Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, July 12, 2005

The Mufti and the Arab refugees

I've been looking through the pages of the Palestine Post to find contemporaneous information about the Arab refugees from Palestine. There are many articles about the issue, I touched upon it specifically for the Arabs of Haifa over here.

Among Zionists, it is an article of faith that the Arab leaders encouraged Palestinian Arabs to leave, and far more left from the urging and rumors caused by Arabs than from anything the Jews did. In the future I hope to put together an article of the number of times that Jews encouraged Palestinian Arabs to stay where they were.

It becomes apparent upon researching the issue that there were a specific set of Arab leaders who consistently encouraged the Palestinian Arabs to flee, but not the entire Arab world - especially not the leaders of Arab countries who were expected to host these thousands of undesirables. It was, in fact, the members of the Arab Higher Committee, which was led by the ex-Mufti of Jerusalem, who consistently led the Palestinian Arabs to ruin because of their own narrow political goals. And the Arabs at the time, especially the Palestinian Arabs, knew this quite well.

First, here are the players' positions on the refugee issue in August, 1948:

Now, here is a good analysis of the Mufti's position and motives:

So the Mufti and the Arab Higher Committee once again showed that their interests lied not in their people but only in their own power. Today's Palestinian leadership, from Arafat to Abbas, has shown remarkably similar characteristics. Reading the vitriol from the Mufti in the 40's it is striking how similar it is to the same idiocy spewed out today, and how little it has to do with bettering the lives of actual Palestinian Arabs.

Which was well-known even in 1941 when the Mufti was partying with his pal Adolf: (December 31, 1941)

Crossposted to Palestine Post-ings.

Operation Divest Terror

The website is a little shrill but the idea makes sense. If the many anti-Israel divestment campaigns gain so much traction, shouldn't anti-terror divestment campaigns work as well? The fact is that in the end, it is Western money that funds terror through various investments in countries that support terror either explicitly or implicitly.

And here is a link to the only terror-free mutual fund there is.

The Islamist fifth column in England

Great and scary article in the CSM. Excerpts:

Since the bombings, the media and Muslims have been at pains to explain that most of the country's 2 million Muslims are peaceful. "The Muslim community in Britain has a long history and is enormously diverse," says Anas al-Tikriti, a member of the Muslim Association of Britain.

But the attacks are turning attention to the increasing numbers of young British Muslims (hundreds of thousands? -EoZ) who are rejecting their parents' traditional culture in favor of a radical and expansionist Islam. This strikingly Western version of Islam combines an independence of thought with a contempt for established traditional scholarship and a theme of teenage rebellion.

"Getting involved in radical Islam is an emotional thing rather than a rational decision," says Abdul-Rahman al-Helbawi, a Muslim prayer leader. "And it's not a matter of intelligence or education - a lot of these radicals in Britain are very well-educated."

In Dalston market in north-east London on Thursday, "Abdullah," a Muslim watch-mender and evangelist, was in a pugnacious mood.

"We don't need to fight. We are taking over!" he said. "We are here to bring civilization to the West. England does not belong to the English people, it belongs to God."

Hours after the bombings, Helbawi logged onto an Internet chat room run by British Muslim extremists. "They were all congratulating each other on the attacks," he said. "It was crazy. They were talking about how they had won a great victory over the infidels, as if they had just come back from a battle."

Although so far, there is no evidence that British Muslims were involved in the bombs, there is little doubt that many British Muslims feel that Britain "deserved" the attacks for supporting the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

The hypocrisy of Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi

Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi, spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood movement and the head of the European Council for Fatwa and Research, told www.islamonline.net [9] that he condemned the bombings in London: "We were dumbfounded by the grave news which surprised us, and all the world today, about the bombings that took place in the city of London, that killed dozens and wounded hundreds of innocent people who attacked no one and had committed no crime to remove the immunity of their blood."

Al-Qaradhawi described the bombings as "cruel and barbaric black actions that Islam harshly condemns." He also said, "[Even] In an official war, when state armies battle face to face, Islam does not permit the killing of women, children, elders, priests, farmers and merchants, and those like them, who are non-combatants, and whom nowadays we call civilians."

Al-Qaradhawi offered his condolences to the families of the victims, and sent a special letter of condolence to the mayor of London, which stated: "We express our condolences to our dear friend, London Mayor Ken Livingstone, a man of justice who always defends Arab and Muslim causes."
------------------
And concerning other types of attacks against civilians, he says:
------------------

SHEIKH YUSEF AL-QARADAWI
(Qatar University)
TRANSLATION:
It's not suicide, it is martyrdom in the name of God, Islamic theologians and jurisprudents have debated this issue. Referring to it as a form of jihad, under the title of jeopardising the life of the mujahideen. It is allowed to jeopardise your soul and cross the path of the enemy and be killed.

MARSHALL:
In the mind of Sheikh Yusuf Al- Qaradawi, that view prevails even though women and children are often the innocent victims.

SHEIKH YUSEF AL-QARADAWI
TRANSLATION:
Israeli women are not like women in our society because Israeli women are militarised. Secondly, I consider this type of martyrdom operation as indication of justice of Allah almighty. Allah is just. Through his infinite wisdom he has given the weak what the strong do not possess and that is the ability to turn their bodies into bombs like the Palestinians do.

Haveil Havalim #28 is out, and something about Islamic womens wear

This blog is mentioned in HH for this post.

As usual, it is an excellent collection of articles around the Jewish blogosphere, this time hosted by Soccer Dad.

For the two fans out there that I have, you can submit any articles you think are particularly noteworthy to this page. Unfortunately I haven't had the time recently to post really noteworthy articles, although I thought that this one was a pretty good find.

Another tidbit about Islam courtesy of Daf Yomi: The custom of Arab women covering their faces completely except for their eyes predates Islam by at least a few centuries, as a Mishnah discusses this in BT Shabbos 65A. Which is interesting, at least to me; both because it indicates that wearing a chador is not an Islamic innovation, but the idea is much older than the mid-'70s as is implied by the excellent Amir Taheri. (Re-reading the article he is speaking about a very specific kind of hijab, so he is strictly correct, but the implication that I took from the article was that major face-covering was a newer innovation.)

UK-Sun: Israel not victim of Islamic terror

Thanks to Media Backspin for posting this map in the Sun (UK) of major terror attacks by Islamic terrorists in recent years:

So they do recognize that it is "Islamic" terror. They do recognize that it is a worldwide phenomenon.

But no matter what happens, they will not acknowledge that the hundreds of terror attacks against Israel fit the same definition. Somehow, they still think that terror attacks against Jews in Israel are not terror but a legitimate freedom fighter movement - even though Hamas' and Islamic Jihad's philosophy is indistinguishable from that of Al Qaeda.

Interestingly, synagogues in London are built like fortresses to foil terror attacks. But there is still the cognitive dissonance between Arabs wanting to kill Jews in Britain (bad) and Arabs wanting to kill Jews in Israel (justifiable.)

Genteel Jew-hatred is alive and well in England.

Here's how "moderate" British Muslims were in 2004

From a poll of British Muslims in March, 2004:

Q5. President Bush and Tony Blair have said war against terrorism is not a war against Islam. Do you agree or disagree?
Agree 20%
Disagree 68%
Don't know 12%

Q6. Jenny Tonge, a Liberal Democrat MP said she condemned all forms of violence, but if she had to live in the same situation as a Palestinian she might consider becoming a suicide bomber herself. Do you agree or disagree with her?
Agree 47%
Disagree 43%
Don't know 10%

Q7. Would you regard further attacks by Al Qaeda, or similar organisations on the USA as justified or unjustified?
Justified 13%
Unjustified 73%
Don't know 15%

So we see that over 200,000 British Muslims (out of nearly 1.6 million) think that 9/11 was justified. And many, many more would consider blowing themselves up to kill Jews in Israel.

But they are only a "tiny minority," right?

Tony Blair, idiot

British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Saturday it is crucial to address terrorism's underlying causes, which he identified as deprivation, lack of democracy and ongoing conflict in the Middle East.

Thursday's bomb attacks on London demonstrate the pressing need for world leaders to tackle problems like poverty, he told British Broadcasting Corp. radio. He said leaders had taken on some of those issues at the G-8 summit of the world's wealthy nations in Scotland this week.

'I think this type of terrorism has very deep roots,' Blair said. 'As well as dealing with the consequences of this — trying to protect ourselves as much as any civil society can — you have to try to pull it up by its roots,' he said.

That meant boosting understanding between people of difference religions, helping people in the Middle East see a path to democracy and easing the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, he said.

Wow. Lockerbie, the USS Cole, the first WTC attack, the Luxor massacre, Bali nightclub, Madrid, Istanbul, Tripoli, and now London - what they have in common is poverty, lack of democracy and the Middle East?

Somehow, I thought that what they had in common was a murderous political ideology aimed at world domination under the name of Islam. Silly me....if only Israel would give up land, none of these attacks would have occurred, according to Mr. Blair.

