Wednesday, December 31, 2008



. . . to all friends, readers, visitors, supporters, and supporting blogs,

from . . .
Islamic Danger to Americans
How to Stop the Islamic Jihad
Islamic Danger FU
The Jew in Yellow
islamic Danger 2U
Islamic Danger to Bharat (India)
Islamic Danger in History
Islamic Danger (original, now censored)
On the Back of My Mind

The Islamic Danger family of blogs

May the new year bring us all joy and glorious times, with the opposite to all who wish us ill and seek to destroy us.

. . . and to those mus who are my enemies . . .

watch my finger . . .

Eidelberg on "Applying the George S. Patton Principles to Israel's War Against Hamas on Gaza"

To Israel’s General Staff: Lessons From A Master of War - UPDATED!
By Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Israel’s General Staff would do well to emulate George S. Patton, the general most feared by Nazi Germany.

On the eve of battle, Patton would admonish his soldiers: “The object of war is not to die for your country. It is to make the other poor dumb bastard die for his.” This requires confronting and killing the enemy on the battlefield.

“Never let the enemy rest.” No cease fires or hudnas. Unconditional surrender should be Israel’s proclaimed war aim!

“We want the enemy to KNOW that they are fighting the toughest fighting men in the world!” This precludes benevolence (which Arabs despise). Just as Hamas terrorists would show no mercy to you, so you should show no mercy to them. These terrorists must be killed even if this results in civilian casualties.

“Forget about army regulations … [which] are written by those who have never been in battle…Our only mission in combat is to win.” Hence general officers may sometimes have to disobey orders of the political echelon!

Israel must devastate the Arabs from top to bottom so as to erase the Islamic arrogance that prompts them to wage war against the Jewish State.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak must not shy from these war principles, which would require them to order the IDF to confront and kill the enemy primarily on the battlefield. Bombing the enemy’s infrastructure should not obscure the importance of destroying the enemy’s ground forces. The defeat of these Arab terrorists must be so thorough that it will eradicate their desire to wage war for a hundred years—the policy of the Allies powers that made militant Germany and Japan lovers of peace.

Israel’s political echelon will be reluctant to pursue this policy not for humanitarian reasons—recall its brutality ay Amona—but it fears world opinion, UN condemnation, and possible sanctions. This fear cannot but undermine the General Staff and the fighting spirit of Israeli soldiers. This fear is baseless.

It is of capital importance that Israel’s ruling elites pursue the war in Gaza as a war between good and evil. They must shun the moral relativism that tainted Ariel Sharon who said, while Jews were being reduced to body parts, that he does not think in terms of “black and white.”

Israel’s victory in Gaza will ultimately depend on whether its General Staff is animated by the profound sense of good and evil that inspired America’s greatest generals—suffice to mention, along with Patten, William Tecumseh Sherman of Civil War fame. Both generals inspired their armies with complete confidence in the justice of their cause. Yet both pursued a war strategy that actually minimized casualties on all sides. They imbued their soldiers with the will to win and in the shortest possible time. This requires the use of overwhelming force and the uninterrupted attack.

The general who believes in the justice of his country’s cause will not shy from cruelty against Hamas because it is by means of cruelty that he can shorten the war and thus minimize bloodshed. Thus, in this war between good and evil, those Israeli generals who implement the principles of war will be our greatest humanists.

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Will Israel really neutralize Hamas? Don't count on it

December 30, 2008

Debbie Schlussel thinks not:

[...] There have been many of these occasion, temporary Israeli attacks on HAMAS or temporary blockades of funds or supplies to Gaza. And they are a waste of time because Israel doesn't mean business. Eventually, Israel backs down and stops and allows HAMAS to get "refueled" with supplies, money, etc. And yet the HAMAS attacks never end.

You must ask yourself why Israel suddenly chose to strike back now after years of HAMAS sending these rockets to kill the poor, working-class Israelis of Sderot--most of them descendants of Jews expelled from their homes and property in Arab Muslim countries. Why did it not matter that HAMAS sent rockets every day to kill Jews during the faux-truce and before then? Why does it suddenly matter now? What was different about now versus two months ago or two months from now?...

Find out the answer at Debbie's site.

And see also this, from commenter Mega over at Pamela's place:

The pattern:1) Israel starts out with an aggressive military response to the terrorists - the goals are somewhat fuzzy, but it does feel cathartic2) The terrorists go to ground quickly after taking a minor hit to key forces and weaponry3) The Arabs riot in the streets of Europe and across the middle east4) Western govts get nervous and turn the screws on Israel to pull back and negotiate and make peace5) The media reports it as a humanitarian tragedy story, complete with the pathetic pictures of Palestinian kids, leading to massive pressure on Israel to call it quits6) Israel gets nervous and starts doing non-strategic things like flattening empty buildings, to avoid civilian casualties, while trying to figure out what to do next in the face of strong and (to them) unexpected international condemnation7) The enemy, seeing that Israel has no real war plan, starts claiming victory, i.e. "survival" in the face of the onslaught of the world's 4th largest army blah blah blah, and uses some of its mostly-untouched forces and armaments, which were, of course, hidden beyond the IDF's reach8) Israel calls it off and tells its citizens it won.

Everyone knows otherwise.

We seem to be roughly at stage 6 right now.

Posted by Robert at December 30, 2008

What YouTube Doesn’t Want You to See

What YouTube Doesn’t Want You to See
Noah Pollak - 12.30.2008 - 11:00 AM

from Commentary magazine
Obtained via

Yesterday, the IDF did something innovative: it opened a channel on YouTube and posted videos to it that help explain why Israel is fighting Hamas. The site hosted about a dozen videos showing things like Israeli humanitarian aid deliveries to Gaza and airstrikes that prevented terrorists from firing rockets at Israeli civilians.

This was apparently too much for YouTube, which moments ago removed several videos from the IDF’s channel, including the most-watched video, which showed a group of Hamas goons being blown up in an air strike as they loaded Katyusha missiles onto a truck. The point of such footage, as if it needed to be said, is not to revel in violence — it is to show the legitimacy of Israeli self-defense.

(This is the You-Tube IAF video: Israeli Air Force Strikes Rocket...
Israeli Air Force Strikes Rockets in Transit
[TRANSLATED] Israeli Air Force Strikes Rockets in Transit
The Israeli Air Force strikes terror operatives transferring short-range missiles ...
1 day ago 19,162 views idfnadesk)

The rank double-standard that YouTube has applied to Israel is disturbing. YouTube hosts all manner of similar footage — much of it far more gory than the grainy infrared images posted by the IDF — of U.S. air strikes. Why is YouTube capitulating to those who do not wish for Israel to be able to tell its side of the story?

UPDATE: the IDF just uploaded a new video to its channel, this one of Hamas’ headquarters going out of business. Let’s see how long it lasts. Click here to watch.
»Back to Contentions
»Back to Commentary

This entry was posted on Tuesday, December 30th, 2008 at 11:00 AM and is filed under Contentions. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

This post obtained via

Monday, December 29, 2008

If you think that the belated Israel attack on Gaza is the solution . . .

. . . think again!

excerpt from Sultan Knish's - The Gaza Picture Show

In Israel only the right and the far left will point out the general uselessness of the operation. This won't matter because footage of bombs falling on Gaza will do a great deal to reassure the average Israeli that their government has finally woken up and is doing something about the rocket attacks, without asking where the bombs are falling or even noticing that the rocket attacks are still continuing.

Hamas does not particularly care if Israel bombs 90 percent of the Gaza strip down to bare rock. Not so long as the Iranian money and weapons keep coming in. Like Al Queda in Iraq, Hamas is a tentacle of a larger Islamist movement, and its ambitions, like that of the Third Reich which inspired it, are global.

Israel has no doubt killed some Hamas terrorists, at a probable cost of a few million dollars per fighter. It has also reminded Hamas and Iran that it has become a paper tiger which can be counted on to cause some damage, before it retreats back into its lair. Until Israel shows that it is prepared to deny Gaza to Hamas by retaking it, picture shows such as this serve no purpose except to give the international media something to talk about.

Livni and Barak have improved their election prospects, squandered huge amounts of money, and given Hamas the PR boost they wanted. And while top Hamas leaders are no doubt trembling in their bunkers somewhere underneath a children's school, a hospital or a foreign aid office, they will emerge a week from now, deliver press conferences, and vow to continue the resistance.

Israel meant to show Hamas that it can hurt it, but Hamas already knew this. What Israel has failed to show time and time again, is that it can destroy it.

Shooting to Lightly Wound impresses no one. Hamas cares nothing for human life, and it can easily replace the low level fighters who fall. And anyone higher ranking will get a martyrs brigade named after them.

While Obama's team in D.C. grits their teeth, watches their TV's and curses the Bush administration, even while knotting a fresh noose for Israeli's impudence in bombing the very same people Obama's advisers were conducting negotiations with-- Livni and Barak pretend that they're strong leaders, rather than corrupt fools with no long term objective who appear incapable of even thinking strategically on any subject beyond their own careers.

