December 30, 2005

The inane destructive behavior of a couple of inane establishment Jewish organizations

(Re-dacted from article in Outpost published by Americans for Safe Israel, December 2005)

The immediate world is overflowing with anti-Israel fervor. Mainline churches embark on divestment campaigns. Moslems attack Jews, desecrate cemeteries and destroy synagogues in France. Anti-Semitism in England becomes virulent, the flames fed by its ever- growing Moslem population. Iran’s President calls for Israel to be wiped off the map. A TV series based on that notorious forgery the Protocols of the Elders of Zion further poisons the Arab world against Jews. Opponents of the Iraq war, left and right, attack it as a neo-con (read Jewish) conspiracy to help Israel.

So how does the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) address these extremely serious problems? By ignoring them, that’s how, and instead attacking evangelical Christians, Israel’s chief base of support in the United States, as the great threat against which the Jewish community must mobilize!
The chutzpah of the ADL’s Abe Foxman is breathtaking. What is the sin of the Christian right in his eyes? Why is it doing what the ADL and other Jewish organizations do routinely. As Hillel Halkin aptly observes in an essay entitled “Foxman’s Hypocrisy,” Foxman accuses the Christian right of pushing an “agenda on a wide range of issues, including judicial nominees, stem-cell research, same-sex marriage, abortion restriction and faith-based initiative” - each of them which happen to be issues on which major Jewish organizations have “again and again, fought for politically liberal positions.”

Columnist Don Feder reports that the ineffable Foxman in June actually wrote to the superintendent of the U.S. Naval Academy demanding an end to the practice of grace being said-- led on a rotating basis by Protestant Catholic and Jewish chaplains before midshipmen take lunch. As Jews and Israel come under fire everywhere, this is what engages the ADL!

Not surprisingly, the Union of American Hebrew Organizations, under the equally disgraceful leadership of Eric Yoffie, has trotted after Foxman, passing a resolution attacking the Christian right for engaging in political action. With chutzpah to rival Foxman’s, it then passed a resolution demanding that the Senate reject Samuel Alito’s nomination to the Supreme Court.

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the fight against anti-Semitism would be best served if the ADL and the UAHC went out of existence, given that both organizations actively promote anti-Semitism by doing their utmost to make enemies of would-be friends and natural allies.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 07:08 AM | Comments (0)

December 28, 2005

Dubious Diversity

By Ward Connerly
National Review On-line, December, 2005

“There is not one major American success throughout our history that can be placed at the doorstep of ‘diversity.' All that we are as a nation we owe to merit and individual enterprise.
A quota system is the antithesis of a meritocracy. "[...]

“Although there, is universal rhetorica1 rejection of quotas, there is ample reason to believe that this expressed, outrage is little more than political verbiage. To substantiate this view, we need look no further than the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

“There can be little doubt that the president felt obliged to fill the vacancy that existed on the Supreme Court with a female, and that Miers’s primary qualification was her gender. [...] “The tragedy evidenced by the Harriet Miers nomination is that so many of us were content to accept the underlying quota reality that the nomination represented.

As a nation, our ideological senses have been numbed by the constant blather about ‘diversity.'

“America dodged a bullet when Harriet Miers withdrew her name. But the gun remains pointed at our collective heads in every sphere of American life. Whether it is a student body, a Supreme Court, an athletic team, or a private board, any organization or entity that is, constituted around the quota mindset will not be the best that it otherwise could be — and the nation suffers because of this.”

Ward Connerly, writing on “The Q-Word & American Realities, “December, 2005 in National Review On-Line

Mr. Connerly is the gentleman that has been fighting so-called Affirmative Action - which is, in fact, a quota system- all over the country. Read his:
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/connerly200403030929.asp

Michigan voters will also have an opportunity to restore genuine equal opportunity for its citizens on the November 2006 ballot via legislation sponsored by the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative. For up to date information read: A New Era for Social Science by Chetly Zarko, http://www.chetlyzarko.com/commentary/deference.html


Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 08:17 PM | Comments (0)

December 26, 2005

Hamas' Victory in Municipal Elections

By Meir Litvak
Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies

(By the way, peace with Israel is not part of the Hamas political platform - Jsk)


Hamas' sweeping gains in the fourth round of the Palestinian Authority (PA)
municipal elections, held on December 16, completed its evolution as the
dominant faction in local politics, with significant ramifications for national Palestinian politics as well. Over 1,000,000 Palestinians now live in municipalities governed by Hamas, compared with about 700,000 in municipalities controlled by the hitherto dominant Palestinian movement,
Fatah. This accomplishment may serve as a prelude to a Hamas victory, or at
least a very great success, in the PA parliamentary elections scheduled for
January 2006.

