November 27, 2008

Shimon Peres advises Indian PM Singh re: Islam’s messengers of “peace”

An Open Letter from President Shimon Peres to Indian PM Manmohan Singh

Authored by Professor Steven Plaut, Haifa, Israel University

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

My heartfelt sympathies to you and the Indian people for the Bombay/Mumbai
unrest and protests against occupation this week. However, we must really speak about how to deal with these forms of activism in India, perpetrated by these misunderstood Islamic militants.

Mister Prime Minister, I have a great deal of experience in dealing successfully with terrorism and violence, and this is why I wish to come to your rescue. The first thing you must realize is that one can only make peace with one's enemies. With one's friends, there is no need to make peace. There is no military solution to the problems of terrorism, and this is why you must seek a diplomatic solution. "No Justice, No Peace?" as they say.

You must invite the leaders of this Islamic organization responsible for the
bloodshed in Mumbai to New Delhi to meet with you and perhaps tour the Taj Mahal together. You must learn to feel their pain and understand their needs. However, most importantly, you must end the illegal occupation of territory that does not belong to you! First, you must withdraw from Kashmir and Jammu and remove all the Hindu settlers there. But, that is just a beginning. Large sections of West Bengal, Assam, Kerala, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat and Hyderabad contain local Moslem majorities. Lakshadweep is 95% Moslem.

You cannot continue to coerce these people into living as demographic minorities. The solution is to create two states for two peoples, inside India itself. Indian Moslems are entitled to self-determination and national sovereignty! You must bear in mind that India was conquered by the Moguls and that makes all of India the homeland of Moslems. The fact that India was
partitioned with Pakistan and Bengladesh granted independence does not solve anything. What about the right of return for Punjabi Moslem refugees and other Moslems? These demand that they be allowed to exercise their sovereign rights inside India in the lands of their forefathers and have their one-time homes restored to them!

Then there is the matter of the status of New Delhi. It was a Moslem city for centuries, and served as the Moghul capital. Your selfish insistence that New Delhi remain Indian is racist. You must end the apartheid regime inside Delhi and turn it into the shared capital of two states, or maybe three. I have no doubt Pakistan will applaud your efforts.

You must meet all the demands of the militants in Mumbai in full. In addition, you must offer them Internet web services and five-star tourist hotels in exchange for their promising to abandon violence. After all, that is how we turned Yasser Arafat into a peace partner. You see, military force serves no role any more in the post-modern universe. It is passe. It is archaic. Today, consumer interests dominate the world, and the Islamist activists of the earth will surely make peace in exchange for some profits from participating in global trade.

The attacks on Mumbai came because you have been insufficiently sensitive
to the needs of the Moslem Other. You took their rhetoric at face value, whereas we in Israel know that all this rhetoric is empty and in fact, these people truly want peace. Sure, they praise Hitler and celebrate genocidal atrocities, but what is it that they really want? You must negotiate with them even while under attack. Conditioning negotiations on an end to violence is a no-win situation. It will simply extend the bloodshed! You must put your own house in order, and eliminate inequality and injustice inside India, and then the terrorists will no longer target you.

The key is to build a New Middle Asia, one in which everyone is so busy with the important matters of developing tourism, infrastructure investments and high-technology that they will have no time to pursue violence. Moreover, if you strike at the perpetrators of the Mumbai protests and their supporters, you will simply expand and enlarge the cycle of violence. Your retaliation bombs will no doubt injure some innocent children and civilians alongside any terrorist activists you strike. That will enrage the rest of the world and make the victims seek revenge. Your violence against these militants and activists will cause them to hate the Hindus and it will drive the separatists to embrace terrorism. Moreover, if you refuse to negotiate with the Moslem separatists, then their leaders will be toppled and a violent extremist group will take charge. In that case, you will have lost the window of opportunity to make peace.

Begin by declaring a unilateral ceasefire! Mister Prime Minister, blessed is the peacemaker. Remember Mahatma Gandhi (but not Rehavam "Gandhi" Zeevi). The entire world will support you and congratulate you if you respond to these horrific attacks by disarming India and opening serious dialogue with the terror activists. All we are saying is give peace a chance. Yitzhak Rabin would have approved. Yes, chaver, what you need is shalom, salaam, peace. You will be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize in recognition. Do not allow yourself to be drawn down into the gutter of retaliation. Violence never achieves anything. History has no lessons. History is the dead past.

Follow my example! Provide the Bombay bombers with anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles so that they can battle against the true radicals and extremists. And they will do so with no ACLU or Supreme Court to restrain them! Demonstrate your humanity by paying pensions to any widows and orphans of the terrorists who blew up the hotels. Mister Prime Minister, my own peace policies have eliminated war, bloodshed and terror from the Middle East. We now have only peace partners. If you follow in my footsteps, you can achieve the same lofty goals.

Peacefully yours,

Shimon Peres, Peacemaker-at-Large

(Of counsel - Jimmy Carter, Bishop Tutu, Hugo Chavez, Haim Ramon, Yossi Beilin, Shalom Achshav, Peace Now and the United Nations at large) jsk

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 08:43 AM | Comments (0)

November 25, 2008

A Transcendent View by Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

A Transcendent American Moment

The Jewish Press, November 14, 2008

November 4, 11 PM Times Square — Taxis horns are honking, young people are jumping. Barack Obama has just been declared president-elect of the United States. Amid the collective euphoria, a young man on a bicycle sees me and my yarmulke, rides over and says, “Hey man, you didn’t vote for Obama, did you?” “Why would you say that?’ I ask him. “You don’t even know me.” “Because I’m from Israel,” he responded. “And I didn’t either.”

Interesting assumption, that Jews are not applauding the election of America’s first black president. It’s an impression that we best quickly correct. Because an African-American’s victory as president of the United States is a triumph for every Jewish man, woman and child.

Yes, I know that many in our community are concerned about Obama and Israel and especially his declared willingness to meet with the Ahmadinejad of Iran. And, no doubt our community will do its utmost to tell him why that’s a bad idea. But, that should not change our shared pride in the fact that a special man from a downtrodden minority has reached the highest office in the land.

When I was chosen to host “Shalom in the Home” and could we take my black yarmulke and jazz it up with some color? My name was already weird enough. Why alienate Americans in the heartland further with those bizarre strings hanging from my pants while I talked to troubled couples about their marriages? If only those same producers could have known that two years later a black man, with an African name as strange as my own, would be elected president, they might have thought differently about my ability to appeal to the American mainstream.

How many Jewish men and women changed their names to hide their ethnicity? How many were convinced that only by jettisoning Jewish peculiarity could they succeed? How ironic that Barack Obama would be the one to prove how misguided they were.

When I served as rabbi at Oxford, some of the brightest Jewish Rhodes and Marshall scholars arrived at the university with a yarmulke that was quickly taken off. They had no choice, they told me, if they were to get ahead. Likewise, many abandoned Jewish ritual observances, like putting on tefillin, which they saw as backward and primitive. Some were students who nursed aspirations of being president. Sophistication was essential is they were to play a role on the world stage.