I guess the fact that much of the incitement to kill Jews comes out of merry old England doesn't bother Tony one bit. We just have to "understand" the murderers better, so they will feel more "fulfilled."

I really, really hope that he was playing politics with this incredibly stupid statement and that he doesn't believe it.

UPDATE:

AL-QAEDA is secretly recruiting affluent, middle-class Muslims in British universities and colleges to carry out terrorist attacks in this country, leaked Whitehall documents reveal.

A network of “extremist recruiters” is circulating on campuses targeting people with “technical and professional qualifications”, particularly engineering and IT degrees.

But I thought the terrorists were poverty-stricken!

Time to wake up, Mr. Blair. The terrorists include people who are smart, technical, and dedicated to wiping out Western civilization. To even imply that Israel is part of the problem is to hand them a big, fat reward for killing scores of Londoners.

UPDATE 2: It seems Blair never said that; it came from the fevered imaginations of the AP.

LONDON - In a July 9 story about Prime Minister
Tony Blair's comments on overcoming global terrorism, The Associated Press erroneously reported that he spoke of easing the conflict between
Israel and the Palestinians. Blair did not specifically mention the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in his interview with the British Broadcasting Corp.

We are all infidels

A very nice post in the Is Full of Crap blog.

The world will be a better place when it realizes that we are all in the fight against the same enemy. As long as "enlightened" Westerners try to make hair-splitting distinctions between the murderous intentions of Hamas/Hezbollah/Al Aqsa/Islamic Jihad and the murderous intentions of Al Qaeda, they will not understand the nature of the war that we are in now, one that we didn't declare but that the enemy declared against us centuries ago.

Five op-eds on London

Excerpts from Daily Alert:

British Islamists Threatened Violence - Daniel Pipes
In April 2004, Sayful Islam, head of the Luton branch of Al-Muhajiroun (Arabic: "the immigrants"), an Islamist British group, announced that he supports Osama Bin Laden "100 percent" in the quest to achieve "the worldwide domination of Islam." "When a bomb attack happens here, I won't be against it, even if it kills my own children....But it is against Islam for me to engage personally in acts of terrorism in the UK because I live here."
In an August 2004 story in the New Statesman, "Why Terrorists Love Britain," Jamie Campbell cited Mohamed Sifaoui, author of Inside Al Qaeda, that it has long been recognized by the British Islamists, by the British government, and by UK intelligence agencies that as long as Britain guarantees a degree of freedom to the likes of Hassan Butt [an overtly pro-terrorist Islamist], the terrorist strikes will continue to be planned within the borders of the UK but will not occur there.
But in January 2005, Omar Bakri Mohammed, a Syrian immigrant to the UK who headed Al-Muhajiroun, determined that the covenant of security had ended for British Muslims because of post-9/11 anti-terrorist legislation that meant "the whole of Britain has become Dar ul-Harb [the Abode of War, the territory open for Muslim conquest]." Therefore, "the kuffar [unbelievers] has no sanctity for their own life or property." Thursday's explosions mark the end of the "covenant of security."
Let's hope they also mark the end of an era of innocence, and that British authorities now begin to preempt terrorism rather than wait to become its victims. (FrontPageMagazine)

Rules of Conflict for a World War - Efraim Halevi
The multiple, simultaneous explosions that took place on the London transportation system were the work of perpetrators who had an operational capacity of considerable scope. There was careful planning, intelligence gathering, and a sophisticated choice of timing as well as near-perfect execution. We are faced with a deadly and determined adversary who will stop at nothing and will persevere as long as he exists as a fighting terrorist force. We are in the throes of a world war, raging over the entire globe. We are in for the long haul and we must brace ourselves for more that will follow.
The executives must be empowered to act resolutely and to take every measure necessary to protect the citizens of their country and to carry the combat into whatever territory the perpetrators and their temporal and spiritual leaders are inhabiting. The rules of combat must be rapidly adjusted and international law must be rewritten to permit civilization to defend itself. There is no doubt that international cooperation is essential. Yet this cannot replace the requirement that each and every country effectively declare itself at war with international Islamist terror and recruit the public to involve itself actively in the battle. The writer, who heads the Center for Strategic and Policy Studies at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, is a former head of the Mossad. (Jerusalem Post)

The Attacks on London - and the Battles to Come - Johann Hari
Anybody who tells you these bombers are fighting for the rights of Muslims in Iraq, Palestine, or Chechnya should look at the places they chose to bomb. Aldgate? The poorest and most Muslim part of the country. Edgware Road? The center of Muslim and Arab life in London and, arguably, Europe. Does anybody need greater evidence that these Islamic fundamentalists despise Muslims who choose to live in free societies, and they would enslave Muslims everywhere if they were given the opportunity? Nor is this tit-for-tat revenge for deaths in Iraq: very similar jihadist plots have been foiled in France and Germany, countries that opposed the invasion. Anybody who doubted that the fight against Islamic fundamentalism - a murderous totalitarian ideology - was always our fight should know better now. (Independent-UK)

And This Is Why They Did It - Amir Taheri
According to witnesses, Theo van Gogh, the Dutch film-maker, who was shot by an Islamist assassin on his way to work in Amsterdam last November, tried to reason with his assailant. "Surely we can discuss this," he kept saying as the shots kept coming. Van Gogh was reacting like BBC reporters did Thursday, assuming that the man who was killing him may have some reasonable demands which could be discussed in a calm, democratic atmosphere. But sorry, old chaps, you are dealing with an enemy that does not want anything specific, and cannot be talked back into reason through anger management or round-table discussions. Or, rather, this enemy does want something specific: to take full control of your lives, dictate every single move you make round the clock and, if you dare resist, he will feel it his divine duty to kill you. (Times-UK)

If It's a Muslim Problem, It Needs a Muslim Solution - Thomas L. Friedman
When jihadist-style bombings happen in Riyadh, that is a Muslim-Muslim problem. That is a police problem for Saudi Arabia. But when al-Qaeda-like bombings come to the London Underground, that becomes a civilizational problem. Every Muslim living in a Western society suddenly becomes a suspect, becomes a potential walking bomb. Either the Muslim world begins to really restrain, inhibit, and denounce its own extremists, or the West is going to do it for them.
The greatest restraint on human behavior is what a culture and a religion deem shameful. The Muslim village has been derelict in condemning the madness of jihadist attacks. To this day, no major Muslim cleric or religious body has ever issued a fatwa condemning Osama bin Laden. (New York Times)

Reuters: You are not a terrorist if you attack Jews or Americans

More than once, Reuters seems to have broken with their "impartial" tradition of not describing terror attacks as such:
:
"US officials reacted with little public fanfare to the terrorist attacks in London on Thursday"
"after a series of explosions hit London's transport network in an apparent terror attack. ..."
"as dealers calculated the potential economic fall-out from terror attacks in central London. ... "

Well, it didn't take long for Reuters to show its hypocrisy. It even quotes Blair calling it a terrorist attack without putting it in scare quotes.

Remember - 9/11 was never described by Reuters as a terrorist attack.

Here was Reuters' policy in the wake of 9/11:

" Throughout this difficult time we have strictly adhered to our 150-year-old tradition of factual, unbiased reporting and upheld our long-standing policy against the use of emotive terms, including the words 'terrorist' or 'freedom fighter'. We do not characterise the subjects of news stories but instead report their actions, identity or background. As a global news organisation, the world relies on our journalists to provide accurate accounts of events as they occur, wherever they occur, so that individuals, organisations and governments can make their own decisions based on the facts."

Apparently, the Reuters style manual only applies if the victims are Jews or Americans.

Not "militants", not "activists", not "insurgents."

Amazing how UK newspapers have no problem calling the murderers "terrorists" without the scare-quotes.

But Reuters sticks to its guns.

Terror intent, terror attempts, terror successes

The West, understandably, doesn't want to punish people for crimes not committed. There is great discomfort at implementing a "future crime" scenario as in the movie "Minority Report."

However, most people would agree that for people who could pose a future threat, who have stated an intent to kill Westerners, it is prudent to keep a close eye on them and to be ready if and when such a threat materializes.

And, aside from the loony tree-hugging Left, most reasonable people would agree that Western powers are quite justified in responding forcefully and directly to successful terror attacks.

But when dealing both with terror and crime, for some reason the West is lenient on those whose attacks are not successful. Only when there are mass casualties is there any resolve to strike back, hard, at the terrorists. When the damage is "limited"or the plot is foiled, then it is only expected to give a "proportional" response. For some reason it is not considered fair to have a massive counterattack when the terrorists didn't fully succeed.

This makes no sense. Sending a few cruise missiles, as Clinton did after the 1998 Al Qaeda attacks on US embassies (when "only" 200 people died), is not only ineffective - it is counterproductive. It emboldens the terrorists to try again.

Today was not the first time that terrorists targeted London. Scotland Yard has foiled other attacks. It seems obvious to me that when a country or an organization intends to kill massive numbers of people, and shows its seriousness by actually attempting such an attack, that one is morally obligated to pro-actively make sure that this nation or organization is not going to remain a threat.

