Shaky

Israeli PM Olmert’s coalition might look a lot less solid at the end of the day. OneJerusalem reports that the 11 seat Yisrael Beiteinu faction is likely to leave the government, leaving the Kadima led coalition with 67 seats.

The Jerusalem Post has more:

At the start of Monday’s Knesset plenum session, Israel Beiteinu showed its displeasure with the government by walking out on a no-confidence motion regarding Israel’s negotiations with the Palestinians on core issues.Sources close to Lieberman said the party head had received the impression that Olmert concluded that Labor and Israel Beiteinu could no longer exist in the same coalition and that he chose to keep Labor at Lieberman’s expense.

They cited Olmert’s statements to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Monday about the need to negotiate the core issues of the conflict and his statements Sunday to Kadima ministers about outposts remaining being a disgrace.

While One Jerusalem speculates that this would increase pressure on the religious Sephardi party, Shas, to leave and bring down the government, the Jerusalem Post looks at the effect Yisrael Beiteinu’s departure will have on Labor.

Olmert’s associates said he had not intended to push out Lieberman but privately they admitted that if Israel Beiteinu left, it would give the diplomatic process a boost and make it more likely that Defense Minister Ehud Barak would keep Labor in the coalition.Sources close to Barak said Israel Beiteinu’s departure would indeed increase pressure for Labor to stay, but that Lieberman would not impact Barak’s decision about whether to keep his promise to remove Labor from the coalition upon the Winograd Report’s publication on January 30.

Channel 1’s Ayala Hason reported Monday that if the Winograd report ended up being extremely critical of Olmert, Barak would give Kadima six weeks to elect a new leader. If Kadima would refuse, Barak would bring down the government and force an election.

Even if Shas stays, the result of the Winograd commission could leave Kadima severely weakened.

On his way out of Israel, President Bush urged Yisrael Beiteinu and Shas to stay in support of PM Olmert. This probably didn’t help as it cast those critical of PM Olmert and Kadima as being against peace.

Israelis aren’t against peace. But they aren’t in favor of dangerous – not just painful – concessions. They’ve seen an increase in terrorism and radicalism since the Oslo process began. Now they see a an unpopular Prime Minister trying to boost his own fortunes by adopting policies that appeal to the American president but not to his electorate. President Bush’s appeal to Yisrael Beiteinu and Shas was a slap in the face of the Israeli people.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel | Comments Off on Shaky

“Humanitarian aid” to the PA: Two tons of explosive material

Once again, Israeli security forces found Palestinians attempting to smuggle material used to make explosives into the Gaza Strip. Two tons of it. That goes along with the six and a half tons of potassium nitrate in UN bags caught a few weeks ago.

Security workers employed by the Israel Airport Authority uncovered two tons of fertilizer used in the manufacturing of Qassam rockets on Monday afternoon, the substantial amount of explosive material was concealed in a truck allegedly transporting humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip.

The security officials manning the Kerem Shalom border crossing discovered the smuggling attempt during a random inspection of vehicles carrying humanitarian equipment and goods.

This is the second such incident to occur this week.

Hands up, those of you who think this news will make the wire services. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

Posted in Gaza, Terrorism | Comments Off on “Humanitarian aid” to the PA: Two tons of explosive material

All nied up

via memeorandumfrom Bothersome Intel on Iran by Michael Hirsh, Newsweek

Israeli and other foreign officials asked Bush to explain the NIE, which concluded with “high confidence” that Iran halted what the document describes as its “nuclear weapons program.” The NIE arrived at this finding even though Tehran continues to operate uranium-enrichment centrifuges that many experts believe are intended to develop material for a bomb, and despite the CIA’s assertion that it had, for the first time, concrete evidence of such a weaponization program. Most confusing of all, the document seemed to directly contradict a 2005 NIE that concluded—also with “high confidence”—that Iran did have such a weapons program. Bush’s national-security adviser, Stephen Hadley, told reporters in Jerusalem that Bush had only said to Olmert privately what he’s already said publicly, which is that he believes Iran remains “a threat” no matter what the NIE says. But the president may be trying to tell his allies something more: that he thinks the document is a dead letter.

