Friends of Israel

Another arrest, in an update on this story. "FBI: Port Richmond man funded terror group," from WPVI, March 15: PHILADELPHIA - March 15, 2012 (WPVI) -- Federal authorities have arrested a Port Richmond resident and charged him with providing material support and resources to a terrorist organization based in... Marisol

The liberal war on voter integrity has now morphed from partisan hypocrisy to parody. It is bad enough for the Obama administration and its cheerleaders in the media to falsely brand the effort by various states to require citizens to present a picture ID when they go to vote as a revival of Jim Crow laws. But the NAACP has reduced that controversy to satire by asking the United Nations Human Rights Council to weigh in on the matter at an upcoming conference on minority rights in Geneva, Switzerland.

This is the same UN Council that is comprised of some of the worst human rights abusers in the world such as China, Cuba and Saudi Arabia. The idea that Americans would ask a group whose members are countries that not only restrict voting rights but lack even the façade of democratic rule to take a stand on U.S. laws is beyond absurd. It seems never to have occurred to the partisans at the NAACP that there is something humorous about regimes that deny all of their citizens any say in governance standing in judgment on an actual working democracy. The arguments arrayed against voter ID laws by the Obama administration and those seeking to create a race issue where none exists are already weak. But by involving the UN, the NAACP has exposed itself to some well-earned scorn.

The UN Human Rights Council is itself a standing mockery of the entire cause of human rights not just because it is comprised of tyrannies who routinely practice the atrocities the council is supposed to combat, but also because it devotes the vast majority of its time and effort to attacking Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East. The UN’s obsession with delegitimizing Israel has long since crossed the line into anti-Semitism. But the world body’s lack of interest in doing something about China’s abuses in Tibet, the plight of women in the Arab world or the suppression of dissent in Cuba and China is just as outrageous.

The internationalization of the voter ID issue is also particularly inane because most developed countries, including the democracies, require citizens to have ID cards as a matter of law.

It should also be remembered that the argument that voter ID laws disenfranchise minorities is a thinly veiled attempt to incite racial distrust at the expense of a good government measure. The notion that there is something discriminatory about requiring voters to properly identify themselves in a nation when such photo IDS are already required for all airline travel and many other routine measures is absurd. The best that Attorney General Holder could do when overruling Texas’ voter ID law last week was to cite the fact that approximately 94 percent of Hispanics have such documentation as opposed to about 96 percent of non-Hispanics. Interestingly, there was no mention in the complaint about any disparity between African-Americans and other citizens even though we are told voter ID laws target the poor.

In fact, as Rich Lowry noted last week in National Review, the Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that voter ID laws were legal. That 6-3-majority opinion was written by liberal Justice John Paul Stevens who wrote, “there is no question about the legitimacy or importance of the State’s interest in counting only the votes of eligible voters.” Stevens also noted “we cannot conclude that the statute imposes ‘excessively burdensome requirements’ on any class of voters.” That is especially true because the states that have passed or considered voter ID laws have made provisions to give such cards free of charge to the tiny minority of citizens who don’t already have them.

Hillary Shelton, the NAACP’s senior vice president for advocacy, claims that by going to Geneva, “We can learn a lot from those who haven’t gone through as much as we have.” But the only thing that can be learned about democracy from China, Cuba or Saudi Arabia or the United Nations is how to suppress rights, not to protect them. Imagine what imprisoned dissidents in those countries will think about the NAACP granting their torturers this sort of legitimacy.

In bringing their flimsy complaint to such a tainted forum, the NAACP isn’t just illustrating the weak nature of their argument. By going before the council in this manner, the NAACP, which once actually stood for principle in the civil rights struggle, is demonstrating indifference to the real abuses of democratic rights around the globe. That isn’t comical. It’s shameful.

From Ya Libnan:

Syria has planted landmines near its border with Turkey along routes used by refugees fleeing the regime’s deadly crackdown on dissent, the Turkish deputy prime minister said on Thursday.

“The Syrian administration has been planting mines, taking measures not to allow refugees to flee to the other side of the border,” Besir Atalay said in televised remarks.

Up to 500,000 Syrians may cross into Turkey seeking refuge from the deadly year-long crackdown on protests by the Damascus regime, the head of the Turkish Red Crescent warned Thursday.

