Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, March 07, 2011

Meanwhile, in Qatar...

From the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information:

The Arabic Network for Human Rights Information, condemned the continued arbitrary detention of human rights activist and blogger Sultan Khulaifi , owner of the blog “http://binkhaleefa.blogspot.com” without trial early this month.

Security stormed Khulaifi’s house in Doha on March 1st , 2011 , they searched the house and car and then took him by force to an unknown location They informed his his wife that this was the decision of the Attorney General, despite the absence of any decision . So far, reasons for arresting Khulaifi were not announced.

However, it is expected that Khulaifi was arrested against the backdrop of his human rights activities in support of freedom and democracy on his blog . Arresting the blogger is a flagrant violation of the right to freedom of expression and an unacceptable breach to national legislations, treaties and international obligations.

The blog they refer to has a mere 4 posts, and has not been updated in over a year. I see no indication that posts have disappeared from it, so this does not look like it was a major or influential blog in the least.

The blog seemed to criticize Qatar from an Islamist perspective.

Now Israel is behind the Arab revolutions!

It gets so confusing. The Arab revolutionaries accuse the authoritarian governments of being in Israel's pocket, the governments are accusing the rioters of being Zionists, the liberals accuse Israel of not being supportive of these revolutions, others accuse Israel of sending mercenaries to fight the rebels.

It's time to get some clarity.

So here is Hesham Tillawi, an American of Palestinian Arab origin and host of a Muslim TV show called "Current Issues," being interviewed by Iran's PressTV:

The real problem is in the West Bank. The real problem is where Israel is building the settlements. By the time all this chaos in the Middle East settles down, which might take about five or ten years before the dusts settles down. Israel will have the whole of Palestine. Israel will have 1.5mn settlers in the West Bank. This is where the problem is. This is what all this distraction is. And is it worth it for Israel? Yes it worth it for Israel to have this chaos. It's not that they don't talk about it. They talked about it. They have a huge plan. These are people who have been under oppression and have been under these regimes for many years. The Arab world is waiting for a huge revolution.

But what are the aims of these revolutionaries in the streets? Is there a total liberation program with all these revolutions? I have not heard one. So who is going to benefit out of these revolutions? The only one that will benefit out of these revolutions is Israel. They will have the whole of the West Bank with another million settlers in the West Bank. In my opinion that is where we need to look at. If these powers can stop Muammar Gaddafi and say he is a war criminal and he's killing his people, just look what Israel did today. Isn't building settlements in the West Bank illegal under the international law? Yes it is. But we don't see anyone talking about it. We see them talking about this. Of course what Muammar Gaddafi is doing is definitely illegal under international law. But let us not take our eyes off of what Israel is doing, and Israel is choosing this timing when the world is looking the other way to basically do what it needs to do.

When the Arab revolution part I stopped, and they woke up to see what was really happening Israel was on the map. Israel was not on the map before. When this dusts settles, the West Bank which is supposed to be part of the Palestinian state, will be on the map of Israel. This is what the whole story is. You have to look at all the players and see what they will get out of it.

So now you know that Israel was behind the Tunisian guy who set himself on fire and with all the Tahrir Square protesters. It's all so clear, as long as you listen to this guy in Louisiana who got his doctoral degree in international relations from world-renowned Bernelli University in St. Kitts.

Take that, Roger Cohen!

Then again, a leader of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood is more aligned with Cohen:

I say to every Muslim, Christian, and human being in these places: Protect your unity, your nation, and your honor, and do not let yourselves be humiliated. Get rid of the control of the US and Israel. This is a conspiracy aimed at destroying this region, starting with Afghanistan, and continuing with Iraq, Lebanon, Sudan, and so on. Everybody must treat this matter seriously.

We must know who our enemies are and who our friends are, and we must all stand as one against the American-Zionist tyranny, which has penetrated our region and destroyed its foundations.

