Presbyterians Usher in the Jewish Holiday of PurimDivestment and the War Against the Jews, Part 2010.
The Presbyterian Church in the United States (PCUSA) is about to release a report which denounces Israel as a “racist” nation which has absolutely no historical, covenantal, or theological right to the Holy Land. The report calls for the United States to withhold financial and military aid to Israel and for boycotts and sanctions against Israel. That’s not all. The report also endorses a Palestinian “right of return” and “apologizes to Palestinians for even conceding that Israel has a right to exist.” According to the press release, it also states that Israel’s history begins only with the Holocaust and that Israel is “a nation mistakenly created by Western powers at the expense of the Palestinian people to solve the ‘Jewish problem’.”
In addition, PCUSA has also resolved to divest in companies that supply military equipment to the American Army, e.g. Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, etc.
In 2004, this Church became the first mainline Protestant denomination in America to “approve a policy of divestment from Israel.” This was rescinded, but in 2008 the Church “created a committee dominated by seven activists holding strong anti-Israel beliefs. The lone member sympathetic to Israel, quit in protest when he saw their radical agenda.”
The Simon Wiesenthal Center notes that 46 members of the US Congress and Senate are Presbyterians and fears potentially “significant repercussions in the political domain” as well as a negative “impact on interfaith relations.” They urge us all to protest directly to the top leadership of the PCUSA “to stop this dangerous campaign which denies the legitimacy and security of Israel,” and to “reach out to your Presbyterian friends.”
Friday, February 26, 2010
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Use the drones vs Iran
This week the Israeli Air Force (IAF) held a ceremony spotlighting the "operational acceptance" of its biggest unmanned aerial vehicle, the 4.5-ton Heron TP, or "Eitan." The far-flying UAV, with a wingspan almost as long as a 737 airliner, appeared on the runway with a comparatively diminutive F-15 alongside it. The IAF already rushed this UAV into action during the 2008–'09 war in Gaza, so the ceremony really served as a reminder to Iran that its drone fleets can reach the nation. But how will Israel use them?
The Eitan can carry a ton of payload and can reach Iran's nuclear facilities, which the United Nations last week determined is hiding an active weapons program. But that does not mean these will be used as bombers. The IAF has been buying and upgrading airplanes specifically for long-distance strikes such as a potential attack against Iran. At least 50 F-15 Raam and F-16 Soufa aircraft have been converted by installing extra fuel tanks for greater range and countermeasures to defeat radar and missiles. So maybe the warplane/UAV tag team presented at the "operational acceptance ceremony" speaks to how manned and unmanned aircraft will work together on missions: The drone provides information while the manned airplanes drop the guided munitions.
Working from high altitudes, the Eitan will likely be used to provide prestrike information on targets, to eavesdrop on electronic communications and to send battle damage assessments back after an attack. It will also undoubtably be used to monitor any retaliation for the airstrike—seeking rocket launches and eavesdropping on Iran. The onboard power required to electronically jam radar and communications equipment is not in the Eitan, Israeli defense industry officials told the trade journal Defense News. But the ability to carry so much weight opens up questions about the drones' ability to conduct long-range, high-risk bombing missions on their own.
Early literature suggested the Eitan would have a role in shooting down enemy missiles in flight as well as in bombing targets. But the craft at the ceremony featured a pod under the nose that contains only sensors, which can track moving targets at high resolution, day or night. Eitanhas the eyes of a predator, but seemingly no claws. Unless, of course, the less public Israeli Eitan fleet has hidden surprises in UAVs' bays or tacked onto the wings at various hard points. But just providing information could greatly assist with an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities—especially if Israeli special forces are present on the ground. Deep in enemy territory, they would be avid consumers of such recon.
Israel has been at the forefront of UAV development for decades, and taught the U.S. a thing or two about drones. The U.S. Air Force flew unmanned recon drones called Lightning Bugs during the 1970s in Vietnam, but shut down all its UAV funding until the mid-1980s. Israel changed world opinion about UAVs in 1982 when they used small UAVs to trick radar installations into becoming active during the battle in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley; manned airplanes then moved in to destroy the radar sites after the unmanned planes revealed their locations. This is not the kind of mission the Eitan will fly—they soar at high altitudes that make them difficult targets, and flirting with surface-to-air missile sites is not their role. The United States realized UAV potential only after the Bekaa Valley campaign. Still, during the 1990s, the Pentagon spent only $3 billion on UAV development, procurement and operations. It took wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to change all that: The Defense Department is spending $5.4 billion on UAVs this year alone.
America sees the advantage of UAVs in insurgent campaigns, both urban and rural. But in a "big war" operation, when enemy radar and missiles are robust, as they are in Iran, the way Israel could use its UAVs is worth watching. Israel's long-distance Eitans are not that new, but the way they could be used during a complex air raid could be groundbreaking. Literally and figuratively.
The Eitan can carry a ton of payload and can reach Iran's nuclear facilities, which the United Nations last week determined is hiding an active weapons program. But that does not mean these will be used as bombers. The IAF has been buying and upgrading airplanes specifically for long-distance strikes such as a potential attack against Iran. At least 50 F-15 Raam and F-16 Soufa aircraft have been converted by installing extra fuel tanks for greater range and countermeasures to defeat radar and missiles. So maybe the warplane/UAV tag team presented at the "operational acceptance ceremony" speaks to how manned and unmanned aircraft will work together on missions: The drone provides information while the manned airplanes drop the guided munitions.
Working from high altitudes, the Eitan will likely be used to provide prestrike information on targets, to eavesdrop on electronic communications and to send battle damage assessments back after an attack. It will also undoubtably be used to monitor any retaliation for the airstrike—seeking rocket launches and eavesdropping on Iran. The onboard power required to electronically jam radar and communications equipment is not in the Eitan, Israeli defense industry officials told the trade journal Defense News. But the ability to carry so much weight opens up questions about the drones' ability to conduct long-range, high-risk bombing missions on their own.
Early literature suggested the Eitan would have a role in shooting down enemy missiles in flight as well as in bombing targets. But the craft at the ceremony featured a pod under the nose that contains only sensors, which can track moving targets at high resolution, day or night. Eitanhas the eyes of a predator, but seemingly no claws. Unless, of course, the less public Israeli Eitan fleet has hidden surprises in UAVs' bays or tacked onto the wings at various hard points. But just providing information could greatly assist with an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities—especially if Israeli special forces are present on the ground. Deep in enemy territory, they would be avid consumers of such recon.
Israel has been at the forefront of UAV development for decades, and taught the U.S. a thing or two about drones. The U.S. Air Force flew unmanned recon drones called Lightning Bugs during the 1970s in Vietnam, but shut down all its UAV funding until the mid-1980s. Israel changed world opinion about UAVs in 1982 when they used small UAVs to trick radar installations into becoming active during the battle in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley; manned airplanes then moved in to destroy the radar sites after the unmanned planes revealed their locations. This is not the kind of mission the Eitan will fly—they soar at high altitudes that make them difficult targets, and flirting with surface-to-air missile sites is not their role. The United States realized UAV potential only after the Bekaa Valley campaign. Still, during the 1990s, the Pentagon spent only $3 billion on UAV development, procurement and operations. It took wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to change all that: The Defense Department is spending $5.4 billion on UAVs this year alone.
America sees the advantage of UAVs in insurgent campaigns, both urban and rural. But in a "big war" operation, when enemy radar and missiles are robust, as they are in Iran, the way Israel could use its UAVs is worth watching. Israel's long-distance Eitans are not that new, but the way they could be used during a complex air raid could be groundbreaking. Literally and figuratively.
Presbyterian Church's again blames wrong party
February 23, 2010
A statement from the Reverend Gradye Parsons, Stated Clerk of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) regarding the work of the General Assembly Middle East Study Team.