Right now, in almost all cases, Islamic terror pays. Terror is being rewarded today in Israel and elsewhere and it has been successful in making heroes out of Muslim murderers throughout the world. Terrorists get fame, they get recruits, they get money, and they get political results. Unless this calculus changes dramatically, unless there is a concerted and united effort to make sure that terrorists will lose far more by each attack than they gain, we will continue to see more and more days like today.

MEMRI exposes another "moderate" Muslim leader - this one from NYC

An imam at the Islamic Society of Mid-Manhattan and a lecturer on Islamic studies at Manhattanville College, Ahmad Dewidar, was recently called "the face of the next generation of Muslims in America." He has met with President Bush, Mayor Giuliani, Governor Pataki and U.N. Secretary-General Annan.

Recently, Dr. Dewidar attended the annual Conference of the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs in Egypt, where he gave a series of interviews. In one that aired on MBC TV on June 9, he discussed the spread of Islam in America. He referred to sermons he had heard in 1995 that stated, "We are going to the White House so that Islam will be victorious, Allah willing, and the White House will become Muslim House." To view the broadcast, visit www.memritv.org.

On June 15, Dr. Dewidar was interviewed by the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood's Web site, www.ikhwanonline.com. When asked about how the attacks of September 11, 2001, impacted the spread of Islam in America, he said that he witnessed hundreds of Americans converting to Islam. Hinting at an American government conspiracy related to the attacks, he said, "Whether or not these events were planned, or pinned on the Muslims, or something else - [it] provided an opportunity for [the American government] to legislate dubious laws that restrict the growth and presence of Islam in the U.S."

Regarding American skepticism toward Islam following September 11, 2001, he said, "The media - most of which is under Zionist control - has helped to spread this perception." Later in the interview he said that "the Jews" control the press. When asked, "What is the extent of the Muslim community's influence on American society?" He answered, "The Zionist community numbers only 3 million, but they control the government, the politics, the economy, and the media in the U.S."

Also while speaking to the Web site of the Muslim Brotherhood, he denounced President Bush's policy in the Middle East, claiming it was dictated by Natan Sharansky: "This Jew has despicable goals, and we see their effects today in America's actions in the region, imposing its opinion and its outlook on democracy, education, and political involvement on our countries."

Dr. Dewidar and Sheik al-Gamei'a's interviews shared some themes, such as blaming Islam's poor image in America on a Zionist-controlled press. They also both said the Zionists control political decision-making and economic institutions. Both were extremely positive on the future of Islam in America and discussed a trend of Americans converting to Islam following September 11, 2001.

While the New York press has yet to pay this story adequate attention, it is being discussed by blogs such as Little Green Footballs. Others, such as Solomonia.com/blog, wrote about Dr. Dewidar's statements: "Before MEMRI - people could give these kinds of interviews abroad and no one would ever be the wiser. While still not broadcast widely, at least now, there's a chance of people wising up." On June 30, EconoPundit wrote: "MEMRI.org's most important contribution has been to make it harder for Middle East leaders to say one thing to their English-speaking audience while saying opposite and often contradictory things to their non-English-speaking constituents and allies. It now seems MEMRI's mandate has extended itself to U.S. Islamic leaders as well.

Recognize a pattern here?

Just like Hezbollah is claiming more and more land in the north, the PA is now claiming more and more in the south. And they are setting the stage for another round of terror in the name of "Palestinian" land. And the Jew-hating world will think they have a legitimate point.

As I've said time and time again, the only thing consistent about Arab actions vis a vis Israel is the desire to not allow any Jews to own land in the Middle East. Everything else is window dressing.

Palestinian Authority Civil Affairs Mohammed Dahalan, in charge of coordinating disengagement with Israel, has raised questions on the status of the current Gaza Strip border demarcations, according to National Security Council chief Giora Eiland.

A moshav, Netiv Ha'asara, is situated in the disputed area.

According to Eiland, in talks with Israeli counterparts, Dahalan claimed the northern Gaza border had been moved 2 km to the south, and the Palestinians were demanding that it be recognized as such according to 1949 armistice lines.

But Eiland insisted Israel had made it "clear" to the Palestinians that the Gaza border recognized by Israel was set with Egypt in 1950 in a protocol with a map, and the same border was reconfirmed in 1994 under the Oslo accords. He said that the protocol had recognized a land swap in which the territory of the strip had been moved south by 2 km but had also moved to the east.

Another worthless treaty

Hat tip to Ze'ev:

Background: Treaty already obligates Egypt to stop arms smuggling

The Sharon team reportedly wants a written Egyptian commitment to stop the
arms smuggling from Egypt into the Gaza Strip before Israel retreat from the
Philadelphi Corridor - a narrow strip between Egypt and Gaza. It should be
noted that Egypt is already obligated to do this per the Peace Treaty
Between Israel And Egypt signed on March 26, 1979. It is far from clear why
the Sharon team considers the signing of an additional piece of paper to
have significance given that Egypt has ignored the very same obligation for
over a quarter of a century. If anything, the fact that a new piece of
paper is being signed indicates that that is all it is - a piece of paper.

Text follows:
www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/egypt_eng.htm:

Smuggling weapons to kill Israelis falls into Article III.2.:

'...Article III 2. Each Party undertakes to ensure that acts or threats of
belligerency, hostility, or violence do not originate from and are not
committed from within its territory. . .. Each Party also undertakes to
refrain from organizing, instigating, inciting, assisting or participating
in acts or threats of belligerency, hostility, subversion or violence
against the other Party, anywhere, and undertakes to ensure that
perpetrators of such acts are brought to justice.'

Smuggling through the tunnels - regardless of the purpose is also illegal:

'Annex I Protocol Concerning Israeli Withdrawal and Security Agreements

Article II 2. Access across the international boundary shall only be
permitted through entry check points designated by each Party and under its
control. Such access shall be in accordance with laws and regulations of
each country.'

"Secret documents known as "martyrs' kits" obtained by The Post provide a startling glimpse into the world of suicide bombers, who are recruited with promises that their families will be well taken care of financially.

These kits ensure that the families of Hamas, PLO and Palestinian Islamic Jihad killers get generous "charitable donations" from Saudi Arabia-based organizations and, while he was in power, Saddam Hussein.

The documents reviewed by The Post include a martyr kit for Maher Kamel Hbeishe, a Hamas fanatic who blew himself up on a Haifa bus Dec. 2, 2001, killing 15 Israelis and wounding 40.

Much of the kit's paperwork carries the corporate logo of the Arab Bank — the Middle East's most important and influential financial institution — and the numbers of the accounts through which his family was paid.

The cover on Hbeishe's file — in the records of Saudi relief committees — proclaims: "the martyrs receive reward from their Lord, they and their light."

Replete with florid Arabic tributes to dead terrorists, the paperwork explains the manner of death, making it clear that the bank knew exactly whom it was giving money to and why.

If the terrorist were successful, the family would receive $5,316; being wounded or captured would earn them a lesser amount.

Though small by Western standards, the payments are more than six times the West Bank's average annual income of $850.

To get its money, Hbeishe's family was most likely contacted by the so-called "social welfare arm" of Hamas and instructed to open up an Arab Bank account. Then representatives of Hamas would use the information in the martyrs' kit to provide the bank with the name of the attacker and the beneficiaries getting checks.

The Saudi charities — called relief committees — that provide the funding for the terrorists make no secret of their activities, even taking out full-page ads in newspapers. One such ad listed more than 1,000 individuals who had been wounded or captured by the Israelis during the intifada and whose families were eligible for benefits.

Every ad explicitly directs the family members to go to Arab Bank.

Terrorists on shooting spree demanding jobs as policemen

Once again, the Palestinians move beyond parody.

Dozens of militants linked to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah group stormed a government building in Gaza on Saturday, demanding he make good on a deal to recruit them into the Palestinian security forces.

About 40 armed militants from the group, some masked, raided the Palestinian Legislative Council building in the town of Rafah to protest the delay in the move, but said they were not using violence or holding anyone hostage.

Also, this:

In Tulkarm on Monday, some 20 Fatah gunmen went on a shooting spree in the center of the city, accusing the PA leadership of failing to fulfill its promise to pay them salaries.

The gunmen went earlier in the day to a local bank to check if the PA had deposited money in their accounts. When they discovered that the money had not arrived, they took to the streets, shooting into the air and chanting slogans against the PA.

Hamas planning on raining rockets on Jerusalem, Tel Aviv

Nice to see how "moderate" they have become.

After the security services identified Hamas efforts to transfer the infrastructure for Kassam rockets from Gaza to the West Bank, an official verification of this trend has arrived. An article on the Hamas website warns: "The Kassam in the West Bank will be the main deterrent weapon in the next phase....The entire distance from Netanya to Tulkarm is no more than 4 kilometers. Ramallah and Bethlehem are adjacent to Jerusalem; the entire distance between Kalkilya and occupied Tel Aviv is no more than 7 kilometers." The article explained that intense efforts have been underway for the last two years in Jenin and Nablus to develop this capability. (Maariv-Hebrew, 5Jul05)

Here's a map of which parts of Israel are vulnerable to Kassams and Katyushas from the Defensible Borders website, which looks like it may become a very nice resource.