YNet needs to learn how to read polls

From YNet:

Israel is one of the least popular countries in the world, according to a survey conducted by Globescan for the BBC in 27 different states.

More than 28,000 people were polled between December of 2010 and February of this year in a survey designed to gauge attitudes towards various countries worldwide.

Just 21% of those polled expressed a positive opinion of Israel, while 49% expressed a negative attitude towards the Jewish state. However dismal, the numbers are still an improvement from last year, when just 19% were pro-Israel.

Of the 17 countries included in the survey, only three were found to be less popular than Israel – Pakistan, North Korea, and Iran – with 17% and 16% of those polled supporting them, respectively. More than 55% of those polled expressed a negative attitude towards these states.

When looking at a poll, it is critical to know the question being asked.

And the question being asked in this poll was not "how much do you like country X?" as YNet seems to imply. It was:

Please tell me if you think each of the following countries is having a mainly positive or mainly negative influence in the world:

That is a completely different question and it is not a popularity question (although some of the surveyed will of course think of it that way.)

Also, since the poll started, Israel's numbers have been generally rising! Amongthe bottom of the list, only Israel's ratings went up this year, while Pakistan, North Korea, and Iran went down.

The one troubling part is that while Americans who were positive about Israel's influence stayed the same, the number who were negative increased by 10%.

I'm not trying to say that Israel's numbers would be great if it was a popularity poll, but reporters need to learn to understand basic English.

One other thing: The poll only asks people about 17 countries. No Arab countries are on the list. How would Saudi Arabia, or Libya, or Syria, or even Egypt rank in this list? Who knows? But I would guess that the world does not have warm feelings for those countries' influence either. So when Arab news outlets trumpet this report that Israel is ranked so low, it makes one wonder how they would perform.

And how come the BBC doesn't think that they should be included.

Thousands of Muslims attack Christian homes, church in Egypt

From CBN News:

At approximately 3A.M. Saturday, a mob of several thousand Muslims attacked, burned and looted Christian homes and the Virgin Mary and St. George Church. Sources tell CBN News police did not respond to calls for help. Firefighters were reportedly turned away and an Egyptian Army unit nearby was slow to respond. When soldiers riding in three tanks finally arrived on the scene, some village elders insisted that everything was under control and they turned the soldiers away.

The Assyrian International News Agency reports that the Muslim mob chanted “Allahu Akbar” as it destroyed the church. No Copts were killed in the incident. The number of homeless Christians is unknown at this time.

And some background - the riots happened because of Muslims killing Muslims over whether they should perform an honor killing of a Muslim woman who had a relationship with a Coptic man:

Coptic contacts told CBN News, the Muslim mob that attacked the Christians did so at the urging of Mullah Ahmed Abu El-Dabah. They said during noon prayers at his mosque last Friday, March 4th, the imam told attendees the “kaffirs” (infidels) had caused a lover’s dispute that led to the death of two Muslims the day before. He allegedly incited Muslims to rid the town of all Christians.

40-year old Coptic Ashraf Iskander was reportedly in a relationship with a Muslim woman. Village elders— Muslims and Christians agreed that Iskander needed to leave the village. CBN News has learned that the woman’s father entered into a heated argument with his cousin and the cousin demanded that more be done. He insisted it was not enough for Iskander to leave the village—the woman had dishonored the family and should be killed. The woman’s father argued that his daughter not be killed; only Iskander should be required to leave. Guns were drawn and the cousin killed the woman’s father. The woman’s brother then killed the cousin to avenge the death of the father.

Muslims killing Muslims over whether they should kill another Muslim - and the Christians get attacked.

The latest Ma'an-fueled anti-Israel protest: EPIC FAIL

Ma'an once again is publicizing an otherwise marginal protest against Israel.

Just like last week's breathless story about a "million man protest" at Israeli embassies that was based on a tiny Facebook group that had only a few dozen followers, Ma'an yesterday reported on another way to fight Israel:

Young Palestinians have started a campaign on Facebook, encouraging others to write "Free Palestine" on Israeli currency in a new bid to spread the message.