The victory of Hamas is part of a broader trend in the Middle East. Whenever free or relatively free elections take place, the Islamist movements either win - as in Iraq, Kuwait and Morocco -- or at least increase their representation considerably, as happened in Egypt under more constrained circumstances. This phenomenon highlights once more both the power of Islam as the primary framework of identity in the Arab world and the structural weakness of non-Islamist ideologies and political movements.

At the same time, the municipal victories are consistent with the particular
evolution of Palestinian politics since the beginning of the latest round of
confrontation with Israel in 2000, and they are as much a reflection of the
crisis and disintegration of Fatah as of the waxing strength of Hamas.

The past six years have witnessed a worsening economic situation - a consequence of the fight against Israel -- the failure of the PA to function as a
government, and rampant corruption within Fatah's ranks. All these factors
have driven a growing number of Palestinians to support Hamas, whose
efficient and reputedly honest network of social-welfare and religious
propagation institutions have provided essential social services as a surrogate state.

A corollary to this has been growing religiosity in Palestinian society, demonstrated by increasing mosque attendance, the rise in veiling among women, and Fatah's adoption of a religious discourse. The unilateral Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, which most Palestinians attribute to Hamas' military campaign, also helped boost Hamas' fortunes.

Moreover, Hamas has been able to overcome the killing by Israel of its two
charismatic leaders, Ahmad Yasin and Abd al-Aziz al-Rantisi, in March and
April 2004. Indeed, the "gray" personalities of the new Hamas leaders may
have enabled them to work together more effectively to further their
movement's goals.

Fatah, by contrast, has been unable to recover from the death of its founder and leader, Yasser Arafat. Fatah was always a heterogeneous movement but it is now threatened by total disintegration due to splits and rivalries between the older generation that came from Tunis and younger activists who have risen from the ranks inside the territories, as well as between rival security organs and a host of other groups and personalities.

While Arafat could control the internal squabbles thanks to his charisma and manipulation, his successor, Mahmud Abbas, lacks both stature and a personal power-base, and he has failed to exert authority on the warring factions within Fatah or carry out the reforms necessary to salvage the movement. As armed groups, mostly associated with Fatah, terrorized the population, the PA's inability to stem the anarchy further undermined support for it. Likewise, Fatah's temporary split into two rival lists in the parliamentary elections undermined the enthusiasm and commitment of its activists to work for their movement's victory in the municipal election campaign.

Always attuned to public opinion, Hamas focused its municipal campaign on
socio-economic issues and the fight against corruption, and its candidates
enjoyed local prestige as heads of its welfare and educational institutions.
But Fatah had little to offer voters on these issues because it has always
lacked a social agenda, subordinating it to the national struggle and
postponing its articulation to the day after liberation, and it failed to
adapt itself to current voter concerns. Reflecting these differences, Hamas
lists carried the words "Reform" and "Change," while Fateh's lists were
named "The Martyrs."

It may be argued that Hamas' victory is more an indication of a popular
desire to address local matters and put the internal Palestinian house in
order rather than of widespread endorsement of Hamas' radical program and
goals vis-a-vis Israel. Advocates of such views usually point to opinion
polls that show great support among Palestinians for the resumption of
negotiations with Israel and the pursuit of a two-state solution to the
conflict.

However, the election results could also prove to be a crucial step in fulfilling Hamas' long-declared goal and strategy to become the dominant Palestinian faction that can influence if not dictate the Palestinian political agenda and even acquire a veto-power over Palestinian decision-making processes. And the growing power of Hamas will undoubtedly further complicate the already difficult task of advancing a political solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

In recent months, Hamas has expressed its intention to emulate the conduct of the Lebanese Hizbullah movement, which operates as a legitimate political party while keeping its military-terrorist apparatus against Israel intact and employing it whenever it deems that to be useful. Thus, Hamas has insisted that it will refuse to disarm or cease its attacks on Israeli targets even after it enters the Palestinian parliament. Clearly, such an eventuality is unacceptable to Israel and to those who aspire to a peaceful resolution of the conflict.

However, Hamas' control of municipalities and future presence in parliament
will confront it with tough ideological challenges. Since Palestinian
mayors need to maintain almost daily contact with the Israeli authorities in
order to deal with pressing social needs, Hamas mayors will have to choose
between their ideological rejection of any contact or negotiations with
Israel and the practical necessities of serving their constituencies. A
similar dilemma with even greater political ramifications will arise once
Hamas representatives take their place in the Palestinian parliament -- and
especially in the PA government --if negotiations are resumed. A few Hamas leaders in the West Bank have already voiced a readiness to consider a more pragmatic line, but so far they are in the minority; the majority still opposes any negotiations for peace.

