Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, May 17, 2005

Three thoughts on the Koran Kerfuffle

How much should religion be respected?

As a hopefully religious person myself, I can sympathize with those who are offended by the desecration of their religious symbols. I would not purposefully do anything to disrespect any religion, and I think it is reasonable to expect others to do the same.

But three things strike me about the discredited Newsweek story saying that US soldiers flushed the Koran down the toilet, causing deadly riots in Afghanistan.

One is that the level of respect that Muslims demand of the Koran cross the line from reasonable requests into bigotry. Check out what US policy really is in Guantanamo on how to handle a Koran:

The three-page memorandum, dated Jan. 19, 2003, says that only Muslim chaplains and Muslim interpreters can handle the holy book, and only after putting on clean gloves in full view of detainees.

The detailed rules require U.S. Muslim personnel to use both hands when touching the Koran to signal "respect and reverence," and specify that the right hand be the primary one used to manipulate any part of the book "due to cultural associations with the left hand." The Koran should be treated like a "fragile piece of delicate art," it says.

The memo, written a year after the first detainees were brought to Guantanamo from Afghanistan, reflects what U.S. officials said was a specific policy on handling the Koran, one of the most sensitive issues to Muslims. The Pentagon does not have a similar policy regarding any other major religious book and takes "extra precautions" on the Muslim holy book, officials said.

The Pentagon memo, among other directives, barred military police from touching the Koran. If a copy of the book was to be moved from a cell, the memo said, it must be placed on a "clean, dry detainee towel" and then wrapped without turning it over at any time. Muslim chaplains must then ensure that it is not placed in any offensive area while transported.

Sorry, but while these rules may make sense in a Muslim country, they seem way excessive for detainees. It would be more reasonable to ban the Koran altogether from Guantanamo than to force the US to act with such dhimmitude. And beyond that is the explicit bigotry that no non-Muslim can even touch a Koran - what is that about? Would Islamic law say that my hands be cut off if I pick one up in a bookstore of library? It appears to me that Muslims are using Western sensitivities to assert their own superiority over the West, when things like this are demanded.

The second thing that is glaringly missing from this story is how much Newsweek is being blamed, and how little Afghani Muslims are being blamed, for the deaths in the riots. It appears that personal responsibility does not apply to the Arab world, and this is hardly the first time this has happened. It echoes the many news stories blaming Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount for the outbreak of the intifada - do Muslims and Arabs not have any ability to choose right and wrong for themselves? Are they animals who only act by instinct, and therefore the blame goes to the person who got them angry? The willingness to overlook actual acts of terror and murder by the left-leaning media and indeed the rest of the world is, in my opinion, one of the leading factors in the spread of terror itself.

The third point that is the jaw-dropping hypocrisy of the Muslim world, the absolute lack of symmetry between how they expect and demand to be treated and how they treat other religions. Is there any other religion that has such a varied history of desecrating other religion's holy places and symbols more than Islam? Look at the Buddha statues, the many Hindu temples destroyed, the destruction of Joseph's Tomb and Second Temple artifacts, the Church of the Nativity - the list is endless.

It seems to me that a religion that has no concept of how to respect other religions is in no way, shape or form in a position to "demand" that their own religion be respected to such an absurd extent.

The historical Palestinians: A very simple test

I don't think that anyone can seriously doubt that today there are a people who could accurately be described as "Palestinian."

But there is an incredible hue and cry whenever people say, accurately, that there were no such people that could be distinguished from the rest of the Arab world until relatively recently.

There is a very simple test that can prove which claim is more accurate, whether the Palestinian people have existed as such historically or not. The test is to look at newspaper archives from before the establishment of Israel and see how they used the word "Palestinian."

Unfortunately, there are not too many free newspaper archives on the Internet that go back that far. One of the best is the Palestine Post, in which Tel Aviv University has done an incredible job of showing articles from the time before Israel was founded in context (ads, too) and one can learn far more from reading these articles about how day to day life was in British Palestine than from any books.

Here is a sampling of articles that show up when doing a search for "Palestinian":

As is clear, at least in Palestine, the word "Palestinian" usually referred to Jews, not Arabs.

But perhaps you would argue that the Palestine Post (now the Jerusalem Post) is a biased source. Despite the fact that the above articles also quote British sources as using the word "Palestinian" to refer to Jews, but we can also look at other sources.

The Washington Post has its archives online as well, although you have to pay to see the full article. But even the abstracts can show interesting results:

Products of Palestinian Art Will Be Shown at Jewish Center; Novel 10-Bay Exhibit of Sculptured and Other Work by the Late Boris Schatz Will Open Tomorrow at 1529 Sixteenth Street.
The Washington Post (1877-1954). Washington, D.C.: Apr 3, 1938. pg. TT5, 1 pgs

Abstract (Document Summary)
Products of the new Palestine art will be displayed in a novel ten-day exhibit, opening at the Jewish Community Center, 1529 Sixteenth street, tomorrow at 8:30 p.m. A number of pieces of sculpture work m relief, bronze, hand-hammered brass, ivory carvings and others of the late Boris Schnatz, founder of the new school of modern Palestinian art, will be exhibited by his son and daughter, ...

