Why be serious about Syria?

Posted on 03/05/2009 by Soccerdad

With the administration and its fawning media in a tizzy about the warming of relations between the United States and Syria, Bret Stephens warns that Syria really offers nothing to the United States, and that the U.S. engages Bashar Assad at its own peril. Obviously, read the whole thing, but these two paragraphs illustrate who the United States seeks to deal with:

Bashar Assad ascended to power almost immediately upon his father’s death in June 2000. He was then not quite 35 years old, a doctor, trained as an ophthalmologist in Britain, with an attractive British-born wife who had previously worked as an international banker. Surely, it was said, the younger Assad would seek to modernize his country, liberalize its politics, and reach out to his neighbors. There were also predictions that he would not last long in office, that he lacked the toughness and the nerve of his father, and that the ruling establishment was merely biding its time until it could settle on a more suitable officeholder.

Neither prediction was borne out. In his first year in office, Assad allowed what came to be known as the “Damascus Spring.” Courageous Syrian intellectuals emerged from obscure corners to call for political reform and democracy, and Assad himself pushed for the creation of a private banking system. By the end of 2001, however, many of those intellectuals were in jail, and today, the economy remains mainly in state hands.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Syria | Tagged | Comments Off on Why be serious about Syria?

Unhelpful Hillary

Posted on 03/05/2009 by Soccerdad

In order to show that it is even-handed in its approach to the Middle East, the United States must show that Israel is in violation of its commitments as the Palestinians. The Washington Post reports that yesterday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton dutifully played her role.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized the Israeli government on Wednesday for its plans to demolish dozens of Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem, calling the actions “unhelpful” and a violation of international obligations.

Clinton made the rare public complaint about Israeli actions in response to a question at a news conference with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank city of Ramallah. Israel’s plans to destroy homes in Arab East Jerusalem, which Palestinians consider the capital of a future Palestinian state, have angered Palestinians.

Jonathan Tobin explains what’s outrageous about Secretary Clinton’s criticism.

Nevertheless, it should be pointed out that homes demolished in Jerusalem were built without permits, a practice that is illegal in most countries. Moreover, as anyone who has visited Jerusalem in recent years can testify, building in Arab neighborhoods of the city has grown exponentially. So the implied charge that no Arab homes are being allowed to be built is utterly false.

Of course, at the same time, the United States continues to carp about the building of Jewish homes in Jewish communities in the territories, especially those in Greater Jerusalem, which no Israeli government would ever surrender. So it’s more than a bit hypocritical for the U.S. to call on Israel to freeze the building of Jewish homes while opposing any effort to curb the growth of Arab housing.

(See Shiloh Musings for visuals)

The Washington Post uncritically repeats some Palestinian claims about the housing but Nadav Shragai gives a pretty complete background that is at odds with Post’s account. (h/t Backspin)

About 20 years ago, the Jerusalem municipality shored up the water runoff there, and in the open green area (al Bustan, in Arabic), which the Turks and the British took care to preserve for hundreds of years as a public area intended for preservation and development of parks and tourism, an illegal Palestinian outpost arose.

Within 18 years 88 buildings went up there, under the noses of mayors Teddy Kollek and now outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. Under former mayor Uri Lupolianski, the construction was halted, after the municipality confiscated tractors and heavy machinery from the lawbreakers.

Last summer the director general of the Antiquities Authority, Shuka Dorfman, noted in a kind of “post mortem” that the construction in the King’s Garden caused significant and irreversible damage to antiquities.

That last bit is important (though not to the Washington Post nor to Secretary Clinton.) Palestinian nationalism has always been about the eradication of Israel. The Palestinian National Charter denies the historical connection between Jews and Israel. So any action that serves to erase that history is important. The reason permits weren’t available for those buildings is because the area was not one that was supposed to be built. In any other circumstances deliberate efforts to destroy antiquities is condemned. But when Israel’s involved, it’s excused.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel, Israeli Double Standard Time | Tagged | 1 Comment

Iran, the Jews and Roger Cohen

Posted on 03/05/2009 by SnoopyTheGoon

This is a slight modification of the NYT headline Iran, the Jews and Germany, an article by Roger Cohen.