Tel Aviv Notes is published byTEL AVIV UNIVERSITY,The Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies & The Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies through the generosity of Sari and Israel Roizman, Philadelphia
--------------------------------------------
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis
Website: www.imra.org.il

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 07:07 AM | Comments (0)

December 19, 2005

For those who don't mind a little nausea

By DAVID BEDEIN
Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency

There is an unprecedented consensus of revulsion, across the political spectrum, that the movie MUNICH, produced by Steven Spielberg, represents the ultimate of "moral equivalency", since it equates the "human interest" story of PLO murderers with the human interest of the unarmed Israeli athletes whom they murdered.

This week, it was confirmed news Spielberg has hired Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon's aide Eyal Arad, to promote 'Munich'!

Spielberg would not have been able to hire the chief strategist and media advisor of the Prime Minister of Israel without the clear and express consent of the Prime Minister of Israel.

On May 21st, 2005, the Israel Civil Service Commission reported to the Knesset Israel Government Controls Committee that Arad indeed receives a full time salary from the government of Israel to provide strategic service to the Prime Minister of Israel.

Our news agency has asked the Prime Minister and the Israel Civil Service Commission to explain how it is that the Israeli government's most senior PR advisor would advocate for the "moral equivalency" message of Israel’s
adversaries.

The question remains: Does this have anything to do with the fact that Mahmoud Abbas, the chairman of Fatah and head of the Palestinian Authority, now in negotiation with the government of Israel, was the PLO official who financed the PLO Munich massacre? #

(The most immediate question to my mind is whether Sharon is really the guy that the Israelis want to lead them in the so-called “peace process” with the Arabs? I have an idea that, with all due respect, there was something wrong with Sharon before he had the stroke. Physicians call these preceding episodes transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) or mini-strokes that occur for a period before the patient actually conks out, as did Mr. Sharon… Just an idea.) Jerome S. Kaufman

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 08:29 PM | Comments (0)

December 15, 2005

The heart-rending complete speech of Carolyn Glick

This speech by Caroline Glick, Deputy Managing Editor, Jerusalem Post, was delivered at the annual dinner of the Zionist Organization of America at the Marriott Marquis Hotel in New York City December 11, 2005 upon her receiving the Ben Hecht Award for Excellence in Journalism for the Middle East.


Good evening. Thank you so much. It is really wonderful to be here in New York with all of you tonight. Thank you.

I want to thank Mort Klein and the ZOA Board of Directors for honoring me with this prestigious award. Ben Hecht was a great Jew, a great Zionist and a powerful writer who used his pen to defend our people and our rights.

That the Zionist Organization of America should view me as worthy to receive an award bearing Ben Hecht’s name is a tremendous vote of confidence in me from people I respect. I am humbled by your faith in me. I hope that I will always remain worthy of this faith.

I also want to thank my boss and colleague in Washington, Mr. Frank Gaffney, the President of the Center for Security Policy for being here tonight.

Frank is a great American patriot and a great friend of the Jewish people in the tradition of George Washington and Orde Wingate and Lord Balfour.

Knowing there are people like Frank in Washington gives me reason to believe that the future holds hope for the Jewish people and for the American people and gives me faith that ultimately, we will emerge victorious in the war now raging against us.

I also want to thank some people who are not here. I want to thank Amnon Lord, the editor of Makor Rishon – the greatest Hebrew newspaper in Israel – for bringing me into newspaper business six years ago and for continuing to encourage me ever since.

David Horovitz, the editor of the Jerusalem Post has provided me with a wonderful platform for my writing and for this I am grateful as well.

Now, back to the people who are here. I want to thank my family. My parents – Gerald and Sharon Glick and my siblings – David, Bonnie and Douglas Glick and their families. My brother in law Paul Foldi and my nephews Matthew and Jonathan are also here tonight.

The responsibility for the survival and success of the Jewish people has always rested first and foremost on the Jewish family. I can say without reservation that I would never have been able to accomplish what I have accomplished in my life if I hadn’t had you as my family. I want you to know that I do not take your love and support for granted. I owe who I am to my ability to trust that love. Thank you.

One of the most fundamental lessons we learned growing up in our parents’ house was the difference between reality and fantasy.

As children, the distinction seemed obvious to us. But apparently, the difference between the two is a lot less easy to discern than it would seem.

This must be the case because the fact of the matter is that today, for the second time in 12 years, a government of Israel -- being led by an elderly politician with a distant past as a war hero -- is basing its policies on fantasy rather than reality.

I made aliyah in May 1991 and joined the army. A couple of years after my service began, I found myself working as the coordinator of the negotiations with the PLO in the Ministry of Defense. In that position, I saw on a daily basis what life looks like in the world of fantasy.

On July 18, 1995 Ori Shachor and Ohad Bachrach – aged 18 and 19 were hiking in Wadi Kelt when they were murdered by Palestinian terrorists. They were each shot in the head and then, after they were dead, their throats were slit.

I remember their murders well. They were killed on a Friday morning. I was sitting at a hotel in Zikhron Yaacov with the heads of the Israeli and Palestinian negotiating teams as they laid out the schedule for the next week of talks when we got word of the killings.