The final sentence is written in such a way as to indicate that President Bush has, for political reasons, ignored the professional analysis of his intelligence community. Of course the rest of the article, describing the Israeli displeasure with the conclusions of the NIE, suggest that Israel’s intelligence community came to different conclusions from the United States.

Connect the Dots points out that what President Bush is disavowing is not the NIE itself:

The NIE may be perfectly sound, but the declassified summary of it, produced at the last minute after the White House decided to release the document, is something else. By relegating to a footnote the fact that Iran has a continuing uranium-enrichment program, and by declaring flatly that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003, without so much of an indication that a crucial aspect of that program — the development of fuel for a nuclear-bomb core — continues apace, the public — including America’s allies and adversaries — were baldly misled.

If Schoenfeld’s speculation is correct, then, the NIE represents less of a departure then the president’s critics, such as Hirsh portray it.

Israel Matzav looks at the implications for Israel.

There are two issues here and the only way Bush can quell that ‘rising chorus of voices’ is to resolve one of those issues and see to the resolution of the other issue. The issue Bush can resolve is the view here that the NIE shut the door on US action against Iran. Most people here believe that the NIE took the US military option against Iran off the table. If there still is a military option that the United States is prepared to use in the event that – as seems almost inevitable – sanctions will fail, that will go a long way towards quelling the ‘rising chorus of voices’ for unilateral Israeli action. A second – not nearly as satisfactory scenario – would be for Bush to make it clear that the US will support or at least not hinder Israeli military action against Iran if and when that becomes necessary.

From what I can gather, only the second option really remains. The summary of the NIE took the American option out of consideration.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Iran, Israel | 2 Comments

Refuah Shlema for Tim Blair

Your thoughts and prayers are needed for a friend down under.

Tim’s always been a friend to me. My thoughts are with you, and I’ll try to remember you for the official Refuah Shlema on Shabbat as well.

Posted in Bloggers | Comments Off on Refuah Shlema for Tim Blair

On the care and feeding of autocrats

Shibley Telhami, who has made a career of interpreting polling data from totalitarian regimes, tells us today that “It’s not about Iran.”(If your leader, through the media and other apparatuses of state, makes clear that the Israeli “occupation” of Palestine is of utmost importance to his regime, you’re not going to tell a person of uncertain affiliations that you think that the restrictions of freedom of assembly is a more pressing matter.)

In truth, I don’t disagree much with the conclusion of the article: that the Arab world isn’t really focused on the Iranian threat, I’m just skeptical of how Telhami reached that conclusion.

And even though Gulf Arab governments need the U.S. military umbrella for their security, their publics view the United States as a far greater threat than Iran. It is a challenge for these governments to have to continually depend on an America whose foreign policy is rejected by their own publics and whose record in recent years has been more of failure than of success.

Their own publics? The Arab world is not populated by regimes who abide by the consent of the governed. It’s the other way around.

While America’s policy in the Middle East hasn’t been perfect, even now there appears a bit of the American push for democratization in the Middle East. Whether or not it ill take hold is uncertain, but would the president’s outreach to democratic elements in the Gulf be possible if Saddam were still in power? It’s not as if President Clinton’s appeasement of Arafat led to better results.

The Arab/Muslim world indeed seems to be embracing Iran. But it’s disingenuous to attribute it to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. The conflict is real, but even if it were resolved, the Arab world would be no more friendly to the United States and its interests than it is now. Right now Iran seems to be have the certainty of purpose so it will have more friends in the Arab world. And the Iranian path, frankly, is the path to take for despots who wish to hold on to their power.

It’s also ironic the Telhami focuses on the conflict, because a recent poll of Palestinian shows that the “occupation” is far down the list of their concerns.

The focus on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is a way of allowing rulers who care nothing about the views of their own subjects to pretend to respect democracy. It’s perverse, but this is what Prof. Telhami promotes. His CV says that he’s “Anwar Sadat professor for peace and development at University of Maryland.” What he promotes isn’t “peace and development” but extended terms for tyrants.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel, palestinian politics | Comments Off on On the care and feeding of autocrats

The unacknowledged war

The Palestinians of the Gaza Strip have been at war with Israel for years. The Jews of Gaza are gone, but the war continues. On Sunday, another volley of mortars fell on Israeli communities, pretty much unnoticed by all but the Israeli press.

