Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Saturday, January 28, 2006

The cult of the "Peace Process"

Rarely has there been a real-life doublespeak term as egregious as "the peace process." Just in Googling the news from only today, I see 248 entries using that term - invariably without the scare quotes.

Hamas' win "casts a pall" over the peace process, we read.

What exactly is the "peace process"?

It is, bluntly speaking, the process where Israel dismantles itself "piece by piece" in exchange for empty Palestinian Arab promises. Israel concedes land, outsources its security to third parties who don't care about Israel's security, and is asked to arm those who want to destroy it. In response, Israel gets vilified that it hasn't done nearly enough and it gets rewarded with more international pressure to give more and more in exchange to a people who cannot even stomach a map of Israel anywhere on their territory. Occasionally, Israel does get some temporary diplomatic benefit as a result of a concession - but never any from the supposed "peace partners." )

There is nothing remotely peaceful about the "peace process." It directly led to more Arab bombs and more terror than before. It emboldened terrorists to kill Jews. It also led to more Palestinian Arab deaths than before this "peace process" started.

Any process that causes thousands of deaths can hardly be called "peaceful." Any objective observer would see immediately that the life in the disputed territories and in Israel proper were much more peaceful in the 12 years before Oslo compared to the 12 years since, including the first intifada - both for the Palestinian Arabs and for the Palestinian/Israeli Jews.

And yet the world drinks from the Kool-Aid of the supposed "peace process" and is up in arms at the realization that the Palestinian Arabs freely elected a slate of candidates who have no interest whatsoever in peace, or even in pretending to want peace (which would be enough to further the charade.)

Here's where the cognitive dissonance kicks in. Since the only hope for peace is the peace process, the reasoning goes, we need to find a way for a bunch of murderers and thugs and terrorists to pretend to moderate a little bit so we can get the process of Israel giving up more land to them back on track.

The Fatah-led PA was enthusiastic about the "peace process" as long as it doesn't involve any actual peace for any Jews that happen to live in the neighborhood. That was enough for the world - they were on board with the agenda.

But now we have people who not only reject Israel's existence (like the PA) but also reject the hallowed "process", too! What a shame! What a tragedy! Only Jewish "extremists" act in such ways!

There are many potential problems with Hamas leading the Palestinian Arabs, but the death of the "peace process" is not one of them. It has caused nothing but grief and pain to thousands of people on both sides.

Real peace agreements involve real, tangible, and irreversible concessions on the part of both parties. Real peace, itself, more often than not is the result of a crushing defeat in a war and an imposed solution to the vanquished.

The "peace process" was always a farce, a triumph of wishful thinking over reality, a willfully blind denial of truth. And if its adherents would be honest with themselves, they would realize that it would never end until Israel doesn't exist any more.

Hamas poses great threats to Israel's and the world's security. But we should not mourn the death of the fake "peace process."

JIB jab

OK, I have not once asked for votes for the JIB awards and I'm not going to start now, despite this blog's abysmal performance in the voting for Best Designed Blog.

But to see Cross-Currents in first place in this category?

I just asked the esteemed Daughter of Ziyon her opinion of the CC design, without telling her that it was in first place, and she said, "Honestly? Ewwww."

It is plain, it is boring, and worst of all - it has ugly ads tacked on to the side.

It is certainly readable and it is far from the worst blog designed out there, but, come on, people! Vote for a blog that actually deserves the award, like Jewlicious or The View from Here!

Not that I would complain if you want to tell DoZ how much you like her design....

(I am not kvetching about the awards themselves, of course, but how could I resist that title?)

The day's best pun: ותמלא הארץ חמס

Thanks to Blog HaMincha, which is an excellent pun as well.

(To those who don't understand Hebrew: It is a quote from Genesis 6:11. In English it is translated as "and the earth was filled with violence." The Hebrew word for violence in this verse is "Hamas.")

Interesting Holocaust article on alt.muslim

A flawed but illuminating article from a Muslim perspective about what the author claims represents the Muslim role in the Holocaust:

By Mas'ood Cajee, January 27, 2006

Six decades on since the slaughter of World War II and the Nazi holocaust, we hear extremist voices alternately exploiting or denying the Holocaust for political gain. By warping our memory of the Shoah (the Hebrew word for the Holocaust), both exploiters and deniers miss the stark, vital message of the Holocaust and its heroes - those who displayed uncommon moral courage in the face of evil.

Holocaust exploiters

A growing chorus of voices which exploits the Holocaust for political gain has been trying to smear Muslims - and Arabs in particular - with grand accusations of complicity in the Holocaust and support for the Nazis. These voices serve hawkish interests in Israel and the United States who wish to justify and legitimize continued war, violence, and yes - even genocide - against Muslims and Arabs. Identifying Muslims with and as Nazis eases the task of selling continued bloodshed to war-weary publics. Reading the books and op-eds of the smearers, one could almost conclude absurdly that the Nazi holocaust was an Arab Muslim and not a European Christian project. As evidence, the smearers usually trot out the pro-German Mufti of Jerusalem Amin Al-Husayni and the Bosnian Muslim SS "Handschar" division.

