Philip's posts with tag: arabs
24 March 08 by Gil Ronen (IsraelNN.com) Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama is currently hiding his anti-Israel views in order to get elected, according to a well-known anti-Israel activist. The activist, Ali Abunimah, claimed to know Obama well and to have met him on numerous occasions at pro-Palestinian events in Chicago. In an article he penned for the anti-Israeli website Electronic Intifada, Abunimah wrote: "The last time I spoke to Obama was in the winter of 2004 at a gathering in Chicago’s Hyde Park neighborhood. He was in the midst of a primary campaign to secure the Democratic nomination for the United States Senate seat he now occupies. But at that time polls showed him trailing. "As he came in from the cold and took off his coat, I went up to greet him. He responded warmly, and volunteered, 'Hey, I’m sorry I haven’t said more about Palestine right now, but we are in a tough primary race. I’m hoping when things calm down I can be more up front.' He referred to my activism, including columns I was contributing to the The Chicago Tribune critical of Israeli and US policy [and said:] 'Keep up the good work!'" Barack, Michelle, Edward and Mariam
Abunimah's report included a photo of Obama with his wife Michelle seated at a table with virulently anti-Israeli Professor Edward Said and his wife Mariam, in what Abunimah said was a May 1998 Arab community event in Chicago at which Said gave the keynote speech. In an interview earlier this year for the leftist radio show "Democracy Now!," a daily TV and radio news program hosted by Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Abunimah said he knew Obama for many years as his state senator "when he used to attend events in the Palestinian community in Chicago all the time." "I remember personally introducing him onstage in 1999, when we had a major community fundraiser for the community center in Deheisha refugee camp in the occupied West Bank," he recounted. "And that's just one example of how Barack Obama used to be very comfortable speaking up for and being associated with Palestinian rights and opposing the Israeli occupation." About face 'to get elected'
The Arab-American activist went on to say: "In 2000, when Obama unsuccessfully ran for Congress I heard him speak at a campaign fundraiser hosted by a University of Chicago professor. On that occasion and others Obama was forthright in his criticism of US policy and his call for an even-handed approach to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict." "Obama's about-face is not surprising," Abunimah wrote. "He is merely doing what he thinks is necessary to get elected and he will continue doing it as long as it keeps him in power."
When Obama first ran for the Senate in 2004, the Chicago Jewish News interviewed him on his stance regarding Israel's security fence. He accused the Bush administration of neglecting the "Israeli-Palestinian" situation and criticized the security fence built by Israel to prevent terror attacks: "The creation of a wall dividing the two nations is yet another example of the neglect of this Administration in brokering peace," Obama was quoted as saying.
by Hillel Fendel
March 16, '08 (IsraelNN.com) Several nationalist organizations are calling upon the public to join them as they march on the home of the terrorist who massacred eight Merkaz HaRav students and destroy it. The police, already on high alert because of terrorist warnings, are planning to deploy large forces to stop the march. The march is set to begin at 5 p.m. Sunday afternoon from the Banks Junction on Hevron Rd. in the south Jerusalem neighborhood of Talpiyot. It is being sponsored by Beit El-based Komemiyut (Standing Tall), Women in Green, Lev Yehudi (Jewish Heart), and the bereaved families. Red, black and white posters that can be seen all around Jerusalem blare, "The Arab enemy is inside Jerusalem! The mourning period is over. It's time to destroy the terrorist's house and wipe out the evil from our midst." Zionsake: Israeli Arab girls: The expression on their faces
seems to say, "Don't photograph us, we don't belong here!" "Government Has Done Nothing"
Moshe Musa Cohen, a Komemiyut organizer, told Arutz-7's Hebrew newsmagazine about the initiative: "It's been over a week, and our government has not yet provided a real response to the slaughter in Merkaz HaRav. The same government that destroyed thousands of homes in Gush Katif can't destroy the home of just one terrorist? The still-standing home of the terrorist is a symbol of the government's weakness and failure to act. They want quiet while they carry out their mistaken diplomatic policies, and are generally unwilling to take action, and that's why the house is still standing." "They keep talking about completing the partition fence," Cohen said, "yet this terrorist came from within the fence! He is a full-fledged resident of Israel." Most Arabs of eastern Jerusalem are residents with near-total citizenship rights, except for the right to vote in national elections. In 1980, when Israel annexed the entire city of Jerusalem, the Arab residents were given the right to full citizenship, just like the other Arabs of Israel, if they would learn Hebrew and pledge allegiance to the country; most of them refused. The Message: Internal Enemy Must be Fought
"When a country is afraid to deal with its enemies in its own capital," Cohen said, "that is a sign of bankruptcy... For us, it is hard to sit quietly; we want to express our protest and destroy the house." Cohen does not expect to fulfill his second objective of destroying the house: "The same police whose men stayed outside Merkaz HaRav while the terrorist massacred the students, will be out in force to make sure that we don't get close to the house. But at least we will get our message across: We have an Arab enemy in Israel, and we must protect ourselves and fight against him."
"There is a fifth column inside the State of Israel," Cohen said, "and that is the Israeli-Arabs. We don't see a solution to this problem." Matar: Boycott Arab Transport Company
Nadia Matar of Women in Green said, "The family of this terrorist is a wealthy one; it runs the Tiyulei HaPninah transportation company in Jerusalem, and we should boycott it." Matar further said, "Today's protest is an important one. It begins a new campaign regarding the future of our country, and it is good that this issue is being raised... The government has not razed the house because it is afraid of the Arab MKs' reaction - just like it is afraid to attack Gaza and stop the Kassams. The government thus does not represent Jewish interests."
Israeli-Arabs Happy With Attack
Not only have the Arab Knesset Members not condemned or spoken out against the murder of the eight yeshiva students, other Israeli-Arab elements have actually implied praise of it. The main headline in the Islamic Movement’s Al-Mithaak weekly the day after the attack read, “The First Response to the Massacre in Gaza!!!”