Ahmet Lutfi Akar said his organisation expected more refugees “to cross into Turkey through the border province of Hatay in the upcoming days, as there is an extreme situation. There are various scenarios that this figure may climb up to 500,000,” the Anatolia news agency quoted him as saying.

Atalay said the Syrian army was militarily intervening in any attempt by the people fleeing the unrest. “Many have lost their lives,” he added.

The number of Syrians arriving at the Turkish border is increasing daily. Around 1,000 Syrian refugees, including a defecting general, flocked into Turkey in the last 24 hours, the Foreign Ministry said Thursday.
Video from HRW:

israelconsulate: Anyone remember when MTV Europe was first made available in Israel? Working on our new facebook timeline :)

Wonder how the left was able to mobilize so quickly on the Rush Limbaugh boycott? According to the architect behind it, Media Matters online strategy director Angelo Carusone, the project was actually created in 2009, but stayed inactive until the Sandra Fluke controversy boiled over (via Legal Insurrection):

I started Stop Rush in 2009, 2010, and when I went to register the domain, I saw that Rush owned StopRush.com….

The Beck work was working, and I kind of froze the Rush work, and experimented with it a little, to get a sense of who Rush’s advertisers were and what their comfort level with him was. It was definitely valuable, and I am glad I spent some time doing it. It has informed the work I am doing now.

Legal Insurrection’s William Jacobson connects the dots on the story most of the media missed: that the entire Limbaugh boycott was pure, undistilled Astroturf.

The secondary boycott of Rush Limbaugh advertisers is portrayed in the media as a reaction to a groundswell of public outrage.  In fact, the secondary boycott was initiated by and driven by Media Matters, which had a “Stop Limbaugh” campaign on the shelf waiting to be used, and was executed by Angelo Carusone, Director of Online Strategy for Media Matters.

But while Carusone depicts his campaign as a response to the Fluke controversy, it seems obvious from the timeline that Media Matters played a large role in creating the controversy. According to the New York Times, the dormant “Stop Rush” twitter account run by Carusone snapped to life on Wednesday, Feb. 29, the day Limbaugh made his now-infamous comments. Media Matters also appears to be the first media outlet that reported on Limbaugh’s remarks, with Think Progress picking up on the story a few hours later, and the Huffington Post following up that evening.

This is a really useful case study of how the left coordinates to create a full-blown media uproar. Democrats in Congress don’t typically rush out to respond to every insult from conservative radio hosts. But Rep. Nancy Pelosi managed to round up six other female congressional Democrats to release a joint statement condemning Limbaugh’s comments within hours of the broadcast:

“When Sandra Fluke testified before the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee after Republicans attempted to silence her, she courageously spoke truth to power. As a result, today, she has been subject to attacks that are outside the circle of civilized discussion and that unmask the strong disrespect for women held by some in this country. We call upon the Republican leaders in the House to condemn these vicious attacks on Ms. Fluke, which are in response to her testimony to the Congress. Democrats will always stand up for women’s health and women’s voices.”

According to Carusone, he began reaching out to Rush’s advertisers the next day to put the boycott campaign into action. Two days after Limbaugh’s comments, a Friday, President Obama put in a call to Sandra Fluke, which fanned the flames of the controversy and kept it going through the weekend.

Something else worth noting: Tucker Carlson recently reported that Media Matters representatives have weekly meetings with the White House, and the activist group is in close contact with the administration. Was anti-Rush media strategy ever discussed? Was the White House aware that Media Matters had a “Stop Rush” boycott campaign teed up and ready to go? After all, top White House officials have spoken openly about their 2009 campaign to use Rush Limbaugh to attack the Republican Party.

The anti-Limbaugh boycott may not have been the wild success Media Matters wanted it to be, since at this point it doesn’t look like there’s going to be any long-term fallout for Rush. But they were able to dominate the news cycle with their message for weeks and during a contentious primary race – a pretty impressive feat. Ruthless conservative political strategists out there would do well to take notes.

Every Gaza terror group loves to give out statistics on exactly how many rockets they shoot at Jews. Here are the totals through Monday:

Islamic Jihad: (Al Quds Brigades)

91 Grads
31 "Jerusalem" missiles
24 "107" missiles
31 mortars

PRC (Nasser Salah Din Brigades)

47 "Nasser" rockets
9 mortars

Fatah (Al Aqsa Brigades - al-Nedal Division)

19 Qassam-type rockets
7 mortars

So the total through Monday is 91 Grads, 121 short range rockets and 47 mortars, or 259 projectiles for these three groups. There may have been others that shot rockets as well.