Or check this article out, perhaps for a better picture:
Palestinians in France
The Washington Post (1877-1954). Washington, D.C.: Feb 29, 1940. pg. 5, 1 pgs

Abstract (Document Summary)

Somewhere in France, Feb. 28. -- Their past differences forgotten in the common effort, a force of 700 Palestinian soldiers, about three-quarters of them Jews and the rest Arabs, arrived at a French port today to join the British expeditionary force.

Even though this article includes Arabs as being Palestinian, it is the exception that proves the rule: there is nothing inherently Arab about Palestinians, and more often than not, Palestinians when referred to as such were Jews.

So how were the Arabs who lived in the area referred to? Usually just "Arabs", sometimes "Bedouins", and sometimes even "Arab nationalists:"

British Troops To Palestine.
The Washington Post (1877-1954). Washington, D.C.: Sep 6, 1936. pg. B6, 1 pgs

Abstract (Document Summary)

The seriousness at the Palestinian situation is at last being recognized by the British government. No longer are the authorities at London taking the complacent view that the fires lit in the Holy Land by Arab Nationalists some months ago, when they ordered a general strike in protest against further Jewish immigration, would soon burn themselves out.

Note that nowhere are these Arabs referred to as "Palestinians."

This is just scratching the surface. Reading old newspaper archives is fascinating and fun, and little details emerge that show that things were just as messy then as they are now, along with the occasional ad in the Jewish-oriented Palestine Post that may strike you as strange:

So don't take my word for it. Do the research and you will find out that when people claim that there have never been a historic Palestinian people separate from other Arabs, they know what they are talking about.

UPDATE: The New York Times has a similar summary archive service. Check out this article:
PALESTINIAN COUPLE ENROLLS AT FORDHAM
New York Times (1857-Current file). New York, N.Y.: Nov 1, 1947. pg. 5, 1 pgs

Abstract (Document Summary)

Fordham University enrolled yesterday as students a young Palestinian Jew and his wife who hope to make American culture and its techniques play a more dynamic role in the culture of their homeland.

But the New York Times for the most part seems to have been very specific in referring to Palestinian Jews and Palestinian Arabs, usually not "Palestinians."

The first time I am able to find a reference to Palestinian Arabs as Palestinians by default in the NYT is arguably this article from 1959 , a somewhat better reference is here although it can be argued that Jordanian Palestinians are of course Arab by default. The first I am able to find the word used unequivocally to mean Palestinian Arabs is here:
U.A.R. Plans to Draft A 'Palestinian Army'Special to The New York Times. New York Times (1857-Current file). New York, N.Y.: Nov 3, 1963. pg. 5, 1 pgs

So while the word Palestinian as referring to Arabs who lived in the area does seem to predate the 1964 establishment of the PLO, it is not by much - and it seems pretty clear that the impetus towards the establishment of the PLO came from Egypt and other Arab states, not from the Palestinian Arabs themselves.

PA TV ups the ante in Jew-hatred and incitement

Ah, the moderate Mahmoud Abbas!

The current chief of Palestinian TV was personally appointed by the PA's "president." This is the man who is hailed worldwide as a "moderate", as a "realist", as someone seeking "peace."

Oh, and one of the Palestinian commitments of the "roadmap" is to stop incitement.

Oh, and Abbas himself very eloquently promised that the PA would stop incitement. In 2003.

But I guess that liars are considered moderates in the Palestinian universe.

'The Jews are the cancer spreading all over the world...the Jews are responsible for all wars and conflicts,' Sheikh Ibrahim Mudairis said Friday during a sermon from his Gaza Mosque in the presence of uniformed Palestinian police.

'Do not ask what Germany did to the Jews, but what the Jews did to Germany,' he went on to say. 'True the Germans killed and burnt Jews, but the Jews exaggerate the numbers to gain propaganda advantages and sympathy.'

Another new Havel Havelim

Apparently the publishers haven't decided on a standard for transliteration :)

But for the unbelievable second week in a row, one of my postings was deemed fit to be mentioned in the latest Hevel (or Havel) Havelim. This time around it is hosted at Shiloh Musings, another excellent blog from Israel.

I'm having a Sally Fields Oscar moment!

Jewish Stanford pro-peace freshman gets lesson in Muslim racism

A letter to the Stanford newspaper shows the beginnings of a real education.

I am a Jew. I support human rights for the Palestinian people and do not agree with some things Prime Minister Sharon is doing. I have never hurt a Palestinian, and as a Jew I am saddened that the issue at hand during the Nakbah Day event was devalued to simply another racist message.