On Sunday morning while I was driving up the coastal highway to Zikhron Yaacov, opponents of the Oslo process staged a creative demonstration.
A convoy of cars, buses and trucks drove up the highway at 20 miles an hour with signs reading, “Rabin, Peres, go slow.”

I was deeply moved by the demonstration. I cried the whole way to Zikhron. I was grateful to the protesters - who made me arrive an hour late at the talks. I was grateful to them for taking the time to show their loyalty to the memory of the young men – for maintaining the honor of our dead.

But when I got to the hotel, my tears were replaced by shock. here, the heads of our delegation were livid at what they considered the chutzpa of the demonstrators for making us start our negotiations late. Uri Savir, then director general of the Foreign Ministry and head of our delegation, like the politicized IDF generals, apologized to the Palestinians for the inconvenience caused them by the demonstrators.

They apologized even as the murderers of Shachor and Bachrach had in the space of 36 hours been arrested and released by the Palestinian security forces. And they apologized even as their Palestinian counterparts were the commanders of the security services that released the young men’s killers.

For these Israeli leaders, the fantasy of the peace process was impervious to the screams of our murdered youths. For these so-called peacemakers, their murder – at the hands of the so-called “enemies of peace” – was a simple inconvenience.

Yehudit Shachor, Ori’s mom told reporters a couple of years later that when she tried to talk to Shimon Peres about the fact that her son’s murderers were walking free, Peres told her that there was nothing that he could do about it because he was in the business of signing peace treaties.

All he could offer was the suggestion that Mrs. Shachor speak with Yassir Arafat.

The fantasy of Oslo was that the Arabs want peace with Israel. This fantasy was laid to rest five years ago when the Palestinians began their terror war against Israel in earnest -- with the support of the entire Arab world and Iran.

Israelis lost their faith in the fantasy of peace as our people were incinerated at cafes, on buses, at bar mitzvah parties and at Passover Seders while in the background, from Cairo to Tehran to Beirut and Damascus to Amman, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion were turned into TV mini-series and the infamous forgeries went into their thousandth printings throughout the Arab and Muslim worlds.

The odd and tragic thing is that just as the fantasy of Oslo was disintegrating against the overwhelming power of the reality of war, it was replaced not with a strategy for victory based on reality, but by a new strategy based on a new fantasy.

Those who for years spoke of the danger of Oslo and watched in horror as their darkest forecasts came true, did not receive the belated thanks of their people.
They continued to be pilloried, as Israel’s elites and their foreign benefactors replaced one old politician and former military leader with another old politician and former military leader and replaced one fantasy for another.

This new fantasy, propounded by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is the fantasy of disengagement.

According to this fantasy, while it is true that the Arab world in general and the Palestinians in particular have no interest in living at peace with Israel, Israel can deal with their hatred by unilaterally disengaging from the Middle East. We can hold up behind walls and barricades, turn on the internet and become immediately transported to a world where we will be safe.

The disengagement from geographical and strategic reality that Sharon is advancing is in many ways more dangerous than the fantasy of Oslo.
Oslo endangered Israelis by empowering the PLO, Hamas and Islamic Jihad and giving them safe bases of operations against Israel in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

Oslo endangered Israelis by sending a clear message to the entire Arab and Muslim world that Israel can be defeated through a strategy of attrition based on terrorism.,The disengagement fantasy does all of this as well. But it also does something more.,The disengagement fantasy involves Israelis directly in the brutalization of other Israelis.

In August of this year, at the command of Sharon and his yes-man Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, the Israel Defense Forces and the Israel Police deployed a force of 50,000 soldiers and policemen to forcibly expel all Jews from Gaza and northern Samaria. In so doing, Sharon and Mofaz made Israel the first country to ethnically cleanse land from Jews simply because they are Jews since the Holocaust.

The justice system in Israel was subverted to ensure the accomplishment of the goal of making Gaza and northern Samaria Judenrein. People were denied permits to protest..People’s freedom of movement was restricted as policemen intercepted buses transporting lawful protesters to legal demonstrations.

Thousands of people were arrested en masse and kept behind bars for weeks and months without trial or indictment for the “crime” of opposing their government’s policies. Among these Jewish political prisoners were hundreds of minor children. And when the Public Defender’s office put out a report explaining that laws were prejudicially enforced based on the suspects’ political views, Chief Public Defender Inbal Rubinstein was forced to apologize for the report under threat of firing from Justice Minister Tzipi Livni.

In the meantime, in spite of the constant demonization by the Hebrew press and the Prime Minister’s office, the protesters themselves, managed to protest against this immoral and strategically disastrous policy while maintaining their dignity and reputation as Israeli patriots and democratic opponents of the government.

