Future vision: what the Arab Israeli leadership is calling for in Israel

FYI, this is an old article (from 2007), but within it is information which is vital to understanding the dynamic between Jews and Arabs within Israel. The mainstream leadership of Arab Israelis have united around a "Future Vision" document which does the following:

• Ellimination of the Jewish character of Israel
• Ellimination of the Law of return
• Ellimination of the Magen David as Israel's national symbol
• Making Israel an officially bi-national state
• An apparent call for right of return for Palestinians (end of the Law of return for Jews, but implementation of 'right of return' for Palestinians)

More equal distribution of government aid and benefits (this is a tricky subject; aid is not distributed equally in part because Arab Israelis do not serve in the IDF, nor do they vote in the same percentages Jews vote; much of the aid is distributed based upon voting numbers as well as status as an IDF veteran)

The "Future Vision" document calls the creation of Israel a "Nakba" (catastrophe in Arabic) Ending any Jewish control over the Arab schools - teaching Arab Israelis a "Nakba education" (please note that already Arab Israelis learn a "nakba education")

Here are more articles discussing the 'future vision,' which came out around the time I first was in Israel...

IHT

Haaretz

The document itself

Please note a few background facts. Firstly, as you may or may not be aware, there are 57 members of the Organization of Islamic Conference. This means 57 states in the world define themselves as explicitly Muslim in character. There are numerous states which also explicitly call themselves Christian in character. In neighboring Jordan, Jews are not allowed citizenship, nor can they own land. In Saudi Arabia, non-Muslims are not even allowed to enter the city of Mecca, nor can non-Muslims get citizenship or even be allowed to openly practice their religion. Furthermore, any Palestinian state would most likely be defined as Islamic in character.

As far as the Law of Return goes; it is important to note that the Arab Israeli document does not mention the more than 750,000 Jews who were kicked out of Arab countries after 1948, without compensation, and for the mere crime of being Jewish. It is also important to note that while the Arab Israeli document calls for the end of the Jewish Law of Return, it calls for an explicitly Arab return to Israel, thereby reducing Jews in the one state they are a majority to a minority within Israel. This document also fails to note the fact that the 'Palestinian' refugees exist because they declared war upon the nascent state of Israel in 1948; there would be no refugee problem if there was no war which was declared upon Israel.

Thus far, no major Arab Israeli leader I am aware of has disavowed the "Future Vision" document. In fact, it appears that, though the document itself may not have been read by Arab Israelis, the concepts within them are certainly widely accepted.

In my opinion, it is harmful for Arab Israelis to learn a different history than Jewish Israelis, and have a separate education system. This means they become a separate people, and a state-within-a-state. It is problematic enough that Arab Israelis are exempt from the IDF and rarely serve in National Service. What the "Future Vision" document is calling for is essentially a "two state solution," wherein there is a 'Palestine' in the West Bank, and an Israel-of-Arab-character-possibly-to-be-renamed-an-Arab-name to the West. So really two Arab states.

Food for thought when considering what should be done re: the Israeli-Arab conflict.

Defining RIGHT and WRONG.

I was reading over old posts, and I came upon a gem of a comment I wrote back in 2006. I still adhere to this ideology, and so I thought I would post it for you kind C4A folks: This was written back in 2006 in response to someone who claimed "nonviolence is always possible," and that "sin is only a religious concept."

You said again and again that 'nonviolence is always possible.'

Please point to a single case of nonviolent peaceful resistence against the Nazis by the Jews that resulted in the saving of Jewish life.

Obviously, I am aware that many Jews simply fled Nazi Germany and were able to live because of this. I also know that, prior to Nazi Germany starting the Holocaust, some Jews were saved out of Germany. That is not my question.

I want to know of a single case of Jews saving Jews in the middle of the Holocaust that was done in a nonviolent manner. One single case.

You flat out said on multiple occasions that 'nonviolence is always possible' and 'killing leads to more death.'

So point to one single case of this. You would certainly have half a leg to stand on if you could point to a single case of this.

The concept of sin has been linked to religion, but also is linked to secular humanism. I am referring to crimes against humanity, and NOT against God. Many secular humanists absolutely believe in morality and right and wrong.

The fact that you lump together what Israel is doing to the 'Palestinians' and what was done to the Jews during the Holocaust is the essence of BOTH moral absolutism AND moral relativism.

All killing is wrong, according to you. This is moral absolutism.

Hence, according to your very words: I don't see violence as being any more acceptable because it wasn't indiscriminate.

That means that aiming for Bin Laden is the same as aiming for a crowd.

Both involves killing. And killing is always wrong.

Your extreme stance on killing results in presenting equivalencies between very different scenarios.

Correct me if I am wrong, but according to you, there are two choices: die or fight back. Those are the only two choices if one wants to be ethically sound. Should someone fight back, they are no longer ethically sound to you, as killing is always wrong, regardless of why it is going on.

I already presented the most extreme examples of gunmen going into your home and hoping to annhiliate your family, and you still said that killing would be wrong EVEN THEN.

I realize you are being consistent, and certainly I cannot criticize you for that! I also realize you do not give Jews a double standard that you would not apply to yourself. What you are saying does not stem from antisemitism - I see that very clearly.

What I don't get if why you insist on these logical extremes. The 'choice' between killing and being slaughtered oneself is hardly a choice at all. If what you are saying is that you are hoping to avoid a slaughter, then isn't a slaughter going to happen if Israel does not and accepts 'Palestinians' coming in and massacring Jews? And is it ethical of a nation to allow the mass slaughter of its citizens because it refuses to fight back? What is the point of nationhood if NOT to get some measure of protection against the world?

You also said the following: In case you haven't read it enough times, my view is that genocides are always wrong because they entail the killing of innocent people. I don't make exceptions for those who wish to kill Jews any more than I make exceptions for those who wish to kill those of any other particular ethnicity or nation.

This assumes that Israeli Jews are actually trying to genocide 'Palestinians' when they fight back. This is absolutely untrue. The Israelis have the firepower such that if they wanted to, they could kill every 'Palestinian' in a matter of days. Yet they do not do this. Why? Because they take the time to only kill those who are terrorists and take great pains to avoid civilian death. This is never 100% - but the intent is not to kill civilians. As I said, this is equivalent to a robber coming into your home, shooting at you, and when you shoot back, you kill a civilian. The legal responsibility for that death is on the robber. Same applies here.

Where is there an intent to genocide? If there was such an intent, the 'Palestinians' would have ceased to exist long ago. I already showed you a link to an extensive archive of 'Palestinian textbooks' and media, showing a clear intent to wipe Israelis off the face of the earth. We know the 'Palestinians' are attempting a genocide (not all are, but at least the leadership is). This is definitively proven. If they had the firepower, they would kill every Israeli today. What do you point to when you claim that Israelis are genociding the 'Palestinians'? What shred of evidence can you even claims supports this?

The bottom line is that your claims of Israelis genociding the 'Palestinians' are as spurious as your claims of Israel being an apartheid state.