I stood in there in horror Tuesday as people stared at my 'I love Israel, I want Peace, I am a Zionist' shirt and as speeches were given decrying what the 'Jews are doing.' I don't know if the Stanford Muslims actually hate the Jews or if it was simply an act of ignorance, but I was scared about the message being conveyed to the community.

I also was shaken up by the propaganda shown at the event. The speakers rallied the crowd against former Prime Minister Golda Meir for her famous quote 'Palestinians don't exist,” but carefully avoided the fact that neither the Palestinian Liberation Organization nor any of the surrounding Arab countries recognize the state of Israel at all.

The propaganda did not stop there. The next speaker vilified Israel through an undated Mahatma Gandhi quote questioning Israel's legitimacy to exist. ('It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct.') However, this quote is from 1938, well before the Holocaust made it clear that Jews were homeless. I was stunned that such an out of context and outdated quote would be used to inform Stanford students.

Don't get me wrong: the Palestinians have very real human rights complaints, but those complaints were lost in the racism of Nakbah Day.

Sudanese foreign minister blames Zionists for trying to split up Sudan

Apparently, genocide isn't the problem. What a surprise! there.

DAMASCUS, Syria, May 13, 2005 (Sudan Tribune) -- 'There are world powers which do not care about the unity of Sudan. We can even say that these powers want to dismember Sudan and replace this government with another one that serves their strategic interests, represented in obliterating Sudan's Arab identity', The Sudanese minister of state for foreign affairs Nejib al-Khari Abdelwahab said.

In an interview, in Damascus, published by Syrian newspaper Tishrin on 13 May; the Sudanese official indicated that it is very easy for Arab and Syrian observers to see foreign interference in Sudan's affairs through the foreign interference and pressures put on Syria. The two are similar, the source of these pressures is the same, and the policy adopted toward the two countries is also the same. All this is part of the greater Middle East plan.

Abdelwahab said that these powers want to dismember Sudan and replace this government with another one that serves their strategic interests, represented in obliterating Sudan's Arab identity.

Top among these powers is the Zionist lobby, which considered the Darfur issue primarily a Jewish issue requiring solidarity between the Jews and some African tribes, which claim to be in conflict with Arab tribes.

New Director of Israel Gov Press Office strikes back at pro-terror media

This is indeed welcome, albeit a bit too late. The Palestinians have used the press and the press has allowed itself to be used, with real reporting being the casualty.

What is particularly shocking isn't just the bias that the foreign media displays, but their active collusion with terror.

Let's hope that this has an effect.

Under direct orders of Yasser Arafat, foreign media representatives such as Reuters, AP, CNN, ABC, and CBS have for years employed Palestinian editors and directors who determine news content.… Palestinian efforts to control the news are not new and go back to the 1980s when they began to nurture young Palestinians to work with the foreign press.”

Dani Seaman, Director of the Israel Government Press Office (GPO) – which is responsible for licensing and assisting the foreign media in Israel – is taking a new approach to the seemingly insurmountable challenge presented by prejudiced reporting in the foreign media about Israel. Otherwise even-tempered and personable, Seaman is ticked off by one thing: the systematic maligning of Israel and biased reporting in the foreign press.

In recent interviews with Israeli papers, Seaman – a veteran immigrant from the US with over ten years of frustrating experience liaising with the foreign media – has decided to lay bare the truth about the underhanded activities of foreign representatives of the fifth estate. Seaman charges that under direct orders of Yasser Arafat, foreign media representatives such as Reuters, AP, CNN, ABC and CBS have for years employed Palestinian editors and directors who determine news content. According to sources that Seaman will not reveal for fear that they would suffer professional and perhaps personal retribution, Palestinian employees of these news outlets are fully coordinated. Three were in constant contact with the now-apprehended Tanzim commander Marwan Bargouti regarding the repeated machine-gun and mortar fire attacks which he ordered against the Jerusalem neighborhood of Gilo. Bargouti would advise the Palestinian employees of coming attacks and the Palestinian directors would be sure to broadcast only the Israeli responsive fire and not the Palestinian fire. These employees also counseled Bargouti how best to present the Palestinian case, according to Seaman. Three of these employees have been directly implicated in terrorist activities including the smuggling of radios, phones and satellite dishes to Arafat while he was trapped in the Muqata and assistance to terrorists trying to escape the Israel blockade, and the transport of armed terrorists in cars marked “TV”. Equally frustrating is the fact that even Palestinian spokesmen who have repeatedly lied to the foreign media, such as Saeb Erekat (e.g., repeated comments about the Jenin “massacre” and the Karine-A interception) remain unquestioned sources for the foreign press. Seaman also charges that foreign press outlets had requested in the past – and received – press cards for Palestinians in return for information and favors, even though they were not journalists.

