Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Monday, January 23, 2006

Today's Palestinian Police Phunnies XXIII

On Friday afternoon, 20 January 2006, Mohammed Bassam Shuhaiber, 11, from Gaza City, was injured by a live bullet to the abdomen during an electoral gathering. According to investigations conducted by PCHR, Shuhaiber was attending an electoral gathering organized by Fatah in the al-Sabra neighborhood in the east of Gaza City, when a member of Fatah fired gunshots into the air. One of the bullets hit the child, who was evacuated to a hospital in the city. Soon after, the child's family destroyed a car belonging to the member of Fatah, who is believed to be responsible for the shooting and also beat him. PCHR also discovered that the suspected shooter is a member of the security services.

Meanwhile, Hamas is accusing Fatah of forcing the Palestinian Police to vote for Fatah.

Somehow, this is all Israel's fault. A prominent Yemeni columnist notes, with a straight face:

One is truly amazed to watch the US coverage of the Israeli Prime Minister’s latest illness and how little mention, if any, is ever given of the black record that Sharon has accumulated over the years. On the contrary there were efforts made to paint the man as having turned to the only “hope for peace”, as he has shown by his unilateral decision to get the settlements out of Gaza. Nothing could be further than the truth. If you ask anyone in Gaza, they will tell you that not much has changed since the Israelis “withdrew”, as they are confronted with daily killings, encroachments, assaults and what have you, to make life as miserable for the residents of Gaza as possible.

Cognitive dissonance is an amazing thing.

Put simply, the experimenters concluded that human beings, when asked to lie without being given sufficient justification, will convince themselves that the lie they are asked to tell is the truth. Only when sufficient justification is given, researchers speculated, are human beings able to resist having their mind instantly reprogrammed by any request that they lie.

Anti-zionism is racism:

The General Assembly declared 2005 the Year of the Desert. Famine and poverty-ridden countries in Africa and Asia benefit from technologies created in Israel's Negev, where, with scientific and technological ingenuity, the desert miraculously became a productive region of wealth creation.

At Turtle Bay, however, Arab diplomats threatened to vote down a resolution because Israel proposed to insert a paragraph hailing an international desert conference in Beer Sheba. Although it is within Israel's pre-1967 borders, the Negev capital is "disputed territory," the Arabs said. In a "compromise," a balancing paragraph alleging Israeli destruction of natural Arab resources was awkwardly slapped on.

Most African and Asian countries joined the attack on Israel. Some Europeans, too, eagerly jumped in, while other Europeans religiously observed their abstaining tradition. As a result, the desert resolution was turned into a petty Middle Eastern dispute.

Iran secretly increasing nuclear capabilities

Hamas' "equal rights" for women:

With her textured handbag, heavy mascara, and a veil revealing only her eyes, Alaa Awdeh sounds like the ultimate feminist. Women, she believes, should have equal rights in Palestinian society, especially the right to die in the armed struggle against Israel.

''That's what I am looking for, to sacrifice my life," said Awdeh, 18, an Islamic studies major at Al Najah University in Nablus and enthusiastic member of the youth wing of Hamas, the radical Islamic group.

HH54

Haveil Havalim #54 is out, this week hosted at Jack's Shack.

As usual, it is an excellent collection of more good articles from the Jewish blogosphere than I have time to read. There are two articles from here, one which I submitted (at the advice of Soccer Dad) and one which I didn't, so presumably Jack liked it. Even a little appreciation towards a blog goes a long way, and although I may like to pretend to have no ego, I have to admit it feels very nice when someone compliments an article I wrote.

Check it out!

It's all a game - and the cards are stacked

The Nobel-prize winning Professor Israel Aumann has been spending his newfound fame on giving advice about how game theory affects the Middle East conflict. What he says makes sense, and I like his backhanded swipe at "Peace Now."

Rushing to surrender territory to Israel's enemies in an effort to increase security and foster peace is a bankrupt policy that will only lead to further bloodshed.

So said Nobel Laureate Professor Israel Aumann Saturday evening during a speech to participants in the Herzliya Conference on the folly of Israel's “disengagement” from the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria.

