Number 600

Finally, after a week of anticipation, the 600th Palestinian Arab to die from internal violence in 2007 (by my count) has been identified. Fittingly, it was from a "work accident":

The General Commander of the Abu Ali Mustafa Brigades, the armed group affiliated to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine PFLP, Mu'in Al-Masri aged 40 died on Saturday night of his wounds sustained in an internal explosion in Jabalia in the northern Gaza Strip months ago, Ma'an's reporter said.

Ma'an helpfully adds a picture of the unfortunate terrorist:

This late entry for the Splodie Awards is a fitting way to top off a record-breaking year of intra-Pali violence.

Read More

The Israel lobby and Western shared values

Egypt's Al Ahram recently published an op-ed, republished in Al-Arabiya, about the challenges the Arab world has in trying to come up with its own version of the "Zionist lobby." The author, Ayman El-Amir, starts off with "what everybody knows":

Ask any Arab politician, diplomat, foreign policy guru, media practitioner, political activist or Arab-American of any vocation about the secret of Israel's iron grip hold on the formulation and direction of U.S. foreign policy, and the answer comes directly: it's the Zionist lobby. Hundreds of articles, books and debates have been published about the mythical powers of this lobby, how it can make or break careers in the U.S. Congress, the junkets it organizes for high-profile or rising journalists, business leaders and promising young political apprentices to Israel.

Its intimidating influence on senators and congressmen, media magnates, academia, the intelligence community, its fund-raising activities and, above all, its deep and public infiltration of the Pentagon -- the dwelling of the Olympians who run the American war machine -- are all a matter of record. What this lobby has done over the past 40 years to dovetail Israeli interests into U.S. foreign policy, and sometimes make them superior to U.S. concerns, is stupendous. One of its many successes has been the neutralization of any Arab counter-lobby. And the Arabs are watching helplessly.

But when he starts talking about the difficulties that Arabs face in building their own lobby, he accidentally stumbles onto a real truth:

So what do Arab governments or peoples have in common with the U.S. that policymakers can take seriously as influential in formulating domestic or foreign policy?

In the U.S., the Arabs are not a solid voting bloc that politicians running for public office weigh carefully in drafting their policy agenda. They are not a significant source of campaign funding; on the contrary, their contributions could be a source of embarrassment for candidates who want to court the Jewish vote, and they all do. Looking at the Arabs on their own turf from a distance could hardly evoke a sense of joy, admiration or partnership for the average American, from the perspective of his or her value system. What shared values can be found in the area of human rights, the rule of law and equality before it, free elections of government and the free will to change it, or respect for the rights of women and their promotion?

Israel, on the other hand, is perceived as the only democracy in the region, not because it is really so, but because there are no other democratic systems in the region to match. Israel's racist policies towards the Palestinians, its brutal occupation and the threat of its nuclear arsenal, appear matters of little concern. In short, to the average American there is nothing in the Arab value system that he or she can identify with, unlike the pro-Western Israeli model.

The author seems to be saying that the main leverage of the Arab lobby is, simply, oil:

From the viewpoint of vital interests, the Arabs should have the strongest influence on US foreign policy, given its concern that oil flows freely to American shores.

Of course, it never occurs to even the more intelligent Arabs that the shared values mentioned are more important than the legendary organizational expertise of the Israel lobby in influencing who Americans identify with.

In spite of present difficulties, a potentially effective Arab special interest group in the U.S. is not impossible. However, it has to be home grown and based on grassroots action. It cannot misrepresent dictatorship as democracy, rigged elections as free and fair, police state tactics as maintaining the rule of law, or the abuse of women as respected traditional values.

So what can the Arabs do?

...the Arabs have placed all their assets in the hands of the US, including their natural resources, the value of their strategic location and the defense of their wealth and territories. They have thus lost any measure of leverage, which is the name of the game.

The answer is, simply, use oil as a weapon.

While El-Amir shows more understanding of the US than the average Arab pundit, he still doesn't get it.