Seaman intends to fight this battle in a number of ways, first by strictly adhering – albeit years after it should have been implemented – to the standing law that mandates that any Palestinian employed in Israel carries a valid work permit – a step which will drastically decrease the number of Palestinian working with the foreign press in Israel. This move will have a secondary result of opening up these jobs to Israelis. On security grounds, he also revoked the press cards of all Palestinian reporters who were misusing them as entry permits into the country. In another measure, Seaman targeted four of the most egregious foreign offenders – Suzanne Goldenberg of The Guardian (UK), Lee Hockstader of the Washington Post, Sandro Contenta of the Montreal Star, and Gillian Findlay of ABC News – with a cooperation blackout. All four have been reassigned and replaced, although their bosses vigorously reject the notion that this had anything to do with the GPO’s measures. As another case in point, Seaman also notes Rula Amin, CNN’s Palestinian mouthpiece, who was reassigned to Baghdad, despite understandings with the cable outfit that she would be fired from the station.

Palestinian efforts to control the news are not new and go back to the 1980s when they began to nurture young Palestinians to work with the foreign press. According to Seaman, all are graduates of a media manipulation course at Bir Zeit University and, as long suspected by discerning viewers, the now-famous Muhammad A-dura case was a PA manipulation utilizing Palestinian cameramen employed by foreign stations. Over the years this policy paid off for the Palestinians as the foreign media began to romanticize the their struggle and adopted their narrative. Until 1993, the foreign press was free to cover the territories, but ever since Arafat was given control, it was made clear by Palestinian heavies that they will receive access only if they employ Palestinians. At times, Palestinian pressure on the foreign press became heavy handed, such as when an Italian reporter was forced to flee the country after it was revealed that he was the only person brave enough to publicize footage of Palestinians wildly lynching two Israeli soldiers who mistakenly entered Ramallah. Photographers have routinely had their film confiscated by PA security forces when they suspect that unflattering pictures had been snapped. But by and large the press has been ready to play by the Palestinian rules.

Seaman makes no bones about it: the foreign media took advantage of a very liberal Israeli attitude but succumbed to become Arafat’s mouthpieces.

[...]

Although Seaman should be viewed as a new hero in the fight for fair reporting about Israel, not everyone in the Israeli hasbara establishment – on the defensive after an unflattering state comptrollers’ report – agree with his tough approach. There are those who want to continue to use kid gloves with institutions that long ago decided to throw their support to the Palestinians and disregard the fundamentals of journalism: truth, fairness, context, and objectivity. Seaman’s approach might cost the Jewish State nasty editorials in the days to come, but in the long run Israel’s self-respect will be well served.

UPDATE: It appears that, although I just saw this posted this week at IsraPundit, Seaman was appointed and quoted in 2002.

Two declassified reports from the Canadian intelligence service say young Islamic militants with Canadian nationality or residency have been through terrorist training camps in Afghanistan or elsewhere and constitute "a clear and present danger to Canada and its allies."
"The presence of young, committed jihadists in Canada is a matter of grave concern," states one of the reports, highlighting fears that the northern neighbor might become a staging post for terror attacks in the United States.
"They represent a clear and present danger to Canada and its allies and are a particularly valuable resource for the international Islamic terrorist community in view of their language skills and familiarity with Western culture and infrastructure," says the report, titled "Sons of the Father: The Next Generation of Islamic Extremists in Canada."
Barbara Campion, spokeswoman for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, said the situation was "alarming because [in many cases] these are people who don't have any obvious pedigree in extremism or connection to terrorist groups."
In other cases, persons with long and well-known histories of association with terrorist groups are at large in the country, apparently continuing to organize.
Jim Judd, the service's director, told a Canadian Senate hearing recently that Canada was home to "several graduates of terrorist training camps, many of whom are battle-hardened veterans of campaigns in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya and elsewhere."
"Often these individuals remain in contact with one another ... or with colleagues outside of the country," he said, "and continue to show signs of ongoing clandestine-type activities, including the use of countersurveillance techniques, secretive meetings and encrypted communications."
The reports, released to the National Post newspaper under Canada's Access to Information Act, were produced in April 2004, but Miss Campion said "the situation depicted [in them] continues to be accurate."
Miss Campion would not comment on the estimated number of militants in Canada, but said the service was monitoring about 350 individuals and organizations in Canada and abroad.
"It is safe to say we are keeping an eye on them," Miss Campion said, adding that "whenever we find something that might be of use to law-enforcement or immigration agencies, we pass that along."
She said her service was working "very, very closely" with its U.S. counterparts. "If we have information we think an intelligence partner needs to know, we pass that right along."
As legal Canadian residents, the militants would be entitled to cross the border into the United States without a passport -- a serious vulnerability identified by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.

YNet: Israel saves the US billions

Another good article for Yom Ha'atzmaut.

by Yoram Ettinger

Statements made by and the conduct of Israel’s leaders since 1993 create the false impression that Israeli-American ties constitute a one-way relationship.