In that article Roger Cohen, NYT op-ed columnist, tries to answer his many critics regarding his series of apologetic articles on Iran. Soccer Dad has dealt with one of these articles – The other Iran – in his post Apologist for the mullahs, which easily made a mincemeat of the article and the author.

In Iran, the Jews and Germany Roger Cohen makes an effort to backpedal (somewhat clumsily) from some of his stronger sentiments in the previous articles. Well, the “flawed but vibrant democracy” is muted a bit by “Iran is an un-free society with a keen, intermittently brutal apparatus of repression, but it’s far from meeting these criteria [of a totalitarian state]”. Things like this, a bit of glossing over some too obvious signs of adoration.

No attempt, however, was made by Mr Cohen to gloss over another, more pernicious statement: “Iran has not waged a war of aggression for a very long time.” Of course, wishful thinker like Cohen can’t allow himself and errant thought about the terrorist bombings in Argentina. Or about the unending flow of weapons to Hezbollah – the cancer on the Lebanon’s body. Or about incessant military support of Hamas. Or about fomenting unrest in Iraq with willing assistance of Shia clerics… the list could go on and on, and why should Iran wage a war of aggression by its own lily-white hands? To cause unneeded wrath of Roger Cohen?

Another clumsy attempt at backpedaling – in a different direction, though, becomes clear when you compare the last article’s passage:

If you’re thinking trains-on-time Fascist efficiency, think again. Tehran’s new telecommunications tower took 20 years to build. I was told its restaurant would open “soon.” So, it is said, will the Bushehr nuclear power plant, a project in the works for a mere 30 years. A Persian Chernobyl is more likely than some Middle Eastern nuclear Armageddon, if that’s any comfort.

where Cohen assuages the worry about Iran’s nuclear aspirations, with an older article’s statement:

The Iranian nuclear program, which Iran implausibly says is for civilian purposes, is “the greatest challenge” now facing 21st-century leaders.

Clumsy as heck, but whatever works…

So what is it Mr Cohen (assaJew, mind you, he wouldn’t let you forget) trying to say in his latest article about Iran and its Jews?

  • Iran is un-free society – check
  • It is managed by a virtual dictatorship of one Khamenei – check
  • Its mouthpiece “president” is most active Holocaust denier in the world – check
  • The fanaticism does exist – check
  • The threats to annihilate Israel are issued – check
  • Life in Iran is more difficult for Jews than for Muslims – check
  • The nuclear development is clearly not for peace – check

But:

  • The air you breathe in Iran is not suffocating!
  • Ahmadinejad’s rival in the next presidential elections, Mohammad Khatami, once spoke in a synagogue!
  • Anything but mad, the mullahs have proved malleable!
  • Internet and satellite television is widespread, the BBC’s new Farsi service is all the rage!
  • Iranians are not cut off, like Cubans or North Koreans!

The last but not the least:

  • No fire has burned the Majlis, or parliament, down!

Ergo:

Iran’s Islamic Republic is no Third Reich redux!

Please don’t laugh, because really Mr Cohen is motivated by an essentially overwhelming force, the one beautifully expressed in this paragraph:

One Iranian exile, no lover of the Islamic Republic, wrote to me saying that my account of Iran’s Jews had brought “tears to my eyes” because “you are saying what many of us would like to hear.”

Dear Iranian exile: Mr Cohen indeed performs a great service to many people: he just tells them (and himself) what they (and he) want to hear. It is so simple… and so pathetic.

And, to my sorrow, Mr Cohen in his naivety (?) reminds me too strongly about the uncountable fellow travelers from the West visiting Soviet Union during Stalin’s time and bringing back the usual laudatory reports. While people were incarcerated and died in droves.

But could Roger Cohen, a journalist of such caliber, achievements and standing, be so naive? Well, it’s another can of worms I really don’t wish to open. No, sir…

Afterword: Stumbled on this accidentally on Soob (thanks Jay):

Notice the source. Apparently the mention of Germany by Mr Cohen was relevant, after all…

Cross-posted on SimplyJews.

