchill. Faced with this reality, Britain used her clout to redraft the San Remo terms, so that the mandate given to Britain by the League of Nations in July 1922 did indeed permit Britain to exclude Eastern Palestine from the Jewish National home.

Fromkin summarizes the subsequent developments thus:

[T]he Colonial Office's temporary and merely administrative set of arrangements for Transjordan in time hardened into an enduring political reality. The Arabian prince with his foreign retinue settled in Amman and became a permanent new factor in the complex politics of the Palestine Mandatory regime... The newly created province of Transjordan, later to become the independent state of Jordan, gradually drifted into existence as an entity separate from the rest of Palestine; indeed, today it is often forgotten that Jordan was ever part of Palestine.
There are numerous examples that demonstrate the same trend, such as Egypt’s success in garnering the support of the West at the same time as she was firmly in the Soviet camp during the Cold War era. But if the story of Abdullah and the other historical examples are not enough of a warning, consider how effectively the Arab propaganda machine is succeeding in turning governments and public opinion in Europe against our sister-republic, Israel, to this very day. One has to marvel how a collection of autocracies with hands dripping with blood can subvert the minds of educated, freedom-loving people, inducing them to regard a vibrant sister-democracy as the devil incarnate - and yet the Arabs are doing so continually. Arab propaganda has out-manoeuvred reason and facts, using little more than petro-dollars and terrorism.

Which is why I cringe when I hear leaders from Bush to Sharon accept the notion of a second Palestinian Arab state, and the more I hear about imposing conditions of “reform” and “demilitarization”, the more I cringe: I've seen "conditions" before.

Another obvious example of how Arab countries outwit the West is Iraq, a topic which warrants a separate article. I mention this point in closing only to call attention to a recent article by David Warren, an article which should be read in its entirety. To whet one’s appetite, I quote but one paragraph that encapsulates much of the story:

The Iraqis had found the previous U.N. inspector, the distressingly competent Richard Butler, much too confrontational, and found the American's proposed compromise candidate, another Swede, Rolf Ekeus, also too confrontational. Mr. Blix was the sort of sap they were looking for, and in 1998 the Clinton administration was persuaded to accept him as the head of the newly watered-down UNMOVIC after long nights of filibuster by the Russians, French, and Kofi Annan.
Is there any wonder the Arabs laugh at us?

Contributed by Joseph Alexander Norland. This piece is cross-posted on IsraPundit and Dawson Speaks.

December 05, 2002

Israel investigates Arafat funding

The Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, has ordered a full investigation into allegations that an Israeli envoy was involved in setting up a Swiss bank account for the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, and his financial adviser.

The former Shin Bet official, Yossi Ginossar, is alleged to have transferred money to an unknown destination.

He has denied any wrongdoing. He said all his business activities had been legal and he had not engaged in business while on government missions.

The Palestinian senior negotiator, Saeb Erekat, rejected the allegations, which he said were part of an Israeli smear campaign against the Palestinian Authority.

Synagogue vandalized in western France

Vandals broke into a synagogue in southwestern France, ransacking the main prayer hall and destroying holy books, police and Jewish leaders said Thursday.

The attack on the synagogue of Perigueux, in the Dordogne region, took place before dawn Wednesday after worshippers and officials had already left. It came during the eight-day Jewish celebration of Hanukkah, which ends Friday at sundown.


Islam's Nazi Connections

One of the good things one can truthfully say about Islam is that there has never been any love lost between Moslems and Marxists. Sadly, the opposite end of the totalitarian political spectrum is quite another matter. SS chief Heinrich Himmler was known to remark that he regretted that Germany had adopted Christianity, rather than "warlike" Islam, as its religion, and there is a disturbing amount of twisted but very real logic in his remark.

Al-Qaeda's Global Jihad

IDF document presents world-wide plan of terror group.
During the month of the Ramadan (which ended this week), an announcement was published by an active Al-Qaeda cell on a website connected to the Al-Qaeda Islamic terror network. The announcement called for Muslim nations to unite around the "common goal", and that the solution to the Islamic nation's problems, was to follow the path of Allah and Jihad.

The announcement requests that Muslims not remain silent in the face of the injustices caused to Islam since the fall of the Caliphs dynasty. It talks of the loss of "Andalusia" to the "Christian occupation" of Spain in 1492, the loss of Palestine, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, The Balkans, the Caucases, Kashmir, Burma and Sudan.

