IsraelAmerica

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Talks Constitution, Women And Liberty On Egyptian TV

2012-02-07T12:32:00.003-07:00

Appearing on Egyptian television before concluding a four-day trip in Egypt, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg extolled the virtues of the U.S. Constitution but urged Egyptians to look to other countries' newer constitutions for guidance as they craft their own in the coming months. The U.S. Embassy in Cairo's website noted in a Feb. 2 release that Ginsburg concluded her trip to Egypt "following four days of discussions and programs in both Cairo and Alexandria with judges and legal experts as well as law faculty and students." She had intended to "'listen and learn' with her Egyptian counterparts as they begin Egypt's constitutional transition to democracy," according to the embassy. Yet while Ginsburg's interview, posted on YouTube on Wednesday, lauded the Founding Fathers' "grand general ideas that become more effective over the course of ... more than two sometimes-turbulent centuries," she also said she "would not look to the United States Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012," given its original exclusion of women, slaves and Native Americans. Since World War II several other models have emerged that offer more specific and contemporary guarantees of rights and liberties, she said, pointing to South Africa's constitution, which she called a "really great piece of work" for its embrace of basic human rights and guarantee of an independent judiciary. She also noted Canada's charter of rights and freedoms and the European Convention of Human Rights. "Why not take advantage of what there is elsewhere in the world? I'm a very strong believer in listening and learning from others," she said. Among those currently sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court no other justice has publicly advised another country on the creation of a constitution. In 1960, eight years before he became a justice, Thurgood Marshall traveled to Kenya to draft its bill of rights, which he modeled after the European Convention on Human Rights. Unlike the U.S. Constitution, the Kenyan document guarantees rights to education, health, welfare and a right to work. Nevertheless, Ginsburg spent most of the 18-minute interview spelling out all the ways the Egyptians could take inspiration from the United States' Constitution, from the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech and a free press to the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause that she, as a lawyer in the 1970s, convinced the court to expand to protect women's rights. "We were just tremendously fortunate in the United States that the men who met in Philadelphia were very wise," Ginsburg said. "Now it is true that they were lacking one thing," she continued with a chuckle. "And that is that there were no women as part of the Constitutional Convention." "It's a very inspiring time -- that you have overthrown a dictator and that you are striving to achieve a genuine democracy," Ginsburg told Al Hayat TV. "I think people in the United States are hoping that this transition will work and that it will genuinely be a government of, by and for the people." Jan. 25 marked the one-year anniversary since the start of the Tahrir Square protests that toppled President Hosni Mubarak's nearly three-decade regime. When asked by her interviewer how best to draft a constitution and protect it from contemporary political pressures (perhaps alluding to Islamic parties' dominance in the new parliament's lower house), Justice Ginsburg answered, "A constitution, as important as it is, will mean nothing unless the people are yearning for liberty and freedom." "If the people don’t care, then the best constitution in the world won’t make any difference," she said. "The spirit of liberty," she continued, "has to be in the population."
This Story Appeared Earlier on The Huffington Post

How Iran Controls Afghanistan

2012-02-02T14:15:00.002-07:00

These changes have given rise to tension between the Afghans who never left home and the Afghan returnees

By Fariba Nawa

Afghanistan has suffered from foreign meddling since its inception. But while Pakistan’s role has been widely discussed -- most Afghans will point to concrete examples -- Iran’s involvement is more subtle.

Iranian influence is all encompassing--the Islamic government funds Afghan Shiite sects and politicians, has invested in building roads and providing fuel and transport, and is fighting hard against the Afghan opium trade that supplies millions of addicts. But Iran’s lasting power on Afghanistan is cultural as well as political, broadcasting state radio and television programs inside Afghanistan.

Yet the country’s biggest cultural influence is not imposed by the Iranian government.

The more than one million repatriating Afghan refugees from Iran – tens of thousands have been deported –bring the dialect, food, music, and clothes particular to Iran.

Some of the Afghans repatriates are migrant workers, similar to Mexicans in the U.S., some are construction workers who became addicted to drugs in Iran, others were able to get an education and acquire job skills, and most have lived there for over three decades.

Yet Iran will not grant them legal status; they do not have a right to a higher education, to own property, or to work. Most voluntarily return to Afghanistan because there are more opportunities in their home country. These Afghans are changing Afghanistan’s identity to be more Iranian – for better or worse.

My family escaped the Soviet invasion in 1982 and settled in the U.S.

I first returned to Afghanistan in 2000 when the Taliban reigned, but it was after the group’s ouster that I witnessed the cultural changes brought on by immigration.

(Photo: http://righttruth.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451c49a69e20120a5e29feb970b-popup)

I was traveling through Afghanistan researching the drug trade for my book "Opium Nation" from 2002 to 2007, and my first confrontation with Iran’s cultural impact was language.

Iran and Afghanistan both speak Farsi, but the Afghan dialect is called “Dari.” I’m fluent in Dari but I no longer understood what many of the families in my hometown, Herat are saying.

Common words, idioms, and even Iran’s use of French terms have invaded Afghan speech. The Herati folk songs I recalled hearing in shops as a child were replaced by Iranian pop produced in Los Angeles. The young Afghan activists and artists read Iranian websites and books.

These changes have given rise to tension between the Afghans who never left home and the Afghan returnees.

The skilled repatriates are resented for getting better jobs with aid companies and the Afghan government.

Conservatives view the Afghan women who grew up in Iran with disdain because they appear more liberal and courageous--they sing on TV, they’re news broadcasters, business owners, and government workers. They voice their opinions loudly in a male dominated country.

The Hazara ethnic group in Afghanistan who were historically the poorest of minorities return richer, more literate, and united. They have made unprecedented advances in Afghanistan, including in the arts and in the government.

These returnees are called “Afghan-e badal,” or counterfeit Afghans. Few of them have political connections to Iran, but their time living in the Islamic Republic taints themin the eyes of the Afghans who didn’t leave as culturally inauthentic and politically suspect.

Several Afghans at NGOs I met told me that their returnee colleagues had clandestine connections to Iran. When I asked for tangible evidence, one of them told me. “I just know by that accent they use. They’re sellouts.”

While I’m not fully comfortable with this cultural invasion, I understand that Iran advanced while Afghanistan struggled to survive in the last three decades.

Culture is fluid and both countries share a common history. After all, my own husband is one of these Afghan returnees and he’s a true patriot.

Repatriating Afghans have enough of a hard time readjusting to their battered country – ostracizing them is simply cruel.

However, Afghan bitterness toward the Iranian government is justifiable. The Islamic Republic backs religious divisions inside Afghanistan, using Afghan Shiites as pawns.

Shiite Afghans, who come from other ethnic groups as well, are encouraged to watch Iranian clerics give fiery speeches against Sunni Afghans. Iran built the road from Herat City to its border, one of the finest rebuilt highways, but the signs alongside the road bear Koranic verses picked by Iran‘s government.

My homeland is geographically determined as a buffer zone where empires and nations have fought their battles using Afghans as their pawns.

Extremist Sunni groups cross the Pakistani border to kill Afghan Shiite children and women. The carnage last month in Kabul at a Shiite mosque killed eighty people and was a new height in religious sectarian violence for Afghanistan. It won’t be long before Iran recruits a group to bomb a Sunni mosque.

Iran and Pakistan were not such deadly influences on Afghanistan before the revolutions and wars inside these countries.

A harmonious cultural exchange was common among these neighbors. Pakistani couples took their honeymoon in Kabul while Iranian singers traveled to give concerts in Kabul in the 1960s.

Before the Soviet invasion, my mother, a Sunni, joined her Shiite friends to commemorate the death of Prophet Mohammed’s grandsons during the month of Muharram.

One of my uncles married a Shiite woman, and while throughout history tensions existed between the two sects, the result was not as violent.

I can take pop music and the Iranian Farsi drawl, but Iran’s sponsorship of sectarian violence must be stopped -- by the U.S. and other foreign powers invested in Afghanistan -- but mostly, by Afghans themselves who must unite to stand up to their neighbors.

Fariba Nawa is the author of "Opium Nation: Child Brides, Drug Lords, and One Woman’s Journey Through Afghanistan." She lives in the San Francisco Bay Area with her husband and two daughters. Visit her online: http://www.faribanawa.com

Category: Corruption - Views: 1079

Copts Protest over Egyptian Killings

2012-01-31T13:52:00.000-07:00

Copts Denounce Egyptian Government Over Killings

The New York Times

Coptic Christians demonstrated in Cairo on Monday in reaction to the deaths the night before of at least 24 people in clashes between Copts and the army. More Photos »

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

Published: October 10, 2011

CAIRO — An angry crowd of thousands gathered at the largest cathedral here on Monday to mourn the death of two dozen Coptic Christian demonstrators killed the night before in clashes with security forces, as liberal activists lamented the military’s increasingly tight hold on power.

Multimedia

A Coptic Christian mourned a relative in Cairo on Monday, the day after Egyptian troops killed at least 24 protesters. More Photos »

Enlarge This Image

The New York Times

Bodies on the floor of a morgue in Cairo. The Health Ministry said more than 300 people were wounded in the violent crackdown on protests. More Photos »

The bloodshed appeared to mark a turning point in the revolution, many here said. It comes just eight months after Egyptians celebrated their military as a savior for its refusal to use force against civilians demanding the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak. Confidence in the military had already been eroded by its repeated deferrals of a handover of power to civilian rule, now set to take place perhaps as much as two years after parliamentary elections, set to begin next month.

Now political liberals as well as Copts said the brutal crackdown had finally extinguished the public’s faith in the ruling military council as the guardian of a peaceful transition to democracy.
“The credit that the military received from the people in Tahrir Square just ran out yesterday,” the party leader Ayman Nour said at a news conference of prominent parties and political leaders denouncing the military. “There is no partnership between us and the council now that the blood of our brothers stands between us.”
Others took an even darker view, saying that the violence suggested that the military may now hold an even tighter grip on power than Mr. Mubarak did.
“Cairo yesterday was a part of Syria,” said Shady el-Ghazaly Harb, a liberal activist who helped set off the revolution, invoking the violent crackdown against that country’s uprising. “This is a threat not just to the Copts, but to all of the people. We saw what would happen if we rose up against the army.”
Witnesses, victims and doctors said Monday that demonstrators were killed when military-led security forces drove armored vehicles over as many as six people and fired live ammunition into the crowds. Doctors at a Coptic hospital showed journalists 17 bodies, including one with a crushed skull and others with mangled limbs.
Doctors and Interior Ministry officials said bullet wounds accounted for most of the deaths, including that of Mina Daniel, a young political activist a doctor said had been shot in the shoulder and leg. More than 300 others were wounded in four hours of street fights, the Health Ministry said.
The military council did not explain Monday why shots were fired or why military vehicles ran over demonstrators.
In a statement on state television, it appeared to distance its officers from any responsibility for the deadly clashes. The statement referred only to unspecified “unfortunate events” that “transformed peaceful protests to bloody ones.” Expressing “deepest condolences to the families of the victims,” the military reiterated its determination to refuse “attempts to cause a rift between the armed forces and the Egyptian people.”
The military also sought to appease the Coptic Christians, about 10 percent of the population here. Although the Copts had embraced the revolution’s promise of a tolerant and pluralistic democracy, many have been uneasy as the removal of Mr. Mubarak’s iron fist has unleashed suppressed rivalries, as in the recent dispute over the construction of a church near the southern city of Aswan that inspired the march in Cairo on Sunday.
The military said it had asked its civilian prime minister to begin an investigation into the violence, and Egyptian news organizations reported that at least 15 suspects were being prosecuted in military courts for instigating the riots.
The civilian cabinet, meanwhile, announced a series of long-promised measures to deter discrimination. The measures would impose jail time and large fines on anyone found guilty of discrimination on the basis of religion, with heavier penalties for government employees. And to address the legacy of cumbersome rules on permits to build churches, the cabinet said it would implement a law to standardize procedures for all houses of worship.
The minister of information also backed away from state television coverage of the protests on Sunday that urged “honorable Egyptians” to defend soldiers from a mob of armed Christians. The announcers who made those statements were “under emotional stress,” the minister, Osama Heikal, said, according to the Web site of the state-run newspaper Al Ahram.
While the liberal parties denounced the military’s handling of the protest, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist group considered the principal opposition under Mr. Mubarak, adopted a tone notably more sympathetic to the government.
Mahmoud Ghozlan, a spokesman for the group, said in a statement that while both Muslims and Christians faced problems during the “critical phase” of the transition, “there was no need for the peaceful protests to metamorphose into violent clashes.” He added: “Under no circumstances should violence and aggression be a solution.”
Coptic leaders issued an unusually pointed statement charging that the demonstrators were set up to take the blame for a crackdown. “Strangers got in the middle of our sons and committed mistakes to be blamed on our sons,” the statement said, claiming that acts of discrimination or aggression against Copts repeatedly “go unpunished.”
In a measure of their growing distrust of the military-led government, the families of the Copts killed in the violence decided they did not trust government-run facilities to perform autopsies, fearing the results might hide evidence of the violence by security forces. After hours of deliberation with priests, activists and human rights groups, they arranged to bring forensic teams to a Coptic hospital, causing the funeral to be called off.
Inside the hospital, Mariam Telmiz, 40, sat at the bedside of a brother-in-law who had been wounded by a bullet at the demonstration. Another brother-in-law had been killed by a bullet.
The military was ready to protect Egyptian Muslims who carried a Saudi flag or even pulled the Israeli flag off its embassy, she said, “but the one who holds his cross high gets humiliated.”