Now a black man whose Kenyan relatives slaughtered sheep and goats to celebrate his victory is about to become the most powerful man on earth. What Obama has done is remove from every Jewish person, and indeed every member of any ethnic minority, the excuse that he or she cannot succeed because of prejudice.

The guiding principle of my life has always been the first chapter of Genesis, where the Torah declares that every human being is created equally in God’s image. As a Jew, I have always loved America, the world’s first modem republic dedicated to the notion that all people are of infinite value and free and that no one is born more royal than anyone else. And Jews have prospered mightily in this country. But against the backdrop of that love of country was the knowledge that just 130 years ago black women were put on a block, their teeth and gums examined, sold to the highest bidder like cattle, their babies ripped from their arms to serve as human chattel.

Even after Abraham Lincoln took a bullet to the head after he had become the Great Emancipator, the iniquity continued with Jim Crow laws and segregation, well into the 1960s. A hundred years after Lincoln, black kids playing baseball in the shimmering summer heat, beads of sweat dripping from their temples, were still not allowed to quench their thirst at water fountains reserved for white folks. And now, the most powerful man in the world is a man with black skin.

If we in the Jewish community cannot celebrate that achievement, whatever disagreements we may have with the president-elect on some important policies, then we have no sense of history. We who know what it is like to be targeted for our very being salute a man who caused others to transcend theft innate prejudice. And we who know what it is like to be hated when we have caused no offense pay homage to a man who has caused others to rise above theft personal demons and embrace the better angels of their nature.

Three summers ago, I drove my children out to Memphis, Tennessee to experience the last days of Martin Luther King, Jr. We stopped at the Masonic Temple where he declared, just 22 hours before he died, “tonight I am fearing no man .. - because the Lord has taken me over the mountain.”

And as we stood outside the patio of the Lorraine Motel, where an assassin’s bullet took the civil rights leaders life, I read the haunting words on a marble slab that had been put there just one week after his death by his dear friend Ralph Abernathy. It quoted from the book of Genesis and the story of Joseph: “Behold, there cometh the dreamer. Come let us slay him and let us see what shall become of his dreams.” We have all just seen what has become of Dr. King’s dream.

P.S. Suddenly, in the middle of the night after posting the above article, I awoke realizing that Rabbi Boteach was barking up the wrong tree assuming that American Jews were not applauding the election of a Black man. That is patently false. Jews obviously applauded Obama far more than the general population with 78% voting for him versus only 52-53% of the rest of the American electorate!.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 09:32 PM | Comments (0)

November 24, 2008

The Palm Beach Post on GW Bush, B. Obama and Israel

Middle East Awaits President 44

Redacted from Palm Beach Post Editorial, November 3, 2008

“George Bush waited too long to seek a Middle East peace agreement. His successor should not wait at all. Some of Barack Obama’s more hysterical critics have claimed that an Obama presidency would be a problem for Israel. But, Israel, these days, is making serious problems for itself. A week ago, the government dismantled an illegal settlement outpost in the West Bank. Under Mr. Bush’s “road map,’ the outposts were to have been torn down, but only a few have been removed because the settlers have become so strong politically, especially in parties such as Shas. These ultra-Orthodox settlers believe that God gave the West Bank — Judea and Samaria — to the Jews...”

My letter to the editor below, limited to 200 words as per instructions, but, of course, not printed anyway.

Jerome S. Kaufman

Relative to your editorial, “Middle East awaits President 44” which blamed President Bush for “waiting too long to seek a Middle East peace agreement”:

Why did you not include in the blame Presidents 33-42, the 10 presidents before GW? These began with Harry Truman, who was in office at the re-birth of the State of Israel in 1948. The list continues of successive Presidents that have not been able to make “peace” in the Middle East. They are, in order: Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmie Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton at Number 42, who spent his entire presidency courting Yasir Arafat. Arafat visited the White House far more times than any other leader before or afterward, and all to no avail. After months of tortuous negotiations, Arafat rejected Barak’s suicidal offer completely and instead, began terrorist plan, Intifada II.

When are the media and the immediate world going to realize that the Arabs have no interest in making a genuine peace with Israel, regardless of the deal put on the table? History shows that they have never stopped trying to drive the Jews out of their land since the time of Muslim forces pouring out of the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century to conquer the world. That was 1300 years before the State of Israel was even re-established! How then blame GW Bush? “Peace” will not result from giving up any of Israel’s infinitesimal land to pacify her relentless enemies. Peace to the Arabs has always meant only driving the Jews out completely or have them live under Muslim domination and Sharia law. Giving up more of Israel’s infinitesimal country will only hasten its destruction and, guess who Islam plans as its ultimate victim.

Jerome S. Kaufman

Of course, if it were not for the 200 word letter to the editor recommended limitation, I would have advised the ill-informed and anti-Israel Palm Beach Post that the Israeli settlers were absolutely right. The Jewish Bible (Old Testament) and near 4000 years of history have unequivocally confirmed that the land of Israel was given to the Jews. In fact, it was to have been many times greater in size than the microscopic piece of territory Israel now possesses. It was to have contained the territory on both sides of the Jordan River including the artificial and never previously existing nation of Jordan going all the way to the Euphrates River in Iraq. That much land was also the amount that was to have been returned to the Jews by the League of Nations Mandate after WWI.

Anti-Israel historians also choose to forget that, at the same time the return of the Jews to their ancient land was planned, the League awarded the Arabs land that became 21 Arab nations, on land 100 times greater than that returned the Jews.

As to the “Road Map.” That is not “President Bush’s Road Map” but rather that of the European Union, the Soviet Union, The United Nations and the American State Dept. – all of whom are renown for their pro-Arab tilt – not unlike most of the so-called liberal press of the world. The Road Map is just another formula, much like the again heralded Saudi “Peace” Plan, for Israel’s destruction. And, this will certainly not be in our best interests or that of the rest of the free world.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 05:33 AM | Comments (0)

November 22, 2008

A Patriotic American Muslim addresses President-elect Barack Obama

Redacted from an article by Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser

As President-elect Barack Obama and his administration begin the transition process from the Bush administration, anti-Islamists cannot help but be concerned. Those of us dedicated to stimulating and facilitating long overdue reform within the Muslim consciousness against the growing threat of political Islam cannot help but feel more adrift now than ever before with little legitimate “hope for change” in our policy against Islamists then we have ever had. The long and arduous two year campaign negligently spent little to no time laying out what the policy of the Obama administration would be toward Islamists, both foreign and domestic.

While the Bush administration understood the basic need to promote liberty as an alternative to oppression in Muslim lands, they were unable to translate that into an effective policy with a critical engagement of Islamists. They did not seize the opportunities they had to counter political Islam by fostering grassroots movements for freedom against Islamists. If the Obama campaign is any sign of what is in store, we seem to be headed even further back into a retreat from any perceptible contest of ideas against the ideology of Islamism.