A human rights organization within the Jewish community has issued a statement about the report to the 219th General Assembly (2010) from the General Assembly committee to prepare a comprehensive study focused on Israel/Palestine. The statement says, “…we are deeply troubled that current moves underway in the Church radically depart from its 2008 commitment that its review of Middle East policies would be balanced and fair.”
The Middle East Study Team’s report, which will be released by Friday, March 5, 2010, contains a letter to the American Jewish community. The study team begins the letter by saying:
We want to be sure to say to you in no uncertain terms: We support the existence of Israel as a sovereign nation within secure and recognized borders. No “but,” no “let’s get this out of the way so we can say what we really want to say.” We support Israel’s existence as granted by the U.N. General Assembly. We support Israel’s existence as a home for the Jewish people. We have said this before, and we say this again. We say it because we believe it; we say it because we want it to continue to be true.
The team, which engaged in intensive study, meetings, and travel to the Middle East since their appointment following the 218th General Assembly (2008), continues:
And, at the same time, we are distressed by the continued policies that surround the Occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights, in particular. Many of us come to this work out of a love for Israel. And it is because of this love that we continue to say the things we say about the excesses of Occupation, the settlement infrastructure, and the absolute death knell it is sounding for the hopes of a two-state solution, a solution that the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has supported for more than sixty years.
Several previous General Assemblies of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) have adopted statements about Israel/Palestine. Two excerpts:
In 2004: The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has approved numerous resolutions on Israel and Palestine, repeatedly affirming, clearly and unequivocally, Israel’s right to exist within permanent, recognized, and “secure” borders (for example: 1969, 1974, 1977, 1983, 1989, etc.). It has deplored the cycle of escalating violence—carried out by both Palestinians and Israelis—which is rooted in Israel’s continued occupation of Palestinian territories (cf. statements of successive assemblies since 1967). Presbyterians have continued to be concerned about the loss of so many innocent lives of Israelis and Palestinians (see “Resolution on the Middle East,” approved in 1997, and “Resolution on Israel and Palestine: End the Occupation Now,” approved in 2003).” GA Minutes, 2004, p. 66.
In 2006: We call upon the church…”To work through peaceful means with American and Israeli Jewish, American and Palestinian Muslim, and Palestinian Christian communities and their affiliated organizations towards the creation of a socially, economically, geographically, and politically viable and secure Palestinian state, alongside an equally viable and secure Israeli state, both of which have a right to exist.” GA Minutes, 2006, p. 945.
I join the Middle East Study Team that will be reporting to this summer’s General Assembly in asking all people to continue to pray, and work, for the peace of Jerusalem."
So ask them
Why did the Palestinians not accept the UN vote to partition Palestine into Jewish and Arab state 60 years ago? There could have been a Palestinian State for 60 years.
2. Why do the Palestinians raise their kids to commit suicide by killing innocent Israeli civilians?
3. Why do they teach Jew hatred in primary grades?
4. Why are their summer camps terrorist training camps?
5. Why do they send missiles to try to blow up schools in Israel daily?
6. Why do they try and run guns from ambulances?
7. Why did Jordan not set up a Palestinian state from 1948-1967 when they controlled the West Bank?
8. Show me one source about an Arab Palestinian people in history prior to 1930?
Palestine was the name the Romans gave the area and Palstinians were Jews.
9. Israeli Prime Minister Barak told Arafat he could take 98% of the West Bank and Gaza and Arafat walked out and started infada 2.
10. Israel is on record willing to create a Palestinian state but not to people who won't accept her existence and openly say they want to destroy her.
A statement from the Reverend Gradye Parsons, Stated Clerk of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) regarding the work of the General Assembly Middle East Study Team.
A human rights organization within the Jewish community has issued a statement about the report to the 219th General Assembly (2010) from the General Assembly committee to prepare a comprehensive study focused on Israel/Palestine. The statement says, “…we are deeply troubled that current moves underway in the Church radically depart from its 2008 commitment that its review of Middle East policies would be balanced and fair.”
The Middle East Study Team’s report, which will be released by Friday, March 5, 2010, contains a letter to the American Jewish community. The study team begins the letter by saying:
We want to be sure to say to you in no uncertain terms: We support the existence of Israel as a sovereign nation within secure and recognized borders. No “but,” no “let’s get this out of the way so we can say what we really want to say.” We support Israel’s existence as granted by the U.N. General Assembly. We support Israel’s existence as a home for the Jewish people. We have said this before, and we say this again. We say it because we believe it; we say it because we want it to continue to be true.
The team, which engaged in intensive study, meetings, and travel to the Middle East since their appointment following the 218th General Assembly (2008), continues:
And, at the same time, we are distressed by the continued policies that surround the Occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights, in particular. Many of us come to this work out of a love for Israel. And it is because of this love that we continue to say the things we say about the excesses of Occupation, the settlement infrastructure, and the absolute death knell it is sounding for the hopes of a two-state solution, a solution that the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has supported for more than sixty years.
Several previous General Assemblies of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) have adopted statements about Israel/Palestine. Two excerpts:
In 2004: The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has approved numerous resolutions on Israel and Palestine, repeatedly affirming, clearly and unequivocally, Israel’s right to exist within permanent, recognized, and “secure” borders (for example: 1969, 1974, 1977, 1983, 1989, etc.). It has deplored the cycle of escalating violence—carried out by both Palestinians and Israelis—which is rooted in Israel’s continued occupation of Palestinian territories (cf. statements of successive assemblies since 1967). Presbyterians have continued to be concerned about the loss of so many innocent lives of Israelis and Palestinians (see “Resolution on the Middle East,” approved in 1997, and “Resolution on Israel and Palestine: End the Occupation Now,” approved in 2003).” GA Minutes, 2004, p. 66.
In 2006: We call upon the church…”To work through peaceful means with American and Israeli Jewish, American and Palestinian Muslim, and Palestinian Christian communities and their affiliated organizations towards the creation of a socially, economically, geographically, and politically viable and secure Palestinian state, alongside an equally viable and secure Israeli state, both of which have a right to exist.” GA Minutes, 2006, p. 945.
I join the Middle East Study Team that will be reporting to this summer’s General Assembly in asking all people to continue to pray, and work, for the peace of Jerusalem."
So ask them
Why did the Palestinians not accept the UN vote to partition Palestine into Jewish and Arab state 60 years ago? There could have been a Palestinian State for 60 years.
2. Why do the Palestinians raise their kids to commit suicide by killing innocent Israeli civilians?
3. Why do they teach Jew hatred in primary grades?
4. Why are their summer camps terrorist training camps?
5. Why do they send missiles to try to blow up schools in Israel daily?
6. Why do they try and run guns from ambulances?
7. Why did Jordan not set up a Palestinian state from 1948-1967 when they controlled the West Bank?
8. Show me one source about an Arab Palestinian people in history prior to 1930?
Palestine was the name the Romans gave the area and Palstinians were Jews.
9. Israeli Prime Minister Barak told Arafat he could take 98% of the West Bank and Gaza and Arafat walked out and started infada 2.
10. Israel is on record willing to create a Palestinian state but not to people who won't accept her existence and openly say they want to destroy her.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Humor
> By the Israeli humorist, Efraim Dishon
>
>
>
> Israel is the only country in the world with bus drivers and taxi drivers
> who read Spinoza and Maimonides.
> where no one cares what rules say when an important goal can be
> achieved by bending them.
> where reservists are bossed around and commanded by officers, male and
> female, younger than their own children.
> where "small talk" consists of loud, angry debate over politics and
> religion.
> where the coffee is already so good that Starbucks went bankrupt trying
> to break into the local market.
> whose soldiers eat three sets of salads a day, none of which contain
> any lettuce (which is not really a food), and where olives ARE a food and
> even a main course in a meal, rather than something one tosses into a
> martini.
> where one is unlikely to dig a cellar without hitting ancient
> archaeological artifacts.
> where the leading writers in the country take buses.