Heba Afify contributed reporting from Cairo.

A version of this article appeared in print on October 11, 2011, on page A4 of the New York edition with the headline: Copts Denounce Egyptian Government

Muslim Reformers vs Extremists

2012-01-26T11:26:00.001-07:00

Muslim Reformers vs Extremists

Statement - “We will not leave”: Muslim reformers to extremists

- On 7 December 2011, twenty radical Muslims hijacked an event featuring Muslim reformists, Irshad Manji and Tofik Dibi, in Amsterdam.

The extremists repeatedly declared “Takfir!”, thereby ordering the execution of Manji and Dibi. After threatening to break Manji’s neck, they demanded that the event, sponsored by the European Foundation for Democracy, be stopped.

The speakers refused to leave the stage. Their discussion on the modernisation of Islam resumed after the police arrested a number of the extremists. Stated Manji, “I never felt afraid. Not once. Neither did Tofik. In fact, all of us refused to leave, even when police asked. We wouldn’t play on Jihadi terms. Some things are simply more important than fear.”
Emphasized Dutch MP, Tofik Dibi, “the disruption shows that even in the Netherlands it is necessary to continue the debate on reforming Islam.”
Roberta Bonazzi, Executive Director of the European Foundation for Democracy, added “the voice of democratic Islam will not be silenced by extremism. We are united and will continue to support inspirational Muslim reformers across Europe.” By bringing together two such reformers at the Amsterdam event, the European Foundation for Democracy is pursuing its mission of empowering liberal Muslims who advocate the values of open societies.
Irshad Manji is in Europe to promote her latest book, Allah, Liberty and Love. Manji, a practicing Muslim, is also the author of The Trouble With Islam Today. As part of her tour she is meeting fellow Muslim reformists, youth activists and parliamentarians in the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany.
The radicals are believed to be members of Sharia4Belgium, one of several Islamist groups seeking to enact Sharia law throughout Europe.
*****
IRSHAD MANJI: Senior Fellow with the European Foundation for Democracy, Irshad Manji also directs the Moral Courage Project at New York University (http://www.moralcourage.com/). In those countries that have banned her books, Prof. Manji is reaching readers by posting free-of-charge translations on her website, irshadmanji.com. To date, the Arabic, Urdu and Farsi translations have been downloaded more than 2 million times.

ALLAH, LIBERTY AND LOVE: Written by the dissenting yet faithful Muslim Irshad Manji, Allah, Liberty and Love advances a 21^st-century reformation within Islam. As a Muslim who bridges East and West, Prof. Manji addresses people of all faiths – and none. What she teaches is “moral courage,” the willingness to speak up when everyone else wants to shut you up. Calling out both the fatwa-flingers and the mute moderates, Allah, Liberty and Love is the ultimate guide to becoming a gutsy global citizen.
EUROPEAN FOUNDATION FOR DEMOCRACY: Based in Brussels, EFD (http://www.europeandemocracy.org/) is a non-profit organisation which promotes universal human rights, individual liberty, freedom of conscience and pluralism of peaceful ideas. Its accomplishments include the support of Muslims in several European countries who advocate democratic values within their communities.

PA Leader: All Muslims are Obligated to Kill Jews

2012-01-19T13:17:00.000-07:00

PA Leader: All Muslims are Obligated to Kill Jews

2914Share

: A top Palestinian Authority religious leader claimed in a sermon at a major Fatah event that Muslims are obligated to kill the Jews.
The Mufti Muhammad Hussein presented the murder of Jews by Muslims as a religious Islamic goal while celebrating the 47th anniversary of the Palestinian Authority’s Fatah faction.
An appointee of Palestinian Authority Chairman and Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas, the Mufti made the claim at an official Fatah event marking the founding of the largest faction in the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), also led by Abbas, as well.
Citing what he said was the Hadith (the Islamic tradition attributed to Muslim prophet Muhammad), the Mufti claimed “The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until you fight the Jews. The Jew will hide behind stone or trees. Then the stones or trees will call: ‘O Muslim, servant of Allah (G-d), there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.’ ”
Although a video of the speech was previously available on YouTube, it has been removed because it violated the site’s Terms of Service for violence.
A poll sponsored by the Israel Project found that 73 percent of Palestinian Arabs “believe” this Hadith, according to the findings of a July 2011 study by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner.
The moderator who introduced the Mufti also reiterated another “Islamic belief” — that the Jews are descendants of apes and pigs,” according to a broadcast on PA TV translated by the media watchdog agency Palestinian Media Watch (PMW).
“Our war with the descendants of the apes and pigs (ie: the Jews) is a war of religion and faith,” the moderator said.
The Mufti added to the moderator’s statement, saying that Islam’s goal is to kill the Jews. The same cleric preached in a sermon at Jerusalem’s Al Aqsa Mosque in 2010 that the Jews are “enemies of Allah.”
Please ‘SHARE’ this horrific news with everyone you know. The TRUTH must get out – please SPREAD it!

2914Share

The mission: Protecting Israel

2012-01-18T13:16:00.003-07:00

Op-ed: Israeli hacker who leads group that hit Arab sites explains team's actions Have you ever thought of what goes through the mind of a general in charge of his soldiers when heading to battle? Who will be sent to the front, and who will remain close by because his presence is required for continuing the offensive? I've been pre-occupied with these kinds of thoughts in recent days. While we face a virtual battlefield, the decisions are the same – who will I "sacrifice" when I ask him to publish classified information, and who will I "dispatch" to strike the targets?

After the credit information of Israeli nationals was leaked, I was infuriated. I couldn't believe it was happening. How could it be that organizations that receive daily inquiries alerting them to such grave security lapses ignore them, until it's too late?

These alerts contribute nothing, and the common folk would continue to be harmed, so I therefore decided to take action. I formed a pro-Israeli group of hackers that would fire back against the threats directed at Israel in recent weeks.

Identifying people who wish to take part in the group's activity, which is illegal, took longer than expected. Most of my inquires were rejected for one reason: Israel's computer laws, whereby any online breach could result in a prison term of up to five years. However, eventually I managed to bring together a group of people who believe in the same principles and are wiling to sacrifice themselves if needed, in order to offer a proper response to the "Saudi hacker."

This is war

In the first stage, we struck several Saudi-owned shopping sites in order to elicit sensitive data that includes credit card information. Regrettably, we faced a difficult start. Most attacks failed to bear fruit and despair started to malign group members. Yet then came a surprising announcement from one teammate: "I found what we've been looking for."

We finally had a lead that allowed us to progress in order to elicit as many details as possible. As hours passed by, we managed to identify more and more sources of information. After a few more hours we had enough information to confront the "Saudi hacker." As a team, we came up with an "arsenal of responses" to guide our actions. From now on, all that's left is to wait for the right time and identify the right moment in order to utilize the information in our possession.

As the group's leader, it's very important for me to emphasize that we do not operate against any specific nationality, and any person who operates against the group's principles will be harmed, regardless of religion, creed or gender. In addition, I wish to note that the group regrets harm done to innocents and tries to avoid it as much as it possible. However, such moves are necessary in this war, and we have no choice but to do it.

Yoni, Israeli hacker

Published:

01.18.12, 01:23 / Israel Opinion

Fisrt Published on Ynet

Hamas leaders evacuating families from Syria

2012-01-17T14:31:00.001-07:00

By Ibrahim Barzak

Associated Press / January 17, 2012

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip—Hamas officials say senior members of their exiled leadership will evacuate their families from the group's headquarters in Syria.

Hamas, a militant Islamist Palestinian group, rules the Gaza Strip.

The officials, speaking from Damascus, said Tuesday that the evacuations are in response to the deteriorating security situation in Syria, where President Bashar Assad has been resisting a 10-month uprising.

The officials say the families of three top officials -- Moussa Abu Marzouk, Mohammed Naser and Izzat Risheq -- are set to leave at the end of the month, while the three men will remain in Damascus.

In recent months, Hamas has pulled lower level officials and their families out of Syria.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were discussing the inner workings of the secretive group.

Shalit welcome to run

2012-01-13T12:56:00.001-07:00

Shalit welcome to run

Op-ed: Just like any other citizen, Noam Shalit has full right to run for Israel’s parliament

Anyone who is not tainted by corruption, who does not boast a history of wrongdoing and who is not a habitual criminal can join the political race and run for the Knesset.

This is one of democracy’s cornerstones: The right to elect and be elected is open to everyone, and it is not conditioned upon the motives that push the candidates to the front of the stage. This is true for Noam Shalit, and of course for Karnit Goldwasser.

However, the above statement says nothing about the abilities of these two figures, their suitability for the post, or even their electoral appeal. Shalit and Goldwasser have not produced a cure for cancer, have not resolved the mystery behind the world’s creation, and did not use their political stature thus far in order to establish, lead or manage projects in favor of Israel’s poor and unprivileged.

Goldwasser attempted to join the media world, Shalit apparently returned to the pursuits he undertook before his son’s abduction, and now they are again making headlines: Goldwasser by apparently joining Yair Lapid’s party and Shalit as a future contender in the Labor Party primaries.

That’s how system works

They have the full right to do so, just like the voters have the right to decide on their own criteria before placing their ballots in the box. Indeed, the voters will decide whether the familiar face from television, or the impression created by the struggle to return their loved ones home are enough to vote for Shalit and Goldwasser.

As Shalit already officially declared his intention to run, we shall say again that he has the full right to do so. What will determine whether he wins a Knesset seat is his conduct in the public sphere in the coming months, the positions he’ll present, and the answers he’ll provide to questions that come up. There is no other way and no path that can circumvent the need to become closely familiar with the candidates.

The current Israeli Knesset, for better and for worse, is full of people who two years ago we knew very little about; these are people who were granted the opportunity to gain experience at the expense of Israel’s citizens because of our political model. Indeed, each and every citizen will eventually be able to reward these Knesset members, or send them packing – because that’s how it works.

Ariela Ringel-Hoffman

Published:

01.12.12, 00:16 / Israel Opinion

Ron Paul...Anti-Semite in Chief?