America was built and relies on the same values that Israel demonstrates every day. True, the giant oil companies, the "public" media that they fund, and the State Department will tend to lean towards placating the Arabs because of oil. Yet average Americans are more interested in stopping the US dependence on corrupt, misogynist, Arab kleptocracies and the natural resources they had the dumb luck to be on top of, and they prefer to identify with the brave Zionists who built a vibrant nation from scratch - the Protestant work ethic and the American pioneering spirit being actualized in ways that are otherwise unimaginable.

Not to mention the successes Israel has had in fighting the shared dangers of Islamic and Arab terror.

The people who made their fortunes from oil think that it is Jewish money that is the major influence on American foreign policy, and they just do not get that money is not what Americans admire - it is getting results from a combination of brains and hard work. It is individual effort, not inheriting millions of cubic feet of dead dinosaurs. The Israel lobby benefits from existing American values; the Arab lobby is trying to change those values.

Read More

Former aide admits Arafat founded Black September

Ma'an (Arabic) reports that a series of articles being authored by longtime Arafat aide Marwan Kanafani in Egypt's Al Ahram will say that it was Yasir Arafat himself who created the Black September organization in 1970.

Black September was behind many of the highest-profile terror attacks in the early 1970s, including the murder of Jordanian Prime Minister Wasfi Tel, the Munich Olympic massacre, the May 1972 hijacking of a Belgian airliner from Vienna, dozens of letter bombs including at one that killed an Israeli politician in London, and the murder of two US diplomats in Khartoum.

The PLO always used Black September for plausible deniability, claiming that the deadliest BSO attacks had nothing to do with them. Although many historians had already made the connection between the two groups, the US State Department wrote a confidential memo in 1973 (released in 1981) showing connections between the groups, and the State Department also had linked Fatah and Arafat directly to the Khartoum murders, this appears to be the first confirmation by someone in Arafat's inner circle that it was Arafat himself who was the founder of Black September and personally in charge of operations.

And we know that the current Palestinian Arab President Mahmoud Abbas was also involved in Black September, specifically in the Munich massacre.

UPDATE: The English-language Ma'an article can be found here.

Read More

Eric Alterman - another liberal who doesn't get it

In the most recent issue of The Nation, as well as the International Herald Tribune, Eric Alterman laments the fact that while Jews are overwhelmingly liberal, American Zionist organizations tend toward the right:

Today's topic is the paradox - or one of them, anyway - of American Jewish political behavior. No, it's not that hoary old cliché that they "earn like Episcopalians but vote like Puerto Ricans." Rather, it's that they think like enlightened liberals yet allow belligerent right-wingers and neocons who frequently demonize, distort and denounce their values to speak for them in the U.S. political arena.

Don't take my word for it. According to the American Jewish Committee's 2007 survey of American Jewry, released Dec. 11, a majority of Jews in the United States oppose virtually every aspect of the Bush administration/neocon agenda. Not only do they disapprove of the administration's handling of its "campaign against terrorism" (59-31 percent), they believe by a 67-to-27 margin that we should never have invaded Iraq. They are unimpressed by the "surge" - 68 percent say it has either made no difference or made things worse, and by a 57-to-35 percent majority they oppose an attack on Iran, even if it was undertaken "to prevent [Iran] from developing nuclear weapons."

So the survey proves what all of us know - most Jews are liberal. But Alterman gets fuzzy with his next paragraph:

Jews are also impressively sensible when it comes to Israel/Palestine, all things considered. Though barely more than a third think peace is likely anytime soon, and more than 80 percent believe the goal of the Muslim states is to destroy Israel, a 46-to-43 percent plurality continues to support the creation of a Palestinian state.

This is his entire evidence of American Jewish support for a liberal agenda vis a vis Israel. He brushes aside the 80% who think that the Arab states want to destroy Israel to focus on the bare plurality - not majority - who support a PalArab state nevertheless.