Interestingly, they are not counting any rockets fired since the "cease fire" on Tuesday night.
The fragile armistice between Israel and the Gaza terror groups was stretched further on Thursday night as several rockets were fired at western Negev communities from the Strip.

Gaza terrorists fired a Grad rocket at Ashdod, which was intercepted by a nearby Iron Dome battery. Moments later Qassam rockets hit open areas in Eshkol Regional Council and the outskirts of Ashkelon.

Thursday morning saw a Gaza-launched rocket explode in an open area near Netivot. Several hours later a Grad rocket fired at Beersheba was intercepted by the Iron Dome system. None of the terror groups are taking responsibility for these rockets. So, by the logic of the Western world, they cannot be considered "cease fire" violations.

Only when Israel responds is it a violation.

Those are the rules of the media, and who am I to argue?

From the seemingly harmless country of cycling enthusiasts, windmills, and those little wooden shoes nobody understands, comes the latest in a string of nefarious and anti-Semitic episodes, as a self-described liberal-Protestant Dutch website, VPRO, marketed an online game based on the popular board game ‘‘The Settlers of Catan.’’

Apparently, ‘‘The Settlers of the West Bank’’ was conceived and defended as ‘‘satire,’’ despite the overtly politicized idea behind the game, and the numerous, obviously insensitive features, including the ‘‘Jewish stinginess,’’ ‘‘Wailing Wall,’’ and ‘‘Anne Frank’’ cards. Allusion is also made to the ‘‘typical mercantile spirit’’ of the Jewish nation, and, according to the Jerusalem Post, the ‘‘settler’’ may also use the ‘‘Mahmoud Ahmadinejad card’’ to avoid losing resources to a terrorist and simultaneously draw resources from other players. The ‘‘Anne Frank House’’ is a ‘‘winning point’’ for the settler.

The website receives state funding from the Ministry of Education, Culture, and Science, but the minister claimed the state has no authority over content. In any case, according to Dr Shimon Samuels of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, ‘‘the funding makes the Netherlands the largest financier of hate incitement among youth in Europe.’’ Liberal Dutch Jewish groups, which also protested the game, agreed.

To put this in context, remember that the Netherlands has a ban on Jewish ritual slaughter forever pending in parliament, and a rising Muslim community whose intolerance of Jews provoked a veteran Dutch politician to warn Jews to leave, for their own safety. As for the game itself, it has just been taken offline, but the damage has been done.

In case anyone thought the low-lying Netherlands could not stoop any lower, evidently the Dutch are now prepared not only to tolerate the further abuse of their domestic Jewish population, but also to disinherit Anne Frank. It was precisely this European inconstancy toward its resident Jews – friendly here, lashing out there – that contributed to the need for the Jewish state. Evidently, little has changed, but with Anne Frank – and the many others – gone, the hostility turns to that very entity which could have saved her life.

Maybe that’s playing the Anne Frank card. But it was Europe which dealt the Jews this hand.

Yet more Muslims misunderstand Islam and get the crazy idea that it has something to do with hating and brutalizing Jews. "Man arrested, suspected of planning Milan-synagogue attack," from ANSA, March 15 (thanks to David): Man arrested, suspected of planning Milan-synagogue attack (ANSA) - Milan, March 15 - Police arrested... Robert http://www.jihadwatch.org/

They didn't kill him. They must be moderates. But note well: this is the kind of treatment Islamic supremacists would love to see imposed in the West upon those who "offend Islam." Sharia Alert from the Islamic Republic of Pakistan: "Pakistani Muslim jailed for burning Koran," from AFP, March 15... Robert http://www.jihadwatch.org/

Going from Churchill’s subtle and magisterial “Iron Curtain” speech at Fulton, on which Seth commented yesterday, to Obama’s remarks at the White House in welcome to David Cameron is like going from Paganini to the village fiddler. Honestly, who writes this stuff? The joke about the British burning the White House in 1814 was funny enough when Tony Blair used it in 2003 in his speech to a joint session of Congress:

On our way down here, Senator Frist was kind enough to show me the fireplace where, in 1814, the British had burnt the Congress Library. I know this is kind of late, but sorry.