2011-12-31T14:51:00.000-07:00

Via a comment on Shadow Democracy
Ron Paul, my former boss, is not an explicit Anti-Semite, but he is most certainly anti-Israel and one could make a strong case - outright anti-Jewish.
During my 6-year stint with him, I served as his only Jewish staffer. He regularly touted me as proof against allegations that he wasn’t an Anti-Semite, even one time ordering me to wear Jewish clothing and attend a press conference of his Democrat opponent who was exposing his links to Anti-Semitic groups. I felt used.
(For the record, Ron did not know I was Jewish until I had already been hired.)
Ron and I finally departed ways, partly because I was ashamed to work for such an explicitly anti-Israel advocate.
If you still doubt his anti-Jewish/anti-Israel views, ask yourself this question:
Why is it that when Ron Paul talks about the evils of taxpayer dollars going overseas for foreign aid, he only singles out Israel as a recipient? Why does he never mention the billions we send each year to Egypt for foreign aide? Turkey, the Palestinians, other Nations? Never a peep out of Paul about those dollars. It’s just always the “Jews.”
Eric Dondero, Fmr. Senior Aide
US Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX)
1997-2003
Dondero also reveals that the infamous 95 percent of black men are criminals quote was actually authored by Lew Rockwell, Ron Paul's congressional chief of staff.
In fairness, the comments about Blacks being “fleet-footed” were written for Ron, though published under his name in his Ron Paul Newsletter, by his Top behind the scenes aide Lew Rockwell.
But the other comments about Israel being the most powerful lobby, were definitely Ron Paul’s words. In fact, I’ve heard him say similar comments on numerous occasions, some far more explicit, to private quasi-Anti-Semitic groups.
Taking into account my previous post, I have to wonder if a certain gay pagan quaker minister named Jim Christian Perry with a possible Jewish grandparent wasn't bullied into putting on "Jewish clothing" and going out to represent the Ron Paul campaign to defend Ron Paul against accusations of bigotry.
Eric commented further on this post describing the news conference
Thanks for asking about the press conference. It was quite an amusing incident actually. It was not only Ron who urged me to do it, but practically the whole campaign staff at the time, including Ron's longtime Campaign Manager and staunch Christian Right Conservative Mark Elam.
I went down to Victoria for the conference. Lefty Morris was waving some papers in the air accusing Ron Paul of being a closet NeoNazi. (This followed, btw, a huge protest weeks ealier in front of the Victoria Holiday Inn of activists waving signs, "Ron Paul is a Nazi...").
Well, I showed up with a yalmurka on my head, and carrying some Jewish insignias. It threw Morris off-kilter. He was watching me the whole time. Towards the end, the Victoria media turned to me and did an interview. It all hit the papers and the local TV station the next day.
Looking back it was quite brillant political theatre for a campaign. It worked.
But now I just feel like I was used.
It's funny that the Austin and Houston media were so viciously against "extremist far-out fringe Anti-Semite" Ron Paul in that 1996 Campaign. Now they are virtually supporting him, or at least completely silent on their former criticisms of him.
Now that Paul has switched to being a liberal, opposing the War, and bashing Bush, he's their best friend.
But back in 1996, they were 100% behind Lefty Morris.
*See more from Eric in the comments section to this post. Eric himself blogs at Libertarian Republican*

Jews for Ron Paul Exposed as a Fraud!
[The Jim C. Perry / Yaakov Perry Report]
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2007/11/jews-for-ron-paul-exposed-as-fraud-jim.html
Ron Paul, the Anti-Republican candidate for President and a favorite of White Supremacists like David Duke, has unveiled a new defense strategy to counter charges of Anti-semitism. The campaign of the candidate who claims to disdain ethnic collectivism now boasts an organization called "Jews for Ron Paul."
If Jews for Ron Paul puts you in mind of Jews for Jesus, you're not far wrong. Because Jews for Ron Paul is a scam.
Jim C. Perry (James Christian Perry, the C is short for Christian), the Executive Director of Jews for Ron Paul and heavily featured as the spokesman for the front group. Like many Jews for Jesus figures, Jim C. Perry claims to be an Orthodox Jew. The JTA article featured many of Perry's grandiose claims.
For Perry, an Orthodox Jew, there is a connection between his own religious beliefs about personal responsibility and the Libertarian philosophy underpinning Paul's candidacy.
"It's the idea that people are meant to be equal and free in a just society. Those are the same things that draw me to be an observant Orthodox Jew," said Perry. "I believe Judaism puts strong emphasis on individual meaning, personal responsibility," he said, adding that God "calls us to take responsibility for our own actions.".
Here I am a kipah-wearing, fringes-hanging Orthodox Jew...
The real Jim C. Perry though is not an Orthodox Jew, though he makes a point of dressing up like one until he's virtually a cartoon. He's gay and is currently married to a gay man and a self-identified Churchgoing Unitarian Universalist. Here he identifies himself as a Seminarian. He has another account where he calls himself Reverend Jim C. Perry H.P., M.D.A. (he also claimed to have a doctorate in English which he apparently modestly left off here all at the tender age of 22) and a Pagan Minister. Briefly he appears to have gone Ward Churchill and began calling himself Jim Flying Eagle. (He may have also used James L. Rush and posted at Cherokee Pride as James L. Rushing River pretending to be Cherokee)
Now Jim C. Perry, Gay Pagan Unitarian Minister (possibly also Cherokee and Mormon), thanks to a few photos in costume, is being passed off as an Orthodox Jew. A clear and unambiguous lie. Like everything else in the Ron Paul campaign, Jim C. Perry and Jews for Ron Paul is a lie.
Under the user name XSOIDEI, Jim C. Perry has posted at pagan sites as "Pagan GOP"
GOP NOT KKK
by Pagan GOP (Concord, NH)
I am quite offended by the person who the comment that the KKK and GOP are one and the same. I am a PROUD Republican and Pagan. I was hurt by your comments.
No, I do not support the War in Iraq, no Republican in his right mind would! Bob Barr, Ron Paul and Orrin Hatch, all GOPer in Congress were OPPOSED to the War!
I am very Liberty Minded.
Xsoidei
Since universal unitarians are actually compatible with paganism this may not be a contradiction or it may be another case of Ron Paul supporters pretending to be members of various groups to rally support for him. There are signs of this with Jim C. Perry because he also appears to have been joining Mormon groups. Jim C. Perry or "Yaakov Perry" as he calls himself on the phony Yahoo Jews for Ron Paul group has penned announcements on behalf of "Jews for Paul" shilling for Ron Paul on Digg under YaakovPerry. There he has claimed to be Chabad, but here he claimed to be gay and a quaker.
Perry, who is gay, said he wants to help Democratic lawmakers protect and extend civil liberties in New Hampshire. Perry's marriage is recognized by his Quaker faith but not New Hampshire law.
He appears to run New England Flags and to be married to a man named Armen. If you're getting bored of this the sum total is that Jim C. Perry is a lot of things, including compulsive liar. He is not an Orthodox Jew. Jews for Ron Paul which he runs is a scam.
When I first wrote about Ron Paul, I noticed a burst of comments from people claiming to be Jewish and Ron Paul supporters. I suspected that most of them were fake, probably at least one of them was really Jim C. Perry who moonlights as a Jewish Ron Paul supporter, when he's not being a Pagan Ron Paul supporter, a Cherokee or a Unitarian Universalist. The JTA story on the Ron Paul campaign and Jim C. Perry or Yakov Perry needs to be changed to reflect the fact that he is not an Orthodox Jew.
The Jews for Ron Paul advisory board also features Burt or Burton Blumert, better known as the publisher of LewRockwell.com, a site named after Ron Paul's former Congressional Chief of Staff, that might be considered slightly to the left of Stormfront. Burton Blumert is not exactly the poster boy for those who would argue that Israel would be better off with Ron Paul.
Consider tidbits like this from his "essays" such as "My Palestinians."
It is obvious that Palestine under the British Mandate – an island of freedom and free enterprise as compared to rule by Istambul or Tel Aviv – led its citizens to a love affair with the gold sovereign that becomes more entrenched with time... My Palestinians haven't been calling much lately asking the price of the COIN. Their future doesn't look too bright, but they have survived horrible oppression in and around Israel, and, maybe, just maybe they will persevere."
The bulk of the "Jews for Ron Paul" board are associated with LewRockwell.com and with Mises and the Austrian School of Economics. Then there's Ilana Mercer, a WND columnist (a site which hosts pro-israel commentary but also the anti-semitic and anti-israel ravings of Pat Buchanan and Vox Day among others) who penned such articles as "Al Jazeera: Fair, Balanced & Banned"
"The only fair shake Israel ever gets in this country’s media is from Al-Jazeera. The women anchors are also beautiful and refined,”
Lovely.
The simple reality is that the Ron Paul campaign is Anti-Jewish and Anti-Israel but it is also extremely manipulative and deceptive. On the Jews for Ron Paul group, mainly non-Jewish figures hash out ways to sell Ron Paul to Jews utilizing political and religious arguments. The key one that has hit home with some is to claim that Ron Paul will "leave Israel alone."
I have no doubt that Ron Paul would eliminate foreign aid to Israel, but anyone who thinks that a bigot whom the David Duke website proclaims as their King and whose promoters include White Supremacist figures is just going to "leave Israel alone" really has not done a good job of learning from history. People like that don't leave Israel or Jews alone, whether they're libertarians, anarchists, conservatives or liberals.
The Ron Paul campaign is fantastically deceptive and the latest twists involve botnets and stolen credit cards. I have no doubt that Jim C. Perry, who's played a mormon, a pagan, a unitarian universalist and now an orthodox jew on the internet will quickly come back with excuses. No matter how red handed you catch them, Ron Paul supporters always have their excuses. What they completely lack is any honesty or integrity or trace of decency. As far as they're concerned any lie you tell to promote Ron Paul is justified and operating on its usual principle of plausible deniability in regard to the Neo-Nazis, Racists, 911 Deniers and other extremists and haters promoting Ron Paul, the Ron Paul campaign will shrug and claim this has nothing to do with them. Yeah, right.
And while Ron Paul supporters are targeting Jews one way, they're targeting Muslims in a whole other way that reveals the real slant. See here.
Ron Paul may be crazy but he's also dangerous. His supporters are pathologically deceptive and manipulative and behave in ways that are downright psychotic. Jews for Ron Paul has been exposed as a fraud, but don't expect it to go away. The Ron Paul campaign responded to revelations that Ron Paul has received a donation from a leading Neo-Nazi figures, not by returning the money, but by unveiling a Jews for Ron Paul group. Even if Jim C. Perry is dumped after this (which I suspect he won't be) the lies from Ron Paul supporters and the Ron Paul campaign will go on.
That's why it's important to go on exposing them.
Update 1: Jim C. Perry as a Democrat, the fallout and his failure to return campaign contributions despite promising to do so.
Update 2: Jim C. Perry's disastrous Libertarian party time Via Andrew Walden
Update 3: Linked to by Little Green Footballs, HotAir, Anti-Racist blog, American Thinker, Israel Matzav and Free Republic, Bookworm Room , Space Ramblings , Pillage Idiot,Ioterran, Maverick News Network among others.
Update 4: "Birth Name: James Christian Perry. I was named after my uncle James Perry, one of my father’s five brothers. My middle name was given to me in honor of a late friend of my parents." - In other words, Jews for Paul is run by James Christian Perry. Sigh.
Update 5: Ron Paul's Lone Jewish Staffer Speaks Out
Update 6: Jim C. Perry signed a thank you petition for army deserter Ehren Watada for his desertion.
Update 7: Jim C. Perry was originally the outreach liason for the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender community for the Free State Project. The wording of his messages is instructive.
Hey Skip, welcome! No, I am have been racking my brains trying to come up with ideas for how to pitch the FSP to the BGLT Community.
My boyfriend Micah (also on this list) already lives in NH and I am in the process of moving to NH.
I am trying to figure out a way to turn the whole gay marriage issue into a reason to join the ranks of the FSP. If it isn't hard for us to get the gay/les/bi wing of the poly crowd interested (as seen from the size of the poly yahoo group, if you have ever seen their numbers) then I don't see why we cant attract bglt people who arent poly into joining as well.
On that note thought, most polyamorus people learn of this group marriage option through books like Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert Heinlein... a LIBERTARIAN author, so I must say they are usually already Libertarian leaning as it is.
And then a few years later Jim traded in Micah for Armen, began calling himself Yaakov and got assigned as the liason to the Jewish community and began racking his brains on how to pitch Ron Paul to the Jewish community. Lest anyone doubts that this is the same person, he lists the original website he used before he had to take it down after he got exposed at Free Republic.
Jim C. Perry was originally also the GLBT Outreach Director for the George Phillies campaign

Chag sameach and happy Hanukkah to all!