What these smearing Islamophobes don't like to tell you: the "Mufti" was actually an appointee of the Jewish administrator of British Palestine who completed one measly year at Al-Azhar and betrayed the Ottoman Sultan to join the British. The much-vaunted "Hanschar" SS division - disbanded after a few months due to mass desertions - was the only SS division ever to mutiny. Because they are allied to the power establishments in Israel & the United States, the Holocaust exploiters generally keep mum about American, Jewish, and Zionist complicity in the Holocaust. They aren't currently touting the cruel, forced 1939 return from Miami of the Jewish refugee ship SS St. Louis to Nazi Europe. Or that elites in the Anglo-American sphere widely admired Adolf Hitler throughout the 1930s - George Bush's hero Winston Churchill first condemned Hitler only five years after he came to power. Or that elements of the Jewish and Zionist leadership collaborated with the Nazis - as documented by Hannah Arendt and other Jewish historians (who called their actions "the darkest chapter of the whole dark story"). Or that today, Israel ironically dangles the specter of Holocaust - in its Nuclear avatar - over the mostly Muslim peoples of the Middle East.

Holocaust deniers

On the other side, too many Muslim and Arab intellectuals and leaders continue to fail in adequately addressing the Nazi holocaust and its implications for today in meaningful, humanitarian terms. Two recent examples include the Muslim Council of Britain's daft refusal to participate in Britain's annual Holocaust Memorial Day and the public indulgence in Holocaust revisionism and labeling of the Nazi holocaust as "myth" by Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood chief Muhammad Akef. Deep-seated, knee-jerk anti-Zionism and the continuing occupation of Palestine have unfortunately blinded many Arabs and Muslims to the historical reality and legacy of the Nazi holocaust.

An intelligent and compassionate regard for the victims of the Nazi holocaust - Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, the disabled, and others - on the part of contemporary Muslims is critical for preserving ethical and communal integrity, for a just resolution of the Palestinian question and for the future - if there is to be one - of Western Muslims. Instead, the Holocaust remains a historical blindspot in Arab and Muslim discourse, and as a result it has become a potent political weapon to be exploited at will by those who view Palestinians and Muslims as enemies.

Holocaust heroes

In their perversion of memory, Holocaust deniers and exploiters share another moral ugliness. Both insult the memory of the countless Muslims who risked or gave their lives to rescue Jews threatened with extermination by the Nazis. The stories of the Muslim rescuers of Jews are largely unknown and unpublicized. Only in the past fifteen years have Holocaust researchers brought a few to the public's attention.

Several Muslims (whose stories of heroism and courage we know) have since been honored by Yad Vashem and other Holocaust memorial groups as Righteous Gentiles. They include: the Bosnian Dervis Korkut, who harbored a young Jewish woman resistance fighter named Mira Papo and saved the Sarajevo Haggadah, one of the most valuable Hebrew manuscripts in the world; the Turk Selahattin Ulkumen, whose rescue of several dozen Jews from certain death at Auschwitz led to the death of his wife Mihrinissa soon after she gave birth their son Mehmet when the Nazis retaliated for his heroism; the Albanian Refik Vesili who - as a 16-year-old - saved eight Jews by hiding them in his family's mountain home.

Most Holocaust historians would agree that Muslim Europe - Albania, Bosnia, and Turkey - responded courageously and righteously, especially in comparison to Christian Europe. While there were Muslims who collaborated with the Nazis, they were the exception and certainly not the rule. In addition, in North Africa the Sultan of Morocco, the Bey of Tunis, and the Ulema of Algeria all lent support to their beleaguered Jewish countrymen.

Continental Europe's only independent Muslim country - Albania - was also the only European country to have a larger Jewish population at the end of the war than at the beginning, according to Miles Lerman, a former director of the US National Holocaust Museum. Harvey Sarner, a Jewish American in awe of the Albanian Muslim response, penned the telling book "Rescue in Albania: One Hundred Percent of Jews in Albania Rescued from the Holocaust".

There were many Bosnian Muslims, especially in Sarajevo, who saved the lives of their Jewish compatriots. Indeed, the Jewish community in Sarajevo owed its very existence historically to the centuries-old Ottoman Muslim policy of providing sanctuary to Jews fleeing European Christian persecution.

Republican Turkey thankfully followed that same Ottoman tradition of rescue and sanctuary. Due to its neutrality during most of World War II, and its unique geographical proximity to both Europe and the Middle East, Turkey and Turkish diplomats living abroad played an important role for European Jews in danger during World War II and the Holocaust, according to the Anti-Defamation League. Muslim-majority Turkey rescued over 15,000 Turkish Jews and over 100,000 European Jews.

Like their Christian counterparts, the Muslim men and women who rescued Jews during the Holocaust are among history's true heroes, whose stories we should be telling our children and grandchildren. They represent the best of the Abrahamic and Islamic tradition and spirit. May He grant us true moral courage like them in the face of hardship and adversity. May God - the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful - free us of denying or exploiting the suffering of others.

Of course I have to strongly disagree with his characterizations of "Holocaust exploiters." The author minimizes the role of the Mufti of Jerusalem, the enthusiasm with which the Islamic world accepted German-manufactured anti-semitism, and he ignores the fact that the Arab world recruited Nazis to finish their job when Israel was born. This is not to accept his strawman that the Muslim world was a critical or even major component in the Holocaust; obviously the Nazis and willing European anti-semites didn't need any Muslim help in their quest for the utter destruction of all Jewish men, women and children. His points about European and American indifference to Hitler are well-known and utterly irrelevant in his attempt to minimize Muslim Jew-hatred.

It is also beyond obscene to characterize anything Israel does as "genocide", making the author guilty of his own accusation of exploiting the Holocaust.

It is a sad commentary to the Muslim world that even with these problems, the author is about as reasonable as one can find in the Islamic world, and the thrust of the article is an important one.