My words were as important then as they are now. My only quibble would be that I now do believe it is extraordinarily difficult to define 'sin' and 'right' and 'wrong' without religion. Unless there is a fixed star to define what is good and what is bad, I do fear moral relativism. This moral relativism can also occur with religion, and it is ultimately one of the greatest enemies of our times. It is why I have been studying Judaism now for about two years, and continue to study it weekly.

Why am I reposting this? Because of comments that have been posted on C4A in response to a post I wrote a year and a half ago concerning my night at the theater to see 'Masked' the play. The responses are not substantive, but center upon some idea that I do not believe in 'peace.' (Of course their version of 'peace' is ultimately the 'peaceful' destruction of Israel; they claim to love Jews, but they only appear to love the Jews of the Holocaust who walked peacefully to the gallows.)

I believe that these commentators believe what they believe because they fail to appreciate the difference between right and wrong, and fail to comprehend that you have to stand up for your rights. There is also a dynamic similar to the battered wife syndrome which I already commented upon in my original 'Masked' post. But I believe, in addition to the battered wife syndrome concept, these commentators simply fail to appreciate the difference between right and wrong. That is why I am posting the comment I wrote about 2 1/2 years ago.

Jews such as the ones who replied to that post will often be seen pouring over books on Yiddish and think this is an example of their 'love' of Jewry. This makes perfect sense to me. Such Jews believe in the weak and ghetto Jew as epitimized by the Jews of Europe during the 19th and early 20th centuries. And so "J-Street" Jews and their ilk will profess a love of Yiddish culture...only it really is a love of Jews of the Holocaust, who [mostly] walked meakly to the gallows.

This is not real love, it is ultimately hatred, despite the protestations to the contrary often witnessed by such leftist Jews. This is the sort of 'love' that the Neturei Karta engage in. They too claim to truly 'love' Jews - as long as they are the meek Jews of the Holocaust.

I was not diplomatic in my original post on the topic (and could have phrased things better), but I do stand by the sentiment I expressed concerning my encounter at 'Masked' the play.

Israel at 60 event at radio City Music Hall: Demonstration and Counter-Demonstration!

Greetings! Sorry for not posting in ages! I have been very busy. Last night, I attended the Israel at 60 event at Radio City Music Hall. I was counter-demonstrating outside, and then I received a free ticket!

I was able to hear Matisyahu, he's amazing! The bands inside were amazingly talented, and I was able to hear Governor David Patterson speak. He was amazing! I am now a huge Gov. Patterson fan. :)

Anyway, below are pictures from the demonstration outside against Israel. As you can see, there was open support for terror, and the conflation of the Sean Bell case with the 'Palestinian' cause. I never knew Sean Bell was a 'Palestinian'! You learn new things every day! I told one of the people, a 70+ year old man, that he was associating with terror supporters (a clear fact), and he screamed, at the top of his lungs: "MURDERER! MURDERER! YOU MURDER LITTLE BABIES!" I was so shocked to see this level of hate in his eyes that I nervously laughed, and then walked away. The only surprise for me was the lack of the Neterei Karta presence.

Click here to see pictures of the 'demonstration'!

Samples:

Open terror support!

Then there was our counter-demonstration (yay Andy!). Click here to see some pictures. Am Yisrael Chai!

Samples:

It is clear who is flying American flags and who hopes to take down America.

UPDATE: Please read the Jewish Week for a summary of the concert last night. Rightly, Gov. Patterson was mentioned as an amazing speaker. He really did stand out.

Take action; support Congressman Lowey!

(United States) Rep. Nita Lowey, Foreign Operations Chairperson, is demanding accountability from Abbas on statements he has made in Arabic in the Jordanian press. She spoke of taking away the $150 million in funding promised to the 'Palestinian Authority.' In addition to Abbas's Jordanian statements, the PA official newspaper put a picture of the terrorist who perpetrated the attack on Thursday in Jerusalem on the front page calling him a ‘holy martyr.’ As long as the endorsement of terrorism is still going on in the PA there will never be the possibility of peace. We must do all we can to hold them accountable.

We suggest that you call Rep. Nita Lowey thanking her for demanding accountability from Abbas and the PA for their statements, and that you call or email the White House demanding that they hold the PA accountable for their endorsement of terrorism.

Here is a suggested statement:

We call on the United States to hold PA Prime Minister Abbas and the official PA newspaper accountable to the 2008 Foreign Operations Bill for advocating or honoring terrorist activity. The PA newpaper called the perpetrator of last Thursday’s attack a ‘holy martyr’ and Mr. Abbas spoke with pride of violence he had waged in his past, suggested that terrorism could start anew in the future. Is this the PA that we want to be funding?

Representative Nita Lowey

Washington, D.C. Office

2329 Rayburn HOB

Washington, D.C. 20515

202-225-6506

202-225-0546 (fax)

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20500

Phone Numbers

Comments: 202-456-1111

Switchboard: 202-456-1414

FAX: 202-456-2461

TTY/TDD

Comments: 202-456-6213

Visitors Office: 202-456-2121

E-Mail

Please send your comments to comments@whitehouse.gov.

Human butchers mass murder in Jerusalem yeshiva

Just disgusting. Israeli Arab terrorists killed at least eight yeshiva boys today.

I have no words. This is an Israeli Arab group, supposedly 'so well integrated' into society,' who are doing the butchering, and in this case they purposely attacked a school - with teenage boys. The brutality and inhumanity is disgusting and beyond words.

What is most shocking is that somehow, despite the fact that this attack happened, 'peace talks' will go on, as if somehow there is a culture for 'peace,' or anything other than a desire for PIECES of Jews.

Tragic.

UPDATE:

If you have time, please say the following:

PSALM 130: A song of ascents. From the depths I called you Ado-nay. My Lord, hear my voice, may Your ears be attentive to the sound of my pleas. If you preserve iniquities, O' God, my Lord, who could survive? For with you is forgiveness, that you may be feared. I put confidence in Ado-nay, my soul put confidence, and I hoped for his word. I yearn for my Lord, among those longing for the dawn, those longing for the dawn. Let Israel hope for Ado-nay, for with Ado-nay is kindness, and with Him is abundant redemption. And He shall redeem Israel for all its iniquities.

PRAYER FOR THE ILL: He who blessed our forefathers, Avraham, Yitzchak and Ya'acov, Moshe, Aharon, David and Shlomo, may He bless and heal those injured today in the terrorist attack at Yeshivat Mercaz Harav. Because I (insert your name) will, without taking a vow, contribute charity on their behalf. In reward for this may the Holy One blessed be He be filled with compassion for them to restore their health, to heal them, to strengthen , to revivify them. And may He send them speedily a complete recovery from heaven among the other sick people of Israel, a recovery of the body, a recovery of the spirit, swiftly and soon and let us all respond Amen.

The Peaceful Realisation of The Palestinian Right of Self-determination

I found this link worth reading:

For nearly four decades, he expressed and symbolised in his person the national aspirations of the Palestinian people.