The presumption is that America gives and Israel receives, leading to Israel’s inferior position and the alleged compulsion to follow the State Department dictates.

However, Former Secretary of State and NATO forces commander Alexander Haig refuted this claim, saying he is pro-Israeli because Israel is the largest American aircraft carrier in the world that cannot be sunk, does not carry even one American soldier, and is located in a critical region for American national security.

On our 57th Independence Day, Israel and the United States enjoy a two-way relationship. Israel is like a start-up company that enjoys the kindness of the American investor, but yields much greater profits than the investment.

Every day, Israel relays to the U.S. lessons of battle and counter-terrorism, which reduce American losses in Iraq and Afghanistan, prevent attacks on U.S. soil, upgrade American weapons, and contribute to the U.S. economy.

Senator Daniel Inouye recently argued Israeli information regarding Soviet arms saved the U.S. billions of dollars. The contribution made by Israeli intelligence to America is greater than that provided by all NATO countries combined, he said.

Innovative Israeli technologies boost U.S. industries

Meanwhile, the vice president of the company that produces the F16 fighter jets told me Israel is responsible for 600 improvements in the plane’s systems, modifications estimated to be worth billions of dollars, which spared dozens of research and development years.

Israel’s utilization of American arms guarantees our existence, but at the same time gives U.S. military industries a competitive edge compared to European industries, while also boosting American military production, producing American jobs, and improving America’s national security.

Japan and South Korea, for example, preferred the “Hawkeye” spy plane and the MD-500 chopper, both purchased and upgraded by Israel, over comparable British and French aircraft.

Indeed, innovative Israeli technologies have a similar effect on American civilian and agricultural industries, which view Israel as a successful research and development site.

As early as 1952, U.S. Army Chief-of-Staff Omar Bradley called for the integration of Israel into the Mediterranean Basin area, in light of the country’s location and unique capabilities.

In 1967, Israel held back a radical Arab, pro-Soviet offensive, which threatened to bring about the collapse of pro-American Arab regimes and disrupt oil supply, thus severely undermining the American standard of living.

In 1970, Israel brought about the withdrawal of Syrian forces from Jordan, at a time when the U.S. was tied up by wars in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, thus preventing the fall of the pro-American Hashemite regime and a possible domino effect that could have reached Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states.

Israel shares counter-terror lessons

The 1976 raid in Uganda that freed Israeli passengers of an Air France flight hijacked by terrorists provided America with a backwind in the war on international terror, while in 1977 Israeli intelligence provided the intelligence information that foiled Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi’s plan to assassinate Egyptian President Anwar Sadat .

Notably, Sadat would later go on to make peace with Israel, paving the way for other agreements between Israel and the Arabs.

In 1982, Israel destroyed Soviet anti-aircraft batteries in Lebanon that were considered immune to American weapons. Israel promptly shared the operation’s lessons, estimated to be worth billions of dollars, changing entirely the global balance of power in the process and contributing to the Soviet Union’s eventual disintegration.

In 1981, Israel bombed the Iraqi nuclear reactor, providing the U.S. with the option of engaging in conventional wars with Iraq in 1991 and 2003 and preventing a possible nuclear war and a terrible price of thousands killed.

In 2005, Israel provides America with the world’s most extensive experience in homeland defense and warfare against suicide bombers and car bombs. American soldiers train in IDF facilities and Israeli-made drones fly above the “Sunni Triangle” in Iraq, as well as in Afghanistan, providing U.S. Marines with vital intelligence.

Without Israel, the U.S. would have been forced to deploy tens of thousands of American troops in the eastern Mediterranean Basin, at a cost of billions of dollars a year. Had Israel been located in the Persian Gulf, the U.S. would have been spared the need to send hundreds of thousands of soldiers to the region, thanks to Israel’s deterrence and operational capabilities.

Indeed, Congress leaders, Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld are aware of Israel’s unique contribution to U.S. interests. In fact, they all wonder why the post-1993 Israel does not use its impressive contribution as leverage, in sharp contrast to the pre-1993 Israel.

They hate Jews more than they love themselves

I know I should be immune to these sorts of things, but my jaw still drops when I read this stuff:

CAIRO, May 12, 2005 (IslamOnline.net) – A new strategy drafted by the Islamic World Council for Dawaa and Relief (IWCDR) has called on the Arab League to issue an annual report on global Anti-Arabs and Muslims discrimination to counterbalance Washington’s report on anti-Semitism.

The Cairo-based body began on Wednesday, May 11, two days of discussions on the strategy which aims at to counterbalance the US State Department’s report on anti-Semitism.

It urges the pan-Arab body to issue a similar report documenting discriminations against Arabs and Muslims across the world, on the upswing since the 9/11 attacks.

Let's look again at the point of producing such a report. Is it to make the world aware of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim feelings? Is it to combat bigotry? Is it to help their fellow Arabs and Muslims fight discrimination?