We can learn from the French

The poor French. They deal with Algerian terrorists for years, then they finally leave in 1962, and decades later, after years of French appeasement of Arabs, the Muslims are still trying to kidnap and kill them.

French diplomats living in Algeria asserted that the French government is concerned about a possible alliance between the Algerian fundamentalist organization, 'Salafist Group for Call and Combat' and Al-Qaeda in Iraq led by Abu Musab Al Zarqawi. According to the sources, the alliance will target French citizens who live in Iraq and French interests in general all over the world. French diplomats expressed the concerns of their intelligence services to Asharq Al Awsat saying that the Algerian Salafist Group for Call and Combat wish to integrate with global Jihad.

Where are the analysts who predict less terror after withdrawal?

Is there any analyst who has made a serious assessment and determined that Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza will make things any more peaceful?

This is only the latest pessimistic analysis I have seen. But I have read many of them, from people who seem to have stellar credentials in political or military matters. However, I have yet to read any article giving a realistic scenario of Palestinians not increasing their attacks on Jews in the wake of the Gaza withdrawal. Sometimes I'll see a throwaway comment like "Peace negotiations will be kickstarted by the disengagement" but I cannot recall one time that there was any evidence behind it.

If anyone has such an article, please let me know.

Random links - hebrewsports.com and parshablog's Linkify

Been busy at my real work and with various other projects, including yet another side business called hebrewsports.com where you can buy clothing and gifts with Hebrew versions of professional sports logos. (I'm particularly proud of the Knicks logo I made tonight:

and my recent Mets logo:

.)

I'm also going to be going on a few business trips in the next few weeks so posting will be sporadic. My heyday of putting together articles worthy of Havel Havalim seems to be behind me, alas.

But check out parshablog's Linkify, a very cool Mozilla Firefox add-on that notices any reference to verses in the Tanach or Talmud on web pages and links them to the appropriate page on the Mechon Mamre or e-daf sites. Very nice!

Palestinian "Police" work ethic shines through

Just six weeks before Israel is due to evacuate its Gaza Strip settlements, the U.S. general charged with reforming the Palestinian security forces said Thursday that they were not yet ready to enforce internal security or prevent attacks on Israeli targets. Army Lt. Gen. William Ward told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee the Palestinians had not yet forged their disparate security groups into a single force under a centralized command. Ward depicted a Palestinian force that is woefully unprepared to handle internal policing duties or stop attacks on Israel after Israeli forces withdraw from Gaza. The Palestinian security force has more than 58,000 members, Ward said, but no more than 22,000 "actually show up for work."

He said the force was like 'a social welfare net,' with the payroll including officers who do not 'contribute to the day-to-day security situation on the Palestinian street.'

That's where he is wrong. They contribute, all right - just on the wrong side.

The Washington Post adds:

Assistant Secretary of State C. David Welch, who has traveled repeatedly to the region to assist Israeli-Palestinian coordination on the Gaza withdrawal, echoed Ward's assessment. "Overall, Palestinian performance on confronting violence has been far from satisfactory, and this is a real shortfall and area of concern," Welch said.

Ward said he had completed an inventory of the equipment needed by the Palestinians, including vehicles, clothing and basic infrastructure. Some of it will be supplied by the Europeans, and he said he was working to expedite it through Israeli customs.

Israeli officials have drawn the line at providing lethal weapons to the Palestinian security. They have pointedly told their Palestinian counterparts that if they need weapons, they should simply collect the illegal ones on the streets.

Ward demurred when asked whether Abbas's strategy of trying to co-opt militant groups -- rather than confront them -- would work in the long run. He said that he did not "know if I'd do business that way" but that it "has created an atmosphere that is allowing other things that are important to occur."

Like daily terror attacks, shootings, killings, attempted bombings, arms smuggling, allowing terrorists to go free from jail, criticizing Israel for doing the PA police job, encouraging Palestinian kids to become martyrs, and accusing Israel of poisoning poor Palestinians.

War of the Worlds: The Lost Version (Iowahawk)

If you've never read Iowahawk spoofs, this is a great one to start with. Here's an excerpt:

CARL PHILLIPS
Can you tell the folks at home who you are, and what you are doing here?

CAPTAIN LANSING
I’m Captain Lansing of the signal corps, attached to the state militia, and we’re here to give these Martians a taste of hot New Jersey lead.

CARL PHILLIPS
Captain, I think question on the mind of all our listeners is obvious – have you received authorization for this action from the League of Nations?

CAPTAIN LANSING
Well, no, but the President and the War Department have asked us to…

CARL PHILLIPS
If you proceed without the cooperation of Prime Minister Chamberlain or Mr. Stalin or the Germans, won’t the mechano-men have a strong case that this is an illegal, unilateral strike that only serves the interest of the United States, and neo-Venusian masters? Won’t this just anger the Martian community, and provoke them further? What about the brutal New Jersey winter? What about --

CAPTAIN LANSING
Listen, pal, I have to go, they’re shooting death rays at our tanks. You’re welcome to embed with us.

CARL PHILLIPS
With all due respect Captain, that would compromise my integrity as a radio journalist, and a citizen of the solar system. Wait! Ladies and gentlemen, I can hardly describe the horror before my eyes! The Air Corps bombers… and the tanks… they are overwhelming and decimating the outmatched mechano-men! One by one, the mechano-men are fleeing and surrendering!

(TROOPS CHEERING)

CARL PHILLIPS
I think I’m going to be sick.

PROF. PIERSON
Roosevelt lied! Robots Died!

CARL PHILLIPS
(OFF MIC) What..? Are you sure? Ladies and gentlemen, I have just received a wire service report that state militias and police have captured and killed hundreds of mechano-men from Maine to California. How many mechano-women and mechano-children also died in this senseless violence, we may never know. I’m afraid this is it folks… I’m afraid that it looks as if we have lost all hope for mechano-kind.

Israel arrests Palestinian terrorist/"policeman"

Just another shining example of the types of people that Mahmoud Abbas is paying for his "police" force that does no policing.

A Palestinian policeman involved in the October 2000 Ramallah lynching has been arrested. Numerous investigations have shown that Wassim Radi, the Palestinian policeman in question, was directly involved in the murder of Sergeant First Class Yossi Avrahami. Wasam Radi was arrested May 22nd, 2005 in a joint IDF and ISA operation.

Radi is suspected of being directly involved in the Ramallah lynching on October 12, 2000, during which two IDF reserved soldiers were brutally murdered. Radi, a 30-year old Palestinian policeman, is originally from the Gaza Strip and is currently a resident of the village of Beituniya, southwest of Ramallah.

The IDF will continue to hunt all those who were involved in the murders until they are brought to justice.

According to the news, only settlers are "extremist" and only Palestinians are "moderate"

Number of hits in Google News search for the phrase "extremist settlers": 106
Number of hits in Google News search for the phrase "extremist Palestinians": 1
Number of hits in Google News search for the phrase "moderate settlers": 0
Number of hits in Google News search for the phrase "moderate Palestinians": 125

In other words, people who advocate genocide of Jews, who danced on 9/11, who cheered Saddam's SCUD missiles, who burn the American flag regularly, who idolize people who blow up pizza shops, who name public squares after terrorists, who prefer Hamas to any non-Muslim - they don't have an extremist among them!

So what crimes are the extremists in this conflict doing? Read the articles: they are doing such heinous crimes as stopping traffic on Israel's highways, protesting and getting hit by moderate Palestinian stones, building houses, and, um, that's about it.

A reasonable question to all "news" sources would be why wouldn't they use scare quotes when talking about "extremist" Jewish settlers when they will use them while talking about Muslim terrorists?

Arabs helped Titus conquer Jerusalem in 70 AD

Interesting tidbit (thanks to Emet m'Tziyon). Publius Cornelius Tacitus mentions this in his Histories:
[5.1] EARLY in this year Titus Caesar, who had been selected by his father to complete the subjugation of Judaea, and who had gained distinction as a soldier while both were still subjects, began to rise in power and reputation, as armies and provinces emulated each other in their attachment to him. The young man himself, anxious to be thought superior to his station, was ever displaying his gracefulness and his energy in war. By his courtesy and affability he called forth a willing obedience, and he often mixed with the common soldiers, while working or marching, without impairing his dignity as general. He found in Judaea three legions, the 5th, the 10th, and the 15th, all old troops of Vespasian's. To these he added the 12th from Syria, and some men belonging to the 18th and 3rd, whom he had withdrawn from Alexandria. This force was accompanied by twenty cohorts of allied troops and eight squadrons of cavalry, by the two kings Agrippa and Sohemus, by the auxiliary forces of king Antiochus, by a strong contingent of Arabs, who hated the Jews with the usual hatred of neighbours, and, lastly, by many persons brought from the capital and from Italy by private hopes of securing the yet unengaged affections of the Prince. With this force Titus entered the enemy's territory, preserving strict order on his march, reconnoitring every spot, and always ready to give battle. At last he encamped near Jerusalem.