Eight mortar shells were fired Sunday from the northern Gaza Strip towards the western Negev. Two of the mortars hit the community of Netiv Haasara, and the rest landed in open areas.

One of the mortars fell between two houses, causing damage. Moira Dror’s daughter lives in one of the houses, which was hit by shrapnel. “She left one or two minutes before the mortar hit the house,” she said.

The second building hit was the house of a woman and her two children. Luckily, they were not at home during the strike.

“We have a lot of luck or miracles,” Dror added. “We live about 200 meters (656 feet) from (the northern Gaza Strip town of) Beit Hanoun. As opposed to Qassam rockets, which have an alert system, we try to listen to the mortars being launched and manage run to the bomb shelters. But that only happens when the window is open and it’s very quiet. Today we didn’t hear it. It was very quick, and fell right next to us.

The Palestinians recently resumed the firing of mortar shells at Netiv Haasara, hitting only the southern part of the community, particularly one street.

Kassam rockets are fired on a near-daily basis, especially when dignitaries are in town. But the news organizations denigrate the severity of the attacks by labeling them “crude, homemade rockets” and pointing out that “only” 12 people have been killed by kassams in the years that the terrorists have been firing them. As if that really matters to the people in Sderot, or in any of the other towns that have been hit by kassams and mortars.

The New York Times’ Steve Erlanger has finally noticed the harm done to Sderot. But still, he makes sure that he skews the stats to make things seem less deadly:

Sderot, a working-class town of mainly North African immigrants less than two miles from Gaza, has been hit over the past four years with some 2,000 rockets of improving range and explosive power — 22 in the last eight days. Eight Sderot civilians have been killed by the rockets; Razi has seen 15 therapists.

There have been twelve deaths from kassam rockets. Three of them were children under the age of five. But Erlanger finds it necessary to define the deaths in Sderot as “civilian” deaths—as if the death of a soldier by a rocket fired in an undeclared war is any less important.

But already quiet, with the population down unofficially to perhaps 17,000 from 24,000, the people of Sderot live in a most un-Israeli hush, so they can hear the alerts. The vendor in the market who sits on a stool and yells out the prices of his cheap underwear has been told to stop using a megaphone. People sleep with the heating system off and a window open on the coldest night. There is no Muzak in the grocery store, and people keep their car windows open and their radios and televisions on low volume, even in the town’s few bars or pubs.

They take quick showers, afraid to miss an alert, no longer sleep in upstairs bedrooms and avoid public places at what are considered peak Qassam times. And when the alert sounds, people drop everything, including their unpaid groceries in the aisles, costing Daniel Dahan more than $100 a day, he said. He owns Super Dahan, the grocery his father started. They run to one of the square concrete shelters, known as betonadas, after the word for cement, that increasingly dot the town. Then they pull out their phones, to check on their children.

“What kind of life is this, when you can’t even make your home safe for your children?” Ms. Sasson asked.

A good question. Hamas provided the answer in 2006:

“We have decided to make Sderot a ghost town,” said a spokesman for Hamas who gave his name as Abu Ubeideh. “We are not going to stop launching our rockets until they leave.”

They’ve made a quarter of the townspeople leave. Because Israel isn’t fighting the undeclared war to the best of her abilities. The world won’t let her. They exaggerate every negative aspect of Israel, and make up lies about what Israel does when there isn’t enough negative news to publish.

The undeclared war continues. In Gaza, in the West Bank, and in Jerusalem.

Posted in Gaza, Israel | 1 Comment

How to Win Friends and Influence People

This is only a part of the headline (they told me not to make them too long). The other part is:

Or lying through your teeth about power shortages in Gaza

The story by Barry Rubin of Gloria Center has all the elements of journalistic expose and I do not intend to steal his thunder here. Go and read it. I shall just tell you that I have taken the sentence of that lying SOB he points to:

Yesterday, Kanan Obeid, chairman of Gaza’s Hamas-run energy authority, said Gaza now has only 35 percent of the power its 1.5 million residents need.