No, no, a thousand times no. The report has but one reason, stated twice: to counterbalance the US report on anti-Semitism. Not for any single positive reason, but only because they hate Jews so much, they want to blunt the impact that occurs when Jew-hatred is publicized.

In other words - because they themselves are congenitally anti-Semitic, they don't want anyone to sympathize with Jews one iota! Nothing to do with Zionism, nothing to do with helping their presumably oppressed brethren. Just simple, blatant, explicit Jew-hatred is driving this project.

Amazing, truly amazing.

Shmuley Boteach: British Jews must stand up to UK Jew-hatred

The point that the AUT is anti-semitic is clear, but Boteach points out that the passive methods used by British Jewry to combat hate are not working.

Britain's attacks on Israel have nothing to do with a specific anti-Israel focus and have everything to do with good old-fashioned anti-Semitism. The country that was once the most enlightened in the world and gave civilization the idea of parliamentary democracy is now witnessing the steady rise of contemptible Jew-hatred.

The Jewish community in Britain is very different than its American counterpart. It believes in being low-profile, not making waves, and always trying to reason with its opponents. There is no British equivalent of AIPAC, for example, a body that exists solely to lobby the American government on behalf of Israel. Several such organizations have attempted, and failed, to garner mainstream British Jewish support, because British Jewry believes that this kind of overt pressure is counterproductive, and may even foster anti-Semitism. For this reason, British Jews usually shy away from calling developments like this new academic boycott anti-Semitism. But this is hardly a time for diplomatic niceties.

But if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it's probably a duck. When British academics talk like anti-Semites and demonstrate a visceral hatred for a law-abiding and virtuous democracy that happens to be a Jewish state – while showing an affection or an indifference to brutal Arab regimes – then it's a fair guess they're anti-Semites. Israel is the Jewish homeland, and unfounded hatred of Israel is motivated mostly by hatred of Jews.

Not that the British hate Jews per se. They just hate proud Jews. Jews who stand up for themselves. Jews who believe in their own right to nationalism and self-defense. It's Jewish autonomy that drives them crazy and, hence, Israel is their foremost target. They're used to obsequious Jews, and indeed, tons of them, sadly, exist in Britain. Jews who believe that Judaism should be practiced quietly. Jews who believe they are guests in someone else's country, even though such sentiments contradict the very principles of democracy which states that no person is less a citizen than another.

Anti-Semitism in Britain must be combated forcefully. The old way of doing it quietly has failed. Jewish students should get together and organize massive protests against the British Association of University Teachers and call their boycott what it is: out and out Jew-hatred. The ringleaders of the boycott should be named as anti-Semites. Saying that they're merely ignorant of the real facts in the Middle East, which is what we're already hearing Jewish leaders in Britain proclaiming, is preposterous. Academics are not a rabble. They are not ignorant. They're very profession is to know. They have come out against Israel not because they don't have the facts, but because they have malice.

It is time for the world Jewish community – especially in Europe – to pursue a policy of zero tolerance for anti-Semitism and every other form of racial prejudice. Thousands of years of Jew-hated is enough. This can't continue indefinitely. Let us stand up to it, forcefully and effectively. We should learn from our brothers and sisters in the African-American community who will not tolerate an iota of racism. Just imagine what would happen to a group of British academics who decided to boycott Morehouse or Spellman College? They would rightly be called racist bigots. Hatred of Jews should earn no less a condemnation.

Feminism, Hamas-style

Backspin notes this paragraph in the middle of a Newsweek article on women in Hamas:

In the meantime, some female Hamas loyalists have chosen to take up arms themselves. In January 2004, Re’em Rayashi, a 22-year-old mother of two toddlers, walked toward the Erez checkpoint in the northern Gaza Strip, where she detonated a suicide bomb that killed her and four Israeli soldiers. Some reports said that she had committed adultery, and been forced into the mission by her jealous husband. Whatever the motive, her act was generally praised by local Hamas leaders, a reminder that elections are not Hamas’s only preoccupation. “Women must decide for themselves what their priorities are,” says Sami Abu-Zuhry, a Hamas official in Gaza. “Raising children for jihad, or participating in acts of martyrdom.”

What a progressive movement! Women seem to have even more choices than men in Hamasistan - men can only blow up Jews, but women can also raise boys to blow up Jews!

No wonder the European liberals are so partial to Palestinian aspirations! How many European women are so empowered that they can blow themselves up along with a bunch of dhimmis? How many liberal women are so empowered that they have a socially-acceptable way to erase the stigma of adultery?

Yes, clearly Palestinian society is the darling of progressive movements because they are just so darn progressive themselves.

Proud to be a Zionist

I wrote the following essay a few years ago on a Yahoo message board, and it seemed appropriate for Yom Ha'atzmaut.