For the most part, the IDF too maintained its dignity. It was clear from Sharon’s statements that he wanted for the IDF to clash with the protesters. Through word and deed he made it clear to everyone that he wanted for the two sides to view one another as enemies and to act that way. Sharon’s aim was to force a violent clash between the IDF and the opponents of the expulsions in order to delegitimize the supporters of the Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza in order to prepare the groundwork for mass expulsions from Judea and Samaria. He failed.

In the now destroyed synagogues in the now destroyed town of Neve Dekalim, in Gedid, in Atzmona, in Netzarim, in Kfar Darom, soldiers and protesters - expelled Jews and their supporters - prayed and sang and wept together.
The IDF stood by its duty to fulfill the orders of the government even when the government is wrong.

And the hundreds of thousands of protesters against the expulsions understood that one man and one man alone was responsible for this moral outrage – Ariel Sharon – and he was not in Gush Katif. The strength of the Jewish people was palpable during the dark days of July and August. Both the opponents of the expulsions and the army that was called in to execute those expulsions understood that they held a grave responsibility to avert a civil war that Sharon and his political consultants were pushing for.

But while the achievements of both the army and the opponents of the expulsions were great, ironically, they paved the way for the next round of expulsions by making it seem easy to throw Jews out of their homes.

Today Sharon and his associates are planning to move immediately after the general elections to expel an additional fifty thousand Jews from their homes in Judea and Samaria. Indeed, the coming elections will answer one question and only one question:

Will Sharon continue the policy of ethnically cleansing the Land of Israel of Jews and transfer 95 percent of Judea and Samaria to our enemies – even before he begins negotiating Jerusalem, the immigration of foreign Arabs to the Land of Israel and Israel’s security arrangements with anyone?

That is, will Israel expand its vulnerability to national destruction at the hands of our enemies and continue to turn Jew against Jew in the hopes of inciting a civil war?

Will Israel, at the same time as the Iranians with the silent support of the Arab world call for the eradication of the Jewish state, continue to cling to the fantasy that we can live in our land and pretend that we are not part of our neighborhood?

It is possible that Sharon will win the coming elections, although all must be done to point out to the Israeli people and to our friends around the world in the coming months, the tragic toll such an event will take on the lives of thousands Israelis and our allies around the world.

All must be made to know that the result of choosing fantasy over reality is the murder of thousands of real people. And if Sharon does win, we must understand that the fight for truth will continue. In such an event the role of the ZOA and its members will become both more difficult and more important.
Just as it has done since Israel first chose fantasy over reality 12 years ago, the ZOA will be forced to remain a voice of truth even as the power rests in the hands of those who base their policies on denying truth.

In Gaza this summer I saw the greatness of the Jewish people even in the hour of our self-inflicted suffering. I have seen since the withdrawal from Gaza -- with the transformation of Gaza into a base for international terror, and the transformation of the western Negev into a war zone -- that our enemies continue to be consistent in their dedication to the destruction of our country.

I believe in the greatness of the Jewish people. I know that alas, we have a tendency, because of the burden of our identity, to choose false messiahs in every generation – men who tell us there is an easy way out of our struggle.

I also know that there is a core among us, that never loses faith in our destiny as the Children of Abraham, Issac and Jacob. This is the core of Jews that never forgets the distinction between fact and fantasy. And the people in this room are part of this core. I entreat you to recognize that each of us carries the responsibility for our people but also the ability as committed proud Jews, and friends of the Jews to secure our future.

There is much difficult work to be done. And I have trust that we are equal to the task. I pray that G-d should bless all of you and that he should bless the Jewish people and our friends throughout the world.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 12:28 PM | Comments (0)

December 13, 2005

REMARKS OF JOHN BOLTON AND CAROLINE GLICK @ ZOA DINNER

JOHN BOLTON, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UNITED NATIONS
CAROLINE GLICK, DEPUTY EDITOR JERUSALEM POST

BOTH HONORED AT ZIONIST ORGANIZATION OF AMERICA DINNER, DEC. 11, 2005

AMBASSADOR BOLTON, “IT'S A FANTASY THAT ISRAEL IS TREATED FAIRLY AT U.N.”

NEW YORK - A record 1000 people came to the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) National Dinner on Sunday night at the Marriot Marquis Hotel in New York City. The U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, was ZOA's Keynote Speaker. Bolton received the ZOA's Defender of Israel Award and delivered a powerful speech in which he laid out many of the problems at the United Nations, stating, "Let's be clear - for it to be said that Israel is being treated as a normal nation at the U.N. is fantasy." Bolton's address was repeatedly interrupted by applause and he received a standing ovation.