> where the graffiti is in Hebrew.
> where the "black folks" walking around all wear yarmulkes.
> that has a National Book Week, during which almost everyone attends a
> book fair and buys books.
> where the ultra-Orthodox Jews beat up the police and not the other way
> around.
>
> Israel is the only country in the world where inviting someone "out for a
> drink" means drinking cola, coffee or tea. where bank robbers kiss the
> mezuzah as they leave with their loot. where people read English, write
> Hebrew, and joke in Yiddish. that introduces applications of high-tech
> gadgets and devices, such as printers in banks that print out your statement
> on demand, years ahead of the United States and decades ahead of Europe .
> where everyone on a flight gets to know one another before the plane lands.
> In many cases, they also get to know the pilot and all about his health or
> marital problems. where no one has a foreign accent because everyone has a
> foreign accent.
> where people cuss using dirty words in Russian or Arabic because Hebrew
> has never developed them.
> where patients visiting physicians end up giving the doctor advice.
> where everyone strikes up conversations while waiting in lines.
> where people call an attache case a "James Bond" and the "@" sign is
> called a "strudel".
>
> Israel is the only country in the world where there is the most mysterious
> and mystical calm in the streets on Yom Kippur, which cannot be explained
> unless you have experienced it; and sunsets in Jerusalem are gorgeous every
> evening.
>
>
>
> Israel is the only country in the world with bus drivers and taxi drivers
> who read Spinoza and Maimonides.
> where no one cares what rules say when an important goal can be
> achieved by bending them.
> where reservists are bossed around and commanded by officers, male and
> female, younger than their own children.
> where "small talk" consists of loud, angry debate over politics and
> religion.
> where the coffee is already so good that Starbucks went bankrupt trying
> to break into the local market.
> whose soldiers eat three sets of salads a day, none of which contain
> any lettuce (which is not really a food), and where olives ARE a food and
> even a main course in a meal, rather than something one tosses into a
> martini.
> where one is unlikely to dig a cellar without hitting ancient
> archaeological artifacts.
> where the leading writers in the country take buses.
> where the graffiti is in Hebrew.
> where the "black folks" walking around all wear yarmulkes.
> that has a National Book Week, during which almost everyone attends a
> book fair and buys books.
> where the ultra-Orthodox Jews beat up the police and not the other way
> around.
>
> Israel is the only country in the world where inviting someone "out for a
> drink" means drinking cola, coffee or tea. where bank robbers kiss the
> mezuzah as they leave with their loot. where people read English, write
> Hebrew, and joke in Yiddish. that introduces applications of high-tech
> gadgets and devices, such as printers in banks that print out your statement
> on demand, years ahead of the United States and decades ahead of Europe .
> where everyone on a flight gets to know one another before the plane lands.
> In many cases, they also get to know the pilot and all about his health or
> marital problems. where no one has a foreign accent because everyone has a
> foreign accent.
> where people cuss using dirty words in Russian or Arabic because Hebrew
> has never developed them.
> where patients visiting physicians end up giving the doctor advice.
> where everyone strikes up conversations while waiting in lines.
> where people call an attache case a "James Bond" and the "@" sign is
> called a "strudel".
>
> Israel is the only country in the world where there is the most mysterious
> and mystical calm in the streets on Yom Kippur, which cannot be explained
> unless you have experienced it; and sunsets in Jerusalem are gorgeous every
> evening.
Killing the Hamas murderer
* The Proportionate Killing of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh - Michael J. Totten
Hamas senior military commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh was a terrorist commander on a mission to acquire Iranian weapons for use against civilians. He was a combatant. Unlike his victims, he was fair game. In Dubai, he was taken out quietly without harming any of the civilians around him. If only Israel could fight all its battles this way. It would be the cleanest and least-deadly war in the history of warfare.
It's always better to take out a high-level target in person whenever possible than with a blockbuster bomb from a distance. I can't help but wonder if those griping about the recent hit in Dubai care less about the lives of real human beings than the latest excuse to bash Israel. If the Arab-Israeli conflict will continue - and it will continue - civilians on both sides should prefer that combatants be taken off the board quietly while everyone else goes about their daily business in peace. (Commentary)
Observations:
Israel's Right to Self-Defense - Gerald M. Steinberg (Wall Street Journal)
* The headlines and video images allegedly showing Israeli spies in Dubai are titillating, but they mask the serious issues involved in the death of Hamas terrorist Mahmoud al-Mabhouh. This case is the latest example of the failure of the international legal system and the UN to provide a remedy to mass terror.
* Al-Mabhouh was a cold-blooded murderer. In an interview just last year on Al Jazeera he boasted about kidnapping and then killing two Israeli soldiers. He was also a major figure in arranging arms shipments from Iran to Gaza. Al-Mabhouh shared responsibility for the thousands of rocket attacks fired at civilians in Sderot and other Israeli towns, which resulted in last year's war in Gaza.
* But international law provides no means for stopping terrorists like al-Mabhouh. Cases involving Muslim terrorists, supported by Iran, would never be pursued by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, or raised in the framework of the UN. Al-Mabhouh violated the human rights of untold Israeli civilians, but the UN's Human Rights Council has no interest in Israeli complaints.
* The bitter reality is that for Israel, international legal frameworks provide no protection and no hope of justice. Instead, these frameworks are used to exploit the rhetoric of human rights and morality to attack Israel.
* Unlike U.S. Predator strikes on jihadi terrorists in the Afghan-Pakistan border region which hardly raise an eyebrow in the West these days, there was no "collateral damage" in Dubai. No innocent civilians were hurt, no buildings were damaged. Justice was done, and al-Mabhouh's preparations for the next war ended quietly.
The writer is a professor of political studies at Bar-Ilan University and heads NGO Monitor.
Hamas senior military commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh was a terrorist commander on a mission to acquire Iranian weapons for use against civilians. He was a combatant. Unlike his victims, he was fair game. In Dubai, he was taken out quietly without harming any of the civilians around him. If only Israel could fight all its battles this way. It would be the cleanest and least-deadly war in the history of warfare.
It's always better to take out a high-level target in person whenever possible than with a blockbuster bomb from a distance. I can't help but wonder if those griping about the recent hit in Dubai care less about the lives of real human beings than the latest excuse to bash Israel. If the Arab-Israeli conflict will continue - and it will continue - civilians on both sides should prefer that combatants be taken off the board quietly while everyone else goes about their daily business in peace. (Commentary)
Observations:
Israel's Right to Self-Defense - Gerald M. Steinberg (Wall Street Journal)
* The headlines and video images allegedly showing Israeli spies in Dubai are titillating, but they mask the serious issues involved in the death of Hamas terrorist Mahmoud al-Mabhouh. This case is the latest example of the failure of the international legal system and the UN to provide a remedy to mass terror.
* Al-Mabhouh was a cold-blooded murderer. In an interview just last year on Al Jazeera he boasted about kidnapping and then killing two Israeli soldiers. He was also a major figure in arranging arms shipments from Iran to Gaza. Al-Mabhouh shared responsibility for the thousands of rocket attacks fired at civilians in Sderot and other Israeli towns, which resulted in last year's war in Gaza.
* But international law provides no means for stopping terrorists like al-Mabhouh. Cases involving Muslim terrorists, supported by Iran, would never be pursued by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, or raised in the framework of the UN. Al-Mabhouh violated the human rights of untold Israeli civilians, but the UN's Human Rights Council has no interest in Israeli complaints.
* The bitter reality is that for Israel, international legal frameworks provide no protection and no hope of justice. Instead, these frameworks are used to exploit the rhetoric of human rights and morality to attack Israel.
* Unlike U.S. Predator strikes on jihadi terrorists in the Afghan-Pakistan border region which hardly raise an eyebrow in the West these days, there was no "collateral damage" in Dubai. No innocent civilians were hurt, no buildings were damaged. Justice was done, and al-Mabhouh's preparations for the next war ended quietly.