While the dominance of economic issues during the final months of the campaign can certainly be understood, one major attack by radical Islamists is all that would be necessary to precipitate what could ultimately be a most devastating and crippling blow to our economy. We cannot afford to overlook this possibility. To do so leaves little room for comfort in the hearts of concerned anti-Islamists today. In fact, looking at the Obama campaign’s inclination to appoint individuals like Mazen Asbahi to “Muslim outreach” may portend a naïve facilitative role with regards to Islamists and the ideology of Islamism. Looking at the converse, in what appears to be significant domestic and foreign support for President-elect Obama by Islamists, also portends an upcoming weaker stance – if not outright appeasement – from Washington against the ideology of Islamists.

The messages from the Obama campaign (or lack thereof) concerning political Islam, were interpreted favorably by American Islamist organizations. The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and their umbrella lobbying organization the American Muslim Task Force (AMT) all quickly rushed to congratulate President-elect Obama.

Interestingly, the AMT pushed out an election eve endorsement on November 3, 2008, deceptively trying to “have its cake and eat it too.” They stated to the Massachusetts Telegram and Gazette, “by making an ‘indirect endorsement’ but keeping it low profile, Mr. Ali said, the organization avoided two pitfalls: ‘creating problems for the Obama campaign (and) accepting exclusion from the American mainstream.”

In other words, the Islamists carefully avoided any possibility of having the Obama campaign account for their stance by having to accept or reject the endorsement of every American Islamist organization. Thus, the twelve Islamist organizations which are represented by AMT were able to claim public and open support of Obama on November 5, 2008 while avoiding any real contest of ideas and reckoning about their own facilitation and promulgation of political Islam.

Post-election day, AMT quickly rushed out a press release of the results of a poll (conducted by “Genesis Research Associates”) of American Muslims, which was uncritically regurgitated by the mainstream media claiming that 89% of American Muslims voted for Obama. It also claimed a 95% Muslim voter turnout. I am inclined, for a number of reasons, to believe that these numbers are a bit inflated. This reminds us of the dire need for anti-Islamist Muslims to contract well-established polling firms in the study of the American Muslim population from an anti-Islamist perspective rather than what can be a self-fulfilling prophecy completed by Islamists.

By the way, it should not escape informed readers that Islamists are “hardly liberal.” They are in fact “reactionary,” if not medieval in their views, when it comes to their beliefs on women’s rights, minority rights, free speech laws (i.e. blasphemy laws), and corporal punishment for crimes, to name just a few areas of conflict between current day “established sharia law” and the rule of law in Western secular liberal democracies.

The Obama mantra of “change” gives anti-Islamists little comfort arising out of a campaign which was negligently short on substance on the issue of radical Islamism and the threat of Islamist-inspired terrorism. One would be hard-pressed to find candidate Obama or any of his surrogates on the record once about the “contest of ideas” and what his vision, or that of his advisors, is of how that contest would play out in his administration.

Sadly, when the issue of Islam and Muslims was addressed it focused far too narrowly and naïvely on identity politics and religious freedom for Muslims in America, rather than the threat of political Islam or the absence of religious freedom in “Muslim” nations. Political correctness once again prevailed against a backdrop of an ideology promoted by Islamists which still threatens our national security.

Regardless of how much American Islamists reject terrorism as an act, the fact remains that all radical Islamists come out of the mindset of political Islam. Real counter-terrorism can only come out of real anti-Islamism. Collectivizing Muslims in elections, as the Left is want to do, is reckless and feeds into the ideology, means, and mission of savvy Islamists who know exactly how to manipulate this.

We will never defeat such an ideology which thrives upon the political collectivization of all Muslims if we continue to feed into the mindset which demagogues Muslims as a homogenous collective unit. We need cautious and thoughtful politicians who understand the “contest of ideas” within the Muslim consciousness. We need leaders who are willing to ask Muslims and all of their organizations the tough questions – not just the easy ones about condemning terrorism which any human being should do; but rather to ask Muslims to condemn the ideology of political Islam which is always an undercurrent of radical Islamist movements.

One can only guess that President-elect Obama seems to come from the school of thought that terrorism is simply a crime problem and radical Islamists are simply a crime syndicate. Such a line of thinking is not only wrong-headed but leaves us perilously and continuously exposed to a deep existential threat. Islamist terrorism is just that- Islamist. It is fueled by an undercurrent of political Islam which is running rampant in the Muslim world and yet remains unopposed by western ideas.

Is President-elect Obama ready to acknowledge this threat? Is America going to live up to our own ideologies of liberty, freedom and secular democracy by advocating for such ideas abroad? Will his administration finally have the stomach to confront the ideology of Wahhabism under the Saudi regime? Will we continue the often hypocritical and short-sighted policy in the Muslim world of making our “enemy’s enemy” into our friend?

Do we understand how that perception undermines our credibility with real reformist movements? What will be the Obama strategy for countering the dangerous ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood abroad and domestically? How will the Obama administration counter and engage that media including such outlets as Al Jazeera, MBC or GeoTV to name a few.

M. Zuhdi Jasser M.D. is the founder and Chairman of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy based in Phoenix Arizona. He is a former U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander, a physician in private practice and a community activist.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 07:16 PM | Comments (0)

November 20, 2008

A moment of great pride for all of us

Army officer becomes first female four-star General

Associated Press, November 15, 2008

WASHINGTON — Call it breaking the brass ceiling. Ann Dunwoody, after 33 years in the Army, ascended Friday to a peak never before reached by a woman in the US. Military - four-star general. At an emotional promotion ceremony, Dunwoody looked back on her years in uniform and said it was a credit to the Army, and a great surprise to her, that she would make history in a male-dominated military.

“Thirty-three years after I took the oath as a second lieutenant, I have to tell you this is not exactly how I envisioned my life unfolding,” she told a standing-room-only auditorium crowd. “Even as a young kid, all I ever wanted to do was teach physical education and raise a family. It was clear to me that my Army experience was just going to be a two-year detour en route to my fitness profession,” she added. “So when asked, Ann, did you ever think you were going to be a general officer, to say nothing about a four-star?’ I say, ‘Not in my wildest dreams.’

“There is no one more surprised than I, except, of course, my husband. You know what they say, ‘Behind every successful woman there is an astonished man.”
Dunwoody, 55, hails from a family of military men dating back to the 1800s. Her father, 89-year-old Hal Dunwoody a decorated veteran of World War II, the Korean War and Vietnam, was in the audience, along with the service chiefs of the Army, Navy Air Force and Marines, plus the Joint Chiefs chairman, Admiral Mike Mullen. Dunwoody, whose husband, Craig Brotchie, served for 26 years in the Air Force, choked up at times during a speech in which she said she only recently realized how much her accomplishment means to others.