I run it through Google, and just to give you the taster of the agencies that run the article:

  • MSNBC
  • Ha’aretz
  • Philadelphia Inquirer
  • CBS news
  • Boston Herald
  • China Post
  • Etc. (the above results are from one page only, so…)

Read the expose and see the stinking lie for what it is.

Cross-posted on SimplyJews.

Posted in Gaza, Media Bias | Comments Off on How to Win Friends and Influence People

Richmond: Welcome to the 19th century

So explain to me, you lawyers out there, why I can’t bring my laptop with me to jury duty tomorrow. I understand that I can’t use it while I’m in the jury box. But I don’t understand why I can’t have it while I’m in the juror waiting area which, if it’s anything at all like the one in Newark, is going to be big and annoying and have Jerry Springer on TV, forcing me to listen to one of the shows on television that has been scientifically proven to make you dumber just by passing a TV with still pictures of it on the set.

I have an air card. I could get my email and do my work while waiting to be picked. And I need to do my work, because three or four projects are crashing down at once, and, well, I worked most of the weekend to catch up. And I’m still behind.

Believe me when I tell you that I’m going to register a complaint with whomever I’m supposed to complain tomorrow. I may never get picked for jury duty in Richmond again, but damn, I’m going to complain about not being able to bring my laptop.

We can’t have our cellphones, either. Okay, I can understand that part. But not the laptops. What, do they think we’re terrorists or something?

Stupid. Professionals need their laptops to stay on top of work they’re missing while sitting in the jury pool room.

Posted in Life | 4 Comments

A brother could love

According to the New York Times:

Given the international uproar that unfolded after the bombing, “we can assume it’s not a reactor,” said David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a private group in Washington that has analyzed the Syrian site.If international inspectors eventually get to the site, he added, they will have a more difficult time looking for nuclear evidence. “The new building,” he noted, “covers whatever remained of the destroyed one.”

is it clear from this statement what Dr. Albright thought about the previous Syria site? Here’s how the Washington Post reports Albright’s statements. (These statements are more complete, though he apparently offered different quotes to each newspaper.):

“It would be very unlikely for this to be a reactor, and we would be very surprised if they tried to put a reactor inside this building,” said David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, who analyzed the images and provided a copy to The Washington Post.Albright said the new facility appears significantly different from the earlier one, having slightly larger dimensions and a vaulted roof. There are no visible signs suggesting a nuclear purpose, he said.

The new construction could complicate future efforts by outsiders to determine the purpose of the original building, Albright said. He added that it is possible that Syria might have constructed the facility to allow the country to secretly excavate all traces of the original building out of the view of spy satellites.

Getting back to the New York Times, it’s pretty clear that they skimped on presenting Dr. Albright’s full views (and I believe that he’s somewhat skeptical of the charge) about the Syrian site and then the reporter adds

Skeptics have criticized the nuclear accusation, saying the public evidence that has so far come to light was ambiguous at best. They noted, for instance, that at the time of the attack the site had no obvious barbed wire or air defenses that would normally ring a sensitive military facility.

So Syria didn’t seem to protect the site. Still why bolster the doubts but why play this up when Syria’s whole approach to the bombing has been somewhat suspicious? Now Syria’s building a new structure that is clearly unlike the first one and will make it that much harder to discover what’s underneath. If it was an agricultural facility that Israel bombed (and even the NY Times reporter seemed somewhat skeptical of the claim) why didn’t the Syrians complain louder? Why did the North Koreans complain at all? It’s wrong for the Times to play up the doubts without giving a full accounting of the reasons to suspect the Syrians of playing nuclear games.

The Astute Bloggers (astutely) point out:

Transparency is central to International Security. Assad’s tyrannical terrorist-enabling regime has no transparency, and this is why we must act preemptively: better safe than sorry.

(via memeorandum)

In other words, despite the Times effort to play down the threat because of uncertainty, the uncertainty is all the reason to be more concerned.