The writer is a professor of political studies at Bar-Ilan University and heads NGO Monitor.
Hamas spies for Israel
Top-level informer affair embarrasses Hamas
AP
*
Buzz up!321 votes
* Send
o Email
o IM
* Share
o Facebook
o Twitter
o Delicious
o Digg
o Fark
o Newsvine
o Reddit
o StumbleUpon
o Technorati
o Yahoo! Bookmarks
* Print
FILE - In this Sunday, May 29, 2005 file photo, Palestinian militant group Hamas AP – FILE - In this Sunday, May 29, 2005 file photo, Palestinian militant group Hamas for the West Bank Hassan …
* Mideast Video:7News: Hamas assassination Australia 7 News
* Dispute over West Bank shrines rumbles on Play Video Mideast Video:Dispute over West Bank shrines rumbles on AP
* Dubai has 15 new Western suspects in Hamas killing: police Play Video Mideast Video:Dubai has 15 new Western suspects in Hamas killing: police AFP
By KARIN LAUB and MOHAMMED DARAGHMEH, Associated Press Writers Karin Laub And Mohammed Daraghmeh, Associated Press Writers – Wed Feb 24, 3:21 pm ET
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip – Claims by the son of a Hamas founder Wednesday that he was a long-term spy for Israel exposed a new side of the Islamic militant group's vulnerability and punched a hole in its meticulously groomed image of secrecy and discipline.
The spy affair comes at a time when Hamas is still reeling from suspicions that Hamas informants helped Israel assassinate a top Hamas operative in a Dubai hotel. The back-to-back scandals were sure to leave Hamas leaders fearful of their own and ever more painfully aware of how capable Israel is of reaching the inner circles of their organization.
At the center of the latest affair is 32-year-old Mosab Yousef, a son of Sheik Hassan Yousef, a Hamas founder serving a six-year term in an Israeli prison.
Hamas, which overran the Gaza Strip in 2007, dismissed the younger Yousef's claims as a lie and said they were part of an Israeli attempt to weaken the movement. However, the man's father did not rule out that his son was an informer, contending he was blackmailed by Israeli agents as a teen.
Analysts said the disclosures hurt Hamas' image and were sure to trigger new security concerns in the movement.
The Israeli Haaretz daily reported Wednesday that Mosab Yousef provided intelligence to Israel's Shin Bet security service for more than a decade, preventing dozens of Hamas attacks against Israelis, including suicide bombings, saving hundreds of lives. The paper said he also helped put several senior Palestinian operatives behind bars.
The younger Yousef, who moved to California in 2007, declined an interview request by The Associated Press.
His memoir, "Son of Hamas," is being published in the United States next week. His publicist confirmed that the information presented by Haaretz is described in the book. The author wrote on his Facebook page that his memoir "will blow your minds away, it is going to be like a tsunami in the Middle East."
Mosab Yousef was considered one of the Shin Bet's most valuable assets and was dubbed "The Green Prince," a reference to his Hamas pedigree and the Islamists' signature green color, Haaretz said.
The newspaper said it confirmed Mosab Yousef's account with Shin Bet agents, including his handler. The report said Mosab, who converted to Christianity, despised Hamas and acted out of ideological conviction.
The elder Yousef said in a statement from prison that he did not rule out that his son was recruited by Israeli intelligence, but he had no access to the movement's secrets.
The father said Mosab was first blackmailed by the Israeli agents as a 17-year-old, and others in Hamas were told. The cleric did not say what damaging information Shin Bet might have used against his son.
"Whether what Haaretz reported is true or not, Mosab was not an active member in Hamas or in any of its military, political or religious branches, or any other body," the elder Yousef said in the statement distributed by Hamas.
Mosab Yousef was first jailed by Israel in 1996 and released in 1997.
The Shin Bet routinely tries to recruit Palestinians of all factions as informers, including those in prisons, by using blackmail or promising benefits, such as work or travel permits.
The spy affair comes at a time when Hamas is still smarting from the Jan. 19 assassination in Dubai of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, suspected by Israel of procuring Iranian arms for
AP
*
Buzz up!321 votes
* Send
o Email
o IM
* Share
o Facebook
o Twitter
o Delicious
o Digg
o Fark
o Newsvine
o Reddit
o StumbleUpon
o Technorati
o Yahoo! Bookmarks
FILE - In this Sunday, May 29, 2005 file photo, Palestinian militant group Hamas AP – FILE - In this Sunday, May 29, 2005 file photo, Palestinian militant group Hamas for the West Bank Hassan …
* Mideast Video:7News: Hamas assassination Australia 7 News
* Dispute over West Bank shrines rumbles on Play Video Mideast Video:Dispute over West Bank shrines rumbles on AP
* Dubai has 15 new Western suspects in Hamas killing: police Play Video Mideast Video:Dubai has 15 new Western suspects in Hamas killing: police AFP
By KARIN LAUB and MOHAMMED DARAGHMEH, Associated Press Writers Karin Laub And Mohammed Daraghmeh, Associated Press Writers – Wed Feb 24, 3:21 pm ET
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip – Claims by the son of a Hamas founder Wednesday that he was a long-term spy for Israel exposed a new side of the Islamic militant group's vulnerability and punched a hole in its meticulously groomed image of secrecy and discipline.
The spy affair comes at a time when Hamas is still reeling from suspicions that Hamas informants helped Israel assassinate a top Hamas operative in a Dubai hotel. The back-to-back scandals were sure to leave Hamas leaders fearful of their own and ever more painfully aware of how capable Israel is of reaching the inner circles of their organization.
At the center of the latest affair is 32-year-old Mosab Yousef, a son of Sheik Hassan Yousef, a Hamas founder serving a six-year term in an Israeli prison.
Hamas, which overran the Gaza Strip in 2007, dismissed the younger Yousef's claims as a lie and said they were part of an Israeli attempt to weaken the movement. However, the man's father did not rule out that his son was an informer, contending he was blackmailed by Israeli agents as a teen.
Analysts said the disclosures hurt Hamas' image and were sure to trigger new security concerns in the movement.
The Israeli Haaretz daily reported Wednesday that Mosab Yousef provided intelligence to Israel's Shin Bet security service for more than a decade, preventing dozens of Hamas attacks against Israelis, including suicide bombings, saving hundreds of lives. The paper said he also helped put several senior Palestinian operatives behind bars.
The younger Yousef, who moved to California in 2007, declined an interview request by The Associated Press.
His memoir, "Son of Hamas," is being published in the United States next week. His publicist confirmed that the information presented by Haaretz is described in the book. The author wrote on his Facebook page that his memoir "will blow your minds away, it is going to be like a tsunami in the Middle East."
Mosab Yousef was considered one of the Shin Bet's most valuable assets and was dubbed "The Green Prince," a reference to his Hamas pedigree and the Islamists' signature green color, Haaretz said.
The newspaper said it confirmed Mosab Yousef's account with Shin Bet agents, including his handler. The report said Mosab, who converted to Christianity, despised Hamas and acted out of ideological conviction.
The elder Yousef said in a statement from prison that he did not rule out that his son was recruited by Israeli intelligence, but he had no access to the movement's secrets.
The father said Mosab was first blackmailed by the Israeli agents as a 17-year-old, and others in Hamas were told. The cleric did not say what damaging information Shin Bet might have used against his son.
"Whether what Haaretz reported is true or not, Mosab was not an active member in Hamas or in any of its military, political or religious branches, or any other body," the elder Yousef said in the statement distributed by Hamas.
Mosab Yousef was first jailed by Israel in 1996 and released in 1997.
The Shin Bet routinely tries to recruit Palestinians of all factions as informers, including those in prisons, by using blackmail or promising benefits, such as work or travel permits.