There are 21 female generals in the Army — all but four at the one-star rank of brigadier. It was not until 1970 that the Army had its first one-star: Anna Mae Hays, chief of the Army Nurse Corps. Women now make up about 14 percent of the active-duty Army and serve in a wide variety of assignments. They are still excluded from units designed primarily to engage in direct combat, but their opportunities have expanded over the past two decades.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 10:29 AM | Comments (0)

November 19, 2008

“Shimon Peres, The indefatigable subversive," Yitzhak Rabin


Redacted from an article by Emanuel A. Winston, Middle East Analyst

The Jewish Prees, November 9, 2008

When a pacifist like Shimon Peres proclaims that "Israel is closer to Peace than we realize" is it a warning or a threat? Peres is one of the most distrusted politicians in Israel. His plotting is well-known and infamous. Some think of him as a malevolent dreamer, whose dreams are nightmares to most others. When Peres makes a declaration of ‘coming peace’ that usually means he has been in deep consultation with Arabists of Europe, the U.N. and America.

Let the better thinkers start to analyze and see who might be a collaborator in a scheme to tame the Islamists and trade parts of Israel to fulfill the Peres midnight ride on a flying horse called "Night-Mare".

1. We already know that Peres is a dedicated Leftist in any number of partnerships with Labor, Kadima, Meretz and the various "Peace Now" clusters who wish to re-partition Israel.
2. More important colluders would be the Europeans who are both Arabist in their politics and anti-Semitic in their history and culture.
3. A driving force to subvert Israel, both in her military capability and her existence as a consuming irritant to the Arab Islamic world are the American oil-dependent Arabists.
4. Lurking no longer in the shadows is Russia, still under Putin, penetrating hostile Arab Muslim States, both to sell weapons and to cause the hated U.S. problems in the region.
5. Within America, the virulently pro-Arab State Department, joined at the hip with the multi-national oil companies, all of which are dedicated to fulfilling the rage and dreams of the Muslim Arabs to obliterate the Jews and the Jewish State of Israel.

We already know that Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (resigned but is still in power), even with his politically dying breath, wishes to abandon Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights and those parts of Jerusalem that were occupied and desecrated by Jordan for 19 years from 1948 to 1967 - to barter for a stand-down in Arab Muslim hostility.

Most non-political Middle East analysts and historians would observe that there is sufficient proof established, since the time of Mohammed that Arabs, especially those who are ruled by the Koran and Mohammed’s Hadith (Oral Sayings), that Muslims will never offer a "Peace" meant to be kept. They will, however, offer schemes called a "Hudna" (temporary Peace) in order to rebuild their forces and then to attack the more vulnerable Jewish State when strong enough to do so.

Shimon Peres and the Left make every effort to fool themselves that, if Israel gives enough, the injunction of Koranic Law will be laid aside by the Muslims who will then live in peace and harmony with the non-Muslim Jews (whom the Muslims call "infidels").

The other colluders like the Europeans, Russian and Washington Arabists know such a peace is an illusion that will quickly disappear and that the Arab Muslims will be able to attack now from superior strategic positions abandoned by the Jewish Israelis. However, they don’t care and, in fact, prefer to have Israel disappear if for nothing more than to ‘theoretically’ calm down the rampaging radical Islamists - all for smoother business. They prefer to fool themselves that raging Islam can be put back in the bottle after Israel is sacrificed.

For such a plan to succeed, the plotters must consider all the facets. First, you must recruit (the “useful idiots” – jsk) from inside your intended victims. You must make promises of a better life, peace and to fulfill all their dreams but never let them know that, in the end, they too will be victims. Promises are easy to make but, even easier to break.

Shimon Peres will find it easy enough to find ideological Leftist Quislings to go along with any Peace Plan. His opposition, Binyamin Netanyahu, would be more difficult. There is concern, however, that Bibi is assembling a Left-of-Center support group while yet inside the more Rightist Likud and then bolting to form a Kadima-like Party, well Left-of-Center.

Will Bibi have a strong enough spine and an enough ideology that Israel must not be disassembled according to the Bush-Rice-Baker Road Map? His lackluster performance at the Wye Conference indicated a decisive lack of staying power. Worse yet, his gifting of 80% of the ancient Jewish city of Hebron to Arafat control, demonstrated a deadly lack of spiritual conviction for Jewish rights to their ancestral lands.

Will Bibi follow Sharon’s platform of promises and then reverse himself to accept all his competitor’s positions? Perhaps Bibi has learned his lesson but better he has a check-and-balance within Likud to insure he does not stray from his pre-election promises.

As a relevant aside, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has just completed a manipulation visit to meet with Olmert, Livni and later she visited Netanyahu. Following that, to finish the scheme, Olmert flies to Washington in two weeks. How then will Peres, Olmert, Livni and Barak on their side of the line go about sacrificing Israel for this illusory Peace that Peres is crowing about?

Many have accurately speculated that Olmert would be kept in power through the machinations of Attorney General Menachem Mazuz, top-ranking police officials and the Leftist courts who will all delay Olmert’s indictments for any or all of his corruption cases. There will be some sort of contrived declaration coming from Olmert (still hanging on as Prime Minister) and linked up with Fatah’s Mahmoud Abbas. He, Olmert, with the authority of his PM Office, declares that he accepts a Palestinian State on the named lands of Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights and major parts of Jerusalem as the second Palestinian State’s Capital.

The collaborators, such as the Arab League, the American Government - including Bush, Rice and in coordination with the new Obama regime, the Quartet (U.S. State Department, the U.N., the E.U. and Russia) will immediately accept and freeze the Olmert declaration as legal and binding. In the Middle East, that’s called being "Caught by his tongue.”

The fact that such a declaration was a "coup d’etat,” without benefit of a debate or approving vote by the Knesset, without a referendum by the people and even without judicial oversight will make no difference to the colluders. They will use the consensus of nations to force Israel to accept their contrived "diktat" and Olmert’s illegal declaration.

It will be another Czechoslovakian Sudetenland betrayal and surrender to bribe the Muslim Arabs on the remote possibility that Al Qaeda, Bin Laden, Hezb’Allah, Hamas - along with their supporters in Iran, Syria, Egypt, the Gulf Oil States to rein in Global Terror. There is where the naive dreamers like Peres and the liberal Left across the planet will cheer wildly on the Chamberlain-esque "Peace In Our Time" has arrived.

Following that, the U.N., with U.S. backing, in collaboration with NATO will send "Peacekeeping Forces" into Israel. If the Left is still in power, they will try to use the army to drive out the patriotic pioneering settlers while confiscating homes, factories, farms and infrastructure so Palestinians can be quickly housed in the now "Judenrein" (Jew-free) areas.

This then is a partial explanation of Shimon Peres’ statement heard on the Hebrew radio in Israel November 8th that "Peace is Closer Than We Realize"

(Yeah, sure Grandpa!) jsk

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 03:53 AM | Comments (0)

November 17, 2008

Zionist Organization of America asks President GW Bush to pardon Jonathan Pollard

November 13, 2008

The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has written to President George W. Bush requesting the out-going president to pardon convicted spy Jonathan Pollard. Jonathan Pollard was convicted in 1987 for passing classified information to Israel. He received a life sentence without recommendation for parole, and served seven of the past 21 years in solitary confinement, despite having cooperated with investigators, pleading guilty pursuant to a plea bargain and expressing remorse for breaking the law.