At the end of a disturbing post about Syria efforts to rebuild in the area of the structure that was destroyed in September by Israel (covered by the Tank at NRO), Daled Amos asks of Nobel Laureate Mohammed El Baradei:

Is El Baradei is equally chummy with Iran?

The answer, I think, comes from a recent news report:

In an unprecedented meeting, Iran’s top leader told the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency on Saturday that the UN Security Council had no remaining justification for focusing on the country’s nuclear program, state-run television reported.Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final say on all state matters in Iran, told Mohamed ElBaradei that the IAEA should exclusively handle Iranian nuclear questions, saying resolution of the controversy would be a “great success” for the UN nuclear watchdog.

My guess is that if Iran is seeking the jurisdiction of the IAEA over its nuclear program(s), it must feel awfully brotherly towards El Baradei too.

For more background on the shattered Syrian nuclear ambitions see Mere Rhetoric.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Iran, Israel, Syria | Comments Off on A brother could love

Norman Finkelstein in Lebanon: when the unmentionable meets the unspeakable

Probably getting booted out from the DePaul university has exacerbated his all-consuming lust for visibility. Now he has found a way – after his other learned friend, who also went on a similar pilgrimage.

Finkelstein is known as a vocal American critic of Israeli policies in the region. He met with a Hezbollah commander in south Lebanon.

There is nothing better than that old quote from that post above:

Chomsky, he added “does not know that the Hezbollah arms scare the Lebanese people more than the Israelis.” Chomsky obviously doesn’’t know that Hezbollah and its allies fought the Cedar Revolution by aligning themselves with the Syrian regime.

I am not sure whether Finkelstein, being groomed in PoliSci, doesn’t know this, but it hardly matters, does it?

He told reporters that he thinks Hezbollah represents hope because “they are fighting to defend their homeland, they are fighting to defend the independence of their country, they are defending themselves against foreign …murderers.”

Yes, that too… And he didn’t miss another photo op, cruising the cemetery of the “Lebanese victims”, 70% of whom were Hezbollah “liberators”.

What can I say? Expect a new book on the atrocities of Israeli murderers soon. And don’t expect the Israeli victims to be mentioned in it.

A man must do what a man must do… for his income.

Cross-posted on SimplyJews.

Posted in Israel Derangement Syndrome, Lebanon | 3 Comments

Caturday

The last few days have been warm and sunny, and Tig has taken advantage of the weather to snooze and sit in the sun. Presented, for your amusement:

The Independent Republic of Tiggerstan

The Independent Republic of Tiggerstan has suffered some border shrinkage, but the Republic remains.

Tigger in sunshine

Tigger in the sun, showing us why the ancient Egyptians worshipped cats. Is it idolatry if the cat is live, not a statue?

There will be quite a photo record of Tig. It doesn’t hurt that he’s so incredibly photogenic, either.

Posted in Cats | 9 Comments

Libya on the UNSC: Stooge for the Arab League

The new Libyan head of the UN Security Council has proven me right, in less than two weeks.

First, the good news:

Meanwhile, the Security Council condemned Katyusha rocket fire from Lebanon that struck Shlomi in northern Israel, according to a report by Army Radio.

Israeli ambassador to the UN Gilad Cohen, who led efforts to get the condemnation passed, was quoted by Army Radio as saying “it’s crucial the Security Council condemn such acts. It was a grave violation of UN resolution 1701 and a threat to world peace and security.”

That’s great. The UN Security Council actually noticed a violation of 1701, although UNIFIL has been turning a blind eye to Hezbullah for well over a year now.

But here’s where the Libyan ambassador proves how fair-minded he intends to be:

For 48 hours, Libyan ambassador Giadalla Ettalhi, sitting head of the UN Security Council, fought efforts to have the condemnation passed, and tried in vain to have it include criticism of Israel Air Force violations of Lebanon airspace, against the wishes of Israel, the U.S., and France.

Uh-huh. That’s what I said would happen.

Posted in Israel Derangement Syndrome, World | 3 Comments

Ms. Magazine refuses to publish ad about Israel’s most powerful women

The magazine co-founded by Gloria Steinem doesn’t seem to like Jews when they’re Israeli Jews. Or at least, that’s the impression they’re giving after rejecting an ad for Israel that the AJC wanted to place.