I often do Internet news searches on the word "Zionist" and, not surprisingly, the word is far more often used as an insult than as a compliment. It is way past time to reclaim the term Zionism and for those of us who support Israel to show pride in the term.

Yes, I am a Zionist and I am proud of it.

I know that Israel has the absolute right to exist in peace and security, just like any other country.

I am proud of how the IDF is conducting itself during the current war on Palestinian terror. There is no other country on the planet, save the US, that would try to minimize civilian casualties in such a situation where innocent Israelis are being threatened and murdered in cold blood.

I am proud of how the IDF is performing doing the most difficult type of battle, that of looking house to house for terrorists, while maintaining amazing professionalism under fire and minimizing its own casualties. I defy anyone to find any other nation who has performed as well -- and as ethically -- as Israel has done during the current conflict.

I am proud that Israel remains a true democracy, with a free press and vigorous opposition parties, while in a constant war situation. Any other nation, again besides the US, would have imposed martial law to maintain peace.

I am proud of how Israeli citizens are going through their day to day lives, even while knowing that a despicable terrorist can still make it in to their hometowns.

I am proud of how many terror attacks have been thwarted by the Israeli police and citizens, and how many lives have been saved. For every "successful" attack (if you can use such a term) there have been many failed attempts, and these are truly miraculous.

I am proud that Israel will investigate any mistakes that happen on the battlefield and keep trying to improve its methods to maximize damage to the terrorists while minimizing damage to the Palestinian people. And over the years of the "intifada" we can see that the number of civilians killed accidentally by Israel has gone down dramatically. I challenge anyone to find an example of a country that was as restrained under these circumstances as Israel has been.

I am proud that Israel takes steps to stop vigilante actions from its own citizens living in impossible conditions.

And, of course, I am proud of Israel's many accomplishments in building up a desert wasteland into a thriving and vibrant modern country, with its many scientific achievements, world class universities and culture. In a short period of time Israel made itself into a strong yet open nation that its neighbors can only dream of becoming.

I am proud that the vast majority of Americans support Israel as I do, and that the rabid terror-lovers we see on the Internet are the aberration.

There is a right and a wrong in this conflict, and I am proud that Israel is in the right.

Why Israel's creation is a "naqba"

Among all of the events of Arab and Muslim history, the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948 appears to be unique.

Muslims have suffered defeats in war beforehand. Christians in Spain defeated the Muslims in the 15th century, Napoleon conquered Egypt, European nations occupied most of North Africa, and the Ottoman Empire kept losing territory and influence from the 17th century until its total disappearance after World War I.

Yet only one event, involving a tiny amount of territory that was all but abandoned by the Arab world for centuries, gets the moniker "naqba", catastrophe.

In what sense is it so important? By any objective measure (number of Muslims killed, number of Muslim refugees, amount of territory involved, the margin of victory), Israel's War of Independence is barely a skirmish in the vast history of Muslim conquests and defeats. (Kuwait expelled more Palestinians in 1991 than Israel did in any war, for example.)

So, what is unique about the establishment of the State of Israel that makes Arab and Muslim blood boil so disproportionately to the actual damage done?

Only one answer makes sense. It is not that the Muslims were defeated, it is who defeated them.

Animosity between Jews and Arabs is as old as the Bible, where the descendents of Ishmael and Isaac always had problems with each other. But as is well known, for many centuries Jews did prosper under Muslim rule more than under Christian rule.

It is important to understand that as a tiny minority in Muslim and Arab countries, Jews posed no threat (and were indeed more similar to the Muslims than the Christians were.) They were clearly second-class citizens, dhimmis. There were still blood libels and other nastiness, but comparatively Jews were well off - as long as they kept their place as dhimmis.

Israel and Zionism changed everything. All of a sudden, the uppity Jews were saying that they had a right to own and control land in the Middle East - equal to the Muslims. The Arab nations could not fit that into their worldview of Jews as naturally second-class citizens, and therefore they attacked the Jews, both in Israel and in their own countries.

What's worse, the Jews had the audacity to be able to fight and win! Muslim pride could not handle such an affront. The weak Jews didn't know their place and this was what caused the Arabs to expel hundreds of thousands of Jews from their midst in the '40s and '50s - an extreme example of pure bigotry that gets next to no mention in the press nowadays.

In some ways, the 1967 war was even worse for Arab pride. They could almost, almost come up with excuses why the hated Zionists beat their combined armies in 1948, but in 1967 they all but guaranteed their people a swift and complete destruction of the Jewish state - and they were routed, by only Jews, with no help from any other country.

More attacks on Arab pride followed: Israel, in a few decades, built a modern and wildly successful society. In the very middle of the failing Arab League nations. They built farms in deserts, they created universities, they built a high-tech powerhouse, they successfully integrated Jews from all over the world. And they did this without any real natural resources. In a short time, Israel's very success at building a nation hurt Arab pride as much as its military successes.