In a letter signed by ZOA National President Morton A. Klein, National Chairman of the Board Dr. Michael Goldblatt, Executive Committee Chairman Dr. Alan Mazurek and Treasurer Henry Schwartz, the ZOA said:

"Jonathan Pollard remains behind bars, 21 years after sentencing, a longer period than that served by any other person in U.S. history, convicted of passing classified information to a foreign power. Illegal as his activities undoubtedly were, Mr. Pollard passed on classified information to Israel, a U.S. ally, not a U.S. enemy. He did not spy for a hostile foreign power. His illegal acts did not lead to the harming or death of U.S. intelligence agents in other countries

… Additionally, the way Mr. Pollard was convicted and sentenced exceeds all necessary severity in dealing with such a case. In conducting his own defense, Mr. Pollard and his attorneys were denied perusal of a 46-page Defense Department memorandum detailing the nature of the information passed on to Israel which was provided to the presiding judge. This occurred despite provisions made for their access to the documentation and thereby circumscribed their ability to argue his case. Moreover, Mr. Pollard pled guilty as part of a plea bargain, yet he was shown no leniency and was given the maximum sentence.

This sentence is comparable to that meted out to Aldrich Ames, the chief of CIA counterintelligence in Eastern Europe, who passed critical defense secrets to the Soviet Union during the Cold War, and who was found responsible for the deaths of at least 11 U.S. agents …

Mr. Pollard has expressed a desire to move to Israel and Israel has indicated it would accept him. In view of all the circumstances, that scenario would be desirable. For these reasons, we assert that the on-going imprisonment of Jonathan Pollard is unnecessary, unjust, disproportionate and inexplicable in terms of protecting the national interest. We respectfully appeal to you to put an end to what is now an inequitable term of imprisonment and pardon Jonathan Pollard.

Zionist Organization of America
Jacob & Libby Goodman ZOA House, 4 East 34th Street, New York, N.Y. 10016
Contact Morton A. Klein at: 917-974-8795 or 212-481-1500

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 03:46 PM | Comments (0)

November 15, 2008

The ADL (Anti-Defamation League) and the California Supreme Court

By Jerome S. Kaufman

It was with great interest that I read the article below:

Chorus of voices to void ban on gay marriage grows louder

Los Angeles Times, November 12, 2008

SAN FRANCISCO — “Anti-discrimination groups and bar associations have joined 44 state legislators in calling on the California Supreme Court to overturn the anti-gay-marriage initiative California voters passed Nov. 4, 2008.

In letters to the court, the Anti-Defamation League and other groups sided with lawsuits that said Proposition 8, which added a ban on same-sex marriage to the state Constitution, amounted to a sweeping revision of the Constitution instead of a more limited amendment.

Constitutional revisions can be placed on the ballot only by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature. Proposition 8 reached the ballot as a constitutional amendment after a signature campaign. “Proposition 8 threatens the permanent and abiding nature of the requirement that laws must apply equally to all — the most basic principle of democratic government,” said the letter from the Anti-Defamation League, Asian Law Caucus, Bet Tzedek Legal Services, Japanese American Citizens League and Public counsel.

The California Supreme Court has yet to take action on the lawsuits, which were filed the day after the election. Meanwhile in Connecticut, Superior Court Judge Jonathan Silbert is scheduled to enter the final judgment this morning in the case that allows same-sex marriages in Connecticut.” (end of press clipping)

The question that comes to mind was why was the ADL taking such a prominent role and expending badly needed resources fighting the banning of gay marriage by the California Supreme Court? An associated question is do donors actually know what is happening to the money they contribute to their charitable organizations. Do they follow the donor’s own agenda? What if they find the money is going to causes with which the donor may actually disagree completely?

As a matter of interest, I looked up the mission statement of the ADL, which old timers like me used to remember as a proud Jewish charitable organization whose title was originally ADL of B’Nai B’rith, a fraternal Jewish charity. The result was that my own concept of the ADL was shot down. The ADL site stated the following:

“The mission of the Anti-Defamation League is to stop the defamation of the Jewish people, to secure justice and fair treatment to all citizens alike.”

“To all citizens, alike.”
Well then, there is no question that such an all-encompassing phrase would include gay marriage and perhaps other issues appearing on the ADL site such as Iran, Hispanic Affairs and Darfur – a favorite charity of Reform and Conservative synagogues world-wide.

However, I guess old concepts have a difficult time dying. Some of us, and probably many ADL members, still believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and actually believe the biblical declaration and admonition that the purpose of marriage is to be fruitful and to multiply. That is the basic premise, as we all know, in the Jewish Bible, (the Old Testament) and a proposition that fundamentalist Christians take very seriously and so do Muslims.

It also has a very practical application. If the Jews are to survive and be fruitful and multiple, as G-d stated, the current birthrate of below 2.1 children per couple, an over 50% intermarriage rate and now, support of gay marriage, is just not going to cut the mustard.

By coincidence, another article was recently published describing a problem that some might think should take precedence over spending charitable dollars fighting the California Supreme Court. It appears below.

Jerusalem----October 12, 2008

"As Israel enters into Yom Kippur one fact remains unchanged. One Israel child out of three is poor, a poverty report reveals. Every third child in Israel lives below the poverty line, according to an annual National Insurance Institute (NII) poverty report released recently. Over 400,000 families in Israel suffer from 'nutritional insecurity,' a euphemistic term for 'hunger'."

28% of Israeli citizens, or 1,600,000 people are living in poverty. Among them are more than 600,000 hungry children. Those experiencing "nutritional insecurity" eat smaller portions, skip meals and, in extreme cases, don't eat for a whole day. Diets may be high in carbohydrates and lacking or almost devoid of meat, dairy products, vegetables and fruit. In Israel, 22% of families are deemed moderately insecure and 8% suffer from severe insecurity."

Where would you prefer your charitable donations go?

Jerome S. Kaufman

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 08:06 PM | Comments (0)

November 14, 2008

The Chutzpa of Condoleezza Rice

By Jerome S. Kaufman
November 14, 2008

How is it that the Foreign Minister of Israel does not tell the United States to break itself up, its 100 times or more greater size country than Israel, into more Canada, more Mexico, deed the eastern and southern colonies back to England, south Florida back to Spain and, of course, all of Louisiana back to the French?

Where does Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice get her chutzpa? How dare she threaten and dictate to Israel what they are to do with its G-d given land and its legitimate political ownership of all of Israel? The land of the Jews was to have extended well past the artificially created, never previously existed nation of Jordan. Now Rice wants to create such a never previously existed state for the Arabs called “Palestine” who, just in the last 100 years, chose to live in Israel because of the Jews re-building their biblical homeland and the Arabs could finally find a decent job and a decent standard of living.

Rice has outworn her welcome. In fact, she had a long time ago. She should go back to minding her own business and I sure hope it’s not commissioner of football or whatever other task for which she is equally unqualified.

Oh, sorry, I forgot the original victim of American aggression - the American Indian! How about a UN Security Council Resolution for them?