The body of the story said: “In a first response to [Israel's] acts of slaughter [in Gaza], Palestinians carried out an operation yesterday in which eight Israelis were killed and ten wounded.” The story refrained from using the term “terror attack,” “murder” or “terrorist.” This week’s edition of the Al-Mithaak weekly reported on Wednesday's IDF liquidation of four senior terrorists in Bethlehem as follows: “After the Massacre in Gaza: The occupation turns to perpetrating massacres in the West Bank as undercover agents carry out massacre in heart of Bethlehem.” Chabad Response: Israel is the Only Place
Rabbi Menachem Brod of the Young Chabad movement wrote in this week's Sichat HaShavua:
"If there is something more horrific than the terrible massacre of the yeshiva students hunched over their Torah texts, it is the quick return to the daily routine and the indications that the government is not planning to do a thing to respond appropriately to this crime. Nearly 52 years ago, we saw similar photos when terrorists infiltrated Kfar Chabad and shot and killed five students and a teacher as they were praying Maariv [the evening prayer]. This event was one of the factors that caused the Government of Israel to begin the Kadesh Operation [Suez Canal War of 1956]. But today, the government merely suffices with an expression of sorrow. "In the past, this type of event was called a pogrom. Jewish communities were aroused to demand that the world not stand silently in the face of Jewish bloodshed. We used to be told that the establishment of the State of Israel was in order to prevent Jewish blood from being spilled wantonly - but now it turns out that the Jewish State is the only place in the world where yeshiva students can be massacred, and within a few days everything is back to normal, as if this is something we must learn to live with."
Barack Hussein Obama and Israel
The American Thinker, January 16, 2008 *Redacted from an article by Ed Lasky* The ascent of Barack Obama from lowly state senator in Illinois to a leading contender for the Presidential nomination in the span of just a few years is remarkable. Especially, *in light of a noticeably unremarkable record -- a near-blank slate of few accomplishments and a disproportionately high number of missed votes.* However, in one area of foreign policy that concerns millions of Americans, *he does have a record* and it is a *particularly troubling one*. For all supporters of the *America-Israel relationship* there is enough information beyond the glare of the klieg lights to give one pause. In contrast to his canned speeches filled with "poetry" and uplifting aphorisms and delivered in a commanding way, behind the campaign façade lies a disquieting pattern of behavior. One seemingly consistent theme running throughout Barack Obama's career is his comfort with aligning himself with people who are anti-Israel advocates. This ease around Israel animus has taken various forms. As Obama has continued his political ascent, he has moved up the prestige scale in terms of his associates. *Early on in his career he chose a church headed by a former Black Muslim who is a harsh anti-Israel advocate and who may be seen as tinged with anti-Semitism. * This church is a member of a denomination whose governing body has taken a series of anti-Israel actions. As his political fortunes and ambition climbed, he found support from George Soros (CFR), multibillionaire promoter of groups that have been consistently harsh and biased critics of the American-Israel relationship. Obama's soothing and inspiring oratory sometimes vanishes when he talks of the Middle East. Indeed, his off-the-cuff remarks have been uniformly taken by supporters of Israel as signs that the inner Obama does not truly support Israel. This despite what his canned speeches and essays may contain. Now that Obama has become a leading Presidential candidate, he has assembled a body of foreign policy advisers who signal that a President Obama would likely have an approach towards Israel radically at odds with those of previous Presidents (both Republican and Democrat). *A group of experts collected by the Israeli liberal [far left!] newspaper Haaretz deemed him the candidate likely to be least supportive of Israel. _He is the candidate most favored by the Arab-American community. _* When Obama moved to Chicago and became a community organizer, he found it expedient to choose a Christian church to join. Even though his father and stepfather were both Muslims and he attended school [and a Mosque] as a Muslim while living in Indonesia, suspicions based on his days as a child are overheated and unfair. Still, his full name alone conveys the biographical fact that he has some elements of a Muslim background. Saul Alinsky, whose philosophy infused community organizing in Chicago, emphasized the importance of churches as a basis for organizing. There are literally hundreds of churches on the South Side of Chicago that Obama could have chosen. He selected one that was headed by Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Jr. The anti-Israel rants of this minister have been well chronicled. Among the gems:*/The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for almost 40 years now. It took a divestment campaign to wake the business community up concerning the South Africa issue. Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community up and to wake Americans up concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism./* *Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Jr. is a supporter of Louis Farrakhan (who called Judaism a "gutter religion" and depicted Jews as "bloodsuckers") *and *traveled with him to visit Col. Muammar al-Gaddafi*, archenemy of Israel's and a terror supporter. Tucker Carlson of MSNBC has *called Pastor Wright a total hater* and wondered why the ties that bind Obama to Wright have not been given greater scrutiny. Mickey Kaus of Slate has also wondered when the ties between Obama and Wright will receive more criticism, given Wright's seeming bigotry, which is in contrast to the soothing melody of unity that Obama has trumpeted on the campaign trail. Some in the media have taken notice. As Obama took steps toward the United States Senate he found a very powerful sugar daddy who would help fund his rise: George Soros (CFR). The billionaire hedge fund titan began supporting Obama very early -- as befits a legendary speculative investor always looking for opportunities. Obama coveted support from George Soros (CFR) and Soros (CFR) responded -- along with many family members and probably the Soros (CFR) ring of wealthy donors. Soros even found a loophole that allowed him and assorted family members to exceed regular limits on campaign contributions. *Soros (CFR) is also a fierce foe of Israel, for years funding groups that have worked against Israel. * Every Presidential candidate assembles a foreign policy team of advisers. A glimpse into the makeup of Obama's team has leaked to the media.*Martin Peretz of The New Republic -- a supporter of Obama and of Israel -- had this to say about Obama's Foreign Policy team:****"I have my qualms, as you may know, about Barack Obama, and most especially about what his foreign policy might be.