Thursday, March 26, 2009

Transfer the "Palestinians?" Yes or No?

"Transfer" the Palestinians? Reasons Against
By Daniel Pipes

Meir Kahane espoused the "transfer" of Palestinians out of Israeli-ruled territories.

Why do I [Daniel Pipes] oppose Meir Kahane's idea of "transfer," that is, forcibly moving Palestinians out of the West Bank, a reader asked recently. Count the reasons:

Morally wrong: This reason suffices unto itself. A government cannot force people to leave their homes only because they speak the wrong language, have the wrong faith, or pursue the wrong politics. Ethnic cleansing is unacceptable. (Also when it applies to Jews, by the way, such as those living in Gaza.)

Turns Israelis against their state: A sizeable portion of Israel's Jewish population would be alienated from a government that engaged in transfer. Some would leave Israel. The Zionist cause would suffer severe damage.

Infuriates the American ally: Israel, with a mere population of 7 million, depends heavily on its U.S. ally; transfer would prompt every American administration to engage in a basic rethinking of its alliance with Israel.

Inflames, not discourages, the Arab enemy: Wars end when one side gives up – and forced removals would not cause the Palestinians, much less their Arab and Muslim supporters, to give up their dream of eliminating the Jewish state. Rather, they would be outraged and agitated. The conflict would be extended, not resolved.

Continue to full text of posting...
Comments (20) [have Reasons For]

First three Comments:
term "ethnic cleansing" is an implied accusation of racism [180 words]
James Garner
Mar 20, 2009 16:12

A rebuttal from Obadiah Shoher [255 words]
Mar 14, 2009 11:53

Complete and irrefuteable rebuttal to Dr. Daniel Pipes [701 words]
Mar 10, 2009 02:48

The Morality of Transfer [2999 words]
Boris Shusteff
Mar 9, 2009 19:25

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

"Is Israel about to lose the support of the United States?" or . . .

. . . has Israel already* lost the support of the United States?

"I have every reason to believe, based on what I’ve seen at my level of [security] clearance especially over the last several years, that Israel will soon be completely on their own… or worse." When asked what could be worse than losing the support of the United States, he stated: "when our administration provides more support to Arab countries [with] financial and military aid, undercutting Israel’s defense efforts all while pushing Israel to succumb to the pressure of unreasonable demands designed to end with their political annihilation as a nation."

--a highly-placed U.S. intelligence official

Read the whole thing at

Referred to the foregoing site by
ACT for America
*with 'bama in charge, what do you think?

Is it time--way past time--for Israel to stop depending on the U.S?

Monday, March 23, 2009

A BNP (British National Party) Proponent Talks about Jews

Posted by The Green Arrow

. . . it is quite possible that the British Jews have been infected with the same malady as the British People whom they live amongst in peace.

But instead of recognizing their true enemy in our shared country, Islam and attacking them, they prefer to tilt at windmills and launch repeated attacks on the only political party that they share common values and cause with. The British National Party.

It is not the BNP that wishes to kill Christians and Jews and wipe Israel off the face of the World Map. It is our common enemy, Islam.

It is not the BNP that attacks them on the streets of North London and across the world or destroys their temples and property. It is again, our common enemy, Islam.

But now for some straight talking about my own views on the Jews and Israel.

I have been involved in Nationalist politics for over 30 years now and have sometimes wondered why almost all our Foreign Secretaries and Key Ministers always seem to have Jewish origins and whether perhaps their loyalties are greater towards the interests of Israel than the United Kingdom.

On an international level I have also wondered whether people like President Sarkozy of France who is also Jewish have any real loyalty to the countries they have made home.

And along with almost every nationalist I have ever spoken to, I came to the conclusion that British Jews support for Israel does not affect their love or loyalty toward Great Britain. A land where they have prospered and a land they they have contributed to. A land where they are safe.

Many Jewish sites have recently done a lot of research into the views of the British National Party towards British Jews and found not one shred of evidence of the BNP attacking Jews in any sense.

In fact it is now only the British National Party that seems to recognise the rights of Jews to survive as a people and Israel to survive as a nation.

The other parties seem to have cast the Jews aside as they build closer links to the new money of Islam. But unlike those parties, the BNP does not drop a core believe just for financial or political gain in scrabbling for the votes of the moslems they continually import to prop up their failing Establishment.

So surely you would think, that if Jews believe that God gave them the land between the two blue rivers on their flag, then God also gave the British this land, our land and would recognise what it is the British National Party are fighting for. The survival of our people.

And rest assured, the only way the Jews in Britain will survive is if the British National Party prevails. Islam will not be so tolerant to either Jew or Christian if they are allowed to gain control of our shared land.

The British National Party does not condemn Israel for its laws on ensuring that political control is not lost to them by allowing unchecked immigration into their land so that they may join the "democratic process" and vote for the destruction of Israel by weight of numbers.

The Jews are not stupid. Far from it. They recognised a long time ago that it not the enemy at the gate that could destroy them but rather the enemy they allow within. The same enemy that, if permitted, once their numbers are large enough would vote away Our way of Life and make the UK just another Islamic State where the people live in fear under the rule of madmen.

But the recent attack on the BNP, shown in the link above, by the Board of Deputies of British Jews encouraging British Jews to campaign against the BNP and support The Esablishments rotating dictatorship in the coming European Elections is a betrayal of the British Jews.

Because the Board of Deputies are akin to the British Politicans who would betray the British People for personal gain. Yes they are are Jews also but that does not make them right. They serve only themselves and the Status Quo which feeds them.

Now then(not much more), I fully expect to be attacked by so called "Nationalists" for supporting the Jews and Israel but there is one thing it took me a long time to learn. The nature of the beast that attacks both Jew and Brit.

Many of these "purists" are state agents paid to make inflammotry and hateful statements to ensure that there is no joining together of Jews and British people to fight their common enemies. Islam and the New World Order. They will not succeed.

The importance to our enemies of propapagating the myth that British Nationalists hate the Jews. By doing so they hope to divert the British People away from the truth that the BNP speaks. The fact that there are global marxists hell bent on creating a New World Order. And this New World Order is not run by "The Jews", although there are many that conspire with them, they are all kinds and colours.

My father fought against the evil of Fascism, his generation died in their hundreds of thousands fighting for freedom and so I end on a note of hope.

It was heartening news yesterday to read on the BNP site that the British National Party had three former Spitfire Pilots still fighting in The Battle Of Britain. I salute them.

I have always marked the Jewish People in this Country down as being smart cookies, they have had to be smart to survive centuries of persecution but now I am wondering if they have a collective Death Wish. It is quite possible.

The majority of the British People seem to have one, as they continue to vote for the Lib/Lab/con alliance, whose long term plan is the complete destruction of the White People whose country this is.

So it is quite possible that the British Jews have been infected with the same malady as the British People whom they live amoungst in peace.

But instead of recognizing their true enemy in our shared country, Islam and attacking them, they prefer to tilt at windmills and launch repeated attacks on the only political party that they share common values and cause with. The British National Party.

Posted by The Green Arrow at
A letter to British Jews

Read the whole post at
A letter to British Jews

Sunday, March 22, 2009


Is it time--way past time--for Israel to stop depending on the U.S. --on the Obama United States--to Protect it from the Islamics Whose Jew-Hatred Makes Them Determined to Destroy Israel and Exterminate the world's Jews?

U.S. furious over Israel's demolition of East Jerusalem homes

By Barak Ravid and Natasha Mozgovaya

The dispute between the United States and Israel over the razing of Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem is intensifying and will likely become the first clash between the Obama administration and the government of Benjamin Netanyahu.

The U.S. argues that the destruction of homes constitutes a violation of commitments made as part of the road map. Israel says this is a domestic issue of law enforcement and that the future status of Jerusalem is only to be discussed in the final status negotiations.