Jerome S. Kaufman

Thursday, November 13, 2008

Olmert and Livni Oppose Rice Initiative for UN Security Council Resolution

By Dr. Aaron Lerner IMRA 13 November 2008

Israel Television Channel One Correspondent Ayala Chason reported on the evening Mabat News program that PM Olmert and FM Livni both oppose plans by U.S. Secretary of State Rice to pass a UN Security Council Resolution that would, among other things, call for the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Rice told Olmert and Livni of her plans during her recent visit to Israel.

Chason noted that Israel sees this move by Rice as much a matter of her wanting to end her career as Secretary of State with something to show as a move to promote the peace process. Among other reasons for opposing the initiative, Israel is concerned that the wording of such a resolution would ultimately be slanted against Israel's interests in order to pass.

According to Chason, Rice warned Olmert and Livni that a UNSC Resolution would help push for a two state solution and that otherwise there may be a shift towards a "one state solution".

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 01:58 AM | Comments (0)

November 12, 2008

Why I love Sarah Palin and ...

Why Liberal Jews Can’t Stand Sarah Palin

By Tom Mountain
Jewish Press, October 17, 2008

Why do liberal Jews have such a problem with Sarah Palm? One would think that the die-hard feminists in the Jewish community would trumpet the ascension of a woman to the second spot on a presidential ticket, much as they did over two decades ago when Geraldine Ferraro took center stage with Walter Mondale in a quixotic attempt to unseat Ronald Reagan.

At the time, Gloria Steinem and her feminist clones were tripping over each other to see who could best herald the Democratic vice presidential contender as the modem Susan B. Anthony of the feminist movement. Ferraro was a feminist to the core — abrasive, dour, humorless, angry with about as much feminine charm as Bea Arthur from Maude. In short, she was one of them. Sarah Palm is not.

(By the way, Ferraro certainly does not give them impression now. She seems very gracious but still had the courage to say that fellow Democrat, Barack Obama, with his very thin credentials, would not have had the remotest chance of obtaining the Democrat’s nomination if he were not Black) jsk

In the world according to Jewish feminists and their feminist-leaning Jewish men (i.e.. metrosexuals), Sarah Palm is an apostate - the anti-feminist, the polar opposite of all that a feminist must be. She is an anomaly. A mystery. A travesty. Smiley, perky, energetic and photogenic - she’s every feminist’s nightmare — the girl-next-door goes to Washington.

Even Betty Friedan could not have predicted Sarah Palm. Instead of sporting a NOW button; Sarah dons an NRA one, as in the National Rifle Association. Not only does she believe in gun ownership, she’s actually (oh. the horror!) a hunter. She’s been known to shoot those sturdy moose that liberals only see in National Geographic. She skins them, carves ‘em up and makes mooseburgers, which means she’s also a meat eater. Not only that, but she proudly poses for pictures with her beastly trophies. Not even Xena, the feminist fantasy role model, ever did that on TV.

Sarah’s husband doesn’t even have an MD, Ph.D., or JD attached to his name, He works with his hands. He’s a fisherman and an oil field worker in that North Slope region where those greedy oil tycoons and their Republican henchmen want to drill for oil and disrupt caribou mating habits. Unlike the feminists’ gentle, progressive, modern (i.e., submissive) husbands, he probably drinks Budweiser, watches NASCAR, shovels his own driveway, and doesn’t know what it’s like when your stockbroker or shrink goes away on vacation to the Hamptons for a week.

Sarah married him after she finished not Wellesley, not Smith, not Vassar but the University of Idaho (as in potatoes). She obviously hardly played the dating field, and never even took a few years off after college to find her inner self before launching a career as an independent working woman. She dove right into marriage and had five kids — one of whom joined the military (what, he couldn’t get into college?). She’s even proud of the fact that he’s on his way to Iraq.

The liberal mantra dictates that because Sarah didn’t bring her daughter to the Planned Parenthood center at age 13, the girl got pregnant. But, instead of marching her down to the abortion clinic the next day, Sarah encouraged her to have the baby. Not only that, but her daughter is actually marrying the young man. Whoever heard of such a thing in Brookline or Cambridge?

Because Sarah doesn’t believe in abortion, she herself opted not to terminate her own pregnancy, despite knowing that her child would be born with Down syndrome. She actually regards the baby as a blessing. Sort of like what it says in the Bible. Sarah belongs to one of those very non-progressive Christian evangelical churches that believe in the power of prayer. She even encouraged her constituents to pray for victory in Iraq. Pray for victory in a war? Can you picture any liberal progressive rabbi doing that? Not surprisingly - the very non-liberal Chabad rabbi in Alaska is a big fan of Sarah’s.

Sarah Palin is the anti-liberal - a die-hard conservative Republican somewhere to the right of John McCain. And, whatever one claims about her lack of foreign policy experience, it’s a safe bet that if Alaska comes within range of North Korean missiles, she’d do her pre-emptive duty and whip those Stalinists back to the Stone Age. Same with Iran, because no one would dare harm the Chosen People on Sarah’s watch.

After all, it’s against her religion to stand idly by if Israelis attacked. Just ask her friend the Chabad rabbi of Alaska And a thousand rabbis like him who have long since determined that America and Israel need leaders who take their Bible seriously - like Sarah Palm. And, that’s what liberal Jews can’t stand most of all!

(Tom Mountain is a weekly columnist for The Jewish Advocate, where this column originally appeared.)

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 04:26 AM | Comments (0)

November 10, 2008

Israeli Interim PM Ehud Olmert assesses President GW Bush....

(Not withstanding, Barack Obama, the Democratic Party and the Left wing press’s successful and relentless effort to destroy the President)

Weekly Israel Cabinet meeting Sunday, September 11, 2008:

Prime Minister Olmert:

"I would like to offer a word in warm appreciation for President Bush. In approximately two weeks, I will meet with him, at his invitation, in Washington, for what will be our farewell visit, after the deep cooperation between him and the State of Israel during my tenure as prime minister and that of my predecessor, Ariel Sharon. I have said previously that President Bush's name will be etched in gold letters in the annals of the State of Israel.

I cannot share everything that I know with the public, nor even with all members of the Government but those who know, know. President Bush is a great friend of the State of Israel and of the Jewish People. I think that he deserves the praise, esteem and profound gratitude of every resident of the State of Israel."

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 07:31 PM | Comments (0)

November 09, 2008

Comparing the ‘Isms – a German Professor's First Hand Account

Emanuel Tanay, M.D., Clinical Professor of Psychiatry
Wayne State University Medical School

A man, whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II, owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism. 'Very few people were true Nazis,' he said, 'but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. Consequently, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed our factories.

We are told again and again by 'experts' and 'talking heads' that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectra of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.

The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder or honor-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers.

The hard quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the 'silent majority,' is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant.

China's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a war mongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet.

And, who can forget Rwanda which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were 'peace loving'?

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.

Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.