The spy affair comes at a time when Hamas is still smarting from the Jan. 19 assassination in Dubai of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, suspected by Israel of procuring Iranian arms for
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Palin endorses bombing Iran
Daniel pipes
Sarah Palin entered the fray yesterday. In a high-profile interview yesterday with Chris Wallace, she spontaneously brought up the topic of Obama's winning a second term by bombing Iran:
WALLACE: How hard do you think President Obama will be to defeat in 2012?
PALIN: It depends on a few things. Say he played—and I got this from Buchanan, reading one of his columns the other day - say he played the war card. Say he decided to declare war on Iran or decided really [to] come out and do whatever he could to support Israel, which I would like him to do, but - that changes the dynamics in what we can assume is going to happen between now and three years. Because I think if the election were today I do not think Obama would be re-elected. But three years from now, things could change if—on the national security front …
WALLACE: But you're not suggesting that he would cynically play the war card?
PALIN: I'm not suggesting that. I'm saying if he did, things would dramatically change. If he decided to toughen up and do all that he can to secure our nation and our allies, I think people would, perhaps, shift their thinking a little bit and decide, "Well, maybe he's tougher than we think he's—than he is today," and there wouldn't be as much passion to make sure that he doesn't serve another four years.
Comments: (1) Buchanan disapproves of Obama taking out the Iranian nuclear infrastructure, but Palin and I "would like him to do" that, thereby removing the world's No. 1 security threat.
(2) After vilification from the Left and tepid reactions on the Right, it's nice to have a major political figure endorse my idea.
(3) I've always liked Palin and been mystified by the fervid hostility she engenders. Perhaps that results from her readiness, as Jeff Bergner puts it, to challenge "The Narrative" formulated by the Democratic Party. True to form, she is, so far, the only politician willing to touch the hot potato of the political implications of bombing Iran.
Sarah Palin entered the fray yesterday. In a high-profile interview yesterday with Chris Wallace, she spontaneously brought up the topic of Obama's winning a second term by bombing Iran:
WALLACE: How hard do you think President Obama will be to defeat in 2012?
PALIN: It depends on a few things. Say he played—and I got this from Buchanan, reading one of his columns the other day - say he played the war card. Say he decided to declare war on Iran or decided really [to] come out and do whatever he could to support Israel, which I would like him to do, but - that changes the dynamics in what we can assume is going to happen between now and three years. Because I think if the election were today I do not think Obama would be re-elected. But three years from now, things could change if—on the national security front …
WALLACE: But you're not suggesting that he would cynically play the war card?
PALIN: I'm not suggesting that. I'm saying if he did, things would dramatically change. If he decided to toughen up and do all that he can to secure our nation and our allies, I think people would, perhaps, shift their thinking a little bit and decide, "Well, maybe he's tougher than we think he's—than he is today," and there wouldn't be as much passion to make sure that he doesn't serve another four years.
Comments: (1) Buchanan disapproves of Obama taking out the Iranian nuclear infrastructure, but Palin and I "would like him to do" that, thereby removing the world's No. 1 security threat.
(2) After vilification from the Left and tepid reactions on the Right, it's nice to have a major political figure endorse my idea.
(3) I've always liked Palin and been mystified by the fervid hostility she engenders. Perhaps that results from her readiness, as Jeff Bergner puts it, to challenge "The Narrative" formulated by the Democratic Party. True to form, she is, so far, the only politician willing to touch the hot potato of the political implications of bombing Iran.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Islamitization of Europe
Geert Wilders is a Dutch Member of Parliament.
*"America, the last man standing"*
'In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: who lost Europe ?'
[Here is the speech of Geert Wilders, Chairman, Party for Freedom, the
Netherlands , at the Four Seasons, New York , introducing an Alliance of
Patriots and announcing the Facing Jihad Conference in Jerusalem].
Dear friends,
Thank you very much for inviting me.
I come to America with a mission. All is not well in the old world. There
is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic. We
might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe . This not only
is a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself, it is a threat
to America and the sheer survival of the West. The United States as the
last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe .
First I will describe the situation on the ground in Europe . Then, I will
say a few things about Islam. To close I will tell you about a meeting in
Jerusalem .
The Europe you know is changing.
You have probably seen the landmarks. But in all of these cities, sometimes
a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world. It
is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration.
All throughout Europe a new reality is rising: entire Muslim neighbourhoods
where very few indigenous people reside or are even seen. And if they are,
they might regret it. This goes for the police as well. It's the world of
head scarves, where women walk around in figureless tents, with baby
strollers and a group of children. Their husbands, or slaveholders if you
prefer, walk three steps ahead. With mosques on many street corners. The
shops have signs you and I cannot read. You will be hard-pressed to find
any economic activity. These are Muslim ghettos controlled by religious
fanatics. These are Muslim neighbourhoods, and they are mushrooming in
every city across Europe . These are the building-blocks for territorial
control of increasingly larger portions of Europe , street by street,
neighbourhood by neighbourhood, city by city.
There are now thousands of mosques throughout Europe . With larger
congregations than there are in churches. And in every European city there
are plans to build super-mosques that will dwarf every church in the region.
Clearly, the signal is: we rule.
Many European cities are already one-quarter Muslim: just take Amsterdam ,
Marseille and Malmo in Sweden . In many cities the majority of the under-18
population is Muslim. Paris is now surrounded by a ring of Muslim
neighbourhoods. Mohammed is the most popular name among boys in many
cities.
In some elementary schools in Amsterdam the farm can no longer be mentioned,
because that would also mean mentioning the pig, and that would be an insult
to Muslims.
Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all
pupils. In once-tolerant Amsterdam gays are beaten up almost exclusively by
Muslims. Non-Muslim women routinely hear 'whore, whore'. Satellite dishes
are not pointed to local TV stations, but to stations in the country of
origin.
In France school teachers are advised to avoid authors deemed offensive to
Muslims, including Voltaire and Diderot; the same is increasingly true of
Darwin . The history of th e Holocaust can no longer be taught because of
Muslim sensitivity.
In England sharia courts are now officially part of the British legal
system. Many neighbourhoods in France are no-go areas for women without head
scarves. Last week a man almost died after being beaten up by Muslims in
Brussels , because he was drinking during the Ramadan.
Jews are fleeing France in record numbers, on the run for the worst wave of
anti-Semitism since World War II. French is now commonly spoken on the
streets of Tel Aviv and Netanya, Israel . I could go on forever with
stories like this. Stories about Islamization.
A total of fifty-four million Muslims now live in Europe . San Diego
University recently calculated that a staggering 25 percent of the
population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now. Bernhard Lewis
has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century.
Now these are just numbers. And the numbers would not be threatening if the
Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate. But there are few
signs of that. The Pew Research Centre reported that half of French Muslims
see their loyalty to Islam as greater than their loyalty to France . One-third
of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks. The British Centre for
Social Cohesion reported that one-third of British Muslim students are in
favour of a worldwide caliphate. Muslims demand what they call 'respect'. And
this is how we give them respect. We have Muslim official state holidays.
The Christian-Democratic attorney general is willing to accept sharia in the
Netherlands if there is a Muslim majority. We have cabinet members with
passports from Morocco and Turkey .
Muslim demands are supported by unlawful behaviour, ranging from petty
crimes and random violence, for example against ambulance workers and bus
drivers, to small-scale riots. Paris has seen its uprising in the
low-income suburbs, the banlieus. I call the perpetrators 'settlers'. Because
that is what they are. They do not come to integrate into our societies;
they come to integrate our society into their Dar-al-Islam. Therefore, they
are settlers.
Much of this street violence I mentioned is directed exclusively against
non-Muslims, forcing many native people to leave their neighbourhoods, their
cities, their countries. Moreover, Muslims are now a swing vote not to be
ignored.
The second thing you need to know is the importance of Mohammed the prophet.