"Apart from a dispute this issue will lead to nothing," a senior government official told Haaretz.
U.S. attention to the demolitions began after the visit to the region by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, catching Israel by surprise.


Get Real #1 Muslims will NEVER make peace with Jews
by Nashville Katz

"In a recorded speech aired Friday evening in Beirut in honor of the Prophet Muhammad`s birthday, Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah rejected a US condition for talks and stressed that his group will not recognize Israel, "even in 1,000 years."

Jews: Do You Know Who Your Enemy Is?

from Skywriting your love

75. Bob Murphy:
I am fascinated at how many American Jews have remained Democrat, remained leftist, and remained psychologically incapable of understanding the nature of their enemy.

What is it about those people?

Can’t they see the inevitable result of the characteristics of the European Jews who lined up, went to their ghettos, lined up and went to the trains, lined up and got sent left or right depending on whether they were worth working to death or should just be terminated immediately?

Hitler and his ilk are always up front about their attention and so is Ahm a nut job, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Brotherhood in Egypt, etc etc.What is it these people don’t get?Americans can afford to be slow to anger. They haven’t been whupped in a very long time.

But Israel and wider Jewry???is Judaism (sp?) so intellectual that they (with the exception of many Israelis) just cannot come out of their mental projection?

Does swinging chickens around their heads make them go funny?I’m amazed.I hate to admit I am not surprised that women as a group voted overwhelmingly for Obama and tend to go fuzzy left emotively. Honorable exception Nahncee.

But the Jews should know better. There are still many thousands of them walking around with Hitler’s telephone number on their left arm.

Maybe Israel should be sending agents overseas and teaching Jews why and how they should defend themselves against Jihad.

Mar 22, 2009 - 12:24 am

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Toward an Independent Foreign Policy for Israel*

Paul Eidelberg

In my report of March 9, I said that with Barack Obama in the White House, the American government has become an overt enemy. I noted that 0bama has made appointments of persons who are openly hostile to Israel. Like him and various Israeli politicians, they advocate an Arab-Islamic state in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. This would lead to Israel’s demise.

Whatever the motives of the Israelis, they are obviously influenced by Washington’s commitment to Palestinian statehood. More fundamental is their perception of Israel’s military and economic dependence on the U.S. They see an umbilical chord with a one-way flow of nutrients from America to Israel. This image distorts reality because America receives enormous nutrients from Israel. Trouble is, no one, to my knowledge, has made a strategic assessment of this two-way flow; hence neither government has adequate knowledge of their mutual dependency.

The citizens of both countries are ignorant of how much each country contributes to the well-being of the other. Virtually everyone believes Israel could not survive without America. But is this belief based on a solid assessment of Israel’s military capabilities? After all, Israel is a nuclear power, and despite its minute size, its Gross Domestic Product exceeds that of all its neighbors—in fact, is the average of countries in Europe.

Although American politicians speak of Israel as America’s “most reliable ally in the Middle East,” no one takes this vague expression seriously. To be a reliable ally, Israel must be capable of defending itself. Why, then, does Washington want to shrink Israel back to indefensible pre-1967 borders? Obviously, Washington has interests that compete with if not outweigh Israel’s value as a U.S. ally—for example, Saudi oil and purchases of U.S. arms.

Washington should be reminded that

If [Israel] were to simultaneously hit only five of the many sensitive points in Saudi Arabia’s downstream oil system, th[at] could put the Saudis out of the oil-producing business for about two years…. Simply blowing of Abqaiq’s up the East-West pipeline’s Pump Station One to smithereens …. would be enough to bring the world’s oil-addicted economies to their knees, America’s along with them. [Robert Baer, Sleeping with the Devil.]

Neither the U.S. nor Europe should disregard Israel’s nuclear capacity, and what Israel, small as it may be, is capable of doing if driven to desperation. Its air force and navy extend the country’s effective size and range of power.

Israel’s timid government plays mum about this power. It prefers to make Israel appear as a teddy bear—as if meekness endears Israel to America and Europe and does not arouse Arab states to obtain or develop nuclear weapons. Syria and Iran have made nonsense of Israel’s meek image. Dare Israel develop an image that intimidates Europe where anti-Semitism or hatred of Israel is rampant? Europe’s hatred is not the result of Israel’s nuclear power, which endangers no European country—the reason why Europe does not fear and respect Israel.

As for the United States, an anti-Israel lobby in Washington wants to terminate the (misleading) image of America’s pro-Israel foreign policy. This lobby has the ear of Barack Obama who certainly does not have an adequate understanding of the extent to which America’s well-being depends on a secure and flourishing Israel.

Hence, we need to reveal Israel’s contribution to America, first, by quoting Dr. Joseph Sisco, a former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern affairs. Sisco told Israeli author Shmuel Katz, “I want to assure you, Mr. Katz, that if we were not getting full value for our money, you would not get a cent from us.”

● For FY2006, U.S. military grants to Israel was $2.28 billion (= $2.28B). Since Israel’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2006, this aid to Israel was less than 1.5% of its GDP!

● Viewed over a longer time period—say between 1991 and 2006—total U.S. military grants and economic assistance to Israel was approximately $47.5B.

What has the U.S. received from Israel in return?

● Israel must spend about 74% of U.S. military aid in the United States, where it provides jobs for an estimated 50,000 American workingmen.

● Total exports from America’s 50 states to Israel between 1991and 2006 was $102.4B—more than twice the $47.5B Israel received in U.S. aid during this period. The annual average of U.S. exports to Israel was $6.4B per year, more than twice the average American aid package. In fact, total exports to Israel from the 50 states in 2006 was almost $11B—more than four times the U.S. military-economic aid package!

● Moreover, U.S. military aid to Israel creates a demand for, and the purchase of, tens of billions of dollars worth of U.S. weaponry by Saudi Arabia and other Arab states. U.S. grants to Israel—far from burdening the American tax payer—actually enriches the U.S. economy. Arms manufacturers know this. So do Senators who represent states in which corporations such as Boeing and Lockheed are located. They have vested interests in opposing any sanctions against Israel if it were to take a more independent stand against Palestinian statehood.

● According to Gen. George Keegan, a former chief of U.S. Air Force Intelligence, between 1974 and 1990, Israeli aid to America was worth between $50-80B in intelligence, research and development savings, Soviet weapons systems captured and transferred to the Pentagon, and testing Soviet military doctrines up to 1990 when the USSR collapsed. Senator Daniel Inouye put it this way: “The contribution made by Israeli intelligence to America is greater than that provided by all NATO countries combined.”

● Yoram Ettinger reports: Israel relays to the U.S. lessons of battle and counter-terrorism, which reduce American losses in Iraq and Afghanistan, prevent attacks on U.S. soil, upgrade American weapons, and contribute to the U.S. economy. Innovative Israeli technologies boost U.S. industries.

● The vice-president of the company that produces the F16 fighter jets told Ettinger that Israel is responsible for 600 improvements in the plane’s systems, modifications estimated to be worth billions of dollars, which spared dozens of research and development years.

● Without Israel, the U.S. would have to deploy tens of thousands of American troops in the eastern Mediterranean Basin, at a cost of billions of dollars a year.

● In 1981, Israel bombed the Iraqi nuclear reactor, thus providing the U.S. with the option of engaging in conventional wars with Iraq in 1991 and 2003, thereby preventing a possible nuclear war and its horrendous consequences.

● In 2005, Israel provided America with the world’s most extensive experience in homeland defense and warfare against suicide bombers and car bombs. American soldiers train in IDF facilities and Israeli-made drones fly above the Sunni Triangle in Iraq, as well as in Afghanistan, providing U.S. Marines with vital intelligence that saved many American lives.

Finally, since Israel has phased out economic aid, U.S. military aid is only 1.3% of Israel’s GDP! This figure would be zero if Israel did not spend billions on security fences and military redeployments resulting from territorial retreats.