* If elected (and actually before he were to be elected), the first decision he would have to make would be who would represent him in the transition to power from early November to January 20. And, frankly, I* get the shudders since he has indicated that, among others, they would be Zbigniew Bzrezinski (CFR) Anthony Lake (CFR), Susan Rice (CFR) and Robert O. Malley (CFR)." Lake (CFR) and Brzezenski (CFR) both earned their spurs in the Carter (CFR) Administration. Jimmy Carter (CFR), of course, has led a very public campaign of vilification against Israel-defaming it as an apartheid state (a view that Obama's Pastor would concur with). * The appointment of Brzezenski (CFR) elicited much dismay among supporters of Israel since Brzezinski (CFR) is well known for his *aggressive dislike of Israel*. . He has been an ardent foe of Israel for over three decades and newspaper files are littered with his screeds against Israel. Brzezinski (CFR) has publicly defended the Walt-Mearsheimer (CFR) thesis that the relationship between America and Israel is based not on shared values and common threats but is the product of Jewish pressure. *Brzezinski (CFR) also signed a letter demanding dialogue with Hamas* - a group whose charter calls for the destruction of Israel and is filled with threats to Jews around the world. Susan Rice (CFR) was John Kerry's (CFR) chief foreign policy adviser when he ran for President. One of the major steps Kerry (CFR) suggested for dealing with the Middle East was to appoint [Jew-Hater] James Baker (CFR) and [Israel-Hater] Jimmy Carter (CFR) as negotiators. Robert Malley (CFR) was part of the American negotiating team that dealt with Yasser Arafat at Camp David. He has presented a revisionist history of those negotiations since then: presenting a view that *blames Israel for the failures of the negotiations*. He has *_spent years representing the Palestinian point of view_*, co-writing a series of anti-Israel articles with Hussein Agha - a former Arafat adviser. Palestinian advocate. ... etc. etc. *_Obama's Choice. Fact - Not Rhetoric!_* Barry Chamish
| By ARON HELLER ABU DIS, West Bank - With the Muslim call to prayer wailing from a mosque, some 20 Palestinian students crowd into a classroom on the outskirts of Jerusalem to study the origins of the Jewish state. The Israel studies program at Al Quds University in the West Bank claims to be the first in the Arab world, drawing an eclectic mix of grizzled ex-prisoners, veiled women and top political operatives. Some seek knowledge to better fight their enemy, while others believe learning more about Israel increases the chances of peace. |  |
|
| Either way, the program has become a hit, with students lining up to study courses about the Israeli economy, its army and the role of women in its society. "Different students go into it with different motivations, of course, but I think that most of the students who are engaged in the Israel studies program are people who are committed to coexistence with Israel," said the college president, Sari Nusseibeh. The two-year master's course is the brainchild of Nusseibeh, a Palestinian moderate who has long preached dialogue with Israel. The program, which has 120 students, counts among its alumni some prominent Palestinian personalities, including former Gaza strongman Mohammed Dahlan and his counterpart in the West Bank, Jibril Rajoub. Sameh Khader, 31, a senior civil servant, enrolled out of sheer curiosity. "Israel was a mystery to me," he said. "This is a process of discovery." He said Palestinians could learn a lot from their next-door neighbor about building a state. "There are similarities between the Israeli cause and the Palestinian cause," he said. "It's not a 'learn the enemy' thing." Such views are not often heard among the 4 million Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza, whose daily contact with Israelis is often limited to tense encounters with weapon-wielding soldiers. Few of the students have ever traveled into Israel. From their classroom window they can see the concrete slabs of the wall and fence Israel is building to keep out suicide bombers. But the isolation doesn't stop them from wondering what it's like. Rasha Rabaieh, a veiled 23-year-old from Bethlehem enrolled in the Israel studies program, said she wanted to "know the enemy, to understand why they came here." Her studies have dispelled some of her animosity. "I had an image of Israel as an enemy, but now I feel less hatred," she said. During a recent class on "the social structure of Israel," students heatedly debated the revival of the Hebrew language, the role of Israel's immigrant community vs. its native-born "Sabras," and whether modern Zionism is religious- or nationalist-driven. When students started bringing up Islam to explain their positions, Professor Mohammed Massalha cut them short, saying he wanted academic points of view, not ideological ones. The program's curriculum is hardly representative of mainstream Israel studies programs seen elsewhere in the world. It relies heavily on writings from the fringes of Israeli academia. Massalha's class, for instance, analyzed at length a text written by Azmi Bishara, an Israeli Arab and former lawmaker who fled the country this year amid suspicions of treason and espionage. Inside graffiti-adorned classrooms, in this Arab town once earmarked as the capital of Palestine, the students furiously talk about Israeli politics. One class focuses on the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, with Khader noting that like the Islamic militant Hamas group, Shas draws strength from the poor and marginalized. "They establish nursery schools and work in poor neighborhoods that are neglected by the government." A lot of students have a hard time separating academics from their daily frustrations. Abir Waridat, 23, from Hebron, was pushed by her family to enroll so she could become its resident "Israel expert." Seven of her brothers are in Israeli prisons, her house was once demolished and she blames Israel for the death of her father _ who had a stroke after an encounter with a soldier. She said she wants to be able to teach, and warn, the next generation of Palestinians about Israel. "It is difficult to believe that there will be peace with Israel because of their mentality," she said. "It doesn't seem that the people who believe in peace (in Israel) can beat the people who believe in war." Another student, Mohammed Ilias, said that was exactly why it was important for him to study. "I believe the conflict will last a long time and you need to know who you are working against," he said. "It is important to know their history, their thought process." Ilias, a middle-aged man who spent 15 years in an Israeli prison, said he wanted to learn how Palestinians can replicate Israel's successes. "We need to understand why we lost," he said. "That is a question that constantly passes in my mind. Why did we lose and how can we overcome them in the future?" Shlomit Keren, director of the Israel studies program at the University of Calgary, said the program's concept was positive, regardless of the students' motives. "The moment you base your world view on knowledge, that is a welcome development," said Keren. Israeli academics often visit the Abu Dis campus. But while studying Hebrew is part of the school curriculum, visiting Israelis are advised against speaking their native tongue, for fear of angering militant students. Khader, the civil servant, insisted most of his colleagues' intentions were pure. "There is no enemy in the education process," he said. "Ignorance is the main enemy." |
|
| |
| Fried riceDavid Wilder
October 26, 2007
A few days ago one of Hebron's least best friends, MK Yossi Beilin, introduced a bill into the Knesset calling for the expulsion of all Jews from Hebron. One of Hebron's best friends, MK Aryeh Eldad, pulled a fast one, introducing the identical bill, except that he exchanged the words, "Jewish Community of Hebron," with the words "Hebron Palestinians."