But no joke stays funny if it gets recycled often enough, and a decade later, it’s become a lame and tiresome jest. And yet Obama, that modern master of rhetoric, and Cameron, who must have groaned when he read the script, used it again yesterday. Quoth Obama:

It’s now been 200 years since the British came here, to the White House – under somewhat different circumstances. (Laughter.) They made quite an impression. (Laughter.) They really lit up the place. (Laughter.)

This isn’t a presidential welcome – it reads, and it sounded, like a third-rate stand-up comedian living on stolen jokes.

And Cameron’s reply was equally cringe-inducing:

So I am a little embarrassed, as I stand here, to think that 200 years ago – (laughter) – my ancestors tried to burn the place down. (Laughter.)  Now, looking around me, I can see you’ve got the place a little better defended today. (Laughter.)  You’re clearly not taking any risks with the Brits this time. (Laughter.)

Please, make it stop.

I decided a long time ago that Obama is only a great speaker if you like him before he opens his mouth. His oratory serves not to persuade, or to inspire, but to affirm. Unlike Churchill, who always presented an argument when he spoke, Obama usually speaks to present a conclusion. If you don’t agree with his conclusion, there’s nothing in his words to make you change your mind, and his reliance on jokey humor in his more informal remarks doesn’t help.

Look – writing welcoming remarks must be a tedious job, and I wouldn’t like to do it for anything. But would it be too much to ask that his speechwriters avoid obvious solecisms? If you’re going to use the tired “the British burned the White House” joke, don’t follow it up, two paragraphs later, with the claim that “through the grand sweep of history, through all its twists and turns, there is one constant – the rock-solid alliance between the United States and the United Kingdom.” So, except for the whole burning thing, it’s a constant?

No one is a more enthusiastic supporter of the Anglo-American alliance than I am, and I mean that literally. But it’s just not true that the alliance is a constant. It reflects, yes, shared interests, but it was also made, with considerable effort and by taking real political risks, by leaders like Churchill. That was the point of the speech at Fulton – not to celebrate the war-time alliance, but to make the case for its continuance in the nascent Cold War.

But when Obama says that “the relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom is the strongest that it has ever been,” just after his administration has announced a “strategic pivot” to Asia and refused to back Britain over the Falklands, he’s not taking any risks, or making any effort, for the alliance at all. He’s just talking. And truly great speakers, like Churchill, don’t believe that assertions can substitute for arguments or actions.

 

After failing to make much headway with women voters by insisting the GOP wants to take away the right to birth control, the Democratic Party is moving onto its next attempt to make the contrived “Republican war on women” narrative stick. The new fight is about the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, legislation the GOP has previously supported.

But this time around, Democrats are pinning a provision to it that would make it easier for illegal immigrants to obtain temporary visas as victims of domestic violence. In other words, it’s a transparent, politically-motivated attempt to provoke Republican opposition to VAWA and allow the left to claim the GOP supports violence against women:

Republicans are bracing for a battle where substantive arguments could be swamped by political optics and the intensity of the clash over women’s issues. At a closed-door Senate Republican lunch on Tuesday, Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska sternly warned her colleagues that the party was at risk of being successfully painted as antiwoman — with potentially grievous political consequences in the fall, several Republican senators said Wednesday.

Some conservatives are feeling trapped.

“I favor the Violence Against Women Act and have supported it at various points over the years, but there are matters put on that bill that almost seem to invite opposition,” said Senator Jeff Sessions, Republican of Alabama, who opposed the latest version last month in the Judiciary Committee. “You think that’s possible? You think they might have put things in there we couldn’t support that maybe then they could accuse you of not being supportive of fighting violence against women?”

Senate Democratic women are jumping on this gimmick today by marching on the Senate floor to insist on the quick renewal of the legislation.

But the one positive for Republicans is that there’s strong public opposition to illegal immigration. If they want any hope of winning on this issue, they’ll need to emphasize that it’s the Democrats who are holding the reauthorization hostage by tying it to provisions that would encourage more fraud in the immigration system. To the Senate Democratic women marching today, the GOP might argue: We would be happy to extend VAWA in its current form. We would love to do it immediately. In fact, the only thing delaying its extension is the controversial measure you tacked onto it.