This is only a thumbnail sketch. We need experts to assess other types of U.S. contributions to Israel’s economy and vice-versa. Hence, we need to know and translate into monetary terms:

The number of engineers and scientists Israel provides the U.S.
The medical technology Israel provides the U.S. and the number of lives saved thereby.
The agricultural technology Israel provides the world in general, and the U.S. in particular, and the number lives saved by this technology.
The U.S.- Israel scientific research projects.
The U.S.-Israel military projects.
The monetary significance of U.S-Israel tourism.

These are just a few items that need to be assessed. The public in Israel as well as in America should be informed in quantitative and qualitative terms what Israel contributes to the security, health, and economic prosperity of the United States. Once this research is complete, Israel—of course depending on wise and courageous leadership—will be able to pursue a foreign policy vis-à-vis the U.S. that does not affect the borders of the country.

*Edited Transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel National Radio, March 16, 2009.

Will Israel Disappear in the Near Future?

People in a Beirut, Lebanon, suburb listen to Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, who appears on a giant screen. Speaking from a secret location, Nasrallah marked the Islamic prophet Muhammed's birthday Friday [March 13, 2009] by telling Hezbollah supporters that "we, our children and our offspring will never be able to recognize Israel. We are capable of defeating this entity and can make it disappear."


CIA report: Israel will fall in 20 years
Global Research,

A study conducted by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has cast doubt over Israel’s survival beyond the next 20 years.

The CIA report predicts “an inexorable movement away from a two-state to a one-state solution, as the most viable model based on democratic principles of full equality that sheds the looming specter of colonial Apartheid while allowing for the return of the 1947/1948 and 1967 refugees. The latter being the precondition for sustainable peace in the region.”

The study, which has been made available only to a certain number of individuals, further forecasts the return of all Palestinian refugees to the occupied territories, and the exodus of two million Israeli - who would move to the US in the next fifteen years.

“There is over 500,000 Israelis with American passports and more than 300,000 living in the area of just California,” International lawyer Franklin Lamb said in an interview with Press TV on Friday, adding that those who do not have American or western passport, have already applied for them.

“So I think the handwriting at least among the public in Israel is on the wall…[which] suggests history will reject the colonial enterprise sooner or later,” Lamb stressed.

He said CIA, in its report, alludes to the unexpectedly quick fall of the apartheid government in South Africa and recalls the disintegration of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, suggesting the end to the dream of an ‘Israeli land’ would happen ‘way sooner’ than later.

The study further predicts the return of over one and a half million Israelis to Russia and other parts of Europe, and denotes a decline in Israeli births whereas a rise in the Palestinian population.

Lamb said given the Israeli conduct toward the Palestinians and the Gaza strip in particular, the American public — which has been voicing its protest against Tel Aviv’s measures in the last 25 years — may ‘not take it anymore’.

Some members of the US Senate Intelligence Committee have been informed of the report.

Selected COMMENT:

Global Research run out of Quebec looks like a website for Israel demonizers and moonbats. Just scroll down the list of authors, articles and subjects. This alleged CIA report could be the product of what author Ken Timmerman calls the ’shadow warriors in the Company in McLean, Virginia who have it in for Israel and for American Jews. The scenario spun in this ‘report’ looks suspiciously familiar -the fictional work of Michael Chabon, "The Yiddish Policeman’s Union" - about detectives in the safe haven in the Sitka district of Alaska created by the US for Jews who failed to establish the State of Israel in 1948. And what arethe mamaloschen speaking detectives hot on the trail of Jews who want to try it again!!
Comment by Jerry Gordon — March 16, 2009 @ 4:34 am

Read all comments at

Sunday, March 15, 2009

Islamic concept of Al-Taqiyah to infiltrate and destroy kafir countries

Click on

Title: Islamic concept of Al-Taqiyah to infiltrate and destroy kafir countries
Author: Dr. Walid
URL: (apparently now a dead link)

This article by Dr. Walid, a top scholar at the Islamic University, exposes our so-called secular Indian Muslims. By the doctrine of Al-Taqiyah, Muslims dominate crime syndicates, increase population by massive Bangladeshi infiltration and make temporary alliances with Dalits, Christians, etc.

In the early years of the Islamic conquest of the Arabian peninsula and in the Fatah (Arab-Islamic invasion and conquest of the upper Middle East and the outside world), a Muslim concept was devised to achieve success against the enemy (non Muslims), Al-Taqiyah. Al-Taqiyah, from the verb Ittaqu, means linguistically dodge the threat. Politically it means simulate whatever status you need in order to win the war against the enemy ...

According to Al-Taqiyah, Muslims were granted the Shar'iyee right (legitimacy) to infiltrate the Dar el-Harb (war zone), infiltrate the enemy's cities and forums and plant the seeds of discord and sedition. These agents were acting on behalf of the Muslim authority at war, and therefore were not considered as lying against or denouncing the tenants of Islam.

They were "legitimate" mujahedeen, whose mission was to undermine the enemy's resistance and level of mobilization. One of their major objectives was to cause a split among the enemy's camp while downplaying the issues related to Islam ("Oh, I am not religious." "Oh, that is not Islam, you are mistaken, there is so much misinformation." "Oh, it is in the interpretation." "Brother, Islam is all about peace and love and music just like in the 60s.") In many instances, they convinced their targeted audiences that Jihad is not aimed at them, that indigenous people are not targeted. Meanwhile the (allegedly) "un Islamic" Muslims continued their attacks on the target's property and life (e.g. Lashkar-e Toyiba, Mujahideen and Osama Bin Laden's
declaration of war against innocent American civilians).

They convinced many Jews that they will be protected from Christians, and they convinced many Christians that Jews were the mortal enemies, because they killed Issa (Jesus). They convinced the Aramaics, Copts, and Hebrews that the enemy is Greece, and signed peace agreements with the Bysantines Greeks at the expense of Maronite Aramaics, etc.

They convinced the knitted diversity of India to degrade into civil war by introduction of a variant Buddhist / mystical Islam (Sufism which is decried as "deviant Islam" used to ease the transition of new recruits from local communities) creating divisions (based on Muslim - Non Muslim) eventually fomenting unrest and chaos in the land to prepare it for waves of armed Invasion (Mohammad bin Qasim, Mahmud Ghaznavi, etc.).

Even today, India is bitterly divided and getting slowly Islamised as battle lines form between hordes of overzealous Muslims (armed and trained in madrasahs) and the more pacifist civilians of urban dwellings.

This Jihadic agency of subversion was one of the most fascinating and efficient arms of the conquest. In less than four decades, the Middle East fell to the Arab-Islamic rule [since Arab society was divided again between pagan and Muslim resulting in nephews and sons killing their uncles and fathers in cold blood] followed by North Africa and Central Asia [this was the era of hordes like tribal conquests where barbaric savages invaded pacifist civilians in towns of major civilizations; the same scenario replayed itself against the Arab-Islamic world with the Invasion of the Mongolian hordes].

Al-Taqiyah was a formidable weapon, used by the first dynasties and strategists. Today, scholars may identify it as deception. But the Jihadic deception was and still is more powerful than the James Bondian methods of Western classical intelligence tactics, for the simple reason that it has a civilizational, global dimension versus the narrow State interest of the regular Western subversive

Al-Taqiyah is still in use today (and is widely practised and acknowledged by the Shi'ite sect) but not necessarily State-organized. Arab-Islamic missionaries are slowly converting the disillusioned criminal classes of the Western world by feeding them a Western "moderate" version of Islam (at the same time denouncing the actions of Muslims in the rest of the world as Un Islamic e.g. Taliban, GIA & FIA [Armed Islamic Front] of Algeria, Hamas, Lashkar -e Toyiba, Bin Laden and company, etc.)

It is done to prevent the new converts from seeing the real face of Islam; at least until their faith or mental conditioning is strong enough to make them turn against their own country and people.