The magazine has turned down an AJCongress advertisement that did nothing more controversial than call attention to the fact that women currently occupy three of the most significant positions of power in Israeli public life. The proposed ad (The Ad Ms. Didn’t Want You To See) included a text that merely said, “This is Israel,” under photographs of President of the Supreme Court Dorit Beinish, Vice Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs Tzipi Livni and Knesset Speaker Dalia Itzik.

“What other conclusion can we reach,” asked Richard Gordon, President of AJCongress, “except that the publishers − and if the publishers are right, a significant number of Ms. Magazine readers − are so hostile to Israel that they do not even want to see an ad that says something positive about Israel?”

When Director of AJCongress’ Commission for Women’s Empowerment Harriet Kurlander tried to place the ad, she was told that publishing the ad “will set off a firestorm” and that “there are very strong opinions” on the subject − the subject presumably being whether or not one can say anything positive about Israel. Ms. Magazine publisher Eleanor Smeal failed to respond to a signed-for certified letter with a copy of the ad as well as numerous calls by Mr. Gordon over a period of weeks.

A Ms. Magazine representative, Susie Gilligan, whom the Ms. Magazine masthead lists under the publisher’s office, told Ms. Kurlander that the magazine “would love to have an ad from you on women’s empowerment, or reproductive freedom, but not on this.” Ms. Gilligan failed to elaborate what “this” is.

I’d be very interested in getting an answer to what “this” is. Because running an ad about three powerful Israeli women saying, “This is Israel,” is an example of women’s empowerment. The magazine ran a cover story on Nancy Pelosi in the winter 2007 magazine, with a headline that seems, well, familiar.

An excerpt:

This Is What a Speaker Looks Like
Nancy Pelosi has finally cracked the marble ceiling of the Capitol. Now what will she do with the unprecedented power she has earned?

Ms. is proud to be the first magazine to feature on its cover Nancy Pelosi, the first woman and first self-identified feminist Speaker of the House. This 2002 Ms. Woman of the Year gives Ms. an exclusive interview in our cover story, “This Is What A Speaker Looks Like,” by Marie Cocco, in which we focus on her substance, rather than her clothes and jewelry.

The headline is parallel to the title of the ad that the AJC wanted to place: “This is Israel.” Click on the link. Look at the ad.

Of course, Ms. Magazine has published many articles about Arab and Islamic women in power.

Mr. Gordon noted that while Israel was apparently too hot to handle, Ms. Magazine did not extend that taboo to Arab and Moslem women. “What is even more amazing is that, while refusing to publish a simple ad praising three very notable women, women who embody the ideal that Ms. Magazine seemingly espouses, Ms. has run a cover article in the Fall 2003 issue on Queen Noor of Jordan, has featured a number of articles on Muslim women, and even ran an article in the Winter 2004 issue entitled, ‘Images of Palestine,’ which discussed the Ramallah Film Festival and gave sympathetic reviews to films concerning ‘the liberation of South Lebanon’ from Israel as well as numerous films which portrayed terrorism as legitimate ‘revolutionary’ activity against Israel and miscast Israel’s activities to counter terrorism as ‘oppressive.’”

And anti-Israel screeds, even at the height of the wave of suicide bombings during the bloody spring of 2002.

Jerusalem Spring 2002–Sharon seems to be our worst nightmare. Since this Intifada erupted, over 1,700 Palestinians and over 400 Israelis have been killed, with some 35,000 Palestinians and 4,000 Israelis wounded.* The terrorist attacks in Israel are horrible, but they have been used by Sharon to carry out deeds far in excess of “destroying the terrorist infrastructure.” The Israeli army deliberately trashed the inside of every Palestinian institution that it did not entirely destroy-schools, charities, health organizations, banks, radio and TV stations, even a puppet theater, [and] all the records of every government ministry. In a few locations, Israeli tanks even rolled over mosques and cemeteries….