So while students of the Bible may not be surprised, Tacitus shows that Arab hatred of Jews pre-dates Islam by many centuries.

I imagine that they were only upset by the "occupation" of Canaanite land a millenium earlier, and that they were just trying to help the Romans uphold international law.

----------------
By the way, Tacitus clearly hated Jews and Judaism, but some of his complaints (the few that are accurate) are actually quite complimentary to Western eyes:

This worship, however introduced, is upheld by its antiquity; all their other customs, which are at once perverse and disgusting, owe their strength to their very badness. The most degraded out of other races, scorning their national beliefs, brought to them their contributions and presents. This augmented the wealth of the Jews, as also did the fact, that among themselves they are inflexibly honest and ever ready to shew compassion, though they regard the rest of mankind with all the hatred of enemies. They sit apart at meals, they sleep apart, and though, as a nation, they are singularly prone to lust, they abstain from intercourse with foreign women; among themselves nothing is unlawful. Circumcision was adopted by them as a mark of difference from other men. Those who come over to their religion adopt the practice, and have this lesson first instilled into them, to despise all gods, to disown their country, and set at nought parents, children, and brethren. Still they provide for the increase of their numbers. It is a crime among them to kill any newly-born infant. They hold that the souls of all who perish in battle or by the hands of the executioner are immortal. Hence a passion for propagating their race and a contempt for death. They are wont to bury rather than to burn their dead, following in this the Egyptian custom; they bestow the same care on the dead, and they hold the same belief about the lower world. Quite different is their faith about things divine. The Egyptians worship many animals and images of monstrous form; the Jews have purely mental conceptions of Deity, as one in essence. They call those profane who make representations of God in human shape out of perishable materials. They believe that Being to be supreme and eternal, neither capable of representation, nor of decay. They therefore do not allow any images to stand in their cities, much less in their temples. This flattery is not paid to their kings, nor this honour to our Emperors.

Islam is more a political ideology than a religion

One of the reasons that the West treats Islam with kid gloves is because of our understandable desire for world-wide freedom of religion. But when religion becomes more than a personal or community-based belief system and turns into a worldwide political philosophy (and a very bigoted and ugly one, at that) then the free world has no obligation to treat it like a religion, rather it should be treated the way that fascism is treated - with no tolerance.

The latest evidence that Islam is not acting like a religion comes from this latest demand:

Islamic states want permanent seat on UN Security Council
Foreign ministers of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) opened a meeting with a call for a Muslim permanent seat on the UN Security Council.

OIC secretary general Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu urged a greater role for Muslim countries in world affairs and demanded a 'permanent representation for the Islamic world on the UN Security Council'.

'The Islamic world, which represents one fifth of total mankind, cannot remain excluded from the activities of the Security Council which assumes a fundamental role in keeping security and peace in the world,' he said Tuesday.

Notice that they aren't saying that any single Islamic state should be represented.

Notice how they wouldn't support India (which is also seeking membership in the Security Council), even though it has more Muslims than any other nation - because it is not an "Islamic state."

Notice how they put aside all their many political differences in order to push their agenda of increasing Islamic influence on the world.

The West needs to wake up and treat Islam on a geopolitical level the way that it treats all other oppressive and bigoted ideologies. The fig leaf of "religion" should not protect today's Islam.

June 28, 1935-36: The Power of Lies

A sobering article in the June 28, 1935 edition of the Palestine Post:

Everyone knew what was happening in Nazi Germany. Everyone saw the vile Jew-hatred coming from Europe. (In the same edition of the Palestine Post was an article about how cities in Germany were stripping Jews of their citizenship, even before Hitler's national law disenfranchising Jews took effect.) While they may not have imagined genocide, it was very clear that for the foreseeable future Jews would be heavily persecuted in Europe.

Britain could have saved millions of the Jews by just allowing them to go to Palestine (and Cyprus and Trans-Jordan.) So why didn't they?

The reason is simple. They didn't want to upset the Arabs.

And the Palestinian Arab leaders had no qualms about playing up their "fears" that Jews would destroy the Al-Aqsa mosque, that they would "endanger the Arabs existence" - any convenient lie would do.

As can be seen in the Post on June 28, 1936:

Do these complaints sound familiar? They are the same complaints we have heard for the past 70 years. And they are just as absurd as they were then.

And the British weren't stupid. They knew that the Arabs were liars (also the same issue):

But lies are insidious. When someone hears a lie, even if they know it is false, it still affects them. A little bit of us tends to think, "What if it is true?" Or, more commonly, "Both sides are very passionate and I don't know all the facts - probably the truth is somewhere in between."

Couple that with the fact that the Western mind has a very hard time accepting that someone would lie to our faces. Hitler did it in the 30s, and the "relief" that could be felt in the West whenever he claimed that he was finished his expansionism was palpable. And they were always lies.

The Arabs learned very well from Hitler's playbook. A lie, repeated often enough, tends to be believed. And in this case the Arab lies about their "fears" of their future (rather than the Jew-hatred that was truly the source of their being against Jewish immigration) made the British pause and think that perhaps this year isn't the best time to allow Jews to save their lives - maybe next year, maybe after negotiations, maybe when the Arabs stop rioting and things calm down - maybe then we will do the right thing. But until then, it is easier to close our eyes and believe some of the lies coming out of the mouths of vile bigots.

Westerners are fans of fair play, of the adage that "there are two sides to every story." It is very hard to accept that one side is right and that the other side is lying.

Arab lies and British (and world) apathy helped combine to the destruction of European Jewry. And the Arabs have never stopped their campaign of getting rid of any Jews in positions of power in the Middle East, partially through their incessant repitition of anti-Semitic lies to their own people and to the apathetic West.

Each lie affects us all until they are called out and exposed for what they are. It is a moral responsibility to expose each Arab lie about Israel and Jews and show the liars to be the bigoted scum they are.

And it is the height of stupidity to believe the promises of liars.

Muslim male bombers get virgins. What do the women get?

From OpinionJournal's Best of the Web:

Girls Gone Wild
Fundamentalist Muslim mythology has it that terrorist 'martyrs' are greeted in heaven by 72 virgins. With Palestinian Arabs increasingly making use of female suicide bombers, we've often wondered what they get in heaven. Now we have the answer, thanks to a report in London's Sunday Telegraph from an Israeli prison:

One of the inmates, Ayat Allah Kamil, 20, from Kabatya, told me why she had wanted to become a martyr: 'Because of my religion. I'm very religious. For the holy war [jihad] there's no difference between men and women shaid [martyrs].'

According to the Koran, male martyrs are welcomed to Paradise by 72 beautiful virgins. Ayat, as with many of the women she is incarcerated with, believes that a woman martyr 'will be the chief of the 72 virgins, the fairest of the fair.'

That is to say, the highest aspiration for a fundamentalist Palestinian girl is murder, suicide and prostitution. Has there ever been a more depraved culture?

"We deserve a state"
JERUSALEM - The upcoming disengagement will allow the Palestinians to show the world they deserve an independent state, Palestinian Authority National Security Advisor Jibril Rajoub said at a conference in Jerusalem Monday.

“Gaza will be a model for the Palestinian state,” Rajoub said in the session, organized by The Media Line news agency at Jerusalem’s American Colony hotel.

Other greatest hits from Rajoub include: "The Israelis may have killed the Israelis in Taba."
and
"The blood of Arafat will chase the Jews forever, the same as Christ's blood"

By Dr. Alex Grobman

What irony! While there are so many reasons for American and Israeli Jews to feel threatened by Arab politicians and religious leaders, they act as if they are not. Arabs, who for the most part could count on Jews to be their friends, continue to act as if Jews are their mortal enemies.

Arabs have been hostile to Jews in Israel for over 100 years. Najib Azouri, a Christian Arab, wrote in 1905 that the Arab nations and Israel were destined to fight until one of them wins. The most recent indication that Palestinians refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state was in Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ mentioning the right of return during the 15 May 2005 Naqba (catastrophe) ceremony. Harvard psychiatrist Kenneth Levin gives psychological reasons for this. One is that reality is too painful to accept; another is believing peace will come if Jews make concessions, which also makes Jews feel they are in control of the situation. Another example of self-delusion is that Palestinians and Jews have the same goals, which led them to be taken in over and over again by Yasser Arafat.

Political correctness also plays a role since Jews might be accused of racism if they were to challenge Arabs. Clearly, many Jews who are the wronged people in this conflict believe they are in the wrong.