Posted in Iran, Media Bias | 2 Comments

Another reason to like Queen Latifah

Posted on 03/04/2009 by Meryl Yourish

I’ve always liked this woman, and now I like her even more.

Queen Latifah, who gave fans the chance to write and pick one of the songs for her next album, has a winner.

Ingrid Woode, of Sharonville, Ohio, will join Latifah in the studio to record Woode’s original song “Fairweather Friend” for the upcoming “Persona” album, set for release this spring.

The 25-year-old Woode works a “day job” at a pharmaceutical company, said a spokeswoman for People’s Choice, which conducted the contest with Latifah. The outcome was released online late Tuesday.

Latifah announced the opportunity when she hosted the People’s Choice Awards in January, with aspiring singer-songwriters invited to submit tunes.

Latifah winnowed the submissions down to three, the songs were posted on the People’s Choice Web site, , and fans picked Woode’s work as tops.

I think it’s wonderful that she’s helping someone fulfill her dream.

Posted in Pop Culture | 1 Comment

Arab men seeking Israeli women for LTR

Posted on 03/04/2009 by Meryl Yourish

Apparently, some Arabs only hate Israeli men.

“I’m asking for your help. I would like to meet an Israeli woman for marriage purposes,” Abdullah, a resident of Saudi Arabia, said in a recent letter to the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem.

“I have heard that the Israeli women are very smart and beautiful,” he added. “I’m ready to pay a dowry of camels, herds or even money. Please help me.”

Dozens of such appeals are received every year by the Foreign Ministry’s department for Arab media. Emails have been arriving from people in Iraq, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

Yeah, I’m not getting it, either.

“The Israeli woman must have a remarkable image in the Arab world,” says Hino. “The Arab men reiterate in their letters that the Israeli women are beautiful and smart, but we politely answer all of them that with all due respect, the Foreign Ministry is not a matchmaking agency.”

Perhaps if the women in Arab countries were allowed to fulfill their potential the way Israeli women are, Arab men wouldn’t have to look farther than their own backyard to find smart, beautiful women. You can’t find them when you force them to wear a burka and don’t allow them to drive, work, or go to school.

Posted in Feminism, Israel | 8 Comments

The Iranian puppetmaster speaks

Posted on 03/04/2009 by Meryl Yourish

We love to demonize Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, mostly because he’s a truly reprehensible Jew-hater. But sometimes the liberal media likes to point out that Ahmadinejad doesn’t really have the power in Iran, and he’s not speaking for the Mullahs.

Well, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei does speak for Iran. See if you can find anything in his words that may remind you of Ahmadinejad’s.

“Another big mistake is to say that the only way to save the Palestinian nation is by negotiations,” Khamenei said.

“Negotiations with whom? With an occupying and bullying regime, who does not believe in any other principle other than force? … Or negotiations with America and Britain who committed the biggest sin in creating and supporting this cancerous tumor … ?” he added.

Sound familiar?

In a blistering speech before the United Nations General Assembly, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad blamed “a few bullying powers” for creating the world’s problems and said the “American empire in the world is reaching the end of its road.”

And then there’s this:

Khamenei also said the Holocaust, in which six million Jews died at the hands of the Nazis, was used to “usurp” Palestinian land and said the West and Israel showed the weakness of their cause by not allowing anyone to question the Holocaust.

Sound familiar?

“The Holocaust was fabricated by the West in order to reach its goals,” state television quoted him as saying.

When people (yes, we mean you, Juan Cole) say Ahmadinejad isn’t the true power in Iran, they’re right. But he is doing—and saying—exactly what the true power wants him to.

AP Addendum: As usual, the AP whitewashes the Iranian Jew-hatred. The very last paragraph of the AP story on the above:

Iran does not recognize Israel and has called for its destruction. Khamenei called Israel a “cancerous tumor” Wednesday that is on the verge of collapse.

The last paragraph is the one most frequently cut when newspapers need space. That fact, and the placement of the quote, speak volumes about AP’s editorial policy.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Iran, Israel | Comments Off on The Iranian puppetmaster speaks

Why Syria? Why now?