Bolton, whose appointment as U.N. Ambassador was strongly supported
by the ZOA, has worked in recent weeks in the U.N. Security Council to have Syria and Palestinian Islamic Jihad named in connection with the terrorist attack against Israelis in Netanya which killed five and wounded more than 30 and also succeeded in having the Islamist terrorist group Hezbollah condemned for its attack upon Israel. This was the first occasion the U.N. has ever condemned Hezbollah. Bolton said at the dinner that the U.S. would not back down and that naming terrorists "is something we plan to do in the future." He also spoke of Iran's public threat to wipe Israel off the map as being "no mere flight of rhetoric when it comes from a state that has been pursuing weapons of mass destruction."

Ambassador Bolton promised to pursue the issue of UN-sponsored
anti-Israeli campaigns. Referring to last week's "Day of Solidarity with the
Palestinian People", at which a "Map of Palestine" was displayed from which Israel was expunged, Bolton said that there was reason to believe the map had been produced and paid for by the U.N. and referred also to the case of a U.N. funded agency that had produced mugs and t-shirts saying, 'Today Gaza, Tomorrow Jerusalem,' saying that the U.S. would pursue these matters:
" If that is true, then you, the American taxpayer, paid for 22% of that map
(percentage of UN budget paid for by US). You probably paid 22% of that
entire event. We're going to find out if that is true . I want to make it clear that we are not finished with the issue . We are setting a new standard for honesty at the U.N." Bolton also praised the ZOA for being willing to speak the truth about the Middle East even when others are reluctant to do so.

Also at the dinner, the ZOA's Ben Hecht Award for Outstanding
Journalism on the Middle East was presented to Caroline Glick, the Deputy
Managing Editor of the Jerusalem Post
and a syndicated columnist for both
the Post and Makor Rishon, who in 2003 was named the most prominent woman in Israel by the Israeli daily Ma'ariv. Glick said, "That ZOA should view me as worthy of this award is a vote of confidence in me from people I respect. I notice there is always a core among us that never loses faith in our destiny as the children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and never forgets the distinction between fact and fantasy. The ZOA people in this room are part of this core."

Glick spoke of the current dangers facing Israel in being led by old
leaders "basing their policies on fantasy rather than reality . To some
Israeli leaders, the fantasy of the Oslo peace process was impervious to the screams of our murdered youth . The fantasy of Oslo was that Arabs want peace with Israel. The fantasy of Oslo was not replaced by a strategy for victory based on reality, but with a new strategy based on a new fantasy .

Sharon's new fantasy of disengagement is that while it is true that the Arab world in general and the Palestinians in particular have no interest in living at peace with Israel, Israel can deal with their hatred by unilaterally disengaging from the Middle East and holding up behind walls and barricades, turning on the internet and becoming immediately transported to a world where we will be safe. The disengagement from geographical and strategic reality that Sharon is advancing is in many ways more dangerous than the fantasy of Oslo..."

"When the mother of an Israeli murdered by a terrorist asked Shimon
Peres about the fact that her son's murderers were walking free, Peres told
her that there was nothing that he could do about it because he was in the
business of signing peace treaties. The odd and tragic thing is that just as
the fantasy of Oslo was disintegrating against the overwhelming power of the reality of war, it was replaced not with a strategy for victory based on
reality, but by a new strategy based on a new fantasy. Those who for years
spoke of the danger of Oslo and watched in horror as their darkest forecasts
came true, did not receive the belated thanks of their people but instead
continue to be pilloried..."

Glick also explained that civil rights were denied to Israeli protestors of the Gaza withdrawal. "The disengagement fantasy involves Israelis directly in the brutalization of other Israelis . People were denied permits to protest. People's freedom of movement was restricted, as police intercepted buses transporting lawful protestors to legal demonstrations. Thousands of people were arrested en masse, kept behind bars for weeks or months without trial or indictment for the 'crime' of opposing their government's polices. Among these political prisoners were hundreds of children and teenagers. When the Public Defenders Office put out a report explaining that laws were prejudicially enforced based on a suspect's political view, Chief Public Defender Rubenstein was forced to apologize for the report under the threat of firing from Justice Minister Tzippi Livni."

"This Gaza disengagement has paved the way for the next round of
expulsions by making it seem easy to throw Jews out of their homes. Today,
Sharon's and his associates are planning to move immediately after the
elections to expel an additional 60,000 Jews from their homes in Judea and
Samaria and transfer 95% of Judea and Samaria to our enemies, even before
beginning negotiations over Jerusalem, so-called Arab refugees and security
arrangements... Will Israel continue to cling to the fantasy that we can
live in our land and pretend that we are not part of our neighborhood? All
must be made to know that the result of choosing fantasy over reality is the
murder of thousands of real people." She concluded by saying, "During these days, the ZOA will remain a voice of truth even if the power rests in the hands of those denying truth."