His points about Albania, Turkey and the Muslim "righteous gentiles" are well taken and do indeed deserve to be publicized to a wider audience. I was not aware of many of these details and they are an important chapter in the history of Europe during the '40s.

The nightmare Hamas scenario

My initial lack of concern over the Hamas victory may be premature. I had forgotten one of my own recent blog themes.

There is a way for Hamas to refuse to talk to Israel, ignore Western economic pressure, stay true to its Islamist roots and to appear to help the Palestinian Arabs in their day-to-day lives.

And the answer is Iran.

Iran would be overjoyed to have an Islamist fundamentalist terror statelet right next to Israel. It will provide more than enough money to offset the shortfall from any chance of the EU refusing to give aid to a terror group. It would increase Iran's influence and further its goals of being the world Islamist power. It would help Iran's popularity among the faithful, and it will solidify Iran's leadership role as the major threat to the West and eventual Islamist world domination.

As long as the world is willing to pay huge amounts of money to Iran for oil, the world will end up subsidizing the Hamastan terror statelet. For only a billion petrodollars a year, Iran can replace the EU, UN and US funds. (And the European twisted logic will then continue to find ways to give money to Hamas as a way to "maintain influence" over a bunch of thugs.)

Iranian missiles in Gaza could reach all of Europe.

Ultimately, Iran views Hamastan as the perfect delivery vehicle for nuclear weapons - an entire "nation" that would happily vaporize itself to destroy Israel.

"Hamas without veils"

Emanuele Ottolenghi makes my points far better than I made them.

Contrary to initial responses, Hamas’s projected victory in the Palestinian parliamentary elections is a positive development. Not, as its apologists claim, because the proximity of power will favor a process of cooptation into parliamentary politics, and therefore strengthen the pragmatic wing of Hamas. There is no pragmatic wing in Hamas, and all differences within the movement — the armed wing and the political wing, Palestine Hamas and Hamas in Syria — are arguably tactical differences. No, the reason is, as Vladimir Ilich Lenin would put it, "worse is better."

Hamas’s favored outcome was not victory, but a strong showing that would leave Hamas with the best of both worlds: It would remain in opposition (or would be invited to join a coalition as a junior partner) but would impose severe limitations on the Fatah-led government on how to manage its relations with Israel. Hamas could thus claim to reject Oslo, decline to recognize the Palestinian Authority and its commitments under the Oslo accords and the roadmap, and continue to use its rising political clout and its military strength to sabotage any effort to revive the moribund peace process.

What victory does to Hamas is to put the movement into an impossible position. As preliminary reports emerge, Hamas has already asked Fatah to form a coalition and got a negative response. Prime Minister Abu Ala has resigned with his cabinet, and president Abu Mazen will now appoint Hamas to form the next government. From the shadows of ambiguity, where Hamas could afford — thanks to the moral and intellectual hypocrisy of those in the Western world who dismissed its incendiary rhetoric as tactics — to have the cake and eat it too. Now, no more. Had they won 30-35 percent of the seats, they could have stayed out of power but put enormous limits on the Palestinian Authority’s room to maneuver. By winning, they have to govern, which means they have to tell the world, very soon, a number of things.

They will have to show their true face now: No more masks, no more veils, no more double-speak. If the cooptation theory — favored by the International Crisis Group and by the former British MI-6 turned talking head, Alistair Crooke — were true, this is the time for Hamas to show what hides behind its veil.

As the government of the Palestinian Authority, now they will have to say whether they accept the roadmap.

They will have to take control over security and decide whether they use it to uphold the roadmap or to wage war.

There will be no excuses or ambiguities when Hamas fires rockets on Israel and launches suicide attacks against civilian targets. Until Tuesday, the PA could hide behind the excuse that they were not directly responsible and they could not rein in the "militants." Now the "militants" are the militia of the ruling party. They are one and the same with the Palestinian Authority. If they bomb Israel from Gaza — not under occupation anymore, and is therefore, technically, part of the Palestinian state the PLO proclaimed in Algiers in 1988, but never bothered to take responsibility for — that is an act of war, which can be responded to in kind, under the full cover of the internationally recognized right of self-defense. No more excuses that the Palestinians live under occupation, that the PA is too weak to disarm Hamas, that violence is not the policy of the PA. Hamas and the PA will be the same: What Hamas does is what the PA will stand for.

Continuing to pursue a violent path will automatically switch off all international aid. Perhaps Hamas intends to offset the resulting loss of revenue by hosting Holocaust-denial conferences in Gaza and terrorist training camps in Rafah, but it will still have to explain to the Palestinian public why it’s better to renounce public aid to wage war.

Read the whole thing.

As Daled Amos points out, and I did too, it is too optimistic to think that Hamas will not follow the PLO footsteps and blame all new terror attacks on the "more radical" groups. Nevertheless, this will present Hamas with the problem of how to deliver on a better life for Palestinian people while not allowing itself to coordinate anything with Israel.

Unfortunately, there is a possible answer....(see next article)

Davos apology - interesting but flawed

YNET reports:

Organizers at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, are working on a new conference booklet after the initial draft containing an article blasting Israel caused uproar.

The head of the Forum publicly condemned the incident and apologized on behalf of organizers.

The apology is nice, but this is hardly the first time such things happened at this "prestigious" event:

Yasser Arafat himself, at the 2001 world economic forum in Davos, Switzerland, shocked his distinguished audience by insisting in front of Israeli Foreign Minister, Peres, that Israel was using depleted uranium and nerve gas against Palestinian civilians.