Now that he is gone, both Israelis and Palestinians, and the friends of both peoples throughout the world, must make even greater efforts to bring about the peaceful realisation of the Palestinian right of self-determination.

It looks like sort of new Gandhi to me...

Whatever, world leaders thoughts are alredy registered. My own comments will be too harsh if i publish them. Yet I wanna know, what do you think?

The State Department, In a Nutshell

I have trouble believing this story, its too crazy.

The USA will defend the PLO - an anti-American and anti-Israel Jew-Hating Nazi-based organisation against Americans who have been harmed by their bombs....

That can't be right.

Can it?

Palestinians Ask U.S. To Intervene in Suits Over Terrorist Attacks

The State Department is considering supporting the Palestinian Authority in its quest to avoid paying hundreds of millions of dollars in judgements won by American victims of Palestinian terrorist attacks in Israel, according to Palestinian officials and defence lawyers involved in the cases.

There should be nothing to consider.

U.S. officials insist that no decision has been made regarding the complex litigation, which could force the Bush administration to choose between supporting compensation for victims of terrorism and bolstering the Palestinian government as the United States presses for a breakthrough in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

Palestinians do not want co-existence with Israel, the so-called "peace" talks are a complete farce.

Testimony in Israeli courts has connected senior Palestinian leaders -- such as the late Yasser Arafat -- to specific terrorist attacks involved in the lawsuits. But Palestinian officials have argued that it makes no sense for the United States to be providing millions of dollars in aid to the Palestinian Authority while U.S. courts are threatening to bankrupt it.

No kidding, it makes absolutely no sense for the USA to be fighting a "war on Terror" while supporting terrorists.

In response to a plea for assistance from Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice 13 months ago sidestepped the issue, writing that "the United States is not party to these enforcement proceedings." But in December, a U.S. federal judge asked the government whether it would get involved, creating the current dilemma for the administration.

"There has been a rethinking in the State Department that I wholeheartedly welcome," said Afif Safieh, head of mission in Washington for the Palestine Liberation Organization. He said the lawsuits were "politically and ideologically motivated to drive the Palestinian Authority into bankruptcy."

It couldn't have anything to do with all those terrorist attacks against innocent men, women and children could it? No, of course not. Do you feel sorry for the Nazi-rooted terrorist organisation?

Victims, who will meet with top State and Justice Department officials tomorrow, said that a U.S. intervention with the courts would make a mockery of the administration's fight against terrorism.

No shit?

Leslye Knox, a 46-year-old mother of six children and widow of Aharon Ellis, a U.S. citizen who was killed in 2002 while singing at a bar mitzvah in Hadera, Israel...

Article Author: Glenn Kessler

[ Full Article ]

[UPDATE: (Red Tulips): Soccerdad, via Meryl Yourish wrote about this subject as well, and has extra details you will want to read about. Run, don't walk, to read his post!]

When Israel Cant Be Blamed

Here is a must-read article from The Sudanese Thinker:

We need Israelis to step into Darfur, because when they do the Arab media will blast the spotlight on the nastiness taking place there… and they’ll blame it on the Jews.

We need a few Zionists to walk around the slums at the outskirts of Khartoum because when they do, people will finally discover and realize the amount of misery that exists there… and then in a fraction of a second, they’ll somehow blame it on the Jews.

At the Altar of Palestine, we sacrifice our issues. Mona Eltahawy isn’t alone in what she thinks because indeed, there can be no denying the obvious.

For decades, successive dictators in the Arab world have sacrificed their respective national concerns on the altar of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, telling us it must be resolved before any kind of progress can be made, whether it’s stopping terrorism, embracing democracy or ending poverty. Unsurprisingly, despite peace with Israel for the past 29 years, Egypt still suffers from all those problems.

[ Full Article ]

The Worlds Richest Arabs

The amazing Sudanese Thinker recently posted an article listing The Worlds Richest Arabs.

Take a look at that article, but not just the article. The comments are good too. For example:

Interesting factoids:

1. The richest Israeli is a woman
2. The richest Arab (30 Billion) is richer than the richest Israeli (4 Billion)
3. Bin Laden is richer than the richest Israeli
4. Despite the fact that so many claim that Bin Laden fights the rich for the poor
5. And despite the fact that so many claim that the Jews have all the money and oppress the poor Arab world

But there are two different types of wealth. One is based on bringing new wealth into the world, like inventing a new gadget or creating products. The other is based on claiming what others could claim too if they had the power.

I put it to this forum that most rich Israelis made their money by creating wealth, by contributing to the world what did not exist before or by contributing capital to such enterprises.

And I put it to this forum that a number of the richest Arabs made their money from sitting on oil and related benefits, while contributing nothing to the world’s total wealth themselves.

- Andrew Brehm

I’m surprised that their brothers in Gaza and other Palestinians had to suffer so much considering what that wealth could have done to ease their suffering. [They] could have built power plants, factories, housing and maybe even a new greenhouse? And think of how nice those refugee camps could be. Shoot, they could even build an island or two (AK47 shaped perhaps?) for even more land to live on.

- Lynn

Funny, and true.

The future of Iraq; what is the position of the American-backed Iraqi government?

On November 27, 2007, I heard the Iraqi ambassador to the UN, Hamid Al-Bayati, speak at the infamous Columbia University.

That is a picture of Mr. Al-Bayati, taken from the event. (proof I was really there!)

While at this event, I took copious notes of all that was said so I could report it on C4A, and then I got lazy and did not do anything about this. So in any case, here is exactly what was said...

Mr. Al-Bayati first posited whether it is worth it for 162,000 American troops to be in Iraq. He responded that few Americans actually listen to Iraqis, and that negative news sells papers. He said that the Iraqi government has come a long way from where it was in 2004, but has a long way to go. He went on to note that life under Saddam was a prison. If you desserted the army, you would have your ear cut off, and the ear cutting would be shown on TV. He said Saddam used chemical weapons on his own people, and 5,000 people died in one attack. (we know this - the Kurds) He said Saddam killed 6500 Kuwaitis and committed war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity. He went on to say that Zarqawi was a terrorist who assassinated a US diplomat in Jordan with Saddam's backing, and attempted to assassinate Bush Senior in 1991. He stated that the UN cannot account for large numbers of WMD's, and in any case, Iraq now will never develop WMD's.

Mr. Al-Bayati was asked if he backed the war in 2003, and he said that he did not back the war back then, but he wanted Saddam to instead be tried for war crimes. In any case, while war might not have been necessary in 2003, it has happened and needs to now be supported for terror concerns and humanitarian concerns in Iraq. Since 2003, the Iraqi people are jubilant regarding the fall of Saddam. The new democracy in Iraq needs the support of the world, and he is frustrated over the US divide over the American presence in Iraq. It hurts troop morale. Al-Bayati stated that the American mission in Iraq is noble, and Iraq will be a model democracy to the rest of the world. In the Iraqi constitution, 25% of representatives are women, and 50% of diplomatic missions are staffed by women. He said that an example of progress in Iraq is the oil sharing legislation that passed.