According to the campaign's Facebook page, the initiative stems from the organizers' "firm belief in non-violent national resistance."

Israeli shekels are used in the West Bank and Gaza, and organizers say by writing on the bank notes Palestinians can advocate change and play a role in resistance to Israel's occupation and its unjust policies towards Palestinians.

This Facebook group is also minuscule, with 123 members - hardly newsworthy for anyone who knows anything about Facebook.

Alas, today Ma'an is forced to reveal that its latest attempt to help fuel protest rather than report real news is a bust:

The Palestinian Banking Society warned Sunday, against a new protest-tactic that would see Palestinians pen the phrase "Free Palestine" on Israeli bank notes, in a plan designed as a non-violent resistance tactic.

The plan, warned the society, could prompt Israeli banks to refuse the bills, making what a statement said would be a "costly protest."

On account of the problem, the statement said, Palestinian banks would not accept notes with the slogan written on them.

"With all appreciation due to the good intentions of the organizers if the initiative, the society urges all citizens to understand the negative impact the act could have on the Palestinian economy," the statement said.

Oops.

Not to worry. Maybe some 12-year old will come up with an idea to scrawl "Free Palestine" on all license plates, and Ma'an will be right there to report on this groundswell and make its audience think that it is a brilliantly new, innovative, major initiative.

Guess whose spies use fake passports?

A long, long time ago...at least eleven months now...

In a rare move by a friendly government, Britain expelled an Israeli diplomat on Tuesday to rebuke the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for what it says was the fraudulent use of a dozen fake British passports in the assassination of a Hamas official in a Dubai hotel earlier this year.

David Miliband, the British foreign secretary, said there were “compelling reasons” suggesting that Israel was behind the misuse of the British passports and called Israel’s actions “intolerable.”

“The fact that this was done by a friendly country only adds insult to injury,” he said in remarks to the House of Commons. “The actions in this case are completely unacceptable and they must stop.”

A host of other lawmakers used even harsher language to excoriate Israel on the floor of Parliament, calling for the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador, urging criminal prosecution of those involved and going so far as to say that Israel was becoming a “rogue state.”

The British really are sticklers for the law, being so upset that alleged spies can even consider using fake passports from another country. Good for them, for being so principled.

Today:

Libyan rebels have released a British special forces team who were detained when a mission to contact opponents of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi went wrong, it was revealed tonight.

The eight-strong group, who were escorting a junior diplomat, has now left the country bound for Malta on board HMS Cumberland.

...According to reports, guards challenged the SAS team when they arrived at an agricultural compound in the eastern city of Benghazi.

They were detained after a search of their bags revealed ammunition, explosives, maps and fake passports.

The BBC says the passports were from at least four different nationalities.

I can't wait to see the debate in the halls of Parliament calling the agency responsible for account. After all, we know that the British would never be hypocritical towards Israel or anything like that.

(h/t Mike)
(Looks like Melanie beat me to this)

Iran claims to have "crushed" Israeli navy

Fantasy from Iran's PressTV:

A commander says during the Iranian naval mission in the Mediterranean the Israeli navy attempted to make contact at sea but was given a crushing response.

A two-vessel Iranian naval group received threatening signals from the Israeli navy, while sailing through Egypt's Suez Canal towards the Syrian coast in the Mediterranean.

“They (Israelis) mounted pressure on Egypt and even Syria to prevent necessary coordination with us from taking place,” Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari was quoted by Fars News Agency as saying on Saturday.

“[They] even threatened [us] during the journey and tried to portray [the situation in] the region as dangerous but we paid no attention,” he added.

“Even at sea, Zionist (Israeli) forces asked our naval group to introduce itself, to which our naval group responded by saying, 'Shut up! It is none of your business' and then, ignoring the request from the Zionist regime [of Israel], it (the naval group) continued on its course.”