A month from now the fresh infusion of Iranian weapons may well help Hamas finish off Fatah in the West Bank as well. And the only way Fatah can avoid that is to stop the defections of its own men into Fatah's ranks by carrying out terrorist attacks against Israel. Attacks that Israel will be forced to ignore, because Abbas is the "moderate" terrorist godfather whom we're relying on to keep Hamas at bay.

If Livni and Barak succeed in finagling this latest disaster into a new government, the odds will be good that we can look forward to State Department diplomats, courtesy of Hillary and Powers, conducting negotiations between Hamas and Israel for a two state solution, this time with Abbas on the sidelines in a coalition government where Hamas has the upper hand. Assuming Abbas even holds out that long.

Meanwhile Israel awaits a government that can finish the terrorists, instead of conducting bombing raids as picture shows. A government that will put boots on the ground, reclaim Gaza, and dig out the terrorist nests there. Until that government comes along, such operations will be nothing more than picture shows, conducted by an increasingly under equipped military, devoid of any real strategic doctrine or plan, beyond putting some big explosions on television in the deluded hope that will will intimidate the terrorists into leaving us alone.


from Dry Bones comes this commentary on the complete disregard of the Preamble to Israel's response to repeated and continuous Hamas Arab attacks on Israel, disregarded by most of the world's nations.

"Israel has finally hit back at Gaza. The anti-Israel choir will soon be in full song.

"For the Main Stream Media the genocidal war against the Jewish State is just not newsworthy ...but the rage of those who would deny us the right to defend ourselves will find their way into newspaper editorials, be featured on op-ed pages, and be prominent in news coverage of Gaza."

Gaza War Diary: DEBKA Special Edition!‏ December 29, 2008

Israel air force pummels Hamas forces, blows up 40 Philadelphi tunnels
December 29, 2008

DEBKAfile's military sources report that Hamas kept a reserve fighting force in and around the tunnels dug under the Philadelphi strip of border land between the Gaza Strip and Egyptian Sinai. The destruction of 40 tunnels in this key pocket Sunday, Dec. 28, Day 2 of the Israeli air offensive against Gaza, blocked Hamas'pipeline for smuggled arms from Iran and Sinai through Egyptian Sinai.

This was the second major Israeli air force operation in two days. More...

Two Israeli armored divisions stand by outside Gaza
December 29, 2008

Amid continuing massive air strikes and wide speculation about whether or not Israeli ground forces will cross into the Gaza Strip, DEBKAfile's military sources report the focus of combat switched Sunday, Dec. 28, Day 2 of the Israeli Gaza operation. thereby sowing confusion in Hamas ranks and not giving them a chance to regroup and recover from the crushing devastation of their military infrastructure since Saturday.

One key objective now is to soften Hamas resistance and prepare the ground for a large-scale invasion by two armored divisions. More...

Hizballah leader says Israel is running out of time.
Oil rises on possible Gaza invasion

December 29, 2008

Hassan Nasrallah in his second speech in two days on the Gaza crisis Monday, Dec. 29, did not offer to help Hizballah's hamas allies, but offered the view that Israel could not hold out for long with air attacks.

Israel's Deputy chief of staff Maj. Dan Harel warned: The campaign has just begun. More...

FM spokesman in Tehran: Iran begins preparing operations against Israel
December 29, 2008

On Monday, Dec. 29, Day 3 of Israel's Gaza operation, the spokesman said Iran had embarked on preparations for operations against Israel in line with the directives laid down by supreme ruler Ayatollah Ali Khameini in his speech Sunday.

In his speech, Khameini issued a fatwa calling on Muslims to stand up and defend Palestinians against Israel. More...

Hamas barrages kill three Israelis Monday, two in night attack
December 29, 2008

Volleys of Palestinian rockets and missiles Monday night, Dec. 29, Day 3 of the Israeli offensive against Gaza, left three Israelis dead, as hundreds of Israel tank, armored cars and artillery piled up outside the gates of Gaza.

The first was killed at an Ashkelon building site; the second two Monday night by intensified Grad rocket and Qassam missile volleys – one outside Nahal Oz and a women driver who took shelter in the Ashdod bus terminus, 30 km from Gaza, which was struck by a Grad Katyusha rocket. Altogether 15 people were injured in the late-night barrage, two seriously at Kibbutz Shear Hanegev. More...

The Duplicity of the Arabs Knows No Bounds

JAFFA, Israel – Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his office today slammed as "barbaric" and "unnecessary" Israel's air strikes in Gaza, but according to top diplomatic sources in Jerusalem, Abbas for months now has been petitioning Israel to launch a massive military raid against his Hamas rivals in Gaza. Read the latest on


Summary of IDF operations overnight‏ (December 29, 2008)

on behalf of
Sent: Sun 12/28/08 11:07 PM

The IDF Spokesperson wishes to emphasize that the IDF will continue to act against anyone who harbors terror in their residence, provides shelter to terrorists and their activities, and forces their children and spouses to act as human shields.

IDF Spokesperson Dec 29th, 2008

Summary of IDF Operations Overnight

Last night, IDF forces struck dozens of Hamas related targets including weapon manufacturing and storage facilities, posts, tunnels, launching grounds and warehouses.

Among the targets hit, was the office of Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Hania, in the city of Gaza. The IAF also targeted a weapons research and development center that was used, among other uses, as laboratories to develop and manufacture explosives and were an inseparable part of the Qassam rocket manufacturing infrastructure.

Naval forces also struck a number of targets, including Hamas vessels and posts, and reported accurate hits.

More than 150 rockets and mortar shells were launched at Israel since the beginning of the operation.

The IDF Spokesperson wishes to emphasize that the IDF will continue to act against anyone who harbors terror in their residence, provides shelter to terrorists and their activities, and forces their children and spouses to act as human shields.

The Home Front Command has deployed soldiers to assist the residents of the communities surrounding the Gaza Strip. Together with the emergency authorities, they are doing as much as possible to prepare the population- which is requested to follow the directions provided by the Home Front Command.
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis

Did Israel Use "Disproportionate Force" in Gaza?

Dore Gold

Israeli population centers in southern Israel have been the target of over 4,000 rockets, as well as thousands of mortar shells, fired by Hamas and other organizations since 2001. Rocket attacks increased by 500 percent after Israel withdrew completely from the Gaza Strip in August 2005. During an informal six-month lull, some 215 rockets were launched at Israel.

The charge that Israel uses disproportionate force keeps resurfacing whenever it has to defend its citizens from non-state terrorist organizations and the rocket attacks they perpetuate. From a purely legal perspective, Israel's current military actions in Gaza are on solid ground. According to international law, Israel is not required to calibrate its use of force precisely according to the size and range of the weaponry used against it.

Ibrahim Barzak and Amy Teibel wrote for the Associated Press on December 28 that most of the 230 Palestinians who were reportedly killed were "security forces," and Palestinian officials said "at least 15 civilians were among the dead." The numbers reported indicate that there was no clear intent to inflict disproportionate collateral civilian casualties. What is critical from the standpoint of international law is that if the attempt has been made "to minimize civilian damage, then even a strike that causes large amounts of damage - but is directed at a target with very large military value - would be lawful."

Luis Moreno-Orampo, the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, explained that international humanitarian law and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court "permit belligerents to carry out proportionate attacks against military objectives, even when it is known that some civilian deaths or injuries will occur." The attack becomes a war crime when it is directed against civilians (which is precisely what Hamas does).

After 9/11, when the Western alliance united to collectively topple the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, no one compared Afghan casualties in 2001 to the actual numbers that died from al-Qaeda's attack. There clearly is no international expectation that military losses in war should be on a one-to-one basis. To expect Israel to hold back in its use of decisive force against legitimate military targets in Gaza is to condemn it to a long war of attrition with Hamas.

Israel is currently benefiting from a limited degree of understanding in international diplomatic and media circles for launching a major military operation against Hamas on December 27. Yet there are significant international voices that are prepared to argue that Israel is using disproportionate force in its struggle against Hamas.

Israeli Population Centers Under Rocket Attack

There are good reasons why initial criticism of Israel has been muted. After all, Israeli population centers in southern Israel have been the target of over 4,000 rockets, as well as thousands of mortar shells, fired by Hamas and other organizations since 2001.1 The majority of those attacks were launched after Israel withdrew completely from the Gaza Strip in August 2005. Indeed, rocket attacks increased by 500 percent (from 179 to 946) from 2005 to 2006.

Moreover, lately Hamas has been extending the range of its striking capability even further with new rockets supplied by Iran. Hamas used a 20.4-kilometer-range Grad/Katyusha for the first time on March 28, 2006, bringing the Israeli city of Ashkelon into range of its rockets for the first time. That change increased the number of Israelis under threat from 200,000 to half a million.2 Moreover, on December 21, 2008, Yuval Diskin, Head of the Israel Security Agency, informed the Israeli government that Hamas had acquired rockets that could reach Ashdod, Kiryat Gat, and even the outskirts of Beersheba.3 The first Grad/Katyusha strike on Ashdod, in fact, took place on December 28. There had been no formal cease-fire between Israel and Hamas, but only an informal six-month tahadiya (lull), during which 215 rockets were launched at Israel.4 On December 21, Hamas unilaterally announced that the tahadiya had ended.