What conservatives should avoid is relitigating VAWA. Yes, there are legitimate arguments that could be made against the law, some of which have been pursued by civil rights groups like the ACLU. But it’s also been in place for almost two decades, and while it may not be perfect, it’s negligible compared to the real battles conservatives need to focus on. If there’s opposition to VAWA from prominent conservative pundits, there’s a good chance it’ll be cited as ironclad proof that the Right is anti-women and used to divert attention from the serious election issues.

From JTA:
The Methodist Pension Board rejected a proposal to divest from companies that supply products to Israel's military.

The United Methodist General Board of Pension and Health Benefits unanimously approved a resolution earlier this month that would allow the board to continue to invest in Caterpillar, Motorola Solutions and Hewlett-Packard. Petitioners had called for divestment from the three companies, saying that they supply products to Israel that are used to violate the human rights of Palestinians.

The board resolved to continue to urge the companies to protect and respect human rights, as well as to seek a remedy for any human rights violations including, but not limited to, the Palestinians.

“The board of directors strongly believes that divesting of stock in a company where you have a dispute is not an effective tool to impact a company’s policy or practices," said Tim Smith, a member of the board of directors’ United Methodist Church Principles Committee. "If you sell stock as a protest, another investor simply purchases it. As an investor, having a seat at the table with a company has generally proved to be a more powerful means of communicating with a company’s management.” I guess the BDSers better concentrate on tiny Yuppie food co-ops and insecure second-tier pop singers.

(h/t Mike)

israelconsulate: Dead Sea mountain bike race - what gear do you use for lowest point on earth? http://t.co/Wwbkrrjy #DesertChallenge

Anyone wondering about how much progress those promoting hatred of Israel have made in recent years need only look at Germany. German governments have combined an understanding of the legacy of the Holocaust with a natural reticence about criticizing the Jewish state even when European political fashion has made such sentiments commonplace on the continent. But apparently that appears to be giving way to a willingness on the part of some of the country’s elites to promote some of the worst slanders against Israel.

As the Jerusalem Post reports, Sigmar Gabriel, the head of Germany’s Social Democratic Party and a likely challenger to Chancellor Angela Merkel in the next parliamentary election, posted on his Facebook page today a statement that Israel “is an apartheid regime, for which there is no justification.” Though he subsequently sought to explain the remark by seeking to limit his slur as applying only to the situation in Hebron (where an embattled small Jewish community lives under siege conditions surrounded by a hostile Arab majority) and also expressed his support for Israel’s existence and right to defend himself, that a possible future German chancellor would be willing to use such language illustrates the extent to which Palestinian propaganda has come to dominate mainstream discourse in Europe.

Hebron is a ticking time bomb where the proximity of Jews and Arabs to each other has led to much violence and hatred. But to imply that the Jewish presence in this place where a Jewish community was massacred in the last century by Palestinian mobs is somehow a form of racism is outrageous. For Gabriel to employ the language of South Africa to Israel is a short step to the delegitimization of the Jewish state. Those who would deny to Jews the same rights they reserve for themselves and others are practicing anti-Semitism. That is a line that no European, let alone a German, should dare to cross.

That the leader of Germany’s second largest party would think nothing of writing in this manner speaks volumes about the way the SPD has adopted the terminology of the far left on Israel. It also highlights the way European elites, even those in Germany where a special relationship has always existed with the modern Jewish state, have come to view the Middle East conflict through the prism of Arab nationalists and Islamists who view the Jewish presence in the country as the cause of the conflict. The real advocates of apartheid and racial cleansing in the region are not the Jews but Palestinians who think Jews must be evicted from the country. Even if Gabriel expressly opposes that goal, by using the language by which Israel may be made a pariah he has strengthened the expectation by the Palestinians that they can reject peace without paying any price.

Though Merkel’s attitude toward Israel has often been critical, it appears that if she is defeated by Gabriel, the result will be even more isolation for Israel in Europe.

israelconsulate: כנס תושבים חוזרים יום א' 25.3 נציגי משרד הקליטה מגיעים להעביר לכם את כל המידע בנושא חזרה ארצה. הכניסה חופשית! למידע: http://t.co/8WHkjU6g

A Muslim preacher in Australia has apparently been a busy boy on the internet, making a hoax threat on Facebook against the Sydney Mardi Gras.

Quite the multi-tasker, he has also reportedly found time to look at kiddie porn.

Picture credit: Herald Sun

Ibrahim Siddiq-Conlon has just appeared in Burwood local court in relation to an AFP and NSW Police joint operation that arrested him in the early hours of 4 March 2012.