ZOA National President Morton A. Klein, in his remarks at the dinner
said
, "Ever since the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and northern Samaria, instead of things getting better, things have been getting worse. Hundreds of missiles have been fired at Israel from Gaza, thousands of weapons have been smuggled into Gaza and dozens of terrorists have entered Gaza." Klein cited poll after poll that Americans support Israel and not the Palestinians and gave a detailed historical, political and religious analysis exposing the "propaganda myth that Jerusalem is holy or important to Arabs and Muslims." His analysis included explanations that Jerusalem is never
mentioned in the Koran and that no Arab leader visited east Jerusalem while
the Arabs controlled it from 1948 to 1967.

Klein also paid tribute to Israel's Christian supporters, noting that, "Unlike others, we praise and appreciate Christian Zionists who support Israel." Klein discussed the accomplishments of the ZOA Division of Government Relations on Capitol Hill, the ZOA Center for Law and Justice and the ZOA College Activism Group. He ended his speech by making it clear that it was a common occurrence in Jewish history that a minority of Jews have been proved right and helped in the end to save the majority of Jews, with the Maccabees during this Chanukah season being the classic example.

IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis
Website: www.imra.org.il


Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 10:25 PM | Comments (0)

December 11, 2005

Eric Yoffie’s Questionable Resolution

By Jerome S. Kaufman

One can’t help but wonder how the more than 2000 voting delegates at the Union for Reform Judaism developed the military and political expertise to draft a resolution demanding a clear exit strategy from Iraq?

How embarrassing for the Jews to have one of their largest organizations take such a stand against an administration attempting to defend us, despite dedicated politically-motivated malicious criticism from almost all the media and dissident groups as typified by flagrant anti-Semites like Cindy Sheehan and her scruffy band of malcontents camping outside President Bush’s home in Texas.

Evidently the fact that President Bush’s war against terrorism is directed entirely against the enemies of the Western world and the State of Israel had no impact on the delegates. Evidently the delegates at the Reform movement conclave think that this worldwide multi-pronged attack will simply disappear if we just once again turn around and go home. The Islamists will somehow not take this as a complete victory and pursue us with even greater and more confident motivation.

The resolution calls the war, “untenable” and claims that President Bush did not exercise all his options before going to war. How many times was Bush to go to the UN for confirmation and help? Never mind the fact that Kofi Annan’s son Kojo had received money from one of the U.N.'s prime contractors under the Oil for Food scam with at least $17 billion grafted out of a U.N. relief program for Iraq. And how naïve would one have to be to not believe that the father was not intimately involved?

Never mind, the French, the Russians and at least one Britisher, George Galloway, who yells daily about the rape of Jerusalem by Zionism, were knee deep in the Iraqi Oil for Food scandal making millions of dollars in payola money from Saddam Hussein. These were the nations and people President Bush was supposed to convince to help us in Iraq against Saddam Hussein, the payer!

Never mind between 1991 and 1998 the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) conducted more than 1500 inspections. IAEA released a report in 1997, with updates in 1998 and 1999, which it believes offers a technically coherent picture of Iraq's nuclear program.

The summary of the IAEA report says that following the August 1990 invasion of Kuwait, Iraq launched a "crash program" to develop a nuclear weapon quickly by extracting weapons grade material from safe-guarded research reactor fuel. This project, if it had continued uninterrupted by the war, might have succeeded in producing a deliverable weapon by the end of 1992.

Never mind that Hussein spent eight years from 1980-1988 attempting to conquer Iran. Never mind in 1988 he committed inhumane atrocities against the Kurds in Halabja a town of 70,000 people where 5,000 people died immediately as a result of a chemical attack and an estimated 12,000 people died during the course of those three days.

Never mind in the First Gulf war of 1991 he did conquer all of Kuwait, ransacked its banks and touted off millions of dollars worth of gold and then proceeded to set fire to all of Kuwait’s oil fields in order to bankrupt the country and thwart his defeat by the United States.

Never mind that George W. Bush has taken our first real stance against the terrorism that the Clinton Administration (1993 to 2001) swept under the rug. During those years while militant Islam was sharpening its teeth, the following direct attacks on the US were virtually ignored:

Blow up of the US embassy in Beirut, Lebanon 1983
Blow up of Marine Barracks Beirut, Lebanon 1983;
Blow up Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988;
Blow up, the first time, of the New York World Trade Center 1993;
Blow up Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996;
Blow up Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy attack 1998;
Blow up US Embassy, Dares Salaam, Tanzania 1998;
Blow up USS Cole Aden, Yemen 2000

Finally, in their great newly found confidence Islamic terrorists bombed the New York World Trade Center and Pentagon September 11, 2001.

Also, note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide. Who were the attackers? In each case, the attackers on the US were Muslims.

Exactly what did Eric Yoffie and his declared “grass roots” of the Reform movement in their ultimate political and moral wisdom want George W. Bush to do - pretend that they happened to someone else as did his immediate predecessor?