I have often wondered how people translate information into knowledge. During the Shoah, there was no historical precedent for the systematic, bureaucratically administered, mass murder of the Jews of Europe. Even when information became available, it took time to assimilate the dimensions of what was happening. Marie Syrkin, a Labor Zionist leader and editor of the Jewish Frontier, explained how American Jews, including Jewish journalists who since 1933 had been actively involved in the fight against Nazi persecution, were not psychologically prepared to accept the truth:

“Today when genocide, gas-chamber and massextermination are the small coin of language, it is hard to reconstruct the more innocent state of mind when American Jews, like the Jews in Europe’s ghettos, could not immediately grasp that the ascending series of Nazi persecutions had reached this apex.” Further, she asked: “If such was the psychological unreadiness of sophisticated publicists whose ‘concerns’ had been to expose each new phase of the Nazi terror, what could be expected from a less informed general public?”

Given our recent experiences with the Nazis, however, why has it been difficult for so many Israeli and American Jews to recognize that the attacks against Israel by Arab religious and political leaders constitute a threat to our very existence as a people and as a nation? How many Israelis have to be killed or maimed by homicide bombings. How often do Jews have to be portrayed in the Arab media and in sermons as Satan, sons of apes and pigs, and as a cancer? How often do Israelis have to have their connection to Jewish holy sites refuted and the Holocaust denied, before we acknowledge the true extent of Arab enmity and their real objectives in dealing with the Jewish Question?

Arab hostility to Jews in the Land of Israel is, after all, not a new phenomenon. In March 1899, Zadok Kahn, Arab Mayor of Jerusalem, responded to Zionist overtures with a suggestion that “the Jews would do better to go somewhere else.” In 1905, Najib Azouri, a Christian Arab who worked as the assistant to the governor of the sanjaq (district) of Jerusalem, was the first Arab publicist to predict that Arab and Jewish national movements would end up in serious conflict with each other. In the introduction to his book, Le Reveil de la Nation Arabe dans l’Asie Turque (The Awakening of the Arab Nation in Turkish Asia), Azouri warned that these two movements, the emerging Arab nation and the “latent effort of the Jews to reconstitute ‘the ancient kingdom of Israel’ are destined to fight each other until one of them wins. The fate of the world will depend on the final result of this struggle between two peoples representing two contrary principles.”

One would be hard pressed to find any indication that these sentiments have changed. If anything, Arabs now are even more vocal about their contempt for Israel and their determination to destroy the country. In a 1974 interview with Oriana Fallaci, an Italian author, writer and journalist, Yasser Arafat was asked how long the conflict would continue. He indicated that the Palestinians did not think in these terms: “We are just beginning to get ready for a long, long war, a war that will run for generations. Ours is not the first generation to fight. In the 1920s our fathers were already struggling against Zionist invaders. We will never stop until we can go back home and Israel is destroyed.” When Fallaci questioned Arafat about whether he was seeking peace, he replied: “We don’t want peace, we want victory. Peace for us means Israel’s destruction and nothing else. What you call peace is peace for Israel. For us it is shame and injustice. We shall fight on to victory. Even for decades, for generations if necessary.”

In a November 1992 speech to an Arab youth group in Amman, Jordan, Faisal Husseini, the leading spokesman for the Palestine Liberation Organization in the disputed territories, declared, “We have not conceded and will not surrender any of the existing commitments that have existed for more than 70 years. We have within our Palestinian and united Arab society the ability to deal with a divided Israeli society. We must force Israeli society to cooperate with our Arab society, and eventually dissolve the ‘Zionist entity.’” During the Oslo period, he asserted that their objective was to establish a Palestinian state “from the river to the sea.”

At a 15 May 2005 ceremony in Ramallah commemorating the Naqba (Arabic for catastrophe), Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas said, “Peace, stability and security in the Middle East” is subject to “achieving a just and agreed solution to the refugees issue.” Zalman Shoval, who twice served as Israeli Ambassador to the U.S., concluded, “the Palestinians, by claiming the ‘right of return’ are still refusing to recognize Israel as a Jewish state.”

Kenneth Levin, a clinical psychiatrist at Harvard Medical School, offers a plausible answer as to why, in the face of continuous killing of Jews, open declarations to destroy Israel and blatant violations of agreements made with the Jewish state, many Jews still disregard this evidence and cling to the notion that Arabs want peace. Israelis, Levin says, are in “state of chronic siege,” which causes them to seek ways to extricate themselves from this predicament. This has produced “the Oslo approach,” which is based on “wishful thinking divorced from reality.”

Maintaining this position regardless of countervailing evidence and tolerating no debate is textbook “delusional,” according to Levin.

This self-delusion, he says, manifests itself in a number of other ways as well. One is to believe they can actually maintain some kind of control of the situation. By accepting the condemnation of their enemies and appeasing the terrorists, Israelis think they will themselves bring an end to hostilities. If only the Jews would make enough concessions to the Arabs, and stop obsessing about defensible borders and other strategic issues, peace would soon be at hand and such concerns would become irrelevant.

Why do some Israelis respond in this way? Levin suggests that since Jews were historically subjected to so much abuse, elements within the community are so eager to escape this painful experience that they interpret the ostensibly improved conditions under Oslo as proof that the past is behind them.

There is also an element of arrogance to “this self-delusion.” Jews assume a responsibility for something over which they have no control in order to ward off despair. Levin suggests that this is similar to an abused child who feels responsible for his plight and views himself as “bad.” The child maintains “the fantasy that if he becomes good enough,” his father will cease hitting him, his mother will give him attention and whatever other form of abuse he suffered will stop. In the same way, some Israelis are delusional when they assume they can control Arab behavior.

Another myth is to describe Arab intentions as “moderate,” even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

A third assumption is the “fellowship fallacy” - that the Palestinians share Jewish values, goals and positions. Some Israelis have met informally or in public forums with high-level individuals from the territories who are connected to the PLO. The Israelis hear more nuanced statements about the conflict in these discussions than are usually heard from the PLO leadership. These words are then interpreted as reflecting what the PLO would agree to in negotiations with Israel. Such was the case after informal discussions with Faisal Husseini. In October 1989, Husseini proclaimed, “The Palestinian Peace Camp has won, and now leads the PLO and the Palestinian people.”

In the speeches quoted above there was no doubt the Arabs’ ultimate goal was the destruction of Israel. The attitude toward Husseini demonstrated the willingness of many Israelis to overestimate words of encouragement and to underestimate the contradictory and inflammatory rhetoric he said to others. This scenario continued under Yasser Arafat, whose guarantees about his yearning for peace would, incredibly, be accepted with greater credibility than his speeches and statements to the Arab media and public, and the racist curricula taught in Palestinian schools about Jews and the need to destroy Israel.

Those who challenge these myths are attacked as racists and bigots for denying the humanity of the Arabs and their feelings and aspirations. Mordecai Bar-On, a founder of Peace Now, suggested that part of the reason for this intolerance and narrow-mindedness toward the Arabs among some Jews and Israelis can be attributed to a lack of education and upbringing, which breeds less tolerance and an inability to understand the “other” and “the complexity of the issues.” This would account, he said, for the Sephardic community’s mistrust of Arab objectives. This distrust could also be found among elements of the Ashkenazi community that were less educated and had a more traditional background.

Levin has done a great service by diagnosing the irrational behavior of many Israelis and Jews who persist in acting out these fantasies. If we are to move beyond this delusion, to accept the situation as it is instead of what we wish it to be, we need to understand the nature of this pathology, which has caused tremendous damage to Israel and the Jewish people.

Teen victims of West Bank shooting attack laid to rest in Jerusalem
Hamas gathers several thousand Gaza fighters and arsenal of Kassams

Terror tunnel uncovered in Gaza - The 20-meter tunnel, which appeared to be freshly dug, had meant to bypass a checkpoint to allow Palestinian terrorists to infiltrate Israeli territory, Israeli military sources said.

The Saudi newspaper Al-Watan reported over the weekend that PA Civil Affairs Minister Muhammad Dahlan, who is in charge of coordinating the withdrawal with Israel, has invited Hamas leaders to move to Gaza.
"We want to see you among us," Dahlan reportedly told Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal and his top aides.
Nayef Hawatmeh and Khaled Abdel Majid, the leaders of two other Syrian-based groups, are also planning to move to the Gaza Strip, the sources revealed.

Nice to see such dividends from "disengagement" and the "cease fire."

June 26, 1936: Ataroth Buries its Dead

As one reads articles about Arab terror against Jews (and the British) in the 1930s, it is hard not to notice eerie parallels to today's Arab terror.

For months in 1936, the Arabs rioted and terrorized the Jews and British in Palestine, ostensibly in protest of the increased Jewish influence and power in the land. There were shootings, bombings, and destruction of Jewish property and businesses, often parallel to the Nazi persecutions of Jews that were happening at the same time. The British did not treat the Arab criminals with kid gloves.

In the details of the murder mentioned in this article and the one following, notice that then as now, the Arab people closed ranks around the terrorists and criminals. They knew that the British would collectively punish entire villages where the terrorists came from and instead of giving up the criminals, the Arab residents would prepare for the punishment by getting rid of the articles the British would confiscate. The nascent hero-worship of Arab terrorists had already started decades before the current Palestinian idolization of murderers. And, as happens today, ordinary Arabs can be counted to support the worst Arab terrorists rather than appear to be on the Jews' (or West's) side.