Critical Voices

On December 27, 2008, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's spokesmen issued a statement saying that while the Secretary-General recognized "Israel's security concerns regarding the continued firing of rockets from Gaza," he reiterated "Israel's obligation to uphold international humanitarian and human rights law." The statement specifically noted that he "condemns excessive use of force leading to the killing and injuring of civilians [emphasis added]."5

A day later, Navi Pillay, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights "strongly condemned Israel's disproportionate use of force." French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who holds the rotating presidency of the European Union, also condemned Israel's "disproportionate use of force," while demanding an end to rocket attacks on Israel.6 Brazil also joined this chorus, criticizing Israel's "disproportionate response."7 Undoubtedly, a powerful impression has been created by large Western newspaper headlines that describe massive Israeli airstrikes in Gaza, without any up-front explanation for their cause.

Proportionality and International Law: The Protection of Innocent Civilians

The charge that Israel uses disproportionate force keeps resurfacing whenever it has to defend its citizens from non-state terrorist organizations and the rocket attacks they perpetuate. From a purely legal perspective, Israel's current military actions in Gaza are on solid ground. According to international law, Israel is not required to calibrate its use of force precisely according to the size and range of the weaponry used against it (Israel is not expected to make Kassam rockets and lob them back into Gaza).

When international legal experts use the term "disproportionate use of force," they have a very precise meaning in mind. As the President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, Rosalyn Higgins, has noted, proportionality "cannot be in relation to any specific prior injury - it has to be in relation to the overall legitimate objective of ending the aggression."8 In other words, if a state, like Israel, is facing aggression, then proportionality addresses whether force was specifically used by Israel to bring an end to the armed attack against it. By implication, force becomes excessive if it is employed for another purpose, like causing unnecessary harm to civilians. The pivotal factor determining whether force is excessive is the intent of the military commander. In particular, one has to assess what was the commander's intent regarding collateral civilian damage.9

What about reports concerning civilian casualties? Some international news agencies have stressed that the vast majority of those killed in the first phase of the current Gaza operation were Hamas operatives. Ibrahim Barzak and Amy Teibel wrote for the Associated Press on December 28 that most of the 230 Palestinians who were reportedly killed were "security forces," and Palestinian officials said "at least 15 civilians were among the dead."10 It is far too early to definitely assess Palestinian casualties, but even if they increase, the numbers reported indicate that there was no clear intent to inflict disproportionate collateral civilian casualties.

During the Second Lebanon War, Professor Michael Newton of Vanderbilt University was in email communication with William Safire of the New York Times about the issue of proportionality and international law. Newton had been quoted by the Council on Foreign Relations as explaining proportionality by proposing a test: "If someone punches you in the nose, you don't burn down their house." He was serving as an international criminal law expert in Baghdad and sought to correct the impression given by his quote. According to Newton, no responsible military commander intentionally targets civilians, and he accepted that this was Israeli practice.

What was critical from the standpoint of international law was that if the attempt had been made "to minimize civilian damage, then even a strike that causes large amounts of damage - but is directed at a target with very large military value - would be lawful."11 Numbers matter less than the purpose of the use of force. Israel has argued that it is specifically targeting facilities serving the Hamas regime and its determined effort to continue its rocket assault on Israel: headquarters, training bases, weapons depots, command and control networks, and weapons-smuggling tunnels. This way Israel is respecting the international legal concept of proportionality.

Alternatively, disproportionality would occur if the military sought to attack even if the value of a target selected was minimal in comparison with the enormous risk of civilian collateral damage. This point was made by Luis Moreno-Orampo, the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, on February 9, 2006, in analyzing the Iraq War. He explained that international humanitarian law and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court "permit belligerents to carry out proportionate attacks [emphasis added] against military objectives, even when it is known that some civilian deaths or injuries will occur." The attack becomes a war crime when it is directed against civilians (which is precisely what Hamas does) or when "the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage."12 In fact, Israeli legal experts right up the chain of command within the IDF make this calculation before all military operations of this sort.

Proportionality as a Strategic Issue

Moving beyond the question of international law, the charge that Israel is using a disproportionate amount of force in the Gaza Strip because of reports of Palestinian casualties has to be looked at critically. Israelis have often said among themselves over the last seven years that when a Hamas rocket makes a direct strike on a crowded school, killing many children, then Israel will finally act.

This scenario raises the question of whether the doctrine of proportionality requires that Israel wait for this horror to occur, or whether Israel could act on the basis of the destructive capability of the arsenal Hamas already possesses, the hostile declarations of intent of its leaders, and its readiness to use its rocket forces already. Alan Dershowitz noted two years ago: "Proportion must be defined by reference to the threat proposed by an enemy and not by the harm it has produced." Waiting for a Hamas rocket to fall on an Israeli school, he rightly notes, would put Israel in the position of allowing "its enemies to play Russian Roulette with its children."13

The fundamental fact is that in fighting terrorism, no state is willing to play Russian Roulette. After the U.S. was attacked on 9/11, the Western alliance united to collectively topple the Taliban regime in Afghanistan; no one compared Afghan casualties in 2001 to the actual numbers that died from al-Qaeda's attack. Given that al-Qaeda was seeking non-conventional capabilities, it was essential to wage a campaign to deny it the sanctuary it had enjoyed in Afghanistan, even though that struggle continues right up to the present.

Is There Proportionality Against Military Forces?

And in fighting counterinsurgency wars, most armies seek to achieve military victory by defeating the military capacity of an adversary, as efficiently as possible. There clearly is no international expectation that military losses in war should be on a one-to-one basis; most armies seek to decisively eliminate as many enemy forces as possible while minimizing their own losses of troops. There are NATO members who have been critical of "Israel's disproportionate use of force," while NATO armies take pride in their "kill ratios" against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Moreover, decisive military action against an aggressor has another effect: it increases deterrence.14 To expect Israel to hold back in its use of decisive force against legitimate military targets in Gaza is to condemn it to a long war of attrition with Hamas.

The loss of any civilian lives is truly regrettable. Israel has cancelled many military operations because of its concern with civilian casualties. But should civilian losses occur despite the best efforts of Israel to avoid them, it is ultimately not Israel's responsibility. As political philosopher Michael Walzer noted in 2006: "When Palestinian militants launch rocket attacks from civilian areas, they are themselves responsible - and no one else is - for the civilian deaths caused by Israeli counterfire."15

International critics of Israel may be looking to craft balanced statements that spread the blame for the present conflict to both sides. But they would be better served if they did not engage in this artificial exercise, and clearly distinguish the side that is the aggressor in this conflict - Hamas - and the side that is trying to defeat the aggression - Israel.

* * *


1. For numbers of rockets, see Dore Gold, "Israel's War to Halt Palestinian Rocket Attacks," Jerusalem Issue Brief, Vol. 7, No. 34, March 3, 2008, Institute of Contemporary Affairs/Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs,'s_War_to_Halt_Palestinian_Rocket_Attacks. See also December 2008 publications on
2. Robert Berger, "Israeli Official Warns of Growing Hamas Military Threat," Voice of America News,, May 17, 2008,
3. "News of Terrorism and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict," Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center at the Israel Intelligence Heritage and Commemoration Center (IICC), December 16-23, 2008,
4. "Intensive Rocket Fire Attacks Again Western Negev Population Center and the Ashqelon Region after Hamas Announces the End of the Lull Agreement," IICC, December 21, 2008,,
5. "Secretary-General Urges Immediate Halt to Renewed Israeli-Palestinian Violence," UN News Service, December 27, 2008,
6. "World Reacts to Israel Strikes in Gaza," Deutsche Welle,, December 28, 2008,,,3905288,00.html.
7. Brazil Criticizes Israeli Attack on Gaza: Special Report: Palestine-Israel Relations," China View,, December 28, 2008,
8. R. Higgins, cited in "Responding to Hamas Attacks from Gaza - Issues of Proportionality Background Paper," Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, March 2008,
9. Abraham Bell, "International Law and Gaza: The Assault on Israel's Right to Self-Defense," Jerusalem Issue Brief, Vol. 7, No. 29, January 28, 2008, Institute for Contemporary Affairs/Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs,'s_Right_to_Self-Defense.
10. Ibrahim Barzak and Amy Teibel, "Israeli Assault on Hamas Kills More than 200," Associated Press, December 28, 2008,
11. William Safire, "Proportionality," New York Times, August 13, 2006,
12. Office of the Prosecutor, International Criminal Court, The Hague, February 9, 2008,
13. Alan Dershowitz, "The Hamas Government Has Declared War Against Israel: How Should Israel Respond?" Huffington Post, March 14, 2008,
14. Richard Cohen, ".No, It's Survival," Washington Post, July 25, 2006,
15. Michael Walzer, "How Aggressive Should Israel Be? War Fair," The New Republic Online, July 31, 2006.