In fact, if you look at the survey questions about Israel, you will see that every question save for the one about a Palestinian Arab state fits far better in with the conservative view of the conflict than with the liberal one. Here they are:

9. Do you think there will or will not come a time when Israel and its Arab neighbors will be able to settle their differences and live in peace?
Will 37
Will Not 55
Not Sure 8


10. Do you think that negotiations between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas can or cannot lead to peace in the foreseeable future?
Can 36
Cannot 55
Not Sure 9


11. Do you think that Israel can or cannot achieve peace with a Hamas-led, Palestinian government?
Can 17
Cannot 74
Not Sure 9


12. In the current situation, do you favor or oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state?
Favor 46
Oppose 43
Not sure 12


13. In the framework of a permanent peace with the Palestinians, should Israel be willing to compromise on the status of Jerusalem as a united city under Israeli jurisdiction?
Yes 36
No 58
Not Sure 7


14. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? "The goal of the Arabs is not the return of occupied territories but rather the destruction of Israel."
Agree 82
Disagree 12
Not Sure 6


15. In your opinion, does the United Nations treat Israel fairly or unfairly in its deliberations?
Fairly 27
Unfairly 61
Not Sure 12

These are hardly the numbers that you would expect to see from, say, a poll of all writers for The Nation. Yet Alterman uses this as a pretext on his attack on the mainstream American Zionist organizations:

These views, however, have been obscured in our political discourse by an unholy alliance between conservative-dominated professional Jewish organizations and neoconservative Jewish pundits, aided by pliant and frequently clueless mainstream media that empower these right-wingers to speak for a people with values diametrically opposed to theirs.

Take a look at the agendas of some of the most influential Jewish organizations, like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, the Anti-Defamation League, the Zionist Organization of America and the American Jewish Committee itself: Each has historically associated itself with the hawkish side of the debate - and some have done so even when Israel took the more dovish side (the Jewish equivalent of being holier than the Pope). Forget for a moment the argument over whether what some call "the Lobby" is good or bad for America. My point is that it's bad for the Jews.

Alterman is (seemingly purposefully) conflating the liberalism of American Jews on non-Israel topics with the relative conservatism of these same Jews when it comes to Israel. The poll results above are far more in sync with the organizations listed above than with the majority of liberal leaders.

In large part the trouble lies with the antidemocratic structures of these organizations and the apathy of most Jews with regard to organized Jewish life. Major Jewish groups respond to the demands of their top funders and best-organized constituencies. Most American Jews, however, have little or nothing to do with these groups. According to the AJC survey, while 90 percent of Jews say being Jewish is either "very important" (61 percent) or "fairly important" (29 percent) in their lives, exactly half say they belong to a synagogue or temple. A fraction of this number belong to Jewish political organizations, and the number of major funders is but a tiny percentage of that. As with so much of American life, the far-right minority is better funded and better disciplined than the liberal majority.

This may be true, but Alterman overlooks another salient fact: the more committed that Jews are to Judaism and Israel, the more conservative their views tend to be on that topic. The more committed Jews are the ones who are more likely to become politically active or to give money to organizations they agree with. The "silent majority" are the ones for whom Judaism and Zionism are less important today, the ones who feel that abortion or global warming are more critical issues than Islamic terror or Israel's existence. This may be a fine liberal attitude but it is hardly a "Jewish" one.

These pundits have every right to put forth their views, of course. It's long past time, however, for the mainstream media to recognize just how out of touch they are with the values of the American Jewish mainstream. If not now, when?

It is nice that Alterman knows enough about Judaism to quote Pirke Avot, but what he needs to realize is that the people who can do that and support a liberal agenda towards Israel is a very small minority of American Jews, not the vast majority that he seems to believe.

Read More

PETA silent on slaughter of millions this week

I have no problem with eating meat, but I do have a problem with hypocrisy. PETA, which goes out of its way to find offense when people hurt animals, is completely silent this week when tens of millions of sheep, camels, and cows are being slaughtered - often in the street, in front of happy crowds of people - in honor of the Eid al-Adha celebration.

Here are some wire-service photos of the happy ritual (I especially like the first one with the animal depicted on the upper-right):





Ironically, the main place one can find serious objections to how the ritual is performed is on an Islamic webpage:

In current time, though, this sacrifice has devolved into a largely empty ritual. Muslim critics have come to recognize that Islamic standards of compassion to animals are violated by efforts to provide sacrificial animals, such as the mass transport of sheep in overcrowded, filthy conditions from Australia. These animals are denied food, water, and medical attention during their lengthy overseas journeys. Such treatment is a clear violation of Islamic teachings.