There are two parts of the (specifically) Arab psyche that are at play here. One, as mentioned, is pride. Extreme pride precludes the possibility of admitting mistakes, or adjusting strategy. Even Sadat said that he could not have considered peace with Israel unless Egypt managed to wage a more successful war that 1967 - the Yom Kippur war was a war for pride. (Losing in war is an even bigger deal to Arabs because so much of Arab history revolves around the sword, romanticizing the best warriors.)

The second, related part that needs to be understood is that Muslims in general, and Arabs in particular, seem to have a big inferiority complex. This comes, I believe, from the rise of the West since the Middle Ages. The Arab world went from being leaders in science and art to also-rans, and the Western superiority in all secular areas kept increasing. Now, as long as Westerners stayed West, it is possible to ignore this widening gap. Excuses could be made. But when Israel came about, where a land that had been a wasteland became a modern high-tech mecca (so to speak) in such a short time, it was no longer possible to ignore the obvious lifestyle differences between the West and the Arab world. Everything that the Arab leaders told their people to keep them in place was being shown to be wrong on a daily basis - women could be successful, democracy works, the free market creates prosperity, individualism allows flexibility, Jews are smart and strong, and freedom is a better social model than despotism. Arabs who live in Israel enjoy a higher standard of living and more freedom than any Arab population in the Middle East.

This is why the creation of Israel is a "catastrophe." The threat to the Arab world is not territorial, it is existential - because freedom is not compatible with what Arab leaders want for their subjects. As long as Israel is demonized, they have a chance of convincing the people that Israel is an aberration of history, a speed-bump on the road to eventual Muslim triumph. But the freedom that Israel represents and the quality of life that Israel enjoys is a poke in the eye of Arab pride.

And the fact that it is Jews who managed to perform these miracles makes it all the more painful.

Plenty to Celebrate (Jerusalem Post)

[...]Ben-Gurion, whose original state contained a mere 600,000 Jews, would have hardly believed that in his own children's lives, this number would grow almost tenfold. He certainly would have been stunned to learn that Zion is only a few years from becoming home to the world's largest Jewish community, a status it has not had not since the Second Temple's destruction, but since the first destruction, nearly two-and-a-half millennia ago.

Ben-Gurion's successor, Moshe Sharett, who founded Israel's Foreign Service, would have been delighted to learn that Israel – in his day ostracized by most of the non-Western world – has since established full relations with China, Russia, India and Egypt as well as the entire former Eastern Bloc and almost the entire Third World.

Sharett's successor and Ben-Gurion's longtime treasurer, Levi Eshkol, would have been in tears had he learned that Israel's per-capita income is higher than half the European Union's, and that the Jewish state has one of the world's most solid currencies and most envied technological industries.

Eshkol's successor, Golda Meir, who was Israel's first envoy to Moscow and as prime minister worked hard to lift the USSR's emigration ban, would have been thrilled to learn that not only the famous Prisoners of Zion on whose behalf she fought, but all of Soviet Jewry has been freed and largely arrived here.

Meir's successor, Menachem Begin, who struggled for the immigration of the Jews of Ethiopia and Syria, would have been overjoyed to learn of their full liberation, and arrival in the Jewish state.

Indeed, even Theodor Herzl, who in 1897 said the establishment of the Jewish state would be accomplished within 50 years at most, would have been dumbfounded to learn that, for now at least, and for the first time since antiquity, that with the exception of Iran, there no is longer a Jewish community anywhere in the world that is formally oppressed by its government.

In the same vein, Chaim Weizmann, who spent decades seeking Arab-Zionist harmony, would have been elated to learn that the Jewish state has signed peace agreements with the two largest Arab states that share its two longest borders.

In fact, Israel's accomplishments are today impressive not only when viewed through such historic prisms, but also when compared with current global trends.

Strategically, Israel is ahead of most countries in tackling the post-Cold War era's biggest menace – terror.

Socially, in a world that is rapidly beset by developed countries failing to either block or absorb immigrations from poor countries, Israel has in just over a decade absorbed a population about a fifth its original size. Unlike initial pessimistic assessments, these immigrants have on the whole found housing, employment and education, and in fact have frequently joined the economic middle class and the cultural mainstream. Demographically, while most other Western populations are shrinking, Israel's continues to grow, thanks to fertility rates that are higher, and marriage ages and divorce rates that are lower, than most other countries in the West.

Economically, in a developed world in which even veteran economies like Germany's and France's are struggling to achieve viable growth rates, Israel has managed to restore its economic growth even after being momentarily debilitated by a vicious terror war.

Lastly, and most importantly, in a world where organic culture is often being overpowered by international commercializing forces, in Israel Hebrew language and culture – which only a century ago hardly existed – are flourishing.

As we celebrate our independence tonight, we should take stock of all this and remember that with all the flaws, setbacks and hardships that involve our existence here – it's worth the effort.