As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

Lastly, anyone who doubts that the issue is serious and just deletes this email without sending it on is contributing to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand. So, extend yourself a bit and send this on and on and on! Let us hope that thousands, world wide, read this and think about it, and send it on before it's too late

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 02:15 AM | Comments (0)

November 06, 2008

Can you believe this?

U.S. Treasury Department and Harvard University Sponsors Conference on Sharia Banking Laws for this country!!

Redacted from press release by Morton Klein, President Zionist Org. of America

New York (Nov. 6) — The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) joined with the Center for Security Policy, headed by Frank Gaffney, (Robert Spencer), and the American Center for Democracy, led by Rachel Ehrenfeld, to hold a press conference today (Thursday, November 6) at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, at 10:00 AM. Several other public policy organizations, human rights activists and religious groups also participated in the press conference to establish the “Coalition to Stop Shariah.”

Shariah is the Arabic word for Islamic law, but in its usage by Islamic extremists, the concept is also used for the idea that the whole world should eventually come under the domination of Islam and the Islamic interpretation of how to live. Saudi Arabia, Iran and Sudan all impose Shariah as the absolute law of the land, and there are virtually no rights in those countries for women, non-Muslims, or religious dissidents.

The immediate common concern to the coalition is the sponsorship by the U.S. Treasury of a workshop at its headquarters today to promote Shariah-Compliant Finance (SCF) to U.S. government personnel. This “seminar for the policy community,” entitled “Islamic Finance 101,” is being made possible by a collaboration between the Treasury Department and Harvard University - the most prominent and aggressive institutional advocate in American academia for Shariah and Shariah-Compliant Finance.

The meeting will be hosted by Assistant Treasury Secretary Neel Kashkari, the man responsible for allocating the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Based on the speakers list, it does not appear that there will be any balance in the presentation to the Treasury officials, since all of the experts invited are either advocates of Shariah-Compliant Financing or financial professionals who have been involved in profiting from the Islamic investments. In response, a number of diverse groups have come to together to form the “Coalition to Stop Shariah.” (

The ZOA opposes the imposition of Shariah-Compliant Financing on the American financial system. Shariah is usually translated as “Islamic Law,” but in authoritative Islam, Shariah actually requires its adherents to work for the realization of global Islamic theocratic rule. It is through Fatwas (rulings) based on Shariah that Israel has been determined to be an illegitimate country and warfare against the US and Jewish individuals wherever they live has been justified. Shariah-Compliant Financing (SCF) is therefore far more than an innocent exercise of religious accommodation, and under the guidance of extremist Islamic scholars, it has the potential to do serious damage to the fight against Radical Islam.

The Shariah scholars who would determine where investments could be made under SCF have been united in condemning the Jewish State of Israel and all interaction with Israelis and Jews. They have been advocates for the worldwide boycott of all Israeli products, and sometimes even all products connected to Jews from any country. In order to be a legal company to invest in, a ”Shariah scholar” must approve the investment, and there is concern that Jewish and Israeli companies will not be eligible.

Before sponsoring workshops on Shariah-Compliant Financing, the US Department of Treasury should speak to the US Department of Justice. It is against US law for any company to participate in the Arab-sponsored boycott of Israel. In addition, any Shariah-approved investment must donate a given amount to an Islamic charity chosen by the “Shariah scholars.” In the recent past, many of these charities have funneled money without supervision to terrorist-connected groups.

In a larger sense, the vision of a world where only Shariah is the guiding principle is actually the root of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is because of the intolerance of Shariah and the hatred it breeds that Israel, whose land mass is as small as New Jersey (Israel is 1/36 the size of Texas) cannot be allowed to survive under any non-Islamic government. It is because of the intolerance of Shariah and hatred of non-Moslems it breeds that the neighbors of Israel are required to be in a state of war with it, regardless of what agreements are reached about borders. Moreover, it is because of the intolerance of Shariah and the hatred that it breeds that the establishment of yet another Arab state in the Middle East will not result in peace of any kind.

Another aspect of this Shariah-Compliant Financing movement is the way it is being financed and even orchestrated from Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is using its massive wealth to influence our Universities, our business community, and now even the US Department of Treasury. The Saudi Kingdom is ruled by a single family and there is ample evidence that they are not working for the best interests of our country. ZOA has supported the Saudi Arabia Accountability Act (H.R. 2976) pending in Congress to hold the Saudis accountable for their support of the construction of extremist Wahhabi mosques and schools around the world, and the direct support of terrorist groups by its wealthy citizens.

Daniel Pollak and Joshua London of ZOA’s Division of Government Relations in Washington, DC said: “Until the authoritative voices of Islamic practice develop tolerant and accommodation doctrines towards non-Muslims and towards Jews and Israelis in particular, Sharia Compliant Finance policies serve to further legitimize immoderate Muslim Clerics and signal American weakness and subservience to radical Islam. Unlike other mainstream religious codes of law and practice, Shariah is espoused as an all encompassing code, imbued with universal aspirations over all others. Shariah is without any robust and egalitarian allowance for non-Muslims. Of course, we believe all Moslems in this country are entitled to the same religious freedoms that Americans of every faith enjoy. But our constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion does not and should not allow for imposing Shariah on the US financial system.”

ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said: “The Zionist Organization of America calls on the US Treasury Department to stop the movement towards any imposition of Shariah on our financial system. In the longer term, the American people must become aware of the strategies of our enemies as well as their tactics. They mean to fundamentally change the paradigm of the West as a tolerant and liberal place to observe any religion without compulsion.

They mean to impose Islamic law on everyone in targeted countries. The ZOA will oppose the tactics of our enemies every step of the way. For a long time, the ZOA has stated that the fight of Israel to survive is part of a larger struggle to prevent Islamic extremism from being triumphant around the world. It is unthinkable to give a victory to our enemies in this Jihad against America by changing our financial system to comply with Shariah.”

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 11:14 PM | Comments (0)

November 05, 2008

Likud, under Netanyahu, attempting to strengthen itself for coming elections.

As to the American elections:

* (The American people have voted. As Jews we believe in Hashgacha Pratis (Divine Providence); our newly elected officials are there by the will and the grace of G-d. We wish the new administration success in dealing with the current financial crisis in America, and hope and pray that it will truly uphold the security of Eretz Yisrael and our brethren who live there.

Rabbi Avrohom Wineberg, Bais Chabad, West Bloomfield, MI)

MK Effi Eitam wants to join Likud

Redacted from an article by Gil Hoffman and staff

Only hours after reports that former science minister Benny Begin's intends
to return to the Likud surfaced, National Union/ National Religious MK Effi Eitam announced that he has decided to run for a place on the Likud list. Senior sources in the Likud, however, said that Eitam could not "force himself" on the party, and that he had "no place" on the list. They clarified that the matter was "not settled."

Speaking on Sunday evening, Eitam commented that he had decided not to join the new Rightist party which NU/NRP MKs founded in an attempt to present a united Right-wing Zionist party, as he believed it would be identified only with the religious public.