2011-12-23T15:02:00.001-07:00

President Obama says happy Hanukkah to Jews around the world

President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama have a message for Jews around the world: chag sameach.
That’s Hebrew for wishing someone a festive holiday, akin to a "happy holidays" greeting. The Obamas issued the following statement today in honor of Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights, which begins tonight at sundown:

Michelle and I send our warmest wishes to all those celebrating Hanukkah around the world.
This Hanukkah season we remember the powerful story of a band of believers who rose up and freed their people, only to discover that the oil left in their desecrated temple –- which should have been enough for only one night –- ended up lasting for eight.
It’s a timeless story of right over might and faith over doubt –- one that has given hope to Jewish people everywhere for over 2,000 years. And tonight, as families and friends come together to light the menorah, it is a story that reminds us to count our blessings, to honor the sacrifices of our ancestors, and to believe that through faith and determination, we can work together to build a brighter, better world for generations to come.
From our family to the Jewish Community around the world, chag sameach.

Chag sameach and happy Hanukkah to all!

I want more than a hug

2011-12-14T12:57:00.001-07:00

Op-ed: Israel needs its American friends to provide more than sympathetic words

Donniel Hartman
　
Newt Gingrich, a true friend of Israel,attempted to prove his friendship by denying the existence of a Palestinian people. This and other similarly "friendly" statements by Republican presidential candidates over the last few weeks is evidence of a perception not merely of friendship but of what these candidates believe the Jewish people want to hear.

There is a Palestinian people

My commitment to a Palestinian state living side by side with Israel grows precisely out of my desire both to enable Palestinians to express their national aspirations and my commitment to ensure my ability to maintain Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people.
As a Jew, I know that there is a Palestinian people. I say, "as a Jew," because beyond the fact that today there are millions of people who define themselves as such, the playing of the historical card to deny present reality is one that we Jews suffered from over and again. In fact, the essence of the current efforts to delegitimize Israel as a Jewish state is grounded in the so-called historical "fact" that Judaism is a religion and not a national identity. As a Jew, I am obligated to live by Hillel’s doctrine - What is hateful unto you, do not do unto others - and to view this doctrine as enjoined by Hillel, as the essence of Torah.
As a Jew, I am obligated to strive for peace and to sanctify all life as created in the image of God. For me, one of the meanings of Israel as a Jewish state is that it is a country whose policies constantly strive to create a world in which these values can be realized. Such an aspiration takes precedence, I believe, over the holiness of the land, the rights of Jews to settle in our ancient homeland, and even requires, as all values do, the taking of risks.
In the real world, one’s commitments to one’s values are measured precisely by the sacrifices one is willing to make for them. Peace and the dignity of all humankind is not simply a word for an ideal awaiting a messianic era but a value which obligates us as Jews.
As a Jew, I know I am obligated by the primacy of human life and that this commitment to the sanctity of life starts first and foremost with one’s own. I am commanded to love my neighbor as myself, a commandment which presupposes the value of my life. As a result, issues of security and the right of self-defense are moral duties.
While moral responsibility must include a measure of altruism, it cannot come at the expense of a healthy sense of self. Israel’s ability to defend itself and protect its citizens, and to live not merely within secure borders but with neighbors who can be trusted to commit to long-term treaties, are self-evident rights and Jewish values.
These are the things I know, the four principles that I have learned from my tradition and the values on which a Jewish state is founded. While I do want to know that I am not alone and that I have real friends, what I want from my friends is more than a hug. What I hope for from my political allies in the United States, be they Republican or Democrat, is to show whether their policies share the above values and how they may help me fulfill them.
We are a strong people, and Israel is a strong country. Our strength is measured in our ability to defend ourselves, in the friends who stand by our side, and in the value and justice of both our aspirations and our policies. To our friends in the American political leadership I ask that you both recognize this and speak with me about this. This is what I really want to hear from you. This is what gives me and my nation hope for a better future.
Rabbi Dr. Donniel Hartman is president of the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem, Israel

A Mitzvah

2011-12-12T11:55:00.001-07:00

I ran this article awhile back, but in view of the current situation, it seems timely, so let me say, one more time:
This morning, while shopping for a bit of food, I was delayed somewhat in the check out line.
I sighed, "So what else is new?"
Time seemed suspended as an elderly lady debated something with the cashier.
She had what looked like a coupon of some sort in her hand.
The fellow in front of me held two loaves of bread, some milk, cereal, lunch meat and some snacks in a blue plastic hand-carrier.
" I bet you thought you were going to get right in and out, eh?" I smiled.
There were three of us in the store and time was passing as the cashier called for assistance over the intercom.
The man had brown hair, graying at the temples, horn- rimmed glasses and a peaceful expression.
He shifted the carrier to his other hand, “Are you Jewish?”, he asked.
The question sort of surprised me, “Why do you ask?” I queried.
He said, “You look Jewish.”
I didn't know exactly what he meant, but I said “I am.”
He stuck his hand out to shake.
We shook hands. “Are you Jewish?” I asked in turn.
“I am.” he replied.
“Cool.” I responded.
He smiled, “So how are we doing?” He asked.
“oh, I guess we're doing okay, there's still a lot of Antisemitism, but it's not as bad as it could be.
The Arabs are still terrorizing Israel...but Jews have made gains, again, it's not as bad as it might be.”
He looked into my eyes ”How are you doing?”
“I'm doing okay, I'm keeping my head below water, keeping the wolf at the door. You know, as long as you have your health, your family...”
He smiled again, “Are you going to lend me some money?”
He seemed like a gentle man asking what seemed an odd question.
“No,” I said, “ I don't really have it. I'm in sort of a trough.”
He looked at me again, “What's a trough?”
“A low spot, financially. A slight depression.”
He ran a slender hand through his graying hair, “Are you a lawyer?”
“No. I'm not as lawyer.”
He sighed, “I am. I'm a lawyer.”
He said, just as the cashier indicated the elderly lady had finally done her business.
The cashier said, “How are you today?” and proceeded to ring up his items.
He gave her a couple of dollars for herself and gestured to the items, “This is my mitzvah for today. My neighbors are having some money problems. I thought this might help a little.” He looked at me with a warm smile, “Could you use a few bucks?”
“No, thanks, I'm ok. It's kind of you to offer though.”
We exchanged pleasantries and went our separate ways.
But he got me thinking of mitzvahs.

So here is mine.
Its about hope.
Its about hope that people will rise above pettiness, and ignorance, and prejudice, and do as these Arabs have done.

There is a web site called Arabs for Israel which I discovered by typing the words “Arabs” for Israel into the Google search box, just wishing to know if there were any Arabs for Israel.
The site touched my heart.
Now I am speaking to Arabs who wind up on this site, which lately, a few have, listen to these wise gentle words.The middle-east is so morally bankrupt, yet it has the ability to turn around completely, not only to take its rightful place in the community of nations, but to be a leader of the world community.
The Jews are ready, nay, eager, to work with the Arabs to lift everyone up, to have peace and love and prosperity.
Here is an excerpt from the Arabs for Israel web site:

Who We Are
We are Arabs and Moslems who believe:
We can support Israel and still support the Palestinian people. Supporting one does not cancel support for the other.
We can support the State of Israel and the Jewish religion and still treasure our Arab and Islamic culture.
There are many Jews and Israelis who freely express compassion and support for the Palestinians. We Arabs also express reciprocal compassion and support.
The existence of the State of Israel is a fact that we accept.
Israel is a legitimate state that is not a threat but an asset in the Middle East.
Every major World religion has a center of gravity. Islam has Mecca, and Judaism certainly deserves its presence in Israel and Jerusalem.
Diversity is a virtue not only in the USA, but would be beneficial around the world. We support a diverse Middle East with protection for human rights, respect and equality under the law to all minorities, including Jews and Christians.
Palestinians have several options but are deprived from exercising them because of their leadership, the Arab League and surrounding Arab and Moslem countries who have other goals besides seeing Palestinians live in harmony with Israel.
If Palestinians want democracy they can start practicing it now.
It will benefit Arabs to end the boycott of Israel.
We can resolve our conflicts using non-violent means. Sending our young people on suicide/homicide missions as a form of Jihad is a distortion of Islam. We can do better.
We are appalled by the horrific act of terror against the USA on 9/11/2001.
It will be better for Arabs when the Arab media ends the incitement and misinformation that result in Arab street rage and violence. We support the Arab media providing coverage of ways that people of all religions are and can live together in harmony.
We are eager to see major reformation in how Islam is taught and channeled to bring out the best in Moslems and contribute to the uplifting of the human spirit and advancement of civilization.
We believe in freedom to choose or change one’s Religion.
We cherish and acknowledge the beauty and contributions of the Middle East culture, but recognize that the Arab/Moslem world is in desperate need of constructive self-criticism and reform.
We seek dialogue with Israel. We invite you to join us on a path of love.
We are NOT:
Anti-Islam, Anti-Arab, confrontational or hateful.
We remember with deep sadness and respect the brave Arabs, known and unknown, who were killed or severely punished for promoting peace with Israel; a special thanks to President Anwar Sadat of Egypt who was killed at the hands of Militant and Radical Islamists after he signed the peace treaty with Israel.
We salute and commend Arab and Moslem writers, scholars and speakers, who found the strength, commitment and honesty in their hearts to speak out in support of Israel. We thank you for being the pioneers that you are and for holding such sophisticated and advanced views in the realm of Arab and Moslem thinking. You are inspiring us all.
ARABS AND MOSLEMS WHO WISH TO POST THEIR VIEWS IN SUPPORT OF ISRAEL CAN DO SO BY EMAILING US. WE WILL THEN POST THEM ANONYMOUSLY, IF THEY WISH. Please send all correspondence to: nonie@arabsforisrael.comQuran:28:4 Behold, Pharaoh exalted himself in the land and divided its people into castes. Asad(28,3) [3] One group of them he deemed utterly low (The Children of Israel); he would slaughter their sons and spare (only) their women: Asad(28,4) [4] for, behold, he was one of those who spread corruption [on earth].
Quran: 28:5 And We (G-d) wished to be Gracious to those (The Children of Israel) who were being depressed in the land, to make them guiding lights for others and make them heirs.
A message from T.Hamid: If G-d himself wants to be gracious to the Children of Israel should not I also be Gracious to them! May G-d bless them all and keep them for the world to make it better and better.
Israel in the Quran
2:47 Children of Israel! call to mind the favour which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all other nations. 2:122 O Children of Israel! call to mind the favor which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all other nations.
7:137 And We made the children of Israel, who were considered weak (and of no account), inheritors of lands in both east and west, - lands whereon We sent down Our blessings. The fair promise of thy Lord was fulfilled for the Children of Israel, because they had patience and constancy, and We leveled to the ground the great works and fine buildings which Pharaoh and his people erected (with such pride). 17:104 And We said thereafter to the Children of Israel, "Dwell securely in the land of promise": 10:93 We settled the Children of Israel in a beautiful dwelling-place, and provided for them sustenance of the best: it was after knowledge had been granted to them.
20:80 O ye Children of Israel! We delivered you from your enemy, and We made a Covenant with you to give you the right side (the blessed side) of Mount Sinai, and We sent down to you Manna (special food) and quails.
26:59 Thus it was, but We made the Children of Israel inheritors of such things (the promised land)
45:16 We did aforetime grant to the Children of Israel the Book the Power of Command, and Prophet hood; We gave them, for Sustenance, things good and pure; and We favored them above all other nations.
44: 32 And We have chosen them (the Children of Israel) above the 'Alamîn (mankind, and jinns) and our choice was based on a deep knowledge.
32.23] And certainly We gave the Book to Moses, so be not in doubt concerning the receiving of it, and We made it a guide for the children of Israel.[32.24] And We made of them Guiding Lights and leaders to guide by Our command as they were patient, and they were certain of Our communications.
[17:104] And we said to the Children of Israel afterwards, “ scatter and live all over the world…and when the end of the world is near we will gather you again into the Promised Land”.
(Comment : This last verse proves that the Quran is declaring that it is the will of G-d himself to gather the children of Israel again in their promised land before the end days. Accordingly, No Muslim has the right to interfere with gathering the Jews in Israel again as this is the will of G-d himself. In addition, Honest analysis of the Quranic verses above leads to the conclusion that the West Bank and Gaza are better called the “occupied” Israeli land.