Without understanding this history of terror-worship, without learning about how the current Arab culture of death pre-dates Israel's existence, one cannot hope to change anything. Superficial words and assumptions that these Arab murderers and their supporters are "just people like us" who will react positively to acts of goodwill and concessions are deadly miscalculations. At no time in history (that I am aware of) can one say that for Arabs, peace was a goal - when it was desired, it was merely a tactic in a war that spans centuries.

Which means that for any true peace to ever happen, the Arab world needs a complete change of culture - one abhorring violence rather than embracing it, one with a true desire for peace rather than a desire for the concessions that it expects will accompany it. Until then, anything that the West does is just a Band-Aid, and more often than not, counterproductive.

Also, in wake of this weeks attempted terror attack against an Israeli hospital by a Palestinian woman who had received treatment there, here is an article from the same issue about how Arab terrorists would try to use Jewish humanity as a means to kill them:

Cross-posted to Palestine Post-ings.

Report: U.S. Government Funds Terrorism-Promotion

Not too surprising, given that Hamas and Al Aqsa have to get their money from somewhere, and the only places they get money from are the US and EU since Saddam's generous terror support dried up....

An Israeli watchdog group alleges that American aid to Palestinian universities and cities promotes terrorism.

A report to be released Friday by Palestinian Media Watch singles out the U.S. Agency for International Development, contending that it has ignored new congressional restrictions that the group helped craft last year on aid money. Specifically, the report points to American development assistance in the West Bank and Gaza that funds universities with student chapters of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, which have funded roadwork for streets renamed to commemorate suicide bombers and television programming that encourages hatred of Jews.

A USAID spokeswoman yesterday said that procedures are in place to make sure that in-kind donations to Palestinian institutions are not diverted to terrorism. But the report has already drawn attention from Capitol Hill, where Palestinian Media Watch's director, Itamar Marcus, is scheduled to testify Friday before the House International Relations Committee on his findings.

3D Test of Anti-Semitism - Natan Sharansky

A nice test to see if someone is giving legitimate criticism of Israel or just hiding their Jew-hatred behind "anti-Zionism".

When I was a dissident in the former Soviet Union, one of my regular activities was monitoring anti-Semitism, and smuggling out evidence and records of such activity to the West. I believed then that the free world, particularly after the Holocaust, would always be a staunch ally in the struggle against anti-Semitism.

Unfortunately, I was wrong. Today, as a minister in the Israeli government in charge of monitoring anti-Semitism, I find myself regularly summoning the ambassadors of West European states to protest anti-Semitic attacks on Jews in their countries and the often meek response of their governments.

Over the past four years, we have witnessed a resurgence of anti- Semitic activity in the democratic world. In Europe, synagogues have been burned, rabbis have been abused in the streets, Jewish children have been physically attacked on the way to school and inside schools, and Jewish cemeteries have been desecrated.

Recognizing the "New Anti-Semitism"

Moreover, the so-called "new anti-Semitism" poses a unique challenge. Whereas classical anti-Semitism is aimed at the Jewish people or the Jewish religion, "new anti-Semitism" is aimed at the Jewish state. Since this anti-Semitism can hide behind the veneer of legitimate criticism of Israel, it is more difficult to expose. Making the task even harder is that this hatred is advanced in the name of values most of us would consider unimpeachable, such as human rights.

Nevertheless, we must be clear and outspoken in exposing the new anti-Semitism. I believe that we can apply a simple test - I call it the "3D" test - to help us distinguish legitimate criticism of Israel from anti-Semitism.

The first "D" is the test of demonization. When the Jewish state is being demonized; when Israel's actions are blown out of all sensible proportion; when comparisons are made between Israelis and Nazis and between Palestinian refugee camps and Auschwitz - this is anti- Semitism, not legitimate criticism of Israel.

The second "D" is the test of double standards. When criticism of Israel is applied selectively; when Israel is singled out by the United Nations for human rights abuses while the behavior of known and major abusers, such as China, Iran, Cuba, and Syria, is ignored; when Israel's Magen David Adom, alone among the world's ambulance services, is denied admission to the International Red Cross - this is anti-Semitism.

The third "D" is the test of delegitimization: when Israel's fundamental right to exist is denied - alone among all peoples in the world - this too is anti-Semitism.

The Rise of Arab and Islamic Anti-Semitism

I am particularly concerned about the constant and growing stream of anti-Semitic propaganda from the Arab and Muslim world - including propaganda that is genocidal in nature against both Jews and the State of Israel. This should be of grave concern, not only to Israel and Jews but to men and women of good conscience everywhere. Such venom defiles the Middle East and the international climate of discourse, and makes it possible for unabashed Jew-hatred to be expressed with impunity.

Earlier this year, my office published a 150-page report on "Anti- Semitism in the Contemporary Middle East." The study surveys anti- Semitic reporting, editorials, and editorial caricatures in the government- controlled press of Egypt, Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf states. In the more than one hundred editorial cartoons included in this report, Jews and Israelis are invariably represented as poisonous snakes, murderous Nazis, and bloodthirsty Crusaders.

We found that vicious anti-Semitism which expressly calls for massive terrorism and genocide against Jews, Zionists, and the State of Israel is becoming more and more commonplace across the Arab Middle East. Moreover, the borders between anti-Semitism, anti- Americanism, and anti-Westernism have become almost completely blurred. The overwhelming majority of this propaganda is issued from the government-controlled media and from supposedly respectable publishing houses closely tied to the Arab regimes.

There is a direct link between the laxity with which countries have responded - or not responded - to growing Arab/Islamic anti- Semitism and the sharp increase in physical and verbal attacks on Jews and Israelis globally.

I recognize that there have been positive developments in the fight against anti-Semitism over the past year or so. The Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has held several meetings on fighting anti-Semitism, and for the first time ever the UN Commission on Human Rights condemned anti-Semitism in three separate resolutions, which were adopted by consensus.

But these important initiatives are not sufficient to combat state-sponsored anti-Semitism, especially of the Arab/Islamic variety described above. For real progress to be made, the free world must be willing to not only publicly and forcefully condemn this anti-Semitism, but also to pursue a policy of linkage against states that support anti- Semitism.

The Need for a Linkage Policy

The effectiveness of a policy based on linkage was powerfully demonstrated a generation ago after a group of dissidents inside the Soviet Union, including myself, decided to form the Helsinki Group in the wake of the Helsinki accords - the very agreement that led to the establishment of the OSCE.

With the help of courageous leaders in the West who were willing to link their relations with the Soviets to their treatment of their own people, the Helsinki Group helped ensure that the Soviets could not take one step in the international arena without their human rights policies becoming an issue. As a result, real progress was made.

I believe that combating anti-Semitism ought to become a much more prominent issue in the bilateral relations between America and the Arab and Muslim worlds. Linkage can be used to marginalize the extremists and to encourage and support those who reject this virulent hatred.

Anti-Semitism is not a threat only to Jews. History has shown us that left unchecked, the forces behind anti-Semitism will imperil all the values and freedoms that civilization holds dear. Never again can the free world afford to sit on the sidelines when anti-Semitism dangerously emerges.

We must not let this happen. We must do everything in our power to fight anti-Semitism. Armed with moral clarity, determination, and a common purpose, this is a fight that we can and will win.

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that local governments can force property owners to sell out and make way for private economic development when officials decide it would benefit the public, even if the property is not blighted, and the new project's success is not guaranteed.

The landmark 5-4 ruling provided the strong affirmation state and local governments had sought for their increasing use of eminent domain for urban revitalization, especially in the Northeast, where many city centers have decayed, and the suburban land supply is dwindling.

[...]Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority Thursday, cited past cases in which the court has interpreted 'public use' to include not only such traditional projects as bridges or highways, but also slum clearance and land redistribution. He concluded that a 'public purpose' such as creating new jobs in a depressed city can also satisfy the Fifth Amendment.

So when are we going to see Rachel Corrie's parents and friends standing in front of bulldozers in American slums?

Or will they argue that a strip mall is more of the public interest than Jews stopping arms-smuggling tunnels and terrorist hideouts?

Perhaps, just perhaps, they can resolve the contradiction by arguing that killing Jews is in fact in the public interest, as the ISM evidently believes.

Wiesenthal Center Letter to United Church of Christ on Divestment

This relates to the last article. It is a good letter being written to people who don't give a damn about the human rights of Jews.

The Rev. John H. Thomas
General Minister and President
United Church of Christ
700 Prospect Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44115-1000

Dear Rev. Thomas,

In the name of more than 400,000 member families of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, we express our deep concern and dismay regarding resolutions to be considered at the General Synod that call for the dismantling of Israel’s security barrier, and divestment from companies doing business with Israel.

One of us is writing from Israel, where earlier today a young woman from Gaza, Faha Samir, had permission on a humanitarian medical request to cross into Israel to seek medical treatment. By the grace of G-d, and through a combination of an anti-terror security fence and other protective Israeli measures, she was foiled from what she admitted was her plan – to blow up Soroka Hospital, which offers medical services to Jews and Palestinians alike. Ten kilograms of explosives were wrapped around her body.

