When last we mentioned Tig’s particular, ah, ailment, it was under control. The antibiotic ear goop that the vet prescribed had cleared up his gastrointestinal upsets, and the kitty flatulence was conquered.

Or so we thought.

Tig started getting more fragrant towards the end of Mom’s visit. It became particularly noticeable when he was playing, and moreso when it was time to clean the litterboxes. So I called the vet, and the vet prescribed the pill form of the antibiotic this time. He thinks it’s a parasite. I think it’s extraordinarily annoying. Tig can’t be happy about it, either, as he is the one who had to deal with the aftermath. But oh. my. gosh, he stinks. He reeks. It’s horrible. And the worst part about it is, Tig simply loves to cuddle, thus reducing the nose-to-fart ratio.

He has been given many nicknames since this started, including: Fartster, Fartman, My Little Stinker, Stinkbomb, and tonight, Chris suggested His Imperial Fartness (or His Royal Fartness, as Tig is really not the imperial type). Then Chris suggested you all pitch in and help me out with more nicknames.

Go to town, folks.

He’s only been on the antibiotics since Thursday, so (sigh) it’s going to be a bit longer before they kick in effectively. And he’s on them for about three weeks. The vet is trying to knock those little parasites out completely. Oy. I really need this to happen. My sense of smell is most acute in the morning, and that’s when Tig climbs into bed to cuddle. And then farts.

Really. It’s just a bit much. I have never had a flatulent cat before, and I never want to have it again.

His Imperial Fartness, looking like he’s about to toot. (In reality, he’s about to leap on a string.)

One of the shining examples of peacemaking in the Middle East always comes back to the 1978 Camp David Accords. Peace between Israel and Egypt is held up as the prize package, even though no other Arab country has waged war on Israel in the intervening years, in spite of not having a signed peace treaty.

But the peace between Egypt and Israel is full of stories like these reported by Commentary’s Eric Trager:

For the most part, tourism between Israel and Egypt has long been a one-way affair. In this vein, Israeli tourism to Egypt peaked in 1999 at 415,000 visitors, whereas Egyptian tourism to Israeli reached a high of merely 28,000 visitors in 1995.

[...] But even for those Egyptians who are financially able to visit Israel and ideologically undeterred, the Egyptian government has done its fair share to build additional barriers to Egyptian-Israeli contact. According to an Egyptian evangelical pastor who asked that his name be withheld, Egyptians who wish to travel to Israel must apply for special single-use passports - a process that automatically places them on an official government register. Upon returning to Egypt, they are frequently questioned by state security officials and closely monitored. Egyptian friends who have expressed their desire to visit Israel have confirmed this account.

Moreover, even when Egyptians seek to interact with Israelis without visiting the Jewish state, Egyptian security services may intervene. One Egyptian academic, who asked that his name be withheld, shared the following story. Recently, he had been invited to an event sponsored by the Israeli Embassy in Cairo, and intended to attend. Shortly before the event, however, Egyptian security services contacted him, “advising” him not to attend - the implication being that there would be retribution if he did otherwise. Apparently, Egyptian security had learned of his intention to attend the event by monitoring his mail.

If there were truly peace between Egypt and Israel, the Egyptian government wouldn’t be preventing its people from so much as attending an event at the Israeli Embassy.

And it is stories like these that are completely ignored by Jimmy Carter and the rest of the Camp David cheerleaders.

I might point out that there has also been this sort of peace between most other Arab nations and Israel since Camp David. And we’re not paying the other countries the $2 billion a year we pay Egypt in aid.

When I saw the following link at Ha’aretz - Aluf Benn: ‘Hamastan’ is prototyope for future Palestinian state, I was surprised. Benn is a committed leftist, and I was surprised that he was acknowledging the danger of strengthening Hamas. Then I read it.

Three years after the disengagement, 15 years after Oslo, Israel faces an independent Palestinian entity with full security and civilian responsibilities for a contiguous area in which there are no Israeli soldiers or settlers. Finally there is someone prepared and able to manage Gaza “with no High Court and no B’Tselem,” as Yitzhak Rabin hoped. Finally there is an authentic Palestinian leadership that rose from the grassroots and demonstrates discipline and enforcement abilities. Finally the buds of mutual deterrence are emerging that may bring calm to the border.