His behaviour is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized. Now,
if Mohammed had been a man of peace, let us say like Ghandi and Mother
Theresa wrapped in one, there would be no problem. But Mohammed was a
warlord, a mass murderer, a paedophile, and had several marriages - at the
same time. Islamic tradition tells us how he fought in battles, how he had
his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed. Mohammed
himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza. If it is good for
Islam, it is good. If it is bad for Islam, it is bad.
Let no one fool you about Islam being a religion. Sure, it has a god, and a
here-after, and 72 virgins. But in its essence Islam is a political
ideology. It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the
life of every person. Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life. Islam
means 'submission'. Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy,
because what it strives for is sharia. If you want to compare Islam to
anything, compare it to communism or national-socialism, these are all
totalitarian ideologies.
Now you know why Winston Churchill called Islam 'the most retrograde force
in the world', and why he compared Mein Kampf to the Quran. The public has
wholeheartedly accepted the Palestinian narrative, and sees Israel as the
aggressor. I have lived in this country and visited it dozens of times. I
support Israel . First, because it is the Jewish homeland after two
thousand years of exile up to and including Auschwitz, second because it is
a democracy, and third because Israel is our first line of defence.
This tiny country is situated on the fault line of jihad, frustrating
Islam's territorial advance. Israel is facing the front lines of jihad,
like Kashmir, Kosovo, the Philippines, Southern Thailand, Darfur in Sudan,
Lebanon, and Aceh in Indonesia . Israel is simply in the way. The same way
West-Berlin was during the Cold War.
The war against Israel is not a war against Israel . It is a war against
the West. It is jihad. Israel is simply receiving the blows that are meant
for all of us. If there would have been no Israel , Islamic imperialism
would have found other venues to release its energy and its desire for
conquest. Thanks to Israeli parents who send their children to the army and
lay awake at night, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and dream,
unaware of the dangers looming.
Many in Europe argue in favour of abandoning Israel in order to address the
grievances of our Muslim minorities. But if Israel were, God forbid, to go
down, it would not bring any solace to the West. It would not mean our
Muslim minorities would all of a sudden change their behaviour, and accept
our values. On the contrary, the end of Israel would give enormous
encouragement to the forces of Islam. They would, and rightly so, see the
demise of Israel as proof that the West is weak, and doomed. The end of
Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only the
beginning. It would mean the start of the final battle for world
domination. If they can get Israel , they can get everything. So-called
journalists volunteer to label any and all critics of Islamization as a
'right-wing extremists' or 'racists'. In my country, the Netherlands , 60
percent of the population now sees the mass immigration of Muslims as the
number one policy mistake since World War II. And another 60 percent sees
Islam as the biggest threat. Yet there is a greater danger than terrorist
attacks, the scenario of America as the last man standing. The lights may
go out in Europe faster than you can imagine. An Islamic Europe means a
Europe without freedom and democracy, an economic wasteland, an intellectual
nightmare, and a loss of military might for America - as its allies will
turn into enemies, enemies with atomic bombs. With an Islamic Europe, it
would be up to America alone to preserve the heritage of Rome , Athens and
Jerusalem .
Dear friends, liberty is the most precious of gifts. My generation never
had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by
people who fought for it with their lives. All throughout Europe , American
cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose
memory we cherish. My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely
its custodians. We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe 's
children in the same state, in which it was offered to us. We cannot strike
a deal with mullahs and imams. Future generations would never forgive us. We
cannot squander our liberties. We simply do not have the right to do so. We
have to take the necessary action now to stop this Islamic stupidity from
destroying the free world, that we know.
*"America, the last man standing"*
'In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: who lost Europe ?'
[Here is the speech of Geert Wilders, Chairman, Party for Freedom, the
Netherlands , at the Four Seasons, New York , introducing an Alliance of
Patriots and announcing the Facing Jihad Conference in Jerusalem].
Dear friends,
Thank you very much for inviting me.
I come to America with a mission. All is not well in the old world. There
is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic. We
might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe . This not only
is a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself, it is a threat
to America and the sheer survival of the West. The United States as the
last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe .
First I will describe the situation on the ground in Europe . Then, I will
say a few things about Islam. To close I will tell you about a meeting in
Jerusalem .
The Europe you know is changing.
You have probably seen the landmarks. But in all of these cities, sometimes
a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world. It
is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration.
All throughout Europe a new reality is rising: entire Muslim neighbourhoods
where very few indigenous people reside or are even seen. And if they are,
they might regret it. This goes for the police as well. It's the world of
head scarves, where women walk around in figureless tents, with baby
strollers and a group of children. Their husbands, or slaveholders if you
prefer, walk three steps ahead. With mosques on many street corners. The
shops have signs you and I cannot read. You will be hard-pressed to find
any economic activity. These are Muslim ghettos controlled by religious
fanatics. These are Muslim neighbourhoods, and they are mushrooming in
every city across Europe . These are the building-blocks for territorial
control of increasingly larger portions of Europe , street by street,
neighbourhood by neighbourhood, city by city.
There are now thousands of mosques throughout Europe . With larger
congregations than there are in churches. And in every European city there
are plans to build super-mosques that will dwarf every church in the region.
Clearly, the signal is: we rule.
Many European cities are already one-quarter Muslim: just take Amsterdam ,
Marseille and Malmo in Sweden . In many cities the majority of the under-18
population is Muslim. Paris is now surrounded by a ring of Muslim
neighbourhoods. Mohammed is the most popular name among boys in many
cities.
In some elementary schools in Amsterdam the farm can no longer be mentioned,
because that would also mean mentioning the pig, and that would be an insult
to Muslims.
Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all
pupils. In once-tolerant Amsterdam gays are beaten up almost exclusively by
Muslims. Non-Muslim women routinely hear 'whore, whore'. Satellite dishes
are not pointed to local TV stations, but to stations in the country of
origin.
In France school teachers are advised to avoid authors deemed offensive to
Muslims, including Voltaire and Diderot; the same is increasingly true of
Darwin . The history of th e Holocaust can no longer be taught because of
Muslim sensitivity.
In England sharia courts are now officially part of the British legal
system. Many neighbourhoods in France are no-go areas for women without head
scarves. Last week a man almost died after being beaten up by Muslims in
Brussels , because he was drinking during the Ramadan.
Jews are fleeing France in record numbers, on the run for the worst wave of
anti-Semitism since World War II. French is now commonly spoken on the
streets of Tel Aviv and Netanya, Israel . I could go on forever with
stories like this. Stories about Islamization.
A total of fifty-four million Muslims now live in Europe . San Diego
University recently calculated that a staggering 25 percent of the
population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now. Bernhard Lewis
has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century.
Now these are just numbers. And the numbers would not be threatening if the
Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate. But there are few
signs of that. The Pew Research Centre reported that half of French Muslims
see their loyalty to Islam as greater than their loyalty to France . One-third
of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks. The British Centre for
Social Cohesion reported that one-third of British Muslim students are in
favour of a worldwide caliphate. Muslims demand what they call 'respect'. And
this is how we give them respect. We have Muslim official state holidays.
The Christian-Democratic attorney general is willing to accept sharia in the
Netherlands if there is a Muslim majority. We have cabinet members with
passports from Morocco and Turkey .
Muslim demands are supported by unlawful behaviour, ranging from petty
crimes and random violence, for example against ambulance workers and bus
drivers, to small-scale riots. Paris has seen its uprising in the
low-income suburbs, the banlieus. I call the perpetrators 'settlers'. Because
that is what they are. They do not come to integrate into our societies;
they come to integrate our society into their Dar-al-Islam. Therefore, they
are settlers.
Much of this street violence I mentioned is directed exclusively against
non-Muslims, forcing many native people to leave their neighbourhoods, their
cities, their countries. Moreover, Muslims are now a swing vote not to be
ignored.
The second thing you need to know is the importance of Mohammed the prophet.