And here is a lovely example of liberal tolerance from the 2003 conference:

I don't know what newspaper called this a "peace demonstration."

So it is nice and somewhat unexpected to see an apology, but it is not surprising that such pure bigotry can emerge at a conference which has tolerated it for so many years.

Backgrounders on Hamas

It is interesting to see how media outlets are writing their background, color articles on Hamas.

Somehow, suicide bombs and attacks against civilians are now relegated to minor side points. Here are links to articles that are backgrounders on Hamas and which paragraph they mention attacks against Israeli civilians:

Times of London: paragraph 7.
BBC - paragraph 5.
Xinhua - paragraph 11 (barely)
AP - paragraph 4

On the contrary, the Jerusalem Post printed parts of the Hamas charter, and Arutz Sheva listed major terror attacks by Hamas.

Hamas' spiritual forefathers

It is worth reposting a link to this article from the Palestine Post about the origins of fundamentalist Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood, from which Hamas and al-Qaeda were born.

Why Hamas won

I have mentioned before that there are two very consistent patterns that explain the entire Arab/Israeli conflict for the past century:

1) Israelis want security.
2) Arab leaders want to destroy Israel.

Essentially every political and military move done by both sides since before 1948 can be remarkably explained by those two concepts. There are rare exceptions, perhaps Jordan is one of them, but on the whole it is a very good rule of thumb that can be used both to understand history and to understand current events.

There is a third consistent pattern as well:

3) Arab people just want to raise their families with dignity and pride.

The entire brief history of the Palestinian Arabs shows this to be true. The ones who lived in Palestine in the 1800s didn't care that they were under Ottoman rule, they didn't crave independence. After the Jews started coming in serious numbers and the economy boomed, many (I believe most) of the ancestors of today's Palestinian Arabs moved into Palestine from Syria and Jordan, because that was how they could best provide for their families. More moved in under British rule than under Ottoman rule, because economic concerns were far more important than political concerns.

If "independence" was the uppermost concern of Arabs, then why do over a million choose to stay in Israel rather than move to PA-administered areas? As the Clinton team famously observed, "it's the economy, stupid."

The people who have screwed the Palestinian Arabs the most have always been their "leaders." It was their leaders who decided to force them to boycott Jewish goods to their detriment, it was their leaders who kept them in "refugee" camps, it was their leaders who forced them to fight losing battles against the hated Zionists.

The "golden age" of Palestinian Arabs was during the "occupation" - this was when they had good paying jobs, when Israel built them an electrical and safe water infrastructure, when the Zionists used their devious Jewish expertise to dramatically increase the Palestinian Arab life expectancy and slash their infant mortality rates. During Oslo, tens of thousands of Jordanians moved illegally into the West Bank so they could raise their families in the comparative paradise that Israel built for the Palestinian Arabs.

The ordinary Palestinian doesn't care who his leader is or about Zionism or occupation or terror or democracy as long as his basic needs are met.

This is the background needed to understand the Hamas victory.

The Palestinian Arabs did not vote for terror or to destroy Israel. They just voted for the party that actually has a chance to improve their day-to-day lives. The party that actually has social programs and builds schools and hospitals. The party that is not headed by "leaders" who live in expensive villas.

The average Palestinian remembers quite well that only a few years ago, they had jobs and they had their pride. They know that Israel treated them better than any Arab leader ever has. Certainly they are subject to brainwashing from the constant incitement against Israel and Jews in their media, but fundamentally their main concern is how to provide for their families with pride, not Israel. It was clear that Fatah would not ever do anything for them. This was highlighted by the chaos in Gaza after the Israeli withdrawal and the PA's incompetence at actually leading.

So, ironically, Israel helped elect Hamas. Also ironically, in what was perhaps the first free election the Palestinian Arabs ever had, they decided to kick out the leaders who screwed them over. And the final irony is that the US and EU backed the leaders who were screwing the Palestinians, which will not help world influence in the future.

The interesting part is that for all of its anti-Israel positions, Hamas will have no choice but to deal with Israel in some capacity, or else it will fail the people who elected it. If Hamas refuses to work with Israel at all, the Palestinians won't be able to cross the border at all, and vital services like water and electricity will end up disappearing. Nothing moderates like pragmatism. Terror will still continue and be supported indirectly by Hamas but if Hamas wants what is best for its people it will have to work with the enemy.

From Israel's perspective, it should emphasize the fact that it has no problem with Palestinian Arabs themselves and it will do anything possible to help them as long as it doesn't jeopardize Israel's own security. At this point Hamas needs Israel much more than Israel needs Hamas but since there is now a working democracy in Gaza and the West Bank, Hamas has to be much more careful as to how it acts, both in relations to the people and to Israel.

A major danger to worry about is that Hamas will demolish the democratic process and create yet another Islamist theocracy. If that is their aim, things are much less predictable.

As far as the peace process goes - there never was a peace process, just a process where Israel keeps giving concessions in exchange for nothing. Stopping such a "peace process" is a very desirable outcome from these elections, and detente is much better than a "peace process" punctuated by daily terror attacks.

Anti-semitism, courtesy of the World Economic Forum

The World Economic Forum happening now in Davos, Switzerland, included a booklet that included an anti-semitic and anti-Israel screed of the types normally only seen in fringe websites. Every delegate got one.