Aumann explained the problem is most Israelis, unlike their Islamic foes, have become convinced they are out of time.

“The Arabs always said they have time, and that they can wait 10, 20 or 50 years until we disappear,” he noted.

But Israelis, “we're in a hurry. We're destroying beautiful, flourishing communities in the name of peace, because 'something has to be done.'”

Instead, Aumann lectured, Israel should be patient and wait until the Arabs truly accept the fact of Israel's existence, regardless of how long it takes.

“If we had patience,” he said, “We might really achieve peace. [But] anyone who wants peace now won't ever get a lasting peace.”

“The very act of running headlong after the longed-for peace is precisely that which distances it from us.”

The man recognized as one of the world's leading game theorists also criticized his government's failure to demand any reciprocity from the Arabs, while under Western pressure Israel continues to dole out concessions.

“The wretched Oslo Agreement,” as he referred to it, “includes a clause in which the Palestinian Authority agrees to stop the unbridled incitement in their schools against Israel and the Jews... This clause has never been carried out, and the incitement gets worse and worse each year.”

The rape of impressionable young minds with such hate-filled propaganda “is much more serious than any terrorist acts or Kassam rockets,” the professor warned.

“If children learn in school that the state of Israel should be wiped off the map, they'll become adults who believe the same thing. And not long from now, they'll be the leaders.”

His point about time is very important.

A little-known and counter-intuitive fact is that if you go to Vegas and bet on a coin toss for an arbitrary number of times, the odds are not 50/50 - the house has an edge. The reason is because the house has unlimited funds and you don't, so it is possible that you will go on a losing streak and lose everything but that is impossible for the casino.

This may be similar. The sheer number of Arabs and Muslims who are dead-set against Israel make even equitable-sounding agreements severely tilt towards the Arab side in reality. Israel does not have unlimited time, unlimited territory ,unlimited population or unlimited resources, and the Arab world has great advantages in all those areas.

There is a well-known saying - the Arabs can afford to lose many wars against Israel, but Israel cannot afford to lose one. I believe that this fact needs to be a major part of the strategy that Israel uses when deciding whether to give more concessions or to cave to more Western pressure. Those who push for a solution now are the ones who ultimately hurt Israel, even if their hearts are in the right place.

NY Sun: Possible terror connection to Brandeis professor

The Al-Arian trial showed some evidence that a Palestinian professor at Brandeis University may have been raising money for Islamic Jihad.

Alisa Flatow, murdered by Islamic Jihad in 1995, was a Brandeis student.

Concern is mounting about the possible connections between a prominent Palestinian Arab scholar, Khalil Shikaki, and leading members of the terrorist organization Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Government wiretaps introduced at the trial of a Florida professor accused of operating the American wing of PIJ, Sami Al-Arian, show Mr. Shikaki distributed money in the West Bank for Al-Arian associates allegedly tied to PIJ - conversations the federal government argues may represent terrorist activity.

Mr. Shikaki is, among many scholarly affiliations, the founder and director of a prominent polling institute, the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, and last year was named a scholar at the Crown Center for Middle East Studies at Brandeis University. Among Palestinian Islamic Jihad's more notorious acts was an April 1995 bombing in Israel that killed a Brandeis student, Alisa Flatow.

He is also the brother of the assassinated founder of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Fathi Shikaki, and a former director of the Florida-based World & Islam Studies Enterprise. WISE was founded by Mr. Al-Arian and connected to several other figures involved in the recent PIJ terrorism trials in Tampa, Fla., during which Mr. Al-Arian and three co-defendants were acquitted.

{...]
Wiretaps of conversations between Messrs. Shikaki, Shallah, and Hammoudeh introduced as evidence at the Al-Arian trial...suggest that Mr. Shikaki distributed money in the West Bank for Al-Arian associates, who raised the funds in America, and then stopped the money transfers in January 1995, shortly after PIJ was declared a blocked terrorist organization by President Clinton.