His behaviour is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized. Now,
if Mohammed had been a man of peace, let us say like Ghandi and Mother
Theresa wrapped in one, there would be no problem. But Mohammed was a
warlord, a mass murderer, a paedophile, and had several marriages - at the
same time. Islamic tradition tells us how he fought in battles, how he had
his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed. Mohammed
himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza. If it is good for
Islam, it is good. If it is bad for Islam, it is bad.
Let no one fool you about Islam being a religion. Sure, it has a god, and a
here-after, and 72 virgins. But in its essence Islam is a political
ideology. It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the
life of every person. Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life. Islam
means 'submission'. Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy,
because what it strives for is sharia. If you want to compare Islam to
anything, compare it to communism or national-socialism, these are all
totalitarian ideologies.
Now you know why Winston Churchill called Islam 'the most retrograde force
in the world', and why he compared Mein Kampf to the Quran. The public has
wholeheartedly accepted the Palestinian narrative, and sees Israel as the
aggressor. I have lived in this country and visited it dozens of times. I
support Israel . First, because it is the Jewish homeland after two
thousand years of exile up to and including Auschwitz, second because it is
a democracy, and third because Israel is our first line of defence.
This tiny country is situated on the fault line of jihad, frustrating
Islam's territorial advance. Israel is facing the front lines of jihad,
like Kashmir, Kosovo, the Philippines, Southern Thailand, Darfur in Sudan,
Lebanon, and Aceh in Indonesia . Israel is simply in the way. The same way
West-Berlin was during the Cold War.
The war against Israel is not a war against Israel . It is a war against
the West. It is jihad. Israel is simply receiving the blows that are meant
for all of us. If there would have been no Israel , Islamic imperialism
would have found other venues to release its energy and its desire for
conquest. Thanks to Israeli parents who send their children to the army and
lay awake at night, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and dream,
unaware of the dangers looming.
Many in Europe argue in favour of abandoning Israel in order to address the
grievances of our Muslim minorities. But if Israel were, God forbid, to go
down, it would not bring any solace to the West. It would not mean our
Muslim minorities would all of a sudden change their behaviour, and accept
our values. On the contrary, the end of Israel would give enormous
encouragement to the forces of Islam. They would, and rightly so, see the
demise of Israel as proof that the West is weak, and doomed. The end of
Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only the
beginning. It would mean the start of the final battle for world
domination. If they can get Israel , they can get everything. So-called
journalists volunteer to label any and all critics of Islamization as a
'right-wing extremists' or 'racists'. In my country, the Netherlands , 60
percent of the population now sees the mass immigration of Muslims as the
number one policy mistake since World War II. And another 60 percent sees
Islam as the biggest threat. Yet there is a greater danger than terrorist
attacks, the scenario of America as the last man standing. The lights may
go out in Europe faster than you can imagine. An Islamic Europe means a
Europe without freedom and democracy, an economic wasteland, an intellectual
nightmare, and a loss of military might for America - as its allies will
turn into enemies, enemies with atomic bombs. With an Islamic Europe, it
would be up to America alone to preserve the heritage of Rome , Athens and
Jerusalem .
Dear friends, liberty is the most precious of gifts. My generation never
had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by
people who fought for it with their lives. All throughout Europe , American
cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose
memory we cherish. My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely
its custodians. We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe 's
children in the same state, in which it was offered to us. We cannot strike
a deal with mullahs and imams. Future generations would never forgive us. We
cannot squander our liberties. We simply do not have the right to do so. We
have to take the necessary action now to stop this Islamic stupidity from
destroying the free world, that we know.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
help joel pollak Ill 9th
"Beverly Sandler"
Joel Pollak - outstanding Pro Israel candidate for Illinois' 9th District has the opportunity to bring on Eric Cantor's fund raising team if he can raise an addition $14,000 by Friday morning. At all costs the incumbent Jan Schakowsky (JStreet) must be eliminated from elected office. Could you help out with this? Please help spread the word.
Contributions can be made on his website.
https://secure.piryx.com/donate/NbeJASm1/PollakForCongress/
Contributions can also be made by check.
Please make checks out to:
Pollak for Congress
Send to
P.O. Box 5027
Evanston , IL 60204-5027
So that we can keep track of how much more we need to raise please ask contributors to email me with the amount of their donations.
The US/Israel relationship is worth fighting for and the fight boils down to us!
Joel Pollak - outstanding Pro Israel candidate for Illinois' 9th District has the opportunity to bring on Eric Cantor's fund raising team if he can raise an addition $14,000 by Friday morning. At all costs the incumbent Jan Schakowsky (JStreet) must be eliminated from elected office. Could you help out with this? Please help spread the word.
Contributions can be made on his website.
https://secure.piryx.com/donate/NbeJASm1/PollakForCongress/
Contributions can also be made by check.
Please make checks out to:
Pollak for Congress
Send to
P.O. Box 5027
Evanston , IL 60204-5027
So that we can keep track of how much more we need to raise please ask contributors to email me with the amount of their donations.
The US/Israel relationship is worth fighting for and the fight boils down to us!
Friday, February 5, 2010
J Stret puished that anti-Israel pro Gaza letter to congress
nethttp://www.forward.com/articles/124915/
Washington — In the strongest sign so far of pushback against dovish Jewish groups, a New York congresswoman representing an ultra-Orthodox constituency retracted her support from congressional initiatives meant to ease the pressure on Palestinians in Gaza.
Yvette Clarke, of New York’s 11th District, which covers large parts of Brooklyn, met February 1 with a group of local Jewish leaders, many ultra-Orthodox, to discuss their concerns about her decision to sign on to two congressional letters dealing with the plight of Palestinians in Gaza. One letter called for lifting travel restrictions on Palestinian students, and the other for easing the Israeli blockade on Gaza.
The Jewish leaders’ intervention produced an open letter to Clarke’s Jewish constituents in which she expressed her regret for supporting the congressional letters. “Unfortunately, these letters are uneven in their application of pressure and do not sufficiently present a balanced approach/path to peace,” Clarke wrote, adding that the letters have “a provocative and reactionary impact.”
A spokesman for Agudath Israel of America said that Jewish participants in the meeting with Clarke responded to her new letter with “cautious optimism” and expressed their hope that her future stance on the Middle East “will reflect the support for Israel she is voicing now.”
Dovish Jewish groups supported the congressional letters on Gaza, and while mainstream pro-Israel organizations were not supportive of them, they did not actively lobby against them.
Hadar Susskind, director of policy and strategy at J Street, a group that advocated in favor of the letters, said he understood Clarke’s wish “to balance her needs with the needs of her constituency,” but he called on the Jewish community to break with “the zero-sum game and understand that improving the situation in Gaza will help us all reach a solution.”
Clarke’s retraction of her support for the Gaza letters echoes similar pressure put on lawmakers in the run-up to J Street’s first national conference, in October 2009. Then, too, some members of Congress from strongly Jewish districts came under constituent pressure to withdraw from a list of sponsors for the eve
Washington — In the strongest sign so far of pushback against dovish Jewish groups, a New York congresswoman representing an ultra-Orthodox constituency retracted her support from congressional initiatives meant to ease the pressure on Palestinians in Gaza.
Yvette Clarke, of New York’s 11th District, which covers large parts of Brooklyn, met February 1 with a group of local Jewish leaders, many ultra-Orthodox, to discuss their concerns about her decision to sign on to two congressional letters dealing with the plight of Palestinians in Gaza. One letter called for lifting travel restrictions on Palestinian students, and the other for easing the Israeli blockade on Gaza.
The Jewish leaders’ intervention produced an open letter to Clarke’s Jewish constituents in which she expressed her regret for supporting the congressional letters. “Unfortunately, these letters are uneven in their application of pressure and do not sufficiently present a balanced approach/path to peace,” Clarke wrote, adding that the letters have “a provocative and reactionary impact.”