Excerpts:

Boycott Israel
Mazin Qumsiyeh

Global civil society ought to boycott Israel until it ends its apartheid-like treatment of Palestinians, says Mazin Qumsiyeh

Millions of activists have come to see an organic link between the occupation and colonization of Palestine and diverse and pressing global issues ranging from the war on Iraq to global poverty.
Those who advocate political Zionism cannot defend it on its own merits, so they focus instead on diverting attention and distorting reality. The best example of this is ignoring the cause of the disease and focusing attention on one of its many symptoms – violence of the natives against the colonial settlers, but not the vastly more deadly violence of the colonizers on native people. The idea is that if we vilify the natives and make them look subhuman, we will not be criticized for killing them and taking their lands.
This is an old strategy to justify the pillaging. It was used by the French in Algeria, by European colonizers in the Americas, by apartheid South Africa, by the Americans in Vietnam and in hundreds of other places where western economic and colonial interests came into conflict with the rights of indigenous people.

Israeli apartheid

Zionism not only supposes that Jewish people, including converts, enjoy ethnic, national or historical rights to Palestine, but also that these rights are superior to the rights of the native population. Unlike in South Africa, where black labour was needed, Zionism wanted the natives out. Simply put, the goal of Zionism was to create a state by, for and of “the Jewish people everywhere” to the exclusion of most of the native people and then to ensure that the minority that remained at all odds is not treated equally.

Zionism represented a colonial British venture later taken up as one of many possible responses to discrimination in Europe. Other responses to discrimination such as socialism and humanism were available and had at least equal strength.
Zionism can be seen as the 19th century-style chauvinistic, ethnocentric – mostly Ashkenazi (central European Jewish) – nationalistic response to prevalent European chauvinistic ethnocentric nationalisms. It is in that sense an attempt at assimilation by some Jews following a now outdated European colonial model.

It is not, therefore, surprising that the Zionist lobby has been pushing America into a neo-colonial perpetuation of these outmoded forms of human relations. In a society that values equality and separation of church and state, a concerted media campaign justifies “pre-emptive” invasion of other countries, religious apartheid, sectarianism, ethnic cleansing and putting walls around ghettoized “undesired” people. Zionist apologists support equality in America and Europe, but tolerate discrimination and exclusion of Palestinian refugees in Palestine/Israel for being not Jewish. Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent by groups ranging from the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee to “think-tanks” in our nation’s capital to promote such bankrupt ideas.

The relentless efforts of many to defend apartheid and separation can only be described as symptoms of cognitive dissonance at best and racism at worst. In their Orwellian world, occupation becomes “security”, a relentless war of colonization and occupation becomes “advancing democracy”, an apartheid wall becomes a “security fence”, being anti- or post-Zionist is morphed into being anti-Jewish, and “moderation” becomes a code word for shredding international law and basic human rights.

Our demands

In July 2005, more than 170 Palestinian civil society organizations issued a historic document. It articulated Israel’s persistent violations of international and humanitarian laws and conventions and called upon “international civil society organizations and people of conscience all over the world to impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era”.

The call stated that “these non-violent punitive measures should be maintained until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law by ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall; recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194” (which the Arabs never accepted - EoZ)

We propose that global civil society take this call seriously and build a coalition open to all people for a global Movement Against Zionism or a global Movement Against Israeli Apartheid. This would bring peace with justice to all people regardless of their religion or ethnicity. It would also contribute to exposing American government-led programmes of domination and hegemony in the Middle East, most aptly revealed by its support of Zionism.

CV Mazin Qumsiyeh

Mazin Qumsiyeh has served on the faculties of Duke and Yale universities. His latest book is Sharing the Land of Canaan: Human Rights and the Israeli-Palestinian Struggle. He is involved in many campaigns supporting Palestinian rights.

I didn't notice anything in this article about the discrimination of non-Muslims in Arab countries, about denouncing Palestinian terror, about the plight of Jewish refugees from Arab countries, about the overwhelming desire on the part of the Arab world desire to ethnically cleanse the Middle East of Jews.

Must have been an oversight, because, after all, the writer cares so much about human rights. I'm sure he's written other articles about Saudi apartheid or how the Lebanese treat Palestinian Arabs, and calling for economic boycotts against Yemen for expelling its Jews.

UPDATE: SoccerDad found that he was indeed an instructor at Duke - of genetics.

A senior Iranian official threatened that Tehran may forcibly prevent oil export via the Straits of Hormuz if the UN imposed economic sanctions due to Iran's nuclear program, an Iranian news Web site said on Monday.

This is the first time an Iranian official makes military threats in a public statement on Tehran's recent disagreements with the West.

I hope it happens.

It has now been over four years since 9/11. Analysts and politicians have been falling over themselves looking for the "root causes" of terror. The real, practical root cause is obvious but uncomfortable so people naturally veer away from admitting it.

The root cause is a combination of the fact that Islamism is a political ideology that wants nothing less than world domination, together with the fact that oil revenue gives the Islamists the power to actually influence world events.

The fact that Islamism is a political movement makes people uncomfortable because it clothes itself as a religious movement, and no one wants to restrict religion. The fact that petrodollars fund terror makes people uncomfortable because any disruption of the flow of oil from the Gulf would cause worldwide economic chaos.

What we needed, immediately after 9/11, was an energy-independence Manhattan project. I hope it is not too late to start it.

The money to fund it should come from the massive defense budget. Putting only a few high-tech weapons projects on hold for a few years would pay for it without much effort, and eliminating our dependence on Arab oil is solidly a self-defense initiative.