The article in the Al-Ansar newspaper (volume 21) Nov. 20, 2002

Thanks to the Al-Qaeda leadership [Al-Qaeda is headed by Mullah Omar and Iman Al-Zawahari], Jihad warriors have managed to break through the boundaries and spread their Jihad activities through many countries. These include Afghanistan, Chechnia, The Balkans, Kashmir, China, the Philippines, Thailand, Burma, Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Eritrea, Sudan, Egypt, Algiers, Libya, Tunis, Morocco, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq. They also include several other countries in Africa, Scandinavia, South and North America and Australia". Said the announcement.

The role of the Muslims in the realization of Islam's goals:

The role of religious scholars and teachers:
click here
For the Record

Arabs anti-Semitic? Never!

Here is a report not from IMRA, not from MEMRI, not from the JPost, but straight from the AP's mouth, under the unequivocal heading, Saudi Minister: Jews Behind 9/11 Attacks :

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) - The Saudi police minister has claimed Jews were behind the Sept. 11 attacks because they have benefited from subsequent criticism of Islam and Arabs, according to media reports.

Interior Minister Prince Nayef made the remarks in the Arabic-language Kuwaiti daily Assyasah last month. The latest edition of Ain al-Yaqeen, a weekly Internet magazine devoted to Saudi issues, posted the Assyasah interview and its own English translation.
Add this one to The Protocols, the Blood Libels and "Jews behind maligning Saudi Arabia".

Contributed by Joseph Alexander Norland. This piece is cross-posted on IsraPundit and Dawson Speaks

Very interesting..

From DEBKAfile's

In a corner of the hall in Herzliya sat a small group of individuals who listened quietly to Sharon’s address with growing astonishment. DEBKAfile’s military sources identified them as a US Pentagon delegation on an unofficial, unannounced visit. Its members failed to understand how Sharon could ignore the new threats menacing Israel on every hand and was sufficiently out of tune with the realities of Washington policies to offer his Palestinian treatise at this time.

It is an open secret in Washington that the White House has no time for the “road map” devised by Secretary of State Colin Powell and the Quartet, any more than it has for Arafat, whom Bush does not want to see anywhere near government, however “symbolic” the role assigned him. In any case, Israel faces untold dangers until the end of January and by then the Middle East is likely to be a different place.

The appointment of Elliott Abrams as head of the National Security Council’s Middle East section is important in the context of Powell’s initiatives in concert with European governments and the UN secretariat – and therefore Sharon’s newfound Palestinian concepts. Announcing the appointment, Dr. Rice made it clear that Abrams will take charge of the White House’s peace initiatives and its policies on Israel-Arab relations, thereby reducing if not cutting out the secretary of state’s powers on these issues.

Ted Belman

Anti-US anger grows among Arab moderates

Just don't call it a clash of civilizations.
BEIRUT - If the United States wants to gauge the extent of anti-American sentiment in Lebanon, it needs look no further than its embassy's efforts in the past few weeks to host iftars, the evening fast-breaking meal during the Muslim month of Ramadan. Just nine of 80 invitees attended a Monday-night iftar. Most observed a boycott of the event in protest of US Middle East policies.

As a possible US-led invasion of Iraq inches closer, and the bloodshed in the occupied Palestinian territories increases, anger toward America in this comparatively Western-friendly nation has grown more violent.

Several American fast-food restaurants have been bombed recently - three in one day last month. Then, two weeks ago, an American missionary was shot dead in her office in Sidon, the first killing of a US citizen on Lebanese soil since the end of Lebanon's 1975-1990 civil war. It is still unclear whether she was murdered because of her nationality or because of her alleged attempts to convert local Muslims.

In Lebanon, as in the rest of the Middle East, public expressions of opposition to Washington's Mideast policies had until recent months been confined mainly to organized and peaceful campaigns to boycott American goods.

The killing last month of a USAID official in Jordan and attacks on US troops based
Missiles to Israel's north: Syria has been trucking Iranian missiles into Lebanon to the forces of Hezbullah. Craig Hines of the Houston Chronicle (Dec. 3) says Israel might have to pre-empt the problem.

Why one should oppose a second Palestinian-Arab state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza - Part 14 of 23

This piece continues a series of which the first 13 parts were posted on September 8, 9, 11, 17, 20, 22, 23; October 7, 24, 28, 29; and November 6, and 26 2002. (Alternatively, the previous articles may be found in the IsraPundit archives as follows: September 8, 9, 11, 17, 20, 22, 23; October 7, 24, 28, 29; and November 6 and 26, 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.

14. Recalling the PLO’s connections with international terrorism, one may well suspect that in the future, the West is in danger of coming under attack by Bin Laden-like terrorists trained in a sovereign Palestinian Arab state.