Snapped Shot has also noted PETA's hypocrisy. Sweetness and Light has more gruesome photos.

Read More

Arab News agrees that terrorists are "martyrs"

The Saudi-based Arab News is as moderate a voice as exists in that Islamic country. It has been very critical of the sharia-law excesses in Saudi courts and is equally scornful of the Muttawa, the Saudi religious police.

But even the "moderate" Arabs all agree that Palestinian Arab terrorists are worthy of praise:

Every One of Them Has Martyrs in Family

Inside the walls of the Palestinian camp at Mina [in Saudi Arabia, performing Hajj] there were many mothers yesterday talking about how they lost their sons and daughters under the hands of the Israeli army. Arab News visited their campsite in Mina to listen to their stories of pain and suffering in the Occupied Territories.

...

Muhammad Abu Askar, a pilgrim from the Palestinian Haj group, said that the sadness and suffering he endured under the Israeli occupation couldn’t be described.

“I’ve lost two of my children,” he said. He added, “I am happy that they died serving the Palestinian cause to liberate the country from Israeli occupation. My sons were not like any other sons in any other country, searching for a beautiful car or a beautiful job. They told me that they would not rest until they saw every area of Palestinian soil liberated from the Israeli occupation. One of my sons, Ahmad, 22 years old, was getting ready for marriage when Israeli soldiers shot him. The other one, Muhammad, 18 years old, was killed during an army raid.”

...

Inside the camp, Arab News met with the mother of Muhammad Al-Sharami; the Israeli army killed her son. She started to cry as she was talking about him. She said that he was like any other Palestinian youth who was suffering under the hands of the Zionists. Like any other young man, he wanted to see Palestine liberated.

“I still remember it like yesterday,” she said. “He came to me and greeted me, kissed me on the head. I looked in his eyes and I felt that there was something wrong. A few hours after he left I received the news of his death; he was shot in the head.”

She said that she was not angry at his death; in fact she said she was happy that he died defending his country and she was proud of him. She said that she came for Haj to pray for him.

The story makes it sound like they are going to talk about how Israel is indiscriminately murdering Palestinian Arab children, and yet every example cited was a young man who was trying to kill Jews.

And every example said that the parents were "happy" their kids were dead.

And the moderate Saudis consider every dead terrorist a "martyr" for Allah.

Read More

Rocking the Casbah

From JTA:

An Israeli army rabbi is under investigation for putting a mezuzah up in an off-limits area of Hebron.

The rabbi of the military's Judea Brigade was photographed this week putting up a mezuzah in the casbah, or old city of Hebron, accompanied by Chabad supporters.

The Hebron casbah, from where many Palestinian residents have fled during the past six years of violence, is off-limits to Israeli civilians out of concern that settlers might try to squat in its buildings.

Many Israelis say casbah properties were originally Jewish-owned and should be reclaimed.

"This gate is one of several gates through which people enter the casbah," Noam Arnon, a Hebron settler spokesman, told Israel Radio on Thursday. "Chabad wanted to put up a mezuzah, a very welcome act. This, of course, did not bother anyone, particularly not the Arabs."

Following protests by left-wing Israeli groups, the military top brass said the rabbi was under investigation and that the mezuzah had been removed.

The Jerusalem Post adds:

Rabbi Yossi Nachshon, a Chabad emissary in Hebron who helped organize the ceremony, said he did not understand the IDF's extreme reaction.

"The media and the IDF have totally blown the whole thing out of proportion," said Nachshon. "We affixed the mezuza in a place where IDF soldiers are stationed near a Jewish neighborhood. We do these types of things all the time. On the same day we affixed mezuzot in various settlements around the Hebron hills."

Nachshon said that according to Jewish law there was no obligation to affix a mezuzah near the casbah. However, he added that a mezuza was believed to offer protection against physical dangers.

Nachshon said that a Jewish settler had been killed near the scene of the contentious mezuza.