* * *

Dr. Dore Gold, Israel's ambassador to the UN in 1997-99, is President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and author of Hatred's Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global Terrorism (Regnery, 2003) and The Fight for Jerusalem: Radical Islam, the West, and the Future of the Holy City (Regnery, 2007).

This Jerusalem Issue Brief is available online at:

Dore Gold, Publisher; Yaacov Amidror, ICA Chairman; Dan Diker, ICA Director; Mark Ami-El, Managing Editor. Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (Registered Amuta), 13 Tel-Hai St., Jerusalem, Israel; Tel. 972-2-561-9281, Fax. 972-2-561-9112, Email: In U.S.A.: Center for Jewish Community Studies, 5800 Park Heights Ave., Baltimore, MD 21215; Tel. 410-664-5222; Fax 410-664-1228. Website: © Copyright. The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the Board of Fellows of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.

The Institute for Contemporary Affairs (ICA) is dedicated
to providing a forum for Israeli policy discussion and debate.

Telling the Truth about how Islam (Arabs, Moslems, etc.) feel about Jews

Hafiz Saeed [is] founder of the LeT (Lashkar-e-Tayyiba) [the Pakistani Islamic organization behind the Mumbai attack].

In 2004 Hafeez Sayeed commented: “The Jews are the worst enemies of Islam. Therefore, there will be no pro-Muslim change. The US economy is worsening. The US is no more as powerful as it used to be. I see a good change in future. Muslim countries will have to unite. If they unite on one platform, they could cause the US's disintegration.”

Sunday, December 28, 2008

Needed: More Men to Match Past Stalwarts

In the waning days of Hanukkah, it behooves us to reexmine what is needed. From Sultan Knish comes the following:

1. Force Justifies Faith - The miracle of Chanukah happened because the Macabees refused to accept the perversion of their religious and national values, and fought to resist those who would impose it on them by force. Had they not fought their way to Jerusalem, the Menorah would have remained only another decoration in a sanctuary defiled by secularism and paganism. Only once the Temple was liberated, it could serve as a vessel for a divine miracle that rewarded the sacrifices of those who fought to liberate it.

Violence is often described as contradictory to faith, but it is no more contradictory than a police officer's gun is to a civil society. Ideally there should be no violence, but in the real world, force is a necessary tool for making faith possible.

Had Moshe not struck the Egyptian taskmasters forcing him to flee for his life, had the Jews refused a second time to enter Israel under Joshua, had King David proven just as incapable of defending his land as Shaul did, right up to the time of the Macabees and to the present day State of Israel, Jewish history would have been quite different.

The union of force and faith is abused, when force is used to conquer and compel faith. The proper union of force and faith, is to use force in defense of faith to create a space in which faith can thrive.

In a dire situation miracles often don't just happen, it takes human action to initialize them. It was when the Jews walked into the sea that the sea split. It was when Jews settled wilderness roamed by bandits and administered by a hostile colonial authority, built farms and protected them, that Israel was reborn. If you want a miracle, you must first fight for it.

2. You're an Extremist When you're Losing, a National Legend when you're Winning - Had the Macabees done nothing, they would have remained nothing more than despised "extremists", rural hicks to be sneered at and ground under by the urban elites collaborating with foreign tyrants.

The Macabees stopped being "extremists" when they actually became extreme, fought back against the so-called moderates and won. Then their values emerged triumphant as well. Extremism is a measure of alienation from the values of those in power. Victory can make anyone a moderate. Had the Macabees spent all their time worrying about being called extremists, and being concerned that their actions might deepen the "national divide" and cause people to associate religious belief with violence, they would have stuck to writing petitions, and we might be celebrating Hellenika today.

3. The Few Can Triumph over the Many - VeRabim BeYad Me'atim. The many can fall into the hands of the few, if the few match dedication with strategy. The Macabees didn't win because they had superior force, but because they were willing to fight on, to outlast and outlive the tyrants and collaborators who were busy carving up their land. But this is conditional on VeTemeim Beyad Tehorim, VeReshoim BeYad Tzadikim. The defiled into the power of the pure, and the wicked in the hands of the righteous. The few can triumph when they have the purity of their commitment to carry them forward through the many setbacks, difficulties and challenges they will encounter.

Israel is stumbling now because that commitment is lacking from the top down and the bottom up, a public glutted by consumerism, a party culture and apathy can no longer produce that kind of rugged determination.

4. Victory isn't Easy or Cheap - The struggle of the Macabees doesn't look much like the coloring book version sold today. It was prolonged, difficult, and desperate. It consisted of numerous setbacks, defeats and losses. Without the big picture, victory often looked a lot like defeat. It was the forward motion of continuing to fight, that transformed it into a legacy of victory.

5. Victory isn't a Solution, Victory is a Chance to Fix the Problem - The Macabee victory was surprisingly ephemeral and it did not take long for it to dissolve into Roman tyranny. By the time Herod, the son of a Nabatean Roman governor had displaced the last of the Jewish Macabean kings and was ruling over Israel, the victory of Chanukah had turned tragically into ashes.

The failure was generational. The Macabees had won a stay of execution, but they had not changed the fault lines in the culture and in the nature of the monarchy's dynastic rule itself, that would prevent the decline and collapse of Israel. Similarly today the sons of conservative Zionist politicians have turned corrupt and Anti-Zionist, with Olmert as a prototype of the species.

The Macabees won a battle on Chanukah, but they failed to win the war for the hearts and minds of the next generation. Israel is now in the same mess as well stuck with a divided country, part of which wants to fight to defend it, and part of which does not.

Force can win battles, but when a civil war is won, the real war to change the deep faults that made it necessary begins.

6. A Single Incident can begin a War - People are naturally reluctant to fight, but one incident can crystallize how intolerable further apathy can be. Whether it was the pig on the altar or Hannah strapping on a sword to resist "droit de'signor", a point is always reached beyond which no more can be borne. It may come at an unexpected moment and in an unexpected place, not from the great atrocity but the small cruelty and ordinary injustices that reach their limits, but it usually comes and it reminds those who had taken refuge if fear, apathy and complacency that the time for such things is ended, and that only one road remains open before them, and only one bloody gate. And when it does, the real struggle begins.

7. God is not a Pacifist, Neither are his Followers - The only truly pacifist religion lives in exile with its homeland under the grim boot of Chinese Communist thugs. But religion, and any strong belief system, is not for pacifists. If you are not willing to fight for your beliefs, either your beliefs lack substance, or you do.

Pacifism is not the refuge of spirituality, but self-righteousness and irresponsibility. The responsible stand up and are counted before God, in his house of prayer and on the battlefield. To believe that there is a moral order, is to recognize that evil must be resisted so that good can thrive. He who will not pick up a gun when his town or his family is threatened, is not nobler for it, but ignoble because by refusing to resist evil, he aids it in its goals.

In the face of evil, every pacifist is a traitor. Before God, everyone who will not fight for what is right, aids what is wrong. That does not mean that force is innately righteous, or that simply putting the name of God before any conflicts puts you automatically in the right. It means that there is such a thing as Righteous Force, and that the warrior on the battlefield fighting for what is right, is as Godly as the healer or the priest or the elder, the scholar and the judge.

8. History Writes the Ending, We Do Our Part - History neatly segments events into beginnings and endings, into causes and effects, gives names to battles and wars, and decides who mattered and who didn't. And though that eye is flawed, it colors how we perceive the past as structured and ordered. But that is a false structure imposed on the chaotic turbulent events of another era. We cannot know where our own histories begin and end, we have no more of a guide to chart where we are on the great wall chart of history. We can only do our part and try to do what is right, as they did in those times long ago.
Labels: Israel
Sultan Knish

Much maligned, but more relevant than the figures looming over Israel today are the following:




There is no "Palestine people" and there is no "Palestine." The lands that today constitute the State of Israel, Judea, Samaria (the West Bank), Gaza and the Golan are parts of Israel, the sole land of the Jews.

Israel's future (not so good--even with the Gaza show)


. . . Netanyahu's refusal to call outright for a retaking of Gaza makes it hard for the average Israeli voter to tell apart the Likud from Kadima. And that's the problem. Netanyahu has made the Likud so "moderate" that it looks as bad as Kadima does. Meanwhile the attempt to moderate Bayit Yehudi has resulted in the implosion of another attempted at a united Religious Zionist front, right back to the treasonous Mafdal.Without a real alternative, Kadima will win again. And unfortunately the only way to prevent that is to vote Likud. Which in some ways perpetuates the problem, but at the same time a left wing government in power in Israel while Obama is in power in the US would mean the almost certain end of Israel in a matter of years.