When asked about the Sunni/Shia divide, Al-Bayati stated that the attacks are not really sectarian. Zarqawi sought to bring a sectarian war (attack on Shina shrines in 2006 - this caused attacks in return) He said "insurgent" is a misleading term, as Al Queda thought it best to fight Americans in Iraq. He said foreign fighters are the most brutal, and more than 50% of serious acts of terror come from "one Arab country in the region" (he obviously meant Saudi Arabia), fighting Americans. Al-Bayati said that Al Queda wants Iraq to be a safe haven for them, and there is some truth to Bush's statement "We fight them there, so we don't fight them here."

Al-Bayati stated that peace in Iraq is possible, but will take time. He also stated that the notion that the war in Iraq was fought purely for oil is disproved by the fact that Saddam exported more than 50% of Iraq's oil to the US. (RT: not sure about that one, but it was in my notes as having been said by Al-Bayati) He also said that in any case, oil is the lifeline of the world economy, and not a trifling matter.

When asked about the UN, Al-Bayati said the UN will play a larger role in Iraq, via Resolution 1770, which deals with humanitarian aid for displaced people.

Critically, Al-Bayati said that the Iraqi government believes in engaging Iran, rather than isolating it. It believes that Iran has a key role in helping with security, and he does not believe there is real evidence that Iran is interfering with internal Iraqi affairs. (!!!!)

When asked whether he considers American troops 'occupiers,' he said that it is the opposite, as there are still troops in Germany from WWII, and no one considers the US 'occupiers' of Germany.

Al-Bayati also stated that he is extremely bothered by the Arab lack of support for Iraq. He said they refuse to reconsider the debt Saddam owed to these nations, and now 5% of Iraqi revenues is going to pay for Saddam's invasion of Iraq. (this is an old story: see the Arab treatment of 'Palestinians') It should also be noted that Al-Bayati was castigated by a Columbia student for being too pro-American. (yes, really)

Critical areas he sees for the future are electricity and drinking water, but the education sector is strong in Iraq.

---

This is what Al-Bayati stated back in November, 2007. What does that mean today?

It means that the Iraqi government is relatively 'pro-Western' in some ways, but is 'anti-Western' in a most critical way of supporting Iran. Despite massive evidence to the contrary, the Iraqi ambassador to the UN think it is 'inconclusive' that Iran is supporting terrorists within Iraq. He thinks it best to 'engage' the Iranians. How exactly can the US claim to be gung ho against Iran getting nukes when they are supporting an Iraqi government that has this agenda? I am deeply troubled by this.

Then, today, I saw a post on Michael Totten's blog that was accompanied by the following photograph:

Please note the 'Palestinian' 'kaffiyeh' affixed to the neck of this 'soldier.' At first I was unable to tell if this was an undercover marine, since it did not look like an Iraqi, and I emailed Michael Totten as to the identity of that individual: was he American or Iraqi? Indeed, he was Iraqi. But what does that mean? I see it as a clear sign of Iraqi identification with the 'Palestinian' cause. Imagine, if you will, if the Iraqi police officers walked around with swastikas. It would be an outrage! But it is completely acceptable for them to walk around with kaffiyehs. Just as it is completely acceptable for the Iraqi government to 'engage' Iran. Who are we kidding? The US government has no coherent position on Iran, and I cannot imagine, at this point, the US government taking actual, serious action on Iran.

What do real Iraqis think of Israel and where will this country go? The Iraqi government, in their UN votes, are very clearly are supporting the broader Arab goals of demonizing Israel. At the same time, they are clearly not supporting terror in the way Saddam was.

Is this an improvement from Saddam? Was it worth going into Iraq? I honestly do not know. This is a very complicated situation with no easy answers. Is America doing anything to reverse antisemitism in Iraq? Is there antisemitism in Iraq to the extent it is found in other Arab states? Again, I really do not know answers to these questions, but when you hear the Iraqi ambassador to the UN speak about 'engaging' Iran, a nation whose president seeks to wipe Israel off the map... ...You really have to wonder.

In any case, Michael Totten did write a great article about the Kurds of Iraq. Their cause seems more clear cut and just; they are friends to Israel. (at least more than most other parties in the region) An unknown side fact: Kurds also are some of the last people in the world to speak Aramaic, along with Lebanese Jews. The Middle East is a complicated place with no easy answers. I do hope that, regardless, this report shed some light on more of what makes the Middle East so complicated.

'Masked' the play

Last night, I saw something that had me very deeply disturbed. I saw a play called 'Masked,' about three Palestinian brothers. This was written by Ami Dayan, Moshe Dayan's nephew. One of the brothers is a suspected 'collaborator' with Israel, one is an Arafish stooge, and one is young and impressionable - the question is where he will go in the future. The play ignored several key parts to the 'Palestinian' question, namely, Islam and jihad. The word 'jihad' was not mentioned once. Moreover, the suffering of the Israelis at the hands of these 'Palestinians' was not mentioned at all. I also saw the choice of the 'collaborater' brother as a false one. Given how leftist Barak basically left a number of the Southern Lebanese army to die after the withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000...why would ANYONE want to risk their life to be a 'collaborator' if they get little to nothing in return?

But anyway, that was only half of my criticism. The brunt was aimed at one of the members of the panel discussion after the play, Elik Elhanan. He said that he lost his sister, and he blamed the death of his sister on the 'cycle of violence' caused by 'the occupation.'

I raised my hand and said "With all due respect, Mr. Elhanan, but there is no cycle of violence. Arafat was offered all that Israel could be willing to give in 2000, and he answered that with the Intifada."

In response, Elhanan said "Oh, but you don't know what was offered, have you seen maps?"

I said "Yes, I have. Dennis Ross wrote a book about this."

Then he incredibly said that you cannot trust Dennis Ross! Abram Epstein, an old and tired leftist Jew also on the panel, responded that his 'Palestinian' friends would say this was all about East Jerusalem. I responded "With all due respect, this was not about East Jerusalem. This was about the 'right of return,' which everyone knows is a ploy to destroy Israel. And moreover, when Israel does not return fire, they get MORE fire, not less. There is absolutely no cycle of violence."

Then some other audience members had a few other comments to make, and Epstein had the gaul to say that Hamas does not have to recognize Israel, as that would be like having the Native Americans recognize America. The most we could expect is they will renounce violence. I responded (shouting out in the audience), "Oh, you mean a hudna." He got very angry at that suggestion, and said "No, I mean long term peace." I laughed at him when he said that. It should be noted that Native Americans recognize America, and certainly have no terror campaign as the 'Palestinians' do.

Finally, it was down to closing comments. Blah, blah, blah. Then down to Elhanan. My friend sitting next to me whispered "Watch him say occupation!" Next thing you know, Elhanan, in his sinister way, said "Really, this is all about the occupation. My sister died due to the occupation. Little children on all sides have died due to the occupation. The occupation is the cause of all the troubles, and drives the 'Palestinians' to commit their terror!" (talk about soft bigotry of low expectations!) My friend and I laughed out loud, right in front of him, as he uttered such tripe.