Posted on 03/04/2009 by Soccerdad

The United States is preparing to engage Syria. According to the NY Times:

Middle East experts say they believe that conditions for an opening to Syria are ripe on both sides.

“We’ve got a Syrian government that wants to engage,” said Martin S. Indyk, a former ambassador to Israel and a peace negotiator in the Clinton administration. “We’re likely to get an Israeli government that will find it easier to engage with Syria than with the Palestinians.”

There are clear benefits to Israel from better relations with Syria: the government of President Bashar al-Assad is a sponsor of Hezbollah, a militant group based in Lebanon, and provides a sanctuary for Hamas’s leaders in Damascus, Syria’s capital.

Indyk gives no indication, how he knows that Syria wants to engage. And that last paragraph quoted is odd. So would a rapprochement between Israel and Syria mean that Syria will rein in Hamas and Hezbollah? One possible problem though is … Israel.

Nonetheless, Israeli public opinion polls show wide opposition to giving up the Golan Heights, captured by Israel in the 1967 war. In his previous stint as prime minister, Mr. Netanyahu initiated peace talks with Syria, but they came to nothing.

On the other hand, left unmentioned is that Netanyahu’s successor, Ehud Barak had President Clinton travel to Geneva to offer nearly all of the Golan to Assad’s father nine years ago. The first President Assad rejected the Israeli offer.

The Washington Post mentions something interesting about one of the American envoys to Syria.

Feltman brings an unusual history to the diplomatic mission. As ambassador to Lebanon during the 2005 Cedar Revolution, his efforts to foster a government independent of Syrian influence so angered the Syrian government that at one point, State Department security officials were concerned that Damascus had ordered his assassination. Shortly before he returned to Washington, in January 2008, an embassy convoy was attacked in a car bombing that killed three Lebanese civilians and injured dozens of people; Feltman was traveling in another convoy and was not injured.

Is this a sign that the Obama administration will be tough with Damascus?

The Post explains the reason why the United States is looking for dialogue with Syria.

A rapprochement between the United States and Syria has the potential to reshape the Middle East if it results in Syria curtailing its ties to Iran and anti-Israeli militant groups in exchange for return of the Golan Heights, which Israel seized during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. In the past year, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has indicated he wants to end Syria’s diplomatic isolation, holding indirect talks with Israel and welcoming French President Nicolas Sarkozy to Damascus.

It does have that potential. But if Syria’s official SANA news service is to be believed, Syria isn’t much interested in detaching itself from Iran.

“Talks with Mr. Shara dealt with the message conveyed to President al-Assad from President Ahmadinejad… during the meeting, both sides underlined the need for boosting and consolidating cooperation between the two countries and the outcomes of the Syrian-Iranian Higher committee held lately in Tehran,” the Iranian Minister said in a statement to reporters following the meeting.

Finally there are two interesting paragraphs towards the end of the Post article. The reporter supports his premise that American engagement with Syria could change the Middle East by quoting a Syrian official. (Editors in Syria are not independent journalists.)

“It is obvious that this administration realizes that the deterioration of the relations between Syria and the U.S. was caused by the lack of dialogue, and it also realizes what such a dialogue could mean in terms of the stability and peace of the region,” said Elias Murad, editor in chief of al-Baath newspaper.

But at the end of the article we learn this:

Yigal Palmor, spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry, expressed some doubt about whether pursuing the Syrian track would bear fruit. He noted that the Turkish-sponsored talks were only to determine the conditions for beginning actual peace talks, and that Syrian officials refused to meet directly with Israeli envoys.

So if the United States will engage with Syria directly that could change the region, but Syria isn’t expected to engage Israel directly? That’s the imbalance that is inherent in dealing with Syria (or any other hostile Middle Eastern country). The country insists that America engage with it and engagement is characterized as the start of a thaw and a rejection of old outdated views. But then Syria doesn’t change and its obstinacy is treated as a matter of course, not as something that can or ought to change.