A good example is the growing influence of Islamists in the Americas. On the one hand, American embassies, trade facilities, soldiers and intelligence infrastructures are under attack (but denounced as un-Islamic for the benefit of the new American converts).

On the other hand, the multiplying Islamic community (due to illegal immigration, paper marriages, religious visas granted to the religious men) attempts to pass itself off as "peace loving" and patriotic. In their own circles, the same community will liberally and violently denounce America, the West and its values (freedom, individualism, secularism, capitalism, scientific materialism, benign rehabilitation of criminals, prevention of cruelty against animals, women and gay rights).

One can easily detect Taqiyah in the two discourses used by Islamist strategists. On the one hand, one comprehensive Islamist theory is attempting to mobilize the Middle East, and sometimes Western Christian leaders and intellectuals, against "evil Jews".

They are forming alliances with everyone from Animal Rights' groups (to attack the Jewish tradition of slaughter which is ironically similar in cruelty to the Islamic way) to Far Right fundamentalists (to push for censorship of critiques of Islam and attack every forward thinking movement like women's rights and gay rights).

We see considerable success on that level. And on the other hand, another Islamist comprehensive theory is attempting - with success also - to mobilize the Jews against "evil and pagan Christians".

One can easily detect the sophisticated work of Taqiyah, for the strategic objective of Islamists is to destroy the foundations of the non Muslim civilizations, as a prelude to the defeat of an isolated Israel, India, United States of America, Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Russia, Egypt, Afghanistan, etc.

Taqiyah is not a unique phenomenon in history. Many strategists from all backgrounds implemented subversion. But the uniqueness of today's Taqiyah is its success within advanced and sophisticated societies. Taqiyah is winning massively because of the immense lack of knowledge among Western elites, both Jewish and Christian.

For interesting examples of Taqiyah methods, visit Christian discussion groups and forums and note the discourse of Islamist visitors aimed at undermining the Christian perception of Jews, and visit Jewish discussion groups and forums and note the subtle anti-Christian discourse of Islamist visitors. It is really informative and fascinating.


Preventing the West from Understanding Jihad
By Walid Phares

In the years that followed 9/11, two phenomena characterized the Western public's understanding of the terrorists' ideology. The first characteristic stemmed from the statements made by the jihadists themselves. More than ever, Islamist militants and jihadi cadres didn't waste any opportunity to declare, clarify, explain, and detail the meaning of their aqida (doctrine) and their intentions to apply Jihadism by all means possible. Unfortunately for them, though, those extremely violent means changed the international public opinion: the public now was convinced that there was an ideology of Jihadism, and that its adherents meant business worldwide.

From Ayman al Zawahiri in Arabic to Azzam al Amriki in American English, via all of the videotapes made by "martyrs" in Britain, Iraq, and Afghanistan, the public obtained all the evidence necessary. Against all the faulty academic literature of the 1990's, the statements by the jihadists themselves were very convincing.

The second phenomenon of help to the public was the surfacing of a new literature produced by alternative scholars, analysts, journalists, experts, and researchers who, from different backgrounds and countries, filled in some of the gaps is "jihadi studies." Producing books, articles, and blogs from Europe, India, the Middle East, and North America, a combination of Third World-born and Western-issued scholarship began to provide the "missing link" as to what Jihadism is all about. These factors came together to shift the debate from "Jihad is spiritual yoga" to "Why didn't we know it was something else as well?" And this triggered in response one of the last attempts to prevent jihad from being understood.

In the 1990's, apologist literature attempted to convince readers and audiences in the West that jihad was a "spiritual experience only, and not a menace." [1] That explanation has now been shattered by Bin Laden and Ahmedinijad. So in the post-9/11 age, a second strategy to delay public understanding of Jihadism and thereby gain time for its adherents to achieve their goals has evolved. It might be called the "good cop, bad cop" strategy. Over the past few years, a new story began to make inroads in Washington and the rest of the national defense apparatus. A group of academics and interest groups are circulating the idea that in reality jihad can develop in two forms: good jihad and bad jihad.

The practice of not using "Jihad" and "Jihadism" was lately defended by two academics at the National Defense University [2] who based their arguments on a study published by a Washington lobbyist, Jim Guirard.[3] On June 22, 2006, Jim Garamone, writing for the American Forces Press Service, published the study of Douglas Streusand and Harry Tunnel under the title "Loosly Interpreted Arabic terms can promote enemy ideology." Streusand told CNN that "Jihad is a term of great and positive import in Islam. It is commonly defined as striving or struggle, and can mean an internal or external struggle for faith." [4]

The article was posted under the title "Cultural Ignorance Leads to Misuse of Islamic Terms" by the US-based Islamist organization CAIR. [5] Since then the "concept" of deflecting attention away from the study of Jihadism has penetrated large segments of the defense newsletters and is omnipresent in Academia. More troubling though, is the fact that scholars who have seen the strategic threat of al Qaeda and Hezbollah have unfortunately fallen for the fallacy of the Hiraba. Professor Michael Waller of the Institute of World Politics in Washington wrote recently that "Jihad has been hijacked" as he bases his argument on Jim Guirard's lobbying pieces.[6] Satisfied with this trend taking root in the Defense intelligentsia of America, Islamist intellectuals and activists are hurrying to support this new tactic.

The good holy war is when the right religious and political authorities declare it against the correct enemy and at the right time. The bad jihad, called also Hiraba, is the wrong war, declared by bad (and irresponsible) people against the wrong enemy (for the moment), and without an appropriate authorization by the "real" Muslim leadership. According to this thesis, those Muslims who wage a Hiraba, a wrong war, are called Mufsidoon, from the Arabic word for "spoilers." The advocates of this ruse recommend that the United States and its allies stop calling the jihadists by that name and identifying the concept of Jihadism as the problem. In short, they argue that "jihad is good, but the Mufsidoon, the bad guys and the terrorists, spoiled the original legitimate sense."[7]

When researched, it turns out that this theory was produced by clerics of the Wahabi regime in Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood as a plan to prevent jihad and Jihadism from being considered by the West and the international community as an illegal and therefore forbidden activity. It was then forwarded to American- and Western-based interest groups to be spread within the Untied States, particularly within the defense and security apparatus. Such a deception further confuses U.S. national security perception of the enemy and plunges democracies back into the "black hole" of the 1990's. This last attempt to blur the vision of democracies can be exposed with knowledge of the jihadi terror strategies and tactics, one of which is known as Taqiya, the doctrine on deception and deflection. [8]

First, the argument of "good jihad" raises the question of how there can be a legitimate concept of religious war in the twenty-first century to start with. Jihad historically was as "good" as any other religious war over the last 2,000 years. If a "good jihad" is the one authorized by a caliph and directed under his auspices, then other world leaders also can wage a "good crusade" at will, as long as it is licensed by the proper authority. But in fact, all religious wars are proscribed by international law, period.

Second, the authors of this lobbyist-concocted theory claim that a wrong jihad is called a Hiraba. But in Arab Muslim history, a Hiraba (unauthorized warring) was when a group of warriors launched itself against the enemy without orders from the real commander. Obviously, this implies that a "genuine" war against a real enemy does exist and that these hotheaded soldiers have simply acted without orders. Hence this cunning explanation puts "spin" on jihad but leaves the core idea of jihadism completely intact. The "spoilers" depart from the plan, attack prematurely, and cause damage to the caliphate's long-terms plans. These Mufsidoon "fail" their commanders by unleashing a war of their own, instead of waiting for orders.

This scenario fits the relations of the global jihadists, who are the regimes and international groups slowly planning to gain power against the infidels and the "hotheaded" Osama bin Laden. Thus the promoters of this theory of Hiraba and Mufsidoon are representing the views of classical Wahabis and the Muslim Brotherhood in their criticism of the "great leap forward" made by bin Laden. But by convincing Westerners that al Qaeda and its allies are not the real jihadists but some renegades, the advocates of this school would be causing the vision of Western defense to become blurred again so that more time could be gained by a larger, more powerful wave of Jihadism that is biding its time to strike when it chooses, under a coherent international leadership.