What a travesty. Little old ladies thanked me afterwards, for stating FACTS in the midst of Jewish self hating LIES. It was disgusting to see such lies propagated to an audience who maybe does not know so much about the conflict, and now might buy into the garbage. Very sinister.

I would like to add that Elhanan stated that he and his cronies, 'Combatants for Peace,' go into 'Palestinian' areas and 'protect' the 'Palestinians' from Israeli bulldozers and IDF action. This is Rachel Corrie-esque. I hence view Elhanan, who organizes far leftist soldiers to not fight in the 'territories,' and 'protects' the 'Palestinians' from IDF action to be a traitor to Israel and the Jewish nation. I wanted to spit at him, I was so furious to see him. He should honestly be tried and convicted of treason, for the activities he has done.

What makes it the most tragic is that he lost his sister, killed by 'Palestinians.' Instead of blaming the right source, he and his family blamed ISRAEL! They blamed the victim! I sort of understand this mentality, as it is twofold. On the one hand, he must think that if people hate Jews so much, they have to have a reason! Many Jews turned to self hatred from this respect, during and after the Holocaust. On the other hand, it is much easier (and safer) to rail against Israel than it is to rail against the corrupt Jew-hating thugs which make up the 'Palestinian' leadership and media (indoctrinating all 'Palestinians' to hate) It gives him hope to rail against Israel, as Israel is a democracy, and responsive to his hate. In contradistinction, the 'Palestinians' would not stop their butchery of Israeli civilians due to Elhanan's action or inaction.

So sad. There was a British man on the panel, Glemore Trenear-Harvey, and as soon as I heard his British accent, I figured he would be a dhimmi. (due to recent British politics) While he most certainly was misguided, he actually was less misguided than the Jews on the panel!

If that does not sum up what is wrong with modern leftist Jews in a nutshell, what does?

UPDATE:

Carl in Jerusalem supplied information about Elhanan's mother. Evidently she was a speaker at a UN-sponsored conference of hate against Israel. With parents such as those, it is no wonder he came out as he did.

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty

I had the following exchange with a friend of mine who is a Zionist. I figured you would appreciate what I had to say.

My friend wrote me the following:

just to reiterate, i'm for the settlers and soldiers to be evacuated, and for soldiers' ability to go after terrorists and other threats. i'm also for israel to keep early warning stations as they see fit. i'm just not for this whole matrix of control over a hostile population....it won't convince them to change their ways, so it's unsustainable and pointless if israel can find just as effective means of self-defense. how don't care how it's viewed by them, they won't be able to penetrate israel and that'll be the best message to send.

This was my reply:

I understand why you believe in evacuating most of the West Bank, but to briefly outline why I do not believe it to be a fruitful platform...

1. Technically speaking, the 'hostile population' already is under the control over the thugs of the Palestinian Authority. In fact, times were best for this hostile population when Israelis were in control in the '80s, pre-Oslo.
2. To that end, the IDF is in there not to 'control' the hostile population, but rather to secure the Israeli population AGAINST the hostile population. Yes, road blocks can be crap, but we know when they were put in - after the Intifada. They were not, repeat, NOT, there pre-Intifada. As such, we have to evalualate them not from whether or not it is hurting Israeli psyche to be 'in control' over a hostile population, but rather, whether they are effective. If you look at the extreme drop in suicide bombings, then yes, they have been effective to at least some degree. I would be in favor of dropping anything ineffective, but ONLY if it is ineffective.
3. It is a human rights nightmare to just evacuate tens of thousands (if not many more) of Jews from the holiest part of Israel. There is not the infrastructure nor the sympathy to care for what will be homeless people. The settlers evacuated from Gaza have been reduced to living in trailers, the kids still, two years later, are not enrolled in schools.
4. If we were to evacuate the West Bank, then it is a guarantee that our holiest sites will be 100% destroyed. I am not so cool with our history and heritage being destroyed. We need only examine the example of Gaza, and the wholesale destruction of the ancient synagogues there.
5. As far as my understanding, the missile defense system will not be effective if the missiles come lobbed RIGHT over the wall, and they are certainly still at a test phase in general. The technology is not as effective as rooting out the terrorists in the way the IDF currently does.
6. WHY should Jews have to evacuate Jewish holy land (which they were slaughtered in in 1929, as you know), and Arabs are allowed to live in Israel? Honestly, if THAT is the philosophy of the JEWISH state - population exchange ONLY for Jews - then that rewards bad behavior. Rewarding bad behavior encourages bad behavior. And it makes me believe that if there is to be a population exchange, let's make it even - let's tell all Arab Israelis they have to declare they are a Zionist (and that their kids must join IDF), or they will be given money to leave. I do not believe it right or just to have a one-way population exchange.
7. Was the IDF set up to forcibly expel Jews from their homes? Having the IDF do such a thing undermines confidence in the IDF. There already is a concern about draft dodging, and such policies will only increase draft dodging.
8. None of this will change the opinion of the world, nor the Palestinians, nor the Arab Israelis, about Israel. If anything, it will make them more vigilant, rather than less. They will see that their actions lead to a reward. As such, if the goal is to curb the impulse to commit acts of terror, that is not achieved.
9. If the goal is to be more militarily effective, I do not believe that would be achieved, either. Let's examine: why are there no rockets being launched through the West Bank, but there are rockets being launched from Gaza? Answer: because of the vigilance of the IDF in rooting out the Islamist terrorists in the West Bank. THAT is the reason. You take away the IDF presence, and there will be, almost as a guarantee, an upsurge of terrorism and rockets being launched at Israel. The missile defense system is still in the test phase and cannot be relied upon and is no substitute for what the IDF does now. Meanwhile, the West Bank sits right on top of MAJOR POPULATON CENTERS of Israel! Thus, leaving the West Bank in the way you propose would expose the population centers, and make them less, and not more safe. And this is under the pretense of assuming that the IDF had to forcibly expel tens of thousands of Jews from their homes - and there is NO Jewish presence in the West Bank (save for the few settlement blocks).
10. Let's examine another scenario. Let's pretend that there is a Jewish presence in the West Bank. Let's pretend that the IDF leaves, and the Jews are told that they can stay, but they will be under the auspices of the corrupt, thug-like Palestinian Authority. These settlers will be armed, as they are now, and will certainly act to defend themselves and their homes. It will be like the Wild West. And a tenet of the IDF is to protect Jews in the world, wherever they may be. (most famously seen in the bravery during the Entebbe hijacking) So the IDF still has jurisdiction over these Jews and still would have a duty to defend them - only they will not be able to be as effective in doing so, having ceded power and control over to the Palestinian Authority. There would be massacres.
11. The bottom line is that Israel has only two logical paths it can follow if it seeks to avoid a human rights nightmare for its Jewish citizens. One is to remain constantly vigilant. Remember what Wendell Phillips said: "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." When I was in Israel, every soldier I saw, I cheered. I told them that I was grateful for their protecting my freedom. What they do is really amazing. We mustn't, and they musn't, buy into the propoganda that they are doing it "only" for the "ungrateful" settlers. We musn't, and they musn't, buy into the propoganda that they are "controlling a hostile native population." (these people are no more native than the Jews, if anything, they are less native, but that is another story) We cannot let THEM dictate the terms over how we see this, and we have to realize that if we remain eternally vigilant, there may be no peace in our lifetimes. We have to resolve ourselves that the only way towards peace is to do something that no one is willing to do, because it may break the very soul of the Jewish state. And that is to follow Kahane's advice and have a wholesale population transfer. This is the only longterm solution towards peace. If we are not willing to do it, as we are not (and as we shouldn't be, because I think it would break the soul of the Jewish state), then we have to acknowledge that peace is not possible with a foe whose goal is ultimately annhilation. Maybe a sizeable chunk of Palestinians can live in peaceful coexistence. Maybe. But not today, and not in three-five years.