To begin with, the PLO is a terrorist organization and its transformation into the PA has not changed its character. To this day, a host of terrorist organizations such as al Aqsa, Force 17 and Tanzim constitute an integral part of Arafat’s own organization, Fatah.

But the terrorist connection is much broader, and well known. Consider, for example, the following excerpt from the official 1994 US report, Patterns of Global Terrorism :
In the 1960s and the 1970s, Fatah offered training to a wide range of European, Middle Eastern, Asian, and African terrorist and insurgent groups.
And what happened after "the 1970"? Did the PLO cease offering “training to a wide range” of terrorist groups? To a great extend the PLO did cease, but only because Israel ejected the PLO from Lebanon in 1982, again, rendering the West an invaluable service and being cursed in return. But the PLO connection with global terrorism did not cease, as shown in the following excerpt from the US Congressional Record, which in turn cites comments made in the US House of Representatives by Robert K. Dorman on July 27, 1990 (the comments, based on a research paper, refer specifically to the PLO terrorist links in connection with the narcotics trade):
European police first stumbled on this trade when Scotland Yard special units, in cooperation with the Dutch Narcotics Squad, unearthed a haul of 300,000,000 pounds' worth of top-grade ‘Lebanese Gold’ transported from Lebanon in two freighters chartered by the PLO. Earlier, a six-man PLO squad led by one of Arafat's chief aides, Ali Mahmoud Buro, was arrested at Heathrow Airport after customs men found a 150-kilogram cache of Bekaa Valley cannabis in their luggage.

Following up on these leads as well as information from Western intelligence services operating in the Middle East, Scotland Yard detectives recently cracked down on a vast IRA-PLO money-laundering operation. The IRA was using British banks and other financial organizations to purchase arms with their drug profits for terrorist operations in Ireland, Britain, Germany, and France.
The connection with the IRA is also recorded by the State Department document, Patterns of Global Terrorism, 1999 . Referring to the IRA, the document states:
[R]eceived aid from a vareity of groups and countries and considerable training and arms from Libya and, at one time, the PLO.
It is most doubtful that the IRA-PLO connection ceased. Feeding these doubts are findings from Israel’s operation in Jenin in early 2002. On August 21, 2002, the NRO posted an article by By Rachel Ehrenfeld which reported:
Following the Israeli incursion into Jenin earlier this year, Paul Collinson, a British explosives expert working with the Red Cross, identified hundreds of explosive devices found there and noted that "the pipe bombs I found in Jenin are exact replicas of ones I found in Northern Ireland." The Daily Telegraph quoted a U.S. government official as saying in response: "If there was clear and convincing evidence that the IRA has been training Palestinians in bomb-making techniques, then we are facing a grave and grievous situation for the IRA — it would surely lead to a reassessment of whether the IRA should be put on the designated list of terrorist organizations with a global reach."

The incident came on the heels of a shooting spree of ten Israelis with a bolt-action rifle, perpetrated by a single sniper who left his rifle behind. This technique was also identified as a Irish Republican Army (IRA) trademark.
Another of the many organizations with connections to the PLO was the Italian Red Brigades (Brigate Rosse – BR). An article exploring this collaboration was released by ICT (Institue for Counter-Terror; the “ICT is a research institute and think tank dedicated to developing innovative public policy solutions to international terrorism.”). Authored by Ely Karmon, the article informs, inter alia:
Initial contacts between the BR and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) were established immediately after the kidnapping of Aldo Moro, in May or June 1978. The initiative came from the Palestinians through a French organization based in Paris offering international assistance to guerrilla movements worldwide. The link was established through Italian revolutionaries in exile who belonged to this organization, comrades of Mario Moretti, leader of the BR at the time. Moretti himself established initial contact in France.
As the Palestinian representative explained in talks with Moretti, the initiative for contacts came from a faction within the PLO that opposed abandoning the armed struggle against Israel. This faction was interested in setting up a militant anti-Israel front, with the help of the BR and German Red Army Faction (Rote Armee Fraktion – RAF), which were supposed to carry[ing] out attacks against “Zionists” in their countries. The French organization, for its part, asked Moretti to step up support for the Palestinian national liberation struggle. A meeting was arranged between Moretti and “the Palestinian Minister of the Interior” (later identified as Salah Khalaf/Abu Iyyad), who introduced himself as leader of a Marxist faction within the PLO interested in extending its influence within the PLO through alliances with European guerrilla organizations. In a subsequent meeting between Moretti and Abu-Iyyad, the following cooperation agreement was drawn up with Arafat’s approval.