Dr Walid Phares is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a visiting scholar at the European Foundation for Democracy. This piece was adapted from his recently published book The War of Ideas: Jihadism against Democracy.

[1] See John Esposito, The Islamic Threat: Myth or Reality? 3rd edition. (New York: Oxford University Press) 1999.

[2] May 23, 2006

[3] "Hiraba Versus Jihad," the American Muslim. August 2003.

[4] See Henry Shuster, "Words in War," CNN, October 19, 2006.

[5] Quoting the American Forces Press Service on June 29, 2006.

[6] Michael Waller. "Making Jihad Work for America." The Journal for International Security Affairs. Spring 2006

[7] (7) See James Fallows, "Declaring Victory," Atlantic Monthly (September 2006).

[8] (8) According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, Taqiya: "spelled Taqiyah, Arabic Taqiyah ("self-protection"), in Islam, [is] the practice of concealing one's belief and foregoing ordinary religious duties when under threat of death or injury to oneself or one's fellow Muslims. The Qu'ran allows Muslims to profess friendship with the unbelievers (3:28) and even outwardly to deny their faith (16:106), if doing so would save them from imminent danger," on the condition that their hearts remain attached to faith. Also see Larry Stirling, "On Taqiya' and ‘Fatwas,'" San Diego Source, September 25, 2006; also Walid Phares, "al-Taqiyah: The Muslim Method of Conquest," Freeman Center for Strategic Studies, December 1997.

Page Printed from:
at March 15, 2009 - 09:38:05 PM EDT

Friday, March 13, 2009

Iran Going Nuclear--Fast!

Israeli Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin

Israeli military intelligence chief: Iran has crossed technological threshold in drive for nuclear bomb

Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin, head of Israeli military intelligence AMAN, confirmed at the weekly government session in Jerusalem Sunday, March 8, that Iran had crossed the technological threshold to a nuclear bomb capability and could decide at any time to go into production.

The Israeli intelligence chief said Iran continues to accumulate hundreds of kilos of low-grade enriched uranium and buying time with diplomacy with the West for consummating its military nuclear program.

Tehran TV disclosed Sunday that Iran had test fired a new long-range missile.

Yadlin's evaluation matched that of Adm. Mike Mullen, Chairman of the US Chiefs of Staff, who said last week: "Iran likely has enough nuclear fuel stockpiled to make a bomb."

Yadlin warned that the Palestinian unity talks resuming in Cairo Tuesday, March 10, were a vehicle for Hamas to break out of international isolation.
posted at Debkafile on 08 Mar.'09
[color emphasis mine. lw]

US Intel does not rule out Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapon from abroad
DEBKAfile Special Report
March 10, 2009, 1:50 PM (GMT+02:00)

US intelligence chief Dennis Blair sounds alarm

In testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee, US intelligence chief Dennis Blair warned that it would be difficult to convince Iran to give up its quest for nuclear weapons by diplomatic means. By 2010, he estimated, Tehran would have enough fissile material for a weapon. More...

Washington experts: Iran has fissile material for 50 nuclear bombs
DEBKAfile Special Report
March 8, 2009, 11:29 AM (GMT+02:00)

On March 4, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy published a paper with two important disclosures:

Iran has enough fissile material available for making up to 50 nuclear bombs and Tehran can go from low enriched uranium to weapons-grade uranium in a relative brief period of time, perhaps a year or so.

Israeli officials, while evading action to curb a nuclear-armed Iran, now go about suggesting that the Jewish state can live in its shadow.

Thursday, March 12, 2009

An "Even-Handed" Arbiter for the Israel vs. Arabs "Peace"?

The infamous "Quartet" fiddles on . . .

A "Palestinian" Woman shows the Artbiter a "Palestinian" Undergarment
in hopes of Further Swaying the Arbiter in the Arabs' Direction

Photo originally captioned as Tony Blair talks to a Palestinian woman in traditional clothes at the merchandise exhibition in the West Bank city of Bethlehem Photo: EPA

Is the "Arbiter" an "Even-Handed" Broker?

Blair served for eleven months as international envoy for Palestinian development

Blair and his family have spent several family holidays at Sharm as guests of Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president.

Obadiah Shoher at Samson Blinded holds the following:

Blair cannot possibly arbitrate our conflict with Arabs because of self-interest; as if real conflicts could be arbitrated at all. Britain consistently takes pro-Arab position in foreign relations. British economic interests lie with oil-producing Muslims. British strategic partnerships are with Arab countries. Britain sought to prevent Israeli state from coming into being and usually did not oppose UN’s anti-Semitic resolutions.


Is there an arbiter acceptable to Israel? The defeatist establishment accepted even the most biased arbiter, the Quartet. A Jewish government would have rejected any arbiter because we want the land rather than justice for Arabs; let the Americans restore justice to their Native Indians first. But an impartial arbiter is impossible to find: since Arabs are more numerous than Jews, more important strategically, and possess oil, any governmental arbiter would favor them.


. . . an impartial arbiter is impossible to find: since Arabs are more numerous than Jews, more important strategically, and possess oil, any governmental arbiter would favor them.


and the

Original post by Obadiah Shoher at Samson Blinded as "Down With The Queen"

Gentleman Wankers Off on a Spree . . .
(Tony Blair is in the Back Row, 3rd from the Right)

Norway Funds NGO's that Support Israel's Enemies

[NGO's = Non-Governmental Organizations]

Also see IMRA's Press Release: Norwegian Government Funds Fuel Mid East Conflict who provided the link to the following:

New Report: Norwegian Government Funds Fuel Mid East Conflict

The Norwegian government provides tens of millions of Norwegian kroner (NOK) annually to politicized NGOs that operate in the Palestinian Authority and Gaza. Some of these NGOs are involved in anti-Israel boycott campaigns and the Stop the Wall Campaign in Norway.

Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA), which received NOK 49 million from the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) in 2007 for its work in with the Palestinians, accused Israel of “war crimes” and “collective punishment,” is active in the Stop the Wall Campaign, uses “apartheid” rhetoric, and supported the so-called Free Gaza Movement. NPA also funds other anti-Israel NGOs and partners with them.

The Norwegian Aid Committee (NORWAC) receives MFA humanitarian funds for emergency medical assistance. A NORWAC representative, Dr. Mads Gilbert has engaged in radical propaganda, including justifying the 9/11 attacks and false claims on the Gaza conflict.

The Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) and the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) partnered with Palestinian "right of return" NGO Badil on a report on the security barrier. The report labels the barrier a "crime against humanity," and does not call for a halt to the terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians that led to the barrier’s construction.

Norwegian Church Aid supports many NGOs with anti-Israel agendas, including Bat Shalom and EAPPI, and is an "important affiliate" of the Stop the Wall Campaign in Norway. NCA attacked the Norwegian government for refusing to transfer money to the "Hamas government" in Gaza.

The MFA funds Israeli NGOs B'Tselem, PCATI, HaMoked, and Gisha. The Norwegian Representative Office to the Palestinian Authority supports extreme groups Al Haq, Al Mezan, PCHR, and Miftah. During the Gaza conflict, these NGOs condemned Israel, misrepresenting international humanitarian law to delegitimize Israeli self-defense measures.

NORAD supports a number of NGOs active in "anti-wall" campaigns, including the Norwegian Assosiation of NGOs for Palestine, the "coordinator for the Norwegian Tear-Down the Wall Campaign and the Norwegian Boycott Israel Campaign."