The Likud received a big boost when Begin announced he is returning to the party that was once led by his father, former Prime Minister Menachem Begin.
The surprising move gave Likud chairman Binyamin Netanyahu the endorsement of a man who left the party in anger in January 1997 to protest Netanyahu relinquishing most of Hebron and personality conflicts between the two. It also gave the Likud a Knesset candidate with a reputation as an honest and humble politician, the same image enjoyed by its main competition in the
February 20 race, Kadima leader Tzipi Livni.

Begin's return was engineered by Likud MK Reuven Rivlin, who is Begin's
upstairs neighbor in an apartment complex in Jerusalem's Yefei Nof
neighborhood. Rivlin said Netanyahu and Begin had met three times over the
last week at Rivlin's home.

“ In recent weeks, I realized that Benny wanted to return to a position of
influence," Rivlin said. "I asked Bibi [Netanyahu] whether he wanted him and
he said he would be honored if he returned. When they met, they brought up
every aggravation one had against the other in their mutual history, and
then they were ready to work together again." A veteran hawk on diplomatic and security issues, Begin received promises from Netanyahu that he would neither divide Jerusalem nor return the country to pre-1967 borders.

Begin formally resigned from his post as head of the Israeli Geological
Institute on Sunday, ahead of Wednesday's deadline for government officials
to quit their jobs to run for Knesset. He submitted the letter to his boss,
National Infrastructures Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer of Labor.

At a memorial service for his father's late adviser, Harry Hurwitz, at the
Menachem Begin Heritage Center in Jerusalem on Sunday evening, Begin
declined to talk to reporters, because his resignation only takes effect
next Sunday, and until then, as a government employee, he is forbidden to
talk politics. Begin spoke cordially at the event with his former cabinet colleague and fellow Likud prince Dan Meridor, who is expected to join him inreturning to the Knesset with the party. While Begin and Meridor are at opposite ends of the political spectrum, Likud officials said there was plenty of room for both in the party.

Likud officials revealed that unlike Begin, who declined an offer of a reserved slot on the party list, Meridor is actively seeking one and Netanyahu is waiting for the right time to ask his party's institutions to grant him the right to give such slots to Meridor and perhaps former IDF chief of General Staff, Lt-Gen. (res.) Moshe Ya'alon.

“ Meridor is not as popular as Begin in the party and it is very possible that if he did not have a reserved slot, he would not get elected," a source close to Netanyahu said. "If that happened, it would not only humiliate Meridor. It would be very embarrassing and damaging to the party."

Sources close to Netanyahu said they were glad that Begin set a precedent of
running for Knesset without asking for a reserved slot and that the same was
true of former major-generals Uzi Dayan and Yossi Peled and former Israel
Police chief Assaf Hefetz.

Netanyahu is also putting pressure on former minister Natan Sharansky to
return to politics. Likud officials said it was extremely unlikely that he would run for Knesset, but that it was possible that he would agree to serve in Netanyahu's cabinet. (The only member of the cabinet who must be an MK is
the prime minister.)

"I'm glad that there is a wave of people coming back to the Likud," Netanyahu told reporters at his party's Tel Aviv headquarters. "Many, many people in the country see the Likud as hope for a new path."

IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 05:26 AM | Comments (0)

November 02, 2008

Part II I stand with the brilliant, irrefutable Charles Krauthammer

My Choice for President of the United States

By Charles Krauthammer

October 31, 2008

Last week I made the open-and-shut case for John McCain: In a dangerous world entering an era of uncontrolled nuclear proliferation, the choice between the most prepared foreign policy candidate in memory vs. a novice with zero experience and the wobbliest one-world instincts is not a close call.

Neither candidate has particularly deep economic knowledge or finely honed economic instincts. Neither has any clear idea exactly what to do in the current financial meltdown. Hell, neither does anyone else, including the best economic minds in the world, from Henry Paulson to the head of the European Central Bank. Yet, they have muddled through with some success. Both McCain and Barack Obama have assembled fine economic teams that may differ on the details of their plans but have reasonable approaches to managing the crisis. So, forget the hype. Neither candidate has an advantage on this issue.

On other domestic issues, McCain is just the kind of moderate conservative that the Washington/media establishment once loved -- the champion of myriad conservative heresies that made him a burr in the side of congressional Republicans and George W. Bush. But, now that he is standing in the way of an audacity-of-hope Democratic restoration, erstwhile friends recoil from McCain on the pretense that he has suddenly become right wing.

Self-serving rubbish. McCain is who he always was. Generally speaking, he sees government as a Rooseveltian counterweight (Teddy with a touch of Franklin) to the various malefactors of wealth and power. He wants government to tackle large looming liabilities such as Social Security and Medicare. He wants to free up health insurance by beginning to sever its debilitating connection to employment -- a ruinous accident of history (arising from World War II wage and price controls) that increases the terror of job loss, inhibits labor mobility and saddles American industry with costs that are driving it (see: Detroit) into insolvency. And he supports lower corporate and marginal tax rates to encourage entrepreneurship and job creation - An eclectic, moderate, generally centrist agenda in a guy almost congenitally given to bipartisanship.

Obama, on the other hand, talks less and less about bipartisanship, his calling card during his earlier messianic stage. He does not need to. If he wins, he will have large Democratic majorities in both houses. And, unlike Clinton in 1992, Obama is no centrist.

What will you get?

(1) Card check, meaning the abolition of the secret ballot in the certification of unions in the workplace. Large men will come to your house at night and ask you to sign a card supporting a union. You will sign.

(2) The so-called Fairness Doctrine -- a project of Nancy Pelosi and leading Democratic senators -- a Hugo Chávez-style travesty designed to abolish conservative talk radio.

(3) Judges who go beyond even the constitutional creativity we expect from Democratic appointees. Judges chosen according to Obama's publicly declared criterion: "empathy" for the "poor or African American or gay or disabled or old" -- in a legal system historically predicated on the idea of justice entirely blind to one's station in life.

(4) An unprecedented expansion of government power. Yes, I know. It has already happened. A conservative government has already partially nationalized the mortgage industry, the insurance industry and nine of the largest U.S. banks.

This is all generally swallowed because everyone understands that the current crisis demands extraordinary measures. The difference is that conservatives are instinctively inclined to make such measures temporary. Whereas an Obama-Pelosi-Reid-Barney Frank administration will find irresistible the temptation to use the tools inherited -- $700 billion of largely uncontrolled spending -- as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to radically remake the American economy and social compact.

This is not socialism. This is not the end of the world. It would, however, be a decidedly leftward move on the order of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. The alternative is a McCain administration with a moderate conservative presiding over a divided government and generally inclined to resist a European social-democratic model of economic and social regulation featuring, for example, wealth-redistributing growth-killing marginal tax rates.

The national security choice in this election is no contest. The domestic policy choice is more equivocal because it is ideological. McCain is the quintessential center-right candidate. Yet, the quintessential center-right country is poised to reject him. The hunger for anti-Republican catharsis and the blinding promise of Obamian hope are simply too strong. The reckoning comes in the morning.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 02:35 PM | Comments (0)