(Note that the author glosses over the terrorist attacks, which were sometimes coming at the rate of two and three suicide bombings per day, and immediately attacks Ariel Sharon for sending in the IDF to stop the suicide bombings, shootings, and other attacks on Israelis. The rest of the article is devoted to the plight of the Palestinians.)

The pro-Palestinian side of the conflict is well-represented. Ms. Magazine covers women’s international political empowerment. There’s an article about the first women in the U.K. high court, one about Israeli mothers marching for peace, international legal discrimination of women, women who changed the face of politics in Northern Ireland, a Saudi feminist princess, a boatload of stories on peace activists, a female Israeli conscientious objector, and a ton of stories on Iraq.

But Ms. magazine refused to run an ad with three pictures of Israeli women in high positions: A Supreme Court judge, the vice president of the country, and the speaker of the Knesset, Israeli’s parliament. The American Jewish Congress was told this was going to “set off a firestorm.” Really? Portraying powerful women in a Mideast nation is a bad thing?

Apparently, when that nation is Israel, and the magazine is Ms., the answer is: Yes.

Phyllis Chesler has written and spoken about anti-Semitism in the world of feminists.

Like men, women are not necessarily compassionate or even fair towards other women — especially if those other women are identified as “evil racist settlers” and the enemies of a beloved revolution. Feminists are no better but perhaps no worse than other women in this regard.

[…] Many feminists who are quite principled on certain issues (equal pay for equal work, reproductive freedom, gay rights, sexual and domestic violence, childcare, etc.) unthinkingly believe that their critiques of patriarchy and of specific American policies can and must be transformed into a generalized hatred of America — the very country in which they practice their dissent — and transferred to the Middle East. Many feminists are totally blind to their own Jew hatred and are now more obsessed with the occupation of disputed lands in the Middle East than they are with the occupation of women’s bodies worldwide.

It appears she was not wrong.

When I tell people that I am a feminist, I usually have to make the distinction that I am not one of those feminists. Because I am a feminist. I believe in equal rights and equal opportunities for women. I believe that we have not yet achieved equality in the U.S., although we have come farther than ever before. I believe that most women are feminists like me. But the ones who run the organizations and the magazines—those women are not my friends. And yes, there are a significant number of anti-Israel Jewish women in those organizations. Shame on them.

As always, when it comes to Israel, there is a double standard. If those women were from any other nation in the world, Ms. Magazine would have been happy to run an ad featuring the three most powerful women in that country. But not if the women are from Israel.

What time is it, folks? That’s right. It’s Israeli Double Standard Time. It occurs every day of the week that ends with a y.

Posted in Feminism, Israeli Double Standard Time | 23 Comments

Arun amok

Arun Gandhi, grandson of Mahatma Gandhi and founder of the M.K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence, gives pacifism a bad name.

Here’s a roundup of responses.

Shira bat Sarah (who brought this swill to my attention) writes in Family Tradition:

Why no calls from the Ghandis of the world for Arabs to lay down their arms? Why is there the implication that Jews and Israelis should not be allowed to defend themselves? Why do their words imply it is okay to have an open season on Jews?

In Arun Gandhi, disgrace of the third generation Solomonia writes:

Gramps suggested the Jews sacrifice themselves to the Nazis in the hope of exciting the sympathy of the world. Grandson apparently thinks the Jews of today should do the same, but goes further in blaming them for the state of the world. Amazing. Jewish identity doesn’t depend on violence, but Jewish survival does. It’s an inconvenient world.

Blog-o-fascists puts it simply:

Ignorance, bigotry…yes, anti-Semitism…thy name is Gandhi. How much dining out can you do on one famous last name?

Infidel Bloggers Alliance similarly observes Arun Gandhi: fruit doesn’t fall far from the tree:

And to sum it up, let me pose this question:

Gahndi says,”the Jews should have offered themselves to the butcher’s knife.” So, how exactly does his philosophy differ, in practice, from that of Hitler?

Sometimes a picture says it best, and Force Duo does it with the Photoshop illustrating Gandhi’s grandson, making his gramps proud!