A great gimmick, which makes a point. Of course the left starting yelling and screaming about racism, to which he replied, 'what about you?" The bill, on its first reading, was defeated 47 to 11.
What bothers me is not Beilin or his friends. They are predictable. I can't say they are totally harmless, but their bark is certainly worse than their bite. What does bother me is the reaction of the present ruling Olmert clan. How did they react? Ministress Ruhama Avraham, answering in the name of the government said that 'this is a diplomatic issue which must be decided by the government, not by the opposition.'
Hearing that response, little red lights start flashing on and off in front of my eyes. My good friends at Arutz 7-Israel National News called me for a response, and this is what I told them:It is ironic that during the very weeks we are reading about Abraham, Hebron, and purchase of Ma'arat HaMachpela, the Knesset should be dealing with a bill promoting expulsion of Jews from Hebron, following in the footsteps of Nazi Mufti Haj Amin el-Hussainei and the British in 1929.
The government response also leaves much to be desired. The response should have been: Hebron, the first Jewish city in the land of Israel, home of our Patriarchs and Matriarchs, site of the 2nd holiest place to Jews in the world, is part of the eternal essence of the Jewish people, the Jewish state and Jewish heritage. It does not stand to reason that such a subject should even be broached. Hebron will remain an integral part of the State of Israel forever." So should have been the response. The fact that it was not so only strengthens the fact that this government must be toppled as soon as possible and a new government, recognizing Hebron's significance, should take power. Over 70,000 people visited Hebron from R"H Elul thru the end of Succot and tens of thousands are expected next Shabbat, when we read about the purchase of Ma'arat HaMachpela. This is our strength, this is our support and this is our future! [http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/124023]
So, the question to be addressed is: why? Why didn't Ministress Avraham (name ring a bell?) say that Hebron will remain Jewish forever?
In the past, PM Olmert, talking about Ma'arat HaMachpela, exclaimed that Israel would never relinquish that holy site. However, he neglected to speak about the Jewish COMMUNITY of Hebron.
Over a half a year ago the Hebron Jewish Community completed purchase of a new, huge structure between Hebron and Kiryat Arba, called it Beit HaShalom, the Peace House, and moved in. Inevitably, due to pressure from the left, and an Arab yelling 'wolf wolf' ('forgery forgery' â which probably saved his life â otherwise he would have been tortured and killed), the case has been in court, and a final decision has yet to be made. When we bought the building and moved in, the structure was nothing more than a shell. The community installed plasterboard walls, dividing the empty halls into rooms, allowing families to move in. However, there weren't any windows installed, nor were their electric lines hooked up to the building.
Due to leftwing demands and pressures, any construction in the building must be okayed by the Israeli "Civil Administration" or the Defense ministry. A couple of months ago, in preparation for winter, the community requested permission to: install windows, tar the roof to prevent leakage, and install electric lines to allow necessary heating in the building. These requests were based solely on humanitarian needs. The answer we received, straight from the desk of Defense Minister Ehud Barak was "NO!" No electricity, no windows and yes to a leaky roof.
Why did Barak so respond? Seemingly, he wishes to apply pressure on Yesha leaders to agree to remove so-called illegal 'hill-top settlements' (ma'ahzim) without a fight. A total building freeze in Judea and Samaria, including such sanctions in Hebron is, as far as he's concerned, a step in the right (left) direction.
Yet, I'm not so sure. The government and its long, extended arms, have been giving Hebron much grief. Barak refused to reconsider the expulsion and destruction of the homes in the Shalhevet neighborhood this past summer, despite the advice of some of his closest advisors. The 'Civil Administration' has plans to destroy another apartment and a room added onto another home as soon as they get a green light from the Supreme Court. The prosecutor's office is backing the planned destruction. Other pro-Arab, dangerous to Jews measures are also planned for the near future. Where is this all leading to? What is the 'between the lines' translation of Ministress Ruhama Avraham's response concerning Hebron?
I supposed you've already guessed. The answer starts with an "A." No, it's not the regime's report card. But it very well could be Annapolis.
Olmert won't be able to make any deals with Abu-Babbu about Jerusalem; that's still too sticky an issue. He will be able to come out with a declaration about a Palestinian state â 'everyone' agrees with that. But he needs something else, an issue with meat on the bones, to prove one hundred percent that he's serious, that he means business. He needs an issue that 'all' agree is a big bone stuck in the throat of the piece process. The big bone, is, of course, the 'settlements.' Which 'settlement' is the biggest and baddest of them all? Hebron. So what could be better than an announcement in Washington, about the impending removal of those 'problematic' Jews from Hebron?!
I wish it was a far-fetched idea. Unfortunately, I'm not sure it is. I don't know, of course, but wouldn't be surprised.
Who is standing behind the pressure on Israel to make such far reaching concessions? Undoubtedly, the White House. But WHO in the White House? George W. may give his blessings, but the woman running the show, (no, not Hillary yet), is Ms. Rice. Condi, looking for a place in history, realizes that it's now or never. And the American Secretary of State has a lot of punch behind her words. And she's punching, real hard. And George W is saying a lot of Amens.
What have Ms Rice and Mr Bush forgotten? Following the expulsion from Gush Katif the Americans suffered a tremendous catastrophe in New Orleans. Tens of thousands of people were forced from their homes due to the storms and flooding waters of Katrina. That was AFTER some 10,000 people were expelled from Gush Katif and the northern Shomron.
This time lightening struck BEFORE; Just saying the words Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria (and about 80,000 people) â and some 500,000 people had to be evacuated from their houses, with over 1,500 homes destroyed.
Everyone knows that George W. is a 'born-again. And it's said that Condi is real religious herself. But it seems they've forgotten that the G-d of Israel watches over his people, and thoughts and pressures concerning Jerusalem, Hebron, and Eretz Yisrael can have serious repercussions.