The PLO would deliver weapons to the BR.
BR members would be allowed to train in Palestinian camps in the Middle East.
The PLO would offer assistance to BR fugitives.
The BR would store weapons in Italy for use by the PLO.
The BR would participate in attacks against Israeli personalities in Italy.
As if more proof is needed concerning the PLO as an integral part of global terrorism, consider a letter sent by Nagi N. Najjar, Director of the Lebanon Foundation for Peace, to Human Rights Watch. In this letter, Mr Najjar writes:

Sabra and Chatilla were one of the largest training centers for international terrorism. Most of the terrorists of the world visited the Sabra and Chatilla Camps in Beirut, received extensive training in terrorism, ranging from the use of plastic explosives to booby trapping cars, and special, assassination techniques given by well experienced followers of Yasser Arafat.

For example, the terrorist Red Brigades from Italy trained there, the terrorist Basque ETA movement, Carlos, Islamist mercenaries from Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Egypt, all came to those camps to be taught how to hijack planes, prepare bombs for use in Europe and elsewhere against US and Israeli embassies and missions. Sabra and Chatilla became known as the terror center in Beirut, whose mission was to export terror and subversion to the world. Many Lebanese were kidnaped to these camps and never returned alive.

All this evidence corroborates the summary given by Benjamin Netanyahu in his recent book:
From the early 1970s until Israel ousted it from Lebanon in June 1982, the PLO's de facto state in Lebanon was a veritable factory of terror, providing a safe haven and a launching ground for terrorist groups the world over. Who didn't come to the PLO bases in Beirut and Sidon? The Italian Red Brigades, the German Baader-Meinhof gang, the IRA, the Japanese Red Army, the French Action Directe, the Turkish Liberation Army, the Armenian Asala group, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, and terrorists from all over Latin America as well as neo-Nazis from Germany - all were there. They came to Lebanon, were trained there, then set off to murder their victims elsewhere. From this unpoliced PLO playground of horrors, the virus of terror was spread throughout the Western world, often with the aid of Arab governments and, until the exposure of its complicity in terror proved too embarrassing, with the aid of the Soviet bloc as well.
[Quoted from p. 222 of
Netanyahu, Benjamin. Durable Peace. New York: Warner Books, 2000.]

The Gang of Four, aka “Quartet”, would do well to heed the Chinese warning, “Beware, lest your wishes come true”: their relentless pressure on a the tiny republic of Israel, stuggling to survive, may well result in the creation of a second Palestinian-Arab state in western Palestine.

And then the international terrorists, trained in this state, will come for the Quartet itself.

Contributed by Joseph Alexander Norland. This piece is cross-posted on IsraPundit and Dawson Speaks.

United States: Friend or Foe of Israel

Usually this question is asked of Saudi Arabia towards the US. So why ask it in this case. Isn’t it the case that the US is the only friend Israel has? But for the US, Israel could not survive. All true. All true. So what is this question all about?

When you look back over the last half-century you will note that the US, while supporting Israel, also restrained it.

Starting in the Sinai Campaign when Israel, France and Great Britain, invaded the Sinai after Nasser took over the Suez Canal, it was President Eisenhower who forced Israel to retreat.

The ’67 war (Six Day War) was made necessary because the US and other guarantors of Israel’s access to international waterways was not acted upon when Nasser closed the Straits of Tiran. When Israel attacked in self-defence, President Johnson sent the spy ship, USS Liberty, up the coast of Israel to spy on it and to supply intelligence to Nasser. In response, Israel sunk the ship.

In the ’73 war (Yom Kippur War), in which Israel was caught napping and almost overcome, the US withheld supplies from Israel so that Israel would learn how dependant they were on the US. When supplies started to flow at the last minute, Ariel Sharon in a brilliant move surrounded the Egyptian Third Army and had a clear road to Cairo, the US insisted that Israel desist and that they release said army. A ceasefire was worked out.

When Israel wanted to destroy the PLO in Lebanon in the eighties, it was America that saved Arafat’s skin and arranged for him and his cohorts to be exiled to Tunisia.

In the early nineties President Bush Sr. declared the settlements to be illegal when they are clearly not and withheld financial guarantees from Israel when they sorely needed them to resettle the Russian Jews in order to make further concessions to the Arabs.

Even President George W Bush, who clearly has affinity with Israel, is constantly criticizing and hectoring Israel about withdrawal from the territories and about the need to show restraint. Lip service only is paid to defending their citizens. Israeli practices such as pre-emptive strikes and targeted assassination while condemned by the US are precisely the practices the US is adopting in their war on terror. God forbid, and the US too, that Israel should bomb the Palestinians as opposed to using hand to hand combat in the streets. But it is okay for the US to bomb cities in Afghanistan to avoid military casualties.