For better or worse, “Hamastan” is the pilot program of the Palestinian state - the laboratory for a permanent-status agreement.

This column isn’t one of despair. Benn really thinks it’s a good idea. In fact he sees it as following another success:

The model for the tahadiyeh is based on the arrangement developed by Ehud Barak and Hassan Nasrallah, who created it around the withdrawal of the Israel Defense Forces from Lebanon in 2000. At its heart is Hezbollah’s willingness to enforce quiet on the Lebanese side of the border without giving up its hostile ideology and bellicose rhetoric. Hamas insisted it would not be the “policeman of the occupation,” and refused to restrain other groups until it gave in to the weapons of hunger and closure and to the temptation of receiving indirect recognition of its rule in exchange for enforcing quiet.

Hamas and Hezbollah are not only Iran’s proxies on Israel borders; every time Israel reaches an agreement with either, they are gearing up for the next conflict. The failure of Israel to insist on the disarming of Hezbollah after 2000 is the cause of the 2006 war. The kidnapping of Regev and Goldwasser wasn’t an isolated incident. It was one more breach of the international border by Hezbollah. Each violation was more brazen, threatening Israel to respond.

Aluf Benn lives in a fantasy world where enemies don’t mean what they say, where Iran isn’t spoiling to control more and more of the Middle East and where there is an acceptable level of terrorism.

Coincidentally, when I saw the Benn article there was another article about a failure to confront evil at an early date, when taking appropriate action might have prevented greater destruction later.
“

Hitler vor Gericht” (Hitler on Trial) explores the 1924 trial of Adolf Hitler in Munich for his part in an abortive coup d’etat that could have earned him the death penalty.

Instead, he served just nine months in prison and was able to rebuild the shattered Nazi party soon after his release.

Had Hitler been given a long sentence, the history of Europe might have been very different, said Ian Kershaw from the University of Sheffield in England.

Living with Hamas and Hezbollah is no prescription for peace and calm. The longer these malignant groups are allowed to thrive, the more damage they will cause. Aluf Benn is an arrogant and blind fool to believe that it’s good thing that Israel’s borders are controlled by these terrorist organizations.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

The Washington Post reports Arab Aid to Palestinians Often Doesn’t Fulfill Pledges.

In 2002, when oil prices were hovering around $21 a barrel, nearly two dozen Arab nations joined to pledge yearly contributions of $660 million to support the Palestinian Authority’s annual budget. Now, even with oil prices more than six times higher and the Palestinian Authority bordering on financial ruin, only a handful of Arab countries are sending even a small portion of the money they promised, according to data examined

Out of 22 Arab nations that made pledges, only three — Algeria, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates — have contributed funds this year, while oil-rich countries such as Libya, Kuwait and Qatar have sent nothing and still owe the Palestinian government more than $700 million in past-due pledges.

The Palestinian Authority uses the contributions to help pay salaries for civil servants, health-care specialists and other workers in the Palestinian territories. European governments, the World Bank and the United States have provided more than three times as much money as Arab countries this year to keep the government afloat, but officials said the Europeans and the World Bank have virtually depleted their resources, leaving a funding gap of about $800 million for the rest of 2008.

First of all, it’s questionable whether this aid even helps the Palestinians. Or does it have the effect of making their government less accountable to its citizens - leading to massive corruption.

Corruption seems to the number one answer why Arab states have not contributed more.

Arab diplomats, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said there is little trust that the Palestinian Authority will use their contributions wisely, even though Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad is a veteran of the International Monetary Fund and, during his time as finance minister, introduced new standards of accountability and financial management. Arab diplomats said they also resent the tight grip that Israel has maintained on the Palestinian territories during the peace talks.

And of course no explanation would do without some gratuitous Israel bashing.

“Most of them make the pledges reluctantly, on the basis that the United States wanted them to do it,” said Shibley Telhami, the Anwar Sadat professor for peace and development at the University of Maryland. “There is frustration that nothing is happening in the peace process, and so they would be throwing good money after bad.”

Telhami professes all kinds of excuses for Arab intransigence against Israel. He does not profess peace, so his title is really deceptive. He doesn’t even consider Palestinian responsibility for the lack of contributions.