According to media reports, authorities in California are looking for arsonists who intentionally set the hellish blaze. Those really responsible are planning the next cataclysm out of the White House: George W and Condi. I call them 'the burning bush' and 'fried rice.'
It should be worthwhile to keep in mind that this may have been the heavenly response to verbal expression of the expulsion from Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem. G-d forbid, what might occur should it actually happen? First, the middle of the country, and now, the west coast. Where's next? Hope we never have to find out. It's preferable not to test the Almighty.
With blessings from Hebron.
|
|
| Abbas' Newspaper: 'Allah, Kill Americans'A paper run by Mahmoud Abbas publishes cartoon with prayers to turn American soldiers' wives into widows. U.S. still believes Abbas is a moderate. |  | | | Al-Hayat al-Jadida, the daily newspaper of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the Fatah terror group, featured a cartoon this week that illustrated a prayer for the killing of Americans. A Muslim is shown kneeling in prayer facing a U.S. B-2 stealth bomber, silhouetted in the sky. The words of the cartoon character's prayer adorn four missiles aimed at the American plane. These are his wishes: "Allah, scatter them!!"
“And turn their wives into widows!!"
“And turn their children into orphans!!"
“And give us victory over them!!" According to Palestinian Media Watch, which reported the story, this plea for the death and bereavement of Americans is a special prayer for Laylat Al-Qadr (the 27th day of Ramadan), as is noted in the corner of the cartoon. Publications in the PA and by Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah faction have a history of promoting support for those who fight and kill Americans. The most recently published 12th grade PA schoolbooks, for example, use the phrase "brave resistance" to describe the insurgents who fight American soldiers in Iraq. On Laylat al-Qadr, literally the Night of Decree, Muslims recite a large number of prayers. The Shi'a Muslims in particular stay awake all night, pray, and make wishes. As the PA calls for the death of Americans, the American government is making preparations for a summit meeting it will host next month between Israel's leadership and the PA's Mahmoud Abbas, whom it regards as a moderate.
| |
 Hamas lying in wait in West Bank
By MOHAMMED DARAGHMEH, Associated Press Writer Tue Jun 19, 1:35 PM ET
RAMALLAH, West Bank - Hamas leaders in the West Bank have been driven underground by a Fatah campaign of kidnappings and arrests, but the Islamic militants warn they'll eventually come out of hiding to try to destabilize the rule of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas with car bombings and assassinations.
Hamas is too weak now for a frontal assault on Fatah in the West Bank, but Iranian funding for Hamas, Abbas' political weakness and Fatah infighting could one day change the balance, Fatah leaders, Hamas militants and Israeli analysts say.
Security forces allied with Abbas say they're determined to snuff out Hamas in the West Bank. The president has declared the Hamas militias illegal, and his security chiefs said they wouldn't just go after Hamas' weapons, but also its money.
"The only way to deal with Hamas ... is by dismantling every single military cell in the West Bank, and that's what the security apparatus is doing now," said Kamal Abu Rob, a Fatah lawmaker.
The best insurance against a Hamas takeover might come from elsewhere: Israel's relentless pursuit of Hamas has kept the militants on the defensive and the resumption of foreign aid to the West Bank, after a 15-month boycott, could swing public opinion strongly in Abbas' favor.
Hamas leaders are keeping their heads down. In the past week, some 120 Hamas activists have been arrested by security forces or kidnapped by a violent Fatah offshoot. Gunmen have stormed the parliament building in Ramallah, burned offices of Hamas lawmakers in Nablus and warned some government employees with Hamas ties not to return to work. One Hamas member has been killed and another seriously wounded. Several others have been shot in the legs.
Khouloud al-Masri, a Hamas member of the Nablus municipal council, was forced from her office Tuesday. She said Fatah gunmen told her she wouldn't be able to return the next day. Al-Masri said her husband is in hiding and their five children are with grandparents.
In response, Hamas has made threats. "They (Fatah leaders) think Hamas is weak in the West Bank, just as they thought Hamas was in Gaza," said Mahmoud Zahar, a Hamas hard-liner in Gaza. "The West Bank may surprise the world with what they don't expect, and it's best for them not to fall into this trap."
Hamas' military strength in the West Bank is difficult to assess. Some Israeli analysts say only a few dozen gunmen escaped arrest by Israel.
But a top Palestinian security official in Ramallah said Hamas has recruited hundreds who are organized in sleeper cells, outfitted with guns and uniforms, and ready to move. Hamas, which carried out dozens of suicide bombings in Israel in recent years, can also draw on explosives experts and runs secret bomb labs, he said, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with the rules of his security service.
A senior Hamas militant leader said the group has recruited about 4,000 gunmen in Nablus and Hebron, and has thousands of weapons. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he is wanted by Israel.
He said that when the signal comes to act, Hamas would carry out car bombs and try to assassinate Fatah leaders to destabilize the West Bank. On Tuesday, civilian cars were banned from security headquarters in the territory amid concerns about car bombs.
Money might help tilt the balance.
Fatah's former Gaza strongman Mohammed Dahlan alleged that Iran funded Hamas' onslaught on Gaza with some $250 million. "If we are not careful, it (the Iranian-directed campaign) will move to the West Bank," he told Palestine TV.
And Hillel Frisch, an Israeli analyst, said Iranian money could buy off Fatah security officers who haven't been fully paid for months. He also noted that militants have moved from one group to the other in the past, and that money could be a strong incentive.
With the foreign aid embargo lifted, Abbas expects full Western support for his government. The resumption of aid will allow him to pay his 27,000 security forces in the West Bank and ensure their loyalty.
Palestinians are following the power struggle with trepidation. "I hope that this new government will control security and control the street," said Medhat Hanans, 45, a shopkeeper in Ramallah. "The foreign aid that we will receive will help the government a lot."
The Ramallah security chief said he has orders to block money to Hamas, some of which he says is funneled through West Bank businesses. He said Hamas' social institutions, such as welfare organizations, will also to be targeted.