The State Department is the leading apologist for Arafat and the PA. They refuse to acknowledge what they know to be true. The same goes for their attitude to Saudi Arabia. While the Arab institutions are calling for blood, literally, of both Israelis and Americans and supporting terror, anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism all over the world, Bush is embracing them and calling Islam a religion of peace and Powell is calling for more Muslim immigrants. The enemy of Israel and the US is clearly these Islamic power brokers who have declared war on them in word and in deed. But the US is unwilling to acknowledge that they are the enemy and prefers to identify the enemy as a tactic namely “terror” rather then a people defined by their religion and in whose name the war is declared.

And now Israel must contend with the “Road Map” and having a second Palestinian State rammed down their throat. Rather than protecting Israel, the US is endangering their existence. No one can assure Israel that such a state will live in peace with Israel or that the Arab countries will live in peace with Israel but that doesn’t stop the US from pursuing this option.

A true friend would not be a power broker or care about being even handed. This only emboldens the Arabs to go for broke. A true friend would stand squarely and unabashedly behind Israel in word and in deed thereby making it clear that the Arabs cannot shake their alliance or their resolve to stand firm.

Ted Belman/

Report cites rising anti-Semitism

Anti-Semitism is on the rise in Greece, according to a new report.

The Greek Helsinki Monitor, a nongovernmental organization affiliated with the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights, said in the report that since the start of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict more than two years ago, "blatant anti-Semitism" has been expressed in the Greek media "by a spectrum of influential personalities in politics, labor, education and culture."

The Sept. 11 attacks in the United States also contributed to the rise of anti-Semitism here, according to the 64-page report that was issued last week.

Edward Said CRASSHes.

Enough Said. Wherein the clever professor is exposed as fakir
Edward Said, celebrity professor and advocate for Palestine, has just ended a stretch at the Centre for Research in the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities—acronym CRASSH—at Cambridge University in England. Between his lectures on "The Example of Auerbach's Mimesis" and "Return to Philology" (serious people never left it), Said huddled in his rooms to settle an old score with the Iraqi dissident Kanan Makiya. The result is an emission that is truly breathtaking for its sheer hypocrisy.

The Said-Makiya feud is more than a decade old, and it's not easy to map all its labyrinthine passages. So here is a crib note. Makiya, an Iraqi who first found politics in the bosom of the Popular Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, later went into exile and set about exposing the regime of Saddam Hussein. His book, Republic of Fear, shattered the complacency surrounding the Iraqi regime, bringing evidence that situated Saddam and his gangs outside civilization. A subsequent book, Cruelty and Silence, brought more evidence of Saddam's crimes, and also served an indictment against Arab writers who either swooned before the Iraqi dictator, or didn't see his misdeeds as sufficient cause for America to act. (For more, see my review of the book.)

Palestinian "intellectuals" beat loud drums for Saddam; some of them played shrill flutes against American intervention. Edward Said was the first flautist. In the fray, Makiya accused Said of sacrificing the Iraqi people to the unappeasable god of "Palestine first." Said in turn denounced Makiya as a traitor to the mother of all Arab causes. The feud later subsided, but the current U.S.-led drive for "regime change" in Iraq, coming as it does in the midst of yet another Palestinian drama, has gotten Said stirred up again—and against Makiya. That's because it's hard to read a major newspaper, or listen to National Public Radio, or even thumb your favorite magazine, without bumping into Kanan Makiya. One reason: Makiya is prominent in the "Democratic Principles Working Group," composed of some 30 Iraqis who belong to the State Department’s "Future of Iraq Project." This has enraged Said to the boiling point; in his column in the Ahram Weekly, he boils over. Take a deep breath, and read it.

Makiya doesn't need me to defend him, and I won't. I'm more interested in the patent hypocrisy of Said's charges. He hardly makes an accusation against Makiya that couldn't be made—usually with more justification—against himself. I'd describe it as a suicide character-bombing.