If there were no oil revenues there would have been no Saddam, no Saudi madrassas, no al-Qaeda, no Iranian threat, no Hamas, no Hezbollah. Islam would just be a relatively harmless religion.

Since such a Manhattan project is not going to happen anytime soon without a major external event, I think that the world would be better off if Iran indeed stops the oil supply (or, as is feared, they end up contaminating the entire Gulf with radiation from an accident.) This would wake up the US quickly. More importantly, the free market would kick in, because alternate fuels would fast become economical.

It would hurt, no doubt. But in a few years we would be seeing clean and safe fuel sources emerge, reducing pollution, helping the environment and incidentally saving the world from Islamic terror - if it is not too late.

Reviews! I feel so important!

At least three blogs have reviewed the blogs nominated for Best Design in the JIB awards, and while there is a snowball's chance in hell that this blog would win anything it is still nice to be reviewed. Luckily, most reviews aren't vicious.

Ezzie started off during the first round with this:

ElderofZiyon's header is okay, though I don't like the fade all the way to white. I also am not a fan of pure white backgrounds, though it actually looks decent on his blog. Fonts and font colors are good, links are well organized. The message board is a nice addition, though appearance-wise it's kind of ugly.

In response, I realized that my tagboard colors were indeed ugly and changed them to match the blog colors.

After I miraculously made it to the finals, I got an extensive review from Chaim of Life of Rubin:

This is a site I do check out from time to time. It’s a good site, and I’m a fan. As far as design goes, this is another “simplistic” look. The white content color is always a good choice. This enables people to read the actual posts without any squinting or eyes glare afterwards. I’m sorry, but if you have a blog with a black color content background, I don’t usally read your blog at your site. If it’s a blog that I like, I read it through blogines. The white on black just kills my eyes.

I like the header, good choice of image, but I can’t tell if you left some of those blogger html DIV headers there because you wanted to or because your not sure how to delete them. If it’s the latter contact me, I’ll help you, since my own blog is a reworked version of that blogger template.

I like the sidebar, it has a very good source of information and all the links are divided up into through categories. I’m not a fan of the embedded chat. It slows down loading time, and honestly who really uses them that often. The other thing I don’t like is the block quote box/form used. For a blog that quotes often from other articles etc, it should have a less noticeable background. It sticks out at you too much, it’s the first thing you notice when you load the page. Overall, I like the design, it pulls off simple but neat at the same time.

I appreciate the thoroughness of the review!

To address the points made:

I like the dividing lines even though they are the default Blogger ones. I think I even used them in places beyond the default, if I recall correctly.
I always hope that people would use the tagboard more. I worked hard to find one that looks decent and doesn't cause pop-up ads. (I used to have a much busier sidebar, along with scrolling news, but the pop-ups and CPU utilization became crazy. But I want to keep the tagboard. Its main problem is that it cannot handle apostrophes.)
I actually like the background color for the quote boxes. It matches the template well. I've noticed on some browsers/monitors it is more noticeable than on others.
I agree that white on black is hard to read, but I am pretty sure it is how teenagers ensure that their parents aren't reading their blogs.

But thanks again for the kind words!

Jewlicious, which is an extremely well-designed blog itself, also weighed in:

The Elder has clearly done as much as can be done with a blogspot blog. The side links are good an chock full o’ links. The color scheme seems to be meant to reflect the color of the Kotel in the header while still maintaining that whole “this blog contains many serious and important ideas” look. Love the name too but how far can one really push a blogspot template?

Good question! I never thought of this blog as pushing the limits of Blogspot, and perhaps this review is an overanalysis, but it sure makes me feel "serious and important" to have people spend so much effort reviewing this.

SoccerDad weighs in:

It's a shame that Elder of Ziyon didn't get more support in other categories. He undertakes the important task of making sure that his readers learn from history. Much of what is happening now, has happened before. Still I've always loved the design of his blog.

Which makes me feel guiltyfor not having done any Palestine Post-ings for a while.

I appreciate all the kind words!

Notable articles

An interview of a German Holocaust historian in Der Spiegel.

It's impossible to combat obsessive historical revisionism using arguments and even the most basic logic. It is quite simply absurd to, on the one hand thank Hitler's Germany for the Holocaust -- which unfortunately does happen -- and then in the next breath say that the murder of six million Jews never took place. It's hard to understand how a state, which accepts aspects of modern life, is able to make obvious lunacy official national policy.

An interesting analysis of Iran's goals, mostly in line with mine and with some points I disagree with.

Iran's Israel policy is a sub-set of its US policy, not the other way around. Given the current war of words between Iran and Israel, this is an important distinction seemingly missed by many of the media and pro-Israel lawmakers in Washington...

Who will cave in first?

Hamas?

Mahmoud Zahar, a top Hamas leader, struck back in the campaign's final days, playing to Hamas's political base in the destitute Gaza neighborhoods and refugee camps that have supplied many Hamas suicide attackers and that revere them as martyrs. Before crowds of thousands, he and other candidates went out of their way to deny they would ever give up their insistence on the destruction of Israel and the right to armed struggle.

Zahar hammered home a fiery stump speech at several campaign stops, including one extravaganza that featured masked and camouflaged Hamas performers leaping through flaming hoops and rappelling down buildings into an enraptured crowd.

Hamas's armed wing, the Qassam Brigades, will never be dismantled, as Israel and the US-backed road map peace plan demand, he said.