So it was just a gesture of support for the IDF, a symbolic wish for their safety, not a political act.

But the left-wing reaction was furious:

Peace Now issued a statement calling for Rabbi Peretz and the soldiers who participated in the ceremony to stand trial.

Knesset members also weighed in on the contentious move. MK Ran Cohen (Meretz) said that "this is a thuggish act vis-à-vis Palestinians who have not been able to live their lives for years. Even worse than that, this time it was not only done under IDF auspices but by soldiers who were engaging in severe political provocation."

MK Avshalom Vilan (Meretz) called on Chief of Staff, Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi to convene a discussion on the matter and deal with the perpetrators "to the fullest extent of the law."

"A uniformed rabbi who participates in an act with lawbreakers disgraces the IDF and should be punished," said Vilan.

Notice anything missing?

Even though it has been a full 24 hours since this event occurred, I have not seen one mention of outrage from any Arab or Muslim about this supposedly outrageous act. The people who riot at the drop of a hat, who obsessively follow Israeli media to find things to offend them, have not said a single word about affixing a small scroll with words of the Torah to the entrance to the old market. I have seen nothing in the Arabic press nor in their English-language press.

Israel's left wing is now more offended on the Arabs' behalf than the Arabs themselves are. Their eagerness to co-opt Arab outrage for their own leftist purposes show that their goal is hardly protecting Arabs as much as it is showing their seething hate for the Right - and religious Jews.

Read More

Who else capitalizes "Prophet?"

Out of curiosity, I decided to see if any other Western news outlets capitalize the word "prophet" in the Muslim manner when referring to the Abraham story behind Eid al-Adha, or when referring to Mohammed. Capitalizing "prophet" indicates that the style book of that publication is bending over backwards to accommodate Islam.

So far I've found:

Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette: "Eid ul-Adha commemorates the Prophet Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice his son, Ishmael, at God’s command, he said."

EarthTimes (UK): "Al Sheikh Ahmed Mohammed Abdullah Al Ali said in his Eid sermon that Muslims across the world commemorate the sacrifice made by Prophet Abraham as per the order of God."

The Journal News, Lower Hudson, NY: "The festival coincides with the annual hajj, the worldwide pilgrimage of Muslims to Mecca, Saudi Arabia, and commemorates the Prophet Abraham's willingness to sacrifice a son. Muslims believe that son to be Ishmael while the Bible says that Abraham was to sacrifice Isaac."

Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel: "The Eid, one of Islam's major festivals, commemorates the Prophet Abraham's willingness to follow God's will and sacrifice his son, who in the Islamic tradition was Ishmael."

Scoop (New Zealand): "The Ka’bah, House of Allah, built by Prophet Abraham (Ibrahim)[peace be upon him] and his son Ishmael (Isma’il-pbuh) four thousand years ago is the holiest site for the 1.6 billion Muslims all over the world."

East Valley Tribune, Phoenix: During the 30-minute rituals, they prayed in the direction of the sacred seat of their faith in Saudi Arabia, where the Prophet Muhammad was born and lived....The Feast of the Sacrifice commemorates a centerpiece moment for all three major monotheistic faiths, the time the Prophet Abraham (or Ibrahim) was about to sacrifice his son, Isaac (Ishmael), as a burnt offering to show his faith and obedience to God, only to be stopped by an angel and presented a ram to slaughter in his place."

NBC 17, North Carolina: "The holiday, which is also known as the Feast of Festival of Sacrifice, commemorates the Prophet Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice everything for God, even his son."

Los Angeles Times: "Badday's comments would prove accurate, capturing the experiences of pilgrims performing a series of rituals, many modeled on the life of the Prophet Abraham."

Toronto Star: "Hajj, for all able-bodied Muslims, is a religious obligation that must be fulfilled in one's lifetime. The week-long journey, which begins tomorrow, involves travelling to cities near Mecca to take part in a number of symbolic rituals re-enacting the struggles faced by the Prophet Abraham and his family as outlined in the Qur'an."

Detroit News: "The Prophet Mohammad cleaned the pagan idols out of the Ka'bah -- the world's oldest house of worship, which the Prophet Abraham constructed in 2000 B.C. -- and established the Muslim hajj, which has continued for more than 1,400 years."