For example, Said tells us that that before Makiya went into exile, he was "an associate of his father's architectural firm in Iraq." That firm did business with the regime. In the next paragraph, Said steals second base: Makiya was a "beneficiary of the Iraqi regime's munificence." By the end of that paragraph, Said has stolen home plate: "Makiya himself had worked for Saddam." It's a crude spin on a typical case of son-works-for-dad. And the irony here is that Said's own father, a Cairene businessman, also kept his son in the office, and compromised him. In fact, according to Said's own memoirs (p. 289), he signed a business contract for his father that criminalized him. "For the next fifteen years," writes Said, "I was unable to return to Egypt because that particular contract, and I as its unsuspecting signatory, were ruled to be in contravention of the exchange-control law." So shall we visit the sins of businessmen fathers on their sons? If we were to apply Said's severe judgment of Makiya to himself, we would have to include money laundering among his past occupations. (On Makiya's tortured relations with his father, see the chapter "Oedipus in Samara" in Lawrence Weschler's Calamities of Exile.)

Said then announces that Makiya "never wrote in an Arab country...whatever meager writing he produced had been written behind a pseudonym and a prosperous, risk-free life in the West." And just where in the Arab world would it have been safe for Makiya to have written and published Republic of Fear under his own name? Come to think of it, has Said ever written in an Arab country? Said told an interviewer in 1989 that even were a Palestinian state created, he wouldn't live in it. "It's too late for me," he said. "I'm past the point of uprooting myself again." "I could have gotten a job at Bir Zeit," he later said. "But I realized this is something I cannot do. My fate is to remain in New York.
Sharon outlines his peace vision

The Sharon proposal for peace is on the table. Though it may not be deemed acceptable, it is an offer that ought to be negotiated. There are of course other issues that also need to be discussed, but a flat rejection is perhaps even worse than the status quo.
The Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has set out, for the first time, his proposals for the creation of a Palestinian state.

The plans, he said, correspond to a framework outlined earlier this year by US President George W Bush which said that a Palestinian state would follow Palestinian reforms.

They call for a Palestinian state within parts of the West Bank and Gaza, with provisional borders by next year and definitive ones by 2005.

The Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has set out, for the first time, his proposals for the creation of a Palestinian state.

The plans, he said, correspond to a framework outlined earlier this year by US President George W Bush which said that a Palestinian state would follow Palestinian reforms.

They call for a Palestinian state within parts of the West Bank and Gaza, with provisional borders by next year and definitive ones by 2005.

However, the plans, Mr Sharon stressed, were conditional on "an absolute end to terror" and, "above all else, all the Palestinian security organisations must be disbanded."

He also demanded the replacement of the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat.

Here are DEBKA headlines on the Sharon speech:
Sharon’s advocacy of a Palestinian state causes uproar on both sides of Israeli political spectrum. In White House, Adviser Rice slams Sharon speech

Wednesday, he came out in favor of fully demilitarized Palestinian state (after terror ends and reforms begin) with provisional borders on current A and B zones, except for security zones

Israel will control all passage points and air space and not allow alliances with its enemies.

Arafat will be relegated to a “symbolic role”

Right-wing leaders: Statehood would reward Palestinian terror. Left-wing: Likud leader is angling for centrist vote in January 28 election.
A Misreading Of Reality

This fine op-ed speaks to American leftists who feel their vision of a PLO terrorist state has been vindicated by the election of Arik Sharon. Nothing could be further from the truth of course, as the Lion of Judah has an impeccable record of never capitulating to the murderers despite the desperate suicidal pleadings of the hysterical anti-Israel left to do so.
By Ruth and Nadia Matar

The recent choice of Arik Sharon over Binyamin Netanyahu to head the Likud Party in the upcoming election scheduled for January 28, 2003, is in no way an endorsement of a Palestinian State. This is true despite the fact that Mr. Sharon has recently stated publicly on several occasions that a Palestinian State was inevitable, and was in fact already in existence. As part of his campaign for leadership of the Likud, Netanyahu opposed the creation of such a state. Since Sharon triumphed in the contest with Netanyahu, one might conclude that the voters in Likud agreed with Mr. Sharon, and endorsed an Arab State west of the Jordan River.

Nothing is further from the truth!

First of all, the representative Central Committee of Likud, which has 2000 members, had unanimously heretofore voted in opposition to a Palestinian State - specifically rejecting the Sharon approach. In addition, polls in Israel were in accord, and clearly showed that a large majority were opposed to another Arab State in our midst. Moreover, the 56% of Likud that elected Sharon as their leader did not thereby endorse a Palestinian State. Women In Green know this as a fact by reason of their activities throughout the Land of Israel. We have already gathered over 350,000 signatures, clearly demonstrating the public´s opposition to such an Arab State. Since we fax these signed Petitions to Sharon daily, Mr. Sharon is personally aware of the public´s strong opposition on this crucial question.