So Syria gets the engagement it wants and gives nothing in return. Assad needs Iran, he does not need the West, except for pressure on Israel. Or perhaps for immunity. The “openness” of Assad has a price, the United States would do well to consider if it’s worth paying.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Syria | Tagged | 1 Comment

Iran’s terror conference: Well populated by Israel’s enemies

Posted on 03/04/2009 by Meryl Yourish

While a summit on Gaza was being held in Sharm al-Sheik, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad held his own summit, replete with terrorists, child murderers, and—legitimate representatives of Egypt. Good to know that peace treaty is holding up so well.

Also, rumor has it that Hassan Nasrallah snuck out of his rathole for a few days of R&R in Iran, where he can actually stay in a hotel under his own name and not have to hide in the basement.

Some 80 delegations from across the world have arrived at the conference, including parliamentary delegations from Egypt and Syria, as well as representatives of the terror organizations supported by Iran.

According to senior Iranian officials quoted by the Tabnak website, Hizbullah chief Nasrallah arrived from Lebanon, accompanied by Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabi Berri and murderer Samir Kuntar.

The conference’s attendees also included Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar and Moussa Abu Marzouk, Islamic Jihad Secretary-General Ramadan Salah, and Fatah’s Farouk Kadumi, the PLO leader in Tunisia.

Addressing the Sharm el-Sheik summit, Ahmadinejad said that “the difference between the two conferences is like the difference between man and Satan. On the one side is a pure, just and good front, and on the other side they have formed a rebellious front.”

You got that right, Mahmoud. But I don’t think we’re on the same page as to which group is the Satanic one. Hey, wait a minute. Did he just call America Satan again? But—but I thought that Obama was going to mend fences with the Muslim world!

The Jew-hating Jews were represented as well.

Representatives of the anti-Zionist ultra-Orthodox Neturei Karta movement also took part in the Tehran conference and met with the Iranian president. One of them, Aharon Cohen of Britain, told Ahmadinejad, “We will always support your brave stances against Zionism’s satanic views.”

How many of these nutjobs are there? Fifty? A hundred? Out of all the world’s Jews? That’s like saying Michael Vicks represents all of professional football.

Oh, and here is Ahmadinejad’s solution to the problem:

According to the Iranian president, “The Palestinians are the only ones who should determine their fate.”

The Tehran regime’s stance is that the Palestinian refugees must be allowed to return, and that this must be followed by a referendum which would put an end to the Jewish majority in Israel, in a democratic way.

I agree with this stance. I propose that we do exactly as they say, just as it’s done in Iran. Which means that Israel gets to vet all of the people who would be allowed to vote, and discount the Palestinians, leaving it only to a referendum in Israel. That’s the democratic way—in Iran.

Posted in Iran, Israel Derangement Syndrome | Comments Off on Iran’s terror conference: Well populated by Israel’s enemies

Facebook follies, anti-Semite style

Posted on 03/04/2009 by Meryl Yourish

I joined Facebook a few days ago. And one of my friends was a member of a group called “I wonder how quickly I can find 1,000,000 people who support Israel.” Since I’ve been on—all of three days, mind you—it’s been hacked dozens of times and renamed “welcome to lebanon”—mostly. But then the hacker got really annoyed. So he changed the name to something delightful:

“i left you some jews to show you why i was killing them”

But that wasn’t good enough. After the group was renamed to its normal name, the hackers decided to show their true colors:

“i left you some jews to show you why i was killing them”

Which still wasn’t hateful enough. After the group was renamed again, the hackers changed it to:

HITLER: I left some jews to show the world why i was killing them..”

and then

“I Wonder How Quickly I Can Find 1,000,000 People Who Hate Israel”

and

“I Wonder How Quickly I Can Find 1 Billion People Who Hate Israel”

The current name is “From Todd Snider: Please Leave the group , we will be back soon.” to “From Todd Snider: Please Leave the group , we will be back soon,” and it’s working. The hackers got 565 members to leave. If you’re on Facebook, and interested in this group: Join it. If for no other reason, join it because it pisses off the Jew-haters.

No matter where we go, there they are. It’s why people like me continue fighting them.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Facebook, Israel | 4 Comments

Shalit: Hamas to supply proof of life?