If we are not going to follow Kahane's advice (I want to underline the fact that I do not believe we SHOULD follow Kahane's advice), then we have to look at how to dismantle the hate education system which produces programs such as "Farfour, the Hamas mouse," and "Nahoul the bee," teaching children the joys of shahid, martyrdom. We have to dismantle the hate education system which teaches children that Jews are subhuman. And if that is taught in Israel, certainly that too should be dismantled. The problem is not the people, it is the culture. There needs to be a wholesale change of culture, so that peaceful coexistence is possible. That cannot happen in our lifetimes, and we should resolve ourselves to that; maybe it can happen in the lifetimes of our children.

What do you all think about what I have to say?

Fisking a New York Times Article

The original article can be found here.

Now for my Fisking...

Fatah Militants Lay Down Arms to Bolster Abbas
By ISABEL KERSHNER

See, the goal is to bolster Abbas, not peace with Israel

NABLUS, West Bank, July 19 — Scores of West Bank Palestinian militants taken off Israel's wanted list as a gesture to President Mahmoud Abbas are handing in weapons and signing pledges to cease violence against Israel, saying they want to give Mr. Abbas a chance to consolidate his rule here.

The goal is again to have Abbas consolidate his rule, NOT PEACE.

Interviews and encounters with more than a dozen members of the gun-toting, notoriously unruly Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades, associated with Mr. Abbas's Fatah faction, indicate that at least in the West Bank they are taking an open-ended timeout.

Open-ended time out = hudna. They are not even pretending it is more.

"Everything must come to an end," said Mahdi Maraka, an Aksa Brigades leader from Al Ein refugee camp here in Nablus, a traditional hotbed of Fatah militancy in the northern West Bank. "There are two tracks, the political and the military. Now is the time for the political stage."

Note: he said "NOW is the time for the political." That necessarily implies that in the future it will be time for the military.)

Nasr Kharaz, 31, an armed militant and spokesman for the Brigades in the West Bank, said, "The military wing of Fatah has stopped armed resistance at this stage."

Note: he said "At this stage."

The Aksa Brigades, which first appeared in 2000, was one of the driving forces of the second Palestinian intifada. It was built by Fatah's grass-roots leadership with the backing of Yasir Arafat as a nationalist force to rival the Islamic militants of Hamas in the armed struggle against Israel.

At the height of the intifada, the brigades — thought to number in the hundreds — carried out scores of shooting attacks on Israeli civilian vehicles and moved on to suicide bombings inside Israel.

But in the occupied West Bank (RT: Note how casually the NYT throws in 'occupied West Bank'...priceless!) in recent years, they have mostly confined themselves to engaging Israeli soldiers who have come looking for them on their turf. (RT: This is a lie. An al aqsa fighter hit Eilat only a few months ago.) Associates of one of the Brigades' chief architects, the jailed but influential Marwan Barghouti, say even they support the amnesty. In Gaza, by contrast, a more aggressive spirit of armed resistance lives on. There, men affiliated with the Aksa Brigades are still firing rockets at Israel.

In the West Bank, Hamas has been adhering to a unilateral ceasefire for its own reasons, its militants underground. All the recent suicide bombings in Israel have been carried out by the extremist group Islamic Jihad.

NOTE: Hamas is the same as Fatah in the West Bank, and Fatah is the same as Hamas in Gaza)

For both Israel and the Aksa Brigades in the West Bank, the emerging cease-fire is an experiment. The disarmed gunmen say they know exactly where their weapons are and who is safeguarding them. (RT: That is rich!) And Israel could always draw up a new wanted list.

But some of the Aksa militants say that the seven years of this intifada have achieved nothing, (RT: Shocka, are they actually non-delusional???) and all of those interviewed said they want to give Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president and leader of the embattled Fatah faction, a chance to negotiate an independent Palestinian state.

"We didn't want to be obstacles in the way of the national project," said Ibrahim Sahli, a senior Aksa commander for the northern West Bank better known by his nom de guerre, Abu Jabal, or father of the mountain.

The fatigue of war colors some of the men's conversations. Inside Preventive Security headquarters in Bethlehem, an Aksa member named Khalil Abayat, 45, grinned widely, his face deeply tanned. He said he was five years on the run, "moving from one mountain to another, one cave to another," (RT: I thought caves were like the Four Seasons to them?) sheltering in abandoned houses, with only fleeting visits home to his wife and 12 children.

His brother and cousin were killed by Israeli forces and two of his sons are in Israeli jails. Asked if he is retiring from the resistance, he said: "Enough. I'm exhausted. I just want to rest." (RT: Rest for now, anyway)

In another room in the Preventive Security compound in Bethlehem, Amjad Khalawi, 35, told how he had let his hair grow to his waist since, as he put it, he "disappeared" in 2002. "I didn't see anybody and nobody saw me," he said. He looks forward to marrying the fiancée he has seen only once in those five years.

But for others, the politics are dominant. They want to aid Fatah, which is closing ranks, in its fight against Hamas, which violently conquered Gaza in mid-June. (RT: Yup, the goal is to fight Hamas...for now.)

After the takeover, Mr. Maraka, Abu Jabal and their foot soldiers took revenge in Nablus, burning and looting dozens of offices and institutions affiliated with Hamas. A month ago, when Mr. Maraka, 30, was interviewed in downtown Nablus, where he appeared with an M-16 machine gun and some armed cohorts in ski masks, he said that the moment Mr. Abbas "provides us with security from the Israelis, we won't need these weapons."

Last Sunday, with Israel seeking ways to bolster Mr. Abbas as a brake on Hamas, Israeli and Palestinian security officials announced that they had agreed on a list of 178 Aksa Brigades members to be offered immunity for past deeds; Mr. Maraka, Abu Jabal and most of their cell members were on it. Security officials would not say what any of the individuals on the list were wanted for, beyond saying that they had all been involved in "security-related activity against Israel."

Now we get to the truth. These men did not unilaterally approach Israel. Rather, Israel approached them, saying they will not go after these fights in exchange for a hudna, in their hopes to fight Hamas. Because the goal of Abbas AT PRESENT is to consolidate power against Hamas, this was agreed upon. In exchange, Israel does not go after the hardcore thugs. Handing in weapons is a joke, as one of them admit that he knows where his weapons stash is, but is not going to it now, because he is 'tired' and seeks to take a nap.