He has been charged with:

• Using a carriage service for a hoax threat, section 474.16 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth)
• Possess child abuse material section 91H (2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW); and
• Using a carriage service to access child pornography section 474.19 (1) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth)

Police allege that, on the night before the Mardi Gras last month, Ibrahim Siddiq-Conlon, 35, made a terrorist threat against the event on the Facebook page of the popular 2Day FM radio program The Kyle and Jackie O show.

Speaking outside court, Mr Siddiq-Conlon said the threat was “just a moment of passion and I didn’t mean it”.

He declined to comment on the child pornography charges.

He is on bail and will reappear in court on May 8.

Meanwhile, here’s more on this hateful man:

I wonder where pedophilia fits into his concept of an Islamic state.

The Sofaer store in Yangon. Some 3,000 Jews once lived in Burma

It never ceases to amaze me how the media can wax lyrical about the 'surprising survival' of only 20 Jews in Burma, and dare to predict that the community might revive. The truth is that tolerance and pluralism of different faiths were old-fashioned colonial values. Article in The Economist (with thanks: Shaul)

Amid the bustle and crumbling masonry of downtown Yangon, there is one building that likes to keep up appearances: Myanmar’s only synagogue. On a narrow street, tucked behind a lot of paint shops, stands the splendid Musmeah Yeshua. Dating from the 1890s, it is a reminder of a lost world and an almost vanished community. It also provides a test of how far Myanmar can change.

Many of Myanmar’s Jews came from Iraq in the 19th century to trade and set up businesses. What was then Rangoon was a flourishing port of the British empire, and the Jewish community became influential. At its peak, it numbered around 3,000. The city even had a Jewish mayor.

Some of the prosperity and worldliness of those days lingers in the streets around the synagogue. Musmeah Yeshua is virtually next door to a Sunni madrassa, dating from 1914. A bit farther down the same street is a large mosque. Both of these are legacies of a Muslim influx from Gujarat, in India. Across the way is a large, gaudy Hindu temple. A few streets down is a large Hokkien temple. Methodist, Catholic and Anglican churches are all nearby. Immigrants came to Rangoon from around the world to make their fortunes.

A virtue, perhaps, of having been isolated from the world is that several decades of religious bigotry seem not to have touched this corner of Yangon. Living and working together, Jews, Muslims and others seem to get along cheerfully enough—in contrast to the violence between the majority Burmans and many other indigenous groups, such as the majority-Christian Kachin in the north and the Muslim Rohingyas in the west. When the devastating cyclone Nargis hit Yangon in 2008, interfaith prayers were held in the synagogue. It was to describe just such a multicultural and commercial conglomeration that J.S. Furnivall, a British colonial servant in Burma, coined the term “plural society” 60 years ago.

Read article in full

A talk in London on the Jews of Burma by Dr Saul Zadka is scheduled for 1 May. For further details check out Harif and Spiro Ark websites.

• On March 12, 2012, Dr. Mohamed Al-Saed Idris, Chairman of the Arab Affairs Committee in the new Egyptian Parliament, presented the committee’s official outline of Egypt’s regional policy.
• The committee’s operative recommendations called for an official definition of Israel as an enemy, severing diplomatic relations, full support for the armed struggle against Israel, re-adoption of the total boycott of Israel, raising the issue of Jerusalem in the international arena, and a review of Egyptian nuclear policy.
• In its eyes, Israel is the foremost enemy of Egypt and the Arab and Islamic world, and the peace agreement with it (the Camp David agreement) is considered a dead letter.
• Egypt is setting itself on a collision course with Israel, using the Palestinian issue in all its aspects – including Israeli military operations against Palestinian terrorism as well as Israeli policy in Jerusalem or the West Bank – as an excuse for direct Egyptian intervention.
• Defining Israel as a “major enemy” means building a military capability to deal with the “Israeli threat,” including an attempt to deny Israel any advantage in the nuclear field and/or the development of Egyptian nuclear weapons.
• At present, the new Egyptian political leadership cannot translate these policies into actions. But this situation is likely to change after the presidential elections on May 23-24 and the establishment of a new civilian government.