Posted on 03/03/2009 by Meryl Yourish

Another Arab paper is reporting that Israel is about to get proof of life from Gilad Shalit. I’m not buying it. I don’t think he’s alive.

Moussa Abu Marzouk, the deputy chairman of Hamas’ political bureau, met last week with Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit’s captors, who gave him a letter written by Shalit, the Kuwaiti-based al-Jarida newspaper reported Tuesday.

The paper quoted Palestinian sources as saying that during his short visit in Gaza, Abu Marzouk met with some of the leaders of Hamas’ military wing in the Strip, the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, and with Shalit’s captors, including military wing head Ahmad Jabari.

According the sources, Marzouk plans to deliver the letter to the Syrian Foreign Ministry.

When was the last time Arab terrorists have delivered a live Israeli prisoner? Once again, you’re going to see terrorists released for remains, I’m sorry to say.

And yes, I would absolutely love to eat these words.

Posted in Hamas, Terrorism | Comments Off on Shalit: Hamas to supply proof of life?

The four suggestions

Posted on 03/03/2009 by Soccerdad

Barry Rubin writes at the end of Helping Hillary while keeping Israel safe:

Of course, the two governments must begin to reach understandings about Iran. The new administration is determined to try engaging Teheran. Israel must convey the point that Washington should be alert to Iranian efforts to bully or fool the new president. The goal of stopping Iran’s nuclear weapons’ drive has to be the top priority; unilateral concessions in exchange for nothing should be avoided.

And the White House will hopefully not be shy in admitting when it finally concludes that Iran doesn’t want to be friends. President Barack Obama has spoken of opening Iran’s clenched fist. The danger is that Iran will do so only to slap America silly.

Presumably towards that end, according to Haaretz, Israel has drawn up suggestions for the American administration (via memeorandum):

1. Any dialogue must be both preceded by and accompanied by harsher sanctions against Iran, both within the framework of the UN Security Council and outside it. Otherwise, the talks are liable to be perceived by both Iran and the international community as acceptance of Iran’s nuclear program.

2. Before the dialogue begins, the U.S. should formulate an action plan with Russia, China, France, Germany and Britain regarding what to do if the talks fail. Specifically, there must be an agreement that the talks’ failure will prompt extremely harsh international sanctions on Iran.

3. A time limit must be set for the talks, to prevent Iran from merely buying time to complete its nuclear development. The talks should also be defined as a “one-time opportunity” for Tehran.

4. Timing is critical, and the U.S. should consider whether it makes sense to begin the talks before Iran’s presidential election in June.

According to Ha’aretz, these suggestions or “red-lines” were drawn up by the Foreign and Defense mininstries, and approved by outgoing PM Olmert. Apparently PM designate Netanyahu has also been briefed on these suggestions.

(The Washington Note writes that Israel is going too far in presenting “red lines” to the Secretary of State. But is “red line” an Israeli term or the terminology of the reporter?)

Not one of these suggestions seems unreasonable. And I have a hard time believing that Israel would dictate anything to the United States. Hopefully the new Secretary of State, will be amenable to Israel’s ideas.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel | Tagged | 2 Comments

Iran and Hamas: Like ham and eggs

Posted on 03/03/2009 by Meryl Yourish

Yes, a treyf (haram!) reference for the Islamist terror twins.

“Hamas’ strategic objective is to seize control of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the Palestinian Liberation Organization,” he said. “This remains Hamas’ vision – to take control over the PA by way of elections, remove (Palestinian President Mahmoud) Abbas and make the West Bank its base.

“Hamas is sincere enough to say that this is its plan, and the group refuses to make any statements, even vague ones, regarding the possibility of peace. At most they are willing to mention a possible ceasefire,” according to Gilad. “Therefore, the cooperation between Hamas, Hizbullah and Iran is stronger than ever.”

Make that the Islamist terror trio.

Hillary Clinton is starting to catch on to that, says Barry Rubin. He says Clinton knows that:

–Bringing Hamas into the negotiating process is a mistake that would doom any chance for peace and might even bring the Palestinian Authority (PA) crashing down altogether. U.S. interests require that the PA survives as recognized Palestinian leader, while Hamas is an Iranian client whose triumph would hurt the U.S. strategic position in the region.