Resolution #16 is entitled “Tear Down the Wall.” It boggles the mind that a major denomination could even think of endorsing such a slogan. We cannot fathom what mixture of naivete, lack of a real grasp of the facts on the ground, and wholesale embrace of the Palestinian narrative produced such folly. Temporary walls and strong preventive security measures are saving innocent Israeli lives – Jewish and Arab– every day. Such defenses should be supported and endorsed by those who care about saving lives, and obtaining the peace that will eventually obviate the need for such measures.

As you are well aware, there has been real movement towards that peace for several months. Israelis and Palestinians have talked and negotiated with each other, for the first time in years. Secretary Rice is still in the region, helping the sides hammer out the fine points of agreements. Why would the UCC introduce resolutions against the security barrier and for divestment just now, when the rest of the world is trying so hard to offer encouragement to the fragile talks, and the United States has thrown its full prestige behind making them succeed?

Has the UCC not considered that such resolutions will be dangerously counterproductive? What are its goals? The easing of Israel’s grip on Palestinians? On the cusp of a painful disengagement that has divided Israelis against each other, Prime Minister Sharon is expending his entire political stock to make sure it happens. Does the UCC want to see the release of prisoners? Israel has released over 900, some of whom have already been apprehended in the process of new attacks against Israeli civilians. What effect can these ill-timed resolutions have, if not to embolden the most extreme elements of Palestinian society, and demoralize Israelis who thought they wanted to press on towards peace? Israel should be encouraged and praised for her efforts, not kicked in the teeth.

Why, then, is the UCC seeking to punish Israel?

When another Protestant denomination recently considered similar resolutions, Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, had this to say. “Israelis are already traumatised and feel that the world is against them. This proposal, if it is agreed, would be another knife in the back. Christians who owe so much to the Hebrew Scriptures and to Israel itself should not be among those who attack Israel in such a way.”

The UCC should be concerned with the plight of Palestinians, as should all good people. But the UCC has not heard the pain of Israeli terror victims, or to the larger narrative of the majority of Israelis who are prepared to make concessions for peace, but not at the cost of dismantling their country. While paying lip service to security for the Jewish state, the programs, literature and website of the UCC have shown a decided preference for Palestinian voices and carefully sanitized opinions from the extreme of the Israeli left. We can point to the national tours of Palestinians to local churches. When did the other side ever get a hearing?

These resolutions will work against the cause of peace, and inflict collateral damage upon relations between Jews and the UCC, and the safety and security of Jews around the world. We are in a position to know, as the largest Jewish membership organization on the globe. We have worked in the name of peace with leaders of foreign governments and as a UN recognized NGO. One of us signs this letter between conferring with the Arab League and a meeting with the King of Jordan. We have championed human rights concerns abroad, and pioneered programs of intergroup tolerance at home.

To most people, divestment means South Africa, and its apartheid regime. To link it with an Israeli democracy that guarantees and delivers freedoms of worship and expression to its Arab citizens; where an Arab sits on its Supreme Court; where Jewish and Arab students sit side by side in university classrooms – is a moral outrage, and a declaration of malice to the Jewish people.

Divestment also threatens other Jews throughout the world, or at least outside of the United States. Since the hate-fest at Durban in 2001, we have monitored an explosion of antisemitism and attacks against Jews. They are linearly related to one-sided rhetoric of Israeli brutality and oppression. Around the world, whatever Israel does, Jews are made to pay. Divestment – with its popular link to apartheid – adds an important brick to a growing edifice of the vilification of Jews.

For decades after the Holocaust, American Jews have noticed and appreciated the attempts of church groups – including the UCC – to promote cooperation and good will. Please do not underestimate how damaging the three resolutions will be, how much positive feeling will be dissipated at the upcoming Synod if they pass. Please do not underestimate the depth of feeling American Jews have for the security of Israel and Israelis. While when many openly disagree with particular policies of the Israeli government, American Jews are united in their commitment to the Jewish State’s right to protect the lives and safety of her citizens. They see fairness trampled upon. Inestimable damage will result to the relationship between our communities.

At this critical juncture, the Simon Wiesenthal Center believes that the UCC ought to drop these resolutions in the interests of a fuller peace for all the inhabitants of the Middle East. If in fact UCC is interested in learning of the horrific toll and suffering of Israeli citizens, and the related spike in Islamist-inspired antisemitic violence, our institution stands ready to provide expert testimony for your Synod participants.

We respectfully await your response.

Rabbi Abraham Cooper Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein
Assistant Dean Director, Project Next Step

The Christian West has a marked, and growing, prejudice against the state of Israel that the government of that country ignores at its peril. The latest instance will be laid before the Anglican Consultative Council in Nottingham tomorrow, in the form of a recommendation that the 38 provinces of the worldwide Anglican Communion should consider divesting themselves of holdings in companies that support the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The recommendation stems from a report on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict issued last September by the Anglican Peace and Justice Network (APJN).

The report is a piece of sanctimonious claptrap whose authors didn't even bother to talk to Ariel Sharon's government. It takes scant account of the trauma to which the second intifada has subjected Israeli civilians and endorses policies, such as the right of return of Palestinian refugees since 1948, that would spell the death of the Jewish state. It has rightly been condemned by, among others, the International Council of Christians and Jews, Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, and Sir Jonathan Sachs, the Chief Rabbi.

If the APJN recommendation is accepted by the consultative council tomorrow, it will be passed to the individual provinces for a decision on implementation. In most cases, they will do nothing. But the American Episcopal Church, which is a member of the Anglican Communion, is considering disinvestment, while the Presbyterian Church (USA) has already embarked on that course. Even where it is shelved, it will serve as a powerful symbol of hostility to Israel.

Mr Sharon is a "power and stockade Zionist" who believes in accomplishing "facts on the ground". His government is not doing nearly enough to advance the moral case for Israel to those Christians who believe that the present-day population has nothing to do with the Jewish aboriginals and therefore has no right to Palestinian land. The further the Holocaust recedes into history, the less Mr Sharon can count on natural sympathy for the Zionist cause. The fact that two Churches in the United States, a country whose support Israel tends to take for granted, are at the forefront of the moves to disinvest is a salutary warning: moral force is just as important as acquiring the latest military gismos from Washington.

This fact cannot be overstated: Israel's "hasbara" has been criminally incompetent. The moral case for Israel is crystal clear and it is botched daily by the people who supposedly "own the media."

There are a number of reasons for this that are not Israel's fault - endemic anti-semitism; the West's guilt over colonialism; the Left's knee-jerk support for the seemingly weaker party in any conflict regardless of the facts, Islam's manipulation of the West's inability to distinguish between the religion of Islam and the fascist political ideology that it also represents, and the media's desire to frame a conflict as "balanced" where a Sharon who gives land for nothing is considered a "hawk" and an Abbas who denies the Holocaust and whose government has yet to show Israel on any map of the Middle East is a "moderate."

Even so, the job of Israel to show its side to the West has failed miserably. Israel already lost the semantic war ("illegal occupation", "settlements", "Palestinian") and it has so far not managed to make much of a dent in presenting its moral case. There are of course some shining exceptions, examples of individual organizations like MEMRI and Honest Reporting who manage to point ou the truth among the deceptions. But from an Israeli government level the incompetence has been stunning, not the least because of self-loathing Israelis who are more than happy to go in front of foreign cameras and tell reporters what they already want to hear.

The number of Israeli government representatives who forcefully and accurately can make Israel's case have been few. Netanyahu was very good when he was Israel's ambassador to the US, and Moshe Arens used to be excellent, as was Sharansky when he was in the government. But it is not enough, and it hurts Israel immensely.

And when it gets to the point that churches, institutions that supposedly are meant to be the leaders in morality, openly support the terrorists and oppose those who want peace and freedom for all, it is clear that Israel has failed at getting her message out.

The PA is finished

The PA is being run by a bunch of wimps who get no respect from anyone. Their days are numbered unless they can figure out a way to actually put some force behind their "peaceful" words.

Oh, and when they say they are against violence, it means against themselves, not against Israelis.

BALATA REFUGEE CAMP, West Bank - Gunmen in a refugee camp opened fire Wednesday, disrupting a lecture from the Palestinian prime minister about the need to end violence. The brazen shooting highlighted the difficulty of his task.

'This country needs order, needs quiet,' Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia shouted, repeating a theme he has pressed for weeks. But even as he spoke, gunfire rang out, startling Qureia and putting his bodyguards on high alert.

Associated Press Television News footage showed militants angrily waving their weapons as Qureia's security guards �� their rifles trained on the gunmen �� stood at the windows of the building where the prime minister was speaking in the Balata camp next to the city of Nablus.

'Don't listen to them. Don't be scared, don't let these gunmen run the show,' Qureia implored his audience.

After Qureia's speech, gunmen opened fire again and set off an explosive device about 300 yards from his convoy. No one was injured. Qureia was whisked away.