Fatah's greatest weakness — its petty internal rivalries — may yet sabotage its stand against Hamas. Behind the scenes, there's angry finger-pointing over the loss of Gaza, but Fatah activists are under orders not to go public.
Kadoura Fares, a Fatah leader in Ramallah, said the shock of recent days might finally shake up the movement, which failed to make reforms even after its election defeat to Hamas in 2006.
"Fatah activists have now realized the importance of defending their movement and building it, and the necessity of halting the internal battles," he said. "For the first time, you find a kind of harmony in the movement, because it is threatened by Hamas, and our national project (of a state) is threatened too."
 JPost.com » Opinion » Columnists »
Our World: Grounded in fantasy By CAROLINE GLICK Jun. 18, 2007 21:04 | Updated Jun. 19, 2007 Iran and its client state Syria have a strategic vision for the Middle East.They wish to take over Lebanon. They wish to destroy Israel. They wish to defeat the US in Iraq. They wish to drive the US and NATO from Afghanistan.They wish to dominate the region by driving the rest of the Arab world toits jihad-supporting knees. Then they wish to apply their vision to the rest of the world. Today, Syria and Iran are ardently advancing their strategic vision for the world through a deliberate strategy of victory by a thousand cuts. Last week's Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip; Sunday's reopening of the Lebanese front against Israel with the Syrian-ordered rocket attacks on Kiryat Shemona; the now five-week old Syrian ordered low-intensity warfare against Lebanon's pro-Western Siniora government; last week's attack on the al-Askariya mosque in Samarra; the recent intensification of terrorism in Afghanistan and Iran's move to further destabilize the country by violently deporting 100,000 Afghan refugees back to the war-torn country - all of these are moves to advance this clear Iranian-Syrian strategy. And all these moves have taken place against the backdrop of Syria's refashioning of its military in the image of Hizbullah on steroids and Iran's relentless, unopposed progress in its nuclear weapons program. For their part, both the US and Israel also have a strategic vision. Unfortunately, it is grounded in fantasy. WASHINGTON and Jerusalem wish to solve all the problems of the region and the world by establishing a Palestinian state in Gaza, Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem. While Israel now faces Iranian proxies on two fronts, in their meeting at the White House today US President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will gush about their support for Palestinian statehood. Creepily echoing LSD king Timothy Leary, they will tune out this reality as they drone on about the opportunities that Gaza's transformation into a base for global jihad afford to the notion that promoting the Fatah terrorist organization's control over Judea and Samaria can make the world a better, safer, happier place. Today Bush and Olmert will announce their full support for Fatah chief and Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas's new government. The US will intensify General Keith Dayton's training and arming of Fatah forces. Israel will give Fatah $700 million. The Europeans and the rest of the international community will give the "moderate, secular" terror group still more money and guns and love. The US will likely also demand that Olmert order the IDF to give Fatah terrorists free reign in Judea and Samaria. Olmert and Bush claim that by backing Abbas militarily, financially andpolitically they will be setting up an "alternative Palestine" which will rival Hamas's jihadist Palestine. As this notion has it, envious of the goodfortune of their brethren in Judea and Samaria, Gazans will overthrow Hamas and the course will be set for peace - replete with the ethnic cleansing of Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem of all Jewish presence. FATAH FORCES barely raised a finger to prevent their defeat in Gaza in spite of the massive quantities of US arms they received and the military training they underwent at the hands of US General Keith Dayton. Bush, Olmert and all proponents of the notion of strengthening Fatah in Judea and Samaria refuse to answer one simple question: Why would a handover of Judea and Samaria to Abbas's Fatah produce a better outcome than Israel's 2005 handover of Gaza to Abbas's Fatah? They refuse to answer this question because they know full well that the answer is that there is absolutely no reason to believe that the outcome can be better. They know full well that since replacing Yasser Arafat as head of the PA in 2004, Abbas refused to take any effective action against Hamas. They know that he refused to take action to prevent Hamas's rise to power in Gaza and Judea and Samaria. They know that the guns the US transferred to Fatah in Gaza were surrendered to Hamas without a fight last week. They know that the billions of dollars of international and Israeli assistance to Fatah over the past 14 years never were used to advance the cause of peace. They know that that money was diverted into the pockets of Fatah strongmen and utilized to build terror militias in which Hamas members were invited to serve. They know that Fatah built a terror superstructure in Judea, Samaria and Gaza which enabled operational cooperation between Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad terror cells. SO WHY embrace the fantasy that things can be different now, in Judea and Samaria? Rather than provide rational arguments to defend their view that Hamas's takeover of Gaza is an opportunity for peace, proponents of peace fantasies as strategic wisdom explain vacuously that peace is the best alternative to jihad. They whine that those who point out that Israel now borders Iran in Lebanon and Gaza have nothing positive to say. To meet the growing threat in Gaza, they argue that Europeans, or maybe Egyptians and Jordanians can be deployed at the international border with Egypt to stem the weapons and terror personnel flow into Gaza. To meet the growing threat in Lebanon, Olmert pleads for more UN troops. Both views ignore the obvious: Gaza has been transformed into anIranian-sponsored base for global jihad because Egypt has allowed it to be so transformed. Assisted by its Syrian-sponsored Palestinian allies, Hizbullah has rebuilt its arsenals and reasserted its control in southern Lebanon because UN forces in southern Lebanon have done nothing to prevent it from doing so. No country on earth will volunteer to fight Hamas and its jihadist allies in Gaza. No government on earth will voluntarily deploy its forces to counter Hizbullah and Iran in south Lebanon. This is why - until they fled - European monitors at the Rafah terminal were a joke. This is why Spanish troops in UNIFIL devote their time in Lebanon to teaching villagers Spanish. SO WHY are Bush and Olmert set to embrace Fatah and Abbas today? Why are they abjectly refusing to come to terms with the strategic reality of the Iranian-Syrian onslaught? Why are they insisting that the establishment of a Palestinian state is their strategic goal and doing everything they can to pretend that their goal has not been repeatedly proven absurd? Well, why should they? As far as Bush is concerned, no American politician has ever paid a price for