Too much strategically important territory has already been surrendered, Iran has an operating base on Israeli soil in Gaza and is racing toward a nuclear weapon. Israel's capital is on the table next, and so are major chunks of Israel that would turn the next war into the Yom Kippur war fought in an Israel with territory predating the Six Day War, and possibly involving nuclear weapons.Projecting an Obama administration that will force Egypt into open elections, bringing the Muslim Brotherhood to power, and turning Egypt into a Sunni version of Iran, a Syria that receives the Golan Heights and the strategic high ground, as well as a free hand in Lebanon, the pictures becomes very dark indeed.

From more there from Sultan Knish more there . . .


Israeli Arabs react with violence to IDF operations in Gaza
By Haaretz Service

Once upon a time there was a Maccabi...

Year 143 BC. King Antiochus governed the kingdom of Syria under an oppressive rule that forbade every religious confession other than a pagan religion. The People of Judea was part of this kingdom and firmly resisted the orders of the tyrant. Mattathias, son of Jonathan and leader of the Jews, headed the resistance and would never allow his people to relinquish its own laws and deepest beliefs. From this moment onwards, the mountains that protected the sun from the oppression of this fanatic king became a shelter for the Jewish people, ready to fight for a non-negotiable value: Freedom!

The triumph obtained by the Jewish people with Mattathias and his sons Yehuda, named "The Maccabi", Jonathan, Simon and Judah, who was elected High Priest to replace his father, turned the Maccabies into a living myth.The Maccabies, the great fighters who advocated life, freedom and the human spirit, are a source of inspiration for our people. . . .

Yehudah Hamaccabi
Judah Maccabee
(killed 160 BCE)

Second leader of the Judean revolt against the Greco-Syrian empire [166 BCE]. Westerners have traditionally referred to the third son of Mattathias of Modein by the Latinate form of his name: Judas Maccabeus. A Judean priest, he assumed command of Judean resistance to Greek forces after his father's death [165 BCE]. His defeat of the Greek governor of Samaria led to even more stunning victories over larger Greek armies at Beth-horon & Emmaus. After this, Judah captured Mt. Zion, purged the temple of Hellenistic cult paraphernalia, reconstructed the sanctuary according to Torah prescriptions and reconsecrated it to the worship of YHWH [Dec. 164 BCE]. The festival of Channukah was later instituted to commemorate this triumph. Judah was repelled, however, in his attempt to drive the Syrian garrison from the rest of Jerusalem and was defeated near the village of Beth Zechariah, southwest of Jerusalem [162 BCE]. He died in the battle of Elasa (north of Jerusalem). Though Judah himself never held an official political position other than ad hoc general of the Jewish rebellion, he had a major influence on the direction of later history by initiating an alliance with the republic of Rome against the Greek Syrian empire. He was succeeded by his youngest brother Jonathan who, like him, left no male heirs. But the descendents of his older brother Simon became the Hasmonean dynasty of Judean rulers.

Saturday, December 27, 2008

Necessary Israeli Posture towards Gaza





Pam Geller of Atlas Shrugs writes:

If Israel doesn't bring hell down on their mortal enemies to protect their girls, their women, their sisters, their mothers -- then they are as depraved as the Islamo-savages.

Friday, December 26, 2008

Then and Now

Paul Eidelberg

Back in 1920, an event took place in Israel that redounds to the honor and courage of many Jews, secular and religious. Indeed, since these Jews were then subject to British rule, their noble conduct shines all the more brilliantly when contrasted to the behavior of many Jews in the supposedly sovereign state of Israel—and I have especially in mind Israel’s ruling elites.

The event is recorded in Dr. Joseph B. Shechtman’s excellent biography of Vladimir Jabotinsky, from which I shall quote and paraphrase.

At the end of 1919, Jabotinsky formed the Jewish Defense Corp (Haganah) in reaction to Arab violence. On April 4, an Arab mob, inflamed by anti-Jewish speeches, began attacking Jews in Jerusalem. “Soon Jewish blood was shed and the mob rushed into the Jewish quarter to kill and to pillage, shouting: “El Dowleh ma’ana (the government is with us).”

“Instead of assisting the victims, Arab police either adopted a passive attitude or joined the attackers. The pogrom lasted two days and resulted in five Jews and four Arabs killed, 211 Jews and 21 Arabs wounded; two Jewish girls were raped.”

The only part of Jerusalem affected by the riots was the Jewish quarter in the Old City, where Orthodox Jews refused to permit Jabotinsky’s Jewish Self-Defense Corp to operate. All other quarters of the City were guarded by Jewish patrols, with the result that not one casualty occurred in these areas.

“Hardly was the pogrom over when the British administration started reprisals against the Jewish defenders of Jerusalem.” Twenty Haganah members were arrested, including Jabotinsky. The men were brought into an interrogation room, where they were surrounded by Arab guards with Turkish lashes in their hands.

On the order of the judge (an Australian captain), an Arab secretary started the investigation by addressing Jabotinsky in Arabic: “What is your name?” There was no answer. The question was repeated in French: Votre nom, Monsieur? No answer. Finally in English: “Will you please tell me your name?” No answer.

The judge lost patience, banged on the table and angrily shouted: “Why don’t you answer?”

Turning to the judge, Jabotinsky said quietly but firmly: “Your honor! I shall not answer a court secretary who belongs to the tribe of the murderers whose attacks upon innocent people, coupled with pillage and raping, are still going on beyond these walls. Furthermore, I shall answer no questions unless they are asked in Hebrew, my language, the language of the Land of Israel and the language of my nineteen comrades.”

“There are no nationalities in the Court; there are only officials,” the judge sternly admonished him.

“If this is the case, I shall not reply to this official,” was the composed answer.

“Take him out of the room,” ordered the judge.
This was quickly done. But the remaining prisoners firmly clung to Jabotinsky’s policy. The Court adjourned. Two hours later they were summoned again; a Jewish sergeant, speaking English and Hebrew, was in the secretary’s chair and his opening question was in Hebrew” “Mah Sh’meicha?” (What’s your name?).

But this is not all. We read in the sequel: “The Jews of Jerusalem learned that Jabotinsky and his comrades ... were committed for trial, on Sabbath, April 10th. The same day, three hundred-eighty members of the Defense Corp who had not been arrested, signed a petition to the Court declaring themselves at one with the twenty arrested men and asking to be tried together with them.

“Simultaneously, in all synagogues signatures were collected under a petition expressing full solidarity with Jabotinsky and stating that, although the signatories had not been in a position to participate in the Self-Defense Corp, they would have done so, had it been possible. The Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem, Rabbi Kook, was the first to sign the petition and authorized its signing on the Sabbath by others.

“Two thousand five hundred Jews signed, among them three hundred women who stated they had been urging their husbands, brothers, sons to join the self-defense. The petition was submitted to the Military Court, but was disregarded.”

Jabotinsky and his comrades were tried, found guilty, and sentenced to fifteen years penal servitude—this, for defending Jewish life and Jewish honor against murderous and rapacious Arabs! Indignation seized the Jews in Jerusalem and all the suburbs. Haaretz reported on April 20: “All the schools, institutions, shops, etc. are closed. Nobody on the streets; no trading, no newspapers, nothing. A total strike.” The Rabbinate proclaimed the 26th of April a day of general strike, fast, and mourning, with the sounding of the Shofar in all synagogues in the country. (What would happen in Israel if such a strike were called today?)

When news about the vindictive sentence reached London, a storm of public indignation was aroused. Members the House of Commons were embarrassed, for Jabotinsky had served as an officer in the British army during World War I, indeed, had organized the Jewish Legion that fought on the side of the allies.

On July 8th, the High Commissioner of Palestine, Sir Herbert Samuel, issued an amnesty for all those imprisoned in connection with the Jerusalem riots, including two Arab rapists! Instead of being exonerated as he had insisted, Jabotinsky and his comrades were placed on the same level as Arab rapists and pogromists! He bitterly protested, but in vain.

A bright episode in Jewish history was thus dimmed by what we now call “moral equivalence.” But the Jewish pride and courage displayed by Jabotinsky, his comrades, and his 2,500 supporters—let us again mention Rav Kook—should serve to inspire Jews today confronted, as they are, not only by bloodthirsty Arabs, but by a shameless and pusillanimous government at war with heritage of the Jewish people.

Reclusive Syrian Jews Denounce Hebron Eviction

By Michael Orbach
Wed. Dec 24, 2008

The recent eviction of Israeli Jewish settlers from a contested building in Hebron has provoked a loud and angry retort from the usually publicity-shy Syrian Jewish community of Brooklyn.
In a December 17 gathering that attracted some 300 Syrian Jews, including the community's leading rabbis, speakers rallied around one of their own: a local women's shoe wholesaler named Morris Abraham, who has played an unlikely role in the Hebron controversy.

"We have created a nation of suicide peacemakers," Abraham told the crowd gathered at Congregation Ahaba Ve Ahva, off Ocean Parkway, referring to the government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and its supporters. Repeatedly, Abraham asserted his claim to have purchased the Hebron building from a local Palestinian.