Sharon was chosen as the Likud leader mainly on the basis of his splendid past record in solving Arab insurrections against Israel. Sharon has an image of being a forceful and decisive leader with vast army experience, including the strategic and daring surrounding of the Egyptian army during the Six-Day War. It is only natural that the Jewish public would choose him over Netanyahu, in the wake of the widespread Arab terrorism and suicide bombings throughout Israel today. The public did not feel that Netanyahu had any real answers to Arab violence and therefore stayed with Sharon as their leader. Nothing More.

Moreover, there were those who voted for Sharon who did not believe what Sharon seemed to be saying about supporting a Palestinian State. These people point to the fact that Sharon had written many articles in the past violently opposed to another Arab state west of the Jordan River. In those articles, Sharon spelled out the real threat and danger of such a state to the existence of Israel. This is especially true in view of the cruel Arab terrorism over the last two years, and taking into consideration Sharon´s strong national feelings. It is not conceivable to these voters that Sharon would change his mind on this vital question of a Palestinian State.

It is more likely, they contend - taking into consideration the upcoming Iraqi war, the known positions of President Bush and the US Secretary of State Colin Powell, as well as the rest of the "Holy Four" - that Sharon decided not to openly oppose those views endorsing a Palestinian State. Since the Arabs are constantly depicting Sharon as a war criminal and oppressor of Palestinian rights, it would appear to be a tactical maneuver on Sharon´s part to appear to go along with the creation of an Arab Palestinian State. Moreover, Sharon has never spelled out the actual conditions under which he would allow such a State to exist, other than saying: "All terrorism must stop first." In reality, the conditions which Sharon requires would never be acceptable to the Arabs. Sharon´s favoring a Palestinian State, they argue, is therefore tantamount to a non-endorsement.

However, it is disturbing that Jewish organizations and others in America are misreading the full extent of Sharon´s position. They are interpreting and believing that Sharon´s victory over Netanyahu demonstrates that the majority of Jews in Israel are supporting the creation of another Arab state west of the Jordan River. This is utter nonsense. The overwhelming majority of Jews here in Israel are fiercely opposed to the creation of another Arab state. You would think that our Jewish leaders in America would be better informed and more sophisticated.
Ballots Under Bullets
By Uri Dan

That last week's day of terror occurred during the Likud primaries was further proof that Arafat means to destroy Israeli democracy prior to dismantling the Jewish state

Ariel Sharon's real achievement in the Likud primaries was not his victory over Binyamin Netanyahu, but the knockout blow he delivered to Yasser Arafat and his supporters.

Netanyahu had made a personal and political mistake in forcing Sharon to take part in a democratically justifiable but unnecessary political struggle whose results were known in advance while a real war was under way against Arafat's terrorist offensive.

That last week's day of bloody terror occurred during the primaries was not by chance. The murderous Palestinian attack on the Likud branch in Beit She'an at least was deliberately timed. And if those missiles had hit the Arkia airliner full of passengers as it was taking off from Mombasa, it is hard to believe anyone would have dared to go ahead with the primaries. The pain and shock felt over the six people murdered in Beit She'an and the many wounded, including three of MK David Levy's sons, threatened to affect the major democratic process taking place that day.

It was further proof that Arafat's intention remains the destruction of Israeli democracy, on the way to the implementation of his plan to destroy the Jewish state.

Israel's act of bringing Arafat to the gates of Jerusalem in the winter of 1994 was what led to Sharon's election, in February 2001, as Israel's fifth prime minister in less than seven years. Arafat had succeeded in getting Shimon Peres, Binyamin Netanyahu, and Ehud Barak ousted from their posts.

All of them had warmly shaken the PLO leader's hand; Sharon was the only one who listened to the voice of his conscience, rejected the advice of political idiots, and forcefully refused to extend his hand to the terrorist leader.

It was therefore hardly surprising that the smile returned to Arafat's face when Binyamin Ben-Eliezer broke up the national-unity government. Arafat and his accomplices began speaking openly, in declarations, articles and interviews, about the "window of opportunity" that had opened up for them to get rid of Sharon.

Over the course of the last 20 months they discovered the bad bargain they had made by helping bring Sharon to power in the hope that he would be a new Milosevic who, aided by international pressure, could be thrown out "in six months" (a consolation offered them by Yossi Beilin and his supporters).

The precise opposite occurred. Arafat was the one who became illegitimate, not only in US eyes, but also for some of the European countries. To the IDF and the Shin Bet Sharon returned their freedom of action in area A so as to minimize as far as possible losses caused by Palestinian terror. After first besieging Arafat in the Mukata and eventually sending in bulldozers to flatten the whole complex, Sharon turned Arafat into the world's best-known homeless person. [Read More]

December 04, 2002

Israel, the violator:

The December edition of Harper's Index leads with something juicy. "Rank of Israel and Turkey among nations in violation of the largest number of U.N. Security Council resolutions: 1, 2" Smarter Harpers Index helpfully points out why this reflects badly on the UN, not Israel.