advancing the cause of peace processes that strengthen terrorists and hostile Arab states at Israel's expense. Bush's predecessor Bill Clinton had Arafat over to visit the White House more often than anyother foreign leader and ignored global jihad even when its forces bombed US embassies and warships. And today Clinton receives plaudits for his efforts to bring peace to the Middle East. By denying that the war against Israel is related to the war in Iraq; by ignoring the strategic links between all the Iranian and Syrian sponsored theaters of war, Bush views gambling with Israel's security as a win-win situation. He will be applauded as a champion of peace and if the chips go down on Israel, well, it won't be Americans being bombed. OLMERT LOOKS to his left and sees president-elect Shimon Peres. Peres, the architect of the Oslo process which placed Israel's national security in the hands ofthe PLO, has been rewarded for his role in imperiling his country by his similarly morally challenged political colleagues who just bestowed him with Israel's highest office. Olmert looks to his left and his sees incoming defense minister Ehud Barak. In 2000, then prime minister Barak withdrew Israeli forces from Lebanon, and enabled Iran's assertion of control over southern Lebanon through its Hizbullah proxy. In so doing, Barak set the conditions for last summer's war, and quite likely, for this summer's war. By offering Arafat Gaza, 95 percent of Judea and Samaria and half of Jerusalem at Camp David, Barak showed such enormous weakness that he all but invited the Palestinian terror war which Arafat began planning the day he rejected Barak's offer. For his failure, Barak has been rewarded by his Labor Party, which elected him its new chairman on the basis of his vast "experience," and by the media which has embraced him as a "professional" defense minister. Olmert looks to his right and he sees how the media portrays Likud Chairman Binyamin Netanyahu and former IDF Chief of General Staff Moshe Ya'alon as alarmists for claiming that Israel cannot abide by an Iranian-proxy Hamas state on its border. He sees that Shas and Yisrael Beiteinu supported Peres's candidacy as president and have joined their fortunes to Olmert's in a bid to block elections which will bring the Right to power. ISRAEL HAS arguably never faced a more dangerous strategic environment than it faces today. Yet it is not without good options. It can retake control over the Gaza-Sinai border. It can renew its previously successful tactic of killing Hamas terrorists. It can continue its successful campaign of keeping terrorists down in Judea and Samaria, and it can continue preparing for war in the north. All of these options can be sold to the Left. But today both Bush and Olmert will reject these options in favor of mindless peace process prattle. They will reject reality as they uphold Abbas as a credible leader and shower him with praise, money and arms. Their political fortunes will be utmost in their minds as they do this. And they will be guaranteeing war that will claim the lives of an unknown number of Israeli civilians and soldiers. Bush and Olmert should know that when the time for reckoning comes they will not be able to claim, along with Peres and Barak that their hands did not shed this blood. Reality has warned them of their folly. But in their low, dishonest opportunism, they have chosen to ignore reality and amuse themselves with fantasies and photo-ops.
 By avoiding war, the US and Israel are inviting war or embracing defeat By Ted Belman http://www.israpundit.com/2006/?p=4946 June 8, 2007 In a recent post I argued that Israel’s choice, either occupy Gaza or embrace Arab “peace” plan. By this I meant Israel must decide whether it wants a peace process or a war process. It can’t avoid war and avoid the “Arab peace” initiative at the same time. Olmert’s overtures to Syria underscores his choice. Caroline Glick’s current column James Baker’s disciples argues that Bush has made the same choice. After discussing how Bush wants Israel to supply arms to Fatah that will be used against Israel and is intent on supplying the latest technology to Saudi Arabia and Egypt that will also be used against Israel, goes on to explain,
The Bush administration is not just asking Israel to facilitate the arming of its enemies. It is also placing restrictions on Israel’s ability to arm itself. As The Jerusalem Post reported on Wednesday, the Pentagon has yet to respond to Israel’s request to purchase the F-22 stealth bomber. Moreover, the US seems to be torpedoing Israel’s acquisition of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The Pentagon recently voiced its objection to Israel’s plan to install Israeli technology in the jets that are to be supplied starting in 2014. Israel’s installation of its own electronic warfare systems in its F-16s and F-15s is what has allowed the IAF to maintain its qualitative edge over Arab states that have also purchased the aircraft. THE ADMINISTRATION’S display of hostility toward Israel is unfortunately not an aberration. It is the result of a policy shift that occurred immediately after the Republican Party’s defeat in the Congressional elections in November. After the defeat, the administration embraced former secretary of state James Baker’s foreign policy paradigm, which is based on the belief that it is possible and desirable to reach a stable balance of power in the Middle East. As Baker sees it, this balance can be reached by forcing Israel to shrink to its “natural” proportions and assisting supposedly moderate and stable states like Egypt and Saudi Arabia to grow into their “natural” proportions. Once the states of the region (including Syria and Iran, which Baker wishes to appease) have settled into their proper proportions, stability will be ensured. She describes the inherent lack of stability in the ME and argues, Aside from that, the specter of a nuclear-armed Iran throws a monkey wrench into any thought of regional stability. A look around the region shows just how absurd Baker’s notions truly are. [..] Furthermore, the paragons of moderation and stability in Egypt and Saudi Arabia that Baker and his followers are so keen to strengthen are neither stable nor moderate. Both Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Saudi King Abdullah are old men of uncertain health. To “stabilize” their regimes, they wrought unholy alliances with the Muslim Brotherhood and the Wahabis, the only forces in Egyptian and Saudi societies that have not been flattened under their jackboots. This week, Channel 10 reported that the Bush administration recently informed Israel and the Gulf states that it has no intention of launching military strikes against Iran’s nuclear installations. The Americans explained that they need Iranian assistance in stabilizing Iraq to pave the way for an American withdrawal from the country before Bush leaves office. Under Baker’s regency, the administration apparently now subscribes to the belief that they will be better off out of Iraq and with a nuclear-armed Iran, than in Iraq without a nuclear-armed Iran. In the hope of avoiding war, both the US and Israel are inviting war. Posted by Ted Belman @ 9:11 am |
| |
comments 
This is true but it is more accurate to say that Israel can’t avoid war and the war process at the same time since the “peace” process is actually a war process.