He hailed the Navy's reaction as a “determined response.”

Composed of two Iranian warships named Khark and Alvand, the group has successfully conducted the mission and returned via the Suez Canal.

Sayyari said the mission was intended to “convey the message of peace” to regional countries and to “strengthen relations with other countries.”

“They (the Israelis) tried very hard to obstruct our path, but we did not fear these issues and our behavior caused fear and distress for the Zionist regime [of Israel].”

When will Mondoweiss start reporting this "news"? They seem to believe every other idiotic anti-Israel rumor.

PalArabs upset over Star of David lights in "Arabs Got Talent" TV show

Here's the latest evil Zionist plot to corrupt the Arab world: Stage lighting!

A thread in the PalDF Arabic forum shows the shocking sight of dozens of lights in the pattern of Stars of David on the popular MBC-TV show Arabs Got Talent:

Some commenters believe that the entire show is a Zionist plot to corrupt Arab youth.

(h/t Vandoren)

My latest piece for NewsRealBlog:

The peace process.

For years, we’ve been hearing how important the peace process is. We are constantly being told that the Palestinian/Israeli conflict is the root of all the problems in the Middle East (and, sometimes, the world). Even if a solution were to be found, we are constantly led to believe, the entire Arab world will become friendly and cooperative with the West.

The Europeans are frustrated, because they think they know what the major obstacle to peace is. Of course, it is Israeli intransigence. It is the existence of Jews wanting to live in the so-called West Bank, it is the hardheadedness of the Israeli government (especially the Likud,) it is “occupation,” it is Israeli refusal to negotiate on water, and Jerusalem, and descendants of refugees. it is a whole host of seeming issues. Once Israel sees the light and gives a few more concessions, the thinking goes, then the Arab world will welcome Israel with open arms as a full member of the Middle East. Terrorism will stop, Westerners will no longer need to go through security checks on airplanes, birds will sing Bach concertos in harmony and the lion will lie down with the lamb.

There is only one problem: peace is impossible.

Not “difficult.” Not “unlikely.” But literally impossible, at least for the foreseeable future.

Israeli concessions will not bring peace. They can bring temporary lulls, they can bring short-term goodwill from Western nations, but they cannot and will not bring peace.

Here are the top eleven reasons why this is so.

Read the whole thing.

Israeli Apartheid - the video

Prepare to be shocked at these egregious examples of Israeli apartheid against its Arab citizens.

By the way, I hear that my "Apartheid" posters have been spotted at Rutgers, Columbia and even the London School of Economics. But I need photos!

Three Blind Mice (David G)

From David G:

John Brennan from Reuters:

"There is certainly the elements of Hezbollah that are truly a concern to us what they're doing. And what we need to do is to find ways to diminish their influence within the organization and to try to build up the more moderate elements," Brennan said.

James Clapper at ABC News:

“The term ‘Muslim Brotherhood,’” Clapper said, “is an umbrella term for a variety of movements, in the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence and has decried Al Qaeda as a perversion of Islam… They have pursued social ends, a betterment of the political order in Egypt, et cetera. … In other countries, there are also chapters or franchises of the Muslim Brotherhood, but there is no overarching agenda, particularly in pursuit of violence, at least internationally.”

President Obama from NYT:

“All the forces that we see building in Egypt are the forces that should be naturally aligned with us. Should be aligned with Israel,” Mr. Obama said, adding, “I told them we have to be sober, we can’t be naive about the changes that are taking place in the Middle East. Our commitment to Israel’s security is inviolable, is sacrosanct. But we should not be afraid,” of what is happening in the region.

How clueless is this in the administration?

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton argued Wednesday for a continuation of military aid to Lebanon despite the recent government takeover by the Shiite Islamist group Hezbollah and its allies.

In testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Mrs. Clinton said that after new Lebanese Prime Minister Nijab Mikati has formed a government, “we will review its composition, its policies, and its behavior to determine the extent of Hezbollah’s political influence over it.”

“I believe still at this point that we should continue supporting the Lebanese Armed Forces,” she said, arguing that strong “military-to-military ties” with the LAF could pay dividends in the way similar bonds with Egypt did.

Wish I hadn't asked.

h/t JoshuaPundit, Israel Matzav, Barry Rubin, David Kaufman

Anti-Gaddafi, pro-Sharia protest - in London

Barry Rubin noticed that the Obama administration is trying to find subtle differences between bad Islamists and good Islamists:

As the Arab revolutions unfold, the White House is studying various Islamist movements, identifying ideological differences for clues to how they might govern in the short and long term.

The White House's internal assessment, dated Feb. 16, looked at the Muslim Brotherhood's and al-Qaeda's views on global jihad, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the United States, Islam in politics, democracy and nationalism, among others.

The report draws sharp distinctions between the ambitions of the two groups, suggesting that the Brotherhood's mix of Islam and nationalism make it a far different organization than al-Qaeda, which sees national boundaries as obstacles to restoring the Islamic caliphate.

The study also concludes that the Brotherhood criticizes the United States largely for what it perceives as America's hypocritical stance toward democracy - promoting it rhetorically but supporting leaders such as Mubarak.

"If our policy can't distinguish between al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, we won't be able to adapt to this change," the senior administration official said. "We're also not going to allow ourselves to be driven by fear."

On February 25th, two competing groups protested outside the Libyan embassy in London, calling for Gaddafi to resign.

The better-organized and louder group wanted Libya to become an Islamist state.

Alongside demonstrators present at previous protests were Islamists chanting slogans such as: "Gaddafi burn in hell!" "Obama Burn in hell" and "Sharia Law is the only choice."

Tensions ran high between the two sides, with one claiming to speak for all Libyans and the other proclaiming violent Jihad, narrow Sharia Law or nothing.

Since this group is advocating an Islamist, Sharia-based Libya,they must be the good "nationalist" Islamists.

Busy week open thread

Things are getting very busy in the Elder house, so posts will be spotty for the next week or two.

Meanwhile...here's an open thread!

Stephen Walt and Gaddafi's Libya (Zvi)

From Zvi:

Stephen Walt - who has done so much to promote the myth of "the Israel Lobby" - wrote the following after visitingTripoli in 2010.

"First, although Libya is far from a democracy, it also doesn't feel like other police states that I have visited. I caught no whiff of an omnipresent security service -- which is not to say that they aren't there -- and there were fewer police or military personnel on the streets than one saw in Franco's Spain." [http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/01/18/the_shores_of_tripoli]

Of course, Walt evidently stayed in a top-level hotel that caters to westerners, "toured Tripoli" for a few hours (with minders?) and met primarily with regime officials of the sort who monitor Washington politics. A few years before, Michael Totten described a very different set of impressions: [http://pajamasmedia.com/michaeltotten/2011/02/20/in-the-land-of-the-brother-leader-2]

Michael Moynihan visited Tripoli at around the same time as Walt, and his report has a lot more in common with Totten's than with Walt's. Moynihan also writes, quite openly, that the Libya trip that he took (with fellow journalists) was funded by the Qaddafi Foundation under the auspices of Saif al-Islam. He wrote:

"It’s not entirely clear why I am in Libya, although it would have been rude to refuse a trip funded by the generous and, according to their hired help, deeply misunderstood comrades of the Qaddafi Foundation. At the behest of Saif al-Qaddafi—Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi’s slick, London-educated son and dauphin—our group of journalists is being shuttled to the country in an effort to demonstrate a new Libyan openness and, it is implied, a future rather different from the past. Personally, I’m more interested in sneaking a glimpse at the world’s only Islamo-socialist personality cult."