It is Abraham's claim that now lies at the center of the controversy. And the government's treatment of his claim appears to have produced this rare public outcry from his insular community — one of the quietest, most conservative and wealthiest in New York.
"Morris is a very popular person in our community," explained Charles Dweck, a Brooklyn Syrian Jew who, like Abraham, works as a wholesaler.

The Syrians' harsh reaction could have implications for elections scheduled in Israel this February. The community is known as an important source of political contributors for hawkish Israeli political parties, as well as to Shas, a Sephardic Orthodox party.

Abraham, who is 40, says that together with his father, he bought the contested property in Hebron — called the House of Peace by Israeli West Bank settler supporters — through a middleman in 2004 for, he says, $1 million. Other reports in the press cite a price of $700,000.
The deal was midwifed by the Hebron Fund, a Brooklyn-based group that provides financial aid to Israeli settlers in Hebron. Its executive, Yossi Baumol, also spoke at the rally.

With Israeli settlers in Hebron asserting a right of permanent Jewish rule over the overwhelmingly Palestinian city, in part through land acquisitions, Palestinians who sell properties to Jews face the possibility of execution by other Palestinians. After settlers moved into the Hebron site in 2007, its Palestinian owner went to court in Israel, claiming the alleged sale was fraudulent. Abraham presents a video and documents that purport to confirm his purchase.

Last month, Israel's Supreme Court gave the government custody of the property, pending resolution of this suit. And on December 4, Israeli security forces evicted the settlers and took control of it. The evicted settlers proceeded to riot and commit arson against the town's Palestinian residents as the security forces stood by, an event Olmert condemned as "a pogrom." Seventeen Palestinians were reported injured.

Abraham, an unpretentious man with a black velvet kipa and mild Brooklyn accent, told the audience at the synagogue, "Because there were young rioters doesn't mean the government can take land away that was bought legally."

Abraham said he was motivated to purchase the Hebron property as a religious Jew. According to the Hebrew Bible, the ancient city was King David's original capital before he moved it to Jerusalem. Hebron is also home to the Cave of the Patriarchs, a site holy to Jews and Muslims, where Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and their wives are said to be buried.

Abraham claimed a personal connection to the city, as well. He said his grandfather lived there and escaped a 1930 massacre by Arab residents that killed 68 Jews, many of them members of Hebron's long-settled Sephardic community. He said the alleged purchase was also a business investment; the 40,000-square-foot property was to be renovated to fit 30 apartments to be rented for $300 to $500 per month each, he said.

In a community that reveres its rabbis' words as holy writ, close to 20 community rabbis and leaders attended the rally, most notably Syrian Chief Rabbi Saul Kassin.

The atmosphere was rife with disgust for what speakers declared was the anti-religious nature of the government. Parallels were drawn between the fight for the Hebron property and the Soviet Jewry struggle.

"We are more into business than politics," said Abraham Dayan, a silver haired gentleman with a heavy accent whose wife waited for him in a blue BMW as he discussed the quiet nature of the Syrian community. "But we are very Zionistic, one of the most in the world. [The community] has taken to heart what the government did and considers it unjust vis-à-vis religion and Judaism."

Muhammad the Assassin

Muhammad: The Wise Assassin
Author: Kammuna and Lone
on Friday, December 26, 2008 - 03:00 AM
By: Ibn Kammuna and Ibrahim Lone

Thursday, December 25, 2008

"Muslim World Today" articles about Jews and Israel

A flickering Beacon of Hope in the Dark Wilderness of Jew-Hatred that is the Moslem World . . .
Muslim World Today

Hanukah In Israel And At The White House
By Ari Bussel
Reporting from Israel
Full Story

Mumbai And The Jewish 'Peace Camp'
The Mumbai massacre offers yet another reminder that many Israeli and American Jewish "peaceniks," despite all...
Full Story

[excerpt from the immediately foregoing]
The Mumbai massacre offers yet another reminder that many Israeli and American Jewish "peaceniks," despite all their moralistic and idealistic blather, have hearts of stone. All too many self-described 'progressive' Jews seem to have a fanatical hatred for their fellow Jews in the Land of Israel , simply because they happen to reside on the wrong side of an arbitrary political dividing line. In practice, these people give propaganda aid and comfort to the extreme-right-wing, fascist-Islamist terrorists, who are violently opposed to all genuinely progressive and humane values. Even now they are ignoring the Jewish victims of Radical Islamist mass murderers in Mumbai.
more at

Mumbai: Murdering Jews Was Terrorists' Ideal
The multiple massacres perpetrated in Mumbai by jihadist terrorists that resulted in the killing of at least 188 people, including at least 31...
Full Story

[excerpt from the immediately foregoing]
The multiple massacres perpetrated in Mumbai by jihadist terrorists that resulted in the killing of at least 188 people, including at least 31 foreign nationals, and the wounding and maiming of 293 more, were significant not only for their absolute horror and barbarity. There was also something else of terrible significance: although the jihadists targeted non-Muslims in general, it is quite clear that they made a special effort to locate, torture and murder Jews simply because they were Jews.

The terrorists deviated from their otherwise consistent pattern of assault on mass-casualty public venues like hotels and railway stations in order to locate a small Jewish institution, a Chabad House, where they tortured and murdered Rabbi Holtzberg, his pregnant wife and other Jews who were there at the time. One of the examining doctors later stated that, "Of all the bodies, the Israeli victims bore the maximum torture marks."

Terrorists are ultimately responsible for their deeds, but there is also a secondary responsibility for the terrorism committed in Mumbai. It is to be found in the organs of the United Nations, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the League of Arab States and other international bodies that tolerate, promote, disseminate and institutionalize demonization of Jews and Israel.
If multinational (especially Arab and Muslim) organizations devote the lion's share of their time, personnel, committee work and resolutions to maligning Israel as something worthy of being dismantled, perpetuating and raising the volume of demonization, is it any wonder that Muslim and Arab extremists, raised on ideologies of hate, heed the reinforcement of this message?

Muslim World Today
[click on it for more--highly recommended*]

*with some reservations. Why reservations? Well, this I don't really buy:

Abraham is greatly respected by the Jews and Christians. All Jewish prophets and Jesus Christ are related to the Patriarch who came from Iraq. He is also revered by Muslims as the architect of the Holy Kaaba along with his son Ishmael (Ismael to Muslims) and ancestor of the Last Prophet.

By retracing and reliving Abraham's journey, pilgrims experience his unquestioning faith and willingness to sacrifice what was most precious to him, his only and beloved son when ordained by God in a dream. How Ishmael was rescued last minute is a separate and equally fascinating story.

[Islam and Judaism agreeing on Abraham's scarifice? Really?]

What really interests me is how the three great monotheistic faiths - Judaism, Christianity and Islam - are inextricably linked to each other and are united in Abraham.
The force of the unlettered Prophet's own extraordinary personality epitomizing the universal message he brought swept Arabia and beyond in his own lifetime.

After the Prophet's death, it was not the cutting edge of Islam's sword - as many like to believe - but the revolutionary nature of its message and its liberating teachings that conquered the world and hearts and minds everywhere; the message championing the unity of God and humanity and preaching simple but universal basics like honesty, equality, justice and above all accountability for one's actions.

It was this revolutionary message that opened doors for the early Muslims wherever they went - from Persia to Spain and from India to Indonesia.

Contrary to what its many detractors allege, Islam did not spread to far corners of Asia, Africa and Europe riding on the military conquests of the Mughals, Turks and Afghans but thanks to the endearing simplicity, honesty and truthfulness of Arab spice traders who were enthusiastically welcomed on the coasts of Kerala, Malaya and Java.
--Aijaz Zaka Syed

The foregoing is from
Time To Rediscover Islam's Original Message
This is perhaps the only spectacle of its kind on the planet; the sea of humanity constantly surging, swirling and revolving around a square majestic structure. This ritual has been going on for thousands of years following in the footsteps of Prophet Abraham. The sight of men...
Full Story


Muslim World Today is still right on with

Reconsidering the Role of Sponsors in Minnesota Charter Schools

It might be time for the Minnesota Board of Education (MDE) to do away with sponsors in their charter school program...

Full Story

. . . about charter schools [used] to proselytize Islam

by Supna Zaidi, editor-in-chief of Muslim World Today and asst director of Islamist Watch at the Middle East Forum

Supna Zaidi

The founder and editor-in-chief of Muslim World Today and Pakistan Today, California-based weekly newspapers, was Tashbih Sayyed, president of Council for Democracy and Tolerance,(a non-profit organization) an adjunct fellow of Hudson Institute, and a regular columnist for newspapers across the world.

Tashbih Sayyed

Dr. Sayyed was also a Jihad Watch Board member.

by Robert Spencer, Director of Jihad Watch

May 28, 2007
Remembering Tashbih Sayyed

My friend Tashbih Sayyed, a Jihad Watch Board member, died last week. When I got the news, I did not have words, and posted only this. Now, on Memorial Day, I wanted to try to make up for that.