The ideology of the Arab states and Islam demands war. That has already been stated and confirmed constantly for decades now. At issue for the Arabs is how to go about it without risking another defeat. The “peace” process for the Arabs is war by attrition.
Once Israel is weakened and worn down then there will be an actual war. And keep in mind, even if Israel and the Arabs do not actually reach an agreement, the process itself is wearing Israel down. If at some point an agreement is reached however, it will be but a prelude to war.
Comment by RandyTexas
— June 8, 2007 @ 10:48 am
Glick’s take on the issues, the problems and the dynamics of the situation vis a vis America, Israel and the Muslim Middle East as usual smacks not just of truth, but brilliance.
The one thing I do have trouble buying into however is that Olmert’s government is so inept and foolish to be Jim Baker’s lackey and give Israel away in order that Israel can have peace. The two objectives are mutually exclusive.
If I am wrong however and there is no one leader or no political party to put a stop to Olmert and his government, then Israelis may as well just close out the lights and leave Israel to find homes elsewhere. With the loss of Israel in such case, at least Jewish lives won’t be lost but those Israelis who do leave will soon find that they would be living lost lives.
I would think that reading C. Glick’s words would open Israelis eyes not only to reality, but what to do about it. Is the problem that the Jerusalem Post is read by far too few?
Comment by Bill Narvey
— June 8, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
History does not repeat but often it rhymes. Every generation it seems, errs critically in its assessment of the determination of bellicose, totalitarian regimes to risk war in order to conquer and subjugate and this leads inevitably, inexorably to the war they so desperately wish to avoid. Democracies mean well; they understand the cost of war and are thus reticent to engage in them until all else fails. So despite the obvious historical precedents and clear understanding of the limitations of diplomacy, they go through the motions hoping that this time, things will be different.
Well, this time things will not be different and both the US and Israel will be dragged into war — America for its global stature and values and Israel for its survival.
Comment by Charles Martel — June 8, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
Charles, you have characterized democracy as typically meeting challenges the same way time and again in order to avoid being drawn into war and notwithstanding the less than satisfactory and successful results are achieved, still democracies expect a different result each time. That attitude of course is one of the classic definitions of insanity.
We Westerners judge ourselves sane, but we take efforts to avoid war to insane lengths with the result we harm ourselves and embolden and strengthen our enemies.
We Westerners judge radical Islamists including nations such as Iran as acting insanely for using war and threats of war as their modi operandi and vivendi, but the fact is that their efforts to achieve their objectives do succeed, forgetting of course that in doing so, they have left a swath of death, suffering and devastation behind.
When comparing Westerners and the radical Muslim world on a sanity scale therefore without regard to Western values, morality and culture, but look only to objectives and means, it is less than clear which one is the more sane and which is the more insane.
Comment by Bill Narvey
— June 8, 2007 @ 1:59 pm
well..u sound very pessimistic. i agree the situation is not that rosy and peace does seem thousands of years away but this news on Prime Minister Olmert saying that he is willing to quit Golan heights for peace is encouraging, don’t u think..? this could be THE start we have been hoping for..
Comment by bhumikag
— June 8, 2007 @ 2:58 pm
Bhumikag, if Olmert’s offer to give away the Golan to Syria is encouraging, it is only encouraging to Syria and discouraging to Israelis. Ask youself Bhumikag, why Israelis expressed almost unanimous outrage with Olmert’s offer to Syria?
Comment by Bill Narvey
— June 8, 2007 @ 3:55 pm
Below is the text of a voice message I’ve posted to my multiply.com message board. It underscores and explains this tendency of Israel’s leftist, Freemason governments of not wanting to win wars (because Israel’s God fights for them) and recapture territory mandated for a Jewish state, that is now occupied by the Arab Muslims:
Firstly, there have been clear indications for quite a while that Syria is preparing to attack Israel. This threat must have become more serious, AND that might be why the Olmert government is suddenly frantically investigating the possibility of entering into peace talks with Syria. In fact, I heard this morning that Olmert has offered Syria the Golan on a platter. And his ministers are outdoing each others in attempts to assure the Syrians that Israel doesn’t have plans to attack them.
It is an attempt to avert war, because it does not fit the agenda of Israel’s leaders to fight and conquer Israel’s enemies! (Like king David would have done!)
What do I mean by this far fetched statement?
It can be explained by using the inconceivable situation that leftists and anarchist Jews have been demonstrating the last days in solidarity with the Arabs about the tragedy that Israel managed to win the Six Day War in 1967!!!!!
They don’t even care to think what would have happened had Israel lost that war! Then the Sunnis & Shiites might have been killing each other in the streets of Jerusalem and not in Baghdad!
The reason for this situation is explained by the definition of what a leftist is about in Israel and the West, namely, IT IS SOMEONE WHO FIGHTS FOR THE ENEMY!
What most people don’t know is that the Jewish leaders who fought for a homeland for the Jews, including Theodore Herzel, were firstly, leftists and secondly, Zionists, and so were most of the Israeli governments from Ben Gurion until today.
Being leftists they have been doing what leftists do!
They fought for the enemy, but in a subtle way by only reacting minimally to aggression and provocative action of the enemy. [Except of course where God intervened to let Israel win - as in the major wars from 1948 to 1973]
Why is that? It is because they need the enemy to keep them in power and to help them to achieve their goal.
They call this goal PEACE, but it is just a cover-up for what their real agenda is, namely to establish a system and standards that are the complete opposite of God’s guidelines in the Bible for Israel and the nations.
Elohim showed exactly what he wanted and still wants when he dispersed the people of the world when they tried to set up a one world system in Babel.
God wants sovereign nations & Satan wants a one world system!!!
AND here is the real problem!!!
There are Jews among those people in the world who are conspiring to achieve a New World Order.
AND it is this type of Jew who has for the most part been the leaders of Israel since 1948.
But I’ll tell you more about that after this piece has run for a few days.
Comment by zionsake
— June 9, 2007 @ 3:00 am