The gunmen signed a pledge (RT: Palestinian pledges have aaaaaaaalways been adhered to!) to give up all anti-Israeli activity, handed in their weapons and agreed to remain inside local Palestinian Authority Intelligence or Preventive Security compounds for a week and in their home cities for the next three months. (RT: Wow, they will be homebound for a week! That really shows 'em, huh?) They say they are now relying on Mr. Abbas and the authority for protection from Hamas.

If Israel is satisfied that the former fighters are committed to their pledge, they will be able to leave their fugitive lives behind and become salaried employees of the official security services from which most of them originally sprung. (RT: Oh right, and then when they go back to killing Jews, it will be an international incident if Israel dare attack these storied 'politicians.')

The deal has proved so popular that there is already talk of another list, and Aksa militants seem ready to line up for it. "I don't know anyone who doesn't want to be on it," Mr. Maraka said, speaking in a second interview on Thursday in his temporary billet: a former prison cell now equipped with a TV set, a fridge and a whirring fan, at the authority's intelligence headquarters in Nablus. Abu Jabal, a portly figure, speaking under a vine outside his home in Al Ein, said he was on a brief "vacation" from the Preventive Security headquarters in the city, where he was spending the week.

Both men were relaxed and joking, the weapons that had so long defined them conspicuously absent.

Ahmed Balboul, reputedly one of the most wanted men in Bethlehem, was not on the first list, but hopes to be on the next. Meeting openly in Manger Square, he came unarmed. "I could hand over five rifles for the cameras and buy another 10," he said. "Our intentions are more important than the rifles, and our intentions are turned toward negotiation." (RT: Wow! I had no idea it was so easy to get guns in the West Bank?! Who would have thunk it?)

Naturally, there is deep skepticism about how long any lull in the violence can last. (RT: A lull only means less attempts and/or successes at Jew killing than usual, not the lack of such activities.)

"In Palestinian history there are no beginnings and no ends," said Mahdi Abdul Hadi, director of Passia, a Palestinian research institute. "There are unfolding chapters, like waves in the sea." The Aksa men are swimming with the tide, he said, "but they don't know where it will take them." (RT: Again, honesty! Wow!)

Like the some other groups in the first intifada — the Black Panthers and the Fatah Hawks — and Fatah's military wing, Al Asifa (The Storm) before them, Al Aksa Brigades may yet reappear, or be reincarnated under different name. (RT: Nooooo, you don't say???)

Much will now depend on Israel's willingness to adhere to the cease-fire with Fatah and engage in a serious peace effort toward the establishment of a Palestinian state, many Palestinians say. (RT: That is right, if anything happens, it will be on Israel's head! When in doubt, know that the Zionazis are to blame!)

"Deactivating terrorists is a step," said Miri Eisin, spokeswoman for Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. "Let's see if it works, and if it does, we can move forward."

Whatever happens, said Qadura Fares, a Fatah politician in Ramallah and an associate of the jailed Mr. Barghouti, "there will never be a vacuum."

"It will be filled," he said, "with either dialogue and peace, or another round of confrontation."

Mr. Maraka, for one, is making sure that the next generation is prepared to continue the struggle if need be. At the intelligence headquarters in Nablus, he proudly showed video clips on his cellphone of his sons, ages 10 and 8, firing an Israeli Galil assault rifle and an M-16 on a barren mountainside. (RT: Such great parenting. I am at a loss over why he is not featured in 'Parenting Today.' He is just a paragon of good fatherly love. Please note that he is teaching Jew killing to his little kids using Israeli and American-made weapons, and earlielr pledged to not be violent. So touching.)

---

I hope you all enjoyed that good Fisking. The New York Times made it seem as if somehow Fatah is this peaceful and moderate organization... you look a little closer and realize how far from the truth that is.

How can 'peace' be achieved?

Abu Mazen (Abbas) is consistently put forward as a 'man of peace.' This is the same man with a phd in Holocaust denial as well as his funding of the 1972 Munich massacre. This is why I do not believe it wise to empower such a man.

What I am at a loss over is why people like Khaled Abu Toameh are not empowered by Israel. There *are* good Arab Israelis and Palestinians, and they are marginalized not only by Fatah/Hamas, but also by an Israeli government that does not send aid their way. If there is *any hope* for peace, it is NOT through Fatah or Hamas, it is through men like Khaled Abu Toameh. To that extent, I agree with some of the antizionists which hold that the Palestinians are in the position they are in because of Israel. No, directly, they are not, but Israel did help enable this to happen through a misguided idea that sending guns/weaponry to the worst elements of Palestinian society somehow will make the Palestinians more peaceful or moderate.

The root of the problem is Oslo, which placed power in the worst of the worst, Yassir Arafat. This man was not elected, and prior to Oslo, he was marginalized. Shimon Peres was an architect of Oslo, and he is at his old tricks again today.

There are good Palestinians, and as long as Israel deludes itself into thinking an Arafat or an Abbas are part of the "good" Palestinians, there can never be peace. Thus, if one wants to achieve 'peace' in Israel, the first and most necessary place to start is to STOP favoring one group of terrorists over another, and to START looking at parties who actually are truly moderate, and backing them. If none such parties exist at present, then DO NOTHING. By all means, DO NOT send aid to those who wish to genocide Jews. Let the terrorists duke things out themselves, as their disagreement does not concern Israel. WAIT for a truly moderate party to arise!

Moreover, I had some thoughts earlier today. When Israel gives up land, I believe that the Arab response is to think that NO ONE would willfully just GIVE UP land that was lawfully their's. Thus, not only does giving up land make Israel look weak, it ALSO makes it seem as if the land was illegally held to begin with! (as anyone holding land LEGALLY would NEVER give it up without fighting to the death for it) When Israel gives up terrorists it is holding prisoner, I believe the Arab response is to see this as confirmation that the terrorists were 'political prisoners' to begin with, since surely NO ONE would be willing to let killers out to the streets to kill again.

Thus, all these measures which are supposedly done to further 'peace' are in fact doing the opposite: they ensure there will be perpetual war.

Zionazis fire rockets at Lebanese villages

Oh sorry...did I say "Zionazi"? I guess I wrote the headline in the way that delusional Hezby/Islamic fundie supporters would analyze the recent news.

The REAL headline is actually well written (shocka!) by Reuters:

Islamists fire rockets at Lebanese villages.

NAHR AL-BARED, Lebanon (Reuters) - Islamist militants fired Katyusha rockets at Lebanese villages on Friday in a further escalation of their 8-week-old battle with the army at a Palestinian refugee camp in northern Lebanon.

Security sources said al Qaeda-inspired Fatah al-Islam fighters fired about a dozen of the 107 mm rockets which landed several miles away from the Nahr al-Bared camp in north Lebanon, causing some material damage but no casualties.

Of course this is Muslims killing Muslims, so the world media will pretty much ignore this. Nothing to see here, moving on!