Blogs of Zion writes:

It is apparent that Gandhi’s legacy continues with his grandson Arun. Arun Gandhi ignores the real perpetrators of the “culture of violence” and excuses their behavior by using the Jews, Zionism, and Israel as scapegoats.

Reformed Pastor did a very serious fisking of the whole essay, in No one’s fault tub their own:

Israel puts its faith in its military for an obvious reason: having been invaded by its neighbors on several occasions, been the object of almost daily bombardment for decades, been told by Hamas and others that there is no place in the Holy Land for Jews, seen Israel and Jews demonized on a virtually round-the-clock basis by its enemies, threatened with annihilation repeatedly, and condemned on a regular basis by the United Nations simply for defending itself, Israel knows what fools like Gandhi refuse to recognize, that it can depend only on itself and its own strength if it is to survive.

Backspin provides a short version of the fisking.

Shadow Warriors apply scorn liberally:

This from a guy who doesn’t want to get a real job, and instead finds it more lucrative to go on the lifelong speaking-tour, lecturing everyone else about their moral inferiority to him.

Israelly Cool! observes that the grandson’s feelings are Out in the Open:

Accusing the Jews of wanting the world to feel guilty about the Holocaust. Stating that Jews “repulse” friends. Calling Israel and the Jews the “biggest players” in creating a culture of violence.I’ve got two words for you: anti-Semitism.

Barking Moonbat Warning System demands that we explain this:

Israelites get blown to bits for what, existing, and it’s THEIR fault? I don’t know what’s more of a barf alert on this piece, the content or the source of this crap.

PoliGazette assigns some blame to the Washington Post:

Giving a voice to people who hold different opinions is all fine and dandy, but perhaps American news outlets could make an exception for anti-Semites? I can’t see how drivel like this helps the debate.

Little Green Footballs looks beyond the younger Gandhi’s words to the words of the commenters. What he sees is beyond the pale:

And the reader comments for this repulsive article are absolutely vile; the antisemites crawled out of the woodwork for this one.

Contentions.David Hazony spawns an excellent conversation on the topic of the Gandhis and mindless pacifism. It makes you wonder if Commentary might make Richard Grenier’s “The Gandhi Nobody Knows” available. Powerline provides Grenier’s summary.

Rubicon3 points out one possible consequence of such nonsense:

As if the Israelis wouldn’t have jumped at the chance to be friends with their neighbors, coming off the horror of the Holocaust.Such statements are damaging and do not help the cause of peace. On the contrary, they just encourage Islamic fundamentalist violence.

Gandhi has now issued an apology:

I do not believe and should not have implied that the policies of the Israeli government are reflective of the views of all Jewish people. Indeed, many are as concerned as I am by the use of violence for state purposes, by Israel and many other governments.

The ADL has weighed in.

I’d go much further. First of all the original implied nothing. It consisted of clearly stated beliefs. What Dr. Gandhi wrote is that Judaism is too rooted in the past and that the Israeli government in its actions, reflects that. So his response that not all Jews support Israeli actions, does nothing to contradict what he wrote in the first place. What he gives no consideration to – as many critics noted – is that Israel is responding to threats, not arbitrarily attacking innocents.

There is nothing unintentional in Gandhi’s controversial entry. He meant every word. The ADL is wrong to ask him to apologize. He won’t and he can’t because he truly doesn’t believe that there’s anything wrong with what he wrote. He is only concerned with the way his words were (correctly) interpreted.

His morality is just as warped as his grandfather’s.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel, Israel Derangement Syndrome | 2 Comments

Nasrallah the anti-racist

Ynet recorded another eruption from that submerged victorious groundhog, the Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah:

According to Nasrallah, Bush views Israel “as a Jewish state, that is, racist…its existence is premised on race. Israel aspires for a racially pure existence.”

Now I am curious: is it the same Hassan Nasrallah that said:

…if [Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide.

and

If we searched the entire world for a person more cowardly, despicable, weak and feeble in psyche, mind, ideology and religion, we would not find anyone like the Jew. Notice, I do not say the Israeli.

Yep. Notice this.

(And for our Russian – speaking reader(s): nasrallah again…)

Cross-posted on SimplyJews.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Lebanon | 2 Comments