Tarek Hamid

Posted by Michael Blackburn at 5:02 PM 0 Click to Comment

Israel to continue hold on PA tax funds

2011-11-21T17:25:00.001-07:00

JERUSALEM (JTA) -- Israel will maintain its freeze on transferring taxes collected for the Palestinian Authority.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his inner Cabinet of eight ministers in a meeting Sunday decided to continue the suspension that began early this month, shortly after the Palestinians were admitted as a full member of UNESCO, the U.N.'s scientific and cultural agency. The suspension will continue, according to Haaretz, due to new movement between Hamas and Fatah to form a unity government.
Israel transfers to the Palestinian Authority about $100 million in tax payments collected on the Palestinians' behalf each month.
The defense establishment, including Minister of Defense Ehud Barak, has called for the payments to be reinstated. Israeli security services reportedly have argued that withholding the funds, which go in part to pay Palestinian police officers, could hamper security arrangements in the West Bank.
Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman are strongly in favor of withholding the funds.

Netanyahu Says he's Open to Negotiations on Jerusalem

2011-11-12T16:52:00.001-07:00

Bibi says "the final status of Jerusalem is not a pre-condition for negotiation, it is something to be negotiated," watch the video.

Of course, Bibi would not give the Arabs one inch of Jerusalem.
This is called diplomacy.

.

Dershowitz Defends Israeli Prisoner Exchange

2011-11-04T00:47:00.000-06:00

Dershowitz Defends Israeli Prisoner Exchange

By GINA K. HACKETT, CONTRIBUTING WRITER

Published: Friday, October 28, 2011

Harvard Law School Professor Alan M. Dershowitz defended on Thursday Israel’s decision to secure the return of captured soldier Gilad Shalit in exchange for the release of around 1,000 Palestinian prisoners as part and parcel of Israeli democracy, something that he said Western observers do not take sufficient care to understand.

Dershowitz made the remarks at a talk alongside Rabbi Jonathan H. Sacks, the chief religious leader of British Jews, and said that Israel’s decision to agree to a swap represents a vital democracy insofar as the movement to secure Shalit’s freedom was a popular one that was led by his family and carried out in the court of public opinion.

“No matter what we may think in the halls of academia ... ultimately, the decision has to be made by Israelis,” Dershowitz said.

Many observers have criticized Israel’s choice to release a large number of prisoners in exchange for Shalit’s return, a decision that many say will lead to further kidnappings of Israeli soldiers to be used as bargaining chips. Dershowitz pushed back against American criticism of Israeli policy by saying that American critics of Israel do not adequately take into consideration Israel’s status as a democracy, which he said entitles it to a greater degree of independence than some of its critics grant.

In the wake of the exchange, Dershowitz and Sacks both said it was important for Israel to retain its Jewish identity even in the hailstorm of conflict, adding that the long-standing tension between Israelis and Palestinians should, in principle, be able to lead to a sense of understanding between the two peoples.

“If there is anyone on earth who should be able to understand Jewish struggles, it’s Palestinians,” Sacks said. “And if there is anyone on earth who should be able to understand Palestinian struggles, it’s Jews.”

Dershowitz said that while the conflict is headed in the wrong direction politically, it is moving in the right direction intellectually.

“It can’t be based on ‘it’s our home’ or ‘it’s your home,’” Dershowitz said. “It’s the home of both people and both people have to live in peace with each other.”

Both Sacks and Dershowitz, two highly vocal advocates for a Jewish state, recognized the difficulty of the conflict. For all their expertise on the matter, neither Sacks nor Dershowitz had a clear view of whether the effort to achieve peace is progressing in the right direction.

Both men said that there was an inevitability to the tie between the Jewish people’s history and today’s Israel. Because Jews are unique in their perpetual homelessness, Israel remains a product of Jews’ history of trauma and expulsion, Sacks said.

“Jews discovered that there was not one inch on the face of the planet that they could call home,” Sacks said.

“It’s hard to see how, in a world in which there are 56 Islamic states and at least 82 Christian states, there isn’t room for one Jewish state,” Sacks added. “Whatever criterion you use, Jews have a right to this very small space.”

The Narrows

2011-10-27T18:02:00.000-06:00

Ben-Gurion repeatedly faced down crises by fearlessly rejecting retreat and useless compromise. Obama would do well to follow his model.

By Edward N. Luttwak|October 27, 2011 7:00 AM|9comments

Print Email

(Daniel Hertzberg)

Now an international airport and a university, as well as any number of boulevards in Israeli cities and towns, David Ben-Gurion—the man—was born in Płońsk, the Russian-ruled part of Poland in 1886. When he read Israel’s declaration of Independence on May 14, 1948, thereby inaugurating the first government of the first Jewish state in two millennia, he was already 62. In the years since, some 150 new states have been established. Most of these were the gift of colonial powers that handed them over to their new rulers as complete packages with everything ready from internationally recognized borders to a ministry of finance and a prison service. That was true of the post-Soviet states as well, except for the democratic bits, which their rulers mostly ignore anyway.

It was entirely different for Ben-Gurion. The state he led from its birth until 1963, with a fateful gap in 1954 and 1955, had to be created from the ground up, and he had to do much of the creating. The British left abruptly without any organized handover, evacuating their camps and abandoning their offices after taking away all removable equipment. To find clerks and office furniture was nowhere near as hard as finding weapons for an army, air force, and navy—and double-quick because Arab armies were already advancing. Stringent British and U.S. embargoes in the name of peace (with the already equipped Arab armies, including the British-officered Arab Legion left unmentioned) were meant to ensure the expected outcome. But even that near-insurmountable challenge was overcome under Ben-Gurion’s leadership by a variegated cast of unlikely characters that briefly included Josef Stalin (to hurt the British), the irrepressible Hank Greenspun of Las Vegas, the frighteningly smart secret agent Ehud Avriel, a British gentile RAF pilot who could fly any transport any distance, and others worthy of full-scale biographies.

Yet the greatest obstacle to the creation of the Jewish state were the Jews, or rather the Zionist leaders themselves. For all their talents, many were so conditioned by deeply rooted mental habits of dependence that they simply did not understand the absolute imperative of possessing state power. Some, including the religious, could not bring themselves to accept its inevitable military aspect. Guns were for Cossacks, not Jews—an attitude, or mere pose, that long lingered and indeed lingers still in benighted recesses, such as the editorial office of theNew York Review of Books.

As late as the Zionist Congress of 1946, held in Basel in the immediate aftermath of the most terrible demonstration of the ultimate survival risk of statelessness, Ben-Gurion met strong resistance when he pressed for a maximum effort to secure an independent state in Palestine. He was the leading Labor party politician, head of the World Zionist Organization, and chairman of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, which actually built settlements and funded most Jewish institutions, including the Haganah militia. But in Basel, where everything had to be done democratically, the immensely prestigious Chaim Weizmann, who valued his easy access to the halls of the mighty in Britain as elsewhere, preferred continued British control, even as the British continued to block Jewish immigration into Palestine (nobody was impeding the many Arab migrants). As for the very strong Marxist contingent, newly reinforced by the reflected glory of the victorious Red Army, with its powerful kibbutz movement, and the coolest youth movement, Hashomer Hatzair, ennobled by leading the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, it wanted an indefinite U.N. mandate over the whole of Palestine to pursue the binationalism that some still long for. Then there were the non-socialist Zionists, many of whom much preferred caution to action. Outside the Congress, Menachem Begin’s Revisionists were very eager for a state, but only over the whole of Palestine, a non-starter.

Shimon Peres’ new Nextbook Press biography of Ben-Gurion earns its price in its very first pages by describing what happened next in Basel. Though there are much fuller accounts, Peres was actually there as head of the Labor party’s youth wing and as Ben-Gurion’s aide, and he saw it all at closest range. For Ben-Gurion, there was but one way of reconciling his utter certainty that the Jews needed a state with the widespread opposition he was encountering at the Congress.

Peres recounts that Ben-Gurion’s formidable wife Paula suddenly rushed down into the basement where the Labor caucus was meeting to tell a startled delegate that her husband had gone mad (“meshugge gevoren”). Instead of settling for a weasel-worded resolution, Ben-Gurion announced he was packing his bags and leaving Basel to start forming a new Zionist organization that would pursue independent statehood unhesitatingly. Faced with that, his many opponents among the Basel delegates dropped their objections and started working to make it happen.

***

For a true leader in a great crisis, the whole world is but a very narrow bridge, and the only important thing is not to be afraid, to reject ignominious retreat and useless face-saving compromises alike. When Ben-Gurion came to the narrow bridge at Basel, it was only his supremely courageous resolve to abandon the Congress and start all over again that won the day.

Ronald Reagan came to his narrow bridge at the very outset of his presidency. European leaders, his own secretary of State, academia, and the quality press were all telling him that in the nuclear age there was no alternative to coexistence with the USSR, hence it was imperative to resume talks leading to a summit meeting with Brezhnev. Having campaigned against détente, Reagan was being told to resume it—and quickly. Ignoring the establishment, Reagan flatly refused, embarking instead on a tenacious campaign to delegitimize the Soviet Union. His “evil empire” speech that must now be judged prophetic was universally ridiculed at the time.

Bill Clinton was famously deft at avoiding narrow bridges, but when he could not he showed the mettle of true leadership, notably by out-staring House Speaker Newt Gingrich and accepting a federal government shutdown in December 1995 rather than unwanted budget cuts. That was the very clear precedent that President Barack Obama chose not to follow this year. He had weighty justification in our time of global fiscal insecurity. But by allowing the Republicans to dictate the outcome of the budget fight, Obama crippled his own leadership, and even a string of foreign policy successes may not repair the damage.

The newly inaugurated Clinton was also forced to choose between the youthful activists on the left of the Democratic party—many backed by lavishly funded environmentalist lobbies, both of which had done much to elect him—and the dour voices on the right of the party. After 12 years of Republicans in the White House, they wanted more of the same: fiscal prudence and regulatory restraint. Clinton chose the right, broke the tender hearts of the more innocent of his supporters, and paved the way for eight years of economic growth and high employment.

Obama once again did not follow Clinton. Having been elected with enthusiastic Wall Street support and funding from top financiers, he could not bring himself to break their tender hearts, or rather their wallets, when their firms were bailed out. With a tough Secretary of the Treasury—the opposite of his ever-emollient Timothy Geithner, who whines when he attempts to upbraid the Chinese—Obama would not have needed any new laws to force Wall Street firms out of dangerous practices and to stop them from paying spectacularly outrageous bonuses to their failed executives, which rankle still. Instead, at a time when most firms were on federal life support, Geithner feebly said that there was nothing he could do, and Obama allowed himself to be rolled with him.

***

It was just as well that Ben-Gurion had more than his share of courage because he had to face more than his share of narrow bridges. In June 1948 the first Arab onslaught was being precariously held, with Egyptian tanks some 25 miles from Tel Aviv, when a brief U.N. ceasefire came into effect. It was then that the Altalena, a ship outfitted by Menachem Begin’s Etzel militia, arrived with desperately needed weapons and some 800 volunteers. Ben-Gurion was concerned by the violation of the U.N. cease-fire, but very much more by the challenge to the new state’s monopoly of force. He wanted the Etzel dissolved into the newly established Israel Defense Forces, not reinforced with weapons and volunteers that threatened to make Israel into another Lebanon of rival militias. When urgent talks failed, it came to force at Ben-Gurion’s orders, with the 26-year-old Yitzhak Rabin already a brigade commander in charge of the firing that burned the Altalena directly in front of the Tel Aviv beach, a mere 100 meters offshore in full view of the horrified population.

It was outrageous cruelty to fire on Jewish volunteers, but once again Ben-Gurion persuaded all around him that there was no valid alternative to the hardest option, as indeed there was not. Peres was there as an aide, not a soldier, but he had to get hold of a rifle in case the Etzel would attack Ben-Gurion himself. (Begin did not lack courage either: He boarded the ship and was almost the last to jump off with the ammunition already exploding. Then he went on to his radio station to denounce Ben-Gurion, but also to accept the Etzel’s dissolution to avoid civil war.)