-------- ENDS ------------

[IMRA] Editor's Notes:
Please click the link below to view the full NGO Monitor report on
Norwegian government funding
NGO Monitor was founded to promote transparency, critical analysis and debate on the political role of human rights organizations. For more information, see our website at
Other recent publications and reports by NGO Monitor include:-Amnesty's Gaza Report: Abolishing Israel's Right to Self-Defense - February 25, 2009
'Hijacked by Hatred': British NGOs Use Christmas for Anti-Israel Attacks - December 23, 2008
NGO 'Lawfare': Exploitation of Courts in the Arab-Israeli Conflict - October 8, 2008NGO Monitor's Executive Director is Prof. Gerald Steinberg.
Members of NGO Monitor's International Advisory Board include Elie Wiesel, Prof Alan Dershowitz, Sir Martin Gilbert and R. James Woolsey
For further information, comment or interviews contact Dan Kosky+972 (0) 546-305-504
NGO Monitor - 1, Ben Maimon Blvd. - Jerusalem 92262 - Israel - T: +972-2-566-1020F: +972-77-511-7030E:

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Whose Patriarchs? And What To Do About the Pretenders . . .

. . . to the Legacy of the Bastard*

Prayer books at holy site vandalized


Jewish settlers accuse Palestinians of destroying prayer, psalm books at Cave of Patriarchs
Efrat Weiss

Police launched an investigation Monday after Jewish settlers in Hebron accused Palestinians of destroying prayer and psalm books in the Cave of the Patriarchs.

Spokesman for the Jewish settlement in Hebron, Noam Arnon, claimed a double standard was at play. "If Quran books had been torn up I have no doubt the case would be handled drastically and immediately, but when it's damage done to Jewish holy sites there is disregard and whitewashing," he said.

Every year Jewish and Palestinians worshippers are allowed 10 days at the holy cave. On Monday Jewish prayer-goers arrived to find their holy books vandalized during one of the Muslim days of worship at the cave.

According to Arnon, the incident was not the first to occur. "After every such day we gather shards and appraise the damage. This time the damage occurred to prayer and psalm books; in the past it was mezuzot, furniture, pipes, and faucets," he said.

He added that complaints had been filed before, to no avail. "No one has ever been interrogated or brought to justice. No sanctions exist to prevent such incidents," he said.

MK Uri Ariel (National Union) responded to the incident by saying, "The barbaric behavior of the Hebron rioters, who destroyed holy books in the Cave of the Patriarchs, proves once again that they are an agitating and destructive presence that finds itself among cultured people."

He added that the next government, in which his party is predicted to participate, would strive to secure full Jewish control over the holy site.

Police stated that an investigation has been launched. So far no arrests have been made.,7340,L-3683844,00.html

Prayer books at holy site vandalized
Jewish settlers accuse Palestinians of destroying prayer, psalm books at Cave of Patriarchs
Efrat Weiss
03.09.09, 23:38 / Israel News,7340,L-3683844,00.html

Desecration of Holy Books at Ma'arat HaMachpela in Hebron
The Jewish Community of Hebron/Arutz 7-Israel National News/Ynet
March 09, 2009

( Muslims in the city of Hevron were allowed to access the entire Tomb of the Patriarchs (Maarat HaMachpelah) this week in honor of the birthday of Mohammed, whom Muslims revere as a prophet. Worshipers took advantage of the opportunity to desecrate Jewish holy texts, including prayer books and books of Psalms.

The damage was discovered on Monday when Jews were allowed to return to the prayer halls usually set aside for Jewish use. The desecration caused upset and anger among the returning Jewish worshipers.

Jewish community spokesman David Wilder said such damage is unfortunately common. Jews have often returned after Muslims made use of the entire holy place to discover ruined holy books, damaged mezuzah cases and other destruction, he said. Jews try to remove all holy objects from the sanctuary before turning it over to Muslim use, he explained, but books are occasionally accidentally left behind.

The damage is not accidental, however, Wilder clarified. “They know exactly what it is that they are doing,” he said of those who destroy the holy texts.

The IDF is aware of such incidents, he added, as video cameras in the building allow them to see what takes place in the prayer halls. “It's very unfortunate that more care isn't taken to prevent these things from happening,” he said.

Hevron's Jews are now calling on the IDF to refuse the next request for Muslim access to the Jewish prayer halls. If the desecration is not met with punishment, such acts will continue, they say.
© Copyright
*referring to Ishmael, Abraham's older son by an Egyptian handmaiden

The Arabs (Moslems) have no claim on Ha Machpela!


References at:

"there is no historical evidence for the assertion that Abraham or Ishmael was ever in Mecca, and if there had been such a tradition it would have to be explained how all memory of the Old Semitic name Ishmael (which was not in its true Arabian form in Arabian inscriptions and written correctly with an initial consonant Y) came to be lost. The form in the Quran is taken either from Greek or Syriac sources." (Islam, Alfred Guillaume, 1956, p 26-27, 61-62)

The Ishmaelites are mentioned as a distinct tribe in the Assyrian records. They later intermarried with and were absorbed by the Midianites and other local tribes. In Gen. 37:25-28; 39:1, the Ishmaelites are called the Midianites and in Judges 8:22-24 cf. 7:1f, the Midianites are called the Ishmaelites. The identification cannot be made any stronger.

Arabia was already populated by the descendants of Cush and Shem long before Abraham or Ishmael were born (Gen. 10:7). Their cities and temples have been well documented by archeologists.

If all the Arab people descended from Ishmael as Muhammad claimed, where did all the original Arabs go? What happened to them? Who did Ishmael marry if the Arabs did not already exist? If Arabia was unpopulated, who built Mecca? Since he lived there, obviously it existed before he was born. The facts speak for themselves. The Arab people existed before, during, and after Ishmael moved started roaming the wilderness of North Arabia.

The descendants of Ishmael were scattered in Northern Arabia from the wilderness of Shur to the ancient city of Havilah. They were absorbed by the local tribes such as the Midianites (Gen. 37:25-28; 39:1; Judges 8:24). There is no historical or archeological evidence that Ishmael went south to Mecca and became the "Father" of the Arab race. Some modern Arab scholars admit that before Muhammad, Qahtan was said to be the "Father" of the Arab people, not Ishmael.

The Abrahamic Covenant was given only to Isaac and to his descendants. Ishmael and the other sons of Abraham were explicitly excluded by God from having any part of the covenant made with Abraham. (Gen. 18:18-21)

"There is a prevalent notion that the Arabs, both of the south and north, are descended from Ishmael; and the passage in Gen. xvi.12, "he (Ishmael) shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren," is often cited as if it were a prediction of that national independence which, upon the whole, the Arabs have maintained more than any other people. But this supposition is founded on a misconception of the original Hebrew, which runs literally, "he shall before the faces of all his brethren," i.e., (according to the idiom above explained, in which "before the face" denotes the east), the habitation of his posterity shall be "to the east" of the settlements of Abraham’s’ other descendants...These prophecies found their accomplishment in the fact of the sons of Ishmael being located, generally speaking to the east of the other descendants of Abraham, whether of Sara or of Ketuah. But the idea of the southern Arabs being of the posterity of Ishmael is entirely without foundation, and seems to have originated in the tradition invented by Arab vanity that they, as well as the Jews, are of the seed of Abraham--a vanity which, besides disfiguring and falsifying the whole history of the patriarch and his son Ishmael, has transferred the scene of it from Palestine to Mecca." (McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, (Vol. I:339)

Encyclopedia of Islam Myths: Arabs are not descendants of Ishmael

Origin and Identity of the Arabs
"Early the next morning Abraham took some food and a skin of water and gave them to Hagar. He set them on her shoulders and then sent her off with the boy. She went on her way and wandered in the desert of Beersheba. When the water in the skin was gone, she put the boy under one of the bushes. Then she went off and sat down nearby, about a bowshot away, for she thought, ‘I cannot watch the boy die.’ And as she sat there nearby, she began to sob. God heard the boy crying, and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven and said to her, "What is the matter, Hagar? Do not be afraid; God has heard the boy crying as he lies there. Lift the boy up and take him by the hand, for I will make him into a great nation.' Then God opened her eyes and she saw a well of water. So she went and filled the skin with water and gave the boy a drink. God was with the boy as he grew up. He lived in the desert and became an archer. While he was living in the Desert of Paran, his mother got a wife for him from Egypt." Genesis 21:13-21