''They will remain, they will grow, they will be armed more and more until the complete liberation of all Palestine," he said, stressing that Palestine includes not just the West Bank and Gaza Strip that Israel occupied in 1967, but all of Israel as well.

He vowed to send the brigades to take up positions along Gaza's borders -- a step Israeli officials would surely view as a provocation -- to prevent Israel from sending its army back into the strip it vacated last summer, as Israeli officials have threatened to do if they deem it necessary for security.

Or the West?

A senior State Department official said the United States would not deal directly with members of Hamas in a new government.

"Our position is simple, in order to be an effective partner for peace, the Palestinians have to accept the idea of the state of Israel and renounce violence. That is currently the position of the Palestinian government."

"We will not accept terror on any basis," he added.

Asked directly whether the U.S. would recognize a new Palestinian government that contained large numbers of Hamas members, he said: "Let's see what happens first."

"It is very difficult for us to be in the position of negotiating or talking to Hamas unless there’s a very clear renunciation of terrorism," said Mr Blair at his monthly press conference today.

The answer is that, as always, wishful thinking will replace real facts. Hamas will use the PLO playbook and start floating possible less-terroristic scenarios to the West while continuing to support full Jihad against all Jews in the Middle East in Arabic. The West (including Israel) will want to believe that Hamas has turned over a new leaf so much that it will all ignore the inconvenient calls for genocide and jump on every word or omitted words that could be construed as being more moderate.

Get ready to see the words "moderate" and "Hamas" go together more often to justify the inevitable thaw, and get ready to see Palestinian Islamic Jihad used as the corresponding "extremists."

The irony, of course, is that Hamas is no less moderate than Fatah is, but Fatah had better PR and better liars. But in the end, both groups explicitly demand the destruction of Israel, both groups explicitly cheer suicide bombings and call the dead terrorists "martyrs", and both groups' supporters celebrate dead Jews - and dead Americans.

Made it to the finals!

Amazingly, this blog made it to the finals in the JIB awards for Best Designed Blog!

I would like to once again emphasize that the header logo and color scheme of the blog came from the always beautiful and talented Daughter of Ziyon, who is really starting to irritate me with her now having gotten better than me at guitar, keyboards, Photoshop and general design including web design.

Check out the competition and vote!

Interesting article on Iranian worldview

This is a very long article where the author claims to interview some Iranian politicians and military men. The author is clearly sympathetic towards his subjects and it is hard to know how much of what they say is true and how much is bluster. Also, it is not clear that the average Iranian agrees with them - the level of patriotism in Iran is almost certainly not as described. Even so, their analyses are interesting. One excerpt:

When I asked them what Iran would do if the U.S. was serious in attacking Iranian nuclear sites, Hussein said, "Then they open hell's gates towards themselves," and smiled. When I asked him to elaborate more, he continued, "In the papers there is always talk about air attacks on Iranian installations by Israel or the U.S. This type of psychological warfare is used to divert our attention. We know for a fact that no two Western wars are similar and we are sure that the Israelis would not risk an air attack. We know there are at least three possible scenarios of attacking these sites, including using their submarines in the Persian Gulf, commandos from the sea, or Mojahedin Khalgh trained in Israel and Azerbaijan to destroy the Bushehr nuclear power plant from the inside, but these are only plans. We have even more plans for how to confront them as well. This is a game of chess and we have practiced many different scenarios." Ali, another revolutionary guard, smiled and responded, "We have indicated directly and indirectly that with the first bullet shot at Iran, the map of the Middle East will be changed forever. Many American puppet regimes and dictators will fall and there will never be a government like what is now in Israel. The Apartheid system in Israel will be dismantled and a democratic government which embraces Jews, Christians, and Moslems equally will come to power. Millions of Palestinians will return home and millions of European and American migrants will return back from Palestine to their countries."

When I mentioned the immense firepower of the U.S. and the chemical, biological, and nuclear arsenal of Israel Hussein smiled and said, "We are ready, bring them on." Then after chuckling he said, "We have our sensors in place in the U.S., Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, and most Arab countries. We know ahead of the time when they are coming, and since Mr. Bush has given American democracy along with the preemptive strike as the right of everybody in the world, we are going to use it and use it effectively. We are present in most of the military briefings of the U.S. in Afghanistan and Iraq. As soon as we see that it is imminent we hit them and hit them hard. If U.S. commanders used a sledgehammer to break a walnut in Iraq, we will use two sledgehammers for a hazelnut everywhere in the Middle East! Whether the U.S. or Israel attacks us, we will consider it as Israeli attack since we know how much power they have over the U.S. political and decision-making system." When I asked why they would hold Israel responsible if the U.S. attacked unilaterally, he responded that the American policy in Middle East is designed and dictated by Jewish organizations such as the AIPAC (American Israeli Public Affairs Committee) which in turn gets its agenda and policy from Israel. "Don't you remember the role of three Jewish Musketeer's in Iraq invasion?" He meant Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, and Michael Ledeen. Ali added, "The U.S. political system is under heavy pressure from Zionist organizations. Look at the articles published in U.S. papers about Iran. Most of the authors are Zionists strongly affiliated with AIPAC. Most of these guys dream of an Israel which extends from the Nile to the Euphrates. This is dangerous ideology. We must stop this at some stage and this is the best time. Many Western immigrants in Israel are thinking and working toward it. Look at the Mayflower ship which brought a handful of Europeans to America, the American natives lost their identity and culture, and the rest is the history. We do not want this to happen to the Middle Eastern countries."