Ben-Gurion was active in foreign affairs for decades in one capacity or another (he dealt with Ottoman officials before 1914), but it was only in 1956 that he came to two narrow bridges in a row in foreign policy. The first was the secret negotiation with the British and the French over their concerted 1956 attack on Egypt that preceded Israel’s Sinai campaign. Its swift success in conquering the peninsula eventually led to the second: President Dwight Eisenhower’s ultimatum, demanding Israel’s total withdrawal, but with irreversible gains. Ben-Gurion had met Eisenhower in 1945 when as head of the Jewish Agency he visited Germany’s displaced persons’ camps, and preceding revisionist historians by decades, he saw great wisdom in the man. Once again in the room when it happened, Peres gives a uniquely intimate account of what ensued in both cases. Of the first bridge, suffice it to say that when Ben-Gurion was asked to open the negotiations, as if he were the one asking for help, he asked only one question of French Prime Minister Guy Mollet: “When did the French stop writing in Latin to switch to French?” (To find out how that made all the difference, one really must read the book.)

Given Obama’s more than adequate record in the hard business of fighting terrorists, and his sound preference for doing less rather than too much in refractory Muslim lands after the huge error of the Afghan troop surge, it is in economic policy that he must stop backing out from narrow bridges. As Israel’s prime minister during the heroic first years of the Israeli economy, when some 800,000 inhabitants fed, housed, and assimilated more than a million destitute immigrants with little outside help, Ben-Gurion would have failed totally had he failed economically. His successful calls for austerity—there was very strict food rationing—and solidarity from all, showed classic leadership.

But there was also Ben-Gurion’s willingness to reject conventional wisdom and embrace whatever worked. Instead of expensively educated Geithners who fit their government passages into their personal career plans, he had the likes of Pinchas Sapir, a minister of industry who created out of nothing many of the industries he supervised, and who died almost penniless in a modest apartment in a then very modest Kfar Saba after years of courting the wealthy to invest in Israel, because he was greedy only for the honor of public service. It was by every innovative expedient under the sun, through many a wrong turn, that Sapir, and Israel more broadly, succeeded economically. With many millions of Americans in acute economic distress, Obama should not leave the search for innovative expedients to his Republican opponents, nor should he allow himself to be held back by his advisers who confuse the entire economic system with a handful of the very largest firms that offer the best positions to former U.S. government officials.

Edward N. Luttwak, a military strategist and senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, is the author of The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire.

1 2 View as single page

MORE IN: ALTALENA, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, DAVID BEN-GURION, DWIGHT EISENHOWER, HANK GREENSPUN, MENACHEM BEGIN, NEWT GINGRICH, RONALD REAGAN, TIMOTHY GEITHNER

A SICK SYMMETRY

2011-10-20T05:09:00.000-06:00

Gilad Shalit Comes Home in the Eye of the Media

OCTOBER 19, 2011 11:59BY SIMON PLOSKER

[Translate]

Gilad Shalit (Photo: IDF)

After over five years in captivity, Gilad Shalit was finally reunited with his family on Israeli soil as part of a deal that saw hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, including many responsible for heinous and deadly acts of terror, released.

A LOW POINT FOR ETHICAL COVERAGE

From the Israeli side, the main news networks had agreed to handle the story sensitively by keeping their distance from the Shalit home and avoiding invasive photography. Indeed, the blanket coverage on Israeli television was a drip feed of carefully controlled IDF footage and images of the newly released Shalit.

Prior to that, however, as Shalit was released into Egyptian custody, ethical journalism went out of the window as a bewildered and tired looking Shalit, after 5 years in isolation, found himself in front of an Egyptian TV camera for an interview with newswoman Shahira Amin.

Amin has come under intense fire from Israel for conducting an interview under such circumstances, criticism that she has rejected. Was Shalit forced to give the interview? Notaccording to Amin:

It’s true that he was brought in by armed Hamas men, but in the room itself there were only Egyptian intelligence people. They didn’t intervene, and neither did the Hamas men. I say this with complete authority and responsibility: I asked Gilad if he was willing to be interviewed and he said he was. If he’d answered that he didn’t, I wouldn’t have conducted the interview. He seemed pale and exhausted, it’s true, but at the same time he seemed happy that he was going home, and gave good answers. Personally I would have preferred the interview to be in English, without the translator, but Gilad preferred to speak in Hebrew.

Could Shalit possibly have agreed to be interviewed so readily due to the presence of a masked Hamas operative in the room?

As for the interview itself, the Jerusalem Post gives some analysis:

“During all that time of captivity, you did just one video to tell the world and your family that you’re alive,” she tells the soldier. “Why just once? Why didn’t it happen again?”Rather than letting him answer, however, Schalit’s Hamas minder-cum-interpreter scolds Amin for asking the same question twice (a peculiar accusation, given the footage shows the question hadn’t been asked before).

The resulting argument between interviewer and minder is one of the interview’s more regrettable scenes. Amin says Schalit appears unwell, and “that’s why I’m asking the question again” – as if drilling him repeatedly will have a salutary effect. The question is itself absurd, roughly tantamount to asking a hostage victim why he or she didn’t escape sooner.

. . .

Amin proceeds to ask Schalit what “lessons” he learned in captivity. After asking for the question to be repeated, he says he believes a deal could have been reached sooner. Here the Hamas minder renders his response as praise for reaching a deal “in such short time” – a mistranslation repeated by the BBC’s own real-time interpreter.

“Gilad, you know what it’s like to be in captivity,” Amin continues as the painful charade drags on. “There are more than 4,000 Palestinians still languishing in Israeli jails. Will you help campaign for their release?”

Schalit’s answer, after a few seconds’ stunned silence, is superior: “I’d be very happy if they were released,” he says, then adds the caveat, “provided they don’t return to fighting Israel.”

Again, the Egyptian interpreter fails to translate the sentence’s second clause, and again the omission is repeated by the BBC’s interpreter, though he too was apparently translating from Hebrew in real-time.

“I will be very happy for the prisoners to go free, so that they can be able to go back to their families, loved ones and territory. It will give me great happiness if this happens,” the BBC’s interpreter relays.

And shame on those members of the international press such as the LA Times, which failed to adequately check the translation before repeating Shalit’s mistranslated words:

Asked whether he would work to help secure the release of other Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails, Shalit said he would be happy to see them reunited with their families and that he hoped the spirit of cooperation that led to his release would continue between Israelis and Palestinians.

Lasting ten painful minutes for a visibly strained Shalit, the interview delayed his return to Israel and marks a new low point in the media’s need for instant gratification regardless of the cost.

PALESTINE PIE IN THE SKY

Just what is going on at Sky News? Only days ago HonestReporting flagged its coverage, since corrected, that wrongly stated that Shalit had been captured in Gaza. (He was, of course, kidnapped on Israeli soil.) Now, in another blunder, Sky reports:

Putting to one side the argument over whether the term “Palestine” should even be part of the accepted lexicon, in this case, the term is utterly wrong. It wasn’t “Palestine” or even the Palestinian Authority that Israel agreed the deal with. It was Hamas, which certainly cannot claim to represent “Palestine” and governs only the Gaza Strip.

This error was also repeated by The New Statesman, perhaps less of a surprise given that the publication is under the editorship of Islamist Mehdi Hasan.

A SICK SYMMETRY

The Guardian reports:

Families wept as they embraced. Children who had no memories of their fathers were held up to be kissed. But some of the freed prisoners seemed most intent on embracing mothers who wailed with joy.

The reaction across the Gaza Strip and the West Bank as hundreds of jailed Palestinians returned home, or at least left their prison cells, was not so different from the matching emotions in Israel at the release of just one man.

Actually, the emotions displayed by some Palestinians did not match those of Israelis. Perhaps The Guardian’s Chris McGreal would have changed his teary-eyed tune had he also reported on events at the Hamas-organized welcome home event in Gaza, as described in The Daily Telegraph, amongst others:

But outside, the crowd – now 100,000 strong – was in full voice, chanting in unison: “We want another Gilad, we want another Gilad.” Such scenes will have done little to boost the reputation of Gaza’s Palestinian population in international eyes. Some admitted that the spectacle was unedifying, even distasteful – but insisted that they had no choice.

Despite all of the above, Israel and every decent human being can breathe a collective sigh of relief. Gilad Shalit, a young man deprived of his freedom for over five years without even a visit from the Red Cross, is back where he belongs. Welcome home Gilad.

Back To Life, Gilad Shalit

2011-10-18T21:38:00.000-06:00

20.37 Richard Spencer, who has been in Mitzpe Hilareporting on the amazing scenes of the day, looks at Shalit's last 24 hours and the 'rebirth of a son', as his father Noam Shalit, put it:

No one knew how he had stood up to the rigours of solitary confinement. He was also injured by shrapnel during his kidnapping.

He fell ill during his first helicopter ride, and there were fears he would have to be taken straight to hospital. But though said to be suffering from malnutrition and lack of sunlight, he was passed fit to travel on.

His frailty highlighted the irony that it was the bookish and shy Gilad Shalit who had been seized. "He's quiet," said Avishay Mazor, 26, another friend. "He doesn't bother anyone, not even a fly. He just wanted to be left in peace, like his family."

20.31 Stephen Adams, the Telegraph's Medical Correspondent, writes that the last five years will have had a negative impact on his health. Shalit struggled to breath during a TV interview, and Israeli military officers said he showed signs of malnutrition. One British expert, Dr Walter Busuttil, medical director at the chairty Combat Stress, who helped treat British captives Terry Waite and John McCarthy said it could take him years to recover.

If I was looking at him now I would be asking him about his sleeping patterns and meals, as these would both have been interrupted by his incarceration...

The first thing I would give him is a watch, to give him back a sense of control over time.

That's the first thing that would have been taken away from him...

19.45 Daniel Taub, the Israel's UK ambassador, writes forThe Telegraph that Shalit's return is a testament toIsrael's love of life.

At its root, the decision to make the deal was not won by pragmatic arguments or realpolitik. We are bringing Gilad home, and paying the painful price, not because we know that this is the correct strategic decision, but because of our profound conviction that it ought to be. The bittersweet joy of the moment presents a challenge to us all. If this indeed is not a world in which placing supreme value on a single human life is the best course of action, then let us work to make it one.

19.30 The Telegraph's Adrian Blomfield has more on Palestinian militants vowing to abduct a "new Gilad Shalit" to use as leverage against the Jewish state.

For optimists, the exchange represented a moment of hope that perhaps, after years of bitterness, the end of so painful a saga could mark the beginning of a new era in Israeli-Palestinian relations. Prompted by his Egyptian interviewer, Sgt Maj Shalit claimed to share such optimism, saying: "I hope this deal will lead to peace between Palestinians and Israelis and that it will support cooperation between both sides".

18.18 Other former captives have warned that coping with liberty again can prove emotionally difficult. Shalit himself earlier said that he was "on edge" after not having seen people for such a long time.

Mickey Zeifa, an army reserve coloneol held as a prisoner of war by Egypt in the 1973 Middle East War told Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper Shalit will require careful management.

It takes a very long time for a person to get back on course ... you mustn't crowd him...

In my case ... the celebrations around me, which at first were flattering and moving, brought me down. Sometimes the return is a trauma in and of itself, no less difficult than captivity.

18.00 Egyptian prime minister Essam Sharaf has hailed the prisoner swap, which was mediated by Cairo, saying it was part of efforts to boost regional stability. He stressed these objectives "will be achieved through a just and comprehensive solution to the Palestinian question."

17.36 Barack Obama, via his spokesman Jay Carney, has said he was "personally pleased" that Shalit had been freed, adding that he wants Israelis and Palestinians to take steps toward resuming peace negotiations.

Each side needs to take steps that make it easier to return to negotiations rather than harder.

17.18 Noam Shalit, Gilad's father has addressed a crowd outside their family home. He thanked the Israeli government, Benjamin Netanyahu and the IDF as well as activists campaigning for his son. He said that his son, while very happy to be home, found it hard to be exposed to the big crowds of lots of people after being alone and isolated for so many days, where he could not communicate to anyone in his language.