I believe the coming few years are absolutely critical years in Israel’s history. I believe that Israel’s leaders have to give up their petty squabbling and pull together for the sake of Israel’s survival. And it looks like that may be happening, at least in part.

Likud chairman Binyamin Netanyahu is so determined to have Labor chairman Ehud Barak as his defense minister that he is willing to give him the portfolio even if Barak is unable to bring his entire Labor faction into the coalition, sources close to Netanyahu said Monday, confirming a Channel 1 report.

Barak is determined to bring Labor into Netanyahu’s coalition, but he is facing a potential rebellion inside his faction that could lead to a split. Factions can only break up legally if one third of its MKs leave, which in Labor’s case would require five of the 13 Labor legislators.

“Even if he can only deliver a third he could remain defense minister,” a source close to Barak said, adding that if Barak decided to quit the Knesset and join the government on his own without Labor, he would not receive the portfolio.

We have a saying here in the U.S.: Lead, follow, or get out of the way. It’s time for Labor and Kadima to follow or get out of the way. I’d prefer follow.

Posted in Hamas, Iran | Comments Off on Iran and Hamas: Like ham and eggs

Another reason prisoner releases are bad

Posted on 03/02/2009 by Soccerdad

In August of last year, Nadav Shragai wrote about the dangers inherent in Israeli prisoner releases done in the name of “confidence building.”

An investigation by the Almagor Terror Victims Association in Israel revealed that at least 30 of the terrorist attacks perpetrated since 2000 were committed by terrorists freed in deals with terror organizations. Many were freed in the framework of goodwill gestures because they were defined by Israel as “without blood on their hands.” The bloody swath cut by these terrorists claimed the life of 177 persons, with many others wounded and made invalids.

Shragain concluded:

There needs to be a change in the “rules” that have crystallized in recent years where thousands of terrorists are released in return for isolated kidnap victims. This will limit the damage, for fewer freed terrorists will be free to return to the path of terror. One should not pay any price in order to bring about the release of kidnap victims or captives.

I recalled Shragai’s argument when I read the following report from Dan Gordon. (h/t Elder of Ziyon)

The villages of the Gaza strip were criss crossed with tunnels dug underneath the houses. Not weapons smuggling tunnels, mind you, these were kidnapping tunnels. The[re] were communication tunnels through which Hamas militants could go unseen from house to house and carry out combat in a civilian environment disappearing from one house, as it came under fire, to pop up in another. Those tunnels were not dug after Israel invaded as a response to that invasion. No one in Hamas said “Quick let’s dig these tunnels because the Israelis are coming!”

This was their battlefield and they prepared it according to a doctrine that said they would launch rockets from civilian areas in order to draw Israeli troops into those areas. They would turn whole villages into booby trapped battlefields while the villagers were still in them. Their hope was to kill two to three hundred Israeli soldiers and kidnap and take prisoner as many as fifty.

(As an aside, this gives further credence as to why Israel was right to stop the war when it did, regardless of not stopping the rockets. Israel was apparently risking kidnappings and needed to avoid that.)

This report shows an additional danger not mentioned by Shragai: that massive prisoner releases encourage Israel’s enemies to take more hostages for leverage.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Hamas, Israel | Tagged | 2 Comments

The price for killing a Yemeni Jew: It’s only money

Posted on 03/02/2009 by Meryl Yourish

Yemeni courts ruled that the murder of a Yemeni Jew by a jihadi who cried out “Jew, accept the message of Islam” before shooting him five times was caused by “mental incompetence.” The murderer was ordered to pay a fine.

A Yemeni court has ruled that a Muslim on trial for killing a Yemeni Jew is mentally incompetent and ordered h to pay a fine for the fatal shooting.

[…] Monday’s ruling says the defendant – Abdel Aziz Yehia Hamoud al-Abdi, a retired pilot in the Yemeni air force – is “mentally unstable.” It orders he pay a fine of 50.5 million riyals, or about $250,000.