Jamshid said, "Since her inception by the Europeans, Israel has had four wars with her neighbors and in three of those wars she obtained more land. That is until 1979, the year the Islamic Republic was born in Iran, and since then she has not started any wars, since she knew she cannot, because Iran would definitely intervene. They want more land for all these Russian and other immigrants and that is why they put pressure on the U.S. to attack Iran."

I asked Jamshid what the possible response could be, he said very calmly, "If our peaceful nuclear installations are attacked, no doubt we will take out that chocolate factory in Dimona, and not only that one, but all other shops which sell that kind of chocolate in Israel!" He was referring to Israeli nuclear sites, and then continued, "We will make a big mess in Israel and leave it to the Europeans and the Americans to clean this mess up. Both the U.S. and Israel know that, and for that matter, if they are serious about their intention, they have to bomb not only the nuclear research centers, but all the Shahab-3 silos and to be safe many other military sites as well- and that means an all out war. We are ready for that. That is a hard job for them since finding and destroying these sites quickly is very hard," and laughed.

I asked them how they saw the war scenario. Ali said, "The possible war would be outside of Iranian borders. We have many theaters of operations including Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, the Persian Gulf and some Arab countries where U.S has troops there. We can increase the U.S. fatalities to a few dozen a day easily. In the case of Israel we are going to cause the immigration of 2-3 million European and Americans." When I asked for further explanation, he said, "Well if Iran is attacked we know who is responsible and that is when we decide that they should not live in our neighborhood." When I mentioned the Arrow anti-missiles Israelis have, he smiled. "Arrow anti-missiles are not accurate, and we know that for fact. They are working hard to improve it, but have not been successful so far. It is mainly a propaganda tool for the USraelis," stressing the last word with smile, before adding, "The Shahab-3 can easily take care of them. Their accuracy has been improved greatly. We have enough of them to spend more per target to increase the chance of hitting a target accurately, also do not forget we have satellite which looks at our target there and gives us real time information."

Javid, an Iran-Iraq war veteran calmly said, "There are many obstacles to the invasion of Iran. Iran is four times bigger than Iraq, so the number of soldiers has to be more accordingly. The U.S. does not have that many troops, even it were to bring in NATO and can double or triple the size of troops of what is has now in Iraq, there are still a lot of shortfalls. Iranian people have a very distinct culture and history which make them stand out as a solid nation. Two main elements which play important role in the defense of the country are nationalism and Shi'ism. These two are our real nuclear weapon. Both played an important role in the Iraq-Iran war. During the chaos of the revolution where there was no formal army to stand in front of hundreds of Iraqi tanks, ordinary people took up arms and stood in front of the Iraqis heavy army and stopped them for months. Young citizens took up grenades and threw themselves under the tanks and stopped Iraqi tanks. Saddam thought the war would take a few weeks, and although he was backed by Russia, Europe, U.S. and the Arab world, it took eight years and at the end he did not gain a meter of Iranian soil."

When I mentioned the superiority of U.S. military hardware, software, as well as their tactics he said, "Even if they could bring few thousand more soldiers and the best hardware they can not get to Tehran- conquering Iran is wishful thinking a corn-grower from Kansas might believe. First of all, in Iran people always fought against invaders and the army helped them. The U.S. can defeat the Iranian army, but not the Iranian people. There has never been any army in the world that could defeat a nation. Vietnam is the recent history lesson. On the basis of a military evaluation done by some western analysts and institutions, in any invasion of Iran 200,000 to 500,000 troops will be lost. Which country or countries are going to handle that amount of loss just for a problem which there is a diplomatic solution?" When I raised my eyebrow at his figures he got agitated and said, "Well, look, Saddam Hussein penetrated into Iran about 20-60 kilometers and lost about half a million men. Since the Americans have a better army and equipments, then they will have fewer casualties than Saddam. However, anybody who wants to get to Tehran which is a long way from the Iraqi border must pay more". Then he laughed and said, "Otherwise if they want to pay a friendly visit to us, then they are welcome!" He continued on, "Most Iranian cities are near a mountain or in a valley, and it is very easy for a few fighters to go to those mountains that overlook the cities and make hell for the invaders. That is why as a nation we had only two major defeats in the last 2,500 years: one by Greeks and one by Arab Moslem armies. Suppose that an imaginary army comes to Iran; to be successful that army has to get control of at least 10-12 major cities which have more than a million in population, since if any of these cities are ignored, then their mission is not accomplished and that city would quickly become the main point of resistance. Iraq had two cities and quickly was overcome by the invaders. Basra was mainly Shiite and Baghdad was partly Shiite and you know that the Shiite hate Saddam. The reason was that Saddam was a dictator, who did not have popular support, and many disliked him. Iraq had gone through two terrible wars and exhausted its resources physically and mentally. The government of Iran is not like Saddam's, it still has many supporters and even the opposition groups want to correct its shortcomings and not topple the regime. In case of such an invasion, it will inevitably back up the government. Iran came out of the war with Iraq quickly and now it produces his own armaments including airplanes, rockets, missiles, tanks, and heavy armor."

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!

All the fun passed me by

Of all the articles that very angry liberals posted about the JIB awards, especially the Israel Advocacy category, not one bothered mentioning this blog.

Is it because I am careful not to mix up Islam with Islamism, and Palestinian Arabs with their leaders?
Or perhaps because I am not slavishly pro-Bush?
Or maybe simply because it is too inconsequential to mention?