He said his son will go through rehabilitation, with the help of the IDF, adding "we hope he can go back to a normal life." He also revealed that his son was suffering from afew shrapnel wounds and complications due to a lack of sunlight.

We are today finishing a long journey, a tiring and long journey that started in June 2006 ...

As you saw today, he came back, went down the stairs came into the house through the door which he left so long ago...

Gilad is feeling well. He has a few light wounds... shrapnel wounds... also complications due to lack of sunlight.

Today we can say that we've gone through a rebirth of a son. I would like to thank the whole crowd, the public who gathered here today. You came to support Gilad with such a warm turnout, supporting in solidarity...

Unfortunatly Gilad will not be able to come out, but thanks to the pilot of the chopper who brought us here who flew twice over the village. Gilad looked down and waved at the crowds...

We would like to take this opportunity to thank the Israeli government, the prime minister, who took this hard decision, not an easy one unfortunately. I must say that even for us this deal was not easy.

As we stood yesterday at the court with the bereaved families, we sympathise with them, we understand their pain. We understand the price they are paying for Gilad's freedom...

We hope that this great crowd and the media will understand us and will let us go back to our normal lives as soon as possible...

When I met Gilad I didn't say much, I just gave him a big hug, and I said if I remember correctly 'Welcome', but mostly a strong hug.

^{Noam Shalit, father of Gilad, speaks outside the family home in northern Israel}

Gilad Shalit, FREE AT LAST!

2011-10-18T09:17:00.000-06:00

Sergeant Shalit, the first captive Israeli soldier returned home alive in 26 years, was interviewed on Egyptian television before being handed over to Israel. Sitting in a blue checked shirt and speaking Hebrew, he smiled and reflected on the questions before answering them.
Asked if he had feared that he would never get out, Sergeant Shalit answered that he worried it would take many more years although in the past month he had suspected a deal was in the works. He said he was told of his release a week ago.
Asked what he missed most in prison, he replied, “My family and my friends and seeing and talking with people. The worst was having to do the same thing every day over and over.”
He was told that Israel still had thousands of prisoners and was asked if he would like them released. “I will be happy for them to be released if they don’t return to fight us,” he said. “I very much hope that this deal will advance peace.”
Egyptian television showed Sergeant Shalit being rushed through the Rafah crossing terminal from Gaza into Egypt accompanied by Hamas and Egyptian officials.
Soon afterward, an Israeli military statement said: “Gilad Shalit crossed the border into Israel, ending over five years in captivity.”

Possible Deal Near to Free Gilad Shalit

2011-10-11T12:59:00.001-06:00

Possible Deal Near to Free Captive Israeli Soldier

By ETHAN BRONNER

Published: October 11, 2011

JERUSALEM -- The Israeli government was due to meet in emergency session Tuesday to discuss a proposal to exchange Palestinian prisoners for an Israeli soldier who has been held captive by Hamasfor more than five years, a senior Israeli official said.

The official said all 29 ministers had been summoned for the meeting concerning the fate of the captive soldier, Staff Sgt.Gilad Shalit, and that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu viewed the proposal on the table as serious. He said the cabinet was expected to vote on the proposal.

Al Arabiyya, the satellite network, was reporting that Egyptian mediators had made a breakthrough and that the exchange for Sergeant Shalit could happen as early as November.

One Israeli official said that Mr. Netanyahu had already met with his most senior ministers to review the names of hundreds of Hamas prisoners to be released.

Sergeant Shalit was seized in a cross-border raid by Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups in June 2006, and was taken into Gaza. He was 19 at the time, and efforts to end his prolonged incarceration in Gaza have become an emotional cause in Israel.

Hamas won Palestinian parliamentary elections in 2006 and then took full control of Gaza in 2007, routing the Palestinian Authority forces loyal to President Mahmoud Abbas of the rival Palestinian group Fatah.

A prisoner exchange deal had seemed close in late 2009, but the talks collapsed. Israel and Hamas each accused the other of failing to reach agreement. Israel has expressed readiness for a prisoner exchange, but has in the past balked at releasing some of those demanded by Hamas, including those whom Israel has convicted as planners and perpetrators of some of the deadliest terrorist attacks in recent years.

Two years ago, Israel released 20 Palestinian women from its jails in exchange for a videotape of Sergeant Shalit that proved he was alive.

The Israeli government is under constant pressure to arrange the soldier’s release. Despite the popular support here for some kind of a deal, many also have qualms about releasing some of the most notorious prisoners.

Tens of thousands of Israelis joined the Shalit family in the summer of 2010 for parts of a 12-day march from their home in northern Israel to Jerusalem to draw attention to their son’s plight. Since then, the soldier’s parents have spent many of their days in a tent on a sidewalk near the prime minister’s residence.

Hank Williams Jr. should not have been fired.

2011-10-06T20:37:00.000-06:00

Hank Williams Jr. should not have been fired.

We should all strive to engage each other’s intellect in a more productive way, and kindness is a quality endorsed by most civilizations, it should be encouraged.

However, free speech, within, for the most part, reasonable limits, really is the bedrock of the U.S.

If it is Hank Williams Jr.’s opinion that President Obama is as evil as a man who murdered millions of other human beings, that’s his opinion.

Speech, however, has consequences; not legal consequences, at least not in this case, but social, civil consequences.

You or I would be within our rights to stop listening to Hank Williams Jr.’s music.

Personally, I disagree with him.

I’m trying to assess Barrack Obama and what he is doing as President.

I’ve read his books; I’ve listened to his news conferences.

I’m reluctant to say “He’s a mystery wrapped in an enigma”, but he is.

We have to remember when judging the man that he can’t necessarily always do exactly as he would like.

How much influence he personally has on policy is still being debated.

Still, even if one takes the position that Afghans and Arabs and Americans killed by our forces are President Obama’s responsibility on a personal level, he still is not comparable to Hitler who, as we all know, systematically murdered millions of people.

Firing someone for having an unpopular, even outrageous view doesn’t seem to be consistent with a media outlet that should have the utmost concern with protecting everyone’s free speech.

Hank Williams Jr., in addition to being controversial, is an extremely talented singer and song writer.

I don’t agree with Williams or his views, but he has apologized, and he is entitled to his opinion.

“Williams issued a statement Monday night insisting his remarks were misunderstood, then apologized Tuesday.

Among his defenders were Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar of "The View," who have a very different political viewpoint from the conservative Williams, but often are called out for their own comments.

‘Those among us who are without sin, cast the first stone,’ Goldberg said.”

Palestinians Stunned By Obama's rejection of Statehood

2011-10-04T10:45:00.000-06:00

The stunned expressions on Palestinian delegates’ faces as they listened to President Obama bluntly reject their bid for statehood at the United Nations last Wednesday was proof of just how far they had allowed themselves to believe in their own hype....

Palestinians actually believed that they had driven a wedge between Israel and its American backers.

Obama is an American president who has stood up for Palestinian rights and aspirations,

Yet when the cards were down, President Obama demolished years of Palestinian self-deception (and weeks of Palestinian self-congratulation) when he absolutely denied their call for recognition, and added that “for the Palestinians, efforts to delegitimize Israel will end in failure.”

The speech demonstrated Obama’s support for Israel’s requirements when he stated that “the Jewish people – in their historic homeland – deserve recognition and normal relations with their neighbors.” And dismissing the Palestinian move at the United Nations he added: “Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the U.N. If it were that easy, it would have been accomplished by now.”

Thus, it seems President Obama reminded Palestinian leaders of a few core facts that they seem to have forgotten.

First, they must remember that Obama takes into account the opinions of the American “man on the street”, and these opinions are still very much sympathetic towards Israel. Over the years, Americans have come to a better understanding of – and an empathy towards – the plight of the Palestinians, but this has not translated into a lesser support for Israel. Yes, Americans feel that Palestinians should get their own state, but no, the Americans do not believe that it must come at Israel’s expense.

US-Israeli ties have developed into a unique, complex and deeply rooted relationship over the past six decades. The two nations share common cultural values and historical identities, not to mention the extensive military and political cooperation.

Americans have generally sympathized with Israel over the Palestinians and today, Israel still enjoys a vast support in the American society. They may have differences over certain policy issues, including the issue of settlements, but these are in no way divisive differences.

President Obama knows that he cannot walk directly counter to the expressed wishes of his electorate. Despite all the hype about the “Israel Lobby”, the opinion polls tell us (and the President) that the average American still values Israel and sides with it.

If Obama had gone out against his voters’ inclinations without any tangible pro-Israel as well as pro-Palestine result, he would have paid a heavy political price.

No less important, we must remember that a few important changes have happened in the Middle East since Obama first moved into the White House. The Arab Spring, a momentous event, has also seen an outpouring of the rage that the Arab nation feels towards Israel, and this has left Tel Aviv deeply concerned. In this case, the Americans share Israel’s concern with their own fears of the possible rise of ‘new Iran’. They are now more likely to endorse Israel’s security concerns, and they are now less likely to inhibit Israel’s security demands.

And so we come to New York and see Palestinians stunned to hear President Obama warning the UN assembly against “shortcuts” for Palestinian statehood… It seems, however, that in their forgetfulness of reality they have also forgotten another hard fact: To the White House, their move looks like treachery and a deliberate attempt to insult President Obama. There is usually a price to pay for such behavior, especially in the unsteady days of the Arab Spring, when the US cannot afford to appear weak or foolish in the Middle East.

As far as the U.S. is concerned, the Palestinians accepted the two-state solution since 1988. In the years since, several American presidents gave their personal backing to peace proposals to finalize this agreement, and they saw first-hand how the Palestinians never came back with serious replies to these moves.

Former Israeli Premier Ehud Olmert says he offered Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas a return to the 1967 borders and a “fair demographic land arrangement”. In an interview last year, Olmert said Abbas never responded. “I found Abbas to be a fair partner, opposed to terror,” said Olmert. “What happened? That is the question of all questions, which I would answer if I could. “

The strategy of avoiding a final deal until better terms are offered is a sound one, but it involves making the American President look foolish or naïve, which is to be avoided during the Arab Spring. The move to bypass negotiations altogether and go to the UN is, in American eyes, nothing less then throwing a shoe in their face for the entire world to see, and a stab in the back to their president.

Palestinian PM Salam Fayyad saw the danger and opposed the UN move because of the potential of American retribution, which he feared could lead to lowered financial assistance and knock down the emerging Palestinian economy, but he was not listened to.

The Palestinian leadership now hopes it is not about to learn a painful lesson from the American President, about what happens when you insult the only superpower in the world.

(www.yallafinance.com)

Anwar al-Awlaki, American-Born Qaeda Leader, Is Killed in Yemen

2011-09-30T04:59:00.000-06:00

SITE Intelligence Group, via Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Anwar al-Awlaki is seen in 2010 in a still from video.

By LAURA KASINOF and ALAN COWELL

Published: September 30, 2011

REPRINTS

SANA, Yemen — In a significant and dramatic strike in the campaign against Al Qaeda, the Defense Ministry here said American-born preacher Anwar al-Awlaki, a leading figure in the group’s outpost in Yemen, was killed on Friday morning.

Drone Strike in Yemen Was Aimed at Awlaki (May 7, 2011)
Radical Cleric Still Speaks on YouTube (March 5, 2011)
Rights Groups Sue U.S. on Effort to Kill Cleric (August 31, 2010)
Imam’s Path From Condemning Terror to Preaching Jihad (May 9, 2010)
Times Topic: Anwar al-Awlaki

Connect With Us on Twitter

Follow@nytimesworldfor international breaking news and headlines.

In Washington a senior Obama administration official confirmed that Mr. Awlaki was dead. But the circumstances surrounding the killing remained unclear.

It was not immediately known whether Yemeni forces carried out the attack or if American intelligence forces, which have been pursuing Mr. Awlaki for months, were involved in the operation.

A Defense Ministry statement said that a number of Mr. Awlaki’s bodyguards also were killed.

A high-ranking Yemeni security official who spoke on condition of anonymity said that Mr. Awlaki was killed while traveling between Marib and al-Jawf provinces in northern Yemen — areas known for having an Al Qaeda presence, where there is very little central government control. The official did not say how he was killed.