The Record, Waterloo, Ontario: "Eid-ul-Adha, which takes place at the end of the hajj pilgrimage to Mecca each year, commemorates the story of the Prophet Ibrahim (Abraham) and his son Ishmael."

This Is London: "It commemorates the time when the Prophet Ibrahim was willing to sacrifice his son for Allah."

Ha'aretz (quoting Reuters): "At least 1.5 million people are expected to arrive from abroad in Mecca, where pilgrims follow a route around the mountains in line with a tradition established by the Prophet Mohammed. "

AFP: "Hamad had said the plot was revenge for satirical cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed published in European newspapers."

Read More

Reuters might as well just admit it is an Islamic news agency

AP described the slaughter of cattle for the Eid al-Adha holiday this way:

The festival commemorates the story of Abraham and his readiness to sacrifice his son as an act of obedience to God, who provided a lamb to be used instead.

Now, see how Reuters describes it in their similar picture caption:

Muslims around the world celebrate Eid al-Adha, or Feast of the Sacrifice, to mark the end of the haj by slaughtering sheep, goats, cows and camels to commemorate Prophet Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his son Ismail on God's command.

Reuters capitalizes "Prophet", calls him Abraham (not Ibrahim) yet calls his son "Ismail", the Arabic transliteration of Ishmael (Yishmael).

Now, what are the chances that the second caption was written by a Muslim who is subtly trying to promote Islam?

Read More

Insanity, Inanity and a Portent of Calamity (Nissan Ratzlav-Katz)

I've been too busy to blog much today, but that doesn't mean other people aren't writing great stuff.

From Israel Insider:

This week saw at least three events that stood out for their level of inanity, insanity and portending calamity.

Vatican City Must Abandon Its Christian Character
The first item that caught my eye this week -- and knocked me off my chair for its sheer ridiculousness -- was the statement by Roman Catholic Archbishop Michel Sabbah on Wednesday that a state defined as Jewish is unacceptable and should be reformed.

Leaving aside the fact that Sabbah never critiqued the self-defined Arab and Islamic states in this region for a moment, isn't Archbishop Sabbah an official representative of the sovereign state called "Vatican City," last formal remnant of the "Holy Roman Empire"?

I could be wrong, but I seem to recall that Vatican City does have some sort of official state religion. No?

Juden, Raus!
The next item that I can't resist commenting on I refer to as "insanity," but on a more serious level, it actually amounts to a disgrace.

It seems that Knesset Member Yoram Marciano (Labor) is in favor of another Disengagement. This time in Lod, the city adjacent to Ben-Gurion International Airport and well within the 1948 armistice lines (a.k.a., the Green Line). Yes, you read that right -- Marciano has publicly advocated expelling the Jews of Lod. Why? Well, because they are living in fear and find themselves under constant anti-Semitic attack by some of their Arab neighbors. Naturally. Isn't that pretty much national policy now?

[The same Marciano was also reported organizing a "smoker's lobby" in response to Israel's more stringent anti-smoking laws - editor]

It is eminently clear that someone who thinks that the proper response to anti-Semitic violence is that Jews be expelled from their homes cannot possibly be a Zionist or a Jewish patriot. Given that, I will point out an observation that should concern Marciano strictly as a non-sectarian Israeli leader.

Experience shows that expelling the victims does not end the violence perpetrated by thugs; it merely forces them to change targets. When the Christian Arabs in Lod come under attack, will Marciano propose "disengaging" them? And after that, when Sunnis turn on Shiites, will the Shiites have to go?

Allow me to assume that Marciano would answer my rhetorical questions thus: "Of course not! Don't be racist! We of the enlightened Left only ever propose expelling Jews."

Green. Peace?
The final bit of craziness for the week is the news that the walls of the Old City of Jerusalem are to be illuminated with green lights tonight. City Hall, under Mayor Uri Lupolianski, claims that the color was selected as a sign of Jerusalem's commitment to the environment, in conjunction with Greenpeace and the Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel.