In his rebuttal to Dr. Robert A. Morey's book Islamic Invasion, W. Aliyyuddin Shareef, is honest enough to admit:
"In pre-Islamic times Ishmael was never mentioned as the Father of the Arabs." (Shareef, In response to Robert Morey's Islamic Invasion, pp. 3-4; bold emphasis ours)

Writer Camilla Adang, in a footnote from her book Muslim Writers on Judaism and the Hebrew Bible from Ibn Rabban to Ibn Hazm, mentions:
... Ishmael is considered the progenitor of the Arabs. Dagon (1981) has shown that this idea is an Islamic construction AND THAT NO CONNECTION BETWEEN ISHMAEL AND THE ARABS HAD EVER BEEN MADE IN THE PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD. Already in the first Islamic century, however, Ishmael came to symbolize the Islamic Umma, and biblical passages about Ishmael were taken to refer to Muhammad, the Arabs, or the Muslim community. (Adang, p. 147, fn. 37: E.J. Brill Academic Publishers; August 1997 ISBN: 9004100342; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Former Muslim turned to atheist Ibn Warraq writes:
We are told that [Abraham] was born in Chaldea, and that he was the son of a poor potter who earned his living by making little clay idols. It is scarcely credible that the son of this potter went to Mecca, 300 leagues away in the tropics, by way of impassable deserts.

If he was a conqueror he no doubt aimed at the fine country of Assyria; and if he was only a poor man, as he is depicted, he founded no kingdoms in foreign parts. — Voltaire

For the historian, the Arabs are no more the descendents of Ishmael, son of Abraham, than the French are of Francus, son of Hector. — Maxime Rodinson

It is virtually certain that Abraham never reached Mecca. — Montgomery Watt

The essential point ... is that, where objective fact has been established by sound historical methods, it must be accepted. — Montgomery Watt

Ishmael Is Not the Father Of Muhammad’ Revisited.

Arabs Moslems lay claim to all Jewish Holy Sites

Therefore, Arab Moslems Have No Right to Ha Machpela

It's Time They Were Booted from this Site

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Must Israel Change its Relationship with the United States?

The following comes from Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Concerning Forthcoming Eidelberg Reports

1) For its own sake as well as for the sake of its American friends, Israel must change its benign relationship to the United States.

2) The American Government has become an overt, and not merely a covert, enemy of Israel.

3) It is a mistake to believe that the so-called right wing has 65 Knesset seats.

4) Netanyahu is desperate to include Kadima and/or Labor MKs in his coalition since more than five members of his coalition do not support a Palestinian state.

5) A Palestinian state means nothing less than a sovereign Arab-Islamic state in Judea and Samaria and would therefore pose a constant existential threat to Israel.

6) Regardless of his or her subjective feelings, anyone that advocates a Palestinian state must be deemed—from an objective point or view—an enemy of Israel and should be treated accordingly.

7) Certain members of the Knesset should form a strategy board to reassess Israel’s relationship to the United States, and to determine what must be done to prevent the Israel’s Government from betraying the Jewish people as it did in 1993 via the Oslo Agreement and again in 2005 via unilateral disengagement from Gaza.

Reacting to an International War Against Israel

Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Caroline Glick reports:

Ever since the outgoing Kadima government ended Operation Cast Lead in Gaza on January 20, the Palestinians have steadily stepped-up their missile war against Israel. Over the weekend the IDF acknowledged that six weeks later, daily Palestinian missile barrages against Israel have returned to pre-Operation Cast Lead levels. Moreover, the IDF warned that over the past six weeks, Hamas and its sister terror groups have rebuilt their missile arsenals both through imports of Iranian arms from Egypt and through local production lines. They have also brought in fairly advanced anti-aircraft missiles capable of shooting down IAF helicopters. [Nevertheless,] representatives from 80 countries and international organizations convened in Sharm el-Sheikh to pledge billions of dollars in aid to Hamas-controlled Gaza (Jerusalem Post, March 3, 2009).

Donor nations, including the United States, Europe, and Saudi Arabia, agreed to give a total of $4.481 billion to Gaza, that is, to Hamas via the Palestinian Authority, collaborators in the terrorist war against Israel.

Even if much of this money helps rebuild Gaza, any candid person knows that much of it will be used by these terrorist organizations to purchase weapons to be employed against Israel. Indeed, the donation of this money to the Palestinian Authority—the umbrella organization for various terrorist groups, including Fatah and Tanzim— constitutes an additional incentive on the part of these terrorists to wage further war against Israel. Terrorism pays!

It follows that the donor nations in question have become covert if not overt allies of Israel’s enemies. They must therefore be treated as belligerents in the terrorist war against Israel.

There is only one way to respond to these enemies, and that is to employ a principle repeatedly advocated by Benjamin Netanyahu, namely, “reciprocity,” which, in the present case, requires Israel to wage war these nations. Of course, Israel will do nothing of the kind.

Let me nonetheless convey some critical information from Robert Baer, Sleeping with the Devil:

If [some power] were to simultaneously hit only five of the many sensitive points in Saudi Arabia’s downstream oil system, they could put the Saudis out of the oil-producing business for about two years. A commando boat attack could do the job. Simply blowing of Abqaiq’s up the East-West pipeline’s Pump Station One to smithereens—or a single jumbo jet with a suicide bomber at the controls, hijacked during takeoff from Dubai and crashed into the heart of Ras Tanura, would be enough to bring the world’s oil-addicted economies to their knees, America’s along with them.
Consider America. By giving a reported $900 million to the terrorist organizations called the Palestinian Authority, the United States is violating international law. Let me state the issue with the help of Louis Rene Beres, a professor of international law:

There is a long-standing rule in international law known as NULLUM CRIMEN SINE POENA, "No crime without a punishment." It is codified directly in many different authoritative sources, and is also deducible from the binding Nuremberg Principles (1950) [that were applied to Nazi war criminals]. According to Principle 1: "Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment."

Terrorism is an established crime under international law; one of the very worst. The precise offenses that comprise this crime can be found at THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON THE SUPPRESSION OF TERRORISM. Palestinian terrorists are guilty of crimes of war and crimes against humanity — crimes so egregious that the perpetrators are known in law as HOSTES HUMANI GENERIS, "Common enemies of humankind."
International law presumes solidarity between states in the fight against all crime, including the crime of terrorism. This presumption is mentioned as early as the seventeenth century in Hugo Grotius' THE LAW OF WAR AND PEACE.
Although Israel has clear jurisdiction to punish crimes committed on its territory (the primary basis of jurisdiction under international law is determined by territorial location of the offense), it also has the right to act under broader principles of "universal jurisdiction." Its case for such universal jurisdiction, which derives from an expectation of interstate solidarity, is found at the four Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949.
These Conventions unambiguously impose upon the High Contracting Parties the obligation to punish "Grave Breaches" of their settled rules.
Instead of punishing “Grave Breaches” of international law, the United States and other nations are rewarding terrorists under the facade of humanitarian aid to the Palestinian Authority—to repeat, an aggregation of terrorist organizations.

Even if I were not an American tax-payer—besides, I don’t like my money going to terrorists, i.e., my potential murderers—I would strongly oppose this violation of international law by the Government of the United States. Although the U.S. Congress has in the past allocated hundreds of millions of dollars to the Palestinian Authority, I invite experts in American law to investigate more thoroughly the legality and constitutionality of such allocations.