Mr. Awlaki’s name has been associated with many plots in the United States and elsewhere after individuals planning violence were drawn to his engaging lectures broadcast over the Internet.

Those individuals included Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army psychiatrist charged in the 2009 shootings at Fort Hood, Texas in which 13 people were killed; the young men who planned to attack Fort Dix, N.J.; and a 21-year-old British student who told the police she stabbed a member of Parliament after watching 100 hours of Awlaki videos.

Mr. Awlaki’s death could well be used by beleaguered President Ali Abdullah Saleh to reinforce his refusal to leave office in face of months of protests against his 30-year rule, arguing in part that he is a critical American ally in the war against Al Qaeda.

Earlier this year, the American military renewed its campaign of airstrikes in Yemen, using drone aircraft and fighter jets to attack Qaeda militants. One of the attacks was aimed at Mr. Awlaki, one of the most prominent members of the affiliate group, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Mr. Awlaki’s death seemed likely to be welcomed in the United States, where Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said in July that two of his top goals were to remove Ayman al-Zawahri, Al Qaeda’s new leader after the death of Osama Bin Laden in May, and Mr. Awlaki.

Word of the killing came after months of sustained American efforts to seriously weaken the terrorist group.

In August an American official said a drone strike killed Atiyah Abd al-Rahman, a Libyan who in the last year had taken over as Al Qaeda’s top operational planner after Bin Laden was killed.

In July, Mr. Panetta said during a visit to Kabul, Afghanistan that the United States was “within reach of strategically defeating Al Qaeda” and that the American focus had narrowed to capturing or killing 10 to 20 crucial leaders of the terrorist group in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen.

A month earlier, an American official said the Central Intelligence Agency was building a secret air base in the Middle East to serve as a launching pad for strikes in Yemen using armed drones.

The construction of the base was seen at the time a sign that the Obama administration was planning an extended war in Yemen against an affiliate of Al Qaeda, called Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which has repeatedly tried to carry out terrorist plots against the United States.

The American official would not disclose the country where the C.I.A. base was being built, but the official said that it would most likely be completed by the end of the year.

Last year, the leader of Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen sought to install Mr. Awlaki as the leader of the group in Yemen, which apparently thought Mr. Awlaki’s knowledge of the United States and his status as an Internet celebrity might help the group’s operations and fund-raising efforts.

Mr. Awlaki was accused of having connections to the Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a former engineering student at University College London, who is awaiting trial in the United States for his attempt to detonate explosives sewn into his underwear aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253 as it landed in Detroit on Dec. 25, 2009. The bomb did not explode.

Mr. Awlaki has been linked to numerous plots against the United States, including the botched underwear bombing. He has taken to the Internet with stirring battle cries directed at young American Muslims. “Many of your scholars,” Mr. Awlaki warned last year, are “standing between you and your duty of jihad.”

Major Hasan, the American Army psychiatrist charged with killing 13 people at Fort Hood had exchanged e-mails with Mr. Awlaki beforehand. Mr. Awlaki’s lectures and sermons have been linked to more than a dozen terrorist investigations in the United States, Britain and Canada. Faisal Shahzad, who tried to set off a car bomb in Times Square in May, 2010, cited Mr. Awlaki as an inspiration.

Laura Kasinof reported from Sana, Yemen, and Alan Cowell from London. Eric Schmitt contributed reporting from Washington.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

REPRINTS

Child Abuse and Murder in Palestine

2011-09-16T19:05:00.001-06:00

For those who are not familiar with the horrific details of the Fogel Family murders in Itamar, Israel, On March 11, Hakim and Amjad , the murderers, set out for Itamar, armed with knives and tools to cut the perimeter fence and cover their tracks. They crossed from Awarta to Itamar and climbed/jumped over the fence. Once inside Itamar, they proceeded to approach the first row of houses. They broke into a home adjacent to the Fogel residence but found nobody inside. They stole an M-16, clips and a flak jacket. They exited the home and thereupon burst into the Fogel residence. Having spotted children while still outside, they murdered 11-year-old Yoav and 4-year-old Elad. The assailants thereupon entered the bedroom where the parents, Ruth and Udi, were sleeping with 3-month-old Hadas and murdered all three, following a struggle.

Recently one of the murderers of the Fogel family in Itamar, Israel, was convicted and given five life sentences.

Throughout the trial Hakim Awad bantered happily with his attorney and anyone else willing to listen.

He flashed double v-signs at the press, his face in a huge grin, teeth flashing.

You see, he considered himself a hero, and so did many of his fellow Arabs.

How could this be? You ask yourself.

The killer was a real life “Manchurian Candidate”.

He was raised to be a killer, to hate Jews.

He was taught in pre-school that the “greatest glory” was to kill a Jew, the “descendants of pigs and monkeys”.

In kindergarten he sang, along with the other children, “I want to be a martyr”.

Day after day, year after year, indoctrinated with hate.

The panoply of institutional methods used on young Arabs is calculated by most Arab Governments to generate as much hatred and resentment as possible.

The unspeakable murder of the Fogel family by Hakim and his brother are a desired outcome of years of indoctrination by Arab Governments.

And they want another state.

The United States has been taking steps to dissuade the Palestinians from taking their bid to the U.N., sending negotiators to meet with Palestinian officials.

The ambassador from Fatah says these talks have not been fruitful. “They won’t offer us anything … that saves the peace process,” he says. “They would offer us nothing except to say that they will cut financial aid .”

He objects to Israel’s insistence that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state or a national home for the Jewish people, yet Fatah has said, recently and publicly that the proposed Palestinian state would be Judenrein.

Today U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice said on BBC,”We object strongly to the idea of a UN resolution to create a Palestinian State. The issues between the Palestinians and the Israelis can only be resolved through negotiations.”

In an address to the United Nations she said Monday that the United States is engaged in an all-out effort to get other countries to join its opposition to the planned Palestinian bid for statehood recognition.

Ambassador Susan E. Rice warned that nations that vote for any Palestinian resolution have the “responsibility to own the consequences of their vote.”

“The United States, and others have been working very energetically to talk to member states of all sorts about the real-world consequences of this kind of a vote,” Ms. Rice told reporters at a breakfast in Washington hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. “This is not one day of hoo-ha and celebration in the General Assembly or the Security Council and then everybody goes home.” Washington Times

President Barack Obama recently pledged to veto statehood in the Security Council.

Can we make peace with an enemy that pledges to destroy Israel?

They do this every day on Palestinian TV and in classrooms and mosques.

Fatah and The P.A. are pledged to Israel's destruction.

However, they make public statements, chiefly for Western consumption, that they are willing to negotiate.

Hamas, of course does not even pretend that they are interested in peace.

When one thinks of a PA state, one needs to remember the Fogel killings, and the ideology

which directly caused this outrage.

A majority of Canadians believes conflict between Western nations and the Muslim world is “irreconcilable”

2011-09-14T20:29:00.001-06:00

From The National Post:

Geoff Robins/AFP/Getty Images

56% of respondents in a new Leger Marketing poll see Western and Muslim societies locked in an unending ideological struggle.

Postmedia News Sep 11, 2011 – 3:45 PM ET

By Randy Boswell

A majority of Canadians believes conflict between Western nations and the Muslim world is “irreconcilable,” according to a new national survey that revealed a strong strain of pessimism in the country leading up to Sunday’s 10th anniversary commemorations of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the U.S.

The survey of 1,500 Canadians, conducted over three days last week for the Montreal-based Association for Canadian Studies, showed 56% of respondents see Western and Muslim societies locked in an unending ideological struggle, while about 33% — just one-third of the population — held out hope that the conflict will eventually be overcome.

Another 11% of those polled didn’t answer the question.

ACS executive director Jack Jedwab said the finding has “serious ramifications” for Canadian policies aimed at bridging divides between cultures, which are based on the premise that citizens believe significant progress in mending such religious and cultural conflicts is achievable.

The dark view expressed in the survey “contradicts a fundamental idea in multicultural democracies like ours, that conflicts between societies can be resolved through dialogue and negotiation,” said Jedwab. “This is also a key element in multiculturalism, where Canada is often seen elsewhere in the world as a model in conflict resolution.”

He adds: “If a majority of Canadians feel it is irreconcilable, what does this imply for the various projects and programs in place that aim to bridge gaps?”

The online survey, carried out Sept. 6 to 8 by the firm Leger Marketing, is considered accurate to within 2.9 percentage points 19 times out of 20.

The results also confirm the findings of other recent surveys highlighting Canadians’ ongoing anxiety about the state of security in the post-9/11 world and their deep doubts about whether the long and bloody war in Afghanistan has done much to thwart the threat of terrorism.

In fact, 65% of respondents in the ACS survey said they don’t believe the world is safer from terrorists today than it was 10 years ago. And 70% of those surveyed said they don’t believe the war in Afghanistan has reduced the chances of terrorist attacks.

Jedwab said the “pessimistic feeling” about what the war has accomplished is likely linked to the “widespread hopelessness” about the prospects for ever resolving the deep-rooted, “ideological” conflict between Muslim and Western societies.

Many Canadians have come to believe “nothing will work” to end that conflict, said Jedwab, adding that this grim state of mind will require more scrutiny to fully understand and more carefully crafted public policies to rebuild a sense of optimism about the future of global relations.

The survey did offer one notable “ray of hope,” Jedwab suggested, pointing to a result showing that a slight majority of Canadians (52%) believe it would be wrong for airport security officials to do “extra checks” of “passengers who appear to be of Muslim background.”

While 39% of respondents were open to that kind of profiling, Jedwab interpreted the majority’s rejection of the practice as a sign that most Canadians realize such infringements “would make the purportedly irreconcilable conflict even deeper if the enshrined principles of our rights charters are to be disregarded.”

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and anti jihad and freedom of speech activist

View all posts by Eeyore →

This entry was posted in Islam in the Americas. Bookmark the permalink.

IsraelAmerica

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Talks Constitution, Women And Liberty On Egyptian TV

How Iran Controls Afghanistan

These changes have given rise to tension between the Afghans who never left home and the Afghan returnees

Copts Protest over Egyptian Killings

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

Published: October 10, 2011

Multimedia

The New York Times

A version of this article appeared in print on October 11, 2011, on page A4 of the New York edition with the headline: Copts Denounce Egyptian Government

Muslim Reformers vs Extremists

Muslim Reformers vs Extremists

PA Leader: All Muslims are Obligated to Kill Jews

PA Leader: All Muslims are Obligated to Kill Jews

The mission: Protecting Israel

This is war

Hamas leaders evacuating families from Syria

Shalit welcome to run

That’s how system works

Ron Paul...Anti-Semite in Chief?

Chag sameach and happy Hanukkah to all!

President Obama says happy Hanukkah to Jews around the world

I want more than a hug

A Mitzvah

Israel to continue hold on PA tax funds

Netanyahu Says he's Open to Negotiations on Jerusalem

Dershowitz Defends Israeli Prisoner Exchange

The Narrows

Q&A: Edward Luttwak

Uncivil

A SICK SYMMETRY

Gilad Shalit Comes Home in the Eye of the Media

A LOW POINT FOR ETHICAL COVERAGE

PALESTINE PIE IN THE SKY

A SICK SYMMETRY

Back To Life, Gilad Shalit

Gilad Shalit, FREE AT LAST!

Possible Deal Near to Free Gilad Shalit

Hank Williams Jr. should not have been fired.

Palestinians Stunned By Obama's rejection of Statehood

Anwar al-Awlaki, American-Born Qaeda Leader, Is Killed in Yemen

By LAURA KASINOF and ALAN COWELL

Published: September 30, 2011

Related

Drone Strike in Yemen Was Aimed at Awlaki (May 7, 2011)

Radical Cleric Still Speaks on YouTube (March 5, 2011)

Rights Groups Sue U.S. on Effort to Kill Cleric (August 31, 2010)

Imam’s Path From Condemning Terror to Preaching Jihad (May 9, 2010)

Times Topic: Anwar al-Awlaki

Connect With Us on Twitter

Child Abuse and Murder in Palestine

A majority of Canadians believes conflict between Western nations and the Muslim world is “irreconcilable”

From The National Post:

About Eeyore