As to Eric Yoffie’s hyperbolic statement that, “American Jews, and all Americans, are profoundly critical of the war and want the administration to tell us how to bring our troops home.” I don’t think so. What Americans do want is for our armed forces to defeat our enemies and to maintain the marvelously free world with which G-d has blessed us.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 09:48 PM | Comments (0)

December 07, 2005

John Kerry's State Department

New York Sun Staff Editorial
November 21, 2005

A story circulating in Washington, perhaps apocryphal, has it that late one evening during last year's annual Munich Conference on Security Policy, after the day's discussions were finished and a few drinks had been downed, Richard Holbrooke began a sentence by saying, "When John Kerry is president and I'm secretary of state and Nicholas Burns here is undersecretary of state for political affairs ..." However, Mr. Kerry went on to lose the election, and Mr. Holbrooke, who was America's ambassador to the United Nations under President Clinton and Mr. Kerry's foreign policy adviser, is but a private citizen, albeit a distinguished one. Mr. Burns, however, emerged from his position as America's ambassador to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to become just what that story had Mr. Holbrooke predicting, undersecretary of state for political affairs, with the surprise ending being that it's in a Bush administration.

Mr. Holbrooke, relaying a message via his office, denies the yarn about the remark in Munich and says it "wouldn't be appropriate" for him to have made such a declaration. But he is, his office says, "delighted" that theundersecretary is Mr. Burns, who "epitomizes the best in the foreign service." In January, Mr. Holbrooke had written a glowing report in the Washington Post predicting that Mr. Burns would be in the new State Department team, which he described as "among the very best professionals of the current generation." He said their foreign policy would be "more centrist, oriented toward problem-solving, essentially non-ideological, and focused on traditional diplomacy." Mr. Holbrooke got almost all the appointments he predicted (and praised) correct - including Assistant Secretary Daniel Fried, Assistant Secretary C. David Welch, and Assistant Secretary Christopher R. Hill.

Such effusive praise of the Bush administration's team for State from the man who would have most likely led the State Department in a Kerry administration (sorry, Senator Biden) tells a lot about the state of things in Foggy Bottom. President Bush won the 2004 election, a contest fought largely on foreign policy issues. Mr. Bush presented the platform for continuing America's war on terror by tackling tyrannical regimes and democratizing the Middle East. Mr. Kerry ran on a platform of working "more with our European allies," which the American people knew meant ignoring the British, Italians, and others who joined the war in Iraq, and instead making nice with the French and Germans. But the staffing hasn't worked out the way the voters might have expected.

Instead, with a few exceptions, most notably John Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations and Condoleezza Rice as secretary, we've gotten a State Department of Kerry-ites. Mr. Burns, moreover, is unusually influential as the third-ranking officer in the department because Ms. Rice has been relentlessly globetrotting and her immediate deputy, Robert Zoellick, has been preoccupied with Sudan and China. And if there's a tradition of bipartisan consensus in the foreign service and in American foreign policy overall, no one seems to have told Mr. Burns about it. The State Department is back to advancing its own agenda rather than the president's - or, worse, counseling the president and influencing him in ways that pull him away from the policies he ran on.

Mr. Burn's exact role in policy is hidden by State Department secrecy, but it's visible in the Bush administration's letting the E.U.-3 (Britain, France, and Germany) take the lead in handling Iran's march toward the A-bomb. On Friday Mr. Burns was in London representing the administration in meetings with officials from Britain, France, Germany, and Russia to discuss Iran. Letting the E.U.-3 lead in dealing with Iran means policy is guided by the lowest common denominator of the three - Germany - whose policy is closely aligned to that of Russia, which is helping Iran build its nuclear program. Hardly surprising then that the E.U.-3's dealing with Iran are all carrots and no sticks. We sense Mr. Burns's hand as well in the Bush administration's acceptance of President Mubarak's election victory in Egypt - hardly a free or fair election. His influence is also seen in the Bush administration's close relationship with Saudi Arabia and the deference with which it treats Yasser Arafat's longtime sidekick, Mahmoud Abbas.

Mr. Burns has impeccable credentials for a Kerry administration official. He studied in France, earning the Certificat Pratique de Langue Francaise from the Sorbonne, and speaks French, Arabic, and Greek. He did a stint as spokesman for President Clinton's first-term secretary of state, Warren Christopher, where his service included criticizing Mayor Giuliani for kicking Yasser Arafat out of a concert at Lincoln Center, saying that Mr. Arafat deserved to be treated with "respect, dignity, and hospitality." Mr. Holbrooke's praises of Mr. Burns as being among a group of diplomats who are "centrists" and "non-ideological" are no doubt spot on. He's just not what the American people voted for, and when Mr. Bush returns from his gallivanting overseas the best thing he can do to redeem his commitment to voters is to do something about it.

( Not to mention the usual State Department, poured in concrete, policy of throwing Israel down the tube to pacify non-existent Arab allies, as was amply just demonstrated by Condolezza Rice)

Jerome S. Kaufman

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 08:44 PM | Comments (0)