I am not in principle opposed to such gestures in honor of the environment, but I wonder if it escaped the notice of the Jerusalem honchos that green is the color of Islamic conquest and supremacy. Well, timing is everything.

You see, these are also the days of the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha and the season of the Muslim Haj pilgrimage.

Either the event planners at City Hall are abysmally ignorant of the holidays of their Muslim neighbors, and this is a coincidence, or they are well aware of the significance to Muslims of lighting up Jerusalem in green on their holiday -- and that is precisely why they did it. If it is the former explanation, then I am shocked at the utter stupidity; if the latter, and City Hall simply wants to deceive non-Muslims as to the purpose of the green lights, then those lights portend far worse things to come.

I don't think I agree with the last item; just because Muslims like green doesn't mean that Jews should never be able to use the color, even if it is Eid al-Adha. Specifically avoiding the color gives more legitimacy to the Islamists than using it on a day that happens to be their holiday.

Read More

Nice shooting (3)

According to Ma'an (Arabic), Israel has killed 7 more terrorists today, no civilians.

Unfortunately, one IDF soldier was seriously injured.

Read More

Preamble to the Syrian Constitution and the goal of "Arab unity"

When I was looking up various Arab and Islamic country constitutions yesterday, I was struck by the lengthy preamble to Syria's constitution, much longer than the others and with more than a small amount of built-in hate. It was written in 1973. Here it is:

Preamble
The Arab nation managed to perform a great role in building human civilization when it was a unified nation. When the ties of its national cohesion weakened, its civilizing role receded and the waves of colonial conquest shattered the Arab nation's unity, occupied its territory, and plundered its resources. Our Arab nation has withstood these challenges and rejected the reality of division, exploitation, and backwardness out of its faith in its ability to surmount this reality and return to the arena of history in order to play, together with the other liberated nations, its distinctive role in the construction of civilization and progress. With the close of the first half of this century, the Arab people's struggle has been expanding and assuming greater importance in various countries to achieve liberation from direct colonialism.
The Arab masses did not regard independence as their goal and the end of their sacrifices, but as a means to consolidate their struggle, and as an advanced phase in their continuing battle against the forces of imperialism, Zionism, and exploitation under the leadership of their patriotic and progressive forces in order to achieve the Arab nation's goals of unity, freedom, and socialism.

In the Syrian Arab region, the masses of our people continued their struggle after independence. Through their progressive march they were able to achieve their big victory by setting off the revolution of 8 March 1963 under the leadership of the Socialist Arab Baath Party, which has made authority an instrument to serve the struggle for the construction of the United Socialist Arab society.

The Socialist Arab Baath Party is the first movement in the Arab homeland which gives Arab unity its sound revolutionary meaning, connects the nationalist with the socialist struggle, and represents the Arab nation's will and aspirations for a future that will bind the Arab nation with its glorious past and will enable it to carry out its role in achieving victory for the cause of freedom of all the peoples.

Through the party's militant struggle, the 16 Nov 1970 corrective movement responded to our people's demands and aspirations. This corrective movement was an important qualitative development and a faithful reflection of the party's spirit, principles, and objectives. It created the appropriate atmosphere for the fulfillment of a number of significant projects in the interest of our large masses, primarily the emergence of the state of the Confederation of Arab Republics in response to the call for unity, which figures prominently in the Arab conscience, which was buttressed by the joint Arab struggle against imperialism and Zionism, regionalist disputes, and separatist movements, and which was confirmed by the contemporary Arab revolution against domination and exploitation.

Under the aegis of the corrective movement, an important stop was taken on the road leading to the consolidation of national unity for our popular masses. Under the leadership of the socialist Arab Baath Party, a national and progressive front with developed conceptions emerged in such a manner as to meet our people's needs and interests and proceed toward unifying the instrument of the Arab revolution in a unified political organization.

The completion of this Constitution crowns our people's struggle on the road of the principle of popular democracy, is a clear guide for the people's march toward the future and a regulator of the movement of the state and its various institutions, and is a source of its legislation.