There is more to note in this article:

The military, concerned about being sucked into a war of attrition, has stepped up pressure on the coastal camp to force the militants to surrender.

But the well-trained and well-armed militants, some of whom fought in Iraq or trained to go to fight there, have so far rejected all calls to surrender.

I wish people would wake up and realize IT IS ALL ONE WAR! Those who attack Israel are linked to those who attack Lebanon and those who attack Iraq. It is not just about protecting Israel, and the sooner people realize that, the better.

Finally, I want all Culture for All readers to know that the camps in question that Fatah al-Islam are fortressed inside are Palestinian camps in Lebanon, where the Palestinians live in concentration camps - not able to come in or out. This article makes brief mention of the strange legal situation for the Palestinians in Lebanon, but then does not go much further:

A 1969 Arab agreement banned Lebanese security forces from entering Palestinian camps. The agreement was annulled by the Lebanese parliament in the mid-1980s but the accord effectively stayed in place.

In truth, the Palestinians in Lebanon are there due to a very cprrupt agreement between the King of Jordan and the then Maronite PM of Lebanon. Why? King Hussein did not want them, and the PM of Lebanon received a hefty bribe to take these people. He had no intention of making these people citizens, and instead consigned them to squalor. (Israel was blamed for this, of course) Then, after the 1967 war, Arafat and his cronies relocated to Southern Lebanon, and destablized the nation through various terror activities: sending rockets into Northern Israel, hijacking an El Al jet, and then they were granted a "state within a state" status through the 1969 "Cairo Agreement." This meant the Lebanese army had even LESS power to contain PLO terrorism (please note that it was Nasser who brokered this agreement), and it pushed Lebanon to Civil War even to a greater extent. For more articles about the history of Palestinians in Lebanon, please go here (written by someone biased against Israel, but still helpful), here, and here. For more information on Arab persecution of the Palestinians, please go right here.

The morality of MURDER

Several months ago, I wrote posts about terrorism and heroism. I feel that the two posts need to be re-read in light of a recent brutal murder of an Israeli settler near Hebron. This person, Erez Levanon, was stabbed to death by two Israeli teens. Islamic Jihad is claiming responsibility. The crime of Mr. Levanon? Existing. Levanon was not a soldier. He was not a warrior. Rather, all he wanted to do was pray in peace. But Mr. Levanon was a 'settler,' and hence inherently 'evil,' merely by existing. The justification for the attack was that Mr. Levanon was simply living in land that never was 'Palestinian' to begin with, and at the very MOST could be considered disputed territory. (Please read my earlier column explaining why I support Israel's 'settlements.') Yet the world swallows this 'justification' as if there is a moral equivalence. The fact that Mr. Levanon was living in land that Israel has every right to, mind you, is seen as morally equivalent to his brutal stabbing death. It's 'understandable' that 'Palestinians' would brutally slay a settler, because, goshdarnit, the settler is the original evil by trespassing, anyway! OR, it's understandable why an unarmed man would be killed, because it's logical 'retaliation' for Israel's killing Palestinians who are engaged in active warfare with Israel. (please visit Aussie Dave's analysis of the inconsistency in the media reports concerning the death of one such 'Palestinian') Let's see some examples of the MSM's 'reporting' of the issue... United Press International - Spends time going over the IDF activities in Nablus, and then mentions in passing that Erez Levanon was killed, implying that it was linked to Nablus activities, justified by it, or generally insignificant compared to the harm caused to 'Palestinians.' Boston Globe - Spends time discussing activities in Nablus, and then mentions in passing about Levanon, after it goes into detail about the death of Anan Tibi, and 'delays of Palestinian medical trucks.' (this ignores the Red Crescent link to terror, of course) BBC - Oops, no coverage of the Levanon death! L.A. Times - Almost word for word the same as the Boston Globe. N.Y. Times - Spends many paragraphs discussing Tibi's death, as well as the Nablus activities of the IDF, and a passing sentence about Levanon. You get the point. I could do a wider analysis of every single MSM outlet that discusses the death of Erez Levanon, but they are all very similar. Please note how the MSM spends so little time discussing Levanon's death, and so much time discussing Tibi's death. Please also note how Levanon's death is framed - as if it is a justified retaliation to the IDF's activities in Nablus. (activities that are necessary for Israel's security!) Far leftists (and far 'rightists') will openly proclaim Levanon's death as justified because of the mere fact that he is a settler. But the MSM, in the way it covers things, is subtley saying the same. There is no moral equivalence. And there is no justified link between the murder of people like Levanon, and the 'Palestinian' dreams of statehood. While we are NOT fighting a war on 'terror,' (we are fighting a war against Islamofascism), this terror is NOT justified under ANY logical form of reasoning! These Palestinians are NOT heroes or 'martyrs' for some higher cause! Rather, they are the WORST ENEMIES OF THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE! And by acknowledging this, I am one of the few truly 'pro-Palestinian' people out there.

Another reason why Olmert actually is treasonous and NOT suicidally incompetent

On Saturday night, Olmert flew a Palestinian flag side by side with an Israeli flag at his official residence. This is yet more evidence that Olmert does not have Israel's interests at heart. The list of things he has done are so long and wide, words fail me. He also recently expanded settlements in the West Bank. (30 families, it's basically nothing, but enough to cause the mouth breathing Israel haters to be up in arms) Let's recap... I don't see the tiny expansion of Israel's settlements to be much of an issue beyond the effect it has on anti-Israel propoganda. Why would Olmert stupidly and treasonly give up military checkpoints, give Fatah $100 million, let Egypt arm Fatah, and announce he will free Palestinian prisoners, while also expanding settlements??? [source] Olmert is arming the Palestinians and giving them money, taking away important protections for Israelis, and yet also making the Palestinians mad by expanding settlements. It is a recipe for total disaster. Why is Olmert doing what he is doing? I suspect he thinks the piddling settlement of 30 families (tiny number!) in the West Bank will somehow appease the more right wing elements in Israel who are outraged at Olmert's dismal suicidal incompetence. He is completely mistaken if he thinks this will make up for his other various actions. All this does is make the left, right, and center oppose him with a vengeance. At this point, he is persona non grata in Israel. Suicidal incomptence. And yet, by flying the Palestinian flag, I am really starting to believe he is actually treasonous, not suicidally incompetent. All I can say about Olmert is...*spits* I predict he will go down in flames as the worst PM in Israel's history - bar none.

The irony of Jordanian ironies

Irony of the day: Jordanian King Abdullah II asks Israel to state position on Palestinian statehood. Remember that the vast majority of Jordan is Palestinian, and in fact killed more Palestinians than Israel did in its entire history. (1970 - Black September) Jordan is a far bigger country than Israel and could offer to cede territory to Palestinians within its borders, but does not. It is grandly amusing that the king of Jordan asks ISRAEL about its plans for Palestinian statehood, while in fact the king of Jordan is himself responsible for denying the Palestinians statehood. Pot, kettle -> black UPDATE: Sandmonkey explains Jordanian dynamics right here!