So let's get back to Stephen Walt, who - unlike Moynihan - did not mention that the trip was funded, or how much he has been paid for his services by the Qaddafi regime:

"My own view (even before I visited) is that the improvement of U.S.-Libyan relations as one of the few (only?) success stories in recent U.S. Middle East diplomacy... . Libya has also been a valuable ally in the “war on terror”... One hopes that the United States and Libya continue to nurture and build a constructive relationship, and that economic and political reform continues there. (I wouldn’t mind seeing more dramatic political reform—of a different sort—here too). The United States could use a few more friends in that part of the world."

Rapproachment with Qaddafi was a "success story"? Qaddafi as a "valuable ally in the war on terror?" "Reform" going on in Libya? Well, we've all seen how much "reform" was really going on, and what a stellar "success story" it was for the US to coddle Qaddafi. What about Libya as a valuable ally in the war on terror? Was Walt swinging "1 for 3"?

Michael Totten wrote, in 2008, that "U.S. military officials believe 19 percent of foreign terrorists in Iraq come from Libya." [http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2008/01/30/libya’s-son/]

The unproven assertion about the purported Seifaddin Regiment in northern Iraq, and its Qaddafi sponsor, appears to trace back to an Anbar Awakening security chief named Col. Naief:
"Col. Jubair Rashid Naief, who also is a police official in Anbar province, said those attacks were carried out by the Seifaddin Regiment, made up of about 150 foreign and Iraqi fighters who slipped into the country several months ago from Syria.
Naief said the regiment, which is working with al-Qaida in Iraq, was supported by Seif al-Islam Gadhafi, 36, the eldest son of the Libyan leader."

[http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/gadhafi-18218-iraq-mosul.html]

To my knowledge, nobody has proven this particular accusation against Seif al-Islam Qaddafi, and the high percentage of "exported" Libyan terrorists in Iraq does not necessarily constitute direct evidence against Qaddafi's regime, so maybe this does not instantly confirm that Qaddafi was busily sponsoring terror in Iraq in 2008. But to single Libya out - as Walt does - as "a valuable ally of the US" in the war on terror is laughable. So that's "0 for 3."

So what was Walt doing in Libya, and how much was he paid by Qaddafi-affiliated institutions?

Walt was in Libya at the invitation of the Libyan "Economic Development Board." The EDB was launched by none other than Saif al-Islam, together with (apparently) Harvard professor Michael Porter. This is doubly interesting, because Porter is the founder of the Monitor Group and was responsible for introducing the Qaddafi regime to the Monitor Group.

The London Bureau Chief for Business Week wrote about the EDB and the Monitor Group in 2007, when Seif al-Islam and Michael Porter launched it:

"Saif al-Islam al-Qaddafi and Harvard Business School professor Michael Porter at a press conference on Feb. 22 after the launch of the Libyan Economic Development Board. Saif courted Porter, who is known for his work on competitiveness, for years before persuading him to take on the task of helping with economic reform in Libya. Porter brought in Monitor Group, which he co-founded, to help the Libyans with an analysis of the business environment. The Libyan Economic Development Board is intended to cut through Libya's dysfunctional politics and make economic reform happen." [http://images.businessweek.com/ss/07/03/0314_libya/source/2.htm]

"Qaddafi's son, Seif al Islam (Sword of Islam), is making a career of trying to reform what is by many measures one of the world's most backward economies. Now, thanks to his relationship with Porter and Monitor Group, a consulting firm with which Porter is affiliated, a roadmap for restructuring is emerging." [http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/feb2007/gb20070220_956124.htm]

Now, the Monitor Group is the organization that Qaddafi used to fabricate a positive impressions in the western media. Farah Stockman writes in the Boston Globe (March 2011):

"It reads like Libyan government propaganda, extolling the importance of Moammar Khadafy, his theories on democracy, and his “core ideas on individual freedom.