The Constitution is based on the following major principles:

1) The comprehensive Arab revolution is an existing and continuing necessity to achieve the Arab nation's aspirations for unity, freedom, and socialism. The revolution in the Syrian Arab region is part of the comprehensive Arab revolution. Its policy in all areas stems from the general strategy of the Arab revolution.

2) Under the reality of division, all the achievements by any Arab country will fail to fully achieve their scope and will remain subject to distortion and setback unless these achievements are buttressed and preserved by Arab unity. Likewise, any danger to which any Arab country may be exposed on the part of imperialism and Zionism is at the same time a danger threatening the whole Arab nation.

3) The march toward the establishment of a socialist order besides being a necessity stemming from the Arab society's needs, is also a fundamental necessity for mobilizing the potentialities of the Arab masses in their battle with Zionism and imperialism.

4) Freedom is a sacred right and popular democracy is the ideal formulation which insures for the citizen the exercise of his freedom which makes him a dignified human being capable of giving and building, defending the homeland in which he lives, and making sacrifices for the sake of the nation to which he belongs. The homeland's freedom can only be preserved by its free citizens. The citizen's freedom can be completed only by his economic and social liberation.

5) The Arab revolution movement is a fundamental part of the world liberation movement. Our Arab people's struggle forms a part of the struggle of the peoples for their freedom, independence, and progress.

This constitution serves as a guide for action to our people's masses so that they will continue the battle for liberation and construction guided by its principles and provisions in order to strengthen the positions of our people's struggle and to drive their march toward the aspired future.

It is fascinating how well the 1968 Palestinian National Charter meshes with the Syrian constitution - how the goal is not an independent state but rather using an independent state to create a pan-Arab nation. All the talk about "independence" as a goal is meant for Western sympathetic ears, because in reality they regard themselves as part of the Arab nation and their ultimate goal is to become integrated with other Arab states. Here's the relevant part of the Charter:

Article 12. The Palestinian Arab people believe in Arab unity. To fulfill their role in the achievement of that objective, they must, at the present stage in their national struggle, retain their Palestinian identity and all that it involves, work for increased awareness of it and oppose all measures liable to weaken or dissolve it.

Article 13. Arab unity and the liberation of Palestine are complementary objectives; each leads to the achievement of the other. Arab unity will lead to the liberation of Palestine and the liberation of Palestine will lead to Arab unity.. To work for one is to work for both.

Article 14. The destiny of the Arab nation, indeed the continued existence of the Arabs, depends on the fate of the Palestinian cause. This interrelationship is the point of departure of the Arab endeavor to liberate Palestine. The Palestinian people are the vanguard of the movement to achieve this sacred national objective.

Article 15. The liberation of Palestine is a national obligation for the Arabs. It is their duty to repel the Zionist and imperialist invasion of the greater Arab homeland and to liquidate the Zionist presence in Palestine. The full responsibility for this belongs to the peoples and governments of the Arab nation and to the Palestinian people first and foremost. For this reason, the task of the Arab nation is to enlist all the military, human, moral and material resources at its command to play an effective part, along with the Palestinian people, in the liberation of Palestine. Moreover, it is the task of the Arab nation, particularly at the present stage of the Palestinian armed revolution, to offer the Palestinian people all possible aid, material and manpower support, and to place at their disposal all the means and opportunities that will enable them to continue to perform their role as the vanguard of their armed revolution until the liberation of their homeland is achieved.

See how it specifically says that "Palestinian identity" must only be retained "at the present stage" but is pointedly not meant to be permanent. It is a tactic.

Similarly, the idea that Palestinian Arabs must remain stateless and without rights in the Arab world is enshrined in the Charter, because anything else would "weaken or dissolve" the "Palestinian identity." It would naturally be subsumed as Arab identity alone and therefore would be worthless in "liberating Palestine."

Many of the other constitutions also speak specifically of their ultimate goal of "Arab unity" but they are generally not as specific as these two documents as to what exactly that means.

The very existence of a non-Arab state - let alone a Jewish state - in the area is regarded as a mortal threat to this mythical Arab unity and as such every seemingly peaceful move towards Israel is regarded as a tactic on the way to their ultimate victory.

Read More