Tashbih Sayyed was that most rare of human beings: a man absolutely fearless in his commitment to the truth. After 9/11, American Muslim advocacy groups began, with the willing complicity of the mainstream media, to flood the airwaves with a huge mass of disinformation and misinformation about jihad activity in the United States and around the world, and above all about its provenance within Islamic theology and tradition. Instead of acknowledging that there was a mandate to wage war against unbelievers that was rooted in the Qur'an and Islamic tradition, Islamic spokesmen routinely denied this, and castigated those who contended otherwise as "bigots" and "Islamophobes."

Amid all this Tashbih stood virtually alone as an honest man. He stood out sharply among contemporary Muslim spokesmen and activists by admitting that there was a problem within Islam that needed to be solved. As he once told me: "My whole life is devoted to one end: to make the Muslims understand that their theology needs to be reformed and reinterpreted. Anybody who thinks that there's nothing wrong with their theology is either a blind person or an apologist. There are many things in Muslim Scripture that need to be reshaped and reframed and reinterpreted, so that they cannot be used by terrorists to justify homicide bombings and honor killings."

This stance, of course, earned him ostracism and threats, but Tashbih was undaunted. I will never forget his reaction when I asked him whether he thought I should go ahead and write a sira -- a biography of Muhammad -- as I had been considering doing. He said "Of course you should" so quickly that it took me aback: usually when I broached the idea with people their reaction had been to tell me that if I did write such a book I would be threatened and possibly even killed. But Tashbih never flinched. He went on to explain to me that it needed to be done, that the truth needed to come out about these issues -- and clearly that was all that mattered, as far as he was concerned. He knew that if the world was going to prevail against the global jihadist threat, we would all have to take certain risks. And he himself never hesitated to put his life on the line for the truth.

Would that now we had hundreds, and hundreds of thousands, and millions like him, with his quiet strength, his good humor, and his indomitable and unshakeable love for the truth. If we did, the outcome of this present conflict would not be in the slightest doubt.

Tashbih, I am honored that you called me your friend, and I will miss you tremendously. And the forces of civilization have lost a warrior who cannot be replaced.

Posted by Robert at 9:55 PM Comments (22)

Some COMMENTS on the foregoing post:

"...Tashbih stood virtually alone as an honest man."In a dishonest world, honest men always stand virtually alone.
Posted by: Timur at May 28, 2007 4:32 PM

Well, I don't want to inject a note of negativity into a heartfelt tribute for a good man, but I'm a little troubled. If Tashbih could see all that is wrong with Islam, why did he remain a mohammadan?
More at root_cause , click May 28, 2007 6:58 PM

Root_cause...I have the same questions and thoughts about 'moderate' muslims, but I dont think this is the time or place to discuss them.But thats just me...
Posted by: duh_swami at May 28, 2007 8:36 PM

Tashbih Sayyed - Always the Gentleman
Obituary by Ari Bussel

It is with great sorrow that we learned late last week that Dr. Tashbih Sayyed, publisher of Muslim World Today, has passed away. The funeral was held Sunday, May 27th, 2007, in Costa Mesa.

On September 17th, 2006, two events happened simultaneously: A Night to Honor Israel was being held at the Ambassador Auditorium in Pasadena by Harvest Rock Church and its Senior Pastor Che Ahn. This event brought to Los Angeles for the first time Pastor John Hagee’s Christian United for Israel’s tradition of showing support to the Jewish communities around the United States and to the State of Israel, the Jewish Homeland.

Also at the same night an event was held at the Four Seasons hotel in Los Angeles: Profiles of Courage by the American Jewish Congress. The hotel was probably the most secure location that night in the United States of America, for there were "enemies of Islam" as Islamists would call them—Dr. Tashbih Sayyed, Dr. Wafa Sultan, Nonie Darwish, Salman Rushdie and Brigitte Gabriel. [Lebanese-born Gabriel is the exception among this group of five, for she is Christian, the others are Muslim.]
Ari.Bussel for more of this comment click May 29, 2007 5:11 PM

Tashbih Sayyed's light shows what could shine forth from the Islamic countries if free and progressive thought ever emerges.
Posted by: jewdog at May 28, 2007 7:03 PM

It is indeed hard to find a righteous man in this world, or woman. Ayaan Hirsi Ali. With what little I read, Tashbih Sayyed reminds me of her. What confuses me though is that there really, honestly, cannot be a re-interpretation of the text. It is an all or nothing situation. It claims to be the ultimate truth. The ultimate knowledge. The unchanging word of the one, true God. This exercise of re-interpretation simply cannot be done without fundamentally altering the entire theme of the religion. Acknowledging what these two individuals have, I am left confused when they (sometimes) state that they are Muslims. They cannot be. At least not after saying what they have and believing what they do. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with deciding no longer to be Muslim. I, perhaps, do not understand the subject well enough.
Posted by: Spartacus at May 29, 2007 5:11 PM

A Battle Between Democracy And Terror
By:Tashbih Sayyed, Ph. D.
First published in Friday, December 24, 2004 issue of Muslim World Today

Iraq's insurgents represent the ugliest face of Islamist terror.
They know that if Iraqi elections are allowed to go ahead as planned, it will be a major blow to their world wide agenda...
Full Story

Israel Hit by Biggest Gaza Rocket Barrage Since Cease-Fire

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Hanukka Revisited

Why was there no Islamic presence in Jerusalem at this time? No mention of the Islamic conquerors of the Greeks in Judea? Well, guess what: the events described in the "hanukkah story" took place in 124 B.C.E., that is some 700 years before there was such a thing as a "Moslem," an "Islam," an Arab "prophet" that called himself "Mohammed."

BUT . . . BUT. . .

AND IF NOT, WHY ARE THE JEWS PART OF IT (those "apes and pigs" as they are called by the Moslem's koran in 2:62-65, 5:59-60, 7:166)?


They were not always accepted or liked, even hated, but despite all that they did their part to build the American nation. And they never wanted to impose their religion on the American population nor put anything above the Constitution (such a the Islamics want to do with their shariah). Islamics want to make the United States into an Islamic nation--no matter what we, the citizens, want.

The following is from

Jews traced their earliest participation in Virginia's life from the 16th century with Sir Walter Raleigh through Jamestown and the revolution. The first permanent synagogue community Kehilah ha Kadosh Beth Shalome, was founded in 1789 in Richmond, Va.. Beth Shalome built its first permanent building in 1820 in Richmond. The president of the congregation at the time of dedication was Jacob Mordecai, born in 1762 in Philadelphia. His mother Elizabeth (Esther) Whitlock had been a Christian convert to Judaism.

Oct. 25. 1765, a group of Philadelphia merchants gathered in the State House to sign the non-importation agreement to fight the hated Stamp Tax of the British government. The first man to step forward to sign his name was the president of Mikve Israel Congregation, Philadelphia's only synagogue, Mathias Bush.

As the tensions between Britain and the American Colonies increased and finally erupted into war the American Colonial population was split almost into thirds; one third supported the war, one third was neutral and one third was pro British. The small Jewish population of America was also divided – the choice though was very heavily and disproportionaly in favor and support of the American Revolution. Not only did the Jews pledge their fortunes and sacred honor for America but their very lives.

A few days later in Philadelphia, July 4, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was written. A copy was sent to Amsterdam via the small Dutch Caribbean Island of St. Eustatius. The Declaration was intercepted by the British at sea. An accompanying letter with the Declaration of Independence was also intercepted and sent to London as being a secret code about the document that needed to be deciphered - the letter was written in Yiddish.

Jews stood and fought along with their neighbors. Into the terrible dark cold winter at Valley Forge, Abraham Levy and Phillip Russell stood their watch. Joseph Simon from his frontier forge at Lancaster, Pa. supplied the Army with the famous Henry Rifles. Jewish trading merchants, peaceful before the war, outfitted their ships to become privateers and ravage the British at sea. The cost to many was great, the great merchant traders of Newport, Rhode Island saw their fortunes lost.

Men such as Aaron Lopez were bankrupted supporting the Revolution when their ships were lost to the British. In the area of finance the young American government might have foundered too except for the financial genius and personal financial risk and support taken on by Hayim Solomon. Solomon was to die bankrupted by his total support of the American cause. Though small in number the Jews chose to caste their fate with America.

But how did the Jews save the American Revolution? As late as 1781 the war had not been won by the Americans nor was it lost by the British. Arms were being funneled into the Colonies by arms merchants running the British blockade primarily from the tiny free trading Island of Dutch St. Eustatius. Jewish merchants and arms traders were a major presence on the island.