Sharon supports Palestinian state

Sharon spoke at a conference in Hertzlia. He said that Israel supports the plan Bush put forward in his speech in June. Sharon said that there will be a Palestinian state, which will be disarmed, except for light weapons for internal law enforcement use. It will also be barred from forming strategic and military alliances with other states in the region. Sharon stressed that "we will not return to territories that we gave up under international agreements". He also expressed support for a continuing construction of a security fence between Israel and the territories.

(Crossposted here).

Israel on Campus Coalition.

The Israel on Campus Coalition is a partnership of the Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Foundation and Hillel: The Foundation for Jewish Campus Life, in cooperation with a network of national organizations committed to promoting Israel education and advocacy on campus. The more than twenty Jewish agencies currently participating in the Israel on Campus Coalition are dedicated to working collaboratively to assist students in fostering support for Israel on the college campus.

Just the Facts, Maam

After reading a US journalist's argument against transfer, I wrote to him to challenge on his "fundamental facts" as he put it.
Your first "fundamental fact" is that there was ethnic cleansing of 700,000 Palestinians in '48.

While all wars result in movement of refugees to other countries voluntary or otherwise and while there is some truth to the fact that in some cases "Palestinians" were frightened into fleeing as a result of the death and destruction occasioned by the fighting as in all cases of war, there was no forced marches or buses etc used to ensure that they went. In addition it is also well known as a fact that the Arab countries around them encouraged them to leave arguing that they could come back with the victorious armies and share the spoils. There is context that should also be considered .. The Arabs had shown by words and deeds that not only would they not live in peace with the Jews but that also they would not acquiesce in a state being created for the Jews. Realistically it made sense to carve out defensible borders and deport the Arabs who were sworn to kill them. You will argue that that is not nice to transfer populations but the act of killing Jews is also not nice.

At the same time, Jews in Arab lands were expelled and their property confiscated. These refugees totaled at least 700,000 most of whom settled in Israel. They were not Europeans as the Arabs like to portray the Israelis but local Semites no different racially from the Arabs and they constituted a majority of the population in Israel. You might say there was a population exchange. Quite common historically.

I wonder what you have written about other refugees who had to settle elsewhere. Is this a cause that vexes you or only when the Jews are involved as the"cleansers".

Finally it sometimes makes more sense to separate groups into separate countries with some transfer rather than to keep fighting each other over who gets the land. Why not do the rational thing as opposed to the emotional thing. Transfer has always been an alternative to killing and a rational way to end the conflict.

Your second "fundamental fact" is Israel's "illegal occupation" and [the violation of] international law. I believe that their presence there is neither illegal nor an occupation in the strict meaning of the word nor contrary to international law.

Resolution 242 of the Security Council sanctioned Israel's presence in the territories until such time as they could withdraw to secure and recognized borders. This required agreement between the warring parties namely Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and Syria. The Palestinians as an idea did not exist at that time. International law requires the occupying force after a war to maintain law and order. That is their duty.

In 1971, the Arabs voted at the Khartoum conference the three famous "no"s; no recognition, no negotiation, no peace. Obviously no agreement could be worked out so Israel remained in control. Therefore this "occupation" was certainly not illegal.

Now for "occupation". In international law the word occupation refers to occupying the lands of another country. Since the West Bank is not and never was in the last 500 years another country there is no real occupation in a legal sense. These territories are disputed not occupied. This dispute will remain until there is agreement. Israel also has a claim to these territories.

Oslo was entered into with the hope of achieving such agreement. There was no obligation to return all the lands but Israel was entitled to secure borders. There is much in the records of the UN to support that everyone expected changes to the border. That's why the resolution didn't refer to all territories to be given back for peace. If the Palestinians want to end the occupation they could at any time make a deal that Israel finds acceptable. This they refuse to do so the war goes on.

I'm sure you will argue that why should they have to make a deal that they didn't like. Assuming that there is some deal short of destroying Israel, that they would find acceptable, why should they be forced to settle for less than they want. I would argue that that is the real world, or to end the occupation, or because they agreed in Oslo to settle all disputes by negotiations and to stop all violence and incitement.

Now what is this "international law " you talk about. I'll be happy to show you that you are wrong but you have to quote the sections of whatever you quote from so that we can deal with the law and not a psuedo law.
Needless to say, he never wrote back.

Ted Belman/