Funny how all those jihadis who murder Jews keep on being deemed mentally incompetent, even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

According to the security official, the suspect has admitted to killing Nahari, and told his interrogators that “these Jews must convert to Islam”.

Unless the Yemen authorities are saying that Jihadis are insane. I don’t think that’s what they’re saying. But this is, after all, the nation that keeps letting al Qaeda terrorists go free. We should not be surprised that they allow their citizens to murder Jews.

No wonder Yemeni Jews are secretly emigrating to Israel.

Once again, the world is silent as yet another ancient Jewish community is ethnically cleansed by its Muslim hosts.

Posted in Religion, Terrorism | 1 Comment

Changes in Middle East present new challenges for American reporters

Posted on 03/02/2009 by Soccerdad

The Washington Post reports, Tough Options For Clinton on Trip to Mideast, with a sub-head of
“Analysts Urge Radical New Approach To Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process”

What are those “tough options?”

Any new peace effort would be complicated by other factors, including the prospect of a new right-wing Israeli government hostile to the idea of a Palestinian state and the splintering of the Palestinian leadership into a moderate faction that runs the West Bank and a radical group that controls the Gaza Strip. Israel waged war in December against the militant group Hamas, which controls the narrow coastal strip that is home to almost half the Palestinian population, and it has kept a tight grip on crossings into Gaza, making it all but impossible to begin reconstruction.

So let’s see. A new right wing government in Israel is an obstacle peace. But those rockets from Gaza? Apparently they’re a naturally occurring phenomenon. Nothing anyone can do about them, so Israel might as well lie back and enjoy them.

One option for solving some of these impasses is mentioned:

Hamas and its moderate Palestinian rival, Fatah, also have begun talks on creating a unity government, which would complicate U.S. diplomacy. During a meeting in Washington last week, Clinton told Amr Moussa, secretary general of the Arab League, that she hoped such efforts succeeded, according to league Ambassador Hussein Hassouna. But in the VOA interview, she said that unless Hamas meets international conditions for recognition, “I don’t think it [a unity government] will result in the kind of positive step forward either for the Palestinian people or as a vehicle for a reinvigorated effort to obtain peace that leads to a Palestinian state.”

So peace could possibly come about by having the more moderate Fatah come to terms with the terrorist group Hamas. But that would only “complicate” U.S. diplomacy. Why isn’t that described in terms of “the moderate Fatah is considering reconciliation with Hamas that is hostile to Israel’s existence?” At least Secretary of State Clinton seems to realize that.

I’ll give the reporter, Glenn Kessler, credit for citing Elliott Abrams’s Weekly Standard article.

The issues are so complex that some analysts are advocating a radical rethinking. Elliott Abrams, a deputy national security adviser under President George W. Bush who is now a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, proposed scaled-back goals in a recent article in the Weekly Standard that was highly critical of former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s efforts to reach a deal. “It is time to face certain facts: We are not on the verge of Israeli-Palestinian peace; a Palestinian state cannot come into being in the near future; and the focus should be on building the institutions that will allow for real Palestinian progress in the medium or longer term,” he wrote.

Of course, Abrams is saying that the problem is not complicated at all. The Palestinians are demanding more than any Israeli government is willing to give, especially after 15 years of bad faith. And the Israelis are not going to give the Palestinians what they demand.

Kessler concludes with an opposing view.

From the other side of the political spectrum, Nathan J. Brown, senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote in a paper published last week that the effort to create a two-state solution “has come to a dead end” and that it is “time for a Plan B.” He advocated a clear and perhaps even written cease-fire between Israel and Hamas, which could be broadened into an armistice. The effort would require breaking the taboo against speaking to Hamas, but he argued that the taboo has been broken because of indirect negotiations. “The question is whether to make a virtue out of necessity of declaring it open,” he wrote.

Yes, a right wing Israeli government is an obstacle to peace. Not talking to a terrorist organization is a taboo.

The new situation in the Middle East presents reporters with new opportunities to portray Israel as intransigent. Glenn Kessler succeeded magnificently.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel, Israeli Double Standard Time, Juvenile Scorn, Media Bias | Tagged | Comments Off on Changes in Middle East present new challenges for American reporters