But the 22-page proposal for a book on Khadafy was written by Monitor Group, a Cambridge-based consultant firm founded by Harvard professors. The management consulting firm received $250,000 a month from the Libyan government from 2006 to 2008 for a wide range of services, including writing the book proposal, bringing prominent academics to Libya to meet Khadafy “to enhance international appreciation of Libya’’ and trying to generate positive news coverage of the country.

As the crisis in Libya deepens, Monitor’s role in Libya has come under increasing scrutiny." [http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/03/04/local_consultants_aided_khadafy]

The LEDB was repeatedly used to engage western intellectuals in supposed "reform" projects, potentially generating positive press. According to the leaked Monitor Group document, "Project to Enhance the Profile of Libya and Muammar Qadhafi", academicians and other visitors were used by the regime:

"Visitors had the opportunity to meet and exchange ideas with Libyan individuals including the Leader, Saif al-Islam al-Qadhafi, senior government officials, leading political scientists and academics, and prominent members of the business community.
Each visitor described how their visit challenged some of their pre-conceived notions about the country. Each individual articulated his or her desire to remain connected to Libya, to visit again, to meet the Leader again (or for the first time in some cases) in order to pursue their dialogue. All remained convinced that the role they were playing was to encourage Libya to continue on its path of increasing interaction with other nations, developing its economy to create greater prosperity for all Libyans, and finding a way for Libya to contribute productively to regional and global issues.
These visits also provided a unique and privileged account of conversations between Qadhafi and international thought-leaders. The conversations between Qadhafi and some of the most renowned and influential scholars and philosophers of recent history were deeply personal, congenial, and thought-provoking. The account of these conversations is extraordinarily valuable because it reflects aspects of the Leader that are little known to most outsiders, sheds valuable insight into governance in Libya, and informs a more profound and thoughtful understanding of Libya.
A number of the visitors delivered public lectures in Tripoli during their visits. These were all very well-attended with at least 200 people in the audience. There was active dialogue between the public and the speakers which often exceeded the time allotted for the lectures.Ultimately most visitors had the opportunity to meet a cross-section of Libyan people, an experience which each one of them acknowledged was meaningful.
Many of the visitors Monitor brought to Libya have individually briefed all levels of the United States government including specifically the President, Vice President, Heads of National Security and Intelligence as well as the Secretary of State.
To accompany this document we have assembled a binder containing the “Output and content of Phase 1”. Section 2 of this binder includes the materials associated with the visits to Libya of each individual...
Monitor undertook to work with the client to identify appropriate individuals. The client provided a list of preferred individuals which Monitor supplemented with additional visitors. In addition, over the course of the project Monitor developed an extensive list of high-caliber individuals who could visit Libya in the future. In the next phase of the project Monitor and the client should work closely to develop a strategy to further develop Libya’s international network. This requires jointly identifying relevant individuals of interest." [http://www.libya-nclo.com/Portals/0/pdf%20files/Monitor%203.pdf]).

The Monitor Group document explicitly links visits by foreign opinion-leaders with the campaign to polish Qaddafi's image abroad.

Walt is not directly named in the Monitor document; however, the document shows that the Libyan regime used the LEDB to bring high-profile academicians (like Walt) and others to Tripoli and attempted to use them to gain positive press for the regime and to do some lobbying on behalf of the regime. Further, Britain's Guardian newspaper quotes a Monitor Group letter to Qaddafi thug Abdallah al-Sanusi, discussing the effort:

"We will create a network map to identify significant figures engaged or interested in Libya today ... We will identify and encourage journalists, academics and contemporary thinkers who will have interest in publishing papers and articles on Libya," the letter claims." [http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/mar/04/lse-libya-anthony-giddens-gaddafi]

Walt was brought to Libya as part of a well-organized and well-funded propaganda campaign, and given Walt's position as a mainstreamer of conspiracy theories about Israel/Jews, it seems fairly obvious why Walt appealed to the Qaddafi regime.