In 1781, the British realized they had to cut off the open door of arms shipments to the rebels through St. Eustatius. Admiral Sir George Rodney was sent to capture the island. His goal was to destroy the supplies and destroy the island's commercial and merchant class so they could not provide any more aide to the rebels. Early in 1781 the lightly defended island fell to the heavy presence of the main British battle fleet. Rodney in his vehemence destroyed the warehouses and the supplies. He burnt every home. He paid particular venomous attention to the Jews of St. Eustatius. The British burnt their homes and the synagogue, Honen Dalim, "She Who is Charitable to the Poor" – built 1739. Jewish property was confiscated and the men imprisoned with particular cruelty. Rodney spent months directing half his fleet to convey much of the stolen treasure back to England.

While Rodney was engaged in St. Eustatius, Lord Cornwallis and his army of British regulars were forced out of the Carolinas and retreated to the small port of Yorktown, Virginia on the James Peninsula. He needed to await critical reprovisioning and fresh reinforcements being brought by the British fleet. The weakened British fleet, with Cornwallis's reinforcements, was intercepted at sea by the French fleet under Admiral DeGrasse and soundly defeated. Degrasse took up positions at the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay blockading Yorktown from the Sea.
General George Washington saw his chance. Washington trapped and besieged Cornwallis. In short course Cornwallis surrendered. The war was over. The Americans had won with the help of the French.

But how did the Jews save the American Revolution? If the Jews had not helped turn St. Eustatius into a major arms center for the Revolution and if Admiral Rodney had not spent so much time destroying St. Eustatius and particularly the Jews, the war might have ended differently. There is little doubt that Admiral Rodney's anti-Semitism helped squander his time and played a role in delaying and weakening the British fleet. Ironically it was the Jews of St. Eustatius who helped win the American Revolution.


By 1776 and the War of Independence, there were an estimated 2,000 Jews (men, women and children) living in America, yet their contribution to the cause was significant. For example, in Charleston, South Carolina, almost every adult Jewish male fought on the side of freedom. In Georgia, the first patriot to be killed was a Jew (Francis Salvador). And additionally, the Jews provided significant financing for the patriots.

The Truth About George Washington's Hanukkah

An Amerian Naval Commodore

Uriah P. Levy (1792-1862)

Forty years before French army officer Alfred Dreyfus was court-martialed, convicted and eventually exonerated in trials based on anti-Semitism, an American naval officer was facing similar tribulations. The American court's verdict was unanimous for the 63 year old defendant: "Urah P. Levy is morally, mentally, physically and professionally fit for the Naval Service and ought to be restored to the active list of the Navy." Within five years this court-martial, Levy was placed in command of the entire Mediterranean Fleet and was elevated to the Navy's highest rank - Commodore.

Uriah Phillips Levy was born in 1792 in Philadelphia; he was barely 14 years old when he embarked on his naval career by signing on as a cabin boy. Seven years later he volunteered for service in the United States Navy during the War of 1812, as "proof of love to my country." The next year Uriah was captured and imprisoned by the British until the end of the war. In the years following, he faced persecution from many naval officers, he had to defend himself in a duel, and was subjected to a total of six courts-martial ... all instigated by anti-Semitism.
Throughout his life, Uriah P. Levy, was active in religious life; he was the first president of the Washington Hebrew Congregation, and in 1854 he sponsored the new Seminary of the Bnai Jesherun Educational Institute in New York.

It was Levy's wish that he be remembered for his singular efforts to abolish the barbarous punishment of flogging in the U.S. Navy, which resulted in Congressional approval of an anti-flogging bill in 1850.

Preserver of Jefferson's Monticello

Uriah P. Levy regarded Thomas Jefferson as "one of the greatest men in history, who did much to mold the Republic in a form in which man's religion does not make him ineligible for political or governmental life." Thus, about 10 years after the former President's death in 1826, Levy purchased Jefferson's run down estate, that was virtually in ruin. He began a long and costly program of renovation and restoration, including the purchase of an additional 2,500 acres adjoining the historic property. After Levy's death in 1862, his will directed that Monticello - the house and property - be left "to the people of the United States."

The song "God Bless America" was written by a Jew, Irving Berlin.

More about Hanukkah:


Yep, they sure did.

Just look at this. Moslems doing what they do best

Jefferson’s War: America’s First War on Terror 1801–1805

[title of a book by Joseph Wheelan (2003)]

and the following elaboration on that theme:


One immediate effect of the American Revolution . . . was to strengthen the hand of those very same North African potentates: roughly speaking, the Maghrebian provinces of the Ottoman Empire that conform to today’s Algeria, Libya, Morocco, and Tunisia. Deprived of Royal Navy protection, American shipping became even more subject than before to the depredations of those who controlled the Strait of Gibraltar. The infant United States had therefore to decide not just upon a question of national honor but upon whether it would stand or fall by free navigation of the seas.
* * *
Linda Colley’s excellent book Captives . . . shows the reaction of the English and American publics to a [white] slave trade of which they were victims rather than perpetrators. How many know that perhaps 1.5 million Europeans and Americans were enslaved in Islamic North Africa between 1530 and 1780?
* * *
But one cannot get around what Jefferson heard when he went with John Adams to wait upon Tripoli’s ambassador to London in March 1785. When they inquired by what right the Barbary states preyed upon American shipping, enslaving both crews and passengers, America’s two foremost envoys were informed that “it was written in the Koran, that all Nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.” (It is worth noting that the United States played no part in the Crusades, or in the Catholic reconquista of Andalusia.)

[italics and bold emphasis mine. lw]

* * *
It seems likely that Jefferson decided from that moment on that he would make war upon the Barbary kingdoms as soon as he commanded American forces. His two least favorite institutions—enthroned monarchy and state-sponsored religion—were embodied in one target, and it may even be that his famous ambivalences about slavery were resolved somewhat when he saw it practiced by the Muslims.
* * *
John Jay, in his letters, took a “bring-it-on” approach; he believed that “Algerian Corsairs and the Pirates of Tunis and Tripoli” would compel the feeble American states to unite, since “the more we are ill-treated abroad the more we shall unite and consolidate at home.” The eventual Constitution, which provides for an army only at two-year renewable intervals, imposes no such limitation on the navy.
* * *
[Jefferson] . . . when he was out of office and temporarily “retired” to Monticello. . . . could . . . watch . . . the construction of a fleet—and the forging of a permanent Marine Corps—that he

[w]ould one day use for his own ends.

At one point, Jefferson hoped that John Paul Jones, naval hero of the Revolution, might assume command of a squadron that would strike fear into the Barbary pirates. While ambassador in Paris, Jefferson had secured Jones a commission with Empress Catherine of Russia, who used him in the Black Sea to harry the Ottomans, the ultimate authority over Barbary. But Jones died before realizing his dream of going to the source and attacking Constantinople. The task of ordering war fell to Jefferson.
* * *
Yusuf Karamanli, the pasha of Tripoli, declared war on the United States in May 1801, in pursuit of his demand for more revenue. This earned him a heavy bombardment of Tripoli and the crippling of one of his most important ships. But the force of example was plainly not sufficient. In the altered mood that prevailed after the encouraging start in Tripoli, Congress passed an enabling act in February 1802 that, in its provision for a permanent Mediterranean presence and its language about the “Tripolitan Corsairs,” amounted to a declaration of war. The Barbary regimes continued to underestimate their new enemy, with Morocco declaring war in its turn and the others increasing their blackmail.

More at

For another description of the Tripoli venture of the newly formed United States, see


The Barbary Wars: American Independence in the Atlantic World, by Frank Lambert (2005); Jefferson’s War: America’s First War on Terror 1801–1805, by Joseph Wheelan (2003);

To the Shores of Tripoli: The Birth of the U.S. Navy and Marines, by A. B. C. Whipple (1991, republished 2001);

Victory in Tripoli: How America’s War with the Barbary Pirates Established the U.S. Navy and Shaped a Nation, by Joshua E. London (2005).

Most recently, in his new general history, Power, Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East, 1776 to the Present, the Israeli scholar Michael Oren opens with a long chapter on the Barbary conflict.

As some of the subtitles—and some of the dates of publication—make plain, this new interest is largely occasioned by America’s latest round of confrontation in the Middle East, or the Arab sphere or Muslim world, if you prefer those expressions.


from fjordman


as is expounded at

If you are Moslem . . .. . . when in Rome . . . do any damn thing you please and justify it by saying you didn't realize you were in Rome, or what the Romans did, and anyway, the Romans are Infidels so who cares what they do, or expect.

from fjordman via the Disease and the Cure . . . as is the following:

We Muslims are here, here to stay, and we have a right to take advantage of this situation. It is our view of the matter that should prevail. Western goods, like the land on which we now live, belong to Allah and to the best of men -- his Believers. Western women, too, essentially belong to us -- our future booty. Western laws may "apply" but not in any sense that really counts or that we reocgnize. We recognize Islamic law, the sharia, and according to that we are simply exhibiting the attiudes toward Infidels that are drummed into us, that are right and according to the laws of Allah. Why should we act differently? Oh, and if we happen to act, as some of the Islamic websites tell us we can act, in accordance with the local laws -- but only insofar as they do not contradict Islam -- that is only because of darura, the doctrine of necessity -- and that necessity, that darura, is of course only temporary.