The Post provides an interesting graphic accompanying the article. It notes that a number of the countries that pledged support for the Palestinians actually accelerated payment of the aid between 2006 and 2007 after Hamas won the legislative elections. So if they were comfortable making payments that would strengthen Hamas, that undermines their claim that the lack of progress on the peace process is a reason that they’re withholding funds. Clearly they had no problem funding a party opposed to the peace process dedicated to the destruction of Israel. (Aside from that, Fatah funds Hamas.)

According to this table, Arab commitments to the Palestinians since 1999 have just as good a chance of still being commitments as being fully paid. This isn’t really new. (You can go to the ReliefWeb website and put together your own table.)

One of the specific commitments of Saudi Arabia from 2001 was for:
“…supporting the Jerusalem uprising fund.” In other words this aid was designated for funding the so-called “Aqsa intifada.” (It does not indicate if this pledge was fulfilled.) This is one more indication that funding for the Palestinians is often not about nation building or peacemaking but about continuing the fight against Israel.

But if the idea that funding the Palestinian Authority would bring peace suffers from scrutiny of what’s actually given by the Arab world to the Palestinians, another myth is also undermined.

We regularly hear about how the United States is not sufficiently committed to the Palestinian cause; but the United States contributes huge amounts to the Palestinians. It is, of course, a bad investment. But the Americans are backing up their words about supporting a Palestinian state with money. Which is more than what the Arab world is doing.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Elder of Ziyon was likely one of the first bloggers to note Friday’s bombing in Gaza, which brought the death toll of Palestinians killed by Palestinians this year up to 122.

Israel Matzav wondered if there’s a harbinger of civil war in Gaza. LGF makes a similar observation. Meryl noticed a double standard.

But the NYT headline had me wondering.

Blasts in Gaza Stoke Tensions Between Factions

Did the blasts stoke tensions, or reveal them?

Hamas, the Islamic militant organization, blamed the mainstream Fatah for the deadly blast that followed two smaller explosions in Gaza on Friday, issuing a statement accusing the Fatah leadership in the West Bank, led by President Mahmoud Abbas, of concealing “a conspiracy to kill and assassinate and terrorize” Hamas security forces.

In other words, Fatah’s terrorists and assassins are being accused of targeting Hamas’s terrorists and assassins. To me this looks less like a crisis than a win-win situation.

I find it interesting in that the Times’s Jerusalem Bureau Chief was in Gaza last week reporting on a museum, and apparently was unaware of any simmering tensions between Fatah and Hamas. It’s possible that he wasn’t looking for a story on those tensions. Or it’s possible that the tensions weren’t there.

Other than the arrests and threats against Fatah there doesn’t appear to be much movement on this since Friday. For now, I’ll assume that it was an isolated incident and not the start of a bigger conflict between Fatah and Hamas.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

A terrorist’s family sued the government of Israel for damages—for killing the terrorist when he drew a knife and tried to murder a Border Guard. The judges determined that the family are deluded. And they have to pay court costs.

The Haifa District Court ruled Monday against a damages suit filed by the family of a Palestinian who was killed five years ago, while trying to stab a Border Guard officer near city of Umm al-Fahem.

The court ruled that the Border Guard officers present at the time of the incident acted according to procedures when they shot the man, saying there was negligence or wrongdoing on their part; further ruling that the man’s family will pay the State NIS 15,000 (approx. $4,300).

The police investigation determined that the terrrorist was determined to die a “martyr’s” death.

The officers instructed Samudi to lift his shirt, in order to make sure he was not carrying any explosives. When one of the officers approached him – with another providing cover – Samudi drew a knife, yelled “Allahu Akbar,” and began stabbing the officer standing next to him.

An officer sitting in the patrol jeep fired a warning shot in midair, but since Samudi kept stabbing the officer, he than shot and killed him. One of the shots hit the wounded officers, causing him moderate injuries.

Samudi’s family, however, claimed he was shot despite not provoking the officers, adding that once he was shot, the officers proceeded to “confirm the kill.”

The incident was investigated by the Police Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB), which determined the officers were following procedures and ordered the case closed.

A warning shot? When he was stabbing another officer with a knife? You’ve got to be kidding me. He’d be shot dead immediately in America. And deservedly so. I’m surprised they didn’t punish the officer’s partner.

In any case: The definition of chutzpha, indeed.