A spokesman for Agudath Israel of America said that Jewish participants in the meeting with Clarke responded to her new letter with “cautious optimism” and expressed their hope that her future stance on the Middle East “will reflect the support for Israel she is voicing now.”
Dovish Jewish groups supported the congressional letters on Gaza, and while mainstream pro-Israel organizations were not supportive of them, they did not actively lobby against them.
Hadar Susskind, director of policy and strategy at J Street, a group that advocated in favor of the letters, said he understood Clarke’s wish “to balance her needs with the needs of her constituency,” but he called on the Jewish community to break with “the zero-sum game and understand that improving the situation in Gaza will help us all reach a solution.”
Clarke’s retraction of her support for the Gaza letters echoes similar pressure put on lawmakers in the run-up to J Street’s first national conference, in October 2009. Then, too, some members of Congress from strongly Jewish districts came under constituent pressure to withdraw from a list of sponsors for the eve
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Think carefully before donating to the NIF
MKs call for New Israel Fund probe
BY ABE SELIG
04/02/2010 02:04
Schneller: I’m interested in establishing boundaries and limits.
Talkbacks (5)
The brouhaha over allegations raised against the New Israel Fund in a report released this week by the Zionist student group Im Tirtzu has spread to the Knesset, where a number of initiatives to investigate the funding of NGOs and non-profit organizations operating in Israel have been broached.
After details of the Im Tirtzu report – which lays direct blame for the United Nations’ Goldstone Report on the IDF’s Operation Cast Lead in Gaza last winter on the NIF – were printed in an article in Ma’ariv last Friday, MKs Yisrael Hasson and Tzachi Hanegbi, both from the Kadima Party and members of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, announced that they would push for a special hearing on the matter in that committee, in which the report’s claims would be investigated thoroughly.
According to the report, 92 percent of the negative citations used in the Goldstone Report criticizing the IDF’s conduct in Gaza last year came from 16 Israeli NGOs, which Im Tirtzu has alleged received some $7.8 million in financial support from the NIF in 2008-2009.
But Hasson and Hanegbi were not the only ones demanding answers this week. MK Otniel Schneller (Kadima), also a member of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, told The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday that he was pushing for government authorization to create a parliamentary investigative committee to look into the funding and activities of the NIF, the organizations it finances and other NGOs operating in Israel, with the hopes of establishing well-defined lines that would not be crossed in the future.
The creation of a parliamentary investigative committee would be a significant step up from the other committee hearings possibly facing the NIF, and would also have broader powers, which would be decided upon at the time of the committee’s creation.
While Schneller said he had hoped to bring the committee’s creation up for a decision in the Knesset on Wednesday, he had opted to delay the decision until next week in order to “solidify a broad consensus on the matter.”
In his conversation with the Post, however, Schneller refuted the idea that such an investigation would be an affront to freedom of speech, and said the allegations surrounding the NIF had “made it clear that red lines needed to be identified.”
“I’m not interesting in shutting people up,” Schneller told the Post. “I’m interested in establishing boundaries and limits.”
“There’s a certain limit to what is legitimate and what is not,” he continued. “If you have [Israeli] organizations that are actively working against the State of Israel, well then wait a minute – that’s not legitimate, and enough is enough.”
Schneller added that he felt at least one of the groups connected to the NIF, which had given testimony to Goldstone’s commission of inquiry, had overstepped the bounds of legitimacy in that it had already tried to bring the same issue – regarding IDF actions in Gaza – to the Israeli Supreme Court, which rejected the case.
“They attempted to bring a case alleging that the IDF had destroyed entire villages in Gaza,” Schneller said. “The Supreme Court threw it out and dismissed it as false, but the group nonetheless presented the issue to Goldstone. That’s a prime example of an illegitimate activity, because it’s not only faulting the IDF based on false testimony, but it’s saying that decisions made by the courts of the State of Israel are not binding.”
While Schneller insisted that he would continue to pursue the matter in the Knesset, another MK, David Rotem (Israel Beiteinu), who heads the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, announced on Wednesday his intention to form a subcommittee that would look into contributions to Israeli NGOs from foreign governments and organizations.
A press release declaring the need for “a subcommittee whose main task is to investigate the system through which funds are received by NGOs from foreign states,” was sent out by Rotem on Wednesday afternoon.
“The subcommittee under my auspices is not being created to look into any specific organization,” Rotem said in a statement. “But for the need to thoroughly examine the system in which funding is received from foreign governments, which, from time to time, come with foreign motivations.”
BY ABE SELIG
04/02/2010 02:04
Schneller: I’m interested in establishing boundaries and limits.
Talkbacks (5)
The brouhaha over allegations raised against the New Israel Fund in a report released this week by the Zionist student group Im Tirtzu has spread to the Knesset, where a number of initiatives to investigate the funding of NGOs and non-profit organizations operating in Israel have been broached.
After details of the Im Tirtzu report – which lays direct blame for the United Nations’ Goldstone Report on the IDF’s Operation Cast Lead in Gaza last winter on the NIF – were printed in an article in Ma’ariv last Friday, MKs Yisrael Hasson and Tzachi Hanegbi, both from the Kadima Party and members of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, announced that they would push for a special hearing on the matter in that committee, in which the report’s claims would be investigated thoroughly.
According to the report, 92 percent of the negative citations used in the Goldstone Report criticizing the IDF’s conduct in Gaza last year came from 16 Israeli NGOs, which Im Tirtzu has alleged received some $7.8 million in financial support from the NIF in 2008-2009.
But Hasson and Hanegbi were not the only ones demanding answers this week. MK Otniel Schneller (Kadima), also a member of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, told The Jerusalem Post on Wednesday that he was pushing for government authorization to create a parliamentary investigative committee to look into the funding and activities of the NIF, the organizations it finances and other NGOs operating in Israel, with the hopes of establishing well-defined lines that would not be crossed in the future.
The creation of a parliamentary investigative committee would be a significant step up from the other committee hearings possibly facing the NIF, and would also have broader powers, which would be decided upon at the time of the committee’s creation.
While Schneller said he had hoped to bring the committee’s creation up for a decision in the Knesset on Wednesday, he had opted to delay the decision until next week in order to “solidify a broad consensus on the matter.”
In his conversation with the Post, however, Schneller refuted the idea that such an investigation would be an affront to freedom of speech, and said the allegations surrounding the NIF had “made it clear that red lines needed to be identified.”
“I’m not interesting in shutting people up,” Schneller told the Post. “I’m interested in establishing boundaries and limits.”
“There’s a certain limit to what is legitimate and what is not,” he continued. “If you have [Israeli] organizations that are actively working against the State of Israel, well then wait a minute – that’s not legitimate, and enough is enough.”
Schneller added that he felt at least one of the groups connected to the NIF, which had given testimony to Goldstone’s commission of inquiry, had overstepped the bounds of legitimacy in that it had already tried to bring the same issue – regarding IDF actions in Gaza – to the Israeli Supreme Court, which rejected the case.
“They attempted to bring a case alleging that the IDF had destroyed entire villages in Gaza,” Schneller said. “The Supreme Court threw it out and dismissed it as false, but the group nonetheless presented the issue to Goldstone. That’s a prime example of an illegitimate activity, because it’s not only faulting the IDF based on false testimony, but it’s saying that decisions made by the courts of the State of Israel are not binding.”
While Schneller insisted that he would continue to pursue the matter in the Knesset, another MK, David Rotem (Israel Beiteinu), who heads the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, announced on Wednesday his intention to form a subcommittee that would look into contributions to Israeli NGOs from foreign governments and organizations.
A press release declaring the need for “a subcommittee whose main task is to investigate the system through which funds are received by NGOs from foreign states,” was sent out by Rotem on Wednesday afternoon.
“The subcommittee under my auspices is not being created to look into any specific organization,” Rotem said in a statement. “But for the need to thoroughly examine the system in which funding is received from foreign governments, which, from time to time, come with foreign motivations.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