The Arab Lobby at its best, eh? Walt, who has made a name for himself by creating sinister fictions about Israel supporters, allowed the lobbyists of a REAL dictatorship, led by a delusional and mass-murdering psychopath, to use him.

Lest one think that the LEDB was an organization given to largesse without expectation of some "quid pro quo", a document leaked by wikileaks contains a detailed report on discussions with Mahmoud Jibril, the LEDB's chairman. The document states:

"Jibril offered that the U.S. approaches relationships as economic and transactional, whereas Arab culture puts a premium on tribal ties in which gifts are given and expected, but not asked for or stipulated... Jibril stressed that as an Arab, Sadat did not feel he needed to ask for anything because the U.S. should have perceived that he had offered something and reciprocated of its own accord." [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wikileaks-files/libya-wikileaks/8294883/HEAD-OF-LIBYAS-ECONOMIC-DEVELOPMENT-BOARD-U.S.-LIBYA-RELATIONS-NOT-JUST-ABOUT-OIL.html]

(Not only does this shed light on the expectations that the LEDB and the Qaddafis brought to the table when they funded something; it also sheds light on the manner in which the Qaddafis approach business and politics in general. You can't get anything done in Libya without bribing the Qaddafis and their cronies. I wonder why).

The Qaddafi regime has demonstrated again and again that they will do nothing without being paid or threatened. For example, when presented with requests to provide reparations for the assets abandoned by Libyan Jews, they tried to convince Libyan-Jewish Israelis to create a Libyan-funded political party. [http://www.israeltoday.co.il/NewsItem/tabid/178/nid/22686/Default.aspx]

So has Walt acknowledged his (evidently) Qaddafi-funded trip? And did he provide value in exchange for whatever he was paid? Is he being dishonest?

To my knowledge, Walt has not acknowledged any of this in his recent writings, nor has he acknowledged, in the light of subsequent event, his laughable assertions about the Qaddafi regime at the time. Just as importantly, Walt has not clarified how much he was paid for his Libya trip or for any other lectures, paid papers or other tasks completed for this or other Arab regimes.

Rather, Walt seems to conspicuously ignore his past contacts with the Libyan regime and its lobbyists. And today, he is of course on the side of the angels; on Feb 22, with the Libyan revolt under way, he was happy to trash the Libyan regime. But only a few weeks before, when he had written that he doubted that the Tunisian revolt would spread, where was this anti-Qaddafi fervor?

Martin Kramer, in FaceBook comments, writes about a Jacob Heilbrunn story:

"This piece by Jacob Heilbrunn is dishonest. "The efforts of the Bush administration to reach out to Gaddafi made sense," he writes, "but seeking to improve Gaddafi's image is another matter." And then he attacks Richard Perle. Well, Perle didn't write any articles praising Qaddhafi. Benjamin Barber, Joe Nye, Robert Putnam, and Stephen Walt did. Those liberal endorsements were worth gold." [http://www.facebook.com/martinkramer.page/posts/149336985125539]

Kramer cites Michael Moynihan, who was brought to Tripoli at around the same time as Walt, but who - unlike most of the visitors, saw the visit for what it was - "A Libyan Charm Offensive": [http://reason.com/archives/2010/02/22/a-libyan-charm-offensive]

H/t for the original information that Walt visited Qaddafi's Libya and returned to the west to promote rapprochement with the dictator: Martin Peretz. [http://www.tnr.com/article/tel-aviv-journal/84370/libya-saif-qaddafi-western-allies]

Weekend reading

Barry Rubin has seen what he calls "what might be the most frightening paragraph in the modern history of U.S. Middle East policy."

Yaacov Lozowick looks at a New Yorker article fawning over Ha'aretz.

Richard Landes at The Augean Stables has been putting together must-read daily linkdumps.

One of them is the English translation of an article I linked to yesterday, by Adi Schwartz. It is very worth reading and passing on.

Shabbat Shalom!