  Lt.-Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi, a senior researcher at the Jerusalem Center, is a former advisor to the Policy Planning Division of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

(Jonathan D. Halevi - Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs)
Tagged: Camp David Accords, New Egyptian Parliament

One of the important subtexts that are often ignored in the discussion about the nature of the nuclear threat from Iran is the way such weapons would allow Tehran to throw its weight around the Middle East without dropping any bombs. Iran has long employed auxiliary forces around the region to bolster its influence. Though Hezbollah has risen from a sectarian Shia terrorist group to a position where it is in virtual control of much of Lebanon, it is also a loyal follower of Iran. Hamas was deeply dependent on Iranian cash and arms for much of the last decade as it consolidated its control of Gaza. It seems to be willing to break away, but Iran has not lost hope of maintaining its influence among Palestinians via splinter groups as well as by efforts to get Hamas back in the fold. It is also hoping to back up a tottering but brutal Assad regime in Syria that has also been a faithful ally.

But just as troubling for the West is the news reported today by the New York Times that Iran is knee-deep in funding an insurgency in Yemen. While Yemen has been the site of proxy wars for the Muslim world for decades (Egypt’s Gamal Nasser regime came to grief there in the 1960’s), any such activity in a nation that borders a potentially unstable Saudi Arabia is bound to raise alarms in the West. It should also remind those foolish advocates for a policy aimed at containing or deterring a nuclear Iran that the ayatollahs have their own ideas about what the region will look like once they get their fingers on a nuclear button.

According to the Times, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards are shipping weapons to the Houthi Yemeni rebels who, as followers of the Shia variant of Islam, are natural allies of Iran. In doing so, they are countering the influence of the Saudis, who have been intervening in Yemeni tribal and civil wars throughout the country’s history. Given the ability of the Saudis as well as the United States to weigh in with greater resources in Yemen, the Iranian threat there might be dismissed as not that significant. But the more foreign assets Iran accumulates, the greater its ability to strike out via terrorism against the West as well as the regime’s Arab foes.

More to the point, the balance in power in Yemen as well as every other country where Iran seeks to exercise influence will be thrown to the winds once the regime goes nuclear. Though there is a debate as to how “rational” Iran’s Islamist leadership truly is, there is no doubt about its willingness to use terror as a tactic to broaden their regional power base. Even if one is willing to gamble with the lives of millions of Israelis by sitting back and letting the Iranians achieve their goal, a nuclear Iran running an active Middle East terror network will be an entirely different and far more dangerous threat.

The Iranian foray in Yemen is just one more piece of a puzzle that points to the lethal nature of its rulers’ grand ambitions. Those in Washington and Europe who are inclined to keep talking about the problem rather than acting to forestall this peril need to remember that allowing the leading state sponsor of terror to go nuclear threatens not only Israel but the West and moderate Arab regimes as well.

From the Muslim Judicial Council of South Africa, last week:

The Muslim Judicial Council on Wednesday received Palestinian exchange prisoner, Dr. Abdul Aziz Umar. Dr. Abdul Aziz is a true symbol of hope as he in many ways represents the attitude and strength of the Palestinian people in their continuous struggle for freedom against the Israeli Zionist occupiers. Dr. Abdul Aziz related some of his experiences as a prisoner of the corrupt occupying forces and gave detailed accounts of how he was tortured and how on numerous occations the Zionists tried to break his spirit and his resolve.

“I was used as a guinea pig for Israeli medical experiments in order that they could enjoy and display medical genius, even though I have lost the blessing of sight. However, they could not conquer and overpower my will and desire to turn prison into an educational academy.”

With this introduction the blind deported prisoner, Dr. Ábdul Ázīz Úmar (51 years old) started his discussion with “ar-Risālah Net” talking about his suffering and torture that he experienced in Israeli prisons. The emancipator Úmar (i.e. Dr. Ábdul Ázīz Úmar) is the first blind prisoner that carries a doctorate degree and who received a prison sentence of “7 life sentences and 30 years” when he was imprisoned on 27/09/2004.

Unforgettable Memories

He said about losing his sight: “I lost my sight when I started my university studies (i.e. undergraduate level) but that wasn’t a stumbling block in front of me. I completed my Bachelors Degree at Beir Zayt University thereafter I obtained a PhD. (Doctorate Degree) from the Hebrew University in English Literature.”

The academic Úmar speaks about his “incarceration journey”: “I was excelling in my studies despite my disabilities. The occupation forces tried to involve me in some issues by running some medical tests and exams on me but I disagreed. I was imprisoned in a very barbaric way in 1996 and they accused me of aiding and abetting the brave Mujāhid and Martyr Muḥyiddīn ash-Sharīf. After a while they released my innocense but placed me under house arrest for two years.”