In a government wiretap dated January 15, 1995, in a conversation between Messrs. Shikaki and Hammoudeh, Mr. Hammoudeh says to Mr. Shikaki: "If you please, do us a favor. There is an amount of money for orphans in Nablus." In the case against Mr. Al-Arian, the government argued and introduced evidence indicating that "orphans" was a code for Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
Mr. Shikaki replies: "Um ... Eah. [Pause.] [Sighs.] Okay, when you want to give it to them."

In a wiretap from January 28, 1995, Mr. Hammoudeh calls Mr. Shikaki again from Florida to inquire about the money distribution, and Mr. Shikaki refuses - five days after Mr. Clinton signed an executive order prohibiting financial transactions with terrorist organizations threatening the Middle East peace process, including PIJ.

"What have you done for us regarding the subject," Mr. Hammoudeh asks. "Ehh ... I did not do anything for you yet, by God, Sameeh," Mr. Shikaki replies. "If you have another way to give them money, a way other than my way ..."

Mr. Hammoudeh then says: "By God... I mean I can send them a check through the mail. But I thought this way is better, more secure."

This sounds exactly the way two people would speak about giving money to orphans, right?

Hamas' extreme makeover

This story almost seems like a spoof, but the sad part is that not only is it serious - but it will work in Europe.

Hamas is paying a spin doctor $180,000 (£100,000) to persuade Europeans and Americans that it is not a group of religious fanatics who relish suicide bombings and hate Jews.

The organisation, also known as the Islamic Resistance Movement, has hired a media consultant, Nashat Aqtash, to improve its image at home and abroad because it expects to emerge from next week's Palestinian general election as a major political force, and wants recognition and acceptance by the US and EU.

"Hamas has an image problem. The Israelis were able to create a very bad image of the Palestinians in general and particularly Muslims and Hamas. My contract is to project the right image," said Mr Aqtash, who also teaches media at Birzeit University in Ramallah.

"We don't need the international community to accept Hamas ideology, we need it to accept the facts on the ground. We are not killing people because we love to kill. People view Hamas as loving sending people to die. We don't love death, we like life."

Mr Aqtash, who describes himself as opposed to violence and "believing in the Gandhi route", has advised Hamas leaders to change their image by explaining that they do not hate Israelis because they are Jews. And he is attempting to persuade influential foreigners that Hamas is essentially a peaceful organisation that was forced to fight, but is now committed to pressing its cause through politics, not violence.

"Hamas does not believe in terrorism or killing civilians. But Ariel Sharon pressed buttons to make people angry. Sometimes we are innocent enough to react in a way that the Israelis use the reaction against us," he said.

Next week Mr Aqtash says he will address the former US president Jimmy Carter and former Swedish prime minister Carl Bildt, and other prominent foreigners monitoring the election. But he admits he and his small team working from an office in Ramallah have their work cut out. Hamas is responsible for scores of suicide bombings, killing and maiming hundreds of civilians (many of them children), although not for yesterday's attack in Tel Aviv.

Hamas's founding charter calls for the destruction of Israel and it wants to impose an Islamic state on all Palestinian territory.

Mr Aqtash, who says he is not a member of Hamas and does not know where it got the money to pay him but frequently refers to the group as "we", says he has told the leadership it has to change its rhetoric. He says Hamas has not helped itself by celebrating suicide bombings; he advises against celebration. And he has told Hamas leaders not to talk about destroying Israel.

"Abdel Aziz Rantisi [the former Hamas leader killed by Israel two years ago] was on television saying things that foreigners cannot accept, like we will remove Israel from the map. He should have talked about Palestinian suffering. He should have said we need this occupation ended. Foreigners will accept this," he said.

Mr Aqtash has also advised Hamas leaders to emphasise that they are not anti-semitic or against Israelis because they are Jews. Hamas has taken the message on board. In an interview earlier this week, Muhammad Abu Tir, who is second on the Hamas election list, twice (and unprompted) offered an assurance that he is not a Jew hater.

"Loving others is part of our religion. We are not against Jews as Jews, we are against oppression," he said.