The overriding issue, however, is that United States is aiding Israel’s Arab enemies and may thus be deemed a belligerent under the laws of war. I believe that such action on the part of the United States is contrary to the interests of the American people, that such action contradicts America’s war against international terrorism, and that such action constitutes a betrayal of America’s only reliable ally in the Middle East, Israel.

Monday, March 2, 2009

Netanyahu: Lobbyist for a Stateless Arab State

by Paul Eidelberg

In May 1996, Benjamin Netanyahu became prime minister of Israel in the country’s first national election for that office. He defeated Shimon Peres, the architect of the disastrous Oslo or Israel-PLO Agreement. Netanyahu thus had a mandate to scuttle Oslo. He himself had previously said Oslo would lead to war, not peace.

During his premiership, Netanyahu’s office issued daily reports of PLO violations of Oslo. He nonetheless failed to abrogate Oslo even though Israel had every legal and moral right to do so. Unreported, however, are the political and psychological consequences of Netanyahu’s timidity: By adhering to Oslo despite constant terrorist attacks, Netanyahu virtually legitimized Arab terrorism. People abroad became increasingly indifferent to terrorism in general, and to the murder of Jews in particular. They were conditioned to Israeli passivity until Operation Cast Iron Lead, and then the ugliest hatred of Israel erupted.

Netanyahu is partly responsible for this hatred. For by failing to abrogate Oslo as soon the PLO violated its agreement with Israel, he fostered worldwide acceptance of Arab terror and then worldwide outrage against Israel’s belated retaliation in Operation Cast Iron Lead. No one is saying this, neither critics like Moshe Feiglin, nor supporters like Caroline Glick.

Moral responsibility as well as political accountability has been buried in this country along with 1,700 Jewish victims of Arab terror. That’s why Shimon Peres is President of Israel, why Olmert remains Prime Minister, and why none but moral clods or third-rate politicians contested Netanyahu’s return to the premiership. Par for the course in Israel.

Without constitutional checks and balances, without a constitution that could be taught in schools and thus enlighten the public, prime ministers, like Olmert, don’t have to worry about losing their jobs, and they can ignore public opinion with impunity. Thus, on September 27, 1996, Prime Minister Netanyahu said on CNN that no one ever thought he would meet with Yasser Arafat, which means that the people who voted for Netanyahu not only opposed such a meeting, but also its logical consequence, the implementation of the Israel-PLO Agreement! Netanyahu unwittingly admitted that he had betrayed his voters!

(Netanyahu is not unique. Sharon betrayed the nation when he adopted Labor’s policy of disengagement; and Rabin violated his pledge to the nation not to negotiate with the PLO.)

Netanyahu is more subtle. Despite his warning that Oslo would lead to war, he said, "We always intended to implement the Israel-PLO Accords," except that he insists on “reciprocity." What can reciprocity mean? Perhaps this: Israel gives Arabs Judea and Samaria on which to establish a state, and the Arabs give Israel a signed document that this state will have no army, will not make treaties with any country it wants, will not control its own airspace and water supplies?

Can you imagine the Arabs agreeing to this “reciprocity”—this stateless state? Can you imagine the Islamic world remaining silent about this warmed-up version of the Begin Autonomy Plan? Any Arab that agreed to head this stateless state would be committing suicide. Does Netanyahu take Arabs for fools? Or is he taking Jews for fools?
Like other unprincipled politicians, Netanyahu has trapped himself in a charade that requires him to negotiate with terrorists committed to Israel’s destruction. His latest spin is that he will not negotiate with the Palestinian Authority if it includes Hamas—as if Fatah consisted of Canadians rather than Jihadists.

His advisers say he will “lobby Secretary of State Hillary Clinton … against US recognition of a Palestinian unity government that includes Hamas” (Jerusalem Post, February 26). How charming! In this illusionary democracy, the people elected not a prime minister so much as a lobbyist who is going to charm Hillary with his illusionary Palestinian state!

Let’s get serious. Can this spin master compete with relentless and cunning foes like Fatah and Hamas? Can he choose a foreign minister and a defense minister that can reverse the disastrous course of Oslo when he himself voted against its abrogation? Can his foreign minister and defense minister have the conviction and courage to say an Arab state on Jewish land is theologically unacceptable and strategically suicidal?

But since Judea-Samaria is not a theological problem for secularists, perhaps Netanyahu will have them say something like this: “Let’s not rush into this two-state business. We need two decades to make the Palestinians prosperous, peace-loving, bourgeois democrats.” Perhaps he can enlist Natan Sharansky to help him? Just the man to enlighten President Obama about a democracy run by Arabs who taught their children to hate Jews and emulate suicide bombers!

Yes, but Obama has a short-term schedule. As for Fatah and Hamas, they are now playing the “soft-cop-hard-cop” routine. Theirs is the Soviet strategy of the "uninterrupted attack." This strategy uses not only arms but peace offensives, diplomatic pressure, psychological warfare, and manipulation of the media to emasculate the enemy prior to the coup de grace. Never let the enemy relax—this is the essence of the Arab war against Israel, and the Arabs will use Israel’s Left to facilitate their objective.

Israel's leaders don’t know how to fight such a war. They overemphasize the role of PR, and this requires a lot of time when time, in warfare, as in physics, is linked to space. Moreover, unlike the Arabs, who have a forward or offensive strategy, Israel has a strategy of territorial retreat. It’s called “territory for peace.”

But peace with bellicose Islam is a contradiction in terms. Peace with Islam would require Muslims to renounce the ethos of Jihad. It would necessitate the transformation of Islamic civilization. Imagine Netanyahu winning the long distance race in the next Olympics.

Netanyahu has resigned himself to a Palestinian state—and this means nothing less than a sovereign state. He will now have the support of Israel Beiteinu’s chairman Avigdor Lieberman, whose Jewish convictions are as deep as a billboard.

That’s what Oslo is all about. Oslo means the establishment of a Palestinian state on the one hand, and the dissolution of the Jewish state on the other.

Let’s be honest: Israel is supposed to be the God-bearing nation. Anything less is a world-historical fraud, which will prompt more and more gentiles to call for Israel’s elimination. You’re seeing the world’s loss of Israel in America, where the Courts have banned the Ten Commandments from the public sphere.

Leaving the Jewish vision aside, can Netanyahu act on the time-proven principle that nations respect strength, not weakness? Hence, can he go on the offensive against Israel’s enemies and so-called friends?

Does he have the backbone not only to abrogate Oslo, but also to declare that any nation that aids Hamas violates international law and will be deemed a belligerent?

Does this sound truculent? Rabbis have said, “Don’t irritate the goyim?” But Israel’s very existence irritates the goyim. Good Christians will tell you that. Israel should therefore give nations solid cause for being not merely irritated but fearful. Polls say Israel poses the greatest threat to peace. Perhaps it would be wise for Israel to be worthy of that canard? If so, Israel should then be utterly unpredictable, a regime that, if threatened, can set the Middle East ablaze.

Am I sounding mad? But how often is it said that if Israel does not agree to a Palestinian state the Middle East will explode? This means that the only way to prevent this explosion is for Israel to commit suicide.

Better the Middle East should explode. The United States will do nothing about it, if only because America is dependent on an oil rich regime within striking distance of Israel.

Can Netanyahu rise to the challenge and gather a small group of people to wage a sustained multifaceted war against Israel’s enemies?

The provocation or pretext will come any day. Can he eradicate the entire network of terrorist groups west of the Jordan River and thereby cow the enemies beyond?

Can he stop being a politician and a pacifist and become a statesman and a conqueror?

Of course, I am tilting at windmills. Netanyahu will remain Bibi, won’t he? But who knows? Who knows what Israel is capable of doing given the existential threat of Iran. Perhaps Netanyahu will rise to the occasion.

Sunday, March 1, 2009

A Conversation With Avigdor Lieberman

Interview by Lally Weymouth at the Washington Post
Sunday, March 1, 2009; Page B01 readers have posted 25 comments about this item.
View All Comments »