He added: “The imprisonment did not stop there. I was arrested again in 2004 in front of my children in a very horrible way and without any charges. This impacted very negatively and adversely on my small children resulting in them having to receive treatment for the traumatic experience.”

He follows up: “Some months after my seizure (imprisonment) I was convicted and given a prison sentence of “4 life sentences and 30 years”.The charge was that I was spreading new and strange ideas in my intellectual and academic works.” " ...ideas are more dangerous than weapons..." this was the message wispered in the ear of Dr. Abdul Aziz, by an Israeli soldier whilst being arrested and with a gun pointed to his chest. Úmar further explained that he didn't abandon the quest to seek knowledge and further studies, despite this severe sentence that was handed to him. He dedicated himself to teach the prisoners English and Arabic in the precincts of the prison, as well as conducting different symposia and seminars.

He specifically said with regards to his “journey of punishments” in the prisons of the occupation forces: “The occupation forces were artists/ masters in torturing me, trying and hoping to breakdown and destroy my mind more than my body. They used truth serums, electric shock instruments as well as sleeping and relaxation tablets on me. They were the ones who always suffered from fatigue in the end, because my mind remained completely awake and alert.

He further relates about certain tortures he had to endure: “One day they tied me up on the confessions chair and they forced a strong electric and painful x-ray apparatus on my head for more than two hours leading to my body suffering from severe limpness. Some hours after that I was moved to another room whilst I was shackled and they threw me down spread out. They then shocked me with electricity that resulted in me suffering from paralysis in my entire skeleton (bone) structure, and a lost the ability to move.” He continued: “The physical torture barely stopped when they started with psychological torture. They brought the prisoner and the freedom fighter Nāil Bharghūti to us, in order to inform us that “your destiny will be like his” seeing that he (Nāil Bharghūti) is the longest serving political prisoner that they have in their prisons. However, he overpowered them when he said to us: Do not despair and loose hope, victory and freedom are near.” Really? He was arrested for no reason and sentenced to seven (or four, he says) life terms for "spreading new and strange ideas"? He was tortured mercilessly but still managed to teach other prisoners? The prisons service brought Barghouti to break his will and Barghouti fooled them?

What kind of moron would believe this garbage?

Well, obviously, people who hate Israel - and the entire Muslim population of South Africa.

Let's see what the truth is. From a press release by the South Africa Zionist Federation:
Former Palestinian prisoner Dr Abdul Aziz Umar, who is visiting Cape Town to give a series of lectures, has claimed that he was arrested by the Israelis for “spreading new and strange ideas” in his academic works.

The reality is very different

The real reason why Umar was sentenced to seven life sentences by Israel in 2004 was because of his participation in the Café Hillel bombings in Jerusalem on 9 September 2003. Seven Israeli civilians were killed in this cold-blooded terrorist attack. They included Dr David Appelbaum, head of the emergency room at Shaare Zedek Medical Centre and his daughter Nava, who was to have been married the following day.

Whilst in prison, Umar was allowed to further his academic qualifications by studying through an Israeli university, at the Israeli tax payer’s expense. He was freed last year as part on a prisoner exchange deal, in which hundreds of Palestinian prisoners were released in exchange for a single Israeli one.

Those responsible for bringing Abdul Aziz Umar to South Africa have falsely depicted him as an innocent victim of Israeli oppression and prison brutality. The truth is that he is a convicted terrorist with innocent blood on his hands. He has never expressed any remorse for his murderous actions, and he remains a committed supporter of terrorist violence against Israel.

The South African Zionist Federation questions the motivations and the morality of bringing someone with Umar’s record to South Africa. There can be no place in our country for those who propagate hatred and falsehood and who have chosen the path of violence over that of peace.
As long as no one challenges the lies, they will continue to spread.

Muslims and other Israel-haters will not even think twice about inviting and honoring a mass murderer - as long as he hates Israel along with them.

Was there a single Muslim in South Africa who publicly opposed the honor of a mass murderer? Just one, out of over 700,000 South Africa Muslims? Was there even one Muslim who had the moral strength to criticize an unrepentant terrorist and obvious liar whose actions led to the vicious murder of seven people?

This, my friends, is the problem.

(h/t zozosophie)