Mr Aqtash also told Mr Abu Tir to rid himself of a red beard, coloured by henna, because it makes people laugh.

The PR man wriggles away from questions about whether Hamas has more than an image problem when it sends bombers on buses and into cafes.

"I'm personally against killing. All civilians should not be killed. Killing Israeli civilians is not accepted by the international community. They think it is a terrorist act," he said.

"But Sharon was responsible for killing civilians too. During this intifada Hamas killed a thousand Israelis, some of them civilians, some of them soldiers. But the Israelis killed 4,000 Palestinians. It's a war. The Israelis use F16s; Hamas uses people. Anyway, Hamas hasn't sent a suicide bomber in a year."

Hamas is also attempting to soften its image at home with the launch of a television station in Gaza that includes a children's show presented by "Uncle Hazim" and men in furry animal suits. The station, named Al Aqsa Television after Islam's third holiest site, says it intends to put across the group's message "but without getting into the tanks, the guns, the killing and the blood". It will instead focus on religious readings, discussion programmes and a talent show.

Mr Aqtash, however, is not entirely confident in his powers of persuasion.

"How did I do?" he asked as the interview ended. "Did I make you think differently about Hamas?"

Just wait. In a few weeks we will be seeing op-ed pieces from the Eurabians saying that "Israel has to negotiate with enemies" and "Hamas has changed and embraced democracy" and "Islamic Jhad is the menace, not Hamas" and "Hamas has no control over its military wing."

Because when people want to believe something badly enough, they don't need too many reasons to ignore the truth.

Q Mr. Vice President, a cornerstone of U.S. policy has been to spread democracy in the Middle East. Does the electoral success of Hamas and of the Iran-backed fundamentalist parties in Iraq prompt any second thoughts?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: No, I think the basic principle is still sound. If you look at the problem in Iran, though, a very restrictive system in terms of who's allowed on the ballot. And there's an unelected group of clerics, basically, that dominate in Iran. They're the ones who have to certify before someone is allowed on the ballot. And we've seen the result of that process, obviously, has been the election of the new President Ahmadinejad, the former mayor of Tehran. And he has conducted himself in a way and made a number of statements since he got elected, obviously, that are cause for concern. I don't think you can blame democracy or democratic principles for the fact that he is there.

Hamas in the Palestinian areas -- we'll see what happens. We got an election coming up shortly. But if you believe in democratic practices, as we do; believe in a freedom agenda for the Middle East, as we do; then I think it's important for us to be as consistent as possible going forward.
...
Once we've started down this road, though, I think it's very important we stick with it, and stick with those principles. And we believe -- the President believes very deeply and I share his conviction that the solution to the long-term problems in the Middle East lies in having democratically elected governments in places like Iraq that won't spawn the ideology of hatred and violence that has dominated so much of the region, that will offer people opportunities and hope, and will reduce the prospects for war in the future. So it doesn't mean you're always going to get a perfect result, but I would argue that we're going to get a much better result out of that process than we have the system that's been in place in the past that has produced the likes of Saddam Hussein, for example, or of Yasser Arafat.

This is the quandary that we've been talking about for a year now. By pushing democracy before pushing true freedom, you get a sham of an election that is easy for Islamists and terrorists to manipulate.

But if Dick Cheney thinks that election rallies where people get killed by campaigner bullets is what democracy is all about, who am I to argue?

The mainstreaming of Islamic anti-semtism

The Islamic world is far from monolithic. There are reform-minded Muslims, progressive Muslims, and pragmatic Muslims whose focus is in improving their communities.

Since Islam and Judaism are very similar in many ways, I have never jumped on the anti-Islam bandwagon that many right-wing bloggers occupy. On a purely religious outlook level, the two religions have many similar worldviews and goals, and I am dismayed that there isn't more cooperation between the two in matters of mutual interest.

Despite these similarities, and despite the oft-repeated Muslim refrain of how they have no problem with Jews but only Zionism, it is amazing how much instiutionalized anti-semitism has crept into the thoughts of moderate and mainstream Islam. It is no surprise that Jew-haters use Zionism as a code-word for Judaism, but even thoughtful Muslims have it branded on their psyches.

One example is from an Indian Muslim publication, the Milli Gazette, which has many articles about women's rights in Islam and similar topics. But when the topic turns towards Israel or indeed politics altogether, all semblance of logic and reason fly out the window.

One classic example is this article trying to differentiate between terror and "resistance." Almost hilariously the author tries to say that Muslims fighting in Kashmir for territory is terrorist and couterproductive but Muslims blowing up Jewish women and children are justified resistance.

A side comment in an article about Indian communists and Israel betrays the deep-seated anti-semitism of today's Islam:

Israel’s Zionist strategies are not always adopted by the US administration, though at the moment the American Zionist neo-cons do have practically sewed up US administration to their own world-view of total domination of the third world through the use of brutal force, under various spurious pretexts.

Here we see two things:

The classic language of anti-semitism has been entirely replaced by the veneer of anti-Zionism, which even otherwise educated Muslims swallow whole, and
No matter how much wishful thinking Israel's liberal friends display, there is no way that any sort of Jewish state would ever be accepted by the vast majority of Muslims.

This is not the only progressive Muslim publication that turns completely blind when the topic is Israel; Muslim Wake-Up! is another.

Here is one fundamental difference between Jews and Muslims - it is easy to find Jews who passionately hate Israel (see part 6) and hard to find Muslims who passionately hate Palestinian terrorists.

Abu Hamza in court

An interesting detail from the BBC coverage of the trial of terror-inciting Abu Hamza:

Mr Abu Hamza said that Jews had a kinship with Muslims, both religions being descended from Abraham. But Israel and 'Zionism' was another matter.

'I do not believe in Israel,' he said. 'In the Torah [Jewish holy text] it is not Israel. In the Bible it is not Israel. In the Koran it is not Israel. It is Palestine. It's an abomination to change its name.'

Much of the day was taken up with such extremely complicated debate...

Wow, the BBC authors must not be too bright to think that this point is "complicated." It is a simple, provable lie: The Koran not once says the word "Palestine." The Bible calls the land "Israel" and "Judah" numerous times, and not once "Palestine".

I hope that the prosecutor has more brains than the BBC.

Today's fake condemnations

Only Palestinian Arab leaders can look at an attack against Jews and claim that they are the real victims.

Which means that if only Jews would be victims of an attack, well, that would be just dandy!

This is sabotage and aimed at sabotaging the elections, not only the elections, but also the security of Palestinians,' Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas told reporters at his office in the West Bank city of Ramallah.

'The culprits must be punished,' he said. 'They aim to sabotage the elections and the efforts of the Palestinian Authority to impose law and order.'

'We condemn this attack,' echoed senior Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat. 'This is an attack to sabotage the Palestinian elections and sabotage the efforts being exerted to revive the peace process after the elections.'

Has there ever been a culture so obsessed with victimhood to the point of paralysis?

Notable news

A British Muslim writes:

"I am clearly one of those foolish Muslims who have "succumbed to Zionist pressure". I think the salutary lessons of the Holocaust should be remembered. I think that Holocaust Memorial Day, designated by the UK, with the support of the United Nations, as 27 January, is an important commemoration. And I think that Muslims should take an active part in the memorial service and other commemorative events across Britain."

A 15-year old Arab boy gave a bomb belt to the IDF.

The EU is already preparing to negotiate with Hamas terrorists.

Development of the Nautilus laser gun that was meant to shoot down Katyushas and Hamas rockets has been stopped by the US.

Religious Jews are being barred from entering Jordan.

A Haaretz news ticker says that the EU is urging Israeli restraint after today's suicide bombing in Tel Aviv. And Saeb Erekat says yet again that the attack wasn't meant to kill Jews, but to derail the Palestinian Arab elections. You see, he's the victim.

A coerced apology for Jew-hatred

Cape Town Muslim radio station, Voice of the Cape, has apologised for 'a number of deeply offensive and hurtful attacks on Jews and the Jewish religion' during a broadcast.

The offending comments were made by Egyptian student Sheikh Muhamed Colby in a September 2004 programme titled Human Rights And Religion, in which he suggested that Jews were intent on world domination, and were ready to spill Muslim blood.

After a complaint by the Jewish Board of Deputies, which was represented by Advocate Anton Katz and attorney Mervyn Smith, the Broadcasting Monitoring and Complaints Committee ruled that Voice of the Cape should apologise for the comments, which were found to have amounted to hate speech.

The ruling, made in September but only ratified by the committee on Monday, required Voice of the Cape to broadcast a scripted and unreserved apology once on its main news bulletin and at the beginning and end of the programme which contained the original offensive comments.

The station was also ordered to adopt a set of measures to prevent the broadcast of any further offensive material.

In its apology, Voice of the Cape said Colby's statements did not represent the station's views.

'In no way do we hold the Jewish community in contempt. Islam teaches us to respect all religions. We apologise unreservedly and unequivocally for any offence or harm caused to the Jewish community as a result of the broadcast.'

Colby's speech suggested that white Europeans, Zionists and Americans were responsible for a number of human rights violations, including the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

"As far as Judaism is concerned, they believe that they are the chosen nation by God Almighty," he said. "They believe they have been created to enslave and subjugate humanity and take full control of all matters of life.

"When they look at any other religion or sect, other than Judaism, they look at that sect as a means of enslavement, killing, slaughtering, murdering; any form, any means, as long as they reach their aim and their goal."

Colby said the "protocol of the wise Zionist" involved asking what steps could be taken to take "total control of the world".

"This is how they control the nation. This is how they control everything."

Colby said the blood of Muslim people was halaal (permissible) for Jews.

"We are seeing... that the blood of the Muslim is running through the streets and nobody is doing anything about it... " he said.

Notice the timeframe. The broadcast was in September 2004; the apology was this week.

If the Muslim radio station truly believed the words of the apology, why did they wait 16 months when they were ordered to apologize?

UPDATE: It's Almost Supernatural has been following this, and has many details on how it was covered. (Hat tip Soccer Dad.)

The Hamas roadmap, and how Israel can respond

OK, so now the PA is pretty much collapsed and the EU is starting to withhold money from the Palestinian Arabs who seem to spend all their money on "policemen." Hamas is poised to either win the election or come in a strong second place. So what's next?

It seems to me that Hamas will follow the path of Fatah.

They will pretend to moderate just barely enough to get the EU to loosen the purse strings and give themselves legitimacy. They miss the days when they could pretend to have a "political arm" and a "military arm" and the Europeans would happily buy into it. This would in turn pressure the US to moderate its stance towards Hamas, and it would pressure Israel as well.

Like Fatah, they will maintain the terror infrastructure but keep it more clandestine and keep plausible deniability. Islamic Jihad, Hizbollah, Al Aqsa Brigades and probably a Gaza Al-Qaeda will be allowed to operate and be protected by the Palestinian Arab government.

Unlike Fatah, Hamas will try to move the PA towards a more religious direction. It doesn't appear that many Palestinian Arabs will have a problem with that.

There is one other big difference between Hamas and Fatah: Hamas actually cares about the Palestinian Arab people. This of course sounds strange, that an organization that encourages its people to blow themselves up cares about them, but the fact is that Hamas does spend time building hospitals and schools, and the PA ignores anything that could help their people. Admittedly, the schools are meant to be training grounds for the next generation of terrorists, but even so there is a charitable component to Hamas that does not exist in the Fatah leadership.

Although it is a slim hope, this could work to Israel's advantage. After all, Israel has an interest in the welfare of Palestinian Arabs. If they are happy and have jobs and prospects they are far less likely to become terrorists. The only people interested in keeping Palestinian Arab refugees" in camps are the Fatah and other Arab leaders. It is not clear that Hamas would encourage maintaining the refugee camps.

The collapse of the PA is a fait accompli. For Israel to remain intransigent towards a Hamas-led PA will not work to Israel's advantage, and frankly the Fatah-led PA was just as interested in Israel's destruction as Hamas is.

It sounds bizarre, but Israel should take the diplomatic initiative in accepting whoever is leading the PA and make a centerpiece of the policy the destruction of "refugee" camps and building of real towns. The disgrace of the UN-administered and self-perpetuating camps needs to be brought to the forefront; putting not only the UN on the defensive but also the PA, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria for what they have done to the Palestinian Arab people.

A shake-up in the PA can hardly hurt, and it may help. The negotiations with the PA have not helped Israel at all, and Hamas' relative pragmatism may bring an opportunity.

The logical song

Israel likes to use rational, logical arguments to make its case to the Western world. It is a somewhat effective method, but ultimately it is not what wins wars.

When it comes down to it, from a purely rational perspective, Jerusalem is just a piece of real estate, no more or less important than Gaza or Madagascar. Logical, rational Jews can look through the superstitious nonsense of tradition and coldly calculate the cost of keeping the eastern half versus the benefit of giving it up.

When Western leaders want to pressure Israel, they will also use the same cold hard logic to press their claims. Certainly, they reason, logical Jews realize that holding onto the West Bank is untenable: the demographic threat is insurmountable, the cost of protecting isolated Jewish enclaves is too high, the world pressure will be too relentless.

The irony is that Israel's strongest argument is the one it seems to try to actively downplay - the emotional argument.

The Palestinian Arabs don't use logic at all to try to convince their people that their cause is right - they use purely emotional arguments, constant pictures of Al Quds and videos of al-Dura on TV. They know that emotionally-charged citizens - illogical people - are their best weapon, because the West will throw up its hands in the face of emotional arguments and instead try to get the logical Israelis to give up more land and rights.

Meanwhile, the "enlightened" Israeli intelligentsia (and now leadership) will demonize the very Jews who have the emotional, non-logical connection to the land, the ones that don't listen to their cool academic arguments. Whether the connection is religious or cultural or just vaguely emotional, it has no place in Israeli decision-making. Such emotions are not harnessed; they are quashed.

There is no logical argument for Jews to stay in Hebron. None at all. Yes, you can argue that Jews lived there for centuries, but so what - Jews lived in Baghdad and Alexandria for centuries as well.

This anti-emotional attitude is what could lose Eretz Yisroel.

Chevron (Hebron) is the second-holiest city in Judaism. Logic doesn't enter into it - it is a fact. The heroes who moved there after 1967 were not motivated by logic, but out of pure love for the land and all it represents. It was important enough for them to risk their very lives for an idea - nothing logical about that. To have the state act against these people, to see Jews tell other Jews they cannot live in a city that their forefathers are buried in, is not just wrong. It is criminal. It is tragic that any Jew, even the most secular one, can conceive that Hebron is not a place for Jews to live wherever they want.

The same reasons against Jews living in Chevron can be used to cede all of Israel and take the Iranian advice to move to Alaska.

The very people who can best defend Israel because of their pure love of the Holy Land are being marginalized by their own government. It is beyond tragedy that Israel cannot elect a leadership that can say, clearly, to the world: This is our land. There are red lines that we will never cross, no matter what the reason, and they include Hebron. Kever Rochel. Jerusalem.

The emotional arguments are not only stronger than their logical counterparts, but they resonate more with people. Everyone can understand how someone can love their land beyond all rational thought. Abandoning that argument publically means that the "irrational" love that supporters have for Israel gets eroded as well.

As long as Israel concedes the emotional argument to the Arabs, as long as Israel tries to stay "logical" about her claims, she is at a severe long-term disadvantage in this war.

Pity the myopic Hamas women

It's gotta be doubly tough to not only have to walk around with a black veil all day, but also to balance a pair of glasses on it. How can they stop the glasses from slipping off their oh-so-sexy but modestly covered noses? Are there Sharia rules as to what types of frames would not drive the hormonally raged male Hamas terrorists crazy? Must the glasses be tinted heavily, lest someone to see her eyes and be forced